William Ayers was the leader of the Weather Underground. He bombed the U.S. Capitol, the Pentagon and the State Department. In Sept. 11, 2001, he said "I don't regret setting bombs. I feel we didn't do enough."

Barack Obama appeared on panels with Ayers, served on a foundation board with him and held a 1995 campaign event at the home of Ayers and his wife, fellow terrorist Bernardine Dohrn.

Suppose John McCain had a friendly association with an unrepentant clansman who bombed black churches. And this clansman said he regrets he didn’t do enough. Would we think that is OK?

George Stephanopoulos, in the last Democratic debate, asked Obama about his friendly association with Ayers. He gave a poor answer.

Why is Barack Obama comfortable being around William Ayers?

Have a pleasant day.

I don't know.

Do you have any guesses? Perhaps he is FOR doing doing what William Ayers did? That doesn't feel truthful though. But since associations like this always stop short of making any real connection - I'll finish the thought for you.

There.

Yeah. I don't believe that either.Your turn DD. What's the worst case answer that YOU believe?

Why does Donald Rumsfeld feel comfortable shaking the hand of genocidal dictators such as Saddam Hussein? If you can answer this question then you can answer your own.

Why does Donald Rumsfeld feel comfortable shaking the hand of genocidal dictators such as Saddam Hussein?

I'll bet it would be a boney handshake!

Another memo. (What the heck, I could use the therapy right now)

Doesn't matter anyway. This is minor league stuff DD. Obama is going to be the nominee for sure. We know Clinton has a LOT of negatives that would make for a contest, and it just isn't going to happen.

So, we've got Obama -vs- the Republican McCain.

The only reasons this will even be a contest worth watching are:

-23 percenters, who absolutely cannot let the Republican party go. Let's just call them fully vested. There are only niche alternatives, or continuing to support the Republican party, or going home.

-Corporate bias in the media, looking for fights instead of actually informing and investigating. That favors McCain, because they are going to prop him up (and he needs it), and magnify this kind of extremely minor league stuff.

-A percentage of us not yet over racial issues.

For most people, the end game is clear. Either vote Republican, or not.

Republicans got us here and it's not pretty. It's also very clear that the corruption that needs to continue to be supported, excused, covered up, profited from, is going to continue so long as Republicans can actually do that, otherwise, people are going to jail.

We all know what happens when too many people vote for Republicans now, so that's not going to appeal the way it did last time. Thank Bush for that legacy.

Today, with a very quickly growing number of Americans, the word Republican is as dirty as they have tried to make Democratic, Liberal, Left, etc...

So, voting Democrat is the change choice. Either we want change or we don't. This is the end game here, period.

Factoring all that together, we get Dem vote, Republican vote, no vote, or other vote.

Given one of the two parties is going to take the White House, it's safe to lump, no vote, other vote and Republican vote into the same group. They are in the losers camp, having not established enough solid differentiators to win on a solid merits contest.

This is what happens when the party members sell out in the hopes that their pet issue might see legislation. Now it's time to pay the piper.

No vote, Republican vote, Niche Vote all equals that third Bush Term, with the Republican John McCain leading the charge.

A Democratic vote, for Obama, means a change in direction, new blood, fresh start, etc...

For a lot of people, that's all they need to know.

Why?

Because they know what voting for Republicans means now. Bush showed them REPEATEDLY over the last 8 years. Kind of hard to not get the message.

Republicans don't attract the youth vote, educated vote, middle class vote anywhere near the level that Obama does.

Republicans don't have a great field of challengers, hitting hard in all 50 states, running on change and local politics, well funded and able to point to their Republican opponents, saying "See? Do we really need to do that again?".

Republicans don't have their nominee funded by what is probably 2 million individual doners, all contributing regularly to the effort. Republicans don't have their nominee almost completely free from corporate special interest dollars and the dangerous obligations that come with the win on their dime.

Sorry man. This crap is just not even in the ranking of things that could actually matter this election.

This isn't even about how McCain is the better choice for us. He just isn't really, and everybody knows it.

What this is about is trying to just make Obama look bad, so that there are more no votes, or niche votes, so that the worse choice; namely, the Republican McCain has a shot at ending up with the win.

That, combined with vote caging, manupulation, etc... is the only Republican out.

Can't win on merits, so it's got to be on crap.

This is exactly that.

I'm still wondering what the secret meetings Dick Cheney had with oil company bigwigs was all about? Was it to inform them to sell their Enron stocks? Buy life insurance for Kenneth Lay?

...............

I think back on two campaigns of old – the 2004 and the 1988 campaigns for president. In 2004, John Kerry did diddly-squat in responding to accusations leveled against him by the conservative Swift Boater element. Had he responded quickly and went on the offensive early, perhaps his chances of defeating President Bush would have greatly improved. Not likely, but perhaps so. In 1988, Michael Dukakis had a huge lead over then Vice President George Bush going into late August, 1988. But the Republican attack machine went on the offensive and Governor Dukakis choose not to fight back. He lost his post convention bounce and later lost the general election.

Senator Obama has to do a better job of driving home why he should be the next president of the United States. Lofty rhetoric is appealing, but when it comes down to fighting the good fight, the kitchen sink strategy is a necessity. We’re already seeing what the Republican attack machine is planning for the fall campaign, with or without McCain’s blessing. It’s not going to be pretty.

