Bill Ayers Speaks To GMA
Critics of Ayers and Obama will ask why Ayers is speaking out now. But why should he have gone public sooner if it was going to hurt his candidate? Obviously, any public statement during the campaign would have re-ignited a senseless and unnecessary controversy. And, if speaking out for your candidate is helpful, you do it. If not speaking out is helpful, you do that. Now, Ayers is speaking, and he explains his relationship with Barack Obama.
“It’s not at all true that [Obama] sought me out to listen to my radical ideas, or that I sought him out,” Ayers told ABC News’ “Good Morning America.”
“The truth is we came together in Chicago in the civic community around issues of school improvement, around issues of fighting for the rights of poor neighborhoods to have jobs and housing and so on, and that’s the full extent of our relationship.”
But that’s not going to be enough to satisfy the conservative lust for retribution against the candidate who defeated the neocon quest for power. Ayers addressed the idea that there is some deep, hidden secret being kept from America about his association with Obama.
“I don’t buy the idea that guilt by association should have any part of our politics,” Mr. Ayers said, appearing on ABC’s “Good Morning America.” “This idea that we need to know more, like there’s some dark, hidden secret, some secret link is just a myth thrown up by people who want to exploit the politics of fear.”
Ayers also says there has been a dishonest narrative to demonizing him, that there were despicable acts going on but the those were the acts committed by the government. He never hurt or killed anyone but doesn’t think the did enough to stop the Vietnam war. Far from being a demerit on his record, the fact that Obama is willing to talk to a lot of people and listen to many opinions and still have a mind of his own is something we should honor and admire.
As Ayers reminds us, the politics of fear was rejected by the American people during this election.
“I don’t buy the idea that guilt by association should have any part of our politics,”
BO started his campaign in Ayers’s HOUSE!!!!
“Now, Ayers is speaking, and he explains his relationship with Barack Obama.”
I thought BO said he just knew him?
Great, another president that will just lie to us to cover up the truth. This is not CHANGE, this has been going on since the begining.
November 14th, 2008 at 12:24 pm
Alan, what about the fact he left out the failed attempt to plant a bomb in a military base that would have killed/hurt many. Are you seriously defended this man?
November 14th, 2008 at 12:43 pm
Guys, look at it from another point of view.
Our constitution makes provisions for people to take DRASTIC measures to attempt to change an unjust government. Remember how often the conservatives will defend the 2nd Amendment? This applies. Militias of the People. And where did Obama lie? He said he knew him, and that’s what Ayers himself said as well.
Remember our own past. We were ‘terrorists’ at one point in time, when we were in the possession of Britain. We weren’t recognized as a country until some time later by France. Similar to what’s going on in Georgia right now. South Ossetia wishes to be independent. Russia recognizes their will and helps them survive the Georgian cultural genocide, but Bush wants to continue the Cold War and starts badmouthing Russia.
November 14th, 2008 at 1:14 pm
4Patriots, a military base is a military target. There would have been injuries and possibly deaths, but it’s not a civilian target – there are no innocents in a military target – that’s the view of the USA, UN, Russia, Great Britain and so forth.
Not defending his actions, as I think peaceful methods work better than aggressive ones, but I can defend the reality of the situation.
November 14th, 2008 at 1:17 pm
Is this all the Conservatives have? Talk about grasping at straws.
November 14th, 2008 at 1:28 pm
Other man:
You really should stop listening to the likes of Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh and Bill O’Reilly, as they are rotting your brain.
Most of the crap they’re pushing has already been debunked, and quite frankly the majority of Americans don’t care about his past acquaintences.
November 14th, 2008 at 1:49 pm
Well, Budda, we stepped on the family jewels of conservatives by voting for a man who “pal’ed around with terrorists.” Not surprising they might be a little harder to find on the boards and radio shows. The little funkersters are just hiding; waiting for the next Bush.
Ayers is just a washed up hippie. More power to him. Anybody who wants to waste time decrying this man is a wingnut. Do the people who bomb abortion clinics or the man who killed 14 liberals in a church get this level of attention from Hannity & Co? No, because it doesn’t advance the Republican agenda to point out one man’s freedom fighter is anothers terrorist. I’ll defend Bill Ayers for the fact that he hasn’t bombed anything or anyone and that alone goes to show he might not be this radical arsonist / terrorist we hear about. People change and grow out of childish ideas of bang-bang boom-boom.
