Forgive me, but it seems you're saying that as long as he doesn't get caught, it's fine to associate with people like William Ayers. As long as he doesn't get caught, he can align himself with a Jerimiah Wright as a matter of political convenience. I disagree. I think that a man's choices in terms of affiliations and friends speaks volumes about his judgement. I can personally forgive a lot more in terms of a work-related relationship than I can someone's personal choice of friends. Work is work, and as a politician, you're right - people are forced to do business with all sorts of shady people. A President that has to sit across the table from Kim Jong Il is going to be judged less harshly by me than a person who chooses to meet with and accept campaign assistance from an admitted terrorist like William Ayers.

And besides - Obama hasn't been a senator for more than a handful of months. He was a senator for about a year or so - and from there, he's been a full-time presidential candidate. You have to reach back 10 or 15 years to dig up even minimal dirt on McCain. The questionable dirt on Obama is still wet paint.

I'm just saying...

__________________
The price of apathy towards public affairs is to be ruled by evil men.

~ Plato

nice attempt to make up what i said to your convenience. I said COMMITTING self interested actions as senator FOR PERSONAL reasons should be considered more questionable than simply KNOWING Bill Ayers. Has Obama used his position as senator to advance the interests of Bill Ayers? J Wright?????? NO
Oh, so McCain doing personal favors for self interested reasons as SENATOR is merely work-related?? I take it your not an idealist.

__________________

yes, and you might want to consider if your words are as clear to others as they are to you.

nice way to dodge a question you could not answer. OWNED, lil boy.

__________________

thats right, boy. yo mind has been spun.

__________________

LMAOROTFL!

Forgive me. You apparently could not discern my tongue-in-cheek stab at this obviously idiotic statement:

Given the plain humor in what you posted, I assumed you were kidding. I'm sorry I misread.

Obama has not been caught being a Senator, either. He's served a sum total of about two college semesters in the Senate. After that, he became a full-time Presidential candidate. He has missed over 170 votes in the Senate. That's more than he's showed up for, by the way. (You can find that information at U.S. Senate if you don't believe me)

Obama is a complete unknown even still. What is not unknown is his record of switching sides on controversial issues and his pattern of taking credit for work that was not his. His early campaign ads claimed that he "passed legislation that took 80,000 people from Welfare to work." As it turns out, that was legislation he vehemently opposed. He was against it right up to the point at which it looked inevitable, and then he switched sides.

Obama also likes to brag about the bill "he" passed with Indiana Senator Lugar, a Republican, as evidence of his willingness to rach across the aisle. Again, this was a completely safe bet as it was a measure against nuclear non-proliferation. It passed with unanymous support, so Obama staked nothing on his support of the bill. But more telling than that is the fact that this bill hit the floor in 2005, and was under construction well before that. Obama was not an architecht of the bill, but a late-comer who got his name on the byline in time to take credit. It is a common occurrence for Freshmen Senators. I can see that this forum is littered with people who live and work near the Hill, and they will no doubt verify this for me. Freshmen Senators are often given the opportunity as a matter of course to sign on as co-sponsors to bills that are "sure thing landslides." It allows senior senators the chance to win favors ("Remember when I put your name on my bill? Now I'm sure I can count on your support for this measure, right?") without putting much at risk. It also allows the Freshmen to get their names into the public purview without risking offending anyone. Do some research and you'll find out this is true of very nearly all first-term US Senators and Representatives alike. And I mean it - do the research. Don't take my word for it. You can find the facts at U.S. Senate and at United States House of Representatives, 110th Congress, 2nd Session.

As for the previous topic of discussion - it's not the notion that Obama knows Bill Ayers that bothers me. It's that he chose to associate with him knowing full well what the man has done. Yes. To me that says a lot - none of it good.

__________________
The price of apathy towards public affairs is to be ruled by evil men.

~ Plato

please explain:

Barack Obama - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia


in the future, spare me your personal mythology and self delusion.

