It's likely he'll get the Dem nod at this time.

Help me get around these issues, I'm really not a big McCain fan but if these issues are resolved I sure as hell won't vote for Obama.

1) Staff member Rob Malley resigned from Obama's campaign as his ME advisor, very sorted past this one has.....

http://news.aol.com/political-machine/2008/05/12/surro-gate-hamas-ties-and-lies-arise/

2) William Ayres, Obama has held rallies for him, helped him stay in the limelight for book signings and by all accounts this guy is just this side of a domestic terrorist up there with McVay. This is more than a casual relationship.

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/04/hillary-clint-2.html

3) Tony Rezko, this is akin to the lobbyist money scams on the right side of the aisle. Not sure how I really feel about this one.

http://afp.google.com/article/ALeqM5hHBj41cr6EhHoFi52dlaxSHP63XQ

Perhaps these aren't real issues, man I just don't know. But I know the more I read about them the more I wonder how clean Obama is and how tied he is with folks who are as far from what I want leading this country.

Notice I'm leaving the Wright issue out, it's a non player in my book at this point.

Thanks for the help in advance.

I will take a swing.

1. Malley, not sure how i feel about this one myself. It brings up an interesting issue, but if Obama order these talks to go in that direction, is it wrong? Opening communicaiton with the perceived enemy is a start to fixing things is it not. Also that article mentions fears from people who have endorsed Obama, i piddle a child and then publically endorse Obama, that doesnt mean Obama agrees with me, it just means that i endorse him.

2. thing you said it yourself on this one, its more of a casual aquaintence then a relationship IMO.

3. Rezko, this one is the most iffy of them all for me. They have HEAVILY investigated the purchases Obama made through him and they are clean. (there is a slight blurb about the land annex or something but meh) He is a sleezy slum lord but not sure how strong that relationship is.

TBH i put most of these guys on the same level as Wright, just "guily by association" of sorts.

Well I can't see William Ayres being called a casual type connection. Obama and his wife have worked hand and hand with Mr Ayres in regards to his interests , books etc.

I need to do more research on this guy, try to get away from the major media spins and see if I can make sense for this myself. My initial research find Mr Ayres very akin to McVay and with the close ties I have to wonder ;(

Well, looking at what information was available on the Whitewater land deal that the Republicans squandered over $100 million investigating, I think the Rezko issue could be troublesome for Obama.

The one thing I am surprised you did not allude to Fannie was his senior aide going to the Canadian leadership with a statement that what Obama says on the campaign trail regarding NAFTA is just political posturing, and then Obama denying it until it was proven to be true. I think that issue can be one that may haunt him in the general election.

How about the guy from McCain's campaign that left yesterday for supporting the Junta in Burma/Myanmar?

How about the guy from McCain's campaign that left yesterday for supporting the Junta in Burma/Myanmar?


What does that have to do with a discussion regarding Obama?

And what does the Clintons, Whitewater, and Republicans spending money on it have to do with Obama directly? See two can play that game.

Well I can't see William Ayres being called a casual type connection. Obama and his wife have worked hand and hand with Mr Ayres in regards to his interests , books etc.

Can you provide specifics please?

And what does the Clintons, Whitewater, and Republicans spending money on it have to do with Obama directly? See two can play that game.

You seem to be under the impression I am attacking Obama, which I am not.

I am responding to Fandros' asking about issues he wants to get clear for himself regarding Obama as we head into the general election. Regarding the Rezko situation, I think the Clinton Whitewater investigation is a good parallel because it illustrates how a mere hint of potentially incriminating material can be blown into a $100+ million investigation by a sour grapes bunch.

And I raised the NAFTA issue because I truly do think that that will be raised by the McCain folks once we are heading down the stretch, in an attempt to get folks to question if they can believe what Obama is saying.

These are directly tied to what Fannie was asking about, since he is trying to get a clearer picture of Obama and some of the "negatives" that he may be carrying or will face more noise about in the general election.

I questioned you raising McCain issues because he has already said he is not wanting to back that candidate.

Can you provide specifics please?