My issue all along has been Obama’s lack of experience. I’ll vote for him in November because I could never bring myself to vote for a candidate who supports the Iraq War. But he needs to better articulate why he would be a better choice than McCain.

"We’re already seeing what the Republican attack machine is planning for the fall campaign, with or without McCain’s blessing. It’s not going to be pretty."

This is a good reason to consider Hillary. She can wrestle with a pig and look pretty afterwards. If the swiftboaters even THINK of attacking, they'll find themselves torpedoed before the glowplugs completes the engine start cycle.

"My issue all along has been Obama’s lack of experience. I’ll vote for him in November because I could never bring myself to vote for a candidate who supports the Iraq War. But he needs to better articulate why he would be a better choice than McCain."

Ditto.

" he needs to better articulate why he would be a better choice than McCain."

" Ditto."

Like what? What could he possibly say, that he already hasn't said, that would give you more than reluctant support? I'm sure you two are not alone in wanting that. But really, what is it, specifically, that you'd like to hear at this point?

Well, I dittoed a little quick there. I ditto the first two parts (lack of experience/against any Iraq war candidate) but I'm not too worried about his being a better choice than McCain.

Still, I would like to sit down with the man and discuss details about his approaches to education, finance, war, race relations, immigration, etc. etc. etc. Just curious more than concerned.

(Yea, I know that most of this is likely on his website. Gotta go there someday...)

For one thing, McCain is a super flip flopping panderer.

Check out this list.

Keep scrolling when the page comes up, there's more than one screen's worth.

My concern about Senator Obama is his lack of real world experience. He’s a very graceful and articulate speaker and says many of the right things, but I worry that his learning curve will be significant. The man is brilliant, but it took the most brilliant retail politician of my lifetime, President Bill Clinton, several years to find his place in the presidency. It wasn’t until the 1996 campaign that he really found his stride. And too, he ran against a relatively weak candidate in Bob Dole. Plus Clinton had the benefit of a relatively strong economy which continued to grow throughout.

If Obama wins in November, it’s essential he find the best and the brightest to help guide us in repairing the severe damage caused by the current administration. George W. Bush has been a disaster for this country and it’ll take years to undo the mess he and his ilk have created. Bush leaves his successor with a war, trillions in debt, a banking/financial services crisis, a health care nightmare and a recession. If Senator Obama wins, he’s got to move swiftly and decisively to shore up these many messes with bold initiatives.

If I had my druthers, Hillary Rodham Clinton would be the next President of the United States. But it is highly unlikely that she will win enough delegates to capture the Democratic Party nomination to be President. I feel she would be better able to handle the many challenges before us.

Let it be said however that Senator Obama or Senator Clinton would do a much better job than Senator John McCain, hands down.

talpdx sez: "If Obama wins in November, it’s essential he find the best and the brightest to help guide us in repairing the severe damage caused by the current administration."

I think he will do that.

Forty years ago, William Ayers was a member of the Weather Underground. He had his day in court and all charges against him were dropped. Since then, he has spent decades as a distinguished professor and community leader in Chicago.

When they first became acquainted, Barack Obama did not have dinner with a terrorist. Ayers was a civic minded citizen and highly respected member of academia.

What else happened around 1968? Sadly, John McCain was spending his second year of captivity in North Vietnam. He was put in solitary confinement, broke under torture and made a "confession" that was widely used as propaganda.

When they first became acquainted, Barack Obama did not legislate with a deathly ill prisoner of war. McCain was a long-serving Senator from Arizona.

Back in '68, Hillary Rodham was a wide-eyed girl being educated with the elite in an exclusive institution. A leader of the Wellesley Young Republicans, she was invited to the GOP National Convention in Miami where she witnessed the crowning of Richard Nixon.

When they first became acquainted, Barack Obama did not organize tens of thousands of voters in Chicago for an enthusiastically active Republican college kid. Clinton was a lawyer from Little Rock whose husband was running for President as a Democrat.

1968 was a big year for Barack Obama too. He was living in Jakarta, Indonesia. His newly remarried mother was working for the United States Embassy. He was growing up in a neighborhood that had just been hooked up to electricity. For the most part, it looked more like a tropical village.

When America first became acquainted with Barack Obama, he was not a little kid living in the South Pacific. Obama was a celebrated Senate candidate from Illinois addressing the Democratic National Convention.

A whole lot can happen in 40 years.

Add -- The Blueprint for Change is a good place to start if you want to know where Barack Obama stands on the issues.

DD's swoops down for another bird turd never to be seen again..... At least until he has more poop to spread....

Why is Barack Obama comfortable being around William Ayers?

Why is McSame comfortable being around anyone that he ASSociates with? DUHbya? The DICKster??? How about DUHbya and Co.??? They ASSociate with TERRORISTS!!!!!!!!!! They LOVE the Saudis and they are the BIGGEST backers of TERRORISM on the planet???
COME ON DD's!!!!!!

If William Ayers is the best the GOP smear machine can do, then I feel pretty good about their lack of ammo.

George Stephanopoulos is not part of the so-called GOP smear machine. He's a Democrat.

He's a lackey for the mouse. In fact, ever since the mouse took over ABC, their news has lost its bite, shifted from slightly left to slightly right, and lost me as a viewer not because of anything more than they are no longer doing as good a job.

George Stephanopoulos is not part of the so-called GOP smear machine.

But yet YOU are....