Sarah Palin blamed by the US Secret Service for provoking death threats against Barack Obama

[Ling Ling 22]

You aren't the least bit objective, so don't pretend to be. You pronounce yourself above it all and proudly throw away your vote so you can stand for anything or nothing, and exist to batter anyone you wish to here. Other than that, you exist for nothing.

I'm sure you wouldn't have the audacity to say that YOU are objective.

I firmly believe that most here are not purely objective, but at least many are realistic.

[Niels Bohr 72]

Palin is no more a moron than Obama is a Messiah. They have been pegged in those roles by the media, but, in reality, it doesn't define them.

Hmm...Interesting. Lets put away politics. I love it when you inject words into people heads. I totally believe it, almost. Obama a messiah. Where in hell have you got that idea? I would like to know.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

I don't think she had intentions of causing his life to be in further danger by her remarks, but it is sad that it caused that.

I don't believe in reading others minds, but I do believe in extrapolating intent from actual actions. And her actions are clear and their impact couldn't be clearer - even to Sarah. I do believe she tried to get him killed.

She stated the truth...he does have dubious ties to terrorism....what people do from there is up to them.

Good grief. The assumption there is that this Bill Ayers is/was a dangerous terrorist during any associations with Obama. If he is/was such a danger at those times, we is not in Guantanamo? While he had belonged to a group that did some deplorable things back in the 60's, he is not a threat to anyone today which is why he a free man. Obama's associations were with Ayers, the Professor of Education at the University Chicago.

When Right Wingers simply roll their eyes back over the picture of Donald Rumsfeld shaking hands with Saddam Huissen back in the 80's (a reminder of our close ties with Saddam as an ally even though we knew he was ruthless tyrant), or the fact that we supported Bin Laden's fighting forces back in the 80's with arms and training as nonconsequential in who those two historic 'evildoers' became, but jump on Obama's innocuous association with Ayer's, a true double standard is established.

Ok, so was it no big deal that Rumsfeld shook SH's hand? Was it no big deal that we supported Bin Landen?

The double standard is indeed established!

Those two associations have long been down played by Right Wingers as unimportant. The double standard was established when they didn't apply that same line of thinking with regard to Obama.

Was it at all important to you?

Our relationship with Saddam and with OBL were consequential. With OBL, I don't think anyone thought he'd turn around and use the skills he learned from our military against us, or that Saddam would get aggressive with one our allies, but they both bit that hand that fed them.

With Obama's association - it is totally innocuous. He was not meeting Ayers for a Weather Underground Reunion or terrorist plot. They both were board members at the University of Chicago. While Ayers blew up a statue in the 60's, OBL killed thousands of Americans. While the Right Wingers certainly tried hard and seem to continue to try and paint Obama with a guilt by association, rationality hit that argument like a ton of bricks, which is why the majority of American voters didn't let such rubbish sway their vote. I hope this is put to rest, but I realize that the Right Wingers will not relent. In the meantime, Obama's got real issues to face when he's sworn into office.

Steven, I'm a Palestinian Muslim. If you were told that at 40, I knowingly associate with terrorists who were involved with the 1972 Munich Olympics murder of Israeli athletes, but I was only 12 when that happened, what would you think of my judgment?

Edited November 9, 2008 by Virtual wife

[IAMX 3,055]

Me, too, but it doesn't happen. Look around; everyone has their own facts and they're not interested in objectivity or reliable sources. It's just not that deep here. I wish it was.

Ahh yes, reliable sources like the nutjob conspiracy theories about Obama not being an American citizen, or, oh yeah, ACORN causing so many fraudulent votes to be cast.. damn Mickey Mouse. Yes, you've shown how objective your sources are. They're about as objective as Palin is intelligent.

You aren't the least bit objective, so don't pretend to be. You pronounce yourself above it all and proudly throw away your vote so you can stand for anything or nothing, and exist to batter anyone you wish to here. Other than that, you exist for nothing.

Let's see, no massive ACORN voter fraud in the news. Looks like your "sources" were right on the money, right?

Oh, look at this, none of the theories of Obama being born elsewhere (or losing his citizenship) stood up to scrutiny either.

