Barack Obama’s pro-lifer-as-terrorist analogy
Barack Obama’s performance was so awful last night, I gave short shrift to his cringe-inducing comparison of convicted terrorist Bill Ayers with GOP Sen. Tom Coburn. Let’s go back to the transcript to spell out just how botched this moment was:
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Senator, if you get the nomination, you’ll have to — (applause) — (inaudible).
I want to give Senator Clinton a chance to respond, but first a follow-up on this issue, the general theme of patriotism in your relationships. A gentleman named William Ayers, he was part of the Weather Underground in the 1970s. They bombed the Pentagon, the Capitol and other buildings. He’s never apologized for that. And in fact, on 9/11 he was quoted in The New York Times saying, “I don’t regret setting bombs; I feel we didn’t do enough.”
An early organizing meeting for your state senate campaign was held at his house, and your campaign has said you are friendly. Can you explain that relationship for the voters, and explain to Democrats why it won’t be a problem?
SEN. OBAMA: George, but this is an example of what I’m talking about.
This is a guy who lives in my neighborhood, who’s a professor of English in Chicago, who I know and who I have not received some official endorsement from. He’s not somebody who I exchange ideas from on a regular basis.
And the notion that somehow as a consequence of me knowing somebody who engaged in detestable acts 40 years ago when I was 8 years old, somehow reflects on me and my values, doesn’t make much sense, George.
The fact is, is that I’m also friendly with Tom Coburn, one of the most conservative Republicans in the United States Senate, who during his campaign once said that it might be appropriate to apply the death penalty to those who carried out abortions.
Do I need to apologize for Mr. Coburn’s statements? Because I certainly don’t agree with those either.
So this kind of game, in which anybody who I know, regardless of how flimsy the relationship is, is somehow — somehow their ideas could be attributed to me — I think the American people are smarter than that. They’re not going to suggest somehow that that is reflective of my views, because it obviously isn’t.
If this is the kind of “friend” Obama is to principled pro-lifers, who needs enemies?
Is Obama really that marinated in moral equivalence that he gives no pause before likening a convicted terrorist who belonged to a violent radical organization responsible for dozens of bombings to one of the most respected members of the US Senate–a life-affirming, life-giving obstetrician who has personally delivered more than 4,000 babies?
LifeNews.com editor Steven Erfelt reports on the comments Sen. Coburn made that Obama analogized to Ayers’ violent spree, and he notes that the pro-lifer-as-terrorist analogy is a staple of the Left:
Coburn, who is an Oklahoma senator, told AP in July 2004, “I favor the death penalty for abortionists and other people who take life.”
Later, Coburn expanded on the remarks and told The Oklahoman newspaper, “My contention for the death penalty is, if you intentionally take innocent life, you ought to be open to the death penalty.”
This isn’t the first time pro-life advocates have been accused of engaging in terrorism.
In August, CNN’s miniseries “God’s Warriors,” featured file footage of the bombing at a Birmingham, Alabama abortion clinic in 1998 by someone unaffiliated with the pro-life movement but who claimed to be against abortion. Christiane Amanpour said the attack was conducted by “radical opponents [who] had long waged their holy war against abortion clinics,” which also “terrified many women.”
In July 2006, Planned Parenthood’s web site labeled pro-life groups “terrorists and extremists.” The group including a heading, “Terrorists and Extremist Organizations” that included Christian Coalition, Concerned Women for America, Eagle Forum, Family Research Council, Feminists for Life of America and Focus on the Family.
Abortion activist Gloria Steinem came under fire in October 2004 when she called President Bush, because of his pro-life record on abortion, “more dangerous to this country’s citizens than terrorists” at a New Mexico NARAL fundraising breakfast. Asked to comment on Steinem’s remark, Chris Lalley, director of media relations for Planned Parenthood of New Mexico, used terrorism comparisons to describe the president. “We think President Bush is terrorizing women’s rights,” Lalley told LifeNews.com. Steinem’s offhanded remark was too much for Wendy Wright of Concerned Women for America, who told LifeNews.com, “Gloria Steinem demeans the victims of terrorism by equating opposition to her political agenda to acts of violence.”
I called Sen. Coburn’s office for comment; I’m sure they will show far more grace, tact, and friendship than Obama showed last night.
No need to guess how the Obama campaign will handle this latest stumble:
It’s a “distraction” from The Issues. Just another Washington “obsession” with Obama’s baffling thought process.
Oh, and don’t you dare compare him to McGovern or Dukakis. After all, he is a “pretty darned good politician,” if he says so himself.
Narcissism: It’s the opiate of the Obamas.
***
Ed Morrissey weighs in:
I doubt Senator Coburn will remain friendly with Obama after equating him to a terrorist because of a policy dispute. Coburn wanted to pass a law through legitimate democratic and political means; Ayers tried to terrorize people into policy changes by blowing up buildings, for which he remains unapologetic to this day. Does Obama really see no difference between the two? And if not, what does that say about Obama?
