Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6
redrobin
VG87
Global user
Registered: 04-2008
Posts: 94
Karma: 1 (+1/-0)
|
 | 
|
|
Re: US Election 2008
I've got sympathy for Buckeye, its easy to make opinions from afar sometimes a self interested media machine only give us what they want to, back in 97 a slick campaign swept in by a popular vote gave us Blair dumping Major and all the associated sleaze.
Look where we are now!!!
LRG it may not be good to say it but some people have said that to me too.
|
|
5/11/2008, 13:31
|
|
DaleKOntario
VG88
Global user
Registered: 12-2005
Posts: 124
Karma: 4 (+4/-0)
|
|
|
|
|
Re: US Election 2008
From not too darn far from the US border, and our largest trading partner, Bush's foreign policy has sucked.
But Obama's economic and social policies are going to prove to be a disaster, particularly now that he has so many Democrats in office with him, and that will affect us in worse ways than Bush ever did.
I think Americans just "cured" syphilis by giving themselves HIV.
|
|
5/11/2008, 14:08
|
|
howie32
EX95
Global user
Registered: 05-2004
Location: Michigan, USA
Posts: 645
Karma: 14 (+14/-0)
|
|
|
|
|
Re: US Election 2008
LRG, it may be inappropriate, but you may be right. It certainly wouldn't surprise me. I agree with Buckeye, it sucks to work as hard as some of us do and make good decisions, only to watch others benefit from it. It certainly isn't surprising he won, given that there are more people in financial trouble than there has been in a long time. I actually saw a woman on TV saying she voted for Obama because she would then be able to get a free car and house. Heck, why should I even pay my bills, I might as well mooch off of everyone else too. I want my handout.
|
|
5/11/2008, 15:07
|
|
alan a
Ex96
Global user
Registered: 06-2003
Location: Fermanagh
Posts: 896
Karma: 23 (+23/-0)
|
|
|
|
|
Re: US Election 2008
Many things are promised, or suggested in the run-up to elections that may never actually be delivered.
Given the level of debt run up by the current government and the global credit situation, Obama will have a lot less to spend than might have been suggested a few months ago.
He will, probably, get rid of the tax cuts Bush gave to the top 2%, and 'redistribute' that money.
But, due to all the exisitng financial restraints, his hands will be to a large extent tied.
Finally, on a more provocative note, perhaps a more equal and compassionate society would remove some of the social blights that disfigure many US cities.
Mind you, we are most definitely not perfect over here.
---
Alan Armstrong
Western Farm Enterprises
|
|
5/11/2008, 15:38
|
|
Eryl Vet
EX95
Global user
Registered: 11-2006
Posts: 650
Karma: 10 (+10/-0)
|
|
|
|
|
Re: US Election 2008
quote:
howie32 wrote:
LRG, it may be inappropriate, but you may be right.
It is a matter of public record that Colin Powell's wife would not allow him to run for the presidency, because she considered his life would be endangered.
|
|
5/11/2008, 16:21
|
|
Buckeye
Cowtalk Staff
Global user
Registered: 03-2005
Posts: 2883
Karma: 35 (+35/-0)
|
|
|
|
|
Re: US Election 2008
quote:
DaleKOntario wrote:
From not too darn far from the US border, and our largest trading partner, Bush's foreign policy has sucked.
But Obama's economic and social policies are going to prove to be a disaster, particularly now that he has so many Democrats in office with him, and that will affect us in worse ways than Bush ever did.
I think Americans just "cured" syphilis by giving themselves HIV.
I think that is the best way I have seen it stated anywhere.
One more thing, the Democrats are beholden to labor unions, and they want to end NAFTA, and other free trade agreements. They want to put in isolationary, and protectionary controls on the US market. If your country trades with the US, which I suspect most do, watch out. For those of you that don't like Bush, just remember the Devil you know, is better than the Devil you don't.