Yes, great sources, VW. Very objective.

Edited November 9, 2008 by SRVT

[Sofiyya 1,687]

Me, too, but it doesn't happen. Look around; everyone has their own facts and they're not interested in objectivity or reliable sources. It's just not that deep here. I wish it was.

Ahh yes, reliable sources like the nutjob conspiracy theories about Obama not being an American citizen, or, oh yeah, ACORN causing so many fraudulent votes to be cast.. damn Mickey Mouse. Yes, you've shown how objective your sources are. They're about as objective as Palin is intelligent.

You aren't the least bit objective, so don't pretend to be. You pronounce yourself above it all and proudly throw away your vote so you can stand for anything or nothing, and exist to batter anyone you wish to here. Other than that, you exist for nothing.

Let's see, no massive ACORN voter fraud in the news. Looks like your "sources" were right on the money, right?

Oh, look at this, none of the theories of Obama being born elsewhere (or losing his citizenship) stood up to scrutiny either.

Yes, great sources, VW. Very objective.

ACORN is being investigated. I pushed no points about Obama's birthplace, so you exaggerate there. That is what you do.

[IAMX 3,055]

Me, too, but it doesn't happen. Look around; everyone has their own facts and they're not interested in objectivity or reliable sources. It's just not that deep here. I wish it was.

Ahh yes, reliable sources like the nutjob conspiracy theories about Obama not being an American citizen, or, oh yeah, ACORN causing so many fraudulent votes to be cast.. damn Mickey Mouse. Yes, you've shown how objective your sources are. They're about as objective as Palin is intelligent.

You aren't the least bit objective, so don't pretend to be. You pronounce yourself above it all and proudly throw away your vote so you can stand for anything or nothing, and exist to batter anyone you wish to here. Other than that, you exist for nothing.

Let's see, no massive ACORN voter fraud in the news. Looks like your "sources" were right on the money, right?

Oh, look at this, none of the theories of Obama being born elsewhere (or losing his citizenship) stood up to scrutiny either.

Yes, great sources, VW. Very objective.

ACORN is being investigated. I pushed no points about Obama's birthplace, so you exaggerate there. That is what you do.

Which will lead nowhere, as McCain's camp's attack on ACORN was a smear and a show. What was most interesting is your connecting ACORN to Obama. Now there's a good fraud.

[Peikko 1,575]

I don't think she had intentions of causing his life to be in further danger by her remarks, but it is sad that it caused that.

I don't believe in reading others minds, but I do believe in extrapolating intent from actual actions. And her actions are clear and their impact couldn't be clearer - even to Sarah. I do believe she tried to get him killed.

She stated the truth...he does have dubious ties to terrorism....what people do from there is up to them.

Good grief. The assumption there is that this Bill Ayers is/was a dangerous terrorist during any associations with Obama. If he is/was such a danger at those times, we is not in Guantanamo? While he had belonged to a group that did some deplorable things back in the 60's, he is not a threat to anyone today which is why he a free man. Obama's associations were with Ayers, the Professor of Education at the University Chicago.

When Right Wingers simply roll their eyes back over the picture of Donald Rumsfeld shaking hands with Saddam Huissen back in the 80's (a reminder of our close ties with Saddam as an ally even though we knew he was ruthless tyrant), or the fact that we supported Bin Laden's fighting forces back in the 80's with arms and training as nonconsequential in who those two historic 'evildoers' became, but jump on Obama's innocuous association with Ayer's, a true double standard is established.

Ok, so was it no big deal that Rumsfeld shook SH's hand? Was it no big deal that we supported Bin Landen?

The double standard is indeed established!

Those two associations have long been down played by Right Wingers as unimportant. The double standard was established when they didn't apply that same line of thinking with regard to Obama.

Was it at all important to you?

Our relationship with Saddam and with OBL were consequential. With OBL, I don't think anyone thought he'd turn around and use the skills he learned from our military against us, or that Saddam would get aggressive with one our allies, but they both bit that hand that fed them.

