Gee, absolute certainty after cherry picking the facts.

Do you really believe that Warren Buffet would endorse AND advise someone that has ” has a deep contempt for capitalism and our political system. ” Yet you ignore this and base your conclusion on this Ayers nonsense.

If you don’t like Obama’s policy proposals, then don’t vote for him. But to base your vote on this ridiculous stuff qualifies you as a “low information voter.”

Ayers is a poor distraction and the McCain people have acknowledged this by insisting on keeping on this talking point. The economy is a losing proposition fro McCain.

Right now both candidates are airing negative ads.
However McCain and Palin are clearly going down a path that is very dangerous and using rhetoric that is spiraling out of control. Witness the McCain town hall meeting in Minnesota this past week. McCain had to publicly announce that Obama was decent American and he was met with booing and hissing.

It seems that Obama/Biden are on their way to winning the election. The issue for me is that this kind of hate mongering and extreme divisiveness will leave this country with 30 to 40 million extremely angry people.

Dan Chris has already done an good job of debunking your thesis on Obama. My question for you is can you put aside your ill-informed rhetoric and do some proper searching on the information you need to make a good educated decision? Or are you going to keep posting obscure speeches by Ayres hoping to divert attention away from issues and facts.

I would also like to add, I don’t like Obama that much.
He is smart, intelligent and I think he will be alright as a president should he get elected. We need a strong and smart person to lead this country out the mess we are in now. We someone, like FDR, who is capable of restoring faith and calm to the people and who can work to get the country back from what seems to be a pretty dark place. I’m not sure Obama has what it takes, he has shown a calmness and the ability to think rationally, that’s a start for me.

McCain has shown he would be a disaster and his leadership qualities are erratic and his style borders on manic. He makes me think of fear, and as FDR once said, “The Only Thing We Have to Fear Is Fear Itself”.

Here Here, brother!

You’ve hit upon what I think is actually a good argument against Obama. Congratulations for not writing in to tell us Obama is a terrorist. It’s a refreshing change from what McCain and Palin are saying.

To me, the point is not that he didn’t write legislation, but while in the state house he seems to have avoided being associated with controversial votes.

Students and professors from his law school liked and admired him, but they remember him for his evasion of taking sides. He always wanted to find ways of finding points of agreement, etc.

There are different ways of thinking about and explaining this. I definitely shy away from the more conspiratorial explanations and am inclined to interpret it more generously.

Obama’s nature is not taking a side “by gut instinct” and sticking to it. He’s thoughtful and thinks that everyone can be included. It’s potentially a weakness, but the opposite sure hasn’t worked.

I’d take him over the mindless, shallow and vindictive and aerial wolf-hunting governor of Alaska any day. But that’s just me.

I followed the link you provided and read that cacamamie speech by Ayers, given two years ago in Central America.

What’s your point? I’ve never heard Obama talk like this or say anything remotely related to these things.

What provoked your “suspicion”?

You need to face the possibility that you are paranoid, Dan. Maybe you need to believe that a black man could only have gotten this far in American politics with the help of an international communist conspiracy.

Seems pretty foolish to me.

Anyway. Enjoy yourself. The Reagan revolution has 3 weeks to live. Then we’ll see what we’ll see.

You say my argument about Obama having been “vetted” is “laughable” — but again, you don’t contest a single point I have made specifically.

What is “laughable” about any of the different ways I outlined that you may have drawn an informed decision about Obama? (The interviews, the debates, the books, etc.)

Again, I wasn’t saying that my points proved you ought to vote for him. I was just saying that there has been plenty of opportunities for people to get to know Obama as well as criticize, question, and test his “political philosophy.”

He’s done a little bit more than Palin’s two interviews, I think you’ll admit.

I think most people will see that to believe YOU they have to accept the possibility of a cunning and secret conspiracy on Obama’s part that is hard to imagine.

To believe me, they just have to appeal to their own common sense.

You say you “strongly suspect Obama has more than a passing sympathy with Ayers’ ideas of social justice” yet you offer absolutely no evidence to substantiate your suspicion.

Think about the position in which you leave your fellow citizens. How can we prove that Obama does not share these sympathies. If someone asks me to prove that you are not a terrorist sympathizer, where would I begin?

Obama has been in the Senate for four years; he was in the state legislature of Illinois for seven. He’s had constant attention paid to his views and his philosophy for years. There is no reason to suspect him of being some kind of revolutionary.

He has spoken repeatedly about his association with Ayers and investigations by the Times and CNN have corroborated his claims. He attended a coffee breakfast at Ayers’ home in 1995. He later served for a brief time on a charitable board that included a former Reagan ambassador.

Ayers currently serves on a board that includes the Republican governor of South Carolina. Do you “suspect” the governor of South Carolina of plotting to blow up the Pentagon?

Dan, I’m beginning to think you scan the internet for websites that will reinforce the conclusion you’re eager to draw: Obama is a kind of Manchurian candidate, so brilliantly skilled at mass manipulation that he can fool tens of millions of voters — except for Dan and Sean Hannity!