November 14th, 2008 at 1:50 pm
I see this as no different then G. Gordon Liddy and his crimes.
I don’t condone Ayers actions. But #1 he wasn’t convicted. #2 it was 40 year ago. #3 they aren’t friends.
Move on…
November 14th, 2008 at 2:37 pm
But they won’t move on.
Any excuse to criticize Obama will do, and they will keep it up for the next eight years.
At best, it’s because they got their butts wooopt by a Democrat;
at worst because they got wooopt by a black guy.
November 14th, 2008 at 3:06 pm
I’m as done with the Ayers issue as I am with Wright. Let the narrow-minded believe what they will. As seen by the first comment to this thread, they’re going to hold on to their “proof” and continue to shout it until the end of time. (Hopefully. Because if I have to hear this crap for ETERNITY, I’ll go mad.)
November 14th, 2008 at 3:11 pm
I am so tired of hearing that he “STARTED” his campaign at Ayers house. That has been thoroughly debunked. Just because something is said over and over does not make it true. Don’t believe me? Research it yourself instead of listening to Insanity Hannity.
November 14th, 2008 at 3:29 pm
I agree that this Ayres stuff is done, but didn’t a Rabbi launch Obama’s career?
From the NYT:
That was one of several such neighborhood events as Mr. Obama prepared to run, said A. J. Wolf, the 84-year-old emeritus rabbi of KAM Isaiah Israel Synagogue, across the street from Mr. Obama’s current house.
“If you ask my wife, we had the first coffee for Barack,” Rabbi Wolf said. He said he had known Mr. Ayers for decades but added, “Bill’s mad at me because I told a reporter he’s a toothless ex-radical.”
“It was kind of a nasty shot,” Mr. Wolf said. “But it’s true. For God’s sake, he’s a professor.”
November 14th, 2008 at 4:00 pm
The Ayers terrorist group planned to kill large numbers of U.S. military presonnel at a dance at Fort Dix in March 1970. It failed only because they blew themselves up.
Osama bin Laden may not have actually killed anyone either. He just “planned attacks.” By Ayers’s reasoning, bin Laden is not a terrorist either.
November 14th, 2008 at 4:16 pm
Okay. The BBC has a story citing Putin’s spokesperson, Dmitry Peskov, as saying that Russia is “as democratic as Britain or America. Maybe even more democratic”.
“ROFLMAO” does not even begin to describe how I felt when I read that
Anyone else wonder why Putin’s in such a rush to get back at the helm?
November 14th, 2008 at 4:18 pm
Osama bin Laden may not have actually killed anyone either. He just “planned attacks.” By Ayers’s reasoning, bin Laden is not a terrorist either.
Posted by Don Stone
…………………………….
That’s what Iraqi people whose families died in the bombing of shock and awe say about Bush.
I guess it all depends on who did what to who.
November 14th, 2008 at 4:26 pm
Whay exactally does starting your campaign in someone’s living room mean? Can someone explain to me what transpired in that living room? How do we know he was ever in that living room? What was discussed in that living room? I’ve been hearing about that supposed meeting for months. But, have we ever heard the time or date of that meeting, the context of that meeting, who saw the meeting etc etc? Who ever made the first reference to that meeting? Who in God’s name would put an stock in something that vague? It’s obviously not supportable by any solid evidence or we would have heard the evidence by now!
November 14th, 2008 at 4:31 pm
We possibly should have simply called the invasion of Iraq SHOCK. The word the word awe carries a positive meaning.I highly doubt that the citizens of Iraq we in awe of the beauty of the attack!
November 14th, 2008 at 4:39 pm
History is going to prove out if Bush did the RIGHT thing for his country. Just like history has proven out what Ayers has done, said and has proven where his heart is with this country. We were taught by our parents that who you associate with proves what your inner character is. That is Obama’s Character coming out. WEAK, EASILY INFLUENCED AND HE RUNS NOT WALKS TO HAVE HIS EARS BENT BY THE WRONG VOICES. Just look at his track record. He will prove out his weakness in leadership. He will Waffle and fold.
November 14th, 2008 at 5:43 pm
The falsehoods surrounding what Bill Ayers is, said, and was really crack me up. Sean and the wing nuts scream he said, “We should have done more.”…..and we should have. Ayers was saying that we all should have done more to stop the war….he didn’t say that “we” shouldn have bombed more….that was Sean doing his “twist the truth into a lie” game.
