William Ayers on NPR

[Tricky]

And the answer is, again, "so what?"

I know a guy who used to be a coworker of mine. We worked together in the same small room in our office for several years, with our cubes right across from each other. We often ate lunch together, and talked politics quite a bit. He transferred to a different building in another section of town, but we're still friendly; I was most recently at his house for a Halloween party about a month ago.

How many of his political and personal opinions should be ascribed to me because of that? How many of mine to him?

All of 'em. Assuming, of course, he's a terrorist and a commie. Those kind of beliefs are like cockleburrs. They stick to you when you aren't looking. You'll just be walking along and when you look down, BANG! You're covered with communism.

 

[gtc]

No. This is why you have to keep shuffling the same old half-truths in the hope that one day they'll look sinister.

If they are half truths then they must be half untruths. So where is your proof?

P.S: It's over, Obama won.

So? Winning two elections didn't render Bush immune to criticism from the left and the fact that he won an election is irrelevant.

Winning doesn't mean that Ayers wasn't a terrorist or that Obama didn't show poor judgement by choosing to associate with Ayers, Rev. Wright, Ayers and Rashid Khalidi.

Truth isn't determined by the ballot box.

 

[BeAChooser]

I know a guy who used to be a coworker of mine. We worked together in the same small room in our office for several years, with our cubes right across from each other. We often ate lunch together, and talked politics quite a bit. He transferred to a different building in another section of town, but we're still friendly; I was most recently at his house for a Halloween party about a month ago.

Is that guy a communist? Was he a leader of a terrorist organization that exploded more than a dozen bombs in various buildings after formally declaring war on the United States? Did he have a live-in girlfriend who at the time she was his girlfriend was busy building nail bombs to kill hundreds of people at a military dance? Did he marry another woman who was a bomb builder and who he knew to be a murderer of a policeman? Is he unrepentent about all those things? Would you still work with him if you knew all these things? Would you still see him socially if you knew all these things?

 

[gtc]

All of 'em. Assuming, of course, he's a terrorist and a commie. Those kind of beliefs are like cockleburrs. They stick to you when you aren't looking. You'll just be walking along and when you look down, BANG! You're covered with communism.

Crap.

Nothing I have said indicates that I believe this and I have never mentioned communism in this thread.

 

[A'isha]

I have said it again and again. It shows that Obama had poor judgement by choosing to associate with him, nothing more, nothing less.

Why does this indicate poor judgment? "I disagree with your views and your past actions, but you're a free man who was never convicted of anything, hasn't blown anything up in 40 years, is a professor at the major university I also lectured at, served on the same foundation board that other people entirely also selected me for, our kids go to the same school, and you live on my street. I guess going to occasional neighborhood cookouts with you is okay."

That's supposed to be a damning indictment of Obama's judgment?

 

[A'isha]

Crap.

Nothing I have said indicates that I believe this and I have never mentioned communism in this thread.

It seems he was just exercising his remarkable BAC-precognitive abilities.

 

[gtc]

It seems he was just exercising his remarkable BAC-precognitive abilities.

When you find me defending BAC's precognitive abilities, then you can conclude that Tricky's post was fair.

 

[gtc]

Why does this indicate poor judgment? "I disagree with your views and your past actions, but you're a free man who was never convicted of anything, hasn't blown anything up in 40 years, is a professor at the major university I also lectured at, served on the same foundation board that other people entirely also selected me for, our kids go to the same school, and you live on my street. I guess going to occasional neighborhood cookouts with you is okay."

That's supposed to be a damning indictment of Obama's judgment?

I wouldn't socialise with an unrepentant former terrorist. Nor would I associate with Rev. Wright or Rashid Khalidi. Obviously Obama and his supporters on this thread think differently.

Why this requires some of his supporters to spin Ayers' actions and Obama's relationship to him so severly is beyond me.

 

[A'isha]

I wouldn't socialise with an unrepentant former terrorist. Nor would I associate with Rev. Wright or Rashid Khalidi. Obviously Obama and his supporters on this thread think differently.

"I wouldn't do that" does not mean "poor judgment", you know. Solipsism is a poor basis for making political decisions.

Why this requires some of his supporters to spin Ayers' actions and Obama's relationship to him so severly is beyond me.

Some of it is odd spin, yes. But some if it is also correcting apparent errors.

If you're going to disagree with Obama, it behooves one to make sure it's based in facts, and not things that political enemies with a vested interest in portraying him in the worst light possible have reported.

 

[Tricky]

Crap.

Nothing I have said indicates that I believe this and I have never mentioned communism in this thread.

It's a steenkin' joke, gtc, a bit of satire aimed at those who would accuse Obama of having been influenced by Ayers because they occupied the same geographic location occasionally. If you don't fit that description, you're off the hook.

 

[Ausmerican]

When you find me defending BAC's precognitive abilities, then you can conclude that Tricky's post was fair.

Trickys post was fair. Nowhere in his post is he adressing it to you.

And ANTpogo was saying that Tricky was the one being a precog about BAC not that BAC was a precog or that you were defending him.