---
Buckeye seems like a one man wrecking crew out to rid the world of injustice. ----- Mayjay
|
|
5/11/2008, 17:23
|
|
Eryl Vet
EX95
Global user
Registered: 11-2006
Posts: 650
Karma: 10 (+10/-0)
|
|
|
|
|
Re: US Election 2008
The protectionist policies are the main concern about Obama for the rest of the world (and probably one of the things McCain & Palin should have been shouting about, not Ayers and terrorists). There is a danger in the current credit crunch that protectionism and curbs on trade could tip us into a full scale global depression, this is exactly what happened in the 1930's
quote:
Nile Gardiner, who served as Margaret Thatcher’s foreign policy researcher before joining the Heritage Foundation, a conservative think tank in Washington DC, where he has also advised the US government, believes an Obama presidency could wreck the Anglo-American alliance. He said Obama’s protectionist policies – he has talked a lot on the stump about the need to protect American jobs – would hurt British workers. “Obama is very pro-European and will seek to enhance America’s relationship with Germany and France – perhaps at Britain’s expense,” he said.
That said it is still a historic day for the US, and any incoming President needs to be wished the best of luck to deal with CO2 emissions, climate change, the credit crunch, Afghanistan, the budget deficit, record debts, restoring US reputation abroad etc. etc. etc ........
|
|
5/11/2008, 19:17
|
|
FiringOnAllFour
Ex97
Cyborg
Global user
Registered: 01-2004
Location: Northern Ireland
Posts: 1839
Karma: 41 (+41/-0)
|
|
|
|
|
Re: US Election 2008
I don't know how many times I have heard the words 'historic day' today as the news is broadcast.
The rest of the world is over the moon, although I can't think why. I think they are in love with the idea of a black president. I am in no shape or form opposed to a black president or british prime minister.
Today he is a coloured man carrying an ideology of many people. But in a couple of years (or less) when he is up to his neck in it, he will become colourless, and will have to prove his worth. And his 'worth' is a bit too far left for my liking. But we'll see.
I completely understand why black people need this landmark, but now that it has been achieved, I think they will find it completely meaningless and disappointing. His colour is not going to make him a great president.
On the plus side, internationally, I think that the US is in dire need of some image management - and he could well be a big help, or at least a temporary alleviation. You really don't need that 'arrogant, oppressive whiteman' image that bush so accurately personifies.
|
|
5/11/2008, 23:30
|
|
ExpectingRain
EX95
Global user
Registered: 04-2007
Location: SE Cumbria
Posts: 708
Karma: 5 (+5/-0)
|
|
|
|
|
Re: US Election 2008
quote:
broa wrote:
quote:
howie32 wrote:
I actually saw a woman on TV saying she voted for Obama because she would then be able to get a free car and house.
Is Obama to blame for this woman being an idiot? du you think Obama will give her a free car and a house? whatever promises he's made in the run-up to office, he will wake up to reality the first morning on the job. Unlike his predecessor, he's articulate and give the impression of being intelligent. I'd say he soon realize that under current finacial condition there will be little he can do in terms of social spenditures.
No, and no again. Obama is going into this with both eyes open and has from day one. I disagree with FOF, he can make a great president because of his colour, he represents a break with certain aspects of American history and represents huge numbers of people who have previously felt disenfranchised from the political process.
The rest of the world is over the moon because they have just seen the back of the most disastrous US President in living memory and seen him replaced with someone who appears compassionate, intelligent and articulate.
If this man is a socialist then I am Karl Marx...at one point in his campaign I remember him taking flak from black leaders for telling the black population to stop acting like victims, put their history behind them, and make sure that they sent their kids to school. There will doubtlessly be people to the left of Obama within the Democratic Party trying to pull him further to the left but Obama is too much of a realist to allow that to happen.
As a final shot, how anyone could vote for a candidate capable of choosing Sarah Palin as his running mate is beyond my limited comprehension...
