McCain booed after trying to calm anti-Obama crowd

[John317]

McCain booed after trying to calm anti-Obama crowd

By PHILIP ELLIOTT and BETH FOUHY, Associated Press Writers

13 minutes ago

LAKEVILLE, Minn. - The anger is getting raw at Republican rallies and John McCain is acting to tamp it down. McCain was booed by his own supporters Friday when, in an abrupt switch from raising questions about Barack Obama's character, he described the Democrat as a "decent person and a person that you do not have to be scared of as president of the United States."

A sense of grievance spilling into rage has gripped some GOP events this week as McCain supporters see his presidential campaign lag against Obama. Some in the audience are making it personal, against the Democrat. Shouts of "traitor," "terrorist," "treason," "liar," and even "off with his head" have rung from the crowd at McCain and Sarah Palin rallies, and gone unchallenged by them.

McCain changed his tone Friday when supporters at a town hall pressed him to be rougher on Obama. A voter said, "The people here in Minnesota want to see a real fight." Another said Obama would lead the U.S. into socialism. Another said he did not want his unborn child raised in a country led by Obama.

"If you want a fight, we will fight," McCain said. "But we will be respectful. I admire Sen. Obama and his accomplishments." When people booed, he cut them off.

"I don't mean that has to reduce your ferocity," he said. "I just mean to say you have to be respectful."

Presidential candidates are accustomed to raucous rallies this close to Election Day and welcome the enthusiasm. But they are also traditionally monitors of sorts from the stage. Part of their job is to leaven proceedings if tempers run ragged and to rein in an out-of-bounds comment from the crowd.

Not so much this week, at GOP rallies in Pennsylvania, Wisconsin, Florida and other states.

When a visibly angry McCain supporter in Waukesha, Wis., on Thursday told the candidate "I'm really mad" because of "socialists taking over the country," McCain stoked the sentiment. "I think I got the message," he said. "The gentleman is right." He went on to talk about Democrats in control of Congress.

On Friday, McCain rejected the bait.

"I don't trust Obama," a woman said. "I have read about him. He's an Arab."

McCain shook his head in disagreement, and said:

"No, ma'am. He's a decent, family man, a citizen that I just happen to have disagreements with (him) on fundamental issues and that's what this campaign is all about."

He had drawn boos with his comment: "I have to tell you, he is a decent person and a person that you do not have to be scared of as president of the United States."

The anti-Obama taunts and jeers are noticeably louder when McCain appears with Palin, a big draw for GOP social conservatives. She accused Obama this week of "palling around with terrorists" because of his past, loose association with a 1960s radical. If less directly, McCain, too, has sought to exploit Obama's Chicago neighborhood ties to William Ayers, while trying simultaneously to steer voters' attention to his plans for the financial crisis.

The Alaska governor did not campaign with McCain on Friday, and his rally in La Crosse, Wis., earlier Friday was much more subdued than those when the two campaigned together. Still, one woman shouted "traitor" when McCain told voters Obama would raise their taxes.

Volunteers worked up chants from the crowd of "U.S.A." and "John McCain, John McCain," in an apparent attempt to drown out boos and other displays of negative energy.

The Secret Service confirmed Friday that it had investigated an episode reported in The Washington Post in which someone in Palin's crowd in Clearwater, Fla., shouted "kill him," on Monday, meaning Obama. There was "no indication that there was anything directed at Obama," Secret Service spokesman Eric Zahren told AP. "We looked into it because we always operate in an atmosphere of an abundance of caution."

Palin, at a fundraiser in Ohio on Friday, told supporters "it's not negative and it's not mean-spirited" to scrutinize Obama's iffy associations.

But Kathleen Hall Jamieson, director of the Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania an author of 15 books on politics, says the vitriol has been encouraged by inflammatory words from the stage.

"Red-meat rhetoric elicits emotional responses in those already disposed by ads using words such as 'dangerous' 'dishonorable' and 'risky' to believe that the country would be endangered by election of the opposing candidate," she said.

[Neil D]

Quote:

But Kathleen Hall Jamieson, director of the Annenberg Public Policy Center at the University of Pennsylvania an author of 15 books on politics, says the vitriol has been encouraged by inflammatory words from the stage.