Geez L2 don't be lazy. I will give you a primer. Start researching The Woods Fund.

Geez L2 don't be lazy. I will give you a primer. Start researching The Woods Fund.

This woods fund?


MISSION & CORE PRINCIPLES

Woods Fund of Chicago is a grantmaking foundation whose goal is to increase opportunities for less advantaged people and communities in the metropolitan area, including the opportunity to shape decisions affecting them.
The foundation works primarily as a funding partner with nonprofit organizations. Woods supports nonprofits in their important roles of engaging people in civic life, addressing the causes of poverty and other challenges facing the region, promoting more effective public policies, reducing racism and other barriers to equal opportunity, and building a sense of community and common ground.

The Woods Fund has a strong belief in the need for and effectiveness of including the less advantaged in the entire process of addressing issues that affect them.

To this end, the Woods Fund encourages and supports organizations and initiatives that promote “participatory policy making” by reaching out to their less advantaged constituencies. Such efforts should involve the less advantaged in identifying and defining the issues that face them, and in forming effective solutions to these problems.

The Woods Fund believes that encouraging a close, learning-based partnership with its grantees can further the causes of Chicago’s less advantaged residents and communities. All grantees of the Woods Fund are expected to engage in a learning partnership.

Through this partnership, the Woods Fund expects that grantees will share best practices and successes with the Woods Fund and fellow grantees, as well as those challenges that impede effective implementation. This powerful collaboration has the potential to inform the Woods Fund's grantmaking process and to educate the nonprofit community and others about ideas and strategies that they may successfully adopt.

http://www.woodsfund.org/about/mission

Deeper Jedd deeper... The connection is there!!! Deeper!!!!!!

I'm not looking for a smear campaign, just some answers to those 3 connections. All of which are a concern to me, perhaps you don't care that Mr Ayres killed 3 folks by prematurely detonating a bomb meant for a more serious purpose. Perhaps you don't care that Obama's ME advisor quit yesterday after it was outted of his serious terrorist connections.

But these issues worry me, if Obama is going to get on his knees and play patsy with folks who are killing our own then I want to now ;(

Frankly McCain doesn't sit well with me either, but atm he's the lesser of 3 evils. What a sad sack set of selections we've had the last 20 years. ;(

I'm not looking for a smear campaign, just some answers to those 3 connections. All of which are a concern to me, perhaps you don't care that Mr Ayres killed 3 folks by prematurely detonating a bomb meant for a more serious purpose. Perhaps you don't care that Obama's ME advisor quit yesterday after it was outted of his serious terrorist connections.

But these issues worry me, if Obama is going to get on his knees and play patsy with folks who are killing our own then I want to now ;(

Frankly McCain doesn't sit well with me either, but atm he's the lesser of 3 evils. What a sad sack set of selections we've had the last 20 years. ;(

Well put Fandros. Keep looking into Obama. He's going to scare the hell out of you. Well said on McCain. This may be the first time I have not voted for a President..well..If I can write in I will but if I can't I will not vote "for the lesser of two evils" on this one.

The Woods Fund? Really? Thats the big threat?

Because they gave 70k to an organization that was founded by a guy who thinks Israel is fucking over the Palestinians? Cmon. Has the Arab American Action Network ever DONE anything questionable? Or is being Arab simply enough?

And Ayers? They served on same board of a Non Profit Organization that did alot of good things on the South Side of Chicago. Thats the only connection.
And the "Unrepentant" stuff is a load of shit too.

Radical history

According to his memoir, Ayers became radicalized at the University of Michigan where he became involved in the New Left and the Students for a Democratic Society (SDS). In 1969, Ayers joined the Weatherman, a radical group which arose as a result of a schism in SDS. The following year he "went underground" with several associates after the Greenwich Village townhouse explosion, in which three Weatherman members (Ted Gold, Terry Robbins, and Diana Oughton, who was Ayers' girlfriend at the time) were killed while constructing a nail bomb. He was not facing criminal charges at the time, but the federal government later filed charges against him. While underground, he and fellow member Bernardine Dohrn married and had two children. They were purged from the group in the mid-1970s, and turned themselves in to the authorities in 1981. All charges against him were dropped due to prosecutorial misconduct during the long search for the fugitives. Ayers and Dohrn later became legal guardians to the son of former Weathermen David Gilbert and Kathy Boudin after his parents were arrested for their part in the Brinks Robbery of 1981.[3]

