BlogHer - wright - Comments

Smears -- call it what you like(a rose by any other name...)

MJ2007 — Thu, 23 Oct 2008 18:48:53 -0500

Just a note. I don't pay attention to the posts (especially those posts smearing Obama) of those that have only been blogging here for a couple of weeks. The timing of their presence here is questionable at best! Readers beware!!!

LFR (Let Freedom Ring)

wenvas — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 01:43:10 -0500

//The above post ("Obama's progaganda machine")is a copy/paste from LFR site!//

In all honesty - and please don't call me a liar - this is the first I've heard of this site. Have just taken a quick peek now and hope to have a closer look when time allows. Thank you for introducing me to it :-)

How to distort the truth in one easy lesson (Propaganda)

wenvas — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 01:10:12 -0500

First: All evidence must quickly be labeled "Smear". Then, of course, anyone attempting to bring the truth into the public arena needs to quickly be labelled a "Swift Boater".

This usually works for the Obama believers; however, the general public is becoming less and less vulnerable to the Obama propaganda machine... Thank God! No doubt it's a fruitless exercise trying to open the eyes of Obama's believers.

//The above post ("Obama's progaganda machine")is a copy/paste from LFR site!//

Actually not! This was taken from an article by Dick Morris on “The Hill” http://thehill.com/dick-morris/the-obama-ayers-connection-2008-10-07.html

Please click on the hyperlinks in my post...

MJ2007 — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 00:53:20 -0500

I forgot to mention in my above post (The Truth Behind the Obama Smears) to click on the 2 hyperlinks -- "sole donor funding vicious attack ad" and "criminal violation" Both are articles that explain in more detail.

Truth Behind the Obama Smears

MJ2007 — Wed, 22 Oct 2008 00:23:12 -0500

Groups like Let Freedom Ring and the Swift Boat Vets for Truth are behind all of these smears about Obama! The above post ("Obama's progaganda machine")is a copy/paste from LFR site!

Next Generation Swift Boaters

In 2004, Harold Simmons was the biggest funder of the manipulative smear group Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. In 2008, Simmons is the sole donor funding a vicious attack ad in some battleground states that uses tortured logic and clumsy innuendo to invent a tie between Barack Obama and terrorism.

The ad goes completely beyond the pale by cynically exploiting the tragedy of 9/11 in an unfounded connection with Chicago academic William Ayers. Then it claims that Ayers somehow “launched” Barack Obama’s career — an assertion so outlandish that not even Simmons’ fellow discredited Swift Boater Jerome Corsi included it in his smear book.

The ad may even be a criminal violation of campaign finance laws. Simmons has previously been fined tens of thousands of dollars for campaign finance violations – including forging the signatures of his own daughters to make political contributions from trust funds.

Minnesota Star Tribune: Swift Boater Behind Anti-Obama Ad

Texas billionaire Harold Simmons, a major backer of Republican John McCain’s presidential campaign and Swift Boat Veterans for Truth four years ago, is the sole donor to an advertisement attacking Democrat Barack Obama over his relationship with one-time radical activist William Ayers.

Obama's Propoganda Machine

wenvas — Tue, 21 Oct 2008 23:07:34 -0500

It's understandable that only those not swallowed up in Obama's propoganda machine are prepared to look at the mounting evidence regarding Obama's associations which, no doubt, have influenced his own philosophical outlook. It's clearly evident that Obama was splitting hairs and concealing the truth when he said that William Ayers was “just a guy who lives in my neighborhood.”

The records of the administration of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge (CAC), released recently by the University of Illinois, show that the Ayers-Obama connection was, in fact, an intimate collaboration and that it led to the only executive or administrative experience in Obama’s life.

After Walter Annenberg’s foundation offered several hundred million dollars to American public schools in the mid-’90s, William Ayers applied for $50 million for Chicago. The purpose of his application was to secure funds to “raise political consciousness” in Chicago’s public schools. After he won the grant, Ayers’s group chose Barack Obama to distribute the money. Between 1995 and 1999, Obama distributed the $50 million and raised another $60 million from other civic groups to augment it. In doing so, he was following Ayers’s admonition to grant the funds to “external” organizations, like American Community Organizations for Reform. Now (ACORN) to pair with schools and conduct programs to radicalize the students and politicize them.

Reading, math and science achievement tests counted for little in the CAC grants, but the school’s success in preaching a radical political agenda determined how much money they got.

Barack Obama should have run screaming at the sight of William Ayers and his wife, Bernadette Dohrn. Ayers has admitted bombing the U.S. Capitol building and the Pentagon, and his wife was sent to prison for failing to cooperate in solving the robbery of a Brink’s armored car in which two police officers were killed. Far from remorse, Ayers told The New York Times in September 2001 that he “wished he could have done more.”

Ayers only avoided conviction when the evidence against him turned out to be contained in illegally obtained wiretaps by the FBI. He was, in fact, guilty as sin.

That Obama should ally himself with Ayers is almost beyond understanding. The former terrorist had not repented of his views and the education grants he got were expressly designed to further them.