The message that is being sent from the anti-obama camp [and mostly republican camp] is that his life might be in danger....Are you sure you want this type of rhetoric on your conscious if/when Obama is shot? If you guys continue to repeat the inflammatory stuff, ie Obama is "pallin' around" with Ayers, Obama is a muslim or Obama is a socialist.....you guys are contributing to the possiblity and increasing his risk of being attacked by a crazy dude who feels it is his duty to protect the country from communists/terrorists.....

[John317]

Of course, here all I'm doing is posting a news article. I'm personally a pacifist. I'm also a Seventh-day Adventist who believes in Ellen White. What that means to me is that Jesus is coming and it is no time to start taking sides in a heated battle. I'm here to work for the salvation of people on both sides. It doesn't matter to me personally if someone is a fascist, socialist, capitalist, communist, or nazi. They all need the good news of Jesus and nothing takes precedence over that.

However, it is true that Obama is a socialist. He is, after all, the first man running for president on a major ticket who has campaigned for socialists. He is the most liberal Senator, and he votes and talks like a socialist. You don't campaign for a socialist if you are not a socialist. At least I have never known anyone who did.

The socialists want him. When I was Denver, they all wanted Obama, and all of them were opposed to McCain. If that doesn't say something, I don't know what does.

I don't think that some people on the Left realize how many Americans would be willing to die in order to prevent this country from going socialist. That is just a fact.

Would you like it if McCain was a right-wing extremist who you thought might take your country into fascism?

Well, of course you wouldn't, and neither would I. But on the other hand, that is how a lot of Americans feel about socialism. It betrays everything that this country has stood for during the past 230 years.

As for me personally, I think I can already see how things are going in this country and in the world. It is no time to take sides in a war that is being fought by people who do not know the truth about God.

Would I favor doing harm to Obama? No. I would discourage anyone from doing that. I lived through the murder of one president already. I don't want to see another.

[Neil D]

Of course, here all I'm doing is posting a news article. I'm personally a pacifist. I'm also a Seventh-day Adventist who believes in Ellen White. What that means to me is that Jesus is coming and it is no time to start taking sides in a heated battle. I'm here to work for the salvation of people on both sides. It doesn't matter to me personally if someone is a fascist, socialist, capitalist, communist, or nazi. They all need the good news of Jesus and nothing takes precedence over that.

[jasd]

>>The message that is being sent from the anti-obama camp [and mostly republican camp] is that his life might be in danger [...] you guys are contributing to the possiblity and increasing his risk of being attacked by a crazy dude who feels it is his duty to protect the country from communists/terrorists.....<<

Good grief.

[John317]

Originally Posted By: John317

Of course, here all I'm doing is posting a news article. I'm personally a pacifist. I'm also a Seventh-day Adventist who believes in Ellen White. What that means to me is that Jesus is coming and it is no time to start taking sides in a heated battle. I'm here to work for the salvation of people on both sides. It doesn't matter to me personally if someone is a fascist, socialist, capitalist, communist, or nazi. They all need the good news of Jesus and nothing takes precedence over that.

Nice way out...Jesus is the answer...."My life in Jesus"...Sorry, John...but you can't hide behind Jesus. Don't make Him the fall guy for YOUR errors. When you put things up that are not true, and you continue to believe those falsehoods, even when good evidence shows the falsehood as wrong, you should not hide behind Jesus....When you do that, you make Jesus the bad guy too....

What errors? I'm not attempting to hide behind anyone.

What is not true?

Obama is the most liberal Senator. He is the farthest to the Left of any candidate for President, bar none.

Obama campaigned for two socialists-- one in the US and one in Africa.

He thinks and talks like a socialist, and there is good evidence that he is one.

What is wrong here?

[Neil D]

What errors? I'm not attempting to hide behind anyone.

What is not true?

Obama is the most liberal Senator. He is the farthest to the Left of any candidate for President, bar none.

Obama campaigned for two socialists-- one in the US and one in Africa.

He thinks and talks like a socialist, and there is good evidence that he is one.

What is wrong here?

Sources, John....We want to examine your sources and see if we can come to the same conclusions...

You came out with the Ayers connection several month ago...only now, has it come out that there was NO connection....

Now, you claim he is a socialist, and was one of the most liberal senators on record. [ I can look at that later charge and will soon.]...If the Ayer charge that you brought out was wrong, what make you think that the rest of your charges are right?

[John317]

I'm not aware of having put out any mistakes about Bill Ayers.

What have you found that is false about the information in the following article?