Bill Ayers knows our president elect……so what. Bush killed people and bombed a whole country….Ayers was a member of a group that set bombs at a few buildings…did they go off? Did they destroy the pentagon? Who was killed in the bombings…want to know?…it was the people who were making the bombs….yep, no other victims.
Do you think we could let this poor guy go about his work in Chicago without trying to smear our new president beyond what the creeps already tried to do?
Even the republican wreckage tried to smear the new president with Ayers and it didn’t stick…..all it did was reduce even further the lowly credibility that Palin had at the beginning…..
sheesh…..he’s just trying to peddle a few books.
LOL
Maybe to finance another underground organization….hmmmmmmm LOL
November 14th, 2008 at 5:50 pm
Jim from Jersey says, “Guys, look at it from another point of view. Our constitution makes provisions for people to take DRASTIC measures to attempt to change an unjust government….”
Jim, this is true of our history. So, would you agree that those who bomb abortion clinics are using their constituional provisions? I mean, they believe they are in a war to save the lives of millions of babies from a holocaust. (Don’t get upset, I don’t condone bombing abortion clinics; but I can see their point if you use Jim’s thought).
November 14th, 2008 at 6:40 pm
Hey Jim, there are indeed innocents on military bases. There are a few civilian workers up to many. They choose to work there but they are not military. But, there are also housing on military bases in which the families of soldiers live their daily lives as you or I do. So, yes Jim, there are innocents on military bases.
Besides, terrorists, whether they be domestic or foreign, don’t give a darn about life in general.
November 14th, 2008 at 7:32 pm
I think that the more Progressive ideas of the Democratic Party are better for America and the Democratic Party is easily the better party so the GOP has to throw crap like this out to make you not vote Dem because their philosophy is stagnant and outdated. To me if there is going to be a conservative ideology it should be like Ron Paul’s version. The current GOP has very little to offer and all of the flair from the Reagan years has been extinguished. The only Republican I liked this year was Mike Huckabee he is a good man just like Reagan was. The Bush’s both suck and I don’t know much about Bob Dole except the fact that Clinton is far better. I don’t think this Bill Ayers is that bad a guy there were many injustices in the U.S. government back then. I would never bomb something though. Unless the GOP’s actions match its rhetoric they are doomed. Lower spending=lower taxes lower deficit and lower inflation. Clinton was great because he shrank the size of the government and left a surplus wheras Bush has increased the size of govenment so that debunks the whole big government/small government BS.
November 14th, 2008 at 7:38 pm
4Patriots,
Alan has been defending this man, Ayers, ever since he surfaced during the past election cycle. I don’t really understand it.
Alan says that “guilt by association” has no part in the election of a candidate, then he will judge McCain by his association to President Bush. More liberal double standards.
November 14th, 2008 at 7:39 pm
Hoist by my own petard!
Yes 4Patriots, if you stretched it enough you could cover it like that. I tend to think that the target makes the difference though. No matter how much you stretch it, an abortion clinic is still a civilian target, something Ayers didn’t even do to my knowledge.
November 14th, 2008 at 7:42 pm
Willy, I’m not saying there aren’t – but the base itself is a military installation and a viable target. Civilians working at a base know there is a risk there at any given time, especially if the country is at a state of war. It’s a bit different than hijacking a plane of vacationing families or blowing up a commercial building.
November 14th, 2008 at 7:44 pm
Hey David, you have to give the republican congress credit for the budget surplus in the Clinton years. They pushed legislation to reform welfare, which Clinton vetoed 2 or 3 times before he was basically forced to sign on. Divided government is a good thing. It creates a chech and balance, which is what the republican congress did in the 90’s.
The republican party has since left the Reagan Revolution and has drifted to far to the left. They are no longer conservative, for which I am very disappointed. The party has left me just as the democrat party has strayed from Joe Lieberman.
November 14th, 2008 at 7:46 pm
Jim,
Sure, military targets are a viable target, if we are at war. We weren’t at war with Ayers. He declared war with America. Why? Just because he didn’t like the Vietnam war? Pretty darn idiotic if you ask me. No reason what so ever to blow anything up in your own country. There are ways to protest, and violence should not be the way, unless, unless, the federal government is becoming tyrannical, such as, for example, a Saddam Hussein type.
November 14th, 2008 at 7:53 pm
Jim from Jersey,
I don’t think there is a difference. Abortion clinics get federal money and are therefore, part of the government.
