Judy wrote:
Just in general, if he had been more straightforward
and forthcoming about his past associations from the
get-go, it would have been much more difficult for
folks to use them against him.
So the question is, whether Khalidi acted as a PLO
spokesman while the PLO was widely
They were not only wrong, they light babies
on fire by the thousands on their illegal,
and unsanctioned by the American people, air
raids.
Judy wrote:
I agree, but I don't think it excuses Obama's
collaboration with Ayers.
Apparently what we have here are two very mixed
up
Not that the mentally deranged or LIVs care, but here is a good
summary of the khalid nonsense by the washington post:
It turns out that McCain is treading on tricky ground when he cites
the Khalidi case as an example of Obama consorting with terrorist
sympathizers. The Obama campaign was quick
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, boo_lives [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Not that the mentally deranged or LIVs care, but here is a good
summary of the khalid nonsense by the washington post:
It turns out that McCain is treading on tricky ground when he cites
the Khalidi case as an example
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Alex Stanley
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It turns out that McCain is treading on tricky ground when he cites
the Khalidi case as an example of Obama consorting with terrorist
sympathizers. The Obama campaign was quick to point out that an
organization
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's true that McCain distributed several grants, including one
worth about half a million dollars, to the Center for Palestine Research
and Studies, or CPRS, a West Bank organization associated with Khalidi.
What the
I usually learn something from an attack on Obama's ideas. But I'm
hitting a dead end on this attack.
What is the big picture here? Republicans are using these
associations to create fear of Obama, but when McCain is asked
outright if he believes Obama hates America he backs down. So the
it is just the dying gasp of opposition against the next President
of the USA, Barack Hussein Obama. he is obviously no more a
terrorist than those who proclaim him to be. people always resist
change, and this time the change is a substantial one; someone on
the side of the masses instead of
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, raunchydog [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Alex Stanley
j_alexander_stanley@ wrote:
It turns out that McCain is treading on tricky ground when he cites
the Khalidi case as an example of Obama consorting with terrorist
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
But what is your spin Raunchy? I get the point that Obama
downplayed his associations with a guy with a past. Seeing
the constant focus on this issue I can kind of understand why.
But his association
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues
curtisdeltablues@ wrote:
snip
But what is your spin Raunchy? I get the point that Obama
downplayed his associations with a guy with a past. Seeing
the
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues
curtisdeltablues@ wrote:
snip
But what is your spin Raunchy? I get the point
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11
no_reply@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues
You laid out the different positions pretty fairly.
Given that the president of the United States has to work with the
world's despots and dictators to advance the agenda of the US, I think
that Obama's ability to work on a specific project with a guy with a
past like Ayers is an asset. The
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11
no_reply@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
i find it odd that those who would criticize our next President for
the company he may keep hold him to an impossible standard, and one
that is impossible for any public figure to uphold.
the way these
Me, I want as leader of my country someone who is
unafraid to sit down at a table with ANYONE, and
talk things over with them. I want that leader to
actually *listen* as the other person speaks, and
try to figure out where he's coming from. And I
want that leader to weigh what the other
Turq wrote:
I want as leader of my country someone who is
unafraid to sit down at a table with ANYONE, and
talk things over with them.
Yeah, that's the ticket - sit down with Osama bin
Laden and 'talk things over'. Then you would be
guilty by association! You're not even making any
sense,
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, TurquoiseB [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
To suggest that it is bad to talk to someone who
thinks differently than you do is to suggest that
it is bad to think.
Barry Wright, Master of Inadvertent Irony.
This is the fellow who boasts repeatedly of
not
Me, I want as leader of my country someone who is
unafraid to sit down at a table with ANYONE, and
talk things over with them. I want that leader to
actually *listen* as the other person speaks, and
try to figure out where he's coming from. And I
want that leader to weigh what the
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You laid out the different positions pretty fairly.
Given that the president of the United States has to work
with the world's despots and dictators to advance the
agenda of the US, I think that Obama's ability
snip
snip
I don't have a problem with his church either. I have
a problem with his judgment in not realizing how it
would be used against him if he ran for president; and
I have a problem with the way he dealt with it when it
became a public controversy.
So he was quite politically
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11
no_reply@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-snip-
But I do have an opinion about the people Ayers was fighting
against
who were acting against our best interest in South East Asia. They
were not only wrong, they light babies on fire by the thousands on
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
snip
I don't have a problem with his church either. I have
a problem with his judgment in not realizing how it
would be used against him if he ran for president; and
I have a problem with the way he dealt
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@
wrote:
snip
Has nothing to do with editorial perfection. I'm
saying you read into my comments something that wasn't
there and missed what was there.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11
no_reply@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@
wrote:
snip
Has nothing to do with editorial perfection. I'm
saying you
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[...]
The notion that Obama's association with Ayers means
he's somehow in sympathy with terrorism is, of
course, totally absurd, designed to appeal to
nonthinkers. But there are also entirely legitimate
objections.
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11
no_reply@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, curtisdeltablues
curtisdeltablues@ wrote:
You laid out the different positions pretty fairly.
Given that the president of the United States has to work
with the world's
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11
no_reply@ wrote:
snip
i find it odd that those who would criticize our next
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11
no_reply@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@
wrote:
snip
Just in general, if he had been more straightforward
and
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, boo_lives [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11
no_reply@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@
wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11
no_reply@ wrote:
snip
i find it odd that those who would criticize our next
President for
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote:
snip
That's debatable, Curtis, and it really isn't
parallel to a president's dealings with bad
foreign leaders. Remember that Ayers and Dohrn
held a
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, sparaig LEnglish5@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, authfriend jstein@ wrote:
--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, enlightened_dawn11
no_reply@ wrote:
snip
36 matches
Mail list logo