With Obama's association - it is totally innocuous. He was not meeting Ayers for a Weather Underground Reunion or terrorist plot. They both were board members at the University of Chicago. While Ayers blew up a statue in the 60's, OBL killed thousands of Americans. While the Right Wingers certainly tried hard and seem to continue to try and paint Obama with a guilt by association, rationality hit that argument like a ton of bricks, which is why the majority of American voters didn't let such rubbish sway their vote. I hope this is put to rest, but I realize that the Right Wingers will not relent. In the meantime, Obama's got real issues to face when he's sworn into office.

Steven, I'm a Palestinian Muslim. If you were told that at 40, I knowingly associate with terrorists who were involved with the 1972 Munich Olympics murder of Israeli athletes, but I was only 12 when that happened, what would you think of my judgment?

I am not Steven, clearly, but I will answer with my pov as it is related to something I just posted. IE do people who object to the idea that Obama might be friendly with Ayers do so on the basis of 'it's not nice' to associate with someone who did something really vile 40 years ago or because they 'know something' about the Ayers of 2008 that presumably no one else does seeing as he is now not a terrorist but a college lecturer.

Of course, your 'terrorists' are a little different to the Ayers bunch but my answer would be, if the person you associated with had completely repented of his former acts, had served his time in prison and was currently going about his business as an ordinary member of society, then why would one believe that you had poor judgement?

[one...two...tree 2,762]

I don't think she had intentions of causing his life to be in further danger by her remarks, but it is sad that it caused that.

I don't believe in reading others minds, but I do believe in extrapolating intent from actual actions. And her actions are clear and their impact couldn't be clearer - even to Sarah. I do believe she tried to get him killed.

She stated the truth...he does have dubious ties to terrorism....what people do from there is up to them.

Good grief. The assumption there is that this Bill Ayers is/was a dangerous terrorist during any associations with Obama. If he is/was such a danger at those times, we is not in Guantanamo? While he had belonged to a group that did some deplorable things back in the 60's, he is not a threat to anyone today which is why he a free man. Obama's associations were with Ayers, the Professor of Education at the University Chicago.

When Right Wingers simply roll their eyes back over the picture of Donald Rumsfeld shaking hands with Saddam Huissen back in the 80's (a reminder of our close ties with Saddam as an ally even though we knew he was ruthless tyrant), or the fact that we supported Bin Laden's fighting forces back in the 80's with arms and training as nonconsequential in who those two historic 'evildoers' became, but jump on Obama's innocuous association with Ayer's, a true double standard is established.

Ok, so was it no big deal that Rumsfeld shook SH's hand? Was it no big deal that we supported Bin Landen?

The double standard is indeed established!

Those two associations have long been down played by Right Wingers as unimportant. The double standard was established when they didn't apply that same line of thinking with regard to Obama.

Was it at all important to you?

Our relationship with Saddam and with OBL were consequential. With OBL, I don't think anyone thought he'd turn around and use the skills he learned from our military against us, or that Saddam would get aggressive with one our allies, but they both bit that hand that fed them.

With Obama's association - it is totally innocuous. He was not meeting Ayers for a Weather Underground Reunion or terrorist plot. They both were board members at the University of Chicago. While Ayers blew up a statue in the 60's, OBL killed thousands of Americans. While the Right Wingers certainly tried hard and seem to continue to try and paint Obama with a guilt by association, rationality hit that argument like a ton of bricks, which is why the majority of American voters didn't let such rubbish sway their vote. I hope this is put to rest, but I realize that the Right Wingers will not relent. In the meantime, Obama's got real issues to face when he's sworn into office.

Steven, I'm a Palestinian Muslim. If you were told that at 40, I knowingly associate with terrorists who were involved with the 1972 Munich Olympics murder of Israeli athletes, but I was only 12 when that happened, what would you think of my judgment?

Hard to make a viable comparison using a hypothetical...for one, you left out that you are now a U.S. citizen who has left the Muslim religion and that you've lived here 30 years as an upstanding citizen and are currently a distinguished Professor at a major university. We both have been working for education reform in the same community and work together sharing those common goals. Innocuous association.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

Which will lead nowhere, as McCain's camp's attack on ACORN was a smear and a show. What was most interesting is your connecting ACORN to Obama. Now there's a good fraud.