---
Crosshutton Holsteins
60 Homebred cows Annual Average 9800 4.2. 3.3
1EX 32VG 16GP 10G 1F 1P
|
|
6/11/2008, 5:52
|
|
smous
Cowtalk Staff
Global user
Registered: 11-2003
Location: South Africa
Posts: 1905
Karma: 40 (+40/-0)
|
|
|
|
|
US Election 2008
Agree with your summation ER, I really like McCain but he was eight years too late and made some fatal errors, Palin being one of the worst, her worldview and especially her contempt for science is frightening.
Some intersting stats were listed on a local news site:
"There's no set definition for what constitutes a landslide, but Democrat Barack Obama's resounding electoral victory Tuesday night seems to fit the bill.
Kathleen Thompson Hill and Gerald N. Hill, in their book, "The Facts on File Dictionary of American Politics," say a landslide can be defined as "exceeding expectations and being somewhat overwhelming."
With four states yet to be decided, the electoral vote count was 349 for Obama and 144 for Republican John McCain.
President George W Bush, by contrast, won with just 271 electoral votes in 2000 and 286 in 2004. It takes 270 votes to win the presidency.
---
WWS-SA
|
|
6/11/2008, 6:07
|
|
Dairylands
EX92
Global user
Registered: 03-2006
Location: Straid
Posts: 268
Karma: 1 (+1/-0)
|
|
|
|
|
Re: US Election 2008
In my (no doubt strange to everyone else) political view the only American politician I every heard making any sense was Ron Paul. Your media didn't seem to hot on him though, perhaps they don't want to hear about the real problems like a 10 trillion debt. I would have a lot of time for the culture in the US typified by buckeye, however I don't think it's reflected by their leaders in Washington. How is Bush republican (whatever that means) when he has increased public spending and restricted personal freedoms? My brother has fought in both Iraq and Afghanistan and I don't see what need he has to be risking his life over there. I view these huge governments we have in western nations as a burden rather than a saviour. But the popular view seems to be that whatever the problem government can fix it. Even the weather now needs to be sorted by governments kindly green taxes. Interestingly I saw a program on the telly where John Prescott (ex british deputy prime minister) was investigating class in Britain. One chap on benefits was interviewed. He had a wife and 9 children. He was asked why he didn't get a job. He couldn't read and write he said. What about labouring on a building site? That's donkey work he said. Now if a politician can meet folks like that and still believe in government enforced wealth redistribution don't be expecting any lowering in taxes any time soon.
|
|
6/11/2008, 10:33
|
|
FiringOnAllFour
Ex97
Cyborg
Global user
Registered: 01-2004
Location: Northern Ireland
Posts: 1839
Karma: 41 (+41/-0)
|
|
|
|
|
Re: US Election 2008
quote:
ExpectingRain wrote:
I disagree with FOF, he can make a great president because of his colour, he represents a break with certain aspects of American history and represents huge numbers of people who have previously felt disenfranchised from the political process.
The rest of the world is over the moon because they have just seen the back of the most disastrous US President in living memory and seen him replaced with someone who appears compassionate, intelligent and articulate.
As a final shot, how anyone could vote for a candidate capable of choosing Sarah Palin as his running mate is beyond my limited comprehension...
Sorry ER, but he shouldn't make a great president because of his colour - he should make a great president regardless of his colour!
I already said I appreciate the historical significance of this, and what it means to the people. However, electing a black president doesn't automatically imply that everything will get better. Ghetto mentality will always be a problem, irrespective of colour or country.
Take south africa. One man, one vote seems like the right thing, but it hasn't done much for the country. Its much worse in many regards.
|
|
6/11/2008, 10:39
|
|
Buckeye
Cowtalk Staff
Global user
Registered: 03-2005
Posts: 2883
Karma: 35 (+35/-0)
|
|
|
|
|
US Election 2008
ExpectingRain, what is your definition of socialism? It has come to light that their is a move afoot to confiscate private retirement accounts (401k) and put them in a government kitty. Race should not matter, it doesn't matter when I watch TV, go to a baseball or football game, go to the mall, or go to the election booth. Compassionate, intelligent and articulate?
