Imagine that!

#1
T

therealUT

Rational Thought Allowed?
Joined
Mar 9, 2006
Messages
30,347
Likes
4,191
#1
javascript:dc_popup_win('http://www...llbars=no,resizable=no,width=650,height=650')In a new afterword to his memoir, 1960s radical William Ayers writes that the campaign controversy over their relationship was an effort by Obama's political enemies to "deepen a dishonest narrative" about the candidate.


“We had served together on the board of a foundation, knew one another as neighbors and family friends, held an initial fund-raiser at my house, where I’d made a small donation to his earliest political campaign,” he writes.


http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/obama/1278532,bill-ayers-barack-obama-book-111308.article#
Click to expand...
Great timing, right???
 
#3
#3
but that bit about the fundraiser at Ayers' house is a fabrication. Heck, I've read that on this very board many times myself, so Ayers must be making up that part.
Posted via VolNation Mobile
 
#4
#4
Even more amazing is his claim that his bombings weren't terrorism since no one was killed (except for that cop I suppose). Unbelievable.
 
#5
#5
I wonder how much the Obama campaign paid Ayers to keep his mouth shut through Nov. 4?
 
#8
#8
allvol123 said:
I'll say it again, Wright going off at the NPC was a set up.
Click to expand...

Yep, it was done in order to give Obama a reason to distance himself and not look weak while doing it. Made all the more clear since afterward Wright went MIA.
 
#9
#9
what was really ridiculous was when Ayers claimed that he and his ilk were on the right side of both history and the ideological front. He also said that present-day war protesters weren't doing enough, I suppose that means they should be setting bombs.

I wouldn't shed a tear, I might even chuckle a little at the irony, if Ayers/Dorn meet the same fate they had planned for either John Murtagh's father or the NCO dance at Ft. Dix.
 
#10
#10
What, exactly, do you guys think is going to happen because of the Ayers connection? Do you think that Obama is going to take a particular action because of it?

Now that the election is over, and the generalized claim that having anything to do with Ayers reflects, again generally, on poor judgment by Obama at that point in time (or even generally), I think the people who continue to bring this up need to trace some particular anticipated action to it so that we can see if it actually matters. Otherwise, it just seems like a distraction that means nothing.
 
#11
#11
lawgator1 said:
What, exactly, do you guys think is going to happen because of the Ayers connection? Do you think that Obama is going to take a particular action because of it?

Now that the election is over, and the generalized claim that having anything to do with Ayers reflects, again generally, on poor judgment by Obama at that point in time (or even generally), I think the people who continue to bring this up need to trace some particular anticipated action to it so that we can see if it actually matters. Otherwise, it just seems like a distraction that means nothing.
Click to expand...
It makes him a fraud and the media complicit in trying to sweep under the rug that Obama's political career started in Ayers' living room. The relationship wasn't a casual passing on a corporate board.

Whether it becomes anything isn't the point. The point was our watchdog press worked hard to keep this story quiet until now.

Where is your outrage at the bias?
 
#14
#14
BigPapaVol said:
he has lost any semblance of reason when he ranted, well after the election, about the bias of the Fox guys.

I guess he's reasonable, if you're hyper-liberal.
Click to expand...


My disgust with Fox is actually not related to whether Obama should or should not be president. I've ranted about Fox for years, including on here in many contexts. Just so happens that their open campaigning for anything not Obama highlighted it and made it obvious. Don't confuse the two.
 
#15
#15
lawgator1 said:
My disgust with Fox is actually not related to whether Obama should or should not be president. I've ranted about Fox for years, including on here in many contexts. Just so happens that their open campaigning for anything not Obama highlighted it and made it obvious. Don't confuse the two.
Click to expand...
Surely, then, you're offended by MSNBC openly campaigning for anything Obama.

I find the two confusing. Here is Ayers clearly saying that all of the liberal commentators working hard to debunk the "started in Ayers' living room" story were dead wrong. You simply ignore it by calling it immaterial because the election's over. The sorriness of the press as a proper vetting vehicle hasn't changed because the election's over.

It has changed because the overwhelmingly liberal bias out there doesn't bother you in the least.
 
#16
#16
apparently you didn't watch fox's election night coverage when the host was downright glowing that obama had been elected.
 
#18
#18
BigPapaVol said:
Surely, then, you're offended by MSNBC openly campaigning for anything Obama.

I find the two confusing. Here is Ayers clearly saying that all of the liberal commentators working hard to debunk the "started in Ayers' living room" story were dead wrong. You simply ignore it by calling it immaterial because the election's over. The sorriness of the press as a proper vetting vehicle hasn't changed because the election's over.

It has changed because the overwhelmingly liberal bias out there doesn't bother you in the least.
Click to expand...


