The Smallest Minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities. - Ayn Rand
It's a mite difficult, but think back to the time, not too very long ago, when we had no internet. Was the MSM simply not as deeply in the tank for leftist candidates, or did they simply hide it better because we had less ability to uncover and prove it?
I'm looking forward to all of the ads connecting Bill Ayers to Barack Obama. I'm sure the American people are going to be very receptive, in a time of economic hardship, two wars, abysmal health care, education decay, and climate change, to a bizarre and terribly weak argument that Barack Obama "pals around with terrorists."
Cover of New Yorker calling?:)
In particular, Mark, Maoist terrorists.
In a time of economic upheaval, that may have a wee bit more resonance than you expect it to.
And as far as "education decay," Messr. Ayres is personally responsible for some of that, at least in the Chicago area. Or have you been completely oblivious to the substance of our objections to him?
Unrepentant terrorists. Unrepentant terrorists who apparently recruited Obama for a failed education project.
Gee, I wonder what kind of education project Ayers and Obama would be involved in?
And let's not mention the Black Liberation Theology church he belonged to for 20 years either.
Or Obama's relationship with "Frank" - you know, unrepentant Communist Frank Marshall Davis.
Yes, I'd like to hear more about the people who influenced Obama's personal philosophy, and who now find that philosophy personally attractive.
I truly would.
California NOW has issued a statement reaffirming support for Obama/Biden and repudiating Shelly Mandell's support of Palin.
Was the MSM simply not as deeply in the tank for leftist candidates, or did they simply hide it better because we had less ability to uncover and prove it?
I think some of both. They were more "evenhanded" from the 20s to the 60s. Remember before the 20s was the "Yellow Journalism". As the profession "matured", and became a career one studied and aspired to, the leftward drift started. That accelerated due to selection bias, and then when the Pentagon Papers essentially overthrew an administration and defeated an allied nation (nevermind all the pesky collateral damage), those with a mind to "fix society" headed there to "make a difference".
Where the classic post-Yellow Journalism was about the "5 W's", now it was about "telling the story" and "making the point".
The 60s was also the time "Journalism major" was a selection in universities... Add all that up, and now to everybody but Mark, there's a very obvious pattern.
to a bizarre and terribly weak argument that Barack Obama "pals around with terrorists."
That whole truth business you're having such problems with? Comes into play here.
Bizarre argument? Hardly. Obama's been groomed by Ayers (who's living the high life off his father, one of those evil capitalist CEO's), a leftist paragon.
He's shitty at designing bombs, or the builders were shitty at following instructions, but 3 people, including his girlfriend at the time were killed by a nail-filled bomb Ayers designed that had been planned to be set at a military dance.
Does he regret that? No, he says today he wishes he'd "done more". Granted, his success rate was full of more own-goals, but it's pretty "bizarre" to think it was "blow up more crazy leftist chicks screwing me" that he meant.
Terribly weak? From a man who hand-picked Obama to run the Annenberg Challenge? (How did that turn out, by the way?) From the man who hosted his party to declare his candidacy for the Senate Seat party? It's not terribly weak. If you can understand basic facts. If you're trying to prove you're not a mere dittohead of Maher's talking points, this is about the stupidist one you could have picked.
That your natural reaction is to laugh it off, despite the facts known now - which haven't been that well investigated - again demonstrates that you're either totally ignorant, or incapable of synthesizing the known current information.
The MSM sent literally hundreds of reporters to find out about Palin's background 1 asked to see the donated records of the Annenberg Challenge. And those got retracted and redacted before they were given to him.
1. And he wasn't a "MSM" reporter, properly. One, Mark. Hundreds to Alaska, essentially none to Chicago. Even to someone tied strongly to Obama's rise.
Who's been giving interviews and talking quite freely for many years.
I'm sure the American people are going to be very receptive,
Again, that's the first hint you're wrong.
