Guilt by Association

To recap we are all connected &/or related by being on the Earth. Furthermore we are connected by six degrees of separation from one another if you believe in social scientists & game shows. I am referring not to these but more <-> cause & effect kinds of associations. One should look at what the effects are of one's behavior & speech to assess what you are causing for whether it is good.  In the case of politics a leader must continually look at what he is leading his group towards & away from. While the individuals of a group are ultimately responsible for their own actions, I think it can be said that there is a cause/effect chain proceeding from the leadership to the group & down to individuals. Why else would a politician, leader or even a president wish to become such unless he/she/it wants to cause something to happen?  Hence I am looking at the results of a candidate & his acolytes, followers, campaign workers & results accomplished in all arenas & even the groups he/she/it has been part of and worked inside to see if the whole picture is good. It is valid to judge the leader by what his followers do! Words do mean something & action from those words start a cause/effect chain for which the ends can be judged.
Currently I am not finding much good at all in election politics. Currently I don't like much of the direction their words have caused the political, economic & social river to flow.

Tags

  1. guilt by association
  2. association
  3. words
  4. leadership
  5. anti obama
  6. 2008 election
  7. smears
  8. item 10700
  9. item 10647
  10. ayers

Comments


Mark de LA says

Obama & Friends: Judge Not? => Charles Krauthammer


Seth says
M 2008-10-15 09:29:10 10647
seth 2008-10-15 09:08:52 10647
There is no doubt that cause and effect flows from the group to the individual - and back to the group.  And yes, it would be a good idea to have some rules of thumb by which to judge the flow of guilt by mere association.  Obviously the first rule should be something like:  the guilt of associate flows to you iff it can be shown that there is a strong cause and effect between your actions and your associates within the context of the guilty action.  

Well, I think it's more statistical than that.  If you find one man that goes postal working for the post office then you might think it's NOT the post office's fault. If you find a number of them in different locations then it's time to break out the counseling programs & examine what about your training & overall structure is causing that kind of result.
Sure one uses statistics to establish correlations, even cause and effect, where one can - and you gave a good example of that.  But that has not been done in any of the current political claims of Guilt By Association (GBA).  And where statistics have been used, they have just been cherry picked for partisan spin. 

Mark de LA says
seth 2008-10-15 09:08:52 10647
There is no doubt that cause and effect flows from the group to the individual - and back to the group.  And yes, it would be a good idea to have some rules of thumb by which to judge the flow of guilt by mere association.  Obviously the first rule should be something like:  the guilt of associate flows to you iff it can be shown that there is a strong cause and effect between your actions and your associates within the context of the guilty action.  

Well, I think it's more statistical than that.  If you find one man that goes postal working for the post office then you might think it's NOT the post office's fault. If you find a number of them in different locations then it's time to break out the counseling programs & examine what about your training & overall structure is causing that kind of result.

Mark de LA says
That's a problem for a spin discussion also discussed s spin.  I think that ACORN statistics on voter fraud are probably a good example of bad leadership somewhere in the organization if not at the top. OTOH, if spin is tolerated & used at the top of the ticket (& it is by both sides) you can expect it will be used at the bottom; continuing to prove my thesis.


Mark de LA says
Bernardine Dohrn, Bill Ayer's wife had a much more rugged association with domestic terror; apparently constructing the bomb & placing it where it ultimately took a policeman's life!


Mark de LA says
source: ... Just 23 days before a crooked fundraiser helped Sen. Barack Obama buy his Chicago mansion, a billionaire bagman for Saddam Hussein wired millions into the crook's account.

"Barack Obama appears to have personally benefited from funds originating in Saddam Hussein's regime," said Mideast expert Daniel Pipes.

...You can spin things a lot of different ways, but the answers should be made soon & in public before a press conference.


Mark de LA says
More Obama-Ayers connection is HO's endorsement of an Ayers  book.

Seth says
M 2008-10-20 13:58:19 10647
More Obama-Ayers connection is HO's endorsement of an Ayers  book.
Well maybe the book was a "searing and timely account of the juvenile court system, and the courageous individuals who rescue hope from despair."  But hey, you and your friends should keep trying to wipe some shit on this guy. 

Meanwhile i'll keep watching McCain's support go down ...





Mark de LA says
Your only answer to evidence is to scream smear. Never consider the facts & implications it might scare the shit out of you.  I guess it's time to enlighten you that smearing shit on shit is a rude & unpleasant task - I uncover facts & questions instead. Since BHO likes to brush the past behind him these things keep showing up. Perhaps he will never have to answer to it if the electorate is dumb enough. His campaigning for Odinga to the tune of $1M is suspect in light of Odinga's pro Islamist connections.  Perhaps you call that a smear (recent fact); I would ask Barack Hussein Obama what it means & does he still think it was a good idea. I would also ask Condi Rice the same question.
source: ... Obama funded foreign thug who promised Islamic state
Agreement with Muslims pledged to protect terrorists, throttle Christians, impose Shariah

...


Mark de LA says
seth 2008-10-20 16:20:00 10647
Your last one there doesn't pass the smell test.  May i suggest investigating the truth of the beginning paragraph, especially this ...
source: WorldNetDaily

A controversial Kenyan leader for whom Sen. Barack Obama not only campaigned but raised almost $1 million during the run-up to that nation's 2007 presidential election ...
...  That, and the questionable photo, is the only thing that ties Obama to this questionable African leader.  We have no source for that statement except the pen of Corsi of the Daily.  Why doesn't it smell right?  Well in 2007, when Obama was running for the nonination, we are to believe that he is also campaigning for an African Muslim - that doesn't pass my node.  Does it yours?  I doubt this one even makes it to Obama's anti-smear website. 

But hey, keep trying, ...

Yep, you people don't want to investigate or explain just sweep under the rug.

Mark de LA says
M 2008-10-20 17:21:14 10647
M 2008-10-20 17:20:34 10647

WND previously documented that Obama supported and campaigned for Kenya opposition leader Raila Odinga during a 2006 senatorial "fact-finding" trip to Kenya and subsequently reported on documents revealing Obama's part in raising almost $1 million for Odinga.

Are you saying that this did not happen????????????????
Google has 57,000 & some youtube videos on the subject "Obama Odinga connection" are they all fabrications?