Related flashback: Sunday meditation: Obama and the punishment of unborn life
See what others have said
Note from Michelle: This section is for comments from michellemalkin.com's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that I agree with or endorse any particular comment just because I let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with my terms of use may lose his or her posting privilege.
Trackbacks
- Does Obama Believe Coburn=Ayers? : The American Pundit
- Hyscience
- Neocon News » Post-Debate Round Up (and looking beyond Obama’s bad night)
- Unpartisan.com Political News and Blog Aggregator
- Obama’s Moral Equivocation FAILURE « Nice Deb
- Michelle Malkin » Here’s a better analogy for Bill Ayers than Tom Coburn: Eric Rudolph.
- Obama’s Faith is Secular Based: « Riggword Weblog
- Pieces of a Whole » Blog Archive » The appeal of Mr. Barack Obama and his qualifications
Comments
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Categories: Abortion, Barack Obama
Mudville Gazette
» The five-year plan
Stop The ACLU
» SEALs Charged With Assault for Arresting Top TerroristLegal Insurrection
» Is "Finish the Job" the New "Peace With Honor"?JustOneMinute
» Getting Ready For The TurkeySister Toldjah
» WaPo and NYT to Obama: We love ya, you stylish deep thinkerPundit & Pundette
» Hiding the decline: Deniers made them do itWeekly Standard
» McAuliffe, and Rudy, and Ford, Oh My!
i was furious about this too, thanks Michelle. somehow, in the world of moral equivalency, setting bombs that ACTUALLY take someone’s life is JUST AS HEINOUS as advocating that abortionist be given the death penalty (death penalty assumes a criminal procedure).
Where do I start? Dr. Coburn is an obstetrician who has delivered a whole bunch of happiness and joy into the world. Ayers killed people and laments that he only wished he had killed more of them. Obama – get a grip or go away preferrably the latter – there is no comparison of the two. And yes, I believe that in Obamaland he sees them the same. How very sad.
Here is my moral equivalence argument. To a 9th month fetus on the verge of birth, the doctor violating his hypocratic oath by aborting me in the womb is a terrorist. I will equate that doctor to a terrorist and the entire democratic party as harborers of terrorism.
Unfortunately that’s probably how most of the left feel. I wouldn’t be surprised if BHO actually scored points on that exchange with his base…
Let’s turn this around. Imagine a Republican politician who was accused of accepting money and help from Al-Qaeda, and pointing out that hey, I’m also friends with people on the Left, like Nancy Pelosi, even though I disagree with what she stands for.
Ouch! I think the Obama family can count themselves OFF of someones Christmas card list this year.
Bears repeating:
Ed couldn’t have said it better. And that means a lot coming from me, a bloviating father of 13.
“In August, CNN’s miniseries “God’s Warriors,” featured file footage of the bombing at a Birmingham, Alabama abortion clinic in 1998 by someone unaffiliated with the pro-life movement but who claimed to be against abortion.”
I love how CNN had to go as far back as 1998 to find an example of an extreme pro-lifer, and one that’s not even affiliated with the pro-life movement no less. I only have to go as far back as two minutes to find an example of an extreme pro-choicer.
The problem here is that liberals aren’t wired to be critical of their own positions. Logic is illogical to them.
Ummmm, yes. He’s more marinated than Ted Kennedy.
Was this a trick question?
The featherweight is clearly unelectable. As Rush has been saying this afternoon, the super-delegates have decision to make.
Let’s not discuss who he HAS received endorsements from.
One of which just so happens to be a terrorist organization. HINT: it rhymes with Lamaze…as in Lamaze childbirth classes.
Okay, maybe this is stretching things a bit, but maybe we could all sit down peacefully and discuss our differences during a nice and peaceful celebration for Kwanzaa?
From today’s NYT:
Dude, you might want to reconsider. Maybe move some of that money from the NEA’s budget to mental health initiatives. Just sayin’.
Sorry. Wrong thread. :O
What a horrible example of moral equivalence. lgm would have been a more worthy candidate on that stage last night (that’s a real compliment, lgm.)
Outside the red ropes of his sycophants, Obama is not ready for prime time.
Democrats are really a dumb party … This just doesn’t fly. Conflating what someone says he wants to make legal with blowing up bombs, killing innocents … weird.
This man is the most absurd candidate since Jimmy Carter. He is the most leftist candidate in the presidential race. Obama claims to be the guy to “unite.” All he does is throw everyone under the bus including his own grandmother. What a jerk.
Yet sadly, whether Shrillary or B. Hussein Obama take the primary, (and despite the fact of Rino McCain being our only other option) this will still be a close race for the (Insert Color of Preference) House.
