FINAL COUNTDOWN FOR USA ELECTION 2008

As you said yourself: "none of this in itself is damning".

But writing all with capital initials at least shows how bad Obama's characters is. And having had such a person in the neighbourhood certainly proves his terroristic motives.

I've never liked pre-election arguments, anywhere. But if the argumentation is on such a low standard - there can't be a lot of significant political ideas, isn't it?

Walter Hinteler wrote:

As you said yourself: "none of this in itself is damning".

But writing all with capital initials at least shows how bad Obama's characters is. And having had such a person in the neighbourhood certainly proves his terroristic motives.

I've never liked pre-election arguments, anywhere. But if the argumentation is on such a low standard - there can't be a lot of significant political ideas, isn't it?

I don't know what you mean by 'writing with capital initials'. The fact is that for his entire professional career, Obama seems to have surrounded himself with a lot of questionable characters. He only repudiates them when they become a political liablity. If you read closely to discern his mindset in his autobiographies, if you listen closely to some of his campaign rhetoric--rhetoric that is quickly dropped if that also becomes a political liability--and you consider the types of activities/attitudes/emphasis embodied in some of the people he has admired and/or associated with to get where he is today. . . .that all brings into question what he truly believes, thinks, or personally advocates.

I think the 'messiah' has demonstrated by word and action that he harbors or at least tolerates concepts and ideas that are unhealthy and even dangerous for the President of the United States.

I think the 'messiah' has demonstrated by word and action that he harbors or at least tolerates concepts and ideas that are unhealthy and even dangerous for the President of the United States.

I don't know what you mean by 'writing with capital initials'.

And what characters has Obama really disassociated himself from during this campaign.

Your argument is self defeating Fox. You want to argue that Obama has been friends with people that he barely knows but then claim he only disassociates himself from people he hardly knows when politically expedient. Other than Wright, I can't think of one person that Obama has had to disassociate himself from.

McCain however has had to disassociate himself from President Bush. As you said.. "it does call into question the candidates character and judgment when he disassociates himself from them ONLY after they have become a political liability to him."

I guess you didn't get what Walter was saying Fox as you turn around and make more accusations this time using quotes around the worst thing you can think of to say about him.

If dumping associates when they become a political or legal liability makes someone ineligible to be President then McCain/Keating should be examined. McCain met with Keating and supported legislation for him. He only backed away from him after Keating's S&L failed and Keating was charged with crimes.

You don't get to have this both ways Fox. McCain is worse if your standard is knowing shady people.

I believe I asked the same question with regard to the Rev. Wright matter, but I'll ask it again. What is it, exactly, that you think an association with Bill Ayers actually means about Obama? You think it means he wants to bomb the Pentagon or that he wants to reform education in dangerous ways?

And what on earth does it have to do with the state of our country right now and how we're going to get out of the hole we've dug?

FreeDuck wrote:

I believe I asked the same question with regard to the Rev. Wright matter, but I'll ask it again. What is it, exactly, that you think an association with Bill Ayers actually means about Obama? You think it means he wants to bomb the Pentagon or that he wants to reform education in dangerous ways?

And what on earth does it have to do with the state of our country right now and how we're going to get out of the hole we've dug?

To me it means that Obama has no personal inhibitions about associating with such people and is quite willing to look the other way in order to gain advantage from such people. Or else he is the world's most uncurious and/or naive person. And it calls into question about what Obama really believes and/or stands for and/or is willing accept as tolerable which, when added to some of his more unguarded campaign rhetoric and some of his writings, is disturbing.

Obama won't get us out of the hole we've dug. Congress will respond to the demands of the people to do that.

I am concerned about what sort of new holes could be dug in an Obama administration and so far I am not encouraged that I would like any of them.