Obama chummy with terrorsts? Video, you decide...

[NathanDavid]

Here's another link from my eldest brother that question's Barack Hussein Obama's political ties to terrorists, one of who got off on a technicality (no warrant for FBI surveillance)...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DZ52c...eature=related

[casaba]

And here is a picture of Rumsfeld shaking hands with a terrorist known ot have used chemical weapons... oops, we supplied the weapons and the targets weren't Americans, so I guess that bit of history doesn't matter.

People get off it. Time changes everything. Think Ms. Rice shaking hands with someone worthy of assassination and bombing attacks twenty five years ago. This guy had some extreme views, and yes, avoided punishment for actions based on these views on technicalityies at the the time. However, today the guy is no a terrorist than GWB, and in my opinion... but I'll leave that out for now.

[NathanDavid]

Casaba, you claim to have a picture, but where is it? I don't see any link...

Yesterday, on one of those tabloid expose~ type shows (maybe "Extra?"), I heard mention of-and saw a clip of McCain boarding the yacht of a man who was recently reported in the press to be a felon (or ex-con). That tabloid clip later stated that McCain had gone to visit a friend, but that to McCain's unawares his friend had rented the yacht to a known felon. McCain was innocent, and it was stated as such in the clip. It was a surpirise to me that McCain got a fair shake on NBC. For years I have considered NBC to be one of the more liberal networks (given that they air Ellen etc.... (not that I care anything for Tyra's trash, likewise...)).

Nowhere in this FOX News clip is there ANYTHING refuting the accusations that can (and maybe should) be alleged against Obama. Why hasn't Obama's campaign come to the front to explain these associations and answer these questions? If Obama is to be considered for the U.S.'s presidential hot seat, then every trace of evidence that casts doubt on his trustworthiness deserves an explanation. Obama has had more free press thrown at him than Elvis got in his entire lifetime, and yet these very many important questions go unanswered, still.

Why shouldn't we believe that Obama keeps company with terrorists? His very own pastor of twenty years is a Black Libertarian Theologian who embraces a platform combination of marxxism, black power, Islam and Christianity. Obama's answer for that one is that "he didn't know about all of that." That's a joke. Anyone who is as popular, and anyone who is as devout a Christian as Obama claims to be, given his social work experience THAT HE DARES compare to Palin's background and experience, can have no excuse for not even knowing the teachings of his church of twenty years. I would know what my pastor believes within a month, in any church. Church is about "True Peace," not racial hatred.

All Obama has to do is have one of his staff members contact FOX News with an explanation. Obama doesn't even have to go on camera. FOX News would report the truth if they could get it (or whatever Obama claims is the truth, anyway....). Obama won't offer an explanation because, at best, his explanation would show him to be WRECKLESS!

No-one really knows anythnig about Obama, NOT EVEN HE! Obama is just some guy that the liberals scooped up to puppet around and vote for whatever demonic bill that comes along.... If you can't see through that, then you are fool enough to deserve someone like Obama for president!

Obama, by the way, was also mentored for six years (in Hawaii) by a communist; (see my other thread linking to my MYFOXAL.COM thread).

The American people have a right to know!

[casaba]

Sorry for not providing the link; I thought everybody was familiar with the pictures of Rumsfeld meeting with Saddam Hussein.

As far as your "very important questions" regarding his association with the former Weathermen member is silly to me. The guy is today a university professor; I thought it was Christians who valued repentance most. As far as the rest of your post, I find it worthy of Rush Limbaugh and little more. I find especially laughable your claim of a "combination of marxxism, black power, Islam and Christianity"; I would guess that almost any socially progressive cause could be so-called, along with 'combining Wicca, environmentallism, and capitalism'. Such claims come straight from people with much more interest in shock value than understanding. The same goes for the claim that 'Obama associates with terrorists'. Worthless bit of verbage.

[Darth Executor]

And here is a picture of Rumsfeld shaking hands with a terrorist known ot have used chemical weapons... oops, we supplied the weapons and the targets weren't Americans, so I guess that bit of history doesn't matter.

People get off it. Time changes everything. Think Ms. Rice shaking hands with someone worthy of assassination and bombing attacks twenty five years ago. This guy had some extreme views, and yes, avoided punishment for actions based on these views on technicalityies at the the time. However, today the guy is no a terrorist than GWB, and in my opinion... but I'll leave that out for now.

The problem is that Obama's running on "change", only he has no record of real bipartisanship, no record of standing up to the democratic congress with an approval rating 2-3 times smaller than Bush's, no aversion to flip-flopping for political purposes whenever he thinks it suits him and no problem smearing his opponents despite his bull crap "new politics" speech. Plus, Rumsfeld/Rice aren't running for president. Obama is and he hasn't even repented of Ayers.

[casaba]

Sorry, DE, but I can't say I have much of an idea where 90% of your last post came from. The issue in the thread is whether Obama's connections to Ayers is an issue and/or if Obama tried to hide his connections. To me the answer to the first question is most likely 'no' because of the time that has passed since the incident and the actions of Ayers since that time. That is why I brought up Rice in Libya, we can't continue to judge an individual on one action long ago, but must take into account recent actions. (Rumsfeld in Iraq was a bit more of a jab: he was in Iraq when the gasing was taking place, but I was guessing that NathanDavid was a Rumsfeld supporter, which in any case, as you suggest, is not very relevant.) As far as the second part of question, if Obama tried to downplay or even hide his connections, I find it irrelevant. If Ayers is deemed to be a contributor to society today, what is the issue of downplaying connections? I found the attacks on President Clinton to be an silly waste of time and energy; the attacks here are an even sillier waste.