So let’s sum up Obama’s Chicago connections. His chief financial supporter was Tony Rezko, now on his way to federal prison. His spiritual adviser and mentor was the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, of “God damn America” fame. And the guy who got him his only administrative job and put him in charge of doling out $50 million is William Ayers, a terrorist who was a domestic Osama bin Laden in his youth.

Even apart from the details of the Obama/Ayers connection, two key points emerge:

a) Obama lied and misled the American people in his description of his relationship with Ayers as casual and arm’s-length; and

b) Obama was consciously guided by Ayers’s radical philosophy, rooted in the teachings of leftist Saul Alinksy, in his distribution of CAC grant funds.

Now that Obama is apparently ahead in the polls, attention will understandably shift to him. We will want to know what kind of president he would make. The fact that, within the past 10 years, he participated in a radical program of political education conceptualized by an admitted radical terrorist offers no reassurance.

Not a good recommendation for a president.

ayers and obama never close

erica_elena — Tue, 21 Oct 2008 16:24:16 -0500

William Ayers is a professor of education at the University of Illinois at Chicago, with whom Barack served on the board of an education-reform organization in the mid-1990's. According to the Associated Press, they are not close: "No evidence shows they were "pals" or even close when they worked on community boards years ago ..." (http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=D93KD6Q00&show_article=1)

Smear groups and now the McCain campaign are trying to connect Obama to acts Ayers committed 40 years ago - when Barack was just eight years old. Here's what the New York Times reported on the connection (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/04/us/politics/04ayers.html)

But the two men do not appear to have been close. Nor has Mr. Obama ever expressed sympathy for the radical views and actions of Mr. Ayers, whom he has called "somebody who engaged in detestable acts 40 years ago, when I was 8."

Barack has publicly denouncedAyers' radical actions from the 1960's (http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/02/obamas_weatherman_co...):

Senator Obama strongly condemns the violent actions of the Weathermen group, as he does all acts of violence. But he was an eight-year-old child when Ayers and the Weathermen were active, and any attempt to connect Obama with events of almost forty years ago is ridiculous.

I know what I said...

MJ2007 — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 23:32:29 -0500

I know what I said. I'm not arguing about what I said. I've stated that I was clarifying WHAT I said with my last 2 posts -- for you, mainly, since you were the one to quote me. And I didn't twist anything! You, like the Repub campaign, are doing a bang-up job of twisting the facts. You just tried to do it right here. And the only thing "telling" is that you need to go get some therapy! I didn't realize stating that your post was nonsense and full of generalizations was a personal attack. Wow! Did I strike a nerve or what? Or are you truly that desperate for McCain to win? Oh that's right, you aren't endorsing anyone. You're an "Independent" -- yeah right.

I'm not even going to waste my time debating the rest of this garbage post of yours! My post is very clear as to my views. Unlike you (with your right-wing wacko comments), I don't label anyone. By the way, I don't give a damn about what you think my style is, because I certainly don't need to justify anything to you. Unlike you, I'm very open-minded. I've been both a Republican and a Democrat and I favor the idea of a no-party (or one-party) system actually. That shade of gray you keep talking about....

Keep burying your head in the sand and touting yourself as an Independent. I hope that works out for you. I won't be replying to your future posts.

You said: It's a witch

Leplusjeune — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 17:41:20 -0500

You said:

It's a witch hunt -- nothing more than fear tactics by the Repub party to maintain power. People that are afraid aren't as likely to make changes. This is how third world countries and dictatorships are born -- fear. Furthermore, Obama is a senator.

I replied:

Dictators are usually born with great public support by creating class envy and convincing the public that government can solve all their problems, and when the people don't wish to see the truth. Some of the worst dictators the world has ever seen were full of charisma and their countrymen loved them...at first.

How can you twist that? You brought up fear and Republicans and and dictators all in the same paragraph. Not me. I made no comment about dictators other than I don't believe they come about the way you think. I made no association with Obama - NONE whatsoever. I didn't bring up his name, I didn't mention Democrats, nadda. You made that association all by your lonesome and I have to wonder why that is? It's telling.

I'm not going to argue any of the other broad generalities and nonsense from your previous post . I don't need to and no one else here needs to either.

That's a nice vicious little personal attack, isn't it? Is that your typical style? I didn't hear anyone say that you speak for them, and I didn't realize Blogher was Democrats only. Hmm. Well, I've never found it necessary to use personal attacks. It's usually obvious to all why people do.

And I don't know why you keep calling yourself an Independent. You are far from it.

So, if a person isn't for Obama then they're a raging right wing wacko, huh? I don't think I said anything that gave any indication of that. Just the opposite in fact. Do you have any idea what my political views are other than I'm suspicious of Obama? Again, telling. You'd do well to realize there are lots of people like myself who don't wish to be affiliated with either party. It must be frustrating when your ingrained to believe it has to be either one side or the other, A or B, black or white, yadda, yadda, yadda. Most of the country is a shade of grey, I think.