If the media were to cover the true ties to Ayers and Dohrn, you'd be damn straight they'd be very receptive. Obama's loss would look like Dukakis doubled. The media is deliberately misinforming the American public. Because they know that if they told the truth, Obama would be toast as a candidate. And they're too anti-Bush, too Democrat, and too much in favor, in a time of economic hardship, two wars, abysmal health care, education decay, and climate change, to put the government in charge of all of that. The "Right" people. HARDER THIS TIME!
Except, of course, the press. Oh, no way the government could do that job. No, never. That has to be an exception.
"Economic Hardship?" Mark, this isn't hardship. You're on a computer, arguing on the internet. When you're hunting squirrels with a slingshot, that's hardship.
"Education decay?" With the amount of money we're dumping into the educational system? More and more people are realizing that government's the problem, not the solution here. We're spending 20x the amount per student we were in 1950. We're getting a fraction of the result.
Hell, if we stopped wasting our (obviously useless) expenditures on education, we could fix either the economy or at least healthcare!
"Abysmal Health Care"? Move to Canada, hypocrite. Don't come back when you're hurting or need something routine. We've got the biggest health care system, and our average... well, lets say our average health care outcome beats the living shit out of educational outcome on average.
"Climate Change"? Wait, is it warming or not? Stop lying (well, I know, you can't help it) and explain what's changing. And what we can do about it. The average person I know doesn't think it's really a problem, and is OK with the current level - but they're starting to get fed up with the hysteria.
All of this has been discussed with you before.
I'll note that your stance is almost unchanged (other than changing "Global warming" for the covers everything "Climate Change).
And you think it's bizarre and 'weak' that Obama has a 20 year connection to terrorists. These were people who were spiritual brothers with Timothy McVeigh. (Just less competent.) A well documented history.
And even today he claims he'll sit down with the biggest state sponsors of terrorism.
2 wars? Obama and Biden have promised us 3 more! Darfur! Pakistan! Sudan! Maybe Georgia! Somalia, take 2! So they'll surrender in Iraq! They'll replace it with even more impossible military goals!
(It's OK. Those military guys like to die. Ayers told him so.)
Kevin: Looks like somebody's been Googling and posting madly. :)
I'm sure that sounds better in the original German.
Kevin...Kevin...Kevin...and here I thought you were an atheist :) I think it's time for shackles and a good old fashion tar and feathering!
"The media is deliberately misinforming the American public. Because they know that if they told the truth, Obama would be toast as a candidate."
I am reminded of some of the comments you made to me regarding conspiracies and paranoia. We just had MSNBC on and their top story was Ayers, Palin's comments and domestic terrorism. In fact they covered Palin's address this morning live.
"These were people who were spiritual brothers with Timothy McVeigh."
Uh...no. And that's where you have missed a key point
As Kevin has said, don't piss off the white people :)
"These were people who were spiritual brothers with Timothy McVeigh."
Uh...no. And that's where you have missed a key point
Uh, yes. They're just proved themselves far less competent. Even though they had far more "education" than he did, and had spend more time "critically thinking."
I am reminded of some of the comments you made to me regarding conspiracies and paranoia. We just had MSNBC on and their top story was Ayers
Dismissing it the way you did - and this is MSNBC. You realize just you and some people in a retirement home were watching.
But, again, you're deliberately missing the point. Obama's ties with Ayers were known for years. Before he picked up steam. Before the first primary.
And not a breath of them was spoken of them by the press. Remarkably uninvestigated. For a group that can as a whole, send hundreds out on sightseeing to Alaska.
Yes, it's starting to break out, especially when the swing-voter magnet Palin starts to mention it, the press has to cover it, or lose even more credibility and viewership.
(Even they understand the limits of stretching credibility. You should take some notes.)
I think it's time for shackles and a good old fashion tar and feathering!
Mark, it's been overdue for you for years.
Ayers is an unrepentant terrorist and communist. (Remember just this weekend you claimed you never gave communists a pass? You're giving a communist a pass.)
