But I can say this… have a smoking gun on Obama, and the media will find some way to ’splain it away. It’s almost embarrassing that they have prounounced the election “over” on just about every broadcast station. But it’s the way of journalism nowadays. And frankly, I think they are headed for their doom. Right now, they do so by choice. In the future, I’m not so sure.

Now, INRE Doug, bouncing from thread to thread with the McCain is a coward charge:

Ok, as it stands now, no one here cares whether or not McSame has the courage to publicly confront Obama with his allegations.

~~~

As McSame had in bragged on about how he was going to ‘take the gloves off’ on Obama in Nashville, all of us were waiting for that moment… yet it never came, conservatives reclined in their chairs disappointed across the country, wondering what happened, why the Maverick didn’t strike; there was everything in place for it to happen, the table was set, yet McSame never even sat down at the table and all were wondering what prompted the change of keeping the gloves on. Was he never going to bring Ayers up again.

~~~

Shouldn’t McCain, a man of honor, place his attacks, personally, to the man he claims is a ‘friend of terrorists?’

If McSame refuses, he is a coward and slanderer.

My first impulse is to tell your ass where to go on that last statement, Doug. Because from all I know of you, you haven’t got the amount of stamina and courage in your entire body that McCain has in his little finger.

I went thru this with you on another thread. So I’ll repeat that comment here in case you missed it.

~~~

The debate nanny, Brokaw, didn’t allow for any flexibility. It was far from a “townhall” debate as McCain was accustomed to. Brokaw allowed for a 2 minute “answer”, which both just spit out usual campaign speech answers. The 1 minute follow up was a joke…. like anything can be covered in one minute.

Also, Ayers/Obama is an education issue, debunking that Obama has any credibility on either executive management, or his “reform” educational policies.

If you’ll note, there weren’t any questions on education.

Too cowardly? No. Brokaw and the format skirted the issue and related subject with rules, regs and carefully chosen questions.

Try again, dude…. your charges fly in the face of reality.

~~~

Now, I will say this. I don’t know if McCain’s advisors have a grasp of the real story between Ayers and Obama. But more and more media are catching on.

And since candidates, Congressmen and POTUS alike depend upon advisors to keep them up on the latest/greatest, hopefully they will catch on that it’s more than Ayers’ terrorist past.

For me, this is rather a personal test of just how good the people are that surround McCain. Mind you, I already know that those that surround Obama are those I want no where near the control of this country. But after some of Bush’s picks, I have to say that if I’m to vote AGAINST OBAMA, I’d like to know that I’m happy with McCain’s inner circle as recompense.

But… if you ever go to the “coward” and “slander” charge against McCain again for political fodder? Doug, you’ve gone beyond the foul line for me. You will never get an ounce of courtesy from me again. Period. And you know I have far more patience than many here. That’s exactly how far off the reality line you just went.

Mark my words. No one and I mean NO ONE! slanders a man as a coward with McCain’s military record in front of me, and lives to get an iota of my respect.

The Obama-Ayers-education-socialist link is very real. Thus it is not slander.

If you like that socialist bent of Obama, fine. Admit to being a socialist and we’ll get on with it.

But I will not… I repeat, WILL NOT listen to that crap of “coward and slander” from you one more time.

PS: Unfortunate ruling today from AK Supreme Court.

Thanks Doug!

As McSame had in bragged on about how he was going to ‘take the gloves off’ on Obama in Nashville, all of us were waiting for that moment… yet it never came, conservatives reclined in their chairs disappointed across the country, wondering what happened, why the Maverick didn’t strike; there was everything in place for it to happen, the table was set, yet McSame never even sat down at the table and all were wondering what prompted the change of keeping the gloves on. Was he never going to bring Ayers up again.

Well, of course he did. More even than before.

Today he’s started it all up again on the campaign trail, put out an Ad, and even yesterday has his wife questioning Obama’s character. All combined, pretty nasty stuff.

Yet here at FA, no one seems or perhaps cares to acknowledge that no matter how grave, punishing, how incendiary the message McCain has for Obama, McCain has a need noe to make them to his face. —It’s a matter of honor; it’s a matter of placing the truth before the man accused of being a terrorist sympathizer.

‘Obama pals around with terrorists,’ ‘is risky for America,’ or ‘has a friend who’s a terrorist’: in essence, a “traitor” to our country, a cloaked politician of the worst kind, “dangerous.”