Obama has a way of using his “friends” as foils for his own self justifications. He did this even with his grandmother. He said he could not disown his own grandmother either even though granny made remarks that made Barack “cringe”. Then after throwing his granny under the bus, Barack said he loved her anyway and she loves him. He did the same thing with Senator Coburn. Coburn, of course, never said anything about bombing abortion clinics. He said only that he favored the death penalty, after a trial to a jury and the allowance for judicial appeals, for some people who committed abortions. That is a far cry from bombing the pentagon and killing anyone who might be inside. But after smearing Coburn, like he did with his granny, he said he and Tom are still chums. I wonder if Mr. Coburn feels the same way about Barack. And of course there was his infamous remark about Gerry Ferarro. He said that Gerry is a bigot and says the same things as Wright but he (Barack) loves her anyway. Gosh this is one smarmy, cheesy guy.
Well Obama is willing to throw his own Grandmother under the bus, why not Tom? In an odd way, I do kind of understand his point. Sean Hannity all but blamed Obama for knowing the kid that sat two seats to the right of him in second grade, the one that farted out loud in class. Vote against Obama for that too.
Rush said it best. When you shut down the teleprompter, this guy can’t make coherent statements. Just endless blather from an empty suit.
Hmmmm……. I’m a middle-aged white taxpayer. Pray tell, Sen. Obama, what is MY moral equivalent?
Never mind, I’ll just fall on my sword Roman style. I’m so ashamed!!!
So, take out the word “official” in Obama’s response about Ayers’ “official endorsement” and you have a non-official endorsement. Why else would Obama use the word “official” to clarify the act of endorsement other than to spin it away from being on the record as full-fledged support by Ayers.
And did you see how well Obama avoided the early senate race meeting in the home of Ayers. This guy is smooth, but is getting himself caught up clarifying too many actions in his past.
Someone needs to raise the questions about Obama’s association with Frank Davis, a known communist, and the influence Davis had or still has on Obama’s views of the America and Americans.
Wasn’t there also an endorsement by the Black Panthers for Barack Obama? Of course, the page no longers exists on Obama’s site, when you follow the Digg link.
But, someone did get a screenshot of it, before it disappeared.
William Ayers actually planted bombs that caused that caused death and destruction, and wished he’d caused more death and destruction.
Tom Coburn, on the other hand, said he believes abortion providers deserve the death penalty (which, by the way, they will receive one day when they stand before God and try to explain to Him why they did that) but never actually tried to kill any of them.
How can one compare someone who is DOING something, and someone who just SAYS something should be done?
This really didn’t surprise me. Does anyone else remember how Obama compared his white grandma to Jeremiah Wright?
Did you also notice that when Wright was condemning America, he mentions we bombed Japan (to ultimately save lives) but didn’t mention the tens of millions of innocent babies we’ve killed thanks to Roe v. Wade?
That is because Wright, a political lefty, is a supporter of Roe v. Wade.
It just goes to show the hypocrisy of the left. The next time people give you grief for being pro-life, just ask them about all those folks that are pro-choice and yet anti-death penalty. Completely indefensible.
No, no, no. You see, Coburn is bitter because he was punished with children. In his bitterness he clings to religion, and it is religion that says abortion is a sin and a crime. Coburn will certainly understand, that after Obama is elected, Obie will erase all the bitterness in his life, thereby releasing his fingerhold on religion, which will turn Coburn around with the rest of the Country.
Got it?
Obama is clearly just saying that he is friendly with people who have done or said things that he finds reprehensible.
He’s not equating the two.
Death penalty for abortion doctors = prinipled pro-lifer? Really?
He is just saying that he is friendly with terrorists and conservatives. You know, both extremes
A question for his Highness:
“You claim to be the great unifier, the one that can bring both sides together. How will you unify your position as one of the only people to vote against the Born Alive Infant Protection Act with the position of Senator Coburn who believes you must protect that life from day one? Will you offer to meet in the middle, allowing women to kill their baby only up to 4 and a half months?”
We await your answer….
If I just keep my mouth shut from now till November, will you vote for me?
Touche Mr. P.
I’d say that Ayers is beyond extreme. Coburn views are to the right of most conservative anti-abortionists, but not quite to the extremist level. However, Obama has had friendly ties with each. I just don’t think he’s equating. A friendly relationship with Richard Rudolph(Extremist) would provide better balance to the Ayers equation.
Obama would have been better served minimizing his relationships with Ayers and focus on the pardons for the Weather Underground.
I thinks his overall point was what I mentioned in #29.
mistressjustice said:
No, he was clearly comparing the two. But to your second point:
What is inherently reprehensible about Coburn’s position? You hire someone (who has professional training) to kill someone for no good reason. Am I talking about hiring a hitman or a doctor who performs abortions?