Source: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0208/8630.html

Former radical activist Bernardine Dohrn and her companion William Ayers leave court in Chicago on Jan. 14, 1981. Dohrn received a $1,500 fine and three years probation for her role in the 'Days of Rage' disturbance in Chicago in 1969.

Photo: AP

In 1995, State Senator Alice Palmer introduced her chosen successor, Barack Obama, to a few of the district’s influential liberals at the home of two well known figures on the local left: William Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn.

While Ayers and Dohrn may be thought of in Hyde Park as local activists, they’re better known nationally as two of the most notorious — and unrepentant — figures from the violent fringe of the 1960s anti-war movement.

Now, as Obama runs for president, what two guests recall as an unremarkable gathering on the road to a minor elected office stands as a symbol of how swiftly he has risen from a man in the Hyde Park left to one closing in fast on the Democratic nomination for president.

“I can remember being one of a small group of people who came to Bill Ayers’ house to learn that Alice Palmer was stepping down from the senate and running for Congress,” said Dr. Quentin Young, a prominent Chicago physician and advocate for single-payer health care, of the informal gathering at the home of Ayers and his wife, Dohrn. “[Palmer] identified [Obama] as her successor.”

Obama and Palmer “were both there,” he said.

Obama’s connections to Ayers and Dorhn have been noted in some fleeting news coverage in the past. But the visit by Obama to their home — part of a campaign courtship — reflects more extensive interaction than has been previously reported.

Neither Ayers nor the Obama campaign would describe the relationship between the two men. Dr. Young described Obama and Ayers as “friends,” but there’s no evidence their relationship is more than the casual friendship of two men who occupy overlapping Chicago political circles and who served together on the board of a Chicago foundation.

Dem tension hinges on plagiarism charges

McCain turns tables on Times

Clinton holds back in high-stakes debate

But Obama’s relationship with Ayers is an especially vivid milepost on his rise, in record time, from a local official who unabashedly reflected a very liberal district to the leader of national movement based largely on the claim that he can transcend ideological divides.

In one sense, Obama’s journey toward the cultural and political center is not unusual among national politicians. But its velocity is.

Politicians of an earlier generation had their own relationships with figures now far to their left. Hillary Rodham Clinton, for instance, interned at a radical San Francisco law firm while in law school.

On the other side of the political spectrum, many in the generation before hers shifted dramatically on civil rights. John McCain voted against creating a holiday to honor Martin Luther King Jr. and later called that a mistake.

The relationship with Ayers gives context to his recent past in Hyde Park politics. It’s milieu in which a former violent radical was a stalwart of the local scene, not especially controversial.

It’s also a scene whose liberal ideological features — while taken for granted by the Chicago press corps that knows Obama best — provides a jarring contrast with Obama’s current, anti-ideological stance. This contrast between past and present — not least the Ayers connection — is virtually certain to be a subject Republican operatives will warm to if Obama is the Democratic nominee.

The tension between the present and recent Chicago past is also evident in some of his positions on major national issues. Many national politicians, including Clinton, have moved toward the center over time. But Obama’s transitions are still quite fresh.

A questionnaire from his 1996 campaign indicated more blanket opposition to the death penalty, and support of abortion rights, than he currently espouses. He spoke in support of single-payer health care as recently as 2003.

Like many of the most extreme figures from the 1960s Ayers and Dohrn are ambiguous figures in American life.

They disappeared in 1970, after a bomb — designed to kill army officers in New Jersey — accidentally destroyed a Greenwich Village townhouse, and turned themselves into authorities in 1980. They were never prosecuted for their involvement with the 25 bombings the Weather Underground claimed; charges were dropped because of improper FBI surveillance.

Both have written and spoken at length about their pasts, and today he is an advocate for progressive education and a professor at the University of Illinois at Chicago; she’s an associate professor of law at Northwestern University.

But — unlike some other fringe figures of the era — they’re also flatly unrepentant about the bombings they committed in the name of ending the war, defending them on the grounds that they killed no one, except, accidentally, their own members.

Dohrn, however, was jailed for less than a year for refusing to testify before a grand jury investigating other Weather Underground members’ robbery of a Brinks truck, in which a guard and two New York State Troopers were killed.

“I don't regret setting bombs; I feel we didn't do enough,” Ayers told the New York Times in 2001.

And their rehabilitation in establishment circles, even in Hyde Park, has its limits.