In 2001, Ayers published Fugitive Days: A Memoir. Much of the controversy about Ayers during the decade since the year 2000 stems from an interview he gave to the New York Times on the occasion of the memoir's publication.[4] The reporter quoted him as saying "I don't regret setting bombs" and "I feel we didn't do enough", and, when asked if he would "do it all again" as saying "I don't want to discount the possibility."[3] Ayers has not denied the quotes, but he protested the interviewer's characterizations in a Letter to the Editor published September 15, 2001: "This is not a question of being misunderstood or 'taken out of context', but of deliberate distortion."[5] In the ensuing years, Ayers has repeatedly avowed that when he said he had "no regrets" and that "we didn't do enough" he was speaking only in reference to his efforts to stop the United States from waging the Vietnam War, efforts which he has described as ". . . inadequate [as] the war dragged on for a decade."[6] Ayers has maintained that the two statements were not intended to imply a wish they had set more bombs.[6][7] The interviewer also quoted some of Ayers' own criticism of Weatherman in the foreword to the memoir, whereby Ayers reacts to having watched Emile de Antonio's 1976 documentary film about Weatherman, Underground: "[Ayers] was 'embarrassed by the arrogance, the solipsism, the absolute certainty that we and we alone knew the way. The rigidity and the narcissism.' "[3]

Historian Jesse Lemisch (himself a former member of SDS) has contrasted Ayers' recollections with those of other former members of Weatherman and has alleged serious factual errors.[8] Ayers, in the foreword to his book, states that the book was written as his personal memories and impressions over time, not a scholarly research project.[3]

According to Ayers, his radical past occasionally affects him, as when, by his account, he was asked not to attend a progressive educators' conference in the fall of 2006 on the basis that the organizers did not want to risk an association with his past.[9]

And Malley? Wow, no shit, he met with Hamas?
Maybe its because he is a the Director of The International Crisis Group (http://www.crisisgroup.org/home/index.cfm?id=1317&l=1) a group that, by its very definition meets with both sides of issues in order to come to peaceful resolutions.

I am pleased to congratulate the International Crisis Group on the tenth anniversary of its establishment. Thanks to its distinguished trustees and experts the International Crisis Group has in the span of one decade become a widely respected and influential organisation for promoting conflict prevention and resolution. We greatly appreciate the work the International Crisis Group does in the Balkans, Middle East, Africa, Asia and Latin America to make the world a better place. I salute the goals and accomplishments of the International Crisis Group and wish it further success as it enters its second decade.
- Condoleezza Rice, U.S. Secretary of State, 28 November 2005

What the fuck. Seriously. Thank you all for inspiring me to really focus on teaching people how to research. Your continual blind acceptance of half truths and intentionally misleading assertions shows the real dangers to our democracy if we continue to produce citizens who lack the ability to independently form opinions based on solid research.

And Fanny. Take a look where your standing. When has Osgilliath ever been right about anything?

And Fanny. Take a look where your standing. When has Osgilliath ever been right about anything?

/snicker

Oh and btw.

It doesnt really matter. This election is over. President Obama.

Barring him getting caught with a dead girl or a live boy, he is going to win this election without much sweat.

Republicans are going to have all time low voter turnouts this election. There is no energy or enthusiasm on McCain's side. The Republicans who wont vote for McCain cancel out the Democrats who wont vote for Obama. And I'm being generous. What Obama does is expands the electorate. He is bringing in voters that normally do not vote.
Think of this: Blacks in the US widely outnumber Evangelicals. The problem historically with that demographic is that African American voter turnout is usually about 60%. What we have been seeing in these primary states is about 80-85% African American voter turnout. Additionally the 18-25 vote has been really low, about 39%. These Democratic primaries have seen that demographic bump up to about 50-65% (Which is about the "norm"). What we havent seen is any evidence that people who voted for Clinton will vote for McCain (Nor will Conservatives vote for Obama obviously). So what it will be is a equally, at best, depressed vote, assuming Obama can't bring home Democrats by the fall.