Seth says
M 2008-10-20 17:25:15 10647
M 2008-10-20 17:21:14 10647
M 2008-10-20 17:20:34 10647

WND previously documented that Obama supported and campaigned for Kenya opposition leader Raila Odinga during a 2006 senatorial "fact-finding" trip to Kenya and subsequently reported on documents revealing Obama's part in raising almost $1 million for Odinga.

Are you saying that this did not happen????????????????
Google has 57,000 & some youtube videos on the subject "Obama Odinga connection" are they all fabrications?

I don't know what event "this" in your question refers to.  But here are some facts that are uppermost in my mind. 
  • This comes from a book which is at least the second book by Jerome Crosi which contains demonstrable smears. 
  • Corsi was arrested by Kenyan officials and deported.  
  • The only connection that Obama has with Odinga's seem to be established by a couple of questionable emails that came from some unnamed Kenyan sources via Jerome Corsi.  Most, if not all, the alleged evidance appears on this page.  
I think you might find this search gets you closer to the story.

So, considering the source, considering the lack of credible evidance, considering the lack of collaborating evidance, considering that no other repetuable news souce which verifies facts has taken up this story, my judgement remais: it smells like just another smear comming from Jerome Corsi.

But please, if you have something tangeable, something that is not based upon inuendo, something that comes from some source that can be verified, by all means bring it up.

Mark de LA says
Yep, continue to attack the messenger just like you people attack Joe the Plumber.  Make sure you never bother with the substance even though Google managed to show up with 57,000 articles not all linked to Corsi.
<== Seth

Mark de LA says
Watch the Video if you think the picture was fake (first one in my google list):

The question is still about Odinga's Islamist leanings.

Mark de LA says
M 2008-10-21 11:11:25 10647
The details from the CIA factbook on Kenya are:
Ethnic groups:
Definition Field Listing
Kikuyu 22%, Luhya 14%, Luo 13%, Kalenjin 12%, Kamba 11%, Kisii 6%, Meru 6%, other African 15%, non-African (Asian, European, and Arab) 1%
Religions:
Definition Field Listing
Protestant 45%, Roman Catholic 33%, Muslim 10%, indigenous beliefs 10%, other 2%
note: a large majority of Kenyans are Christian, but estimates for the percentage of the population that adheres to Islam or indigenous beliefs vary widely
Obama's father is from the Luo tribe.

Seth says
source: M above
The question is still about Odinga's Islamist leanings.
No it's not.  Odinga is the leader of a Muslim country ... one expects that he will support Muslim causes.  Saying that he is Islamist is just propoganda.  What you need to prove with facts is that Obama is connected somehow to some of Odinga's allegid radical politics.  That is what i do not see.  Even Corsi does not connect those dots.  He talks about how bad Odinga is and then connects Odinga to Obama with unsourced emails and perhaps pictures whith no context wrappers. 

Mark, do you actually believe that Obama ... with all his name problems ... with all his aspirations to run for president ... with all the hate engendered in the US from 911 Islamists ... is going to support a foreign Islamist?   Come on, get real, that does not pass the smell test.  But if it is true, so be it ... present verifiable facts of actual events withing the context of those events. 

Mark de LA says
Seth(ABOVE) : ... ...  That, and the questionable photo, is the only thing that ties Obama to this questionable African leader.  We have no source for that statement except the pen of Corsi of the Daily.  Why doesn't it smell right? 
...
seth 2008-10-21 10:33:17 10647

I don't understand the importance you seem to place on the "57,000 articles not all linked to Corsi".  Look, just for the sake of argument, i will concede that Odinga might be a questionable character to support.  What i am asking you to do is bring me a single article which offers facts connecting Obama to Odinga in a substantive manner, which does not come from the alleged facts being profferend by Corsi.  Can you do that?  If you can't than can you at least admit that all we have is those unsourced emails?
Well watch the movie for starters. He did go to Kenya in 2006. He did support Odinga - just for starters.

Mark de LA says
The problem is, if you look at the map, is that Sudan is right next door to the NorthWest. So is Somalia.  Sudan has a disfunctional government with radical muslims causing the genocide in Darfur. If Kenya goes radical Islamist & the way of Sudan with a nonfunctional government &/or the way of Somalia whose waters are full of pirates then we have another front on the war on terror.


Seth says
source: M above
He did support Odinga
I did watch this movie.  So what we have is a regime, which Obama was accusing of corruption, casting dispersions on a rival political candidate, Odinga, who happens to be of the same tribe as Obama's ancestors.  Apparently Obama did appear at some events with Odinga.  So what? now move from there and prove a case that Obama did something wrong or did something that ties him directly to Islamist adgendas. 

Don't forget that our government supported Osam Bin Laden's group in Afganastan against the Russians.  We supported Sadam Houssain against Iran. Thes kinds of support and associations change with the turbalence of changeing governments.  Judgements must be made in the context of the now in the period of history in which the events occured - not in some context free imaginations of guilt. 

Mark de LA says
seth 2008-10-21 11:33:45 10647
source: M above
He did support Odinga
I did watch this movie.  So what we have is a regime, which Obama was accusing of corruption, casting dispersions on a rival political candidate, Odinga, who happens to be of the same tribe as Obama's ancestors.  Apparently Obama did appear at some events with Odinga.  So what? now move from there and prove a case that Obama did something wrong or did something that ties him directly to Islamist adgendas. 

Don't forget that our government supported Osam Bin Laden's group in Afganastan against the Russians.  We supported Sadam Houssain against Iran. Thes kinds of support and associations change with the turbalence of changeing governments.  Judgements must be made in the context of the now in the period of history in which the events occured - not in some context free imaginations of guilt. 
Huh? Your Kool-Aid knee jerk at first was to say that there was no connection at all (doesn't pass the smell test on the picture, etc). Now you admit some connection. WND has uncovered some nefarious motives for Odinga. Nobody on this side said Obama corrupted anything there, yet!  The million$$ he helped raise for Odinga is interesting!
There is also something that says Condi Rice & the US govt supported Odinga to some extent.  The problem I see is that Odinga since then seems to have made some bargains with the Islamists (see my previous posts). The question is still how much does Obama know about what was going on & what does he think about it NOW. I doubt he will ever answer these questions.  It is also interesting that Corsi got kicked out of Kenya for his investigation of Obama's connections.


Seth says
M 2008-10-21 11:45:04 10647
seth 2008-10-21 11:33:45 10647
source: M above
He did support Odinga
I did watch this movie.  So what we have is a regime, which Obama was accusing of corruption, casting dispersions on a rival political candidate, Odinga, who happens to be of the same tribe as Obama's ancestors.  Apparently Obama did appear at some events with Odinga.  So what? now move from there and prove a case that Obama did something wrong or did something that ties him directly to Islamist adgendas. 

