Patterico's Pontifications

10/20/2008

Politics Can Make You Rationalize Anything

Filed under: 2008 Election,General,Terrorism — Patterico @ 11:25 pm

This is an actual conversation with an unidentified Obama supporter. I am paraphrasing from memory, as honestly as I can recall. I assure you that the last, critical line is a verbatim quote:

Me: So, looks like someone who attended Obama’s coming-out party at Bill Ayers’s home has decided to delete her blog post about it. Her blog post said that Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn were launching Obama’s career in their living room.

Unidentified Obama supporter: So what? There’s no proof he knew the extent of Bill Ayers’s activities, and we don’t even know what he did. For all Obama knew, Ayers was just a 1960s radical who hadn’t done anything violent. Was he required to vet some guy who was throwing him a party?

Me: Somehow I think you’d still be making the same argument even if Obama knew everything Ayers had done.

Unidentified Obama supporter: Well, yeah, because Obama wasn’t really that closely associated with Ayers. Anyway, we don’t really know Ayers was a terrorist.

Me: Ayers set bombs. Members of his group were killed constructing a bomb with nails, intended to kill soldiers. The group is suspected of setting a bomb that killed a police officer in San Francisco. His wife refused to cooperate with an investigation into a robbery in New York State that left two police officers dead. She went to jail for refusing to cooperate. Bill Ayers said in September 2001 that he didn’t regret setting bombs and wished he had done more. He and his wife are unrepentant terrorists.

Unidentified Obama supporter: Ayers and Dohrn had a good intent. In the 1960s people were trying to stop the war. He might have done some things that were wrong, but they had a good intent.

Me: You’ve got to be kidding! Charles Manson had a good intent, in his own warped mind. He thought it would help the country to kill some people and start a race war. But he was a killer. And Bill Ayers was, and in spirit still is, a terrorist.

Unidentified Obama supporter: This country was founded by terrorists.

Me:

END

120 Responses to “Politics Can Make You Rationalize Anything”

  1. Dohrn, that idiot who thinks it’s cool and ‘wild’ to stick forks into pregnant women’s stomachs after murdering them = Ben Franklin and Thomas Jefferson

    Juan (4cdfb7)

  2. Well, I heard tell that Lizzie Borden said, “Kill your parents! That’s where it’s at!” once.

    Adriane (b8ecd8)

  3. Unidentified Obama supporter: This country was founded by terrorists.

    Me:

    You could have told that deluded, deranged liberal (if not ultra-liberal), why, yes, you’re correct! And in another page of world history, Hitler and Mussolini did keep the trains running on time.

    However, now that I think of it, a variety of the left throughout the US in the late 1930s, early 1940s (and I believe throughout portions of Europe too) did promote the idea that America should keep its nose out of Europe, even with the looming, tightening vise grip of the Third Reich.

    Of course, in the mind of the liberal, since their sentiment is big hearted (or supposedly compassionate), any degree of unexpected, corresponding idiocy and irresponsibility is fully excused.

    Mark (f2d1ed)

  4. Clearly.
    They opposed taxation after all.
    Plus they owned guns and were often religious.

    I didn’t even get into Native American history..
    consider yourself repudiated.
    Obviously your high school history teacher did not attend Berkeley in the 60′s

    SteveG (1e9402)

  5. PoMo – It’s all about MY truth!

    daleyrocks (d9ec17)

  6. Patterico, admit it: the ‘unidentified Obama supporter’ is David Ehrenstein, isn’t it? ;-)

    qdpsteve (f35be1)

  7. qdpsteve – It couldn’t have been Ehrenstein. The comment didn’t involve gay sex.

    daleyrocks (d9ec17)

  8. The keen intellect of the reality based community is a wonder to behold. It is no wonder they are entitled to multiple votes.

    Perfect Sense (9d1b08)

  9. Your friend deserves to have his or her taxes raised.

    Jim Treacher (592cb4)

  10. “For all Obama knew, Ayers was just a 1960s radical who hadn’t done anything violent.”

    I just wrote about this, acutally. The failed Fort Dix bombing would have killed hundreds of service personel, more than the Oklahoma City Bombing. Ayers wishes he could have done more … it’s on the record.

    Americaneocon (a45113)

  11. Patterico you are an evil, shameless, exaggerater, and a bad person to boot! Who kicks dogs also, probably!!

    If you had read this 1993 NY Times tongue bath, you would know that Bernadine Dohrn is a kind, wonderful person, who is devoted. And also does not kick dogs.

    In 1982, the year [Dohrn] married Mr. Ayers, she served seven months in jail for refusing to cooperate with a grand jury investigating the Brink’s robbery in Nanuet, N.Y. Those months, she said, were the hardest on her children, who were too young to remember the years in hiding.

    You probably enjoyed making Dohrn’s children suffer. And claimed that two policemen were killed in that so-called robbery, which isn’t true!! Well, okay, so waaay down in the story, while discussing something else, there is this:

    The couple are also the legal guardians of Chesa Jackson, 13, whose mother, Kathy Boudin, and father, David Gilbert, are in jail for their roles in the 1981 Brink’s robbery, in which a Brink’s guard and two police officers were killed.

    That doesn’t really have anything to do with Dohrn, who is wonderful, and also dedicated. To The Children. This also proves how you, Patterico, skew things to slam your political enemes. You claimed Dohrn “refused to cooperate with an investigation into a robbery in New York State that left two police officers dead. ” “Two police officers dead“–that’s wrong!! You left out Brinks guard Peter Paige, who Dohrn’s and Ayers’ BFFs murdered along with Waverly Brown and Ed O’Grady.

    I can only hope that you begin to show Bernadine Dohrn and Bill Ayers the respect that they have so abundantly earned.

    /sarc

    AMac (ff02e4)

  12. *Ring, ring…*

    “Hello this is the Annenberg Challenge office, Barack Obama speaking.”

    “Oh you want the Small School’s Workshop… No, no, you have the right number. He’s right here. I’ll get him.”

    Yells across room, “Bill. Phone for you. Line 2.”

    papertiger (bd6c91)

  13. This country was founded by terrorists

    I’ve heard people say this quite a bit but for the life of me I don’t get it. I’m guessing that if George Washington and John Adams had filled a barrel with nails and gunpowder and set it off at a Tory school, I probably would have heard something about it.