Just because you might find someone else’s existence to be inconvenient, or someone gets in the way of advancing your career, that doesn’t justify killing them.
Anyone who will kill an innocent child for money (apart from any real moral justification) is scum. Drilling a hole in the back of a child’s skull and sucking the brains out, for profit, how could anyone dare suggest the death penalty for such a one?!
Abortion on demand is indefensible.
I am not surprised by Obamanation being buddies with leftist commie bomb-throwing “activists”. To add some spice to the discussion, and grant equal time to Shillary, she was an intern to one of the most vocal communists in California when she graduated from Law School, right? I guess what I don’t get is O.HUSSEIN’s response connecting Ayers to Sen. Coburn.
MagicalPat said:
I’m sure he would offer to split the baby…
I get very annoyed by people who make unequivocal moral comparisons. The worst are people who compare everything to Hitler and the Nazis. Until someone mass murders around 6 million people and invades several countries, I don’t think that comparison can be made.
But anyway, I think the point he was trying to make was based on the controversial nature of both. Being a conservative blog with a majority conservative fanbase, I can see why many of you may not see Coburn’s statement as such, but there are alot of pro-choice people who do. To them it sounds like he’s advocating killing all the people who have abortions. I think Obama was speaking to those people, and for that this comparison rings true to them. Really his comparison’s validity, or lack of (depending how you see it), hinges on your stance on abortion.
It probably would have been better for him to choose a comparison that we can all agree on, but good luck with that.
Now that I’m reading some more comments, I see #29 already beat me to it.
Trollman
Ah yes, the old King Solomon approach. Obama truly is wise….
Wait a second…
Is Obama defending someone who engaged in terrorism?
If so, how do we expect him to be the Commander in Chief during the War on TERROR?
Hmm?
The irony is that the only thing that Obama can remotely claim as a positive senatorial accomplishment was the federal grant database bill he co-authored with…Tom Coburn.
Seriously, its not like the guy was his pastor for decades or anything like that! Good grief.
James Taranto has an interesting take on this subject over at Best of the Web Today:
[Emphasis added]
That last sentence is key, because it highlights the typical leftist tactic of using moral equivalence as a means of shutting down debate.
PBoilermaker in comment 9 above comes close to the leftist mindset when he states, “The problem here is that liberals aren’t wired to be critical of their own positions. Logic is illogical to them.” I’d use “anathema” instead of “illogical,” but the base point remains the same: leftists perceive logic in much the same way that a spoon perceives the taste of food.
Which goes a long way toward explaining not only Mr. Hopenchange’s moral equivalence gymnastics, but also the Rube Goldberg intellectual constructs of his supporters, like:
- “You say Obama’s an elitist? Well, we all know that ‘elitist’ is just code for “uppity,” you racist!”
- “You say Obama’s inexperienced? Well, we all know that ‘inexperienced’ means ‘young,’ and that boys are young, so you’re just using code to call him a ‘boy,’ you racist!”
Lefties hate debate, because it forces them to think – and that makes their brains hurt. So they spend an inordinate amount of time looking for ways to stop debate before it starts.
Funny thing is, if they’d spend the same mental energy building practical arguments as they do trying to silence “diverse” viewpoints, they might actually come up with a workable debating point or two.
How is that ironic? I’m sure it is for that reason that he used Sen. Coburn as his example. I will reserve judgement on how upset Coburn is over this until he makes a statement.
Trollman:
Needless to say I disagree with your whole argument, and so does about half the country. If you think abortion on demand is indefensible, I strongly disagree and there’s no since in debating that issue. I think the death penalty for abortion doctors is reprehensible, but not AS reprehensible as attacking your own country. That’s what I believe Obama thinks too.
Morrissey said it for me.
mistressjustice said:
Not so, I believe it is indefensible precisely because I have thought long and hard about abortion. I have debated many pro-choice folks and have never seen them make a point that could stand.
It is easy to remain pro-choice so long as you don’t think too hard about what it is. I grew up in a pro-choice environment. My parents were pro-choice. The place I grew up in was fiercely pro-choice.
I used to be pro-choice. But then an amazing thing happened, I began to think for myself. I soon realized that this was indefensible, and I’ll gladly engage anyone in debate that thinks abortion on demand can be defended.
In my experience, the more insightful supporters of abortion on demand refuse to engage in debate. I suspect because they realize if they took a long hard look at it, it would rock their idealogical boat.
mistressjustice said:
Please explain what exactly is reprehensible about Coburn’s view.
If the death penalty for abortion providers is reprehensible, do you also think it is reprehensible to put professional hitmen to death? Are you pro-choice and yet anti-death penalty?
I’m willing and able to debate and defend my position, are you?
I would venture a guess that the Obama’s won’t be on Senator Coburn’s Christmas card list this year.