But if you look at the post by BAC right above your response to Tricky starting with "Crap." you will see that Tricky did a pretty good job of predicting BACs response.

 

[A'isha]

Trickys post was fair. Nowhere in his post is he adressing it to you.

And ANTpogo was saying that Tricky was the one being a precog about BAC not that BAC was a precog or that you were defending him.

Pretty much, yeah.

But if you look at the post by BAC right above your response to Tricky starting with "Crap." you will see that Tricky did a pretty good job of predicting BACs response.

I found it quite amusing.

 

[Ausmerican]

I found it quite amusing.

Amusing yes. But also kinda sad that it so hard to tell parody from serious post sometimes.

 

[Tricky]

Frankly, I can't see what all the hoopla is about "associating with unsavory characters". Doing so doesn't make you unsavory. Indeed, you are likely to learn something about them that may help you in the future to deal with their unsavory sides.

Like ANTpogo, I live near, work with, and am related to a number of people who have aspects of their morality I find distateful. Yet I would not hesitate to call them "friend" simply because of this. I associate such behavior with snobs and cliques, who, while I wouldn't refuse to do projects with them, I do not adopt their behavior.

Besides, not just Obama but McCain have both associated with a group far more unsavory than Ayers. They are a bunch of self-serving egomaniacs, working on potentially harmful projects all the time. These are people for whom no trick is too low and truth is a nearly unknown commodity.

I refer, of course, to Congress.

 

[BeAChooser]

Frankly, I can't see what all the hoopla is about "associating with unsavory characters".

 

[Lonewulf]

Unable to make a post with content?

 

[tomwaits]

I'm sorry, but recently it seems that every time there is a thread in Politics that gets lively, BAC comes in and completely ruins it.

 

[Sefarst]

Frankly, I can't see what all the hoopla is about "associating with unsavory characters". Doing so doesn't make you unsavory. Indeed, you are likely to learn something about them that may help you in the future to deal with their unsavory sides.

In the case of Obama, I think the association with Ayers is entirely benign, even though I do consider Ayers to be a former terrorist (and I disagree vehemently with your idea of what constitutes terrorism). Obama is clean on the matter, as far as I'm concerned, but, in general, I think associating with unsavory characters CAN make you unsavory to the public. If you were to tell me that a large number of your friends are KKK members and Neo-Nazis and that you spend a lot of time reading anti-semitic books and only condemned those actions when you had a camera in your face, I would start to regard you as unsavory.

Like ANTpogo, I live near, work with, and am related to a number of people who have aspects of their morality I find distateful. Yet I would not hesitate to call them "friend" simply because of this. I associate such behavior with snobs and cliques, who, while I wouldn't refuse to do projects with them, I do not adopt their behavior.

The whole idea revolves around believing that who a person chooses to spend their time with says something about that person. What it says is always open to interpretation. Maybe you spend so much time with KKK members because you are trying to show them the error of their ways or maybe you secretly sympathize with their racism but just can't publically declare yourself such.

Anyway, everyone would be well-served not to jump to conclusions about a person just because they have an aquaintance that is guilty of some reprehensible actions, but I do think it's okay to start getting suspicious if that person counts among their close friends and aquaintances a parade of resprehensible individuals.

 

[Suddenly]

Besides, not just Obama but McCain have both associated with a group far more unsavory than Ayers. They are a bunch of self-serving egomaniacs, working on potentially harmful projects all the time. These are people for whom no trick is too low and truth is a nearly unknown commodity.

I refer, of course, to Congress.

I'm still somewhat amazed that Charles Keating wasn't an issue. If we are going to talk about a failure of judgment in picking friends, McCain was a far closer friend to a man whose criminal acts caused far more damage than Ayers. McCain was officially criticized for his poor judgment as to these actions.

Gee... poor judgment as to an episode in history involving financial leaders acting in a way that caused a economic downturn and a massive government bailout?

Yet it doesn't come up... but being on the board of directors with a guy who blew up empty buildings forty years ago and since then has become a respected member of the community is big news....

Irony.

 

[Ziggurat]

I'm still somewhat amazed that Charles Keating wasn't an issue. If we are going to talk about a failure of judgment in picking friends, McCain was a far closer friend to a man whose criminal acts caused far more damage than Ayers. McCain was officially criticized for his poor judgment as to these actions.

Gee... poor judgment as to an episode in history involving financial leaders acting in a way that caused a economic downturn and a massive government bailout?

Yet it doesn't come up... but being on the board of directors with a guy who blew up empty buildings forty years ago and since then has become a respected member of the community is big news....

Irony.

Well, McCain is not an unknown quantity. Like him or hate him, his record is long enough, and he's been in the public eye enough, that people can figure out their opinions of him pretty damned independently from that episode. In contrast, Obama was essentially an unknown. He's got precious little public record, and not much in the way of accomplishments. So the relative importance of his associations is much larger. That may not be fair, but that's the way it is, and for good reason. So I'm not sure why you consider it ironic.