> > Don't you think that's a little harsh? You are using a measuring stick > you > wouldn't even begin to apply to Bush. 'work with terrorists'? None of > the > rhetoric or actions have done anything of the kind.
Bill Ayers. Khalid Rashidi. Raila Odinga. I've not exactly held back on facts about these connections, so I don't quite get why you are at a loss to understand what I'm referring to. > It feels very much > like > you define the Bush way (war, wiretapping, hating mUslims) Gross mischaracterizations, by the way. And oh, did you miss the fact that Obama's administration sided WITH Bush in an important wiretapping case last week---and he voted FOR FISA last year, despite campaigning against it?! Did you not observe that he murdered 18 civilians in cold blood this week pursuing the same militaristic solution toward going after terrorist leaders in Pakistan? What a ... a...neoconservative! >to be only > the > very minimum position to take and anything even slightly less extreme > to be > traitorous. You clearly haven't read my critical posts about Bush and my circumspect view about the war? > If working with your enemies to try and reduce the risk of > war > is treasonous to you then I suggest that you rethink your position very > carefully. It is not only dumb but dangerous. My view of Obama is complex. He's definitely got positive attributes: smart, determined, and spiritual. I think he's overrated in the first, underrated in the second, and misunderstood in the third. On the other hand, there is a disturbing rage buried inside him that is a key to understanding what makes him tick. He was on bad terms with both of his parents at the time of their deaths. This is decidedly NOT GOOD. His bizarre relationship with his grandmother (who coincidentally died the night before his election), and his ties to sordid characters like Frank Mashall Davis (who I hypothesize may be his real father), Bill Ayers, Jeremiah Wright, Khalid Rashidi, Khalid Al Monsouri. The fact his original birth certificate was SEALED (on or about the time he visited his ailing grandmother, alone) bothers me greatly. (I rather suspect it removes doubt about his citizenship but injects doubt about his paternity--which would explain a lot of his parental issues.) Whole aspects of his life are in a lock box somewhere. Try to find anything he wrote in college, or as an editor of the Harvard Review. Try to find his grades. Try to find anything but an awful poem about orangutans he wrote as an undergrad and a boring Chapter 4 on community organizing in "After Alinsky", that even begins to compare to the lofty literary flourish of his memoirs. Memoirs of a life yet to be lived, that read hauntingly like Bill Ayers' book Fugitive Days. Try finding out his medical condition---other than a one page letter from a physician asserting his fitness with no details. Other aspects never came up---his long-time drug use, his campaigning as a US Senator for communist thug Raila Odinga (who is convinced they are blood cousins), his life as "Barry Soetero" (a muslim student in Indonesia--where he may or may not have been a dual citizen)---and most people know nothing about them. Not one thing about this guy, his rise to power, and the hypnotic mystique he holds over so many people, makes any sense, or gives me any comfort. He's really something new in our politics---but I don't think he's new in a good sense, and I daresay I know more facts about him, and have gazed far more deeply into his history and motivations, than the vast majority of voters out there---most of whom have been brainwashed by an corrupt media to think he's a great figure of hope and peace. > > I don't mind debating politics and policy from opposing points of view > but > your views lack logic, reason, balance and sometimes even facts. Makes > a > meaningful debate a waste of time. Where is my logic faulty? You haven't impressed me in this email--indeed, you seem impervious to my arguments. Where do I lack reason? I have a reason for everything I believe and can drill down to first principles in any issue. Lack of facts?! Please, but for my posts, almost nothing substantive of a factual nature about Obama's life, critical or supportive, was discussed on ProFox OT during the whole election. - Bob _______________________________________________ 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.