I’m just happy to finally see the Bill Ayers association out in public being discussed by the MSM. I am still pleasantly surprised it was brought up at all. The only thing that doesn’t surprise me is the failure of the Obamination to properly address a real issue defining his character or fitness to be POTUS head on yet. Between this and his non-apology apology I hope the average American is beginning to figure out how dangerous this empty suit is even as a member of the Senate.
Looks like D’oh-bama is starting to alienate a lot of his “friends“–not just Coburn.
This is the best argument obama could come up with? And he wants to be POTUS? Are you kidding me? He wouldn’t have lasted 30 seconds in my first year high school debate class. Weak. Very weak. Without a teleprompter, this guy is a very empty suit.
I get a big kick at how the Obama Kool-Aid drinkers can overlook or rationalize B. Hussein’s choice of people he hangs with or admires. Convicted terrorists, Rezko and all his slimy criminal connections,the Rev. Wright and his black power/hate whitey/hate the Joos sermons, which B. Hussein claims he didn’t hear in 20 years. Will the media mention that Obamalamadingdong was fawning over more evil pals of Rezko at soirees in Chi-town? I mean its all coming out in the Rezko trial now.
Anyone know Chrissie Matthews reaction to last night’s BHO fumbles? I see Drudge poll has BHO winning the debate by around 60-40. Could any of the Obama enablers here kindly explain what the attraction is with buzz words hope and change? Why some of you get tingles in your pringles when he pontificates? Adolf Hitler would be proud and so would the only man who can save America Dr. Paul. It is inexplicable to me why anyone with any intellect doesn’t see through the deception, inveigling and obfuscations of offal such as Obama, Hillary, Paul and Hucklebee.
Is Ayers instructing students like Aliza Shvarts?
Trollman(for the last time)
I guess you believe abortion is still murder in cases of rape and incest. It shouldn’t matter as far as “murder” is concerned. Surely you are consistent. I mean hopefully. Yes I’m pro-choice and anti-death penalty? No I don’t think a first trimester fetus is a human being. I believe a fetus is human when it can survive outside of the mother. I am against partial birth, assuming the fetus would survive, unless the mother’s life is at risk. I’m also in favor of the morning after pill. Are you? I am anti-unwanted child. I wish there were more abortion clinics in ghettos and trailer parks where children are born addicted to drugs/alcohol, and otherwise enter abusive environments. Are you willing to adopt these kids trollman? Do you have any idea what type of shape our foster care system is in? Abstinance and birth control is ideal, but since so many women are too poor and lazy to partake, I’d prefer that the pregnancy be aborted than for an unwanted child to be forced to go through a crap life.
Yes wealthy women get abortions too, but if they were forced to have an unwanted child, the child would likely have a crap life with an unloving parent. Do you have any idea how many bad parents are out there already, who CHOSE to have their children? I sure as hell wish the parents of the Knoxville horror show had abortions..just to name one example. Again, how many unwanted kids have you or any of the pro-lifers out their actually adopted.
You can find a pretty distressing story in Time magazine(2002 or 2003) about the foster care system here in Florida. The cover story was about a child, about ten years old, who was beaten and starved by his foster family. I wish that poor child had been aborted. Period.
Debating abortion is akin to a Christian debating a Muslim, or a member of the Nation of Islam debating a white supremacist. Trollman I believe this little tiff is a distraction from the thread and “trollish” I don’t wish to debate abortion. This is my last comment on this thread.
Trollman #33, I agree with you. The issue as I see it is that Sen. Coburn wants the justice system to punish those who kill innocents, in much the same way as it would deal with those who murder people “outside the womb”. (Were it not for Roe v. Wade, there would be no need to parse this statement into people “inside the womb” and those “outside the womb,” but I digress.) Ayers, on the other hand, in this analogy would be likened more to an abortionist, in that he too is unrepentant in taking innocent lives, and seems to lust for more.
And what if what you believe is wrong?
What if I were to believe that a child is not a human being till he is 2 years old. Would that mean it was ok to kill children under 2. There was a time when black people and Native Americans were not considered people.
It seems at the very least we should consider that our believes may be wrong, and error on the side of preserving life.
I couldn’t believe it when it came out of “The Great Ones” mouth. What a stupid illogical analogy…this guy is not even half as bright as people give him credit for .
I’m always amazed that children know that:
pregnant dogs are pregnant with “dog babies”;
pregnant whales are pregnant with “whale babies”;
but to some well educated humans…pregnant humans are not pregnant with humans until the well educated SAY that humans are pregnant with humans.
mistressjustice said:
Yes, unlike you, I am consistent. Have you ever seen the movie RobRoy? His wife is pregnant, but she isn’t sure if the child belongs to her husband or the man who raped her. She asks what to do with the child. Part of RobRoy’s response is “It isn’t the child that needs killing.”