Though he is a respected figure in liberal educational circles, Ayers wrote recently about how in 2006 he was informed he was persona non grata at a progressive educators’ conference in the summer of 2006.

“We cannot risk a simplistic and dubious association between progressive education and the violent aspects of your past,” he quoted the conference organizers, whom he described as friends, as writing to him.

But the couple has been embraced, by and large, in the liberal circles dominating Hyde Park politics.

“Bill Ayers is one of my heroes in life,” said Sam Ackerman, a longtime local activist. “I knew Tony Rezko, and he ain’t no Rezko.” ....

See link above for complete article.

[John317]

See SEAN HANNITY, OF HANNITY & COLMES ~ FOX NEWS, IS GOING TO AIR A VERY IMPORTANT DOCUMENTARY ABOUT BARACK OBAMA, SUNDAY NIGHT AT 9:00 PM.

An uncle of mine who flew bombing missions in a B-24 and B-26 in both WW2 and Korea sent me the following FWD. See how much of it is valid.

About six months ago, I started thinking 'where did the money come from for Obama'. I have four daughters who went to college, and we were middle class, and money was tight. We (including my girls) worked hard and there were lots of student loans.

I started looking into Obama's life. Where has the money come from?

Around 1979 Obama started college at Occidental in California. He is very open about his two years at Occidental. He even admits that he tried all kinds of drugs and was wasting his time. Even though he had a brilliant mind, did not apply himself to his studies. 'Barry' (that was the name he used during his early years) had two roommates during this time, Muhammad Hassan Chandoo and Wahid Hamid, both Muslims from Pakistan.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2095574/posts

During the summer of 1981, after his second year in college, he made a 'round the world' trip. Stopping to see his mother in Indonesia; next to Hyderabad in India; three weeks in Karachi, Pakistan where he stayed with his roommate's family; then off to Africa to visit his father's family. Where did he get the money for this trip? Nether I, nor any one of my children would have had money for a trip like this when they were in college.

When he came back he started school at Columbia University in New York . It is at this time he asks everyone to call him Barrack - not Barry. Do you know what the tuition is at Columbia? It's not cheap, to say the least. Where did he get money for tuition? Student Loans? Maybe.

After Columbia, he went to Chicago to work as a Community Organizer for $12,000 a year. Why Chicago? Why not New York? He was already living in New York

By 'chance'(?) he met Antoin 'Tony' Rezko, born in Aleppo, Syria, and a real estate developer in Chicago. Rezko was convicted of fraud and bribery this year, (nice guy?). Rezko, was named 'Entrepreneur of the Decade' by the Arab-American Business and Professional Association'.

About two years later, Obama entered Harvard Law School. Do you have any idea what tuition is for Harvard Law School? Where did he get the money for Law School? More student loans?

After Law school he went back to Chicago. Rezko offered him a job, which he turned down. But, he did take a job with the law firm Davis, Miner, Barnhill & Galland. Guess what? That's the firm that represented 'Rezar', which is Rezko's firm. Rezko was one of Obama's first major financial contributors when he ran for office in Chicago. In 2003, Rezko threw an early fundraiser for Obama which Chicago Tribune reporter David Mendelland claims was instrumental in providing Obama with 'seed money' for his U.S. Senate race.

In 2005, Obama purchased a new home in the Kenwood District of Chicago. He paid $1.65 million for the place. While paying off all those previous student loans (?) - Where did he get the money for the property? On the same day Rezko's wife, Rita, purchased the adjoining empty lot. The London Times reported that Nadhmi Auchi, an Iraqi-born Billionaire loaned Rezko $3.5 million three weeks before Obama purchased this new home. Obama has met Nadhmi Auchi many times with Rezko.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tony_Rezko

http://www.suntimes.com/news/watchdogs/757340,CST-NWS-watchdog24.article

Now, we have Obama running for President. Valerie Jarrett, was Michele Obama's boss. She is now Obama's chief advisor and he does not ma ke any major decisions without consulting with her first. Where was Jarrett born? Ready for this? Shiraz, Iran! Do we see a pattern here? Or am I just stupid?

On May 10, 2008 The Times reported that Robert Malley, an advisor to Obama, was 'sacked' after the press found out he was having regular contacts with 'Hamas'. The same Hamas that controls Gaza and is connected with Iran and terrorism.