November 14th, 2008 at 9:08 pm
The right thinks making OBAMA look like mud is pay back for the crap we gave BUSH,but the difference is BUSH is a lousy president that abused his power and the right is having a hard time swallowing a bitter pill.
November 14th, 2008 at 9:34 pm
So, I guess if the anti Obama crowd decides the Obama administration is unjust they then have the right to start using all those guns they’ve been buying and attempt to take back their government. I dunno, is this what you advocate?
It is never “OK” to be an anarchist in a democratic society, we elect our leaders. Obama is our president, I don’t like it, but he was elected
November 14th, 2008 at 11:02 pm
Sean Hannity needs to take his medication. Sean should also be considered a terrorist for ensighting violance in the people who are unfortunate enough to believe his twisted lies, exagerations, and distortions of fact. He, and several of his fanatical wing nuts go beyond the scope of civil discourse of the issues of the day. They ensight people to behave out of fear…..and the result is easily transfered into unfortunate action.
Bill Ayers is not as bad as he is being portrayed. Don’t be taken in by Sean’s obsession.
A discredited “underground infiltrater” on the show was making all kinds of charges that were disproven years ago regarding Ayers. Sean bought the farm like a Wall Street Banker.
For those of us who were present during those unfortunate times, we knew that there were government deceptions, plots, and anarchistic-like activities against our nation’s people. The government was breaking as many laws as the movements of the day. For every Bill Ayers, there were scores of government agents violating individual constitutionally protected rights…repeatedly. In the meantime, we were engaged in an illegal war that was killing thousands of our young people on a monthly basis.
Civil disobediance took both peaceful and alternative forms of demonstration.
November 14th, 2008 at 11:21 pm
“The Ayers terrorist group planned to kill large numbers of U.S. military presonnel at a dance at Fort Dix in March 1970.”
And what could have precipitated this plan?
“In December 1969, the Chicago Police Department, in conjunction with the FBI, conducted a raid on the home of Black Panther Fred Hampton, in which he and Mark Clark were killed… The police claimed they shot in self-defense…the families of the dead won a $1.8 million settlement from the government.”
November 14th, 2008 at 11:23 pm
There was never any prosecutions of that plot….like so many other tales of the dark side, I sincerely question it’s validity….
November 14th, 2008 at 11:26 pm
I used the term “ensight”….I meant “incite”. Brain fart…sorry.
November 14th, 2008 at 11:43 pm
Trees says,”Obama is our president, I don’t like it, but he was elected” trees, Why don’t you like it?
November 14th, 2008 at 11:46 pm
Extra points for Honesty and Candor. Remember ,Credibility is important!
November 14th, 2008 at 11:48 pm
I just think he was the lesser of two poor choices. I wasn’t wild about McCain either Jeffro. But that’s just me, one man, one vote.
How bout you, how you doin?
November 15th, 2008 at 12:34 am
Honesty and candor, H @ C, was that supposed to be a wordplay on Hannity and Colmes?
November 15th, 2008 at 12:45 am
I’m doin’ good. Thanks. But. He was NOT a poor choice. I would love to discuss your reasons for saying that. but I fear that you, like many others that use that generic “Lesser of two poor choices” canard would not be able to be intellectually honest. And Honesty is important. Am I right?
November 15th, 2008 at 12:47 am
Why wouldn’t I be honest with you Jeffro? Aren’t humans “basically good” ?
Are you suggesting I might try and lie to you?
November 15th, 2008 at 12:55 am
Do you think I’m trying to be sly? Do you think I’m saying one thing and thinking another? Why don’t you trust your fellow man? Be good for goodness sake.
November 15th, 2008 at 12:59 am
My friend Jimmy from Jersey taught me that as long as I feel I’m justified that what I’m doing is right that’s its ok to do the wrong thing. It’s just part of nature’s plan. So don’t be afraid, there is nothing to fear, I will promise to do what I think is best, OK?
November 15th, 2008 at 1:07 am
Be Honest. Why was Obama a “poor” choice. Let’s get to some facts.
November 15th, 2008 at 1:10 am
Are you attempting to interrogate me jeffro? I gotta warn you, I’ve been interrogated by professionals before…………
November 15th, 2008 at 1:13 am
I know next to nothing about Obama. He’s only been a senator for two years, he’s never worked as an executive ever. This job as president will be the longest term of employment he’s ever had. Obama makes me think I’m watching a ShamWOW commercial…………
November 15th, 2008 at 1:18 am
And if ya vote for Obama right now we’ll throw in four more years for free, but ya gotta do it now, cause we aint got all day… shamWOW!
