Palin says Obama is palling around with terrorists

source: huffingtonpost.com
Palin told a group of donors at a private airport, "Our opponent ... is someone who sees America, it seems, as being so imperfect, imperfect enough, that he's palling around with terrorists who would target their own country." She also said, "This is not a man who sees America as you see America and as I see America."

This is the kind of message I would expect in a email form a political dirty tricks operative ... not from someone on the ticket.

What surprises me is that the GOP thinks we are so stupid as to believe such a lie and do not realize that being deceitful just proves that they are not honorable enough to deserve our vote. Why would anyone in their right mind send a politician to Washington who is being so overtly deceitful to them in the campaign. What we need in Washington is honesty. This pig and her trainers are just demonstrating to us that we can not trust anything out of their mouths.

Comments

Mark de LA says

Mark de LA says

seth 2008-10-04 17:27:25 10596

Well hopefully calling somebody a "pig" will sting a bit more than calling them a "liberal". In my eyes she earned that epitaph because i have lost all respect for her as a politician. What was particularly deceitful was her putting Obama's association with Ayers in the present ... as in "he's palling around with terrorists". Then she goes on to use that as premise for an outrageous insult on his patriotism. There is no coming to terms with Ayers that Obama needs to do that he has not already dealt with. I understand that you and your GOP buddies hope that there is, but sorry, there is no scandal there. Read this report for a more reasonable account of what actually happened. If you want to examine facts rather than just the typical shouting of insults, i will be glad to examine the actual facts with you.

AND here are a couple that dispute the Times article's white-washing of the connection.

source: ... In Chicago, Mr. Ayers has largely been rehabilitated," the Times article stated.

"Federal riot and bombing conspiracy charges against him were dropped in 1974 because of illegal wiretaps and other prosecutorial misconduct, and he was welcomed back after years in hiding by his large and prominent family," stated the article.

Toward the end of the piece, the article acknowledges it was the New York Times which on 9/11 profiled Ayers and quoted from his just-published memoir, "Fugitive Days," in which he write: "I don't regret setting bombs. I feel we didn't do enough."

Ayers posed for a photograph accompanying the 9/11 piece that shows him stepping on an American flag.

...

But, to a Kool-Aid drinker no amount of evidence is sufficient & the only thing to do is attack the messengers. Your ad hominem slander is duly noted. I guess you are using Alinsky's 3rd rule of ethics of means and ends "... is that in war the end justifies almost any means"

Seth says

Mark de LA says

source: ... "It's hard to imagine he would be so indulgent if we learned that John McCain had a long association with a former Klansman who used to terrorize African-Americans," Chapman wrote. "Obama's conduct exposes a moral blind spot about these onetime terrorists, who get a pass because they a) fall on the left end of the spectrum and b) haven't planted any bombs lately.

"You can tell a lot about someone from his choice of friends. What this friendship reveals is that when it comes to practicing sound moral hygiene, Obama has work to do and no interest in doing it."

...

If you believe in Seth's relativism of truth then you must admit that who O hangs out with (or hung out with in the past) colored his perception of the truth. O's is colored leftist-radical. (M.R.)

ibid: ... "While their relationship just might be a tempest in a teapot -- or in Obamaspeak, a 'distraction' -- is the fact that Obama is once again downplaying a friendship really the bigger deal? After all, this is the same guy that originally tried to claim he hardly knew Tony Rezko, and had only performed a few hours of legal work for him. Where's that famous Obama transparency? This is a 'new kind of politics'?"

...

Seth says

Watch her actual distortions on youtube in context.

Seth says

M 2008-10-06 22:29:05 10596

The GOP dumps their Ayers file here.

A more detailed and non-partisan presentation of the facts can be found in this Wikipedia article.

Mark de LA says

seth 2008-10-07 09:52:07 10596

M 2008-10-06 22:29:05 10596

The GOP dumps their Ayers file here.

A more detailed and non-partisan presentation of the facts can be found in this Wikipedia article.

From the Wikipedia, maybe it's not so neutral:

Seth says

Obviously what Mark shows above is part of the process that helps Wikipedia to be neutral. It is not evidence of a lack of neutrality. Read the article and if you detect any bias or misrepresentations, then join the process.

Mark de LA says

seth 2008-10-07 10:21:05 10596

I am conducting research on another node 10603 & feel no need to defend BO here!