From Wikipedia--

According to Barack Obama's presidential campaign, Malley provided informal advice to the campaign in the past without having any formal role in the campaign.[7] On May 9, 2008, the campaign severed ties with Malley when the British Times reported that Malley had been in discussions with the militant Palestinian group Hamas, listed by the U.S. State Department as a terrorist organization.

Oh, and by the way, remember Obama's college roommates, the Muslims who were from Pakistan? They are now in charge of all those 'small' internet campaign contributions coming in for Obama. Where is that money coming from? The middle class in this country? Or could it be from the Middle East?

I got all of the above information on-line. If you would like to check it - Wikipedia, encyclopedia, Barack Obama; Tony Rezko; Valerie Jarrett: Daily Times - Obama visited Pakistan in 1981; The Washington Times - September 7, 2008; The Times May 10, 2008.

[John317]

....We want to examine your sources and see if we can come to the same conclusions...

Well, of course. Look into it. I'm interested in the truth. This is about America. I could care less about the party or anything else like that. I voted for more Democrats in my lifetime than Republicans. It has nothing to do with party politics. It has to do with who Obama is and where he would take this country.

So don't just see what the sources are. See if the information is correct.

Quote:

You came out with the Ayers connection several month ago...only now, has it come out that there was NO connection....

No connection at all? Obama was not at Ayers house when he was beginning his campaign for public office? Ayers did not give Obama money for his campaign? Did Obama share a speaker's platform with Ayers on several occasions? Is it true that Obama and Ayers served on a Chicago foundation together? Is it true that Ayers said he is not sorry he bombed the US?

If you have good evidence that this is all false info, please post the evidence or the link here so I can see it. I'm not interested in lies so if this is a lie, let me see the truth.

Quote:

Now, you claim he is a socialist, and was one of the most liberal senators on record. [ I can look at that later charge and will soon.]...If the Ayer charge that you brought out was wrong, what make you think that the rest of your charges are right?

Link proving Obama most liberal Senator: http://nj.nationaljournal.com/voteratings/

Who would you say is more liberal? He is more liberal than any presidential candidate of the Democratic party-- far more than John Kennedy (whom I remember), LBJ, McGovern (for whom I voted), Carter, Clinton, or Gore.

Would you deny this?

Yes, he campaigned for a socialist candidate. I have never heard of any Democratic or Republican presidential candidate who campaigned for a socialist before. Have you?

You usually only campaign for someone if their thinking or policies are fairly close to yours, right? Why did Obama want this socialist in the Senate with him? I think I can guess-- probably because he knew the Socialist would vote the way Obama does.

Yes, please check this information out, Neil. Will it make any difference if it is true?

[John317]

Originally Posted By: John317

...However, it is true that Obama is a socialist. He is, after all, the first man running for president on a major ticket who has campaigned for socialists. He is the most liberal Senator, and he votes and talks like a socialist. You don't campaign for a socialist if you are not a socialist. At least I have never known anyone who did.

The socialists want him. When I was Denver, they all wanted Obama, and all of them were opposed to McCain. If that doesn't say something, I don't know what does.

It says that socialists want Obama...Just like the KKK wants McCain

.

Is there any evidence that McCain ever campaigned for the KKK?

Well, there is proof that Obama campaigned for socialists. That makes a big difference.

Quote:

What else are you implying?

You say that Obama is a socialist. And that he campaigned for a socialist. I know that you at one time put up evidence for that alligation. Can you repeat those sources, please?

I'm not implying anything. I am stating it as a fact based on the evidence, that Obama is a very liberal Senator; that he is supported by socialists; and that he speaks in terms familiar to socialists.

Of course I realize that many people don't care any more. They say, "So what? Who cares?" I understand this very well.

Do you think it is just a matter of coincidence that he chose to sit for 20 years (!) in a church where Black Liberation Theology was preached? Black Liberation Theology is based on Marxism.

Study the following:

Source: http://www.aim.org/aim-column/obamas-international-socialist-connections/

Quote:

Obama’s International Socialist Connections

AIM COLUMN | BY CLIFF KINCAID | FEBRUARY 14, 2008

The socialist connections of Obama and the Democratic Party have certainly not been featured in the Washington Post columns of Harold Meyerson, who happens not only to be a member but a vice-chair of the DSA.

Campaign workers for Senator and presidential candidate Barack Obama are under fire for displaying a flag featuring communist hero Che Guevara. But Obama has his own controversial socialist connections. He is, in fact, an associate of a Chicago-based Marxist group with access to millions of labor union dollars and connections to expert political consultants, including a convicted swindler.

