Wednesday, October 08, 2008

Good point by Victor Davis Hanson:

"He [Obama] said they have not spoken by phone or exchanged e-mail messages since Mr. Obama began serving in the United States Senate in January 2005" (New York Times, 10/3)

"Why in the world was Barack Obama still communicating on the phone or via email with Bill Ayers up until 2005 — when in 2001 Ayers gave widely publicized interviews claiming he had no regrets about the bombing, indeed regretted that he had not done enough, and did not necessarily have any remorse either about his Weathermen career?

"Ponder that: the possible next President of the United States, well after 9/11 and in the climate of hourly worry over terrorism here at home, was still friendly and communicating with an associate that had to abandon his book tour due to popular outcry, and was widely quoted as absolutely unrepentant about his terrorism. That is a damning indictment of his judgement — among other things — and it is no "smear" to raise the issue.

"Indeed, there is a disturbing pattern here. Obama's once-close radical Chicago associates are never jettisoned out of principle, but only at the 11th-hour when they became impediments to Obama's political career."


  1. Why is that disturbing? Are you afraid he's going to become the Terrorist in Chief or something? He's an intelligent guy, I don't doubt Ayers has some different perspectives on things. It's just a small-minded 'oooh booga booga terrorist' fear which you couldn't come up with any path to consequences for. I can't believe you're a professor.

  2. It's disturbing because Pakistan has 100+ nukes under dubious control. With AQ and the Taliban running, by treaty, vast swaths of the nation, and infiltrating the military and intelligence.

    AQ does not need to manufacture it's own bomb -- it can simply "borrow" one through bribes/intimidation/persuasion/tribal connections. Deliver it by shipping container. Boom! There goes NYC.

    Obama, palling around with Ayers, is weak and stupid. Dangerous. Guaranteed to get a city nuked. Maybe more.

    After Beslan, Putin addressed the nation. He said, the weak get beaten (true) and Russia was weak. He vowed to correct that. He made deals, short term, with various Chechen factions, and AQ/Iran. He then used the deals to get betrayals of the main Chechen leadership, and used Chechen factions and his army to LEVEL Grozny. He's killed several hundred thousand Chechens to make his point, along with journalists and opposition pols.

    If this was 1892, we could afford Obama. Given the nuclear proliferation, and danger to us from AQ, which has the possibility of having nuclear weapons, we cannot afford terrorist sympathies because they make the President WEAK.

    At no point has Obama put the COUNTRY first, only his hard-left, hate-America radicals. He's basically painting a bulls eye on NYC.

  3. The Obama panic is on. In terms of numbers, how high would the correlation be, between Obama being ahead and market declines of significance? 74% of CEO's believe Obama would be a disaster, and money talks as if it were saying the same as the CEO's in the survey reported in newsmax.

  4. Anonymous12:15 PM

    [Putins]'s killed several hundred thousand Chechens to make his point, along with journalists and opposition pols.

    Weevil Neocon, you're a McCain supporter because you think he will behave like Putin? You're against Obama because he isn't genocidal enough? Unlike McCain, Obama won't slaughter the editorial board at the New York Times. McCain will have a day of the rope for ABC News? Those are selling points to you?

    Crazy99 indeed.


Study of 94k Americans: Irreligious blacks do much more drug selling and theft than religious blacks

This study , using a sample of ~94k teens and young adults, examined the link between religiosity (church attendance and saying religion is ...