Bill Ayer's Interview

Discussion in 'Political Discussions' started by Bill Huffman, Nov 15, 2008.

  1. Bill Huffman

    Bill Huffman Well-Known Member

    Here's the Foxnews article.

    Here's the CNN article which seems to me to contain more information.

    My view is that there is nothing here that is surprising or changes my mind on the importance of the Ayers-Obama relationship, which I considered insignificant to my decision when voting Obama.

    I suspect that my Republican friends will say that this does not change their minds one single bit?

    A point I would like to make is that I believe that Obama was brilliant in the way he handled this topic during the campaign.
  2. BillDayson

    BillDayson New Member

    If you were comfortable with this subject, then you would just relax and smile. Your guy is President-elect. He (and you) have your victory.

    If you expect all dissent to cease and universal mindless adulation to prevail, then that's not going to happen. Nor should it, as long as this country remains a democracy.

    I think that the President-elect of the United States having past associations with terrorists is a very troubling thing. That's simply a statement of fact at this point, it's not open to negotiation, and additional discussion board posts are unlikely to influence it.

    It's still unclear what this terrorist association says about Barack Obama's own personal philosophy, and about what kind of political views he accepts. He might conceivably have known little or nothing about Ayers' and Dohrn's past activities, and would have strongly condemned them had he known. He might have been an unwitting innocent. It's possible to interpret this puzzle-piece that way, but placed alongside the Rev. Wright piece, the cluelessness interpretation loses much of its initial plausibility.

    At this late date, about the only independent variable that's left to us is President Obama's future behavior in office. That remains to be seen.
  3. Bill Huffman

    Bill Huffman Well-Known Member

    Hi Bill (the smart one :)), a most delightful post and I thank you for that. I especially agree with your final assertion that "At this late date, about the only independent variable that's left to us is President Obama's future behavior in office. That remains to be seen." Well said!

    I would like to address your assertion copied at the top of this post. I assure you that I am very comfortable with the subject as well as the Rev. Wright issue. I do not consider this my victory. I really consider this a victory for the country for both economic reasons and foreign affairs reasons but we really need to wait and see as you say. The reason I started this thread has multiple components. I'm intrigued in general by negative campaigning and interested in why it seems to work sometimes and not other times. Also, of interest to me is better understanding the longer term damage it does to unity by the unhappiness post-election to people that believe what I consider to most often be falsehoods.

    So, let's take this past election for example. My view is that Obama ran a relatively positive campaign. It's been mentioned that Palin was smeared during the campaign but my view is that was primarily done by others not associated with the Obama campaign. On the other hand, my view is that McCain's campaign was primarily negative. There seemed to be some support for this view in the polls. The bottom line is that I really would be interested in what your opinion on this was and whether or not your opinion was modified by the Bill Ayers interview and if it was, in what way was it changed?
  4. Gin Ichimaru

    Gin Ichimaru New Member

    You and me both.
  5. Bruce

    Bruce Moderator Staff Member

    I'm not a Republican (I've been "unenrolled" for 20+ years), but it doesn't change my mind one bit. CNN has been in the tank for the Democratic Party since day one; I used to call it the "Clinton News Network" during Bill Lewinsky's time in office.
  6. Bill Huffman

    Bill Huffman Well-Known Member

    Sorry that I called you a Republican. Of course no insult was intended. :) Okay if we can't believe CNN, how about prosecutor William C. Ibershof, the lead federal prosecutor of the Weather Underground case, who wrote to the New York Times on October 9, 2008:

    I am amazed and outraged that Senator Barack Obama is being linked to William Ayers’s terrorist activities 40 years ago when Mr. Obama was, as he has noted, just a child. Although I dearly wanted to obtain convictions against all the Weathermen, including Bill Ayers, I am very pleased to learn that he has become a responsible citizen.
  7. Bruce

    Bruce Moderator Staff Member

    Bill, you and I seem to disagree on the consequences of prior bad acts. In my opinion, if you contribute even the least bit towards Murder, then you should be charged as the principal; a Murder charge for yourself.

    Charles Manson was convicted and sentenced to death under that very same theory. Unfortunately, the USSC temporarily outlawed the death penalty in 1972, which allowed Manson and his cronies to escape the death sentence. Even though Charles Manson was never convicted of killing anyone, he is still behind bars.

    Why is Bill Ayers a free man after confessing to terrorism?
  8. BillDayson

    BillDayson New Member

    For heaven's sake, let it rest. It's over. You've already won. It's time to stop the attacks and to do something constructive. There's no reason to continue trashing McCain's campaign.