Don't forget that our government supported Osam Bin Laden's group in Afganastan against the Russians.  We supported Sadam Houssain against Iran. Thes kinds of support and associations change with the turbalence of changeing governments.  Judgements must be made in the context of the now in the period of history in which the events occured - not in some context free imaginations of guilt. 
Huh? Your Kool-Aid knee jerk at first was to say that there was no connection at all (doesn't pass the smell test on the picture, etc). Now you admit some connection. WND has uncovered some nefarious motives for Odinga. Nobody on this side said Obama corrupted anything there, yet!  The million$$ he helped raise for Odinga is interesting!
There is also something that says Condi Rice & the US govt supported Odinga to some extent.  The problem I see is that Odinga since then seems to have made some bargains with the Islamists (see my previous posts). The question is still how much does Obama know about what was going on & what does he think about it NOW. I doubt he will ever answer these questions.  It is also interesting that Corsi got kicked out of Kenya for his investigation of Obama's connections.

Revising one's beliefs to correlate with verifiable facts is what i call the pursuit of truth.  For this topic to be anything but a example of a smear, you need a factual connection between Odinga's alleged "nefarious motives" and Obama ... not what Odinga did after the fact.  That is the connection that is still missing.

Seth says
M 2008-10-21 13:57:11 10647
seth 2008-10-21 13:39:22 10647
M 2008-10-21 12:32:52 10647
seth 2008-10-21 12:01:32 10647 - snip- (repeat)
Revising one's beliefs to correlate with verifiable facts is what i call the pursuit of truth.  For this topic to be anything but a example of a smear, you need a factual connection between Odinga's alleged "nefarious motives" and Obama ... not what Odinga did after the fact.  That is the connection that is still missing.
For this to be anything but a Kool-Aid test for Seth he has to ask his candidate the serious questions posed in this part of the topic.

Oh, so the question for Obama is:  were you connected, or did you know of, Odinga's nefarious Islamist motives before they were alleged by an apparently corrupt Kenyan opponent?   I'll ask him that right after I ask him if he is flying to Hawaii to beat his grandmother on Thursday.
Ask him if he knows how deep Odinga's Islamist connections are & if he thinks that Odinga intends to install Muslim Sharia.

The question is not what he knows now ... the question is what he knew when he was appearing with him on stage.  Btw, just about every Muslim will support Sharia law ... it's in their book, is it not?  I snipped your insult from my repeat in an attempt to keep the tone of the dialogue conducive to a even handed persuit of truth. 

Mark de LA says
seth 2008-10-21 13:39:22 10647
M 2008-10-21 12:32:52 10647
seth 2008-10-21 12:01:32 10647 - snip- (repeat)
Revising one's beliefs to correlate with verifiable facts is what i call the pursuit of truth.  For this topic to be anything but a example of a smear, you need a factual connection between Odinga's alleged "nefarious motives" and Obama ... not what Odinga did after the fact.  That is the connection that is still missing.
For this to be anything but a Kool-Aid test for Seth he has to ask his candidate the serious questions posed in this part of the topic.

Oh, so the question for Obama is:  were you connected, or did you know of, Odinga's nefarious Islamist motives before they were alleged by an apparently corrupt Kenyan opponent?   I'll ask him that right after I ask him if he is flying to Hawaii to beat his grandmother on Thursday.
NO stupid! Ask him if he knows how deep Odinga's Islamist connections are & if he thinks that Odinga intends to install Muslim Sharia.


Mark de LA says
The question is more of a NOW question in that investigation was barred from happening by Corsi's being deported & probably anyone to follow.  Apparently Odinga doesn't believe in reporters having freedom of speech; that we know for sure.
The usual liberal mantra is What does he know now & what did he know then? . 

Seth says
M 2008-10-21 14:21:41 10647
The question is more of a NOW question in that investigation was barred from happening by Corsi's being deported & probably anyone to follow.  Apparently Odinga doesn't believe in reporters having freedom of speech; that we know for sure.
The usual liberal mantra is What does he know now & what did he know then? . 
Well apparently Wikipedia doesn't know about any of Odinga's Islamist agendas (here and here).  If you know something that qualifies as facts to the Wikipedia, you should update their pages.  If Odinga turned Islamist after his contacts with Obama, i don't see how that reflects on Obama.

Mark de LA says
I've already posted the documents - If you can't read then don't bother to ask for more. The absence of something in Wikipedia doesn't mean it doesn't exist! Short-cut the investigation and ask your candidate.


Seth says
M 2008-10-21 15:19:47 10647
I've already posted the documents - [snip unnecessary spin] The absence of something in Wikipedia doesn't mean it doesn't exist! [snip useless comment]
The documents or the movie do not contain the answer the the pertinent question.  It is true that absence from Wikipedia does not prove anything.  My point is to ask for some facts and documentation that we (or anybody) could update Wikipedia with which would stick there according to their processes.  Something written that does not just contain spin.  Write the paragraph here if you think it can be written. I'll go over there myself and update Wikipedia.  Even if your documents do not contain the answer that would reflect badly on Obama, what actual facts about Odinga should be updated over there?  Can we not adhear to some reasonable standards of truth? 

Mark de LA says
Do your own research. I've asked the questions. I've provided enough links. Otherwise move on to something else.

Seth says
M 2008-10-22 11:58:41 10647
seth 2008-10-22 11:49:35 10647
More rebuttal of this smear here, here, and here.   I still want to see some explanation of the context of the movies that show Obama appearing with Odinga.  I also want to see some context relative to Odinga's alleged actions relative imposing Shariah on Christians. Let me know if you can find any of that.  The pursuit of truth is not something that should be shrugged off as soon as people start examining and testing alligations.  Waving at alligations which have been rebutted without dealing directly with the rebuttals  is just going ("rubber ducker sucker fucker" repeat). 
rebutting things without reading them first just produces a Kool-Aid drunk!
I did read what you presented critically.  Did you read the rebuttals? 

Mark de LA says
seth 2008-10-22 11:49:35 10647
More rebuttal of this smear here, here, and here.   I still want to see some explanation of the context of the movies that show Obama appearing with Odinga.  I also want to see some context relative to Odinga's alleged actions relative imposing Shariah on Christians. Let me know if you can find any of that.  The pursuit of truth is not something that should be shrugged off as soon as people start examining and testing alligations.  Waving at alligations which have been rebutted without dealing directly with the rebuttals  is just going ("rubber ducker sucker fucker" repeat). 
rebutting things without reading them first just produces a Kool-Aid drunk!