    Jimmie (7b8555)

  14. “this country was founded by terrorists”

    *heh*

    I shouldn’t be, but I am, continually amazed at the lengths of self-delusion the Left will embrace.

    One might – just barely possibly – make the argument that the country was founded by Guerillas; irregular fighters who hid in the general population. It would be one hell of a stretch, but one could do it. The difference between Guerillas (who generally target legitimate government and military objectives) and terrorists (who are generally to cowardly and weak to target anything but civilians) is cosmic. In order to pretend that their cozying up to a long series of Radical Chic terrorist thugs (Arafat springs to mind) isn’t a sign that they have no morals to speak of, the Left has long pretended that the difference doesn’t exist. They have repeated this lie so long that they actually believe it.

    It all comes back to one glaring fact; the Left absolutely cannot afford to live in the real world, because in the real world their support for Communism – which continues to this day – makes them accessories to more than 100 million political murders committed by the likes of Stalin and Mao. And they absolutely cannot afford to face THAT because they are intellectual and moral lightweights and the knowledge would destroy them.

    C. S. P. Schofield (2f879a)

  15. “This country was founded by terrorists.” That’s right out of Zinn, fed to millions of kids thanks to thoughtful, open-minded teachers, some in a school district near you!

    gp (72be5d)

  16. It’s not politics that can make you rationalize anything, it’s ‘winning’ that leads to adopting a “the end justifies the means…. even if we have to be totally inconsistent and contradictory to what we have said and done before“.

    In politics, the need to have ‘your guy’ win leads to rationalizations such as above, it leads the media to cover for Obama the way they would never do for McCain. It leads Pelosi to do as Speaker the same things she blasted the Republicans for doing when they controlled the House. In foreign policy, it leads Democrats to blast Bush for doing some of the very same things Clinton did while President, and it leads Republicans to support Bush’s Iraq adventure in a way they never would have had a Democrat been President. With the courts, it leads to Supreme Court justices first deciding how they will vote, then working backwards to find a way of justifying their decision. And in sports, it leads fans of one team to embrace the player who was just traded to ‘their’ team, even if that player was the player they hated while playing for their rival.

    It’s all about winning. Very few people – of either party – care enough about the way in which they win, and fewer still care enough to prefer losing nice than winning ugly. The problem for the GOP is that the Democrats are far better at this than they are.

    steve sturm (369bc6)

  17. Unidentified Obama supporter: This country was founded by terrorists.

    Palin’s statement about Pro-American parts of the country is totally unfounded. God bless (damn?) America, eh?

    Roy Mustang (f6c58b)

  18. Obama supporters only give proof to the worst things said about Obama and his supporters.

    PCD (7fe637)

  19. Two things to be an Obama supporter:

    (1) You have to believe that an unrepentant terrorist is an upstanding citizen, and a woman who raises her own kids is not.

    (2) You have to make up things about current events and history – repeatedly.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  20. I’ll bet a dollar to a doughnut that your liberal friend owns/wears a shirt with Che Guevara’s image on it.

    tmac (f9e092)

  21. gp wrote:

    “This country was founded by terrorists.” That’s right out of Zinn, fed to millions of kids thanks to thoughtful, open-minded teachers, some in a school district near you!

    Of course, Zinn was a prominent member of the New Party; Obama was an endorsed candidate and likely a fellow member.

    Karl (1b4668)

  22. steve sturm writes:

    …and it leads Republicans to support Bush’s Iraq adventure in a way they never would have had a Democrat been President.

    Actually, we have a test case here: Vietnam. And it tends to disprove your theory.

    Karl (1b4668)

  23. I guess I won’t even bother to mention John Stewart’s repugnant “comedy routine” at a college, in which he castigated Palin by uttering the “F” word. Wonder if punky – boy would ever have the nerve to say it to her face? Doubtful. This is the same mouth where the youth of America gets most of the news these days – and we thought Cronkite was bad.

    Dmac (f11dda)

  24. Karl: are you serious? citing a 40 year old conflict to contradict my claim that Republicans TODAY wouldn’t stand behind a Democratic President who was doing the same things Bush was doing?

    steve sturm (369bc6)

  25. They also have to justify the fact that O! sat in the pews of a racist church for 20 years and apparently either heard nothing the entire time or that it really wasn’t racist due to the fact they were hating white people.

    Mr. Pink (eae12c)

  26. Steve are you arguing that you could find elected Republicans that would call a war “lost” in the middle of fighting it or that would say a surge “failed” before it even began? I seriously doubt that would happen.

    Mr. Pink (eae12c)

  27. #

    “This country was founded by terrorists.” That’s right out of Zinn, fed to millions of kids thanks to thoughtful, open-minded teachers, some in a school district near you!

    Comment by gp — 10/21/2008 @ 6:01 am

    I was thinking the same thing. There is a great interview with Howard Zinn on Dennis Prager. He never deviated from his orthodoxy, no matter what logical argument was presented. transcript

    Example for flavor:

    HZ: That’s true that the great majority of Indians died of disease in the 17th century when the Europeans first came here. But after that — after the American Revolution — when the colonists expanded from the thin band of colonies along the Atlantic and expanded westward, at that point we began to annihilate the Indian tribes. We committed massacres all over the country . . . .

    DP: What percentage of the Indians do you believe we massacred, as opposed to diseases ravaged?

    HZ: Oh, well it might have been 10 percent.

    DP: But 10 percent is very different from the generalization of “we annihilated the Indians.”

    HZ: Oh, well 10 percent is a huge number of Indians, that is. So it’s pointless I think to argue about whether disease . . . or deliberate attacks killed more Indians . . . .

    DP: No, but 10 percent is very different from what the general statement of “annihilate” tends to indicate. That’s all I am saying.

    HZ: Okay.

    At the end of nearly all of these talking points arguments, an honest liberal just says “okay – next.” It’s like facts don’t mean anything.

    carlitos (cae053)

  28. Palin’s statement about Pro-American parts of the country is totally unfounded. God bless (damn?) America, eh?

    Comment by Roy Mustang — 10/21/2008 @ 6:25 am

    Her statement is pretty much 100% correct.

    Other than that, I agree with you.