No, Dan. I just don’t believe it. You’ll forgive me, but you’ll have to do better than this.

How do I know? Well… Obama’s political philosophy has been publicly examined by liberal and conservative people for about four years now. He has been in the very center of public attention for two years — more than any other candidate in memory. Many decent conservative thinkers in good faith simply disagree with his policy proposals and “political philosophy.” No serious question has been raised about his loyalty to this country or his belief in basic free market ideas.

Obama, in other words, has been intensely and thoroughly “vetted” — much more so than Palin. How has he been vetted, you ask? It’s a good question, Dan, and I’m glad you ask it.

Obama has been at the center of public scrutiny for two years. He’s a senator and was in the State Assembly of Illinois. Millions of people have heard what he had to say and voted for him. That is pretty good vetting.

Is that all? No, Dan, and I appreciate your healthy skepticism.

Obama has written two best selling memoirs. You don’t have to like or read them. But they’re there, and they’ve been available for critique and questioning for years.

Obama has given dozens of (successful) interviews with news organizations all over the country.

Obama has given several major nationally published and broadcasted speeches on the major issues of our day. Again, you don’t have to agree with him. But he has said what he believes and given no reason to doubt him.

He has participated in over twenty nationally televised or published debates with the best politicians in the business — including John McCain, who has NOT raised these questions in debates.

He has been thoroughly inspected, scrutinized, probed, and investigated by what is commonly held to be the most ruthless and successful “opposition research” organizations in the country — run by, of course, The Clintons.

He has come through all of this not unblemished but certainly not giving any reasonable person cause to suspect his loyalty to this country.

Any more questions?

If you really believe that Obama has connections to domestic terrorism, in our time, how could you talk about ANYTHING BUT that connection?

If you really believe Obama is sympathetic with terrorism or sponsored by Palestinian terrorist organizations, how could you stand on a stage and talk about tax policy with him?

If you do NOT believe the things you are saying, please explain to the American people (if it isn’t as obvious as it seems) how you could have imagined they would be so dumb?

Then don’t vote for him.

This is absurd. How about Palin’s political philosophy.
By your reasoning she supports successionism.

Bill Ayers is not running for president.
As for contempt for capitalism and our political system, well right now I have a lot contempt for the former and I am putting my hopes in the latter.

Why not dramatically repeat and pepper your guests with questions about Governor Palin and her husband’s documented association with the secessionist Alaska Independence Party and all the hatred that the organization’s founder has espoused toward America? The Palins’ association with AIP is not something that happened forty years ago but in this decade and as recently as last year when Governor Palin recorded a welcome message to the AIP conference. At least this is something that’s documented with Governor’s Palin’s welcome message to AIP on YouTube.

Please, we need a civil, informed debate in this—as Peter Matthiessen said on your Oct. 8 program—most important election in at least 81 years.

“You were not supposed to release this information until AFTER the election! Remember that little meeting we had at the Illuminati headquarters in Davos?”

What have you done with Peter, you imposter!! You gave the charade away: you’re showing a sense of humor AND real analytical ability. You should be ashamed of yourself: stealing someone’s cyber-id like this.

I think too many American’s sense of self worth, meaning and happiness is wrapped up in access to material things. We must continue to be a net exporter of good values.

This all sounds good in a platitudish way, but what does it mean in hard, cold realities?

It’s not at all clear to me that recycling and reuse costs jobs. I was the chairman of my local government’s recycling committee for several years and all the studies I saw suggested that properly implemented recycling and reuse programs had a net economic benefit.

Also the “material things” which are at risk here are not the ego-satisfying stuff like widescreen TV’s and snowmobiles, but more basic stuff like food, shelter, and medical care.

And while I’m all for exporting “good values” if we can find a market for them, I’m MORE interested in exporting stuff that people are interested in buying. My employer is a major exporter, and my job along with thousands of others in New England depends on their success and competitiveness. So it’s simply not true that the US is no longer capable of being competitive in real nuts-and-bolts industrial design and production, if we want to.

John Petesch, that’s right. But, there are also some fundamental values that are at risk of being legacies of the past due to zero-sum partisanship and commercialism. Such as: liberal education, unionism, doubt, questioning authority, &c..

And, I think we need to get real about what is a good standard of living. There is still toilet paper on the shelves. The economy needs to adjust to increased fuel efficiency and reduced demand due to reduction and reuse.

I think too many American’s sense of self worth, meaning and happiness is wrapped up in access to material things. We must continue to be a net exporter of good values.

Turn on commercial t.v. and listen to the infomercials that pass for “morning news programs.” The rancid froth of the Rush Libaughs, the unfortunate response that was (is?) Air America, the Hannities and the vanities.

We see the role, “trust,” plays in the financial system, imagine the turn around America can make if there is a revival of liberal values. Imagine feeding money back into schools where our children can be educated and immune to the hate that is perpetuated for the sake of political gain.