I do not believe it is morally right to abort a child just because of rape or incest. Is that hard? Yes, but the right thing often is the hard thing.
mistressjustice said:
Ah, so something has to be self-sufficient to qualify as a human being? So people who are dependent upon machines, medicine, or other people are not human?
The problem with defining a fetus in the first trimester as not being human is this: medical advancements keep pushing back the age a fetus becomes viable. It is conceivable then that at some point in the not too distant future, we could take even a baby in the first trimester and put them in the “Incubator 2000″ where they would continue their development. Your distinction is unnecessarily arbitrary.
mistressjustice said:
I am against anything that would kill a fertilized egg that has already been successfully implanted within the womb.
mistressjustice said:
It is interesting that you make this argument. This is the very same argument that my dad taught me, and that I used to parrot in turn.
First, though it is widely ignored, many pro-life folks do give of their means to charities that help women who find themselves in such situations.
Second, whether I am willing to adopt these children has nothing to do with whether or not abortion is right in the first place, now does it?
mistressjustice said:
OK, so anyone I think who leads/will lead a life that isn’t worth living (by my standards), I am justified in killing that person? Some people start off with bad family situations, and yet still make something of themselves.
mistressjustice said:
Some turn out to love their children after all, but yes, some do not. But whether such a life is worth living, shouldn’t we leave that up to the very life that is at stake? Since we can’t know what that person would choose, we ought to error on the side of caution and let them live.
mistressjustice said:
Not all children who are abused are foster children. Should we abort all children since some will be abused? I think not.
mistressjustice said:
Run away, ’tis far easier than facing the truth of the matter.
Sean Hannity has been using his radio program to ask over and over again “Why does Barack Obama have a friendly relationship with Bill Ayers? Why did he go to the home of Bill Ayers to get a political endorsement? Why does he refuse to disassociate himself with Bill Ayers and Bernadette Dorne?”
It is time to answer the question Sean…
The answer is, because Bill Ayers and Bernadette Dorne are something like royalty to the elite liberal Hyde Park set, to which Barack Obama so desperately wants to belong. Obama needed the support of these unreconstructed leftists in order to run for Illinois State Senate and again when he ran for the US Senate. Kissing the ring of Bill Ayers is a necessary step in gaining this support.
It is ridiculous to suggest that Barack Obama was unaware of this. Bill Ayers is famous for his association with the Weather Underground and has parlayed that association into a lucrative life as the icon of the radical elites. Absent the influence he has with these people, influence that is entirely dependent on his terrorist past, Ayers would just be another English professor and Obama would not give him the time of day.
The damaging thing about this association is that it shows that Obama seeks and receives the support of the most radical elements of society, and that these people are his political base, and will be first in line for political favors. Barack Obama is from Chicago, where political favors are akin to a Holy Obligation. Just as with Jeremiah Wright, Barack Obama knew exactly who he was jumping into bed with, and it is dishonest in the extreme to pretend otherwise now.
He did not care then, and he does not care now, because his is an elitist. He accepts the radicalism of his associates because he is “down for the struggle”, but he thinks the mass of Americans are just too stupid, too bitter, or too blinded by the things to which they cling to understand and accept his radical friends. So he lies about knowing them, and expects us to take his word for it.
Sean has done an excellent job framing the question. Now it is time to give the answer, and in giving it, reinforce the accurate perception that Barack Obama is a radical elitist, and hopelessly out of touch with ordinary Americans.
Gridlock, #56, excellent post! Factual and to the point!
It appears that the Democrats’ Solomon has some work to do on his debating skills.
OMG! Are Chicago Dems really like that?
Chicago Dems have to kiss up to a terrorist to have a successful career in politics? They truly have no honor.
gridlock said #56, I’m just a bitter hick born and raised in Springfield, Il and wanted to know if Mayor Daley also seeks the support of Ayers? Just curious. Is it the same as all the Republican’s in Illinois going for “B.C.’S” support? (If you don’t know B.C. first name is Bill. You’ll know who I’m talking about.
Al in St. Lou, I can answer that fist question: Yes, they are like that. Republicans are the same in the state. If you took “Crook” county out of Illinois, the state would be a solid red state. I always wished a Governor would offer “Crook” County to Indiana or even Michigan.
Its approval that is to be understood, and for CYA purposes, without being openly expressed. On the other hand, in his faith of situational ethics, the man may not even know where the line is between good and evil and therefore equates the two.
Trollman @ 55, you took the words right out my mouth! I used to be pro-choice too, until someone pointed out to me that the issue is whether or not what is being killed is a person, not what rights a woman has to her own body, or the various social factors pointed to by mistressjustice. All those factors she pointed to, while definitely cause for concern, do not justify taking an innocent life. The arguments that favor abortion for those reasons apply just as well to born children–but we would never dream of saying it’s ok to kill them–so why is it ok just because they haven’t been born? (or because they aren’t “viable”–whatever the heck that means?)