    CW Desiato (614aa7)

  29. AMac/11:

    That’s priceless. It’s great that she’s not a rat, and she was willing to sacrifice some children so as not to get noble political bank robbers in trouble.

    I wish I had friends like that. All *my* crappy friends (of all political stripes) would point and yell “cop-murdering bank robber!” in about one second; they, like, totally disapprove of it.

    Judgmental rats, I say – this prevents me from crushing the totalitarian economic state by robbing banks and murdering police. (And you can see how this activity naturally would lead to a utopian ideal of peace and harmony.)

    –JRM

    JRM (355c21)

  30. I wonder how Rebecca Anderson’s family feels about Ayers stating in 2001 he wished he had done more and Obama still not repudiating him

    those 3200 academians who signed a letter of support fo Ayers are not worth Nurse Anderson’s pinky

    EricPWJohnson (47b9ab)

  31. This country was founded by terrorists.

    This guy must have planted the idea

    I wonder if the that guy is for real. Sounds true

    quasimodo (edc74e)

  32. Funny how our Founding Fathers are called terrorists but they have trouble calling Hamas that.

    Mr. Pink (eae12c)

  33. steve asks:

    Karl: are you serious? citing a 40 year old conflict to contradict my claim that Republicans TODAY wouldn’t stand behind a Democratic President who was doing the same things Bush was doing?

    Yep. Totally serious. The GOP by and large understands the value of winning wars and the downside of losing them. There wasn’t much GOP opposition to any of Clinton’s military actions, either. Are you seriously suggesting that the GOP has the same attitude toward wars as the Democratic Party — a party whose activist base are the heirs of the New Left (e.g., MoveOn, CodePink, ANSWER, etc)?

    Karl (1b4668)

  34. steve to put it another way:

    Do you think the GOP has treated Dem Supreme Court nominees the way dems have treated GOP nominees?

    You wrote:

    It’s all about winning. Very few people – of either party – care enough about the way in which they win, and fewer still care enough to prefer losing nice than winning ugly. The problem for the GOP is that the Democrats are far better at this than they are.

    I am merely giving examples of your thesis.

    Karl (1b4668)

  35. The focus on Ayers misses the whole point. Ayers is just one of a long list, and it is the length and lack of breadth of that list that are of interest.

    Ayers
    Rev Wright
    Michael Pfleger
    Louis Farrakhan
    New Party
    Rashid Khalidi
    Sam Graham-Felsen
    Hatem El-Hady
    unknown students and faculty at Columbia, which is pretty much a Mecca for the hard left.

    and of course, Michelle.

    His only centrist friend of note is Tony Rezko. Apparently he talks to Tom Cobern from time to time, but he cannot seem to name many folks past the left fringe.

    Doesn’t it bother ANYONE that we are about to hand unbridled power to a hard-left statist?

    Kevin Murphy (0b2493)

  36. Doesn’t it bother ANYONE that we are about to hand unbridled power to a hard-left statist?

    Comment by Kevin Murphy — 10/21/2008 @ 7:37 am

    It bothers me greatly.

    However, I’m not certain Obama’s going to win.

    CW Desiato (614aa7)

  37. Sure, politics can make you rationalize anything. Obama has just been endorsed by former Congressman Mark Foley.

    Official Internet Data Office (bb7744)

  38. Here are things to do today:

    - Think about how transformational Obama is.

    - CYA like Colin Powell.

    - Go for job security, like Christopher Hitchens or Buckley.

    - Support Obama now. After the election you won’t be considered racist (see: Colin Powell)

    - Check your junk mail. If you get a request for money, send Barry a McCain-Palin sticker in one of the pre-paid envelopes.

    Vermont Neighbor (c91cfe)

  39. Actually, your supporter has a point. I don’t think the founding fathers were terrorists – and my opinion says nothing about the founding fathers, who I’m cool with. But I do think that conservatives would call the Founding Fathers acting in 2008, terrorists.

    What’s the proof? Well, you’re calling Ayers and Dorhn terrorists, eh? Classically, the split between terrorists and insurgents is between military and civilian attacks. I’ve never heard Bill Ayers be accused of attacking civilians – just law enforcement and military folks. Again, not an endorsement of Ayers, but for classification purposes, if he had been acting in Latin America, he’d be called an insurgent.

    By objective folks. Overexcited conservatives call him a terrorist. Anyone who sets off bombs inside America is a “terrorist” in popular discussion, but this is stigma, not classification.

    By the way, folks, the Israeli government *was* actually founded by terrorists. Again, I’m not anti-Israel – this is the literal truth. Ben Gurion may not have been a terrorist, but Menachim Begin and Yitzchak Samir were definitely terrorists. Google the “King David Hotel” bombing of 1948.

    So, Pat, by your criteria, yes, the Founding Fathers were terrorists. Their actions and William Ayers’ are basically indistinguishable in terms of target selection. One of them succcessfully brought down the government at the time, and one did not.

    glasnost (8f3927)

  40. Glasshead demonstrates his excellent posturing of moral relativism once again. For his next act, he’ll discuss why Stalin was really akin to George Washington.

    Dmac (f11dda)

  41. glasnost:

    I guess we should vote for Barry while we still have the chance.

    Vermont Neighbor (c91cfe)

  42. Great work, Dmac. That was a fantastic job you just did there demonstrating that William Ayers and George Washington’s target selection differed in some manner.

    In fact, given the violence directed at civilian British loyalists during the Revolutionary War, George Washington was arguably responsible for *more* anti-civilian brutality than Bill Ayers. As a nation, we have forgiven him. :-D

    Your morals are, in fact, relative. You just don’t know it. So F*ck off.

    glasnost (8f3927)

  43. Those darn synonyms, always confusing light-working, light-thinking lefties. Both the Founding Fathers, and the Weathermen were revolutionaries. Further comparisons tend toward differences rather than similarities.

    Lefties glom on to superficial and infantile comparisons, e.g. Jesus was a community organizer, to justify to, and conceal from, the public the onerous characteristics of their idol or cause.

    The Founding Fathers acted to increase individual freedoms. Their appeals were based on the long history of argument by classical liberal thinkers who believed in such, and duly noted the primary agent which fosters oppression of it is government.