Obama's socialist backing goes back at least to 1996, when he received the endorsement of the Chicago branch of the Democratic Socialists of America (DSA) for an Illinois state senate seat. Later, the Chicago DSA newsletter reported that Obama, as a state senator, showed up to eulogize Saul Mendelson, one of the "champions" of "Chicago's democratic left" and a long-time socialist activist. Obama's stint as a "community organizer" in Chicago has gotten some attention, but his relationship with the DSA socialists, who groomed and backed him, has been generally ignored.

Blogger Steve Bartin, who has been following Obama's career and involvement with the Chicago socialists, has uncovered a fascinating video showing Obama campaigning for openly socialist Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont. Interestingly, Sanders, who won his seat in 2006, called Obama "one of the great leaders of the United States Senate," even though Obama had only been in the body for about two years. In 2007, the National Journal said that Obama had established himself as "the most liberal Senator." More liberal than Sanders? That is quite a feat. Does this make Obama a socialist, too?

DSA describes itself as the largest socialist organization in the United States and the principal U.S. affiliate of the Socialist International. The Socialist International (SI) has what is called "consultative status" with the United Nations. In other words, it works hand-in-glove with the world body.

What do you mean "allegation"? There is no doubt about it.

I will gladly supply the source. I am surprised you did not know this. Will it make any difference?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tIlIpOkRh2A

He also campaigned for a socialist candidate in Africa. I am sure you must be aware of this.

Quote:

And your definition of Socialist is.....?

Neil, I was in the socialist movement (Socialist Workers Party) and have studied socialism ever since the late 1960s.

There are many socialist philosophies but it basically boils down to state ownership of the means of production; a centralized government; redistribution of wealth through heavy, progressive tax; a managed economy; it generally opposes capitalism and free enterprise and attempts to concentrate property under the control of the state, etc. Some socialists, such as Marx, Lenin, and Trotsky, advocated violent revolution; whereas others, such as Eugene Debs, are reformists. Obama is a reformist socialist, which want to make the change to socialism through through changes in laws and regulations, education.

Study the following:

Quote:

Socialism refers to a broad set of economic theories of social organization advocating state or collective ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods, and the creation of an egalitarian society. Modern socialism originated in the late nineteenth-century working class political movement. Karl Marx posited that socialism would be achieved via class struggle and a proletarian revolution, it being the transitional stage between capitalism and communism.

Socialists mainly share the belief that capitalism unfairly concentrates power and wealth into a small section of society who control capital, and creates an unequal society. All socialists advocate the creation of an egalitarian society, in which wealth and power are distributed more evenly, although there is considerable disagreement among socialists over how, and to what extent this could be achieved.

Socialism is not a discrete philosophy of fixed doctrine and program; its branches advocate a degree of social interventionism and economic rationalization, sometimes opposing each other. Another dividing feature of the socialist movement is the split on how a socialist economy should be established between the reformists and the revolutionaries. Some socialists advocate complete nationalization of the means of production, distribution, and exchange; while others advocate state control of capital within the framework of a market economy.

[Tom Wetmore]

... Sources, John....We want to examine your sources and see if we can come to the same conclusions...

You came out with the Ayers connection several month ago...only now, has it come out that there was NO connection....

Now, you claim he is a socialist, and was one of the most liberal senators on record. [ I can look at that later charge and will soon.]...If the Ayer charge that you brought out was wrong, what make you think that the rest of your charges are right?

Neil, you have to understand that for right wingers any Democrat seems like a socialist, if not a communist sympathizer...

And the sources... (The word you haven't heard Shane utter during this onslaught of outrageous throwing any old ____ against the wall by Republicans -SWIFTBOAT) This is the same deep cesspool from which the FOX Noise-makers get their steaming pile of...