Seth says

OMFG, is this movie true, or is it faked? If true, then Sarah is actually palling around with secessionist traitors.

Seth says

Re Palin's small town pandering, I like the way John Stuart puts it:

Mark de LA says

To sum it up -

Seth says

Of course there's this one. $1500 designer pumps, $500 spa treatement, puppy love from the base, priceless.

Mark de LA says

seth 2008-10-26 12:35:39 10596

M 2008-10-26 12:26:25 10596

seth 2008-10-26 12:18:11 10596

M 2008-10-26 12:02:21 10596

seth 2008-10-26 11:59:20 10596

M 2008-10-26 11:49:14 10596

seth 2008-10-24 10:18:54 10596

M 2008-10-24 10:13:52 10596

The problem is that I can't delete yours. Delete yours & it won't be redundant, else wise go pack sand!

I have no idea what you are going on about. Why delete it, those are some hot pumps.

This landed on the wrong item.

Nope. I remember the context well. The rules of fbi were well though out so that a blogger can preserve what is true to him.

Then why did you ask the question you knew what I was talking about. You attached somewhere an irritated message about repeating a large picture with my comment in it. If not this one then some place else.

I don't see any question marks above. Yes this is where you repeated a large graphic with a no-content comment. I informed you that i don't like that on my blog. I like to look at my blog without out a lot of unnecessary repetition of the same image. You don't need to repeat the image to make a no-content comment about it.

As I recall the no content comment was in your mind!

LOL nope again. The comment did not contain any new information whatsoever. I may have seen it as expressing your usual partisan view, but that was not what earned it the classification "contentfree". IOW, it simply was uninteresting and did not pay for the excessive cost the eyeballs have to bear to look at it. It may have been funny, but only to you.

What was it anyway?

I don't know, I think you prolly deleted it.

Seth says

As Greenwald says, it's so stupid it hurts.

Seth says

seth 2008-10-31 15:15:02 10596

seth 2008-10-31 14:34:42 10596

M 2008-10-31 14:10:50 10596

seth 2008-10-31 14:04:27 10596

M 2008-10-31 13:17:36 10596

seth 2008-10-31 13:01:10 10596

How stupid can you get about the constitution?

source: Below the beltway
Freedom of speech doesn’t mean that you get to say whatever you want without anyone criticizing you for it.

It will be great to get a president that actually understands the constitution because he taught it at Harvard.

Must be talking to yourself, no context here!

Surethere is ... go read the cited article on below the beltway. Palin claims that her first amendment right are being infringed upon.

Not much in that blog to think about. Public figures apparently can lie & slander and be lied about and slandered about with impunity. Lots of luck trying to right it in the courts. Otherwise campaigns would not put out pure lies in their advertizements & get away with it. But, they do!

Your off topic here. This is what my comment is about:

source: belowthebeltway
ABC News’ Steven Portnoy reports: In a conservative radio interview that aired in Washington, D.C. Friday morning, Republican vice presidential nominee Gov. Sarah Palin said she fears her First Amendment rights may be threatened by “attacks” from reporters who suggest she is engaging in a negative campaign against Barack Obama.

Her comment obviously shows a lack of understand of what the constitution says about freedom of speech. It was a straight out stupid thing to say. I prefer a president who actually knows what the constitution is all about. Black is not white ... white not black ... a politician should not just say things that are contractual like that. Its not a lie ... it's not even a valid spin ... it's just stupid.

Ok, i finally found the audio of her remarks here. To be fair, it's not at all clear whether she thinks that her first amendment rights are being infringed upon or not. Here is the pertinent quote:

source: Think Progress
I don’t know what the future of our country would be in terms of First Amendment rights and our ability to ask questions without fear of attacks by the mainstream media

Hopefully she knows that if someone slanders her that she has resource through civil court and that has nothing to do with the first amendment.

More background at Salon.

Seth says

And for the record this is the kind of man Romney pals around with ...

source: Huffington post Robert Diamond, Disgraced Barclays Banker, Pulls Out Of Romney Fundraiser

A disgraced London banker has rescinded an offer to co-host a high-dollar fundraiser for Mitt Romney, sparing the GOP hopeful the difficulty of appearing at a lavish event with a man embroiled in scandal.

Palin says Obama is palling around with terrorists

Tags

Comments

See Also