    The Weathermen, to put it charitibly, also fight for freedom. But their fight is to purge society of individual freedoms and institute a collective socialistic freedom wherein what freedoms individuals may be allowed to exercise are to be defined, distributed and managed by government, which is just an euphemism for those who hold the reins of power.

    The trouble with the argument about Obama’s connection to Ayers is not that it shouldn’t be made, but that it should be a transitory point to key in on the underlying political philosophy which both share. Obama didn’t hang with the right leaning revolutionaries. He didn’t even hang with classically liberal leaning revolutionaries (which, I suppose, in this day, would me most likely be called libertarians).

    No, Obama hung with Marxists, admirers of Mao and the long line Soviet Communists, with a special emphasis on their Latin American derivatives.

    This is the fundamental issue that is left to understanding when noting Obama’s ties to Ayers. The problem is that most aren’t aware of, much less understand it. It needs to be explained. If done, then Obama’s connection to not only Ayers but to ACORN and others with their deceitful, ruthless, and often illegal, means to achieve the power of government and impose their brand of freedom, is just icing on the cake.

    Dusty (545d04)

  44. The bottom line is, it doesn’t matter. Obama supporters spew “reasons” to convince themselves that they have reasons. But they don’t and at a base level, they don’t care. They’re voting for Obama because it makes them feel good and facts are evil things that undermine their good feelings; therefore, facts must be stamped out wherever found.

    I firmly believe that most of these people, if they heard that Obama planned to nuke Kansas as his first act in office, would immediately formulate reasons why Kansas has it coming.

    tim maguire (aae967)

  45. I had shorter conversation with an obama supporter.

    Me. ayers was a terrorist who set bombs ….etc

    them: “But did Obama ever blow anybody up?”

    end of conversation

    iceman (026faf)

  46. Doesn’t it bother ANYONE that we are about to hand unbridled power to a hard-left statist?

    I’m sure it bothers the Federalist Society students who voted him the first African-American President of the Harvard Law Review and still have enermous respect for his leadership and accomplishments in that capacity a lot.

    This is obvious a very dangerous person who seeks to impose a hard left agenda onto any organization he’s a part of or leads and whose driving ambition is to sully and weaken American values.

    http://www.lawschooldems.org/index.php/dave/57-lawobama

    Peter (e70d1c)

  47. To whoever made the argument that Ayers and Washington didn’t differ in target selection – you do realize that your argument only works if you conceded that Ayers was actively making war against the United States. Which for a citizen of the US is an act that has a legal definition — “Traitor”.

    So, Obama buddies up with unrepentant traitors. Good to know!

    Hint: In order for the killing of enemy soldiers to be legitimate, you have to be at war with their nation, and you have to be on the other side.

    Chuckg (6d0332)

  48. Your morals are, in fact, relative. You just don’t know it. So F*ck off.

    Gee, I guess I can’t come back after Glasshead’s devastating and witty rejoinder. Brilliant! Not to worry, though – he’ll still keep the title here as Official Apologist for Wanton Killers. Congrats, Glasshead!

    Dmac (f11dda)

  49. I’ve never heard Bill Ayers be accused of attacking civilians – just law enforcement and military folks.

    Well assnost, I guess you see Timothy McVeigh’s bombing of the Murrow Federal Building(FBI offices) in the same light. He was just protesting the government’s use of force at Waco, so I guess we should never have executed him. Probably should have given him a professorship teaching civics!

    Ghost of Ted Gold (9fd170)

  50. I am so glad, I thank God, that my family stayed put – America came to us. We suffered, sure, as landed gentry unused to competition in an arid land that gets occuppied by aggressive anglos who lawyer up fast. [from San Gabriel - Los Angeles - Santa Monica -????]

    That being said – I am glad I am an American. For if we stayed “Latin Americans”, our range of political expression would include.. um, the patois of our Spanish heritage – not guitars and romance, think more Inquisition. What I am avoiding saying is that I find Ayers and his ilk …silly. I think they were/are violent and irrational and deluded. But I find them “silly” because they would cry cry cry like the bourgeois pigs they purport to hate if they were dealt with in the same, um,….”language” they seem to like to play at. So, Ayers-Companeros – be careful what you wish for – you lack the rigor for the regime you want to impose.

    P.S. – don’t these people all boil down to having “daddy” issues? Yet they still take daddy’s money….. pobrecitos.

    Californio (08da63)

  51. Maybe the country was founded by terrorists (not the USA but North America) after all the SPANISH conquistadores were pretty lousy to those cannibals and heart extracting Aztecs. But you won’t hear a word about Spanish IMPERIALISM and CRIMES AGAINST HUMANITY, from the leftards, or even a word against indigenous peoples’ horrific acts against themselves or settlers.
    Or maybe that individual meant the British, as in the Boston Massacre, surely a terrorist operation if ever there were one?
    But if that Doonesbury libtard really wants to talk about terrorism, he cannot find fault with our founders. They scrupulously kept their fight against the British Military Industrial Complex.

    However, what I don’t understand is, if the country was founded by terrorists, and if Ayers acts are excusable in his mind, then why isn’t any act done by a Republican equally excusable?
    I mean, once you say if you have a good intent any vile act is excusable, well, Republicans have equal or better intent, so how can you vote against them when they do acts less vile than the people this person excuses?
    But then, as Joe Biden would say, to a libtard, logic is a four letter word.

    eaglewingz08 (98291e)

  52. Comment by quasimodo — 10/21/2008 @ 7:13 am

    A VERY interesting interview from 1985!
    He sure had some complimentary things to say about former V-P Mondale.

    But, the more important point, are we seeing today the convergence of the three points the gentleman mentioned:

    Economy – we are undergoing an economic crisis that could be seen to be instituting a;
    Big-Brother Govt – Govt in DC is taking unto itself more and more power over every-day aspects of life in America. The remaining aspect of this Marxist-Leninist revolution is;
    The Military – a military pulled out of the ME snatching defeat from the jaws of victory would complete the demorilization of the one remaining bedrock of American strength.
    The military, after the repeal of Posse Comitatus, would be then turned to suppressing dissent within America, completing the revolution.

    A Manchurian Candidate?

    Another Drew (7866bb)

  53. So why did Ronald Reagan hang around with a terrorist sympathizer like Annenberg?

    Josh (86f13d)

  54. That’s hilarious, Josh – but you forgot your new memes for today. Now be a good little boy, and run off to KOS and get the new memo from your Lord and Savior, then get back to us.