[Neil D]

Regarding the Socialist connection, I looked into who the socialist is....This is from Wikipedia-

Bernard "Bernie" Sanders (born September 8, 1941) is the junior United States Senator from Vermont, elected on November 7, 2006. [sniped for brevity]

Sanders is a self-described democratic socialist [my emphasis], but because he does not belong to a formal political party he appears as an independent on the ballot. Sanders caucuses with the Democratic Party and is counted as a Democrat for the purposes of committee assignments. He was the only independent member of the House during much of his service there and is one of two independent Senators in the 110th Congress, along with Joe Lieberman. Sanders is the first self-described socialist to be elected to the U.S. Senate.[1] Sanders left the House in order to run in the 2006 election for the Senate seat being vacated by the retiring Jim Jeffords and won the election with 65% of the vote.[2]

I then went to look at Sanders record. For a "democratic socialist" he sure has a positive record for doing a lot of good. Now, I know that he is a self described socialist, but he is labeled as a "democratic socialist". And according to wikipedia-

Democratic socialism is difficult to define, and groups of scholars have radically different definitions for the term. Some definitions of democratic socialism simply refers to all forms of socialism that follow an electoral, reformist or evolutionary path to socialism, rather than a revolutionary one.[1]

It then goes on to describe several types of socialism, most of which are more in line with democratic proposals of fairness to the middle class. Socialism, as evidenced by more progressive equity in a capitalistic society, is not the great bad "philosophy" that is one step short of communism that some make it out to be.

Indeed, wikipedia describes this form of socialism-

The term "socialist" was first used in English in the British Cooperative Magazine in 1827[17] and came to be associated with the followers of Robert Owen, such as the Rochdale Pioneers who founded the co-operative movement. Owen's followers again stressed both participatory democracy and economic socialisation, in the form of consumer co-operatives, credit unions and mutual aid societies. The Chartists similarly combined a working class politics with a call for greater democracy. ....this is very similar to democratic platform discribed by democrates.

Since the 1890s, the Democratic Party has favored "liberal" positions (the term "liberal" in this sense describes social liberalism, not classical liberalism).... Historically, the party has favored farmers, laborers, labor unions, and religious and ethnic minorities; it has opposed unregulated business and finance, and favored progressive income taxes. In foreign policy, internationalism (including interventionism) was a dominant theme from 1913 to the mid-1960s. In the 1930s, the party began advocating welfare spending programs targeted at the poor. The party had a pro-business wing, typified by Al Smith, that shrank in the 1930s, and a Southern conservative wing that shrank after President Lyndon B. Johnson supported the Civil Rights Act of 1964. The major influences for liberalism were labor unions (which peaked in the 1936–1952 era), and the African American wing, which has steadily grown since the 1960s. Since the 1970s, environmentalism has been a major new component....Once dominated by unionized labor and the working class, the Democratic base now consists of social liberals who tend to be well-educated as well as the socially more conservative working class. Today, Democrats advocate more social freedoms, affirmative action, balanced budget, and a free enterprise system tempered by government intervention (mixed economy). The economic policy adopted by the modern Democratic Party, including the former Clinton administration, may also be referred to as the "Third Way".[15] The party believes that government should play a role in alleviating poverty and social injustice, even if such requires a larger role for government and progressive taxation.

Bernie Sanders philosophy falls well within the democratic ideological values. Granted, he is a 'self-described socialist' but that doesn't necessarily mean what you have implied. I describe myself as a troublemaker here on the board...doesn't mean that I am banned all the time either... I know that there are some who would like me to be banned, but...

[Neil D]

Neil, you have to understand that for right wingers any Democrat seems like a socialist, if not a communist sympathizer...

I know Tom. I have seen what John has put out...and I disagree that Socialism means what he says it means.

Anyways, regarding Bernie Sanders-

Republicans have attacked Sanders as "an ineffective extremist" for passing only one law and fifteen amendments in his eight terms in the House.[11][12] Sanders responded by saying that he had passed "the most floor amendments of any member of the House since 1996."[13] Democratic National Committee chair Howard Dean has stated that "Bernie Sanders votes with the Democrats 98 percent of the time."[14]

For a "socialist", he can't be all bad...

[Robert]

However, it is true that Obama is a socialist. He is, after all, the first man running for president on a major ticket who has campaigned for socialists.

[Robert]

But by repeating those false allegations of the Ayers connections as truthful, are you not culpable for inciting the anger of those anti-socialists? Are you not a part of the problem by hiding in Jesus? That is what I am refering to....

Don't hold back now....

You go, Neil...you go!

Rob

[Neil D]

Quote:

So? Socialism is better than Capitalism. At the heart of Capitalism is the principle of "I" - you know, that disease that Lucifer brought to the human race. Unless Capitalism has all sort of checks and balances (regulation) you get the rich (those in power) accumulating practically all the wealth. In the end Capitalism brings great wealth for a minority and poverty for the masses.