Since that question is now off the table maybe we can start asking Sean about his relationship with Hal Turner.
[Italics are my comments], Bolds are my emphasis
Regulus @ 43:
Spot on as mistressjustice proves two comments later:
MJ, if you’d lay off the maryjane long enough, you’d realize that what Coburn advocated couldn’t retroactively apply to the “guilty parties”. If Coburn’s proposal ever became law, it would criminalize abortion and anyone found guilty afterwards could face the death penalty. So relax, you’re off the hook for doing something that was legal at the time it was done.
Also, if before you believe in anything, it’d behoove you to be able to defend the position with reasoned logic. Even the Bible exhorts believers to study it thoroughly so that Christians can defend their beliefs. So far, you’ve batted .000. Please apply yourself, so you can make a better case, otherwise, you’d just get blown off each and every time.
Obama is insane.
Why is it, that anything that people find to be important and interesting about B. Hussein “Empty Suit Messiah” Obama, he constantly dismisses as a “distraction” and a “Washington obsession”?
Can there be anything more more suspiscious, more pointing towards the fact he has a great deal to hide, than to constantly dismiss that which people want to know about?
He is really starting to look like a guy who is scrambling as hard as he can. His little world is falling apart and people are starting to realize that his suit is pretty damn empty and he is definately not liking it and is shouwing all the early signs of panic.
We gotta keep him talking in public, and keep him talking off his notes. Only then will people keep being shown exactly what a racist, bigotted, hate filled little prince in a David Byrne suit he actually is.
It simply amazes me how stupid Obama thinks everyone is….wait there are some people out there actually planning to vote for him …I guess he could be right about some after all.
Proud of you TOS for finding a call in guest to a radio show, but Hannity isn’t running for office.
Doesn’t even compare to Obama being a certified liar on nearly every aspect of his life and associations.
Why yes it does. You’re judged by the company you keep. Doesn’t matter when the acts were committed, the fact that he BOMBED US facilities in itself despicable.
Just because it happened such a long time ago and that he’s a professor of English now make a difference? Not in my opinion. Especially when he hasn’t apologized for his acts.
Why he’s not in jail today is beyond me.
#70 He (the weatherman bomber and Dorhn) are not in jail because the FBI was spying on them and thus their “righst” were violated. It irks me that official misconduct means setting violent anarchists free. Instead of penalizing the erring law enforcement authorities, the terrorist just gets his “get out of jail free” card and society just lumps it.
People obsessed with the pro-choicr argument always bring up that a woman has the right to do with her body as she pleases. In my youth my own wife had an abortion because she just didn’t want a baby yet at age 23. So it was a matter of convenience. It was either go along with it or she’d go elsewhere and have an illegal one. Of course it didn’t help prolong the marriage either. I’m always curious about how the Hollywood gliterati rationalize abortion on demand and yet fight really hard to keep vicious murderers from facing legal execution….think Mumia, the poor widdle misunderstood radical chic cop killer. Think Yassir Arafish, whose grave Jimma Carter visited recently; yes, idolizing a mass murderer and fellow Peace Prize winner.
Obami himself derives suport from the same gliterati and other elitist elements of our society. It is really a pity that Barack Hussein and his harridan wife’s parents did not exercise choice. It’s not like mama obama or papa obama hung around to raise the boy even though they helped educate him in far leftist/Marxist dogma.
It took the FBI over twenty years to catch up with the SLA murderers in SF. They were tried and convicted although a short sentence. Ayers was never tired!!??!
NO wonder we have terrorists within our midst.
“I always wished a Governor would offer “Crook” County to Indiana or even Michigan.”
why would either one of them possibly take it?!
Well, Trollman successfully hijacked this thread…. this is why I hate it when Michelle opens up new registration: Too many responses to even read, and too many wingnuts coming on here trying to drag Michelle and her site into the mud. Good grief, does Keith Olbermann (D) not have anything better to do with his time!
Can you imagine anyone condsidering being the junior US Senator of Illinois and doing the early planning in the HOME of someone you didn’t hardly know? If he knew or didn’t know Ayers’ history, why would he do this? Buyer Beware!