    Dmac (f11dda)

  55. Hot damn- might have to throw my support to Bqracky. He DOES bring people together. Now even Mark Foley is supporting him. So many defections from the Rethuglican camp. Yes, McCain probably is an angry old white man. And the real bombshell that will surely enlighten those of us who deeply value the respect of the Euroweenies- the Cheese-eating surrender monkeys support Obama 64% to 4% over McCain. LANDSLIDE!!!!! Google french military victories first though. Lordy, that little magic negro sure cast a spell on the world. It will be so great to finally not be looked down upon as an ugly American, the ocean’s waters will fall, terrorists will repent, the poor will disappear and Chrissie “I squat to pee” Matthews and his pal Olberdouche will be invited to the Lincoln bedroom from a menage a trois with Obambi. Afterall there are rumors out there that BO likes anal sex. Much like Palin’s daughter actually delivered the Down’s Syndrome kid.

    madmax333 (0c6cfc)

  56. To which I add:

    Me: “Obama killed your mother.”
    Obama-lover: “Yeah, well, she had it coming.”

    George (a99b03)

  57. They’re voting for Obama because it makes them feel good and facts are evil things that undermine their good feelings; therefore, facts must be stamped out wherever found.

    And the right seems ever at the ready to create endless demeaning justifications for why people want to vote for Obama, lest their weak gruel of all-Ayers-all-the-time won’t do the job of scaring people, it must just be they “don’t understand the facts.”

    What you call “facts” are constructions based, not on the mans character and accomplishments, but the narrative the right desperately needs to place of being troubling, scary, ambiguous, hiding an agenda, anti-business, extreme, communistic, possibly violent, of weak moral fiber and at the beck and call of criminals and “black racists” and terrorists. SO on and so forth. Hyperbole and half baked heaping servings of schlock that make John McCain and Palin sound desperate and insulting of people’s intelligence.

    You folks doth protest too too much. This blog has two or three posts about Ayers every single day, and you may think you’re fighting the good fight in some warped way, but you’re actually doing a disservice to your party and your candidate to continue on with this angle of attack. And I’ll start to really worry about Obama’s chances when you folks and the RIght begins to actually talk about the issues and why McCain is the better candidate because of them, but not to rub it in, but you guys really can’t because there is no over arching vision to the man’s issues, other than the one super imposed upon him by the Republican party and we all know what that is and it’s proved to be morally and intellectually and operationally bankrupt.

    So, yeah let’s talk about the facts, real facts not the myths of a party who’s looking at obsolescence. But like any business in decline it’s so dysfunctional that all it can do is try and re-apply the formula’s that worked for them in the past and they’re view of the situation has become so sclerotic that they can’t even see how ridiculous and out of touch they are with the reality of what is happening and my advice to you guys is simple: Evolve or face extinction.

    Peter (e70d1c)

  58. # 46 Chuckg


    Hint: In order for the killing of enemy soldiers to be legitimate, you have to be at war with their nation, and you have to be on the other side.

    The founding fathers and the thirteen colonies were under the rule of British law and subjects of King George the III.

    Meaning, their actions were, indeed, considered traitorous and they were considered traitors guilty of high treason punishable by death at the end of a rope.

    Peter (e70d1c)

  59. So, yeah let’s talk about the facts, real facts

    Peter, what you call “facts” are constructions based, not on the Obama’s character and accomplishments, but the narrative.

    Official Internet Data Office (bb7744)

  60. We’ll never convince everybody that Ayers & Dohrn were terrorists, I guess. Let’s try another tack: they are formerly-violent, America-hating commie assholes. Even the O-bots should be able to agree with that.

    gp (72be5d)

  61. Meaning, their actions were, indeed, considered traitorous and they were considered traitors guilty of high treason punishable by death at the end of a rope.

    Ding, ding, ding, ding!!!!!!!

    Peter proves the point of the post!

    He can rationalize ANYTHING!!!11!eleventy!!!!

    daleyrocks (d9ec17)

  62. Comment by Peter — 10/21/2008 @ 9:08 am

    Endless Justifications???

    No, Peter. We know that it is because you are a f…ing idiot!
    Reason First, Reason Last.

    Another Drew (7866bb)

  63. Bill Ayers was fighting for the government to control the people. The Founding fathers were fighting for the government to serve the people. It has to do with freedom versus oppression. Democracy over tyranny.

    * * * *________
    * * * *________
    * * * *________
    ____________
    ____________ Obama/Ayers ’08, baby. Finish this thing called America in your lifetime. Donate today.

    Vermont Neighbor (c91cfe)

  64. #52: Where’s your proof, one, that Walter Annenberg was a terrorist sympathizer, or, two, that Reagan hung out with him?

    Is the grant by the Annenberg Foundation to the CAC, the origin of your link? Where is your proof that Annenberg was even casually associated with the decision to provide the grant?

    But as I noted above, the associations are only circumstantial evidence which either helps to infer foundational beliefs, or not, of the person in question, and especially important, when the person takes pains to be seen as enigma.

    Save us time from now on and just type: Lightworkers Unite!

    Dusty (545d04)

  65. “We’ll never convince everybody that Ayers & Dohrn were terrorists, I guess. Let’s try another tack: ”

    Truth for progressives : Obama and Soros are ordering their minions to scrub all evidence of any association with William Ayers. (A random event in someone’s living room? Running a questionable nonprofit together? Sooo harmless ??)

    Vermont Neighbor (c91cfe)

  66. Ah yes, I remember the MASSIVE PROTESTS against the Kosovo war.

    All those College Republicans burning Clinton in effigy.

    All those AmLegion members staging Die-In’s.

    All those “anonymous Admininstration sources” telling all that “we were in it for a Trans-Balkin pipline”.

    Also, the sky is purple

    Techie (9251da)

  67. Daleyrocks /Another Drew, You guys need to up the dosage on the ADHD medicine and look up what it means to have a consistent and cohesive argument, because as usual your manifesting yoursleves to be a bunch of jumped up over caffeinated immature monkeys boys.