November 15th, 2008 at 1:22 am
Your a joker and not to be taken seriously. Sad.
November 15th, 2008 at 1:26 am
Apparently humor isn’t appreciated…………
November 15th, 2008 at 1:29 am
If you had known that bush as gov. of Texas had put people to death, And then mocked them, would you have voted for him?
November 15th, 2008 at 1:33 am
Jeffro, I wouldn’t call you my friend if I didn’t like you. And if I’m serious with you I will be honest, I’m just not in a serious mood right now, I’m relaxing.
God bless you Jeffro, I’m gonna take my mind off things for awhile
Always your friend, trees
November 15th, 2008 at 1:36 am
God Bless You Trees.
November 15th, 2008 at 2:09 am
Open Letter to Sean Hannity
Your shameless display of your hypocrisy leaves me HOOKED to your program every night.Somewhat escapist of me,but somehow makes me feel better seeing a hypocrite like you give more evidence for it each night.
Please rationalize to me how:
1.You are so upset by people snooping in on Joe the plumber,violating his RIGHT to privacy, and then without pause for breath glowingly GLOAT about how you TRACKED down Ayers,Khalidi(people you had already DAMNED before talking to them),without obtaining their consent,knowing that given the way you painted them,they wouldnt want to talk to you,and KNOWING that you ANYWAY intend to paint them even more negatively after this “confrontation”.I guess right to privacy for a person exists as long as the person is on your side huh Sean?BLOODY HYPOCRITE You Are
2.I will have the following mock question session with you:
a.Me:Are you(Sean) proud to be an American?
Sean:YES I AM(reasonable answer?)
Me:America killed THOUSANDS of people in Vietnam,innocent civilians.America hasnt shown ANY sign of being sorry for that.America hasnt apologized to the people of Vietnam
Sean:(You can fill in ANY explanation you want here)
Me: Okay,America killed 1000s and 1000s,America didnt show any sign of being sorry for what they did in Vietnam(Or Iraq)…tell me this:If you believe you could be proud of America,proud of being American,without America apologizing for the above,and yet you believe Ayers needs to feel sorry for killing policemen in the 1960s-70s:you know what word iam leading to?You got it…BLOODY HYPOCRITE
3.The soldiers fighting in Iraq for the USA are brave:They are taking the ultimate risk(of their own individual lives):In return,they’re being told:This is for the safety of your countrymen,for freedom.
How do you respond?Everytime someone wants to talk about withdrawal from Iraq,you make fun of them with this “white flag of surrender” childish taunt. A TRULY brave man will be a WATCHDOG on the commander-in-chief,and ensure in his limited abilities that the commander-in-chief doesnt send OR leave these brave men and women in harm’s way WITHOUT sufficient cause.A truly brave man will OPPOSE the commander in chief with his fullest ability when the commander in chief abuses his power to send them in harm’s way without sufficient cause.A COWARD like you will HIDE behind THEIR bravery and like to pretend that THEIR bravery oozes on to you by your “white flag of surrender” talk. And worse, when someone actually has the COURAGE to oppose their commander-in-chief for sending the brave men and women of the armed forces into harm’s way without cause, AS AYERS ACTUALLY DID,you have the colossal nerve to call HIM a Coward On Air!!!Guess what Sean,that once again leaves you a HYPOCRITE
keep the venom coming,Sean Hannity fans absolutely love it!
Karthik
November 15th, 2008 at 7:28 am
GMA has resurrected the the failed tactics of sean hannity.Sorry Sean , you lost. And election has consequences (fairness doctrine for you and only you).
November 15th, 2008 at 1:42 pm
Obama has the rights to implement all his policies. He WON!
November 15th, 2008 at 1:44 pm
This is an Obama recession, said SEan hannity again.And he worries about the fairness doctrine. Oke, SEan you will be safe as long you apologize for calling Obama’s mother a “White Trash”.
November 15th, 2008 at 1:49 pm
Can sean hannity get a basic security after paling around Hall Turner and his radical friends from Alabama?
November 15th, 2008 at 1:55 pm
can sean get a basic security clearance?
November 15th, 2008 at 1:59 pm
Karthick,
The difference in checking up on Joe the Plumber and Obama is Obama was running for president; Joe was not. He didn’t do anything wrong, EXCEPT ask a question which is what we should ALL do when someone wants to be our president. Get off the Kool-Aid, please.
