> > You state that all the points listed below would fail the "No FUD" test > but fail to provide even > one shred of a rebuttal. Please, feel free to do so so that those of > us > still trying to determine > which way to turn in the upcoming election have some solid data to go > on.
There is a lot of "F" in the list, but no "U" or "D". * It is certain that he announced his campaign in the home of his friend, Bill Ayers. * It is true that Ayers was a founding member of the Weather Underground, and got off on a technicality, and later bragged they didn't do enough to bomb US institutions during their "Riots of Rage" Implication: He has no problem hanging with domestic terrorists of the left-wing variety. * It is true that Tony Rezko, another close friend of Obama, helped him buy his $1mil mansion, and that Tony Rezko was recently convicted of fraud. It is also true that Obama helped him with political favors. Implication: Obama has some very shady dealings with some very shady people. Hardly a candidate of some kind of next-generation politics. * It is true that Obama was able to remove even a sitting Dem incumbent from the primary ballot based on a technicality, and as such ran unopposed as the Dem for his state legislature seat. * It is true that Obama was very lucky that Ryan's private marital records came out at precisely the most convenient time during the campaign, and not sooner. Implication: The people behind him are shrewd "Machiavellians" of the kind Leland use to wax eloquent when he thought the term equated to "neo-con". * It is true that Rev. Wright embraces Black Liberation Theology. * It is true that Black Liberation Theology is based on Marxism, and uses Christian theology as window dressing for its violent political ideology. * It is true that Rev. Wright, along with Meeks and Phleger, are people whom Obama has described as "Spiritual Mentors". * It is true that Obama went to Wright's church for 20 years, and had his children baptized by the man. Implication: He's lying through his teeth when he says he doesn't recognize the Rev. Wright of today with the Rev. Wright he used to know. He's lying when he says he doesn't support the man's ideology or views. He's lying when he claims to be some kind of "cut above" the political fray, a uniter, and a moderate. There is NOTHING in his background WHATSOEVER, to suggest anything but a radical ideology with a far-left bent. * It is true he promised to stick to public financing. It is also true that when his cash advantage over McCain became enormous, he backed out of that pledge to keep the gravy train of money rolling in. Implication: He, like the Daley Machine behind him, is anything but a candidate of change and hope for a better, less money-driven kind of politics. Quite the opposite. * It is true that the Frank he mentions in his biography as a mentor was Frank Marshall Davis. It is true that Davis was an avowed Communist. Implication: Obama has way too many ties to far-left, anti-American radicals to be trusted with the Presidency. All his rhetoric says the opposite of the facts of his life, and the gap is not able to be bridged by ignorance anymore. - Bob > > ::michael > > > > > Your post, Bob, would definitely fail all the "No FUD" tests I've > seen. > > Obama is really a nice guy and has no intentions of putting the white > > race into slaver after he come to office, so stop all this nonsense > > about him being some kind of scary terrorist. I'm posting this email > > through my new router, (eg test, test, test for the "No FUD" test). > > > > Regards, > > > > LelandJ > > > [excessive quoting removed by server] _______________________________________________ Post Messages to: [email protected] Subscription Maintenance: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profox OT-free version of this list: http://leafe.com/mailman/listinfo/profoxtech Searchable Archive: http://leafe.com/archives/search/profox This message: http://leafe.com/archives/byMID/profox/[EMAIL PROTECTED] ** All postings, unless explicitly stated otherwise, are the opinions of the author, and do not constitute legal or medical advice. This statement is added to the messages for those lawyers who are too stupid to see the obvious.