Finally, let me ask you, DE, for what does Obama need to "repent of Ayers"?

[NathanDavid]

Darth, save your rant. He's not going to get it... Most liberals selectively read and hear what they want to. That is makes them liberals...

Casaba, how do you explain Obama's criticizing Leviticus and Exodus, and then calling the Sermon on the Mount "radical?" Oh, yeah, repentance goes a long way on a street corner....

Hey folks, I am about to post a humorous political post. I hope you all see it. Some of it is pretty funny. It took me a little while to work it up...

[Nicholas]

Darth, save your rant. He's not going to get it... Most liberals selectively read and hear what they want to. That is makes them liberals...

Casaba, how do you explain Obama's criticizing Leviticus and Exodus, and then calling the Sermon on the Mount "radical?" Oh, yeah, repentance goes a long way on a street corner....

Hey folks, I am about to post a humorous political post. I hope you all see it. Some of it is pretty funny. It took me a little while to work it up...

You're taking Obama's comments out of context, you know that, right? When he said that the Sermon on the Mount was "radical", he was not denigrating it. What he said that it was so radical that if implemented and people followed it, the Department of Defense wouldn't be needed anymore.

[NathanDavid]

There you go, Nicolation or whatever your name is.... telling dishonesty. In his video, which is available on MyFoxAL.com (and here I have a link to it I think), Obama said that Leviticus upholds slavery, Exodus teaches stoning your children if they depart from the faith, and that the department of defense could not stand if it was run according to the Sermon on the Mount, because that the Sermon on the Mount was so radical.

Given Obama's garbage, when I hear him say, "Lipstick on a Pig," I just refer to his religious position. His holding a Bible is the same as Judas's mocking kiss!

[themuzicman]

Sorry, DE, but I can't say I have much of an idea where 90% of your last post came from. The issue in the thread is whether Obama's connections to Ayers is an issue and/or if Obama tried to hide his connections. To me the answer to the first question is most likely 'no' because of the time that has passed since the incident and the actions of Ayers since that time. That is why I brought up Rice in Libya, we can't continue to judge an individual on one action long ago, but must take into account recent actions. (Rumsfeld in Iraq was a bit more of a jab: he was in Iraq when the gasing was taking place, but I was guessing that NathanDavid was a Rumsfeld supporter, which in any case, as you suggest, is not very relevant.) As far as the second part of question, if Obama tried to downplay or even hide his connections, I find it irrelevant. If Ayers is deemed to be a contributor to society today, what is the issue of downplaying connections? I found the attacks on President Clinton to be an silly waste of time and energy; the attacks here are an even sillier waste.

Finally, let me ask you, DE, for what does Obama need to "repent of Ayers"?

1) Beginning his political campaign by going to Ayers and having Ayers hold a fundraiser for Obama, knowing that Ayers is a terrorist.

2) Agreeing to sit on an executive board with Ayers, giving him legitimacy.

Maybe some explanation as to why Obama would engage in these things with a known terrorist would help, too.

Michael

[casaba]

Musicman, you are ignoring that the terrorist actions in question were more than 30 years ago. Today, Ayers is a university professor active in local politics; I am not familiar with his work but I can guess quite easily that his accomplishments have done far more good than those ranting about their own righteousness on the web. Saying Ayers "is a terrorist" is about disingenuous as saying Gerry Adams 'is a terrorist'.

[Darth Executor]

Musicman, you are ignoring that the terrorist actions in question were more than 30 years ago. Today, Ayers is a university professor active in local politics; I am not familiar with his work but I can guess quite easily that his accomplishments have done far more good than those ranting about their own righteousness on the web. Saying Ayers "is a terrorist" is about disingenuous as saying Gerry Adams 'is a terrorist'.

Do you have a link where he repents of his actions? From what I hear he doesn't, so I see no reason why we should stop treating him like a terrorist if he doesn't regret what he's done.

[themuzicman]

Musicman, you are ignoring that the terrorist actions in question were more than 30 years ago. Today, Ayers is a university professor active in local politics; I am not familiar with his work but I can guess quite easily that his accomplishments have done far more good than those ranting about their own righteousness on the web. Saying Ayers "is a terrorist" is about disingenuous as saying Gerry Adams 'is a terrorist'.

That would be a normal path for a terrorist US radical to take. I don't see anything in his action that indicate he's changed his mind about what he did.

Michael

[Nicholas]

There you go, Nicolation or whatever your name is.... telling dishonesty. In his video, which is available on MyFoxAL.com (and here I have a link to it I think), Obama said that Leviticus upholds slavery, Exodus teaches stoning your children if they depart from the faith, and that the department of defense could not stand if it was run according to the Sermon on the Mount, because that the Sermon on the Mount was so radical.

Given Obama's garbage, when I hear him say, "Lipstick on a Pig," I just refer to his religious position. His holding a Bible is the same as Judas's mocking kiss!

First of all, my name is Nicholas, so I will expect you to refer to me by that name.

Secondly, if you're going to accuse me of being dishonest you had better have something to back it up because I don't take kindly to your attempts to impugn my character.

[Pilgrim]

Come on people, are you telling me you're taking Nathan David seriously? Please don't humor him.