November 15th, 2008 at 2:00 pm
Sean Hannity should receive the same treatment as Dan Rather(CBS)and Bill Maher(ABC).
November 15th, 2008 at 2:04 pm
JOe,the plumber ,was being used as a political Fox; and he should be treated as such. By the way, Joe is done.
November 15th, 2008 at 2:11 pm
The difference in checking up on Joe the Plumber and Obama is Obama was running for president; Joe was not.
…………………………….
Sam Wurzelbacher misrepresented himself in order to bolster one candidate and distort the policies of the other candidate.
If ANYTHING, he was more like Cindy Sheenhan, but without the personal loss, and no one EVER disparaged her!
November 15th, 2008 at 2:16 pm
Ho No, Joe , the plumber, lost personally. He won’t have a job at the white house as a plumber.
November 15th, 2008 at 2:33 pm
4Patriots:
Joe the plumber was most certainly NOT running for office.BUT NEITTHER WAS BILL AYERS.
NEITHER WAS KHALIDI
Joe the plumber VOLUNTARILY came forward,DURING the election,and asked a question.Some crony of Obama or some Obama supporter violated his privacy.
Neither Khalidi NOR Ayers Voluntarily came forward to make ANY comment or take ANY position on the election.And yet FOX News,Sean Hannity PURSUED THEM TO THEIR DOORS,VIDEOTAPED THEM,asked them humiliating questions.If you dont see the double standards here,you are AS much a Hypocrite as Sean Hannity.
November 15th, 2008 at 3:56 pm
4Patriots:
Are you telling me because Obama is running for President,Ayers,Khalidi’s rights to privacy goes to the dustbin because Obama had at some point of time had contact of SOME depth,debated but even possibly deep…whereas Joe the plumber retains his rights to privacy?What kind of standards are these?
November 15th, 2008 at 3:58 pm
Man,4Patriots,you astound me!
I have seen Sean Hannity do this ’sleight of hand’ every day.Justifying an investigation into ALL and Sundry remotely associated with Obama(or even seriously,granting Sean’s belief),because Obama is running for President.Do you think people who have been associated at some point with Obama lose their right to privacy because Obama now chose to run for President?
November 15th, 2008 at 4:02 pm
4Patriots:
Finally,as a passing remark,on Joe the Plumber.
I find his intentions,motivations highly dishonest, and his questioning, argument lacking credibility. Here’s why:
He asked Obama about how Obama’s tax plans will or may end up impairing business.Fair enough.
But nobody who has been following current affairs even to a small degree cannot escape notice of the 13$Trillion deficit raked up during the 8 years of President Bush.
When Clinton left,the government had a surplus.
Do you begin to understand what the deficit means?If you dont,let me explain.
The government under Bill Clinton used to take MORE of your money,and spend more.And balance the budget reasonably,leading to the surplus.
The government under George W Bush took LESS of your money(leaving you with MORE DOLLARS of your income…NOT more money).But they did NOT spend less.Actually they spent more.So much more that they didnt have the money to pay the bills,which was the deficit.And how do they manage the situation?Do they declare they are bankrupt?No,they go to their friends in the Fed,PRINT currency,and pay the bills.
When currency is printed,MORE currency is in the market competing for the SAME goods.Same Government spending with Bill Clinton,MORE spending with Bush,LESS net gross domestic product UNDER George Bush,and YET MORE dollar bills out there to buy the same goods.Result:PRICES GO up.Or,in other words,the EXTRA dollars you took home thanks to Bush’s tax cuts were worth FAR less than under Bill Clinton.WHY do you think the economy is in recession?BECAUSE of reckless deficit spending.LED,CONTROLLED,AND DIRECTED by GW Bush.
Coming back to the point:If Joe the Plumber had been TRULY sincere in his question,he would have GRILLED McCain the same way,asking him to PROVE to him as a doubting voter that he did not intend to do more deficit spending,and cheat him out of his earned income(by devaluing it through currency printing as Bush and Co did).Instead,he blindly bought into McCain’s proposals.How am I to believe that McCain will NOT do deficit spending like Bush?I see no credible evidence in the entire campaign that will suggest that McCain was doing anything more than lip service to fiscal conservatism(which is where my loyalties lie,by the way).And if he isnt serious about Fiscal Conservatism,well,personally,i trust the tax and spend within collections liberal MORE than the tax less and spend beyond means ‘neo conservative’ that Bush and Co have demonstrated themselves to be.Until the Republicans PROVE their commitment to fiscal conservatism,they WONT get back the voters they lost this election.If Obama is fiscally imprudent,those voters will switch to the Libertarians.There is a serious credibility issue for Fiscal Conservatism under Republicans.Face it or try to hide like Sean Hannity behind veils of ‘THERE GOES THE ENEMY’
November 15th, 2008 at 4:16 pm
Karthik,
As far as I know, Joe the plumber never had the one-on-one with McCain to ask him. But that is beside the point. No one had the right to DIG into his privacy, to try to demean him, for no reason. His question was not a threat to Obama. Oh, I guess he considered it a threat since Obama showed his true colors.