Mark de LA says
seth 2008-10-22 12:03:39 10647
M 2008-10-22 11:58:41 10647
seth 2008-10-22 11:49:35 10647
More rebuttal of this smear here, here, and here.   I still want to see some explanation of the context of the movies that show Obama appearing with Odinga.  I also want to see some context relative to Odinga's alleged actions relative imposing Shariah on Christians. Let me know if you can find any of that.  The pursuit of truth is not something that should be shrugged off as soon as people start examining and testing alligations.  Waving at alligations which have been rebutted without dealing directly with the rebuttals  is just going ("rubber ducker sucker fucker" repeat). 
rebutting things without reading them first just produces a Kool-Aid drunk!
I did read what you presented critically.  Did you read the rebuttals? 
...sigh ... sigh....
the contexts are in the linked articles themselves... go read them again;  better still do what I requested & ask Obama what it's all about. Maybe he will tell the truth; maybe not!

Seth says
M 2008-10-22 12:07:47 10647
seth 2008-10-22 12:03:39 10647
M 2008-10-22 11:58:41 10647
seth 2008-10-22 11:49:35 10647
More rebuttal of this smear here, here, and here.   I still want to see some explanation of the context of the movies that show Obama appearing with Odinga.  I also want to see some context relative to Odinga's alleged actions relative imposing Shariah on Christians. Let me know if you can find any of that.  The pursuit of truth is not something that should be shrugged off as soon as people start examining and testing alligations.  Waving at alligations which have been rebutted without dealing directly with the rebuttals  is just going ("rubber ducker sucker fucker" repeat). 
rebutting things without reading them first just produces a Kool-Aid drunk!
I did read what you presented critically.  Did you read the rebuttals? 
...sigh ... sigh....
the contexts are in the linked articles themselves... go read them again;  better still do what I requested & ask Obama what it's all about. Maybe he will tell the truth; maybe not!
Mark, i need (1) the context of the movie of Obama appearing with Odinga.  That is not in your documents.  (2) I need the supporting evidance that Odinga is imposing Shariah on Christians.  That is not in your documents.  Sure there are allegations made by Corsi and even made by Odinga's political enemies - but those are of no value.  The other claims have been rebutted by the links i provided above.  A content less response is certainly easy; but at the same time it is a waste of time and memory storage space on fbi.  To get colser to the truth you need to spend some time.  List the alligations that you still think are outstanding and with references to facts which support them.  I listed the ones that i think are still open. I would like to find a recording of Obama words on those movies and when and why he was appearing with Odinga.  I would like to know what Obama knew about any allegid radical Muslim leanings at the time he appeared with Odinga.  But sans that context i am not willing to assume the worst. 

Mark de LA says
M 2008-10-28 22:43:51 10647
Some more associations for Obama to clarify in front of a news conference rather than through campaign flaks insulated in some office.
source: ...

The Los Angeles Times is refusing to release a videotape that it says shows Barack Obama praising a Chicago professor who was an alleged mouthpiece for the Palestine Liberation Organization while it was a designated terrorist group in the 1970s and '80s.

According an LA Times article written by Peter Wallsten in April, Obama was a "friend and frequent dinner companion" of Rashid Khalidi, who from 1976 to1982 was reportedly a director of the official Palestinian press agency, WAFA, which was operating in exile from Beirut with the PLO.




A number of Web sites have accused the Times of purposely suppressing the tape of the event -- which former Weather Underground terrorists Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn reportedly attended.

Mark de LA says
(***)
source: ...

"The first thing that this brings to mind is Ronald Reagan's old statement. They endorse me, I don't endorse them," said Christopher C. Hull, adjunct professor of government at Georgetown University.

"I think that, in general, voters discount endorsements by people with which they don't believe the candidate sympathizes," he said. "But there is certainly the potential for some harm there. It depends on the degree to which there is concern about the candidate's sympathies."



Mark de LA says
M 2008-10-30 09:30:19 10647
Barack Obama and the Strategy of Manufactured Crisis is an article by James Simpson which ties all Obama's radical ties into one strategy he calls the The Cloward-Piven Strategy of Orchestrated Crisis .  For those of you who are not yet drunk on Obama-juice have a look. I will digest it more when I have the time.
The entire article is in the American Thinker Blog here. Again I am not much of a conspiracy theorist, but there is a huge correlation of radical Obama associations documented here in spite of the candidate's attempt to brush it all aside as a distraction (or so he wishes).


Seth says
William Ayers speaks out on Good Morning America about guilt by association.  I think he's right.



Mark de LA says
Did Seth find the part when Ayers says that Bombing wasn't terrorism?
source: ...

The college professor also argued to "Good Morning America's" Chris Cuomo today that the bombing campaign by the Weather Underground, the group he helped found, was not terrorism. 

... & blowjobs according to Bill Clinton aren't sex either!

Mark de LA says
That should have been 10700 in the above.

Mark de LA says
If you want to nuance definitions, the Golden Rule is not the same thing as The Ethic of Reciprocity. My nuance declares that the spiritual organ (chakra) developing in the heart region is necessary for full appreciation of & acting from the Golden Rule.


Seth says
choy 2008-11-14 12:40:06 10647
If you want to nuance definitions, the Golden Rule is not the same thing as The Ethic of Reciprocity. My nuance declares that the spiritual organ (chakra) developing in the heart region is necessary for full appreciation of & acting from the Golden Rule.

Actually my recommendation of applying the Golden Rule in this case is exactly right on.  Let me give you an example.  Your association with Harry The Truck back in P2 days approximately matches the depth of association that Obama had with Ayers.  (You could, of course, debate that, but i'm sure that you can find a similar association which would be acceptable.)   Now because of this association you have with Harry The Truck are you to now be accused of "paling around with homosexua pedofiles"?  No, not at all.  That would not be fair. I assure you that had you ever been unfairly judged bases upon your casual associations, you would be keenly aware of the pain it causes.  You would not want to inflict that pain on others, as you do not want it inflicted on you:  "Do onto others, as you would have others do unto you". That is the golden rule. 