Unrepentant: feeling or showing no sorrow for wrongdoing
Sept 11, 2001. The New York Time publishes an interview with Ayers.
"I don't regret setting bombs. I feel we didn't do enough."
Even someone as stunningly dishonest as you, Mark, should be able to understand "unrepentant" and not lie about it.
"...[A]gain demonstrates that you're either totally ignorant, or incapable of synthesizing the known current information."
U-J: I vote both!
AP Routers (Yahoo) just picked it up:
Tamed down, though.
In fact, it treats it like it's discussing gossip.
No commentary in that about the LA President of NOW personally endorsing Palin.
"Economic hardship".... hmmm.... I feel the best answer I can make here is to quote what I sent out to my friends living elsewhere in the US when they asked how my family and I did after hurricane Ike (I live near Beaumont, TX, less than 100 miles east [the 'bad side' of a hurricane] of landfall):
"I have found myself redefining luxury' and 'necessity' lately. Luxury is not having to save rainwater to flush toilets with. Or for that matter, having a toilet to flush. Luxury is having a breeze at night when you're trying to sleep. If it's generated by a fan, and therefore a *controllable* breeze, well WOW.
That sounds like we've been suffering. We haven't. We had a generator, so we had fans and lights and a fridge. When power went down we hauled everything out of the freezer and cooked it, so there was no food shortage. I had lashed a garbage can and a wheelbarrow under the drip lines of the roof, so we had washing and flushing water and didn't have to use our drinking water for it. We lived a very minimalist lifestyle by American standards, but we were hardly suffering. And even then, as I have often thought this week.... the doors and windows would close tight, the roof didn't leak, we were in no danger from animals or people, we had plenty of food and potable water.... even today, most of the people in the world would consider that inexpressible luxury."
Mark, I suspect you have no foggiest concept of the definition of "hardship". What I have been through recently ONLY JUST qualifies. Entergy, our local electric company, had 392,000 of it's 395,000 customers lose power due to flooding, blown down power poles or blown down trees across power lines. And yet we suffered the 'hardship' of having to generate our own electricity for a mere four days.
Our current "economic hardship" is the direct result of Congress *requiring* lenders to accept greater risks without demanding greater security or collateral. We were warned of the dangers of this for *seven years* by George W. Bush, John McCain, Alan Greenspan, and some few others. What did they get for their trouble? Accusations of racism, that's what. As if all non-whites are poor, but all whites are wealthy. Who were the accusers?
Christopher Dodd (D-CT)
Barney Frank (D-MA)
Maxine Waters (D-CA)
Lacy Clay (D-MO)
Who were the beneficiaries of Fannie/Freddie campaign contributions?
#1: Christopher Dodd (D-CT) $165,400
#2: Barack Obama (D-IL) $126,349
#3: John Kerry (D_MA) $111,000
The full list is here:
And yes, it contains a lot of Republicans, too. But you'll notice that it's *the Democrat Party LEADERSHIP* that fought hardest against ANY reform, and still does to this day, to the extent of calling ANY criticism of such irresponsibility, cronyism and racketeering "racist".
Unless I miscounted, John McCain, who warned against just such a meltdown back in 2006, shows up on the list at #62.
P.S. And who was Fannie Mae's CEO when Republicans were warning about the potential meltdown and Democrats were accusing them of racism? Franklin Raines, currently housing advisor to the Obama campaign, Fannie Mae CEO 1999-2004.
And who was Fannie Mae CEO from 1991-1998, when Fannie and Freddie first started making bad loans and covering them with questionable bookkeeping at the request of President Bill Clinton? James Johnson, who headed Obama's VP selection committee.
Oh yes, PLEASE let's have the campaigns focus on the economy, who led us into this disaster, who tried to fix it and WHO DID NOT.
But, but, they had the right intentions, you see!
Stop throwing in facts!
Mark Steyn has an interesting column about just how this all came about.
Ol' Barney's in it up to his knickers, he is.