Focus on the details in the message, not the packaging.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Socialism
Last edited by Buckeye, 6/11/2008, 12:03
---
Buckeye seems like a one man wrecking crew out to rid the world of injustice. ----- Mayjay
|
|
6/11/2008, 12:01
|
|
broa
Cowtalk Staff
Global user
Registered: 12-2003
Location: Martebo
Posts: 2621
Karma: 53 (+54/-1)
|
|
|
|
|
Re: US Election 2008
you mean this?
Carolina Journal Exclusives
Dems Target Private Retirement Accounts
Democratic leaders in the U.S. House discuss confiscating 401(k)s, IRAs
By Karen McMahan
November 04, 2008
RALEIGH — Democrats in the U.S. House have been conducting hearings on proposals to confiscate workers’ personal retirement accounts — including 401(k)s and IRAs — and convert them to accounts managed by the Social Security Administration.
Triggered by the financial crisis the past two months, the hearings reportedly were meant to stem losses incurred by many workers and retirees whose 401(k) and IRA balances have been shrinking rapidly.
The testimony of Teresa Ghilarducci, professor of economic policy analysis at the New School for Social Research in New York, in hearings Oct. 7 drew the most attention and criticism. Testifying for the House Committee on Education and Labor, Ghilarducci proposed that the government eliminate tax breaks for 401(k) and similar retirement accounts, such as IRAs, and confiscate workers’ retirement plan accounts and convert them to universal Guaranteed Retirement Accounts (GRAs) managed by the Social Security Administration.
Rep. George Miller, D-Calif., chairman of the House Committee on Education and Labor, in prepared remarks for the hearing on “The Impact of the Financial Crisis on Workers’ Retirement Security,” blamed Wall Street for the financial crisis and said his committee will “strengthen and protect Americans’ 401(k)s, pensions, and other retirement plans” and the “Democratic Congress will continue to conduct this much-needed oversight on behalf of the American people.”
Currently, 401(k) plans allow Americans to invest pretax money and their employers match up to a defined percentage, which not only increases workers’ retirement savings but also reduces their annual income tax. The balances are fully inheritable, subject to income tax, meaning workers pass on their wealth to their heirs, unlike Social Security. Even when they leave an employer and go to one that doesn’t offer a 401(k) or pension, workers can transfer their balances to a qualified IRA.
Mandating Equality
Ghilarducci’s plan first appeared in a paper for the Economic Policy Institute: Agenda for Shared Prosperity on Nov. 20, 2007, in which she said GRAs will rescue the flawed American retirement income system (www.sharedprosperity.org/bp204/bp204.pdf).
The current retirement system, Ghilarducci said, “exacerbates income and wealth inequalities” because tax breaks for voluntary retirement accounts are “skewed to the wealthy because it is easier for them to save, and because they receive bigger tax breaks when they do.”
Lauding GRAs as a way to effectively increase retirement savings, Ghilarducci wrote that savings incentives are unequal for rich and poor families because tax deferrals “provide a much larger ‘carrot’ to wealthy families than to middle-class families — and none whatsoever for families too poor to owe taxes.”
GRAs would guarantee a fixed 3 percent annual rate of return, although later in her article Ghilarducci explained that participants would not “earn a 3% real return in perpetuity.” In place of tax breaks workers now receive for contributions and thus a lower tax rate, workers would receive $600 annually from the government, inflation-adjusted. For low-income workers whose annual contributions are less than $600, the government would deposit whatever amount it would take to equal the minimum $600 for all participants.
In a radio interview with Kirby Wilbur in Seattle on Oct. 27, 2008, Ghilarducci explained that her proposal doesn’t eliminate the tax breaks, rather, “I’m just rearranging the tax breaks that are available now for 401(k)s and spreading — spreading the wealth.”