Mark de LA says
seth 2008-11-14 11:46:15 10647
source: M asks
Did Seth find the part when Ayers says that Bombing wasn't terrorism?
I listened to the part you pointed to and, no, he did not specifically say that.   In context his words do not mean what your question is spinning.  But the point is not to justify or not justify Ayers deeds that transpired when Obama was 8 years old.  The point is that the guilt of those deeds does not flow to Obama by virtue of their casual association.   Ayers does make that point relatively eloquently and apparently the electorate agrees with him.  There are those who will continue to ask these questions as if they mean anything about Obama.  Me thinks those people should study the golden rule and wonder how they themselves will fair under such a loose interpertation of guilt by association.
Apparently ABC thought there was some merit to the assertion. Because Ayers was an asshole when Obama was 8 doesn't mean he wasn't still an asshole when Obama was 50 (or at least a retired asshole like myself.) Nobody has put to rest the assertion that Obama launched his state senate career in Ayer's house. Guilt by association is a funny thing. It depends upon the strength & quality of the bond (association).  If you once accidently shook hands with an idiot does that mean you are an idiot? Probably not! If you continued to associate & work on projects with an idiot & shared some of his values are you an idiot, probably! If you give money to an idiot for a shared purpose you really are an idiot.  If you married an idiot, you are perhaps pushing the bound of credulity to claim that you are not an idiot. 10070 is attempting to sort out both the strength of bonds & the quality of the bonds for a more definitive research of political associations.  Perhaps you are misapplying the golden rule for rectal or rhetorical purposes.


Seth says
M 2008-11-14 12:28:38 10647
seth 2008-11-14 11:46:15 10647
source: M asks
Did Seth find the part when Ayers says that Bombing wasn't terrorism?
I listened to the part you pointed to and, no, he did not specifically say that.   In context his words do not mean what your question is spinning.  But the point is not to justify or not justify Ayers deeds that transpired when Obama was 8 years old.  The point is that the guilt of those deeds does not flow to Obama by virtue of their casual association.   Ayers does make that point relatively eloquently and apparently the electorate agrees with him.  There are those who will continue to ask these questions as if they mean anything about Obama.  Me thinks those people should study the golden rule and wonder how they themselves will fair under such a loose interpertation of guilt by association.
Apparently ABC thought there was some merit to the assertion. Because Ayers was an asshole when Obama was 8 doesn't mean he wasn't still an asshole when Obama was 50 (or at least a retired asshole like myself.) Nobody has put to rest the assertion that Obama launched his state senate career in Ayer's house. Guilt by association is a funny thing. It depends upon the strength & quality of the bond (association).  If you once accidently shook hands with an idiot does that mean you are an idiot? Probably not! If you continued to associate & work on projects with an idiot & shared some of his values are you an idiot, probably! If you give money to an idiot for a shared purpose you really are an idiot.  If you married an idiot, you are perhaps pushing the bound of credulity to claim that you are not an idiot. 10070 is attempting to sort out both the strength of bonds & the quality of the bonds for a more definitive research of political associations.  Perhaps you are misapplying the golden rule for rectal or rhetorical purposes.

The launching of Obama's senate career was adequately "put away" by the NYT and others here ...
source: nyt and other places
It was later in 1995 that Mr. Ayers and Ms. Dohrn hosted the gathering, in their town house three blocks from Mr. Obama’s home, at which State Senator Alice J. Palmer, who planned to run for Congress, introduced Mr. Obama to a few Democratic friends as her chosen successor. That was one of several such neighborhood events as Mr. Obama prepared to run, said A. J. Wolf, the 84-year-old emeritus rabbi of KAM Isaiah Israel Synagogue, across the street from Mr. Obama’s current house.
... and that account matches what Ayers said in the recent interview above. 
source: M above
... & shared some of his values are you an idiot, probably! ...
But you see that is exactly where you go beyond the facts as given and start imagining things that don't exist.  As Ayers said, and i paraphrase:  Obama did not seek out Ayers radical ideas, nor did he seek out Obama to spread his influence him.  There is no avoidance whatsoever that Obama shares Ayers radical ideas that lead to his bombings. 

And i suppose that your "If you married an idiot, you are perhaps pushing the bound of credulity to claim that you are not an idiot" is some kind baseless slam on Michelle's character. 

Mark, your unjust persuit of this guilt by casual association does not bode well for anyone haveing any confidence in your thinking re group threefold society.  Is that the kind of things that would go on there?  Is the Golden Rule to just be applied to other people?

Please cease and desist!

Mark de LA says
seth 2008-11-14 15:43:31 10647
choy 2008-11-14 12:40:06 10647
If you want to nuance definitions, the Golden Rule is not the same thing as The Ethic of Reciprocity. My nuance declares that the spiritual organ (chakra) developing in the heart region is necessary for full appreciation of & acting from the Golden Rule.

Actually my recommendation of applying the Golden Rule in this case is exactly right on.  Let me give you an example.  Your association with Harry The Truck back in P2 days approximately matches the depth of association that Obama had with Ayers.  (You could, of course, debate that, but i'm sure that you can find a similar association which would be acceptable.)   Now because of this association you have with Harry The Truck are you to now be accused of "paling around with homosexua pedofiles"?  No, not at all.  That would not be fair. I assure you that had you ever been unfairly judged bases upon your casual associations, you would be keenly aware of the pain it causes.  You would not want to inflict that pain on others, as you do not want it inflicted on you:  "Do onto others, as you would have others do unto you". That is the golden rule. 
You do of course realize that I am not running for the presidency nor any elective office! You can't sue politicians & celebrities very well for what they say & do outside of criminal behavior like stealing money. I can sue you for slander or libel however! There is a difference & besides you totally ignored the main point of the golden rule vs reciprocity.


Seth says
M 2008-11-14 17:46:24 10647
Seth (in a confused state): ... And i suppose that your "If you married an idiot, you are perhaps pushing the bound of credulity to claim that you are not an idiot" is some kind baseless slam on Michelle's character. 

Mark, your unjust persuit of this guilt by casual association does not bode well for anyone haveing any confidence in your thinking re group threefold society.  Is that the kind of things that would go on there?  Is the Golden Rule to just be applied to other people?

Please cease and desist
... Please go fuck yourself!
The argument was hypothetical & had nothing to do with Obama, Ayers or Michelle (or you in fact!) I am continuing to study political relationships, associations, etc. via 10700. When I work in the group UnhackTheBrain to digest news information & information extraction one aspect is the relationships drawn between people - it's mentographic. Quality or type & strength are two very revealing measurements which have been teased out of the election talking heads & almost 2 years of electioneering.
 