And, by the way, I am not defending Bush’s spending habits for the country. But I don’t believe in bigger government taking more of my money to spend however it wants. You shouldn’t either.
November 15th, 2008 at 4:45 pm
So you dont believe in bigger government,but you’ll blindly trust the same people who have been taking “less” dollars from you and making the government bigger(and making your dollars worth less),just because they say ‘We are for small government’?You dont ask them about their fiscal imprudence.you dont ask them to prove their commitment to take less AND spend within budget.Am I to take it you dont really mind if the government takes less money and keeps the same bloated size,as Bush and Co did,prints currency and takes ur money through the backdoor(via inflation,currency devaluation)?If you are committed to small government you can NEVER lose sight of the deficit while talking of the taxes.Evidence shows that neither party can be trusted to keep government size small,even if they cut taxes.Actually evidence shows BOTH parties have a propensity,desire,inclination to bloat government in any case,either directly through taxes or indirectly through currency printing,devaluation,inflation.
November 15th, 2008 at 4:50 pm
And while I notice you’re here to have a debate with me…I didnt hear you voice your support for the right to privacy for Ayers,Khalidi that I spoke up for.Am I to take it you dont believe these individuals have the same rights to privacy as Joe the Plumber…perhaps because of their ‘actions’ or ‘record’ or ‘history’?
November 15th, 2008 at 4:53 pm
Maybe you were waiting for me to make a statement explicitly:
PEOPLE DIGGING INTO JOE THE PLUMBER’s RECORDS WAS WRONG,AND ILLEGAL,AND IMMORAL.
Now lets hear you say what you feel about Fox,Hannity,and O”Reilly pursuing Ayers,Khalidi to their doorsteps,without being invited, and asking them humiliating questions after demonizing them(Ayers and Khalidi) WITHOUT their(Ayers and Khalidi) doing ANYTHING to come into the election debate
November 15th, 2008 at 4:56 pm
As far as bigger government goes:
I have long gotten disenchanted with the tax being read as a direct parameter of how small the government is (and lower taxes as how less of your money they spend).The evidence speaks for itself:Those who talk about small government give you and I the carrot of lower taxes,show zero commitment to lowering spending which is the TRUE indicator of size of government, and take your money through the backdoor,by devaluing the money they let u keep,by printing currency to make up for their deficit spending.I mean,how long are you going to let yourself get conned by the carrot of lower taxes?
Of course i want small government,and my true reward is my keeping more of my money.But it would be naive of me and you to believe that just because they let you keep more of your earned dollars,they actually reduced government size.Look at the spending,look at how much new currency was printed,and how much your currency was devalued,and figure whether they REALLY let you keep more,after adjusting for devaluation.I dont think they did,under Bush.And i didnt think McCain was committed towards letting people keep more of their money,he didnt show sufficient commitment to NOT rob people through the backdoor by deficit spending.
As far as Obama goes:Higher taxes of course goes against business interests.But the businesses are at the mercy of the big bully called government.One person representing the big bully says ‘i’ll continue blowing money in smoke in avoidable wars’.Another says ‘i’ll stop blowing money on wars,and still spend more,by new government spending schemes’.You figure.I think between these two,all other things remaining constant,business will be hurt MORE by government devaluing money AND blowing it in smoke.If Bush had kept his taxes as they were,and spent OUTSIDE of avoidable wars like Iraq,I would have legitimate reason to believe Obama’s plans will hurt business more.Until i see the avoidable expenses(for which currency is being printed).War destroys economies.The money spent there just goes up in smoke.It is a EN MASSE looting,with a few defense contractors ALONE making money.The overall value add to the economy is a big Minus.
November 15th, 2008 at 6:17 pm
Ya basta con Joe, the plumer, Ayers, REv.Wright, Farrakhan ect. la campagna se acabo!