__________________

Post Script:

I am a little curious. Which do you find more reprehensible? Someone who was involved in a money deal and was later completely cleared by Congress?

Or someone who knowingly and maliciously bombed Government offices and publicly wished he had done more?

__________________
The price of apathy towards public affairs is to be ruled by evil men.

~ Plato

I haven't had much interaction with you until recently, but your posts do seem to turn rather nasty quite quickly. It is much more educational to discuss with one who does not do this. I want to learn while I post here, and your posts are not doing the trick.

Now to the topic: If it is perfectly reasonable to judge JSM on his associations, it is also perfectly reasonable to judge BHO on his. Unless one is a partisan and a hypocrit, that is.

seeing how this guy is a senator and is actually running for president, this is more reprehensible IN THE CONTEXT OF THIS THREAD.
Ahh, we got Hannity Jr here! I did not know that Bill Ayers was running for president!!

and how did BHO help Bill Ayers bomb the government??? He didn't. Their relationship is indirect and peripheral.

__________________

Again, let's get back to the meat of the thread which is judging candidates on their associations, not on what the candidates have or have not done.

Okay. I'm new here, so I'll be glad to explain. I live roughly fifteen minutes away from the Capitol and the Library of Congress. I am personal friends with the woman who handles all of the recording, printing, and binding of Senate material - to include the roll calls and voting records for the Library of Congress and Archives. I am also skilled enough with an internet browser to go to the senate website and look at the actual voting records to see what Barack has done (and failed to do).

I do not let Wikipedia do my research for me, and I do not sling insults at guests without knowing a little about them. What I posted is not a matter of mythology or self-delusion, but of record. It is a publicly recorded fact that Barack Obama has missed or voted "Present" at a greater number of votes that he actually participated in. I'm sorry if that hurts your feelings, but it's a fact.

If you'd like some help with your research, all you need to do is ask. I'll post the senate floor activity website archives for you, and you can see for yourself. Like I said in my last post - I don't want you to take my word for it. I would much rather you go and verify for yourself.

To clarify, I'm not here to get personal, and if that's your game, I'm again very sorry to disappoint. I'm not interested in the name calling and mudslinging. I'm here for good discussion and debate. I'm happy and eager to discuss the facts with you (especially since it looks like you might learn something new in so doing). If it's all the same, though, save your insults for someone else.

__________________
The price of apathy towards public affairs is to be ruled by evil men.

~ Plato

With Keating McCain accepted 9 all expense paid vacations to Keating's luxury villa in the Carribean and then urged regulators to stop investigating Keating.
With Ayers, he and Obama served on the board of a non-profit with the goal of improving Chicago public schools.

As far as digging back to find questionable associations, You only have to go back a few months, and McCain had the chief lobbyist for the Myanmar Junta, the chief lobbyist for Saudi Arabia, etc. in major positions in his campaign.

As far as questionable judgment goes, just a few days ago McCain picked Sarah Palin as his running mate, without anyone from the campaign even looking at the archives of her hometown newspaper.

McCain Camp Didn't Search Palin's Hometown Paper Archives

Now I don't expect McCain to check the archives of Palin's hometown newspaper, but I see this as another example of McCain's bad judgment in assigning people to a task that are not up to properly performing that task.
(Heck of job, Brownie)

__________________
“ The subjects of every state ought to contribute towards the support of the government, as nearly as possible, in proportion to their respective abilities; that is, in proportion to the revenue which they respectively enjoy under the protection of the state.”

Adam Smith , The Wealth of Nations 1776

"We have always known that heedless self-interest was bad morals; we know now that it is bad economics"
FDR's second Inaugural Address

oh so its not judging what the candidates have or have not done with their associations??

It seems McCain has more questionable associations within the context of his government/public life. (ya know, the Senate). Obama's 'associations' include sitting in a room with Bill Ayers at one point years ago and attending a church with an outspoken opinionated pompous pastor (not too rare these days).

You cannot judge an association without considering the context. nice try, though. keep watching father hannity.

__________________