Well the mentographic links (arrows) drawn between Ayers and Obama should be drawn very faintly indeed ... just as faintly as those drawn between you and P2's Tree Frog.  That of course opens a whole discussion re the binary nature of classical mentography where you either draw an arrow or you don't draw an arrow.  These arrows of yours in 10700 need to be fuzzy with weights given for whether they exist or not.  Then you can set a threshold and ones which are beneath that threshold would dissappear. 

Mark de LA says
Seth (in a confused state): ... And i suppose that your "If you married an idiot, you are perhaps pushing the bound of credulity to claim that you are not an idiot" is some kind baseless slam on Michelle's character. 

Mark, your unjust persuit of this guilt by casual association does not bode well for anyone haveing any confidence in your thinking re group threefold society.  Is that the kind of things that would go on there?  Is the Golden Rule to just be applied to other people?

Please cease and desist
... Please go fuck yourself!
The argument was hypothetical & had nothing to do with Obama, Ayers or Michelle (or you in fact!) I am continuing to study political relationships, associations, etc. via 10700. When I work in the group UnhackTheBrain to digest news information & information extraction one aspect is the relationships drawn between people - it's mentographic. Quality or type & strength are two very revealing measurements which have been teased out of the election talking heads & almost 2 years of electioneering.
 


Seth says
M 2008-11-14 17:24:23 10647
seth 2008-11-14 15:43:31 10647
choy 2008-11-14 12:40:06 10647
If you want to nuance definitions, the Golden Rule is not the same thing as The Ethic of Reciprocity. My nuance declares that the spiritual organ (chakra) developing in the heart region is necessary for full appreciation of & acting from the Golden Rule.

Actually my recommendation of applying the Golden Rule in this case is exactly right on.  Let me give you an example.  Your association with Harry The Truck back in P2 days approximately matches the depth of association that Obama had with Ayers.  (You could, of course, debate that, but i'm sure that you can find a similar association which would be acceptable.)   Now because of this association you have with Harry The Truck are you to now be accused of "paling around with homosexua pedofiles"?  No, not at all.  That would not be fair. I assure you that had you ever been unfairly judged bases upon your casual associations, you would be keenly aware of the pain it causes.  You would not want to inflict that pain on others, as you do not want it inflicted on you:  "Do onto others, as you would have others do unto you". That is the golden rule. 
You do of course realize that I am not running for the presidency nor any elective office! You can't sue politicians & celebrities very well for what they say & do outside of criminal behavior like stealing money. I can sue you for slander or libel however! There is a difference & besides you totally ignored the main point of the golden rule vs reciprocity.

To apply the Golden Rule you must be able to put yourself in the other person's shoes, not protest that your shoes are different.  I still say that my application of the Golden Rule here is spot on.  Nor have you shown that it is off base. 

Mark de LA says
If you ignore my arguments are you applying the golden rule ? ... or just the rwg?


Mark de LA says
This item doesn't edit well adding new comments under Firefox 3.03. It works fine for IE.7

Mark de LA says
FYI, I usually don't accuse - I raise questions about associations which I have discovered in the media & which I would like clarified in a news conference where reporters can penetrate beyond the usual spin with follow-up questions. If I knew that an unrepentant bomber lived in my neighborhood, I would steer very clear of any possibility of running into him/her; wouldn't you? I watched parts of Ayer's interview with incredulity. How in World is setting off bombs a proper or valid way of protesting a war?  I wonder if someone disagrees with Obama's policies is he/she/it should protest in the same way that Ayers &/or the Weatherman group did. If I knew that an unrepentant bomber lived in my neighborhood I wouldn't join him on the board of any trust or foundation.
source: ... The Woods Fund of Chicago's current President is Deborah Harrington, who served on former Illinois Governor Jim Edgar's Taskforce on Human Services Reform.

A notable Woods board member is William Ayers, who in the 1960s was a member of the terrorist group Weatherman, and was a wanted fugitive for over a decade as a result of the group's bombing campaign; today Ayers is a Professor of Education at the University of Illinois. In 2002 the Woods Fund made a grant to Northwestern University Law School's Children and Family Justice Center, where Ayers' wife, Bernardine Dohrn, was employed. Barack Obama was one of Ayers' fellow Woods Fund board members at that time.

... How these people get to be college professors is a topic for another discussion.
Your attempt to brand pj2 with the ugly deeds of one person is cute, but irrelevant. In the first place the purpose of the group was not the ugly deeds of that person. The purpose of the Weathermen was.


Mark de LA says
seth 2008-11-15 09:03:13 10647
M 2008-11-15 07:08:52 10647
If you ignore my arguments are you applying the golden rule ? ... or just the rwg?

All i saw you do was point at The Ethic of Reciprocity and assert that it wasn't the same thing as the Golden Rule.  So what ... that's not an argument.  I, however, showed by applying an example how you were breaking the Golden Rule.  You did not refute that. 

Let me translate for you then, what you are applying is not the golden rule but the ethic of reciprocity. The Golden Rule is more complex than just holding up a mirror & looking for hypocrisy.  There is a point of view that says that if I am an asshole I can still hold up a mirror to other assholes in a valid way to help them stop being assholes. But, that isn't the golden rule.

Mark de LA says
seth 2008-11-15 09:09:45 10647
Mark you just go on with the same old shit.  I'm out of here.  For me this item is closed.
A wonderful example of how you have no conception of applying the golden rule yourself!


Mark de LA says
A further translation - The Golden Rule in it's most complex & simple (most detailed) form is:
~
Love one another as you, yourself want to be loved!
~
If you are doing that nobody will find fault with what you are doing!


Seth says
M 2008-11-15 09:12:38 10647
seth 2008-11-15 09:03:13 10647
M 2008-11-15 07:08:52 10647
If you ignore my arguments are you applying the golden rule ? ... or just the rwg?

All i saw you do was point at The Ethic of Reciprocity and assert that it wasn't the same thing as the Golden Rule.  So what ... that's not an argument.  I, however, showed by applying an example how you were breaking the Golden Rule.  You did not refute that. 