Well, yeah....Socialism is a redistribution of wealth and the socialism that is being used/talked about here in the US is one to alleveate the poverty of the masses [aka "middle income workers"]. It can not function without capitalism...that "principle of I"...

And, Robert, heaven's economy is totally different than the convoluted ecomony, and mass ideologies that seems to pervade one's thinking here....

[Dr. Shane]

(The word you haven't heard Shane utter during this onslaught of outrageous throwing any old ____ against the wall by Republicans -SWIFTBOAT)

Actually Shane defended Obama against these charges during the Primaries. Shane voted for Obama during the Primaries and is leaning toward voting for Obama again. The latest attacks from McCain are simply a repeat of what Hillary did during the primaries. So should we call them "Republican" attacks or "Democratic" attacks? Seems Hillary was throwing everything against the wall during the primaries and now McCain is throwing it against the wall again.

Again, Shane believes that McCain needs to address the economy. Obama certainly hasn't laid out a confident plan on how to deal with the economic crisis. McCain has a big opportunity to distinguish himself. Obama is simply gaining the anti-establishment voters' support.

[Dr. Shane]

Face it, Trickle down economics doesn't really work. This is what the Republicans teach. If limits (regulation) isn't placed on Capitalism the masses lose.

Economies are dynamic. As economies change economic policies have to change too. It isn't so simple as finding the "one" economic policy that works, making it law and sticking to it. For years the US has practiced a hybrid of trickle-down and grass-roots economics. That hybrid has created the greatest middle-class in the history of the world. However that hybrid is constantly being fine-tuned and adjusted as the dynamics of the economy changes.

I believe those involved with causing our current economic crisis all had the best of intentions. I don't doubt there wasn't some cronyism going on but I don't think that was the overruling factor that caused the crisis. Our politicians were trying to keep the economy going which would create a better standard of living for all of us. And now... no one really knows how to fix it. Playing the blame game won't get us to the solution.

[John317]

Yes, all of that is true. I never said anything different. What I am saying is that Obama is very liberal and is actually also a socialist. Bernie Sanders describes himself as a socialist, and Obama is fundamentally the same. Obama is considered more liberal than Sanders.

No one here is denying that some Democrats have similar views to the socialists.

[John317]

Originally Posted By: John317

However, it is true that Obama is a socialist. He is, after all, the first man running for president on a major ticket who has campaigned for socialists.

So? Socialism is better than Capitalism.

No comment necessary.

[John317]

Originally Posted By: Tom Wetmore

Neil, you have to understand that for right wingers any Democrat seems like a socialist, if not a communist sympathizer...

I know Tom. I have seen what John has put out...and I disagree that Socialism means what he says it means.

Explain where I am wrong about what socialism means.

[Dr. Shane]

Well, I favor universal health care. May be that makes me a socialist. With a Democrat Senate and House of Representatives, I think electing a Democrat President now is our best chance of getting universal health care for a long time. IF McCain wins we may not have a chance like this again for 20, 30 or 50 years.

[John317]

Favoring universal health care does make a person necessarily a socialist.

Socialism takes in a lot more of the economy than merely insurance.

[John317]

Quote:

So? Socialism is better than Capitalism. At the heart of Capitalism is the principle of "I" - you know, that disease that Lucifer brought to the human race. Unless Capitalism has all sort of checks and balances (regulation) you get the rich (those in power) accumulating practically all the wealth. In the end Capitalism brings great wealth for a minority and poverty for the masses.

Well, yeah....Socialism is a redistribution of wealth and the socialism that is being used/talked about here in the US is one to alleveate the poverty of the masses [aka "middle income workers"]. It can not function without capitalism...that "principle of I"...

You are only making my point about Obama being a socialist. He simply does not call himself a socialist like Bernie Sanders did. But they voted the same in the Senate, and Obama campaigned for him, admitting that they think alike on the issues.

Obama also campaigned for the socialist leader in 2006. He campaigned for Raila Odinga of Kenya, who is the son of communist leader, Jaramogi Oginga Odinga. Raila Odinga has claimed that Obama is a relative, but Obama's campaign has denied this.

See the video: http://www.freedomslighthouse.com/2008/10/video-shows-sen-obama-campaigning-for.html

Let me know if you see any errors or lies in the video. I'd like to know if there are things in it that are factually untrue.