November 15th, 2008 at 7:23 pm
All you liberal loonies should pack up and move out of America. Anyone who would compare Ayers and bin laden to the President of your country needs to see a doctor, quickly! If you defend this man regardless of who you voted for you should be shipped off to France. As an independent, it seems to me the liberals on the far left, always seem to hate America and all it stands for, Why? To be so far on the right or left is disturbing to me. Pres. Obama deserves a chance to be our Pres. just as Bush did. Why do liberals hate so much, if your not on thier side? I say Defend America and all it stands for. Even if you dont agree or didn’t vote for Bush why so much hate? How can one defend Ayres and not your President? It’s crazy to me.
November 16th, 2008 at 2:51 pm
I have to ask if you’re challenged in some way. Did I say what Ayers did was OK? Please point that out to me if I did because Alan must have hackers on the site changing posts.
I said it’s understandable and part of political change. He picked an extremist side, and I abhor violence, so what he did was not OK with me – but his intentions certainly were.
I grow tired of political dick waving contests staged by our military, whether against Russia in the Cold War or Iran in our current messes, and I know I’m not alone. Why can’t we concentrate on the homefront?
If the $87B Bush appropriated for the wars initially had been spent here, we could have had AA batteries outside our major cities and terrorists be damned.
Now we’re way over budget on that too. I wish Clinton could have run again in ‘98. Man he was great for this country.
November 17th, 2008 at 12:16 am
hmm,Bill.Is that a serious question “How can you defend Ayers and not defend our President?”
Let me see.Ayers plotted many bombings.Killed no government worker.damaged some private property.Had some of “his own people” die in an accidental explosion.Paid for all of it with the money HE collected for his organization.
George W Bush did NOT get my consent for the war in Iraq.He did NOT have the money to spend it either.He had the keys to the currency printing machines through the Fed.Knowing he didnt have my consent for the war in Iraq,he decided to bypass getting my consent,went ahead and abused his possession of the above keys, and thereby increased my taxes (by devaluing the post-tax income i retained).I havent yet seen a dime’s worth of value addition to me(OR to you) by the billions of dollars blown in Iraq(unless you count the “oil deals” with Iraqis obtained under the threat of the gun…which if you and I do here in America would send us to Prison).
Question is,do WHO do you believe people are accountable to?Bill Ayers,You,Me are accountable to the legal system.We spend our private incomes.Bush spends the money collected from EVERYONE,that is NOT his own.He is accountable to the people who’s money he spends(directly or indirectly).He isnt really answerable to the legal system(wonderful system of legal immunity).Or do you believe you give your President carte blanche?If so,good luck to you
November 18th, 2008 at 5:03 am
Also,I didnt notice where I or anyone else compared Bin Laden to President Bush.I compared Ayers,Khalidi to Joe the Plumber.What’s your argument,is it this:
“Bush is ‘morally on a much higher pedestal than Bin Laden” and therefore anyone who defends Khalidi’s rights(Khalidi is a Muslim,Osama is a Muslim, so if I defend Khalidi’s rights,I’d defend Osama’s rights next,right?) must be a left/liberal loonie who has no place in the USA?
If you read hate for the USA in what I wrote,I am truly very sorry for you.Anyone who knows me personally knows that I cannot bring myself to HATE anyone(Even Osama Bin Laden(who I believe is an established fanatic terrorist, with whom I dont believe any dialog can make a decent human being out of him, and who must be caught,brought to justice), Or George W Bush(who I believe is a war criminal who sadly will get away with his crimes)).Are you sure you saw Hatred for America in my posts?Or are you unable to hold up the country you (AND I) love and respect and cherish,to the mirror of moral and rational accountability?Because,I believe that’s all I did:hold America(the GOVERNMENT) up to the same standards you hold for Bill Ayers.
November 18th, 2008 at 5:16 am
In other words…America has done its fair share of reprehensible things…Iraq,Vietnam,Hiroshima being the 3 standout actions…I dont hate America because of these 3 actions…Neither do I hate Bill Ayers for plotting to kill government servants…Neither would I have hated Bill Ayers HAD he successfully killed government servants…Bill Ayers has done bad things,and a lot of good things. So has America.I cannot hate one without hating the other, and I’d rather not be a hypocrite,and keep hatred out of my heart,for BOTH(and also because I dont believe hatred gets me anywhere,and I dont believe it does you,either)
November 18th, 2008 at 5:20 am