Let me translate for you then, what you are applying is not the golden rule but the ethic of reciprocity. The Golden Rule is more complex than just holding up a mirror & looking for hypocrisy.  There is a point of view that says that if I am an asshole I can still hold up a mirror to other assholes in a valid way to help them stop being assholes. But, that isn't the golden rule.
I don't know what you are saying here ... its all jumbled up.  Nor did i "just hold up a mirror and look for your hypocrisy".  Rather i showed that you are causing pain to someone and you would not want somone to cause you that same kind of pain to you.  That is breaking the Golden Rule.   That is not even mentioning hypocrisy.  Mentograph it if you are confused.

Mark de LA says
seth 2008-11-15 09:26:12 10647
M 2008-11-15 09:12:38 10647
seth 2008-11-15 09:03:13 10647
M 2008-11-15 07:08:52 10647
If you ignore my arguments are you applying the golden rule ? ... or just the rwg?

All i saw you do was point at The Ethic of Reciprocity and assert that it wasn't the same thing as the Golden Rule.  So what ... that's not an argument.  I, however, showed by applying an example how you were breaking the Golden Rule.  You did not refute that. 

Let me translate for you then, what you are applying is not the golden rule but the ethic of reciprocity. The Golden Rule is more complex than just holding up a mirror & looking for hypocrisy.  There is a point of view that says that if I am an asshole I can still hold up a mirror to other assholes in a valid way to help them stop being assholes. But, that isn't the golden rule.
I don't know what you are saying here ... its all jumbled up.  Nor did i "just hold up a mirror and look for your hypocrisy".  Rather i showed that you are causing pain to someone and you would not want somone to cause you that same kind of pain to you.  That is breaking the Golden Rule.   That is not even mentioning hypocrisy.  Mentograph it if you are confused.
I am causing pain to nobody (except perhaps to you as a partisan)! I have asked for clarity instead of spin in this matter. I would expect that someone who is running for president or who is president-elect would want his affairs & points of view clear.

Seth says
M 2008-11-15 09:20:37 10647
A further translation - The Golden Rule in it's most complex & simple (most detailed) form is:
~
Love one another as you, yourself want to be loved!
~
If you are doing that nobody will find fault with what you are doing!

The Golden Rule is:  Do unto others as you would have others do unto you.   Your rule above is a corollary.  Btw, Mark, i don't see as much promise in the Golden Rule as you do.  It is too easy to misinterpret and it doesn't apply to all people.    The Golden Rule assumes that you have empathy - that you can put yourself in someone else's shoes who is in a different context than you are.  Not all people can do that.  Obviously a psychopath will apply the rule in some bizarre way.

The Golden Rule is a simple thing if you can empathize with you fellow man.  You don't hit someone because you don't like to be hit.  You don't cast someone in shame for something that they are not responsible for, because you don't want that to happen to yourself.  You know how something feels when it happens to you ... so if it doesn't feel good ... you don't make someone else feel that way.  The same goes for positive feelings.  But, for me, that is as far as the Golden Rule goes.  It is not the one single rule that applies in all ethical situations. 

Seth says
M 2008-11-15 09:34:20 10647
seth 2008-11-15 09:26:12 10647
M 2008-11-15 09:12:38 10647
seth 2008-11-15 09:03:13 10647
M 2008-11-15 07:08:52 10647
If you ignore my arguments are you applying the golden rule ? ... or just the rwg?

All i saw you do was point at The Ethic of Reciprocity and assert that it wasn't the same thing as the Golden Rule.  So what ... that's not an argument.  I, however, showed by applying an example how you were breaking the Golden Rule.  You did not refute that. 

Let me translate for you then, what you are applying is not the golden rule but the ethic of reciprocity. The Golden Rule is more complex than just holding up a mirror & looking for hypocrisy.  There is a point of view that says that if I am an asshole I can still hold up a mirror to other assholes in a valid way to help them stop being assholes. But, that isn't the golden rule.
I don't know what you are saying here ... its all jumbled up.  Nor did i "just hold up a mirror and look for your hypocrisy".  Rather i showed that you are causing pain to someone and you would not want somone to cause you that same kind of pain to you.  That is breaking the Golden Rule.   That is not even mentioning hypocrisy.  Mentograph it if you are confused.
I am causing pain to nobody (except perhaps to you as a partisan)! I have asked for clarity instead of spin in this matter. I would expect that someone who is running for president or who is president-elect would want his affairs & points of view clear.
That might be true if these questions had not all been answered.  You continue to bring up questions, implying that something is being hidden - when there is no evidence that it is being hidden.  Certainly you know that is an old partisan tactic. 

Mark de LA says


Mark de LA says
& this one kinda crisps it up a bit more:


Mark de LA says
Fascinating piece in WND today claims that William Ayers & Obama collaborated on his book Dreams from My Father.
source: ...

Cashill conjectures that the apparent revelation of Ayers part in Obama's book would have changed the outcome of the 2008 election.

He recalls that Chris Matthews, host of MSNBC's "Hardball, mocked the Republicans' 2008 vice presidential candidate, former Alaska Gov. Sarah Palin, for needing a collaborator for her book, because "she can't write."

Cashill comments in his column today that as "the Obama-as-Milli Vanilli story unfolds, Matthews and those willfully blind souls like him are in for a shock."

"To admit that Obama needed a collaborator would have undercut his campaign for president," Cashill says, "and to reveal the name of that collaborator would have ended it."


...Now, rather than insulting the messengers in this story I challenge anyone to definitively prove one way or the other & stick to the subject rather than the RWG.


Mark de LA says
seth 2009-09-25 10:30:04 10647
MR 2009-09-25 10:16:46 10647
seth 2009-09-25 09:58:50 10647
MR 2009-09-25 09:53:58 10647
seth 2009-09-25 09:25:37 10647
source: MR above
Fascinating piece in WND today claims that William Ayers & Obama collaborated on his book Dreams from My Father.
That is an old claim, not something that just emerged today.  I remember investigating it during the campaign.  Let's face it, WMN thinks it's job is to discredit Obama and it will dredge up anything, no matter how outrageous.  If your intent is similar, then continue paying attention to this kind of shit.  But you might want to examine some of the actual source materials ... i did back then, and was surprised how thin they were.  Me, i'm, out of here.
Yep, you failed the challenge!
Your challenge was meaningless.  Try mine instead: find the original study of the language of the book that proposes to suggest the collaboration.  See if it passes muster.
Your reply is meaningless (since your are already out of here!) ... you find it.... no you find it ... no you find it.... ad infinitum (RWG).
But that is all this item is ... RWG all the way down. 
Actually this comment is about a claim  Ayers ghost wrote  Obama's book.  Here is some of the analysis.