All workers would have 5 percent of their annual pay deducted from their paychecks and deposited to the GRA. They would still be paying Social Security and Medicare taxes, as would the employers. The GRA contribution would be shared equally by the worker and the employee. Employers no longer would be able to write off their contributions. Any capital gains would be taxable year-on-year.
Analysts point to another disturbing part of the plan. With a GRA, workers could bequeath only half of their account balances to their heirs, unlike full balances from existing 401(k) and IRA accounts. For workers who die after retiring, they could bequeath just their own contributions plus the interest but minus any benefits received and minus the employer contributions.
Another justification for Ghilarducci’s plan is to eliminate investment risk. In her testimony, Ghilarducci said, “humans often lack the foresight, discipline, and investing skills required to sustain a savings plan.” She cited the 2004 HSBC global survey on the Future of Retirement, in which she claimed that “a third of Americans wanted the government to force them to save more for retirement.”
What the survey actually reported was that 33 percent of Americans wanted the government to “enforce additional private savings,” a vastly different meaning than mandatory government-run savings. Of the four potential sources of retirement support, which were government, employer, family, and self, the majority of Americans said “self” was the most important contributor, followed by “government.” When broken out by family income, low-income U.S. households said the “government” was the most important retirement support, whereas high-income families ranked “government” last and “self” first (www.hsbc.com/retirement).
On Oct. 22, The Wall Street Journal reported that the Argentinean government had seized all private pension and retirement accounts to fund government programs and to address a ballooning deficit. Fearing an economic collapse, foreign investors quickly pulled out, forcing the Argentinean stock market to shut down several times. More than 10 years ago, nationalization of private savings sent Argentina’s economy into a long-term downward spiral.
Income and Wealth Redistribution
The majority of witness testimony during recent hearings before the House Committee on Education and Labor showed that congressional Democrats intend to address income and wealth inequality through redistribution.
On July 31, 2008, Robert Greenstein, executive director of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, testified before the subcommittee on workforce protections that “from the standpoint of equal treatment of people with different incomes, there is a fundamental flaw” in tax code incentives because they are “provided in the form of deductions, exemptions, and exclusions rather than in the form of refundable tax credits.”
Even people who don’t pay taxes should get money from the government, paid for by higher-income Americans, he said. “There is no obvious reason why lower-income taxpayers or people who do not file income taxes should get smaller incentives (or no tax incentives at all),” Greenstein said.
“Moving to refundable tax credits for promoting socially worthwhile activities would be an important step toward enhancing progressivity in the tax code in a way that would improve economic efficiency and performance at the same time,” Greenstein said, and “reducing barriers to labor organizing, preserving the real value of the minimum wage, and the other workforce security concerns . . . would contribute to an economy with less glaring and sharply widening inequality.”
When asked whether committee members seriously were considering Ghilarducci’s proposal for GSAs, Aaron Albright, press secretary for the Committee on Education and Labor, said Miller and other members were listening to all ideas.
Miller’s biggest priority has been on legislation aimed at greater transparency in 401(k)s and other retirement plan administration, specifically regarding fees, Albright said, and he sent a link to a Fox News interview of Miller on Oct. 24, 2008, to show that the congressman had not made a decision.
After repeated questions asked by Neil Cavuto of Fox News, Miller said he would not be in favor of “killing the 401(k)” or of “killing the tax advantages for 401(k)s.”
Arguing against liberal prescriptions, William Beach, director of the Center for Data Analysis at the Heritage Foundation, testified on Oct. 24 that the “roots of the current crisis are firmly planted in public policy mistakes” by the Federal Reserve and Congress. He cautioned Congress against raising taxes, increasing burdensome regulations, or withdrawing from international product or capital markets. “Congress can ill afford to repeat the awesome errors of its predecessor in the early days of the Great Depression,” Beach said.
Instead, Beach said, Congress could best address the financial crisis by making the tax reductions of 2001 and 2003 permanent, stopping dependence on demand-side stimulus, lowering the corporate profits tax, and reducing or eliminating taxes on capital gains and dividends.