MSNBC had two shows on that were hosted by commentators who made it no secret that they favored Obama, Olberman and Maddow. They do not claim to be fair and balanced. You could make an argument that Chris Matthews is left of center in his reporting, too.

But Fox's claim that its news coverage is unbiased is just plain fraudulent (and I'm not talking announced commentators such as Hannity --- I'm talking Britt Hume, Shepard Smith, etc.) I recollect Scott McClellane acknolwedging that the Bush White House routinely sent talking points memos to the NEWS department at Fox -- but not to other journalists -- in an combined effort with Fox to shape public opinion.

I do not resent their commentators for being conservative. I fault their conservative commentators for using horrid logic. And I fault their allegedly unbiased news anchors for the fact that they are in reality very, very biased.

The distinctions between these things is blurry, I'll admit. But honestly I feel like Fox uses the blurriness of those distinctions to continue to do what it does.
 
#19
#19
lawgator1 said:
You could make an argument that Chris Matthews is left of center in his reporting, too.
Click to expand...
the fact that you would even deign to pretend that Mathews only possibly fits the definition "left of center," when he was touting his erection over an Obama speech is just astounding to me. MSNBC tries very hard with that lackey to make him appear unbiased, but he's a liberal piece of garbage from the Carter school of lunacy.

Pick someone with a prayer of being objective and I might buy your little act, but Mathews only served to solidify my opinion that you're just a hardcore lefty but ashamed to say so. I can fully understand that reluctance, but it is what it is. First step is admission, my friend. I believe I'm going to begin arranging an intervention up in this joint and get you fixed.
 
#20
#20
BigPapaVol said:
the fact that you would even deign to pretend that Mathews only possibly fits the definition "left of center," when he was touting his erection over an Obama speech is just astounding to me. MSNBC tries very hard with that lackey to make him appear unbiased, but he's a liberal piece of garbage from the Carter school of lunacy.

Pick someone with a prayer of being objective and I might buy your little act, but Mathews only served to solidify my opinion that you're just a hardcore lefty but ashamed to say so. I can fully understand that reluctance, but it is what it is. First step is admission, my friend. I believe I'm going to begin arranging an intervention up in this joint and get you fixed.
Click to expand...


Funny thing is I have a friend that is a big time liberal lawyer down in Miami. He swore up and down that Matthews was a conservative plant. But I will admit that he has softended his view of Matthews lately, so that would support your view of him, I suppose.
 
#21
#21
lawgator1 said:
Funny thing is I have a friend that is a big time liberal lawyer down in Miami. He swore up and down that Matthews was a conservative plant. But I will admit that he has softended his view of Matthews lately, so that would support your view of him, I suppose.
Click to expand...

so, those liberal lawyers are softended?? that just begs for a joke, but I'll keep things above board.
 
#22
#22
lawgator1 said:
Funny thing is I have a friend that is a big time liberal lawyer down in Miami. He swore up and down that Matthews was a conservative plant. But I will admit that he has softended his view of Matthews lately, so that would support your view of him, I suppose.
Click to expand...
I'll bet when he talks about you. He says, "I have a friend that is a big time liberal lawyer...." :whistling:
 
#23
#23
Is there such a thing as an unbiased political commentator? They all seem to have a bias one way or the other and Matthews is definitely an Obama supporter. He seems unbiased next to Olbermann however.
 
#24
#24
615 Vol said:
Is there such a thing as an unbiased political commentator? They all seem to have a bias one way or the other and Matthews is definitely an Obama supporter. He seems unbiased next to Olbermann however.
Click to expand...
Gergen is a massive liberal, but does a very good job of being objective about his views.
 
#25
#25
lawgator1 said:
MSNBC had two shows on that were hosted by commentators who made it no secret that they favored Obama, Olberman and Maddow. They do not claim to be fair and balanced. You could make an argument that Chris Matthews is left of center in his reporting, too.

But Fox's claim that its news coverage is unbiased is just plain fraudulent (and I'm not talking announced commentators such as Hannity --- I'm talking Britt Hume, Shepard Smith, etc.) I recollect Scott McClellane acknolwedging that the Bush White House routinely sent talking points memos to the NEWS department at Fox -- but not to other journalists -- in an combined effort with Fox to shape public opinion.

I do not resent their commentators for being conservative. I fault their conservative commentators for using horrid logic. And I fault their allegedly unbiased news anchors for the fact that they are in reality very, very biased.

The distinctions between these things is blurry, I'll admit. But honestly I feel like Fox uses the blurriness of those distinctions to continue to do what it does.
Click to expand...

He also said they sent talking points to O'Reilly, when O'Reilly called him on the carpet over it McClellane had to admit that that was false.

Kind of makes you wonder what else he said might be false.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top