Mark de LA says
seth 2009-09-25 10:47:57 10647
MR 2009-09-25 10:40:09 10647

Read Cashill's three-part series on Obama's "Dreams":

Part 1, "Bill Ayers' motive for penning memoir"

Part 2, "Deconstructing the text"

Part 3, "Real author of Barack book: Why it matters"


Yep, all from the same WND hacker. Find me something that was done by a actual linguistic researcher and we will have something of substance to study.
I knew your left wing, mentally challenged mind couldn't go beyond ad hominem attacks on the messenger.  You should have left by now. There is nothing here for you.... move along!

Seth says
Ok the Fictionfixer evaluation was the study that i read during the campaign.  It didn't convince me back then.  Did it convince you?  Thing about these kind of programs is that you need to chalk them up against others and see how many false positives you get.  Know your tools and their limitations. 

Then too, who cares. 

Mark de LA says
seth 2009-09-25 11:04:45 10647
Ok the Fictionfixer evaluation was the study that i read during the campaign.  It didn't convince me back then.  Did it convince you?  Thing about these kind of programs is that you need to chalk them up against others and see how many false positives you get.  Know your tools and their limitations. 

Then too, who cares. 
Nothing would convince you, you are an Obami!  Literary analysis with such tools is one way that plagiarism & copyright lawsuits are prosecuted & defended.  Such tools can also produce works written in the styles of Shakespeare, Hemingway or whomsoever you would like. Given large enough corpuses of style & language it's a good start.  I raised this comment as a question that was interesting, not necessarily believing it.   Ghost writing his memoir would go a long way toward documenting Obama's lack of character.  Conversely it is left up in the air.  It may end up in the same place as the investigation of how the Rose law firm billing records which were missing one day just suddenly showed up in Hillary's side of the White House or who hired Craig Livingston or how come Van Jones wasn't vetted better before his appointment given the amount of available info even on the Internet.


Mark de LA says
One more for the road:
William Ayers (Obama's former/current buddy): ...

In the tape, he told the crowd that he doesn't consider himself an optimist or a pessimist. 

Rather, he said: "I get up every morning thinking, today I'm gonna make a difference. Today I'm gonna end capitalism. Today I'm gonna make a revolution. I go to bed every night disappointed, but I'm back again tomorrow. That's the only way you can do it." 

...
Seems Obama is doing a good job helping him out.


See Also

  1. Thought The Objective World vs The Occurring World with 303 viewings related by tag "association".
  2. Thought A thought causing an action with 111 viewings related by tag "association".
  3. Thought Wow! Words have meanings to others too! with 106 viewings related by tag "words".
  4. Thought about: McCain's Cunt problems ... with 46 viewings related by tag "smears".
  5. Thought I like Words - I respect words - I love words with 27 viewings related by tag "words".
  6. Thought about: I like Words - I respect words - I love words with 25 viewings related by tag "words".
  7. Thought Leading to cheat ! with 16 viewings related by tag "leadership".
  8. Thought The 7% ers - Words Are a Waste of Time with 13 viewings related by tag "words".
  9. Thought Concept Net with 8 viewings related by tag "words".
  10. Thought Political Relationships with 7 viewings related by tag "item 10647".
  11. Thought Wright & Moore Wrong with 6 viewings related by tag "anti obama".
  12. Thought Laws of Growth of a Pile with 4 viewings related by tag "words".
  13. Thought Seth & Words - Confusion (moved) with 3 viewings related by tag "words".
  14. Thought Voting Atrocity Headlines with 3 viewings related by tag "2008 election".
  15. Thought Word Piles & Word Clouds with 3 viewings related by tag "words".
  16. Thought Trickle Up Poverty with 3 viewings related by tag "2008 election".
  17. Thought All of Me Loves All of You with 3 viewings related by tag "words".
  18. Thought Illative Force - A Lament with 3 viewings related by tag "words".
  19. Thought Leadership with 2 viewings related by tag "leadership".
  20. Thought Magic Negro ? with 2 viewings related by tag "anti obama".
  21. Thought Bad Choices of Words (or NOT?) with 2 viewings related by tag "anti obama".
  22. Thought Obamma's Momma's Momma with 2 viewings related by tag "2008 election".
  23. Thought Association with 2 viewings related by tag "association".
  24. Thought The Conversation About Truth & Context with 2 viewings related by tag "words".
  25. Thought I* once had a wallabu ... with 2 viewings related by tag "words".
  26. Thought Are these Real? with 1 viewings related by tag "anti obama".
  27. Thought The Voice of Leadership with 1 viewings related by tag "leadership".
  28. Thought I voted with 1 viewings related by tag "2008 election".
  29. Thought Positive words not in our language with 1 viewings related by tag "words".
  30. Thought Hillary claims popular vote! with 1 viewings related by tag "2008 election".
  31. Thought Sarah Palin has Trig problems with 1 viewings related by tag "2008 election".
  32. Thought John Popper Lapdance with 1 viewings related by tag "anti obama".
  33. Thought Obama Security Clearance with 0 viewings related by tag "anti obama".
  34. Thought An historic non-black for the presidency like Obama with 0 viewings related by tag "2008 election".
  35. Thought CNN makes up the news from YouTube with 0 viewings related by tag "smears".
  36. Thought What is a tag ? with 0 viewings related by tag "words".
  37. Thought first black president? with 0 viewings related by tag "anti obama".
  38. Thought Sent by a friend a while ago with 0 viewings related by tag "leadership".
  39. Thought Congrats! with 0 viewings related by tag "2008 election".
  40. Thought For those who drink the Kool Aid & those Who Never Will with 0 viewings related by tag "smears".
  41. Thought about: A New Spirit with 0 viewings related by tag "2008 election".
  42. Thought about: Better Living Through Software - Who's the Master? with 0 viewings related by tag "words".
  43. Thought bozo unvindicated with 0 viewings related by tag "words".
  44. Thought Hillary -VS- Obama -VS- McCain delegate spending with 0 viewings related by tag "2008 election".
  45. Thought This Guy Is Just Too Old with 0 viewings related by tag "2008 election".
  46. Thought Words with 0 viewings related by tag "words".
  47. Thought Network with 0 viewings related by tag "words".
  48. Thought None of the Above with 0 viewings related by tag "anti obama".
  49. Thought OOPS! with 0 viewings related by tag "anti obama".
  50. Thought O-shit! with 0 viewings related by tag "anti obama".