    Obama's association with two former leaders of the terrorist Weather Underground is real enough. One could argue that Obama was simply naive, a political innocent, and didn't know who and what these people were. But taken alongside the long and close relationship with the ranting Rev. Wright, a pattern starts to emerge. Naivete becomes much less plausible.

    I think that these concerns are very real and very troubling. They speak directly to the question of who and what this cryptic man is. But things have already moved far beyond the point of misgivings. All that we can do now is watch how this Presidency unfolds and see where our new prophets ultimately take us.

    I don't have any say in national and international affairs, but my own intellectual and moral integrity remain most determinedly my own.
  9. Bill Huffman

    Bill Huffman Well-Known Member

    Bruce, I have a strong dislike for all murderers. I find it difficult to believe but it appears that you're saying I sympathize with murderers because I don't think that everyone Bill Ayers has been associated with should be branded evil/bad/ignorant/foolish/terrorist/terrorist pal/etc.. You're saying that Bill Ayers is a murderer if for no other reason than he assisted someone else in murder. That is also my understanding of the law. My response to that is to simply repeat for about the sixth time. I do not condone Bill Ayers's actions in the distant past during the Vietnam war. I myself protested against the Vietnam war but was against even harming property to protest the war let alone harming people. If it was within my magical power to somehow put all murderers into jail that haven't yet been brought to justice then I'd do that. I just don't think that everyone Bill Ayers has been associated with over the past thirty-five years (probably many thousands) should be branded evil/bad/ignorant/foolish/terrorist/terrorist pal/security risk etc. Or perhaps what the argument is that we should only brand people that way when we disagree with their politics? :rolleyes:
  10. Abner

    Abner Well-Known Member

    You hit the crux of the matter quite eloquently. Why does the right wing not have a problem with the Republicans that put Bill Ayers in power? Why do they not have a problem with all of the Republicans who still to this day continue to do business with Bill Ayers? They never want to answer that question. Why? They are all about deflection Bill Huffman. Don't address the economy, don't addess poverty, don't address lay offs, don't address crime due to unemployment, don't address the health care problem because we will lose. For if we discuss the issues, it is over.

    Take care Bill Huffman, (I use your last name to distinguish btween you and bill Dayson) :0


    BTW - I heard Obama wants to take your guns!!!! YEEEEEEEHAAAAAAA!!!!!!!
  11. Bill Huffman

    Bill Huffman Well-Known Member

    This is true. I have still not forgotten though, that years ago all my personal decisions/conclusions/beliefs/arguments regarding spiritual and religious matters I have abdicated to you. :D
  12. Bill Huffman

    Bill Huffman Well-Known Member

    Personally I'd like to see all guns made illegal except hunting rifles, guns for law officers, and guns for military personnel. That is a very unrealistic position, I know. My understanding is that Obama has said that he won't take away people's guns.
  13. Abner

    Abner Well-Known Member

    He didn't say that. I was just joking in a slightly sarcastic manner. "They're going to take your guns away" is just another right wing ploy to cause distraction. You usually hear this nonsense filtered down from Right wing radio shows.They said Clinton was going to do the same thing. Did he? No. Deflection. I didn't work this time though.

    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 16, 2008
  14. -kevin-

    -kevin- Resident Redneck


    I would agree except for the numbers presented in this article and the location of the store, an area that distinctly supported Obama.

    I have to agree that uncertainty rather than specifics are a lot to cause for the increase. My present to myself this Christmas will probably be the S&W 500 just in case specialty ammo or large caliber weapons get on the endangered list. I don't agree with Bill H., but there are some issues that we should address with regard to weapons available to the general public.
  15. Bill Huffman

    Bill Huffman Well-Known Member

    Hardly anyone does agree with that position, that's why I said that it's an unrealistic position. :)
  16. Gin Ichimaru

    Gin Ichimaru New Member

    Of course Obama will not. Its just election year rhetoric to scare the NRA crowd.

    I am reading the Audacity of Hope right now and if you really hear what Obama has to say you would be surprised how much is is a centrist. In some respects he actually sounds rather conservative.
  17. Bruce

    Bruce Moderator Staff Member

    Except, apparently, Bill Ayers.

    It's a point of law; if you actively assist someone in committing a murder, then you're guilty of murder yourself. As I mentioned, Charles Manson was never proven in court of actually killing anyone, yet he was tried & convicted of