@hawkeye10,
hawkeye10 wrote:
Quote: "Guilt by association" is a logical fallacy and is frankly tantamount to idiocy. If, years ago, you had associations with Albert Einstein and Edward Gein at various functions; this would in no way indicate you were a brilliant murderer.
it is human nature to associate with people whom are like us, who we identify with. This is not enough to prove legal guilt, which is why there in no "guilt by association" in the law, however whom we associate with does speak to probable cause...it does matter in police work. Your implication that associations are not relevant when pursuing the truth is of course wrong, as you usually are.
Well said. To add to what you said, to say guilt by association is a logical fallacy, that reveals a naivity that is almost beyond belief, when the discussion of this issue is applied to Obama's history and his current administration. True, merely befriending a criminal does not make one guilty of a crime, nor does befriending radicals necessarily prove you are radical, but a pattern of hanging around radicals reveals something about one's personality and beliefs. I am sure everyone has heard the old saying "birds of a feather flock together," and truer words are very difficult to find.
To look at another aspect of this, merely being around radicals and appointing them to your administration does not prove you are a radical, but if you share their beliefs as suspected by many of your own statements, then the coincidence of being around them and appointing them begins to look to be more than coincidence. To use another analogy, you can know a bank robber and be innocent, but if you know they are bank robbers and give them a job or are fast friends with them, that adds to the association, and if you actually drove the getaway car for them, that adds even more.
Surely, everyone would know by now that Obama became elected by promoting the mantra "change," with little detail of what kinds of changes, plus he has made a practice of talking about spreading the wealth around, and similar talk. Add to it that he belonged to the church founded upon Black Liberation Theology, a form of Marxist philosophy, and listened to and endorsed the pastor of that church that ranted about the ills of capitalism, rich white people, Jews, on and on, plus the "chickens came home to roost" statement, also weird statements about aids, drugs, and so forth. No intelligent man is going to listen to that and endorse it unless there is a significant amount of agreement. Add to the Wright business, other radicals such as Ayers, plus all the radicals that have been documented in this administration.
I realize this is old news, but I continue to find it so bizarre that so many people appear to continue to live in denial of the realities of this, that they seem to pass it off as inconsequential, that it means nothing. I think some Obama voters are beginning to know deep down in their hearts that something really big is really haywire now, that they truly did not realize the mistake of their vote, but it is yet very difficult for them to admit to it, to face up to it, and they continue to want to believe the template given them by the media, that Obama is really some kind of new kind of moderate politician that is really really smart and has a unique ability to draw people together and come up with sensible solutions, and so they keep hoping for the best. I think this is purely a media built fantasy not based upon reality, but it is not surprising that when so many people have that much emotional investment of faith into one politician that they think is so special, it is not going to be easy for them to let it go. But I will be one of the many that will continue to pound away here with what I believe the reality of the situation is, as it stares us in the face.