First, that’s really shady logic. I’m sure – I would hope – that you know people with whom who you disagree and whose actions in the past you think were wrong. The degree of despicability seems more or less irrelevant; regardless of how despicable the act is (very, in Ayers’ case), the question is whether or not Obama somehow is guilty solely by virtue of knowing someone. Second, the degree of company-keeping seems trivial. According to Washington Post’s fact-checker site, it seems that Obama and Ayers know each other from having served on a poverty charity’s 8-person board, and from Obama receiving a $200 campaign contribution. While I’m sure that $200 buys a lot of influence, I don’t see how working together on a poverty organization constitutes the sort of company-keeping that would be at all an issue. Is a trivial level of connection really that damnable? Did you realize that Bill Ayers and Michelle Malkin both have blogs powered by Wordpress? It would be ridiculous to say that that means Malkin in anyway agrees with Ayers. Granted, the Wordpress connection is more trivial than Obama’s, but not by much.
fact-checker: http://tinyurl.com/2j6xwc
Bill Ayers’ blog: billayers.wordpress.com
“start asking Sean about his relationship with Hal Turner.”
weakest.strawman.evah.
” personally delivered more than 4,000 babies” Uh, don’t you mean ‘punishments’? He delivered 4000 punishments according to B. Hussein.
As to aborting babies because they are born into poverty or families who don’t want them… I don’t even know where to begin.
I wasn’t wanted and was raised in an EXTREMELY abusive environment. So thank you mistressjustice for thinking I should have been aborted. I’m GLAD I’m alive thank you very much.
On to aborting babies conceived by rape. I aborted my baby in college partly because it was conceived due to date rape.
I bought into the feminist crap that it wasn’t a baby, just a blob. I became pro-life on the table when it was too late. I knew that I had just caused my baby to be killed. And I was not religious at the time, so no it wasn’t religious guilt. I just realized in a mindnumbing moment what I had done. Nothing horrifies me more about my life than the fact that I made that choice. I am now almost 50 and childless. But it’s not about me me me… women used to be willing to sacrifice for their children, now women want their children to sacrifice for them even to the point of death.
There were two other women in the ‘recovery room’ who tried to encourage me. One was on her third abortion, the other her fourth.
I wouldn’t change how I grew up (with the abuse I suffered) but I would change the fact that I aborted my baby. The answer to one crime isn’t to commit a worse crime. He raped so I murder? It doesn’t help or solve anything, only made it worse.
The nightmares that followed cannot be described.
There are SO many people who were born into poverty and unwanted homes who have become such awesome people! And there is always adoption. WHO are YOU to promote weeding out the less advantaged (only in your sick mind). Hitler believed in that kind of thing.
And you think everyone who lives in a trailer park is on drugs or too poor to have children? You must love b. Hussein.b What a moronic elitist snob you are.
I wish liberals would really just shut up. But I believe in freedom of speech, so they can blather on. Carry on with your insanity mistressjustice.
Joy said:
The best thing liberals can do is speak their mind. Let them show everybody what they are all about, rather than pretending to be about hope and change and happy times.
I agree with you, it is the height of arrogance to go around deciding for others what kind of lives are/aren’t worth living.
Yes Trollman, I know you’re right. This subject just really trips my trigger.
I should also remind her that my family was wealthy. That in no way guaranteed a happy childhood. But a horrific childhood doesn’t have to make for unhappy life. I’ve had ups and downs like anyone has. Life is precious, and sometimes those of us who have truly tasted of the bitter, enjoy the sweet to the opposite degree.
It’s one thing for someone who knows me to wish me dead, but quite another for someone who knows NOTHING about me. lol
I don’t really see how running for and being elected to the U.S. Senate is at all morally equivalent to picking a location, or approving your staff’s choice of location for a campaign meeting or rally. Surely Obama could have paid for a facility that would not link him to a known terrorist if he had to pick a place “in the neighborhood”. Even we ordinary working folk can see through that baloney!
Joy, excellent comments.
My wife gave up a career in theatre, ranging from ballet, stage to opera in order not to abort. If there is any regret, it was only for falling into a relationship with a gambling-addicted and serial impregnate-them-and-leave-them boyfriend. Now she has had 5 bundles of joy. Fortunately, it happens more often than assumed that actresses give up their career than abort.
On the flip side, most of the women that I know that have had abortions wish above all to undo the abortions. Some have admitted to re-occurring nightmares. Some feel pain whenever they see precocious kids being themselves. The rest are either narcissistic or lame-brained.
Thank you both (Trollman and Andy) for your comments.
Forget that! BO doesn’t believe we should be at war with terrorists!
Besides how does he propose changing terrorists mind by sitting down with them, when he cannot change the mind of a friend (Bill Ayers) with whom he must have conferred any number of times?
I also had no idea that I should be in line for retro-abortions. After all, wht with the childhood I had…mom wworking three jobs to support my two brothers and I, the violence and abuse rgat went on for years, living well below the poverty level, father being booted out with restraining orders before my little brother…the CHP Detective, was even born…my God…my brothers and I were walking Abortion Poster Boys and never knew it.
However, I do draw the line at rape, incest and threat to the mother. I question what it would be to have to raise the child of the man who raped my wife…
Not saying it would be a decision that could be taken lightly, but one that would have to be made.