Testifying before the same committee in early October, Jerry Bramlett, president and CEO of BenefitStreet, Inc., an independent 401(k) plan administrator, said one of the best ways to ensure retirement security would be to have the U.S. Department of Labor develop educational materials for workers so they could make better investment decisions, not exchange equity investments in retirement accounts for Treasury bills, as proposed in the GSAs.
Should Sen. Barack Obama win the presidency, congressional Democrats might have stronger support for their “spreading the wealth” agenda. On Oct. 27, the American Thinker posted a video of an interview with Obama on public radio station WBEZ-FM from 2001.
In the interview, Obama said, “The Supreme Court never ventured into the issues of redistribution of wealth, and of more basic issues such as political and economic justice in society.” The Constitution says only what “the states can’t do to you. Says what the Federal government can’t do to you,” and Obama added that the Warren Court wasn’t that radical.
Although in 2001 Obama said he was not “optimistic about bringing major redistributive change through the courts,” as president, he would likely have the opportunity to appoint one or more Supreme Court justices.
“The real tragedy of the civil rights movement was, um, because the civil rights movement became so court focused that I think there was a tendency to lose track of the political and community organizing and activities on the ground that are able to put together the actual coalition of powers through which you bring about redistributive change,” Obama said.
Karen McMahan is a contributing editor of Carolina Journal.
I think I'd be alot less concerned with this than the dismantling of your democracy the Bush administration did in the name of "patriotism" and "homeland security". hell even Warren Buffet admitted to your tax system being just too unfair.
---
"Dum spiro, spero"
Cicero
|
|
6/11/2008, 12:47
|
|
Eryl Vet
EX95
Global user
Registered: 11-2006
Posts: 650
Karma: 10 (+10/-0)
|
|
|
|
|
Re: US Election 2008
quote:
smous wrote:
Agree with your summation ER, I really like McCain but he was eight years too late and made some fatal errors, Palin being one of the worst, her worldview and especially her contempt for science is frightening.
With his record of independent thinking, bipartisanship, opposition to Bush and his incredible life story, McCain was the only republican that COULD have given Obama a close race after the disastrous Bush presidency. HOWEVER, he then proceeded to appoint Sarah Palin as a running mate and hire Karl Rove and Bush's campaign staff... and the rest is history.
|
|
6/11/2008, 12:52
|
|
Jeash
EX95
Global user
Registered: 09-2007
Posts: 500
Karma: 3 (+3/-0)
|
|
|
|
|
Re: US Election 2008
You foreigners better look up Jimmy Carter and see what he accomplished. Obama and Carter are a lot alike. We will see inflations spiral out of control and weakened foreign policy. With the Russians finding new found wealth in increased oil revenues, they are looking to flex their muscles. You think that Obama will show a spine and help defend the Europeans? How about Iran? The guy has been life long friends with domestic terrorists and muslim extremists. You guys think the Bush administration was bad wait and see what happens.
|
|
6/11/2008, 13:00
|
|
howie32
EX95
Global user
Registered: 05-2004
Location: Michigan, USA
Posts: 645
Karma: 14 (+14/-0)
|
|
|
|
|
Re: US Election 2008
quote:
broa wrote:
quote:
howie32 wrote:
I actually saw a woman on TV saying she voted for Obama because she would then be able to get a free car and house.
Is Obama to blame for this woman being an idiot?