Lets put it this way..
GOP just lost a House seat tonight in a special election to a Democrat... IN MISSISSIPPI. In an R+10 district, that the NRCC put 1.3 million into, with a R Candidate who had strong local support (Mayor) and nothing controversial.

Its gonna be fucking bloodbath this fall. Expect to lose 5+ Senate seats and the Republican House delegation will be able to caucus in a phone booth.

The Woods Fund? Really? Thats the big threat?

Because they gave 70k to an organization that was founded by a guy who thinks Israel is fucking over the Palestinians? Cmon. Has the Arab American Action Network ever DONE anything questionable? Or is being Arab simply enough?

And Ayers? They served on same board of a Non Profit Organization that did alot of good things on the South Side of Chicago. Thats the only connection.
And the "Unrepentant" stuff is a load of shit too.



And Malley? Wow, no shit, he met with Hamas?
Maybe its because he is a the Director of The International Crisis Group (http://www.crisisgroup.org/home/index.cfm?id=1317&l=1) a group that, by its very definition meets with both sides of issues in order to come to peaceful resolutions.



What the fuck. Seriously. Thank you all for inspiring me to really focus on teaching people how to research. Your continual blind acceptance of half truths and intentionally misleading assertions shows the real dangers to our democracy if we continue to produce citizens who lack the ability to independently form opinions based on solid research.

And Fanny. Take a look where your standing. When has Osgilliath ever been right about anything?


Rashid Khalidi is a known PLO sympathizer and domestic terrorist advocate. I guess that's ok with you because we get /gasp CHANGE! YAY CHANGE!!!!!


Lot's of info out there here is just a small bit.

http://worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=57231

Errr L2 some of the reading I'm doing shows that Ayers and Obama have held functions for each other. Tho I don't really trust the links atm I'm not of the history of such sites.

Ayres is a degenerate of epic proportions. He should be in jail and if Obama can't divorce himself completely of their ties then I'm at a loss.

Btw, since when does anyone of merit judge thier position based solely on who else might support it?

I think you could look at it like this:

Every candidate as with every person could be villified by some of their associations or friendships. We all have that as a way we can be attacked.

I think if you look at this in the big picture sense you'll notice some things:

Obama is constantly attacked by the opposition for who he knows. He's been attacked for what his pastor once said in a sermon, he's been attacked because he knows a businessman that does things with a minimum of morals.

He is attacked by his opponents for his relationship with an individual who was instrumental in the formation of "The Weatherman" way back in the '60s. They attack him for something someone else did 40 years ago, yet this person has more than made up for his youthful exhuberance and has done some great work for our schools and anti-poverty programs.

If this man was so bad and was the terrorist he is made out to be, why is he not in prison or at Gitmo? I suspect because he really isn't guilty of these terrible crimes that he's accused of.

But it does make for good campaign fodder to throw at Obama, as I'm certain the percentage of people who actually look at the whole picture with a candidate is quite small...EX: We elected Bush

I talk to alot of people everyday, I have hundreds of clients, all are obviously business owners and upper management. Do you know what their #1 concern is about Obama?

The raising of the Capital Gains Tax.

That is and should be a legitimate concern for these people. Each one of them fully understands that our tax system is broken, they understand that the system has been in their favor with Bush policies, a majority of them know and understand that they can and should pay more in general income taxes and they are willing to do so. But each and every one does not want the tax on their investments to be increased and they have a valid argument.

Only one person I talk with brought up the Rev Wright issue as a stumbling block, I think most people of intelligence know that using this is pure rhetoric and lacks any real substance.

Look at the issues, not at the associations...if we look at associations...all of Washington should be burned at the stake.

Rashid Khalidi is a known PLO sympathizer and domestic terrorist advocate. I guess that's ok with you because we get /gasp CHANGE! YAY CHANGE!!!!!