LePlusJeune - proud Independent

www.remodelle.net

Just for You LPJ

MJ2007 — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 14:59:35 -0500

I know what my exact words were, LePlus. I thought that I should better explain myself better, since you obviously misunderstood and decided to quote me. I think my last post clearly explains what I am saying. Here's a repost just for you (hopefully it will make sense this time):

LePlusJeune, I didn't allude to McCain being a dictator (but I would say from your last paragraph of your previous post that you DID allude to Obama wanting to be a dictator - bwahahaha!).

I SAID that historically people that are afraid won't make changes and this is how dictatorships (and eventually third world countries) are formed. So let me see -- if I am the ruling power and I want to maintain power how do I stay in power -- fear! That's what I said. So you and I are not that far apart. Dictatorships ARE often formed by charismatic leaders and often with the support of the people (generally not all of the people but the ruling or the "money" class). But what happens when it all starts to fall apart? War, a crumbling economy, inflation...and fear? Hmmmm.....???? Sound familiar?

And now I will use your quote from your previous post and ask you to think about the last 8 years:

Dictators are usually born with great public support by creating class envy and convincing the public that government can solve all their problems, and when the people don't wish to see the truth. Some of the worst dictators the world has ever seen were full of charisma and their countrymen loved them...at first.

Hmmm? The only adjustment I would make to your post is replacing the word "government" with "big business." All I'm saying is that we all need to think for ourselves and not be fed the party line. Regardless of the party.

Call Obama an idealist if you want. He isn't. He IS the candidate of change. He sees the possibilities and has concrete plans for this country to make it better. He ISN'T John-McCain-politics-as-usual. THAT is what will make him a successful president. I'm not going to argue any of the other broad generalities and nonsense from your previous post . I don't need to and no one else here needs to either.

And I don't know why you keep calling yourself an Independent. You are far from it.

I don't think it should

Leplusjeune — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 14:49:19 -0500

I don't think it should surprise anyone that political discussion are heated and passionate. That's why some people refuse to talk politics (or religion, lol)

Can you seriously say you've seen much other than talking points in most of these posts...by either side/s?

LePlusJeune - proud Independent

www.remodelle.net

Yes, well that doesn't

Leplusjeune — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 14:43:37 -0500

Yes, well that doesn't surprise me at all. Members of both parties seem to think anyone who isn't for them is for the other side. Like there are only two sides.

Shelley, when I first registered to vote many moons ago in my youth I was a Democrat. I was a Democrat for a couple of decades. I became extremely disenchanted and switched to being a Republican. I remained a Republican for about 15 years and again became disenchanted.

I finally realized that neither party has my best interests in mind. They're all a bunch of self serving idiots...and that's why nothing gets done because of partisan bs. So, as of about three years ago I'm officially a registered as an Independent, wishing to cow tow to no one. Why should either of the two biggest parties assume they have me in their back pocket? I'm probably more Libertarian than anything but I do believe some government controls are necessary, socially liberal, fiscally pretty conservative.

I believe if we all registered Indenpendent the two big parties would have no choice but to a) run soley on issues because they wouldn't be able to assume that certain sectors will vote for them no matter what and b) have to put their money where their mouth is once they get in office because of A.

So, there you have it. I haven't said who I'm voting for. In fact, a few posts back I said I might write in. Possibly vote for Barr.

LePlusJeune - proud Independent

www.remodelle.net

It's a witch hunt -- nothing more than fear tactics by the Repu

Leplusjeune — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 14:25:12 -0500

You left out a few lines. These were your exact words.....

It's a witch hunt -- nothing more than fear tactics by the Repub party to maintain power. People that are afraid aren't as likely to make changes. This is how third world countries and dictatorships are born -- fear. Furthermore, Obama is a senator.

When you first say that it's a fear tactic by Republicans and then you say dictators are born out of fear...what exactly were you alluding to then?

LePlusJeune - proud Independent

www.remodelle.net

Think for Ourselves

MJ2007 — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 13:12:24 -0500

LePlusJeune, I didn't allude to McCain being a dictator (but I would say from your last paragraph of your previous post that you DID allude to Obama wanting to be a dictator - bwahahaha!).

And now I will use your quote from your previous post and ask you to think about the last 8 years: Dictators are usually born with great public support by creating class envy and convincing the public that government can solve all their problems, and when the people don't wish to see the truth. Some of the worst dictators the world has ever seen were full of charisma and their countrymen loved them...at first.

Call Obama an idealist if you want. He isn't. He IS the candidate of change. He sees the possibilities and has concrete plans for this country to make it better. He ISN'T John-McCain-politics-as-usual. THAT is what will make him a successful president. I'm not going to argue any of the other broad generalities and nonsense from your previous post . I don't need to and no one else here needs to either.

And I don't know why you keep calling yourself an Independent. You are far from it.

Definitely!

MJ2007 — Mon, 20 Oct 2008 12:07:15 -0500

I wonder the same thing every time I log into the site lately! I don't just wonder if there are "plants" here, I know it must be true. The posts are so vicious that it's unbelievable to me. But don't worry UM, in a couple of weeks (when Obama is elected President) they will all be gone.