    Chuckg comment was glaringly ignorant. Just because the American revolutionaries were considered “traitors” by the British government, and Ayers was considered a traitor doesn’t mean I see a congruent moral equivalence to their actions. Anymore than Walter Annenberg did when he hired AYERS for CAC or Ronald Reagan, who made WA gave ambassodorship or WA’s good friend Dick Nixon (well…actually maybe tricky dicky begrudgingly admired Ayers for his operational ambition…Ha ha.)

    Good bye Ass Clowns. That’s all you get for the day. (Someone has to earn that $700 Billion in corporate welfare and golden parachutes for “Self made” Republican CEO’s…)

    Peter (e70d1c)

  68. Ayers is only drawing free breath because the Feds messed up.

    That should tell you everything you need to know.

    Techie (9251da)

  69. Comment by Peter @ 9:48 am

    Obama for President, Ayers for Secretary of State.

    Vermont Neighbor (c91cfe)

  70. Oh, Peter’s going away (probably to study syntax, or such – “…usual your manifesting yoursleves…”).
    I am so disappointed that we won’t have his golden thoughts to muse over.
    …sigh…

    Another Drew (7866bb)

  71. Anymore than Walter Annenberg did when he hired AYERS for CAC

    Walter Annenberg didn’t hire Ayers. You are delusional.

    or Ronald Reagan, who made WA gave ambassodorship

    That’s all but unintelligible.

    or WA’s good friend Dick Nixon (well…actually maybe tricky dicky begrudgingly admired Ayers for his operational ambition…Ha ha.)

    Hilarious to the batshit insane, I’m sure.

    Good bye Ass Clowns.

    You learned how to wipe?

    That’s all you get for the day. Someone has to earn that $700 Billion in corporate welfare and golden parachutes for “Self made” Republican CEO’s…)

    Comment by Peter — 10/21/2008 @ 9:48 am

    Judging by your level of reading and writing skills, it’s certainly not you.

    Get your money back, eight years of college with an undecided major didn’t do any good.

    CW Desiato (614aa7)

  72. that we won’t have his golden thoughts to muse over.

    “…that we won’t have his golden showers to muse over.” Consider that one fixed.

    because as usual your manifesting yoursleves to be a bunch of jumped up over caffeinated immature monkeys boys.

    Bad grammar, terrible punctuation and RACIST INSULTS, all in one sentence!

    According to the Obamatrons, you’re a WACIST, Petey! WACIST! WACIST! WACIST!

    Dmac (f11dda)

  73. Gallup (Traditional)* 10/18 – 10/20 2384 LV 2.0 51 44 Obama +7

    Peter (e70d1c)

  74. glasnost says: “Actually, your supporter has a point. I don’t think the founding fathers were terrorists – and my opinion says nothing about the founding fathers, who I’m cool with. But I do think that conservatives would call the Founding Fathers acting in 2008, terrorists.”

    Oh I don’t know about that. Remember that what the founding fathers primarily fought against was taxation without representation. Considering where the left wants to take the country and the help they are getting from a complicit lying media, we might have to have another revolution in this country sooner or later to fix things. I doubt most republicans would call those people fighting that fight terrorists. Besides, and my history might be a bit hazy but I think I am right, the founding fathers didn’t make it a habit of killing civilians to coerce the British government into leaving them alone or giving in to their demands like your average terrorists tend to do.

    AlexinCT (5578da)

  75. Good bye Ass Clowns. That’s all you get for the day.

    Petey lie – Petey wacist!

    Dmac (f11dda)

  76. Anymore than Walter Annenberg did when he hired AYERS for CAC

    Uh, Annenberg didn’t hire Ayers for anything. Ayers submitted a grant application to the Annenberg Foundation and they accepted it. I highly doubt Walter Annenberg ever even saw it.

    Taltos (4dc0e8)

  77. Obama/Ayers ‘08. Finish this thing called America in your lifetime. Donate today.

    Vermont Neighbor (c91cfe)

  78. Eh. You could dig up a troop of girl scouts that Obama killed and buried in his back yard, and that sort of person would offer some half-assed excuse for why it’s ok.

    Something like “George Washington did the same thing”. It’s pointless attempting to reason with the left, they want what they want and that’s all there is to it.

    John (32622e)

  79. “I do think that conservatives would call the Founding Fathers acting in 2008, terrorists.”

    Riiight.

    Has anyone ever suggested to you that thinking might not be your strong suit? If the Founding Fathers were around today they’d be in the Alaska Independence Party. You know, the one the left likes to call “terrorists”, displaying their usual contempt for reality.

    John (32622e)

  80. If had these conversations more often than most would believe. Seems anything can be excused for the higher purpose of preventing another evil republican administration.

    But this conversation is mild compared to the nuttiness you hear in the black community. If you think Rev. Wright’s speeches are an anomaly, I assure you they’re not. It is just breathtaking to hear someone tell you they honestly believe the gov created AIDS to eradicate blacks, the CIA created crack to eradicate blacks, the Jews in the record industry created rap music to inspire drivebys – and eradicate blacks, the rise of the new confederacy…. and on and on.

    The irony is that Republicans are targeted as the cause of this misery while democrats are not held accountable for there part in creating this mental illness.

    Not long ago, a public official (Maxine Waters I think) was holding hearings to “investigate” drug trafficking by the CIA in south central. So where’s the follow up that clears the CIA?

    TakeFive (7c6fd5)

  81. The correct liberal talking point is: “Ayers is irrelevant. Next topic.”

    Next topic.

    i like america (d2f951)

  82. The recognized #1 most accurate poll in predicting the 2004 Presidential popular vote results was the Battleground Poll, from George Washington University. Today, the same poll shows Obama leading nationally by only 1 point, 48-47, and Obama slipping rapidly. [Note: 2nd link is a pdf.]

    (Historical note: Gore beat Bush in the popular vote in 2000 by the same margin: 1 point.)

    Official Internet Data Office (bb7744)

  83. Comment by TakeFive — 10/21/2008 @ 11:26 am

    All of these great conspiracies being conducted by the Federal Government against minorities,
    conspiracies that have all failed.
    Does that say something about the abilities of government?
    Why would anyone continue to support an institution that is so evil, and so incompetent?

    Another Drew (7866bb)

  84. I wonder which candidate for Congress this person is going to vote for?

    The wife of a Florida congressman embroiled in an adultery scandal filed for divorce Monday.