Therefore, by right, honor attacked, Obama now must defend himself.

But how??? Today he started: Obama is taunting, teasing McCain with his own inability to confront him on his cowardice, and his inability to do the right thing and face him with the ‘facts’, as McCain sees them.

Obama has stepped up calling McSame “uncertain,” and today, in the context of McSame’s character attacks. For the second time, he is challenging McCain to put the case to his face.

Shouldn’t McCain, a man of honor, place his attacks, personally, to the man he claims is a ‘friend of terrorists?’

If McSame refuses, he is a coward and slanderer.

I’ll also include you, Ric (above), into this for a moment. It’s odd you’d want some article or membership to prove Ayers… an unabashed, self-admitted communist/socialist… has any links to the DSA or New Party. I seriously doubt they have full membership lists available to the public.

Perhaps I should have made myself more clear that the DSA/New Party as an Ayers/Alinsky is the spin off of a socialist ideology. Ii would have thought it was more obvious in the timeline because Alinsky, afterall, died 35 years ago… when Ayers was in hiding.

While both could have been members of that, or any other various forms of communism/marxist/socialist organizations, in different eras, the point is the ideology link is undeniable.

Look at the principles of the New Party.

Co-founded in 1992 by Daniel Cantor (a former staffer for Jesse Jackson’s 1988 presidential campaign) and Joel Rogers (a sociology and law professor at the University of Wisconsin-Madison), the New Party was a Marxist political coalition whose objective was to endorse and elect leftist public officials — most often Democrats. The New Party’s short-term objective was to move the Democratic Party leftward, thereby setting the stage for the eventual rise of new Marxist third party.

Most New Party members hailed from the Democratic Socialists of America and the militant organization ACORN. The party’s Chicago chapter also included a large contingent from the Committees of Correspondence, a Marxist coalition of former Maoists, Trotskyists, and Communist Party USA members.

The New Party’s modus operandi included the political strategy of “electoral fusion,” where it would nominate, for various political offices, candidates from other parties (usually Democrats), thereby enabling each of those candidates to occupy more than one ballot line in the voting booth. By so doing, the New Party often was able to influence candidates’ platforms. (Fusion of this type is permitted in seven states — Connecticut, Delaware, Idaho, Mississippi, New York, South Carolina, and Vermont — but is common only in New York.)

This is the Ayers’ philosophy in a nutshell… he states it overtly, never hidden. Do I need to see Ayers as a member of the New Party/DSA to know he is in complete agrement with their mission – and Obama as a member? Nope…

With Ayers espousing this belief openly, Obama’s membership in a party that has the identical mission solidifies their common beliefs for a political agenda. That’s enuf “proof” for me.

What is it you want? An article by Ayers saying he and Obama belong to all the same clubs, and share a common cause to change America to a socialist nation? Isn’t gonna happen…

What worries me, CentFla, is that Americans appear tired of being in control of their own lives, and seem ready to turn it over to the government as a trade off for a life of guaranteed mediocrity. They obviously prefer to have it handed to them rather than strive to achieve, or excel.

It’s either that, or they insist upon rejecting the obvious by wearing blinders and remaining blissfully ignorant.

“I am surprised that, you know, we’ve been seeing some pretty over-the-top attacks coming out of the McCain campaign over the last several days, that he wasn’t willing to say it to my face. But I guess we’ve got one last debate. So presumably, if he ends up feeling that he needs to, he will raise it during the debate.”

In other words, I dare him to bring it up the next debate.

Can we say, if McCain doesn’t bring it up in the next debate, this whole discussion (of ‘the six degrees of separation of an Ayers/Obama’ relationship) you all rant over is BS?

I believe, as I typed in one of your posts weeks ago, that piping the communist claim is falling on deaf ears. The McCain campaign just looks desperate. Main Street does not care about Bill Ayers. But they would care about what Obama has done to education in Chicago.

The Idealouges love it when Palin calls Barry names, but it will not draw one single vote into the GOP Presidential ticket. There must be more substantive discussion on the issues that prove Obama is wrong for America, it is too late for smears. It is as if the McCain staffers watched none of the Democratic Primary season. Once again they reach for something that failed for Hillary.

Hey John - use Cindy more. She ripped yesterday.

It means, “rolling on the floor laughing my a** off.