Lot's of info out there here is just a small bit.

http://worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=57231


Glad you don't link anything that could be misinterpreted as racist...

constituted about a fifth of the Arab group's reported grants

supports open boarders and education for illegal aliens.

The group co-sponsored a Palestinian art exhibit, titled, "The Subject of Palestine," that featured works related to what some Palestinians call the "Nakba" or "catastrophe" of Israel's founding in 1948.

and this...well this is the best one

According to the widely discredited Nakba narrative, Jews in 1948 forcibly expelled hundreds of thousands - some Palestinians claim over one million - Arabs from their homes and then took over the territory.

We know that the Nakba Narrative is incorrect because it's common knowledge that the palestinians sold their homes, at a hefty profit I might add, to the Jews who bought Israel from them.

Actually Rover the reading I've done so far indicate Ayres got off on a technicality. He was guilty, there was one interview that quoted him as saying he wish he had done more ;(

Actually Rover the reading I've done so far indicate Ayres got off on a technicality. He was guilty, there was one interview that quoted him as saying he wish he had done more ;(

Maybe this could help:

Much of the controversy about Ayers during the decade since the year 2000 stems from an interview he gave to the New York Times on the occasion of the memoir's publication. The reporter quoted him as saying "I don't regret setting bombs" and "I feel we didn't do enough", and, when asked if he would "do it all again" as saying "I don't want to discount the possibility." Ayers has not denied the quotes, but he protested the interviewer's characterizations in a Letter to the Editor published September 15, 2001: "This is not a question of being misunderstood or 'taken out of context', but of deliberate distortion." In the ensuing years, Ayers has repeatedly avowed that when he said he had "no regrets" and that "we didn't do enough" he was speaking only in reference to his efforts to stop the United States from waging the Vietnam War, efforts which he has described as ". . . inadequate as the war dragged on for a decade."

Here's a good editorial on Obama's tax position issues --

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120847505709424727.html

"In 2005, 47% of all tax returns reporting capital gains were from households with incomes below $50,000, and 79% came from households with incomes below $100,000."


That is one hell of a statistic that I was unaware of up till now. Obviously, then, raising the capital gains tax would impact the people that the candidates are claiming they would not increase taxes on.

It was also interesting seeing that information on the negative effect raising those rates has on revenue collection. Nice bit of information there. :)


I can't give ya any rep till I spread more around, so will just give ya a public /nod for sharing some interesting data.

Rover i love the point about a majority of the ammo used against Obama is what people have done around him..

To me its a sign of the "fear" of how well Obama is doing. He was written off by Clinton as a competitor over a year ago and woops. Also what republican candidate thought Obama was a hopeful 2 years ago?

Still makes me laugh daily that all the mudslining McCain is doing at Obama, and he brings up the Keating issue and ZOMG you bastard!

Thanks Rover that does help, as I said I'm looking to assuage my fear of Obama's "situational friendships" so I can look at possibly voting for him.

"In 2005, 47% of all tax returns reporting capital gains were from households with incomes below $50,000, and 79% came from households with incomes below $100,000."
That's a very misleading statistic.

That's a very misleading statistic.


Thats true, it is misleading. I would bet those gains were from the sale of a primary residence which can avoid capital gains taxes up to $500,000 I believe.

The average person pays little if any capital gains taxes.

That's a very misleading statistic.

Sorry, I will remember to get a permission slip next time before finding something interesting.

Feel free to be grossly misled if you really want to be, but the quantity of returns in given demographic is pointless to talk about. It's the kind of statistic pushed by the people filing the other 21% of the returns.

You can't even begin to compare middle class families with a few dollars in a mutual with people who derive most of their incomes from capital gains. Characterizing a capital gains increase as something that affects <$100k income families the most is an outright falsehood.

For example: http://money.cnn.com/2003/05/20/news/buffett_tax/

I have to report something like $100 a year from savings bonds left over from college savings, for example. (My parents chose to have the taxes paid year by year rather than all at once upon being sold.) So technically I report capital gains on my tax return each year, even though the amount is tiny, and so changes to the capital gains tax would have a negligible impact on me.