Obama is connected to ACORN, that's not in dispute.

The bottom line is, we have an inexperienced pol as president that we know little about because the media served its racial agenda before it served us, people hated Bush and wanted a change, no matter what that means.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

Hard to make a viable comparison using a hypothetical...for one, you left out that you are now a U.S. citizen who has left the Muslim religion and that you've lived here 30 years as an upstanding citizen and are currently a distinguished Professor at a major university. We both have been working for education reform in the same community and work together sharing those common goals. Innocuous association.

If you set it up to be innocous, it will be, but that's not the reality for Obama and Ayers.

[Peikko 1,575]

Explain how it is not innocuous. Saying that it isn't when the factual evidence point to the fact that it is, are simply not enough.

[Peikko 1,575]

In fact, that's worse than not simply being enough, that's using some emotional 'feeling' of wrongness to explain away your notion that those who don't dislike Obama are being 'duped'.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

Explain how it is not innocuous. Saying that it isn't when the factual evidence point to the fact that it is, are simply not enough.

What is the "evidence" that points to it being innocous?

[Fandango 1,439]

I don't think she had intentions of causing his life to be in further danger by her remarks, but it is sad that it caused that.

I don't believe in reading others minds, but I do believe in extrapolating intent from actual actions. And her actions are clear and their impact couldn't be clearer - even to Sarah. I do believe she tried to get him killed.

She stated the truth...he does have dubious ties to terrorism....what people do from there is up to them.

Good grief. The assumption there is that this Bill Ayers is/was a dangerous terrorist during any associations with Obama. If he is/was such a danger at those times, we is not in Guantanamo? While he had belonged to a group that did some deplorable things back in the 60's, he is not a threat to anyone today which is why he a free man. Obama's associations were with Ayers, the Professor of Education at the University Chicago.

When Right Wingers simply roll their eyes back over the picture of Donald Rumsfeld shaking hands with Saddam Huissen back in the 80's (a reminder of our close ties with Saddam as an ally even though we knew he was ruthless tyrant), or the fact that we supported Bin Laden's fighting forces back in the 80's with arms and training as nonconsequential in who those two historic 'evildoers' became, but jump on Obama's innocuous association with Ayer's, a true double standard is established.

Ok, so was it no big deal that Rumsfeld shook SH's hand? Was it no big deal that we supported Bin Landen?

The double standard is indeed established!

Those two associations have long been down played by Right Wingers as unimportant. The double standard was established when they didn't apply that same line of thinking with regard to Obama.

Was it at all important to you?

Our relationship with Saddam and with OBL were consequential. With OBL, I don't think anyone thought he'd turn around and use the skills he learned from our military against us, or that Saddam would get aggressive with one our allies, but they both bit that hand that fed them.

With Obama's association - it is totally innocuous. He was not meeting Ayers for a Weather Underground Reunion or terrorist plot. They both were board members at the University of Chicago. While Ayers blew up a statue in the 60's, OBL killed thousands of Americans. While the Right Wingers certainly tried hard and seem to continue to try and paint Obama with a guilt by association, rationality hit that argument like a ton of bricks, which is why the majority of American voters didn't let such rubbish sway their vote. I hope this is put to rest, but I realize that the Right Wingers will not relent. In the meantime, Obama's got real issues to face when he's sworn into office.

So you're straddling the same fence you accuse Repubs of! Explains my comment in red

But official US policies with countries and their leaders is indeed different to personal associations. 'Show me your friends and I'll tell you what you are" sort of thing...and consider, when you're in politics, especially eventually running for POTUS, your personal connections are always relevant and always called into question, no matter which side of the political fence you fall on. The question here is not 'how dare they use this info?' but rather 'how could most easily dismiss this sort of info?'

Anyhoo, I have a house to show! bbl

[Sofiyya 1,687]

In fact, that's worse than not simply being enough, that's using some emotional 'feeling' of wrongness to explain away your notion that those who don't dislike Obama are being 'duped'.

There has been nothing but emotion surrounding the defense and praise of Obama.