    Another Drew (7866bb)

  85. Terrorists don’t “found” anything — they blow things up; they kill, maim and torture innocence to further some narrow and anemic end.

    This country has given the world much — and has spilled more blood than anyone else on earth for defending the common good. Germany, Italy, and Japan are the beneficiaries of American goodness.

    Who are the beneficiaries of OBL? Or the Taliban? I’ll leave the lefties to spin their yarn.

    Richard Romano (b96fd9)

  86. Obama for President, Ayers for Secretary of State.

    And Jeremiah Wright for VP.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2lV8x_-Uk2c

    Obama’s Black supremacist religion really, really bothers me. If God is not on the side of black people, kill him? What kind of freaks would say that?

    Roy Mustang (2f688e)

  87. Proof this country was founded by terrorists:
    http://vorg.ca/2893-Washington-Washington—Hes-coming-hes-coming

    Washington, Washington – He’s coming, he’s coming

    zelda (6afa35)

  88. The individuals that participated in the Tea Party, and the later founders of the United States were designed Terrorists by the official and sanctioned government.

    Truth hurts your ideology doesn’t it.

    Bobby (2e9cbd)

  89. Correction, that should read “designated terrorists”.

    Bobby (2e9cbd)

  90. The individuals that participated in the Tea Party, and the later founders of the United States were designed Terrorists by the official and sanctioned government.

    Oh, Bobby… The break with the ‘sanctioned’ government was covered in that “Declaration of Independence” thingy. The founding fathers knew what they were getting into, announced it, and faced the consequences. They would be executed if they failed, as they were committing acts of war. They did not plan on gaining a professorship at Oxford.

    Ayers failed. By your reasoning he should be executed for treason, regardless of the prosecution’s case.

    Is this what you mean to say about someone who Barack Obama shares an ideology?

    Apogee (366e8b)

  91. I had almost the same conversation with a co-worker last week. She didn’t care what Ayers did or may have done. When I said that Ayers and his ilk, and the Obama’s were the “blame America first” crowd who hate this country she said, and I quote”

    “I don’t like this country either”

    Jaynie59 (18e5d1)

  92. “my advice to you guys is simple: Evolve or face extinction.”
    I’m sure everyone here will rush right out to grab hold of advice doled out by insignificant, petty, self-absorbed asses like you ASAP, Peter.

    Jack Klompus (b0e238)

  93. Jack – I was going to respond to your comment earlier, but I was trying to figure out how to evolve so I could be on a higher plane of Enlightenment like our moral and spiritual betters, like Peter.

    JD (c69925)

  94. Bow before his greatness, Ass Clown! Don’t you realize the mere act of declaring your vote for Obama is not only a strike against the evil machinations of racism and Rethuglicans but grants you instant membership in the exclusive club of superior beings??

    Jack Klompus (b0e238)

  95. I want to be in that club. I will now vote for Baracky.

    JD (c69925)

  96. I feel so much better. I am no longer a greedy capitalist running-dog, hell bent on oppressing minorities, and being a racist jingoistic xenophobic homophobe every waking moment. I feel enlightened, and free. Plus, now I can claim to not want to be judgmental, while savagely judging anyone that does not share my views. Plus, some rich dude is going to have to take care of me now. And, to top it all off, I know my leader can stop the oceans from rising. Take that, wingnuts.

    JD (c69925)

  97. And don’t forget, the Queen of Hearts in Waiting Michelle warned you that Barack Obama will require you to work. He is going to demand that you shed your cynicism. That you put down your divisions. That you come out of your isolation, that you move out of your comfort zones. That you push yourselves to be better. And that you engage. Barack will never allow you to go back to your lives as usual, uninvolved, uninformed.

    Jack Klompus (b0e238)

  98. Wait, I thought the argument was that Ayers WASN’T a terrorist. This is like trying to “nail jello to a wall”.

    fat tony (f86b83)

  99. fat tony – The Leftists have a very flexible system of language.

    JD (c69925)

  100. Obama for President, Ayers for Secretary of State.

    And Jeremiah Wright for VP.

    Roy, thanks for the link.

    Vermont Neighbor (c91cfe)

  101. #87 – Bobby

    The individuals that participated in the Tea Party, and the later founders of the United States were designed Terrorists by the official and sanctioned government.

    – Who “designed” them? the guys from Queer Eye?

    Icy Truth (84d054)

  102. From Hot Air. Right2bright posted this funny little script:
    =====================================

    How cool of a meeting was that with Obama and Biden…

    Obama: You really stepped into it this time Joe, this being tested in 6 months is a disaster.

    Biden: Well you didn’t do so well with Joe the plumber, a simple question.

    Obama: Okay, how about if I take a few days and go to Hawaii, and you take the morning off and re-read our talking points.

    Biden: And you promise never to walk through a regular neighborhood without out people along the ropes line again.

    Obama: Okay, but do you really think I will be tested, I am loved.

    Biden: Hell yes, they are going to rip you a new one.

    Obama: Oh Shit…

    Biden: Don’t look at me, I have covered my ass…

    Bolton on Biden.

    Vermont Neighbor (c91cfe)

  103. #89 Apogee:

    The founding fathers knew what they were getting into, announced it, and faced the consequences.

    Which were quite severe.

    Brutal, actually.

    Remind me again about putting fruit on the table?

    EW1(SG) (ec2899)

  104. So much ad hominem and wankery, so little logic.

    I can find one actual attempt to coherently argue exactly how Ayers-era Weather Underground should be classified differently than U.S. Indpendence movement:

    Lefties glom on to superficial and infantile comparisons, e.g. Jesus was a community organizer, to justify to, and conceal from, the public the onerous characteristics of their idol or cause.

    The Founding Fathers acted to increase individual freedoms. Their appeals were based on the long history of argument by classical liberal thinkers who believed in such, and duly noted the primary agent which fosters oppression of it is government.

    The Weathermen, to put it charitibly, also fight for freedom. But their fight is to purge society of individual freedoms and institute a collective socialistic freedom wherein what freedoms individuals may be allowed to exercise are to be defined, distributed and managed by government, which is just an euphemism for those who hold the reins of power.

