independent_thinker2002

That was at the beginning of his career. He didn't get closer.

__________________
==]:{o

aquapub

What was at the beginning of his career? Obama knew Ayers was a treasonous, flag-stomping terrorist. He still worked with him, took campaign money from him, and held fundraisers at his house. That's not how any remotely mainstream, sane person would react to finding out who he's associating himself with.

__________________
They tell you they are not going to tax your family. No, they're just going to tax ‘businesses!’ So unless you buy something from a ‘business,’ like groceries or clothes or gasoline ... or unless you get a paycheck from a big or a small ‘business,’ don't worry ... it's not going to affect you. -Fred Thompson

independent_thinker2002

He held his first fundraiser at his house which he didn't plan. That was the only fundraiser at his house. He didn't appoint him to board they both served on. You are wrong. It's not the first time though.

aquapub

Still waiting on proof. Most of Obama's excuses like this turn out to be pure BS smokescreens. Example:

"Obama has said of his relationship to Ayers, 'the notion that ... 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.' But Ayers published his memoir in 2001 after he and Obama had become friends. And it was in a Sept. 11, 2001, New York Times article about the book that Ayers said, 'I don't regret setting bombs,' adding, 'I feel we didn't do enough.' And when asked by the Times whether he would do it all again, Ayers said, 'I don't want to discount the possibility.'"

Grand Rapid Press. April 28, 2008. Obama's hurdle. Pg. A7.




Since when do you have to appoint a terrorist to work with you in order to be rightly taken as a fanatic for continuing to work with him?

the makeout hobo

What's more important? The good work the Wood Fund did, or who might be on the fund? I think most of us would agree that the good charity work was much more important.

What evidence do you have that Obama and Ayers had become friends. Working on the Wood Fund together, or accepting a contribution, doesn't make them friends. Are you suggesting otherwise? Yes, we know Ayers is a douche, but that's not germaine to the conversation.


I have a question, aqua. Why is it when you quote a newspaper, you just give the name of it in grey, instead of linking to it?

__________________
The Makeout Hobo is real, and does indeed travel around the country in his van and make out with ladies... If you meet the Makeout Hobo, it is customary to greet him with a shot of whiskey and a high five (if you are a dude) or passionate makeouts (if you are a lady).Vague is a man of honor

aquapub

This completely avoids my question. You introduced a red herring by claiming Obama's work with a rabidly anti-American terrorist was ok because he wasn't the one who appointed him. I asked what that has to do with anything. Now you're changing the subject yet again to whether the far left organization does good charity work. Hamas delivers formula to Palestinian mothers. That doesn't make their organization or any of the fanatics working with it any less fanatical.

Aside from the article I just cited? How about this one?:

"Speaking on ABC's "This Week" on Sunday, John McCain was asked if he thought Barack Obama shared his sense of patriotism. McCain's response was to note Obama's long association with friend and associate William Ayers, a member of the Weather Underground..."

Investor's Business Daily. April 22, 2008. Putting On Ayers In The Obama Camp. Pg. A10.

I don't just give the name. I give the name, the title of the article, the page its on, all in accordance with standard citation format, consistent with DebatePolitics rules. I put it in gray so it fades into the backdrop instead of cluttering the post, and I don't link because that's not what Lexis Nexis gives me...well that, and the reality that liberals don't generally operate on facts and evidence, so seeking out and posting links just backs liberals into a corner, which merely drives them to their fallback position of either "you're stupid," "you're mean," or "you're a homo."