No, but unfortunately these are the idiots that we deal with, and their vote counts the same as everyone else. We have way too many people looking for the easy way. These people want to bash those of us that work hard to make an honest living to remain debt free, but they have no problem taking the government handouts. They don't seem to realize if it wasn't for those of us that do things right those handouts wouldn't be there for them.
|
|
6/11/2008, 15:34
|
|
Eryl Vet
EX95
Global user
Registered: 11-2006
Posts: 650
Karma: 10 (+10/-0)
|
|
|
|
|
Re: US Election 2008
I can understand your concerns over Obama, and indeed I have some of my own (as posted above) about his protectionist policies. But can anyone say that it would have been better to have Sarah Palin a heartbeat (and a very old heartbeat at that) away from the most powerful job in the free world??????
|
|
6/11/2008, 16:32
|
|
Jeash
EX95
Global user
Registered: 09-2007
Posts: 500
Karma: 3 (+3/-0)
|
|
|
|
|
Re: US Election 2008
Obama wouldn't be able to snap his fingers and save the economy. However, he doesn't have to make it worse by raising taxes. There are plenty of places to cut government spending and balance the budget. During the early 30s the US was in a recession, what pushed it over the edge into a depression was Hoover increasing taxes on the highest tax bracket.
It was Reagan who started the support of the Muj in Afgahnistan. At the time it was important and helped lead to the defeat of the USSR. Our mistake was pulling up stakes and leaving the region entirely, which led to the Taliban taking control. I'm not saying we havent made mistakes in the past. However, you cant correct that by bending over and taking it in the future.
|
|
6/11/2008, 17:09
|
|
Jeash
EX95
Global user
Registered: 09-2007
Posts: 500
Karma: 3 (+3/-0)
|
|
|
|
|
Re: US Election 2008
Alan, did Nelson Mandela bomb a judges house? Did he bomb the capital building? How about banks? Comparing Bill Ayers to Nelson Mandella shows how much you don't know about the subject. Here is a link to Wiki.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weather_Underground_Organization
|
|
6/11/2008, 17:20
|
|
alan a
Ex96
Global user
Registered: 06-2003
Location: Fermanagh
Posts: 896
Karma: 23 (+23/-0)
|
|
|
|
|
Re: US Election 2008
Try looking up the African National Congress, and it's terrorist activities under apartheid.
Mandela was their leader, and it was only in much later life that he renounced violence.
Having lived through 30 years of a terrorist struggle, i think i understand the effects and results of terrorism.
This guy has been dealt with by the justice system, is now a college professor and an expert on education. I see he also won Chicago Citizen of the year in 1995 for his work on school reform.
His terrorist acts took place when Obama was 8 years old. According to wikipedia, they first met in 2000, hardly 'lifelong friends'.
I don't want to make this a personal battle, and until recently had never heard of Bill Ayers. But I think in the course of elections a lot of dirt gets thrown, some of it more accurately than the rest.
Don't forget that Clinton & Bush have both had Gerry Adams, the former leader of the IRA, round to the White House for dinner. And they killed thousands in their 30 year campaign.
---
Alan Armstrong
Western Farm Enterprises
|
|
6/11/2008, 17:53
|
|
smous
Cowtalk Staff
Global user
Registered: 11-2003
Location: South Africa
Posts: 1905
Karma: 40 (+40/-0)
|
|
|
|
|
US Election 2008
Doing my best to no longer contribute to this thread, but Jeash's post demands a response, Nelson Mandela initiated and led MK (Mkonto we’sizwe – The Spear of the Nation as a final strategy when all other means of negotiation with the white government had failed), the armed wing of the ANC, freedom fighters to the black vote-less majority, terrorists to the incumbent white minority that held power. When MK attacked symbolic or even strategic government installations without loss of life or took on the military, you could argue they were indeed fighting for freedom, a noble cause, but when they killed innocent civilians on train stations, party goers at night clubs, christmas shoppers in shopping malls, restaurant goers and worshippers in church, and countless black township dwellers who lived in the ‘wrong’ area or wore the ‘wrong’ T-shirt then they were terrorists. I could find nothing on Wikipedia that Ayers ever caused any loss of life.
---
WWS-SA
|
|
6/11/2008, 18:05
|
|
click here to give a full reply or use the box below for a quick reply
Page: 1 2 3 4 5 6
|
You are not logged in (login)
Board's time is: 1/12/2009, 12:54
|
|
|
