Obama Campaign wants to silence critics

So try to respond not like the Oblama campaign does by attacking the question.

Try to answer the "effing" question.

Did you not characterize his defense against such slander as strong arm tactics to silence critics? And then imply that the fact that he was so vigorously defending himself meant that there must be something to it?

If Ayers were currently some outside of the mainstream radical, such association would be a reason to raise eyebrows. But he is not. He is a mainstream, active member of many non-controversial groups advocating for education, of which he is a professor. He is doing a lot of work (I'll leave it up to someone who knows to determine whether it is good work) and is connected with many, many politicians other than Obama. So the answer to your question is no, it's not a reason to raise eyebrows because such interactions would be normal for an Illinois and US Senator. If Obama were connected with him when he WAS an outside the mainstream radical, then sure, you could raise those eyebrows.

And the more people refer to Obama supporters as "disciples" the less and less seriously I can take them. The Ayers charges have been answered, directly and truthfully, more than once. There's nothing there except your desire to see something there. Clearly Obama is connected to many, many people, of which Ayers is just one. Heck, I found that he and McCain are both linked to some of my own coworkers on Linkedin. I'm sure that doesn't make him a software developer, though it might make him a software developer sympathizer. Why would he associate himself with such Mountain Dew drinking fatsos? Seriously, the Republicans like the Ayers thing because it fits a narrative of Obama as an angry black radical that they know will fly with a certain segment of society (ahem).

A partial examination of the documents did not reveal anything startling about the link between Obama, the Democratic presidential contender, and Ayers, a founder of the Weather Underground, a Vietnam-era anti-war group that claimed responsibility for several bombings.

No, I characterized his attempt to shut people up about it as strong arm tactics to silence critics. I would have thought it appropriate and presidential had he stood up and said something like, "This guy is lying through his teeth and here is why. . . .and then laid out the case for why the criticism is false and unfair, etc." In fact Obama has done that effectively in numerous cases in which he has been accused falsely. He isn't doing that this time. He's trying to shut people up. Why?

You are the one who says it is slander. Can you make a competent case for why it is?

Frankly my dear, I think this is pure bullshit.

You may correct me on this, but I think that you darn good and well have not and will not forgive McCain for associating with controversial figures such as Hagee, Falwell, et al, and I think it is fair game to bring up such associations.

I don't think you would think it okay for McCain to accept a fund raiser thrown by David Duke so long as McCain wasn't part of David Duke's KKK days.

I'm sorry. I try to limit my cheap shots to calling the more radical Obama supporters 'disciples'. But the rock star, messiah "We are the ones we have been waiting for" image is just too compelling for even me to be magnanimous about it.

Has the Ayers issue been satisfactory answered and truthfully?

See the difference is I don't presume to tell you what you think or want as you do me. I give you a chance to clarify that.

Since when is complaining to a radio station about it's guest "silencing free speech?"

A blog entry does not reflect the actions of his campaign. Nor does this blog entry justify the Oblama campaigns attempt to silence free speech.

Obama also needs to tell America what makes him qualified to be commander in chief.

Zack Christenson, executive producer of "Extension 720 with Milt Rosenburg," said the response was strong.

"I would say this is the biggest response we've ever got from a campaign or a candidate," he said. "This is really unprecedented with the show, the way that people are flooding the calls and our email boxes."

Remind me where I told you what you think or want?

There's nothing there except your desire to see something there.

That there looks like one a' them die-versionary tactics.

A slightly different issue than actually attempting to put words/thoughts/wants/desires into my mouth, but I believe you also also earlier alluded to my perceptions as being born of bias rather than anything substantive. That might have been somebody else though.

I'll let the rest of your post ride as, in my opinion, you are dealing far more with conjecture of your own opinion than with anything substantive that can be backed up.

I backed up mine with articles defending my points with links attached.

I backed up mine with articles defending my points with links attached. And, as we both know, 'did too, did not' kinds of arguments are quite unsatisfactory and extremely boring for others to have to scroll over.

Has the Ayers issue been satisfactory answered and truthfully? Or is that what you want to believe? See the difference is I don't presume to tell you what you think or want as you do me. I give you a chance to clarify that.