ccsl2 Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/07/martin.townhall/index.html "Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr., a Democrat from Chicago who serves as one of the national co-chairs for Obama, told me on The Tom Joyner Morning Show that if we are to use the association tag as evidence of a candidate being unfit for president, what about McCain serving and working alongside people with virulent bigoted pasts like Sens. Jesse Helms, Strom Thurmond and Robert Byrd? Do we have evidence that these individuals committed specific acts against African-Americans during Jim Crow? No. But we do know that their hateful words, and willingness to uphold laws that were absolutely anti-American, did not represent the best of this nation. Thurmond ran for president as a Dixiecrat in 1948 with a platform of maintaining segregation. Based on Helms' policies, he didn't see blacks as full Americans." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bird_1972 Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 Sen Byrd endorsed Obama. Not sure that's such a great line of attack. I'd cast more doubt on Palin with that Alaska Seperatist Party and the crazy church she used to go to. Both are fair game, if Obama needs to match the Repubs blow for blow. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PleaseBlitz Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/07/martin.townhall/index.html"Rep. Jesse Jackson Jr., a Democrat from Chicago who serves as one of the national co-chairs for Obama, told me on The Tom Joyner Morning Show that if we are to use the association tag as evidence of a candidate being unfit for president, what about McCain serving and working alongside people with virulent bigoted pasts like Sens. Jesse Helms, Strom Thurmond and Robert Byrd? Do we have evidence that these individuals committed specific acts against African-Americans during Jim Crow? No. But we do know that their hateful words, and willingness to uphold laws that were absolutely anti-American, did not represent the best of this nation. Thurmond ran for president as a Dixiecrat in 1948 with a platform of maintaining segregation. Based on Helms' policies, he didn't see blacks as full Americans." So basically, you are saying that McCain would open himself up to being attacked on the basis of being in the Senate? Actually, that makes a lot of sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ccsl2 Posted October 8, 2008 Author Share Posted October 8, 2008 So basically, you are saying that McCain would open himself up to being attacked on the basis of being in the Senate?Actually, that makes a lot of sense. I didn't say it, Roland Martin did. It just shows how silly this "guilt by association" crap McCain/Palin are pulling. I think that was pretty much the essence of the article. That and McCain now wanting to talk about the economy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PleaseBlitz Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 I didn't say it, Roland Martin did. It just shows how silly this "guilt by association" crap McCain/Palin are pulling. I think that was pretty much the essence of the article. That and McCain now wanting to talk about the economy. Of the 4, the only one that ISNT in the Senate is Palin. This comparison is stupid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ccsl2 Posted October 8, 2008 Author Share Posted October 8, 2008 Of the 4, the only one that ISNT in the Senate is Palin.This comparison is stupid. Just as stupid as as the "associations" between Obama and Ayers. I think that's the point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
alexey Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 I do not think there is a need for Obama to play this game at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PleaseBlitz Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 Just as stupid as as the "associations" between Obama and Ayers. I think that's the point. It is the point, but its a stupid point. Ok, so McCain says, you worked with Ayers, to which Obama replies, well you worked with Helms, Thurmond, and Byrd. Ok, well, McCain has no control over whom he works with in the Senate, AND Obama also worked with and is endorsed by Byrd, so that makes him a hypocrite. It's like saying McCain and Nancy Pelosi are associates. I guess they are, but it's a stupid point. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimmySmith Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 McCain could not choose his co-workers. Obama could choose his Pastor. Sounds like Jr. is becoming another Sr. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjah Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 McCain could not choose his co-workers. He certainly chose to work with the other Keating four. Or was McCain the unwilling pinky amongst those five fingers? Palin chose her crazy-talk church and church leader. Are there lots of witches in Alaska? Did she just have to join, or else risk being turned into a newt? That carousel could spin forever. It's stupid for anyone to jump on, especially at this late date. It makes a candidate look desperate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Larry Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 So basically, you are saying that McCain would open himself up to being attacked on the basis of being in the Senate?Actually, that makes a lot of sense. The mental image of somebody who's been in the US Senate for what, 30 years?, running on a platform of "outsider" or "maverick" has suddenly made me imagine a fake movie poster for "The 40 Year Old Political Virgin". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TimmySmith Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 He certainly chose to work with the other Keating four. Or was McCain the unwilling pinky amongst those five fingers?You mean the other 4 DEMOCRATS? I am sure he learned from his mistake who to stay away from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TMK9973 Posted October 8, 2008 Share Posted October 8, 2008 The line of attack by McCain and Palin is stupid. MOST people don't know who the hell Bill Ayers is or did. So far, when I have told people that Palin is accusing Obama of "Palling around with terrorists" they all roll there eyes and say "Huh? Is that the Muslim thing again?" They you start saying 'No. He was this guy that supported bombing in the US in the 60's..." and they their eyes start glancing over. The more she says it, the stupider she is looking. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.