    So, your point here, Dusty, is that the American Revolutionists had a good cause and the Weather underground did not. That’s nice. What you haven’t done is demonstrated any relevant difference in conduct. In fact, you’ve actually come right out and endorsed my point. Since the only apparent empirical difference you raise btw the Weather Underground’s violent actions and the American Revolution’s violent actions is not, in fact, an empirical difference at all, but just the goodness of the cause…you’re basically suggesting that we decide who is or is not a “terrorist” by our opinions of how good their cause was.

    Thanks for endorsing moral relativism.

    glasnost (c75a98)

  105. So much ad hominem and wankery, so little logic.

    Good to see glasnost recognizes what is surely to follow.

    JD (c69925)

  106. Okay, so I went ahead and read its self-proclaimed ad hominem and wankery and so little logic, and SHOCKA, glasnost’s ability to predict what it was about to write was 100% accurate.

    JD (c69925)

  107. JD – Watch for it in American History textbooks under Secretary of Education Ayers in an Obama administration in the chapter titled: America Was Founded By Terrorists

    daleyrocks (d9ec17)

  108. Followed by: McCarthy Was A Traitor; The Rosenbergs Were Patriots

    daleyrocks (d9ec17)

  109. Comment by glasnost — 10/21/2008 @ 9:23 pm

    So, let’s start here:
    relevant difference in conduct
    Continental Army wears distinctive uniforms, and has a known, identifiable chain-of-command; v
    terrorists blow up civilian and other targets, killing non-combatants in a so-called “guerilla war”;

    Leaders of the Continental Congress and Army are at constant risk of arrest and impoverishment by British authorities, but operate openly; v
    Weather Underground hides from authorities, denies those activities they undertake, and, if arrested, get lawyer from Daddy.

    Well, that’s a start. I’ll just leave it at that for now.

    Another Drew (7866bb)

  110. glasnost, the issue would be much clearer to you if you had read any real history of the Revolutionary War at all.

    But I suspect that a factual knowledge of what you opine upon is the last thing you want.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  111. “Thanks for endorsing moral relativism.”

    #104: Comment by glasnost — 10/21/2008

    Surely you can see that I’m doing nothing of the sort. Far from it and you either have no idea what moral relativism is or are yourself trying to obfuscate.

    If anything, I am endorsing moral objectivism, but that is not the point, either. But yes, I am making the blunt point that “the American Revolutionists had a good cause and the Weather underground did not.”

    I have not, however, endorsed your point. You only infer it does. I had no intention of writing a book, here, examining the similarities and differences to arrive at a conclusion. My only intention was to note a) inane comparisons lefties think up and b) that the focus should be on the underlying causes or beliefs. If the latter is done, it would be fairly easy to see that the Founding Fathers were not terrorists.

    Dusty (545d04)

  112. Politics can’t make me rationalize voting for a person who won’t salute the flag, won’t say the Pledge of Allegiance and is a member of the elitist illuminati who changes his stance every time the wind blows.

    Jeff (86606e)

  113. ^ I agree. It’s hard to imagine that’s why some people are voting for him.

    Vermont Neighbor (c91cfe)

  114. b) that the focus should be on the underlying causes or beliefs. If the latter is done, it would be fairly easy to see that the Founding Fathers were not terrorists.

    This is the textbook definition of moral relativism, that the same set of physical actions are or are not justified by “the underlying causes or beliefs”. In other words, the ends justify the means when I like the ends, and when I do not, they don’t. Moral Relativism 101. Please try again.

    You only infer it does. I had no intention of writing a book, here, examining the similarities and differences to arrive at a conclusion

    I see. So there are plenty of other differences. You just don’t feel like articulating them. Good work. You’ve won the hand.

    glasnost (c75a98)

  115. Continental Army wears distinctive uniforms, and has a known, identifiable chain-of-command;

    Wrong and wrong in many cases. Lexington & Concord? Did they really advertise their chain of command to the British?

    terrorists blow up civilian and other targets, killing non-combatants in a so-called “guerilla war”

    Thanks for making me reiterate points I’ve already made; i.e. the Weather U. did not strike civilian targets. Military & law enforcement only.

    Leaders of the Continental Congress and Army are at constant risk of arrest and impoverishment by British authorities, but operate openly
    Weather Underground hides from authorities, denies those activities they undertake, and, if arrested, get lawyer from Daddy.

    Actually, they both hid from the authorities (ever heard of “Valley Forge?”, they were both at risk of arrest and impoverishment, and wrong, W.U. acknowledged their attacks, although not Ayers personally in court. So, you’ve established.. no differences. Good work.

    I’m not calling the Founding Fathers terrorists. I’m just pointing out that the W.U.’s behavior is indistinguishable from the F.Fs. Patterico’s the one who’s gone on to apply the terrorist label to what is more accurately classified as guerilla war. But that doesn’t angry up the blood enough, huh?

    glasnost (c75a98)

  116. Comment by glasnost — 10/23/2008 @ 7:29 pm

    Law Enforcement is civilian. Ever hear of Posse Comitatus?

    Valley Forge? The Brits knew they were there, they just didn’t want to go get them; and were shocked when Washington mounted a campaign in the dead of winter that they (the Brits) could not duplicate.

    Lexington & Concord was conducted by civilian militia – the Continental Army had yet to be raised.

    Also, the Founders declared independence from the Crown, set up an independent government, and conducted themselves as to the accepted rules of warfare (something that some British forces failed to do).
    The WU advocated the overthrow of an existing government, did not establish a competing government, held no areas that were independent of existing governmental control, and were murderous thugs, operating outside the bounds of warfare, and civil society.

    You have failed your History test, and have not proven your point.

    Moron!

    Another Drew (b4e6e5)

  117. glasnost, you really have no clue about the actual history of the Revolutionary War if you think that the Continental Army was “hiding” in Valley Forge.

    In fact, you seem completely without any factual basis for your claims whatsoever. The reality is that you cannot establish that Washington’s Continental Army was operating in violation of the rules of war as understood at that time.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  118. Few things infuriate me more than people who think Howard Zinn and Ward Churchill write non-fiction.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  119. The tragedy of glasnost is that he, and the others who venture here from the cozy climes of DU and KosWorld, are the smart ones. The average, stupid ones couldn’t survive in the real world, and glas just barely can ambulate.

    Another Drew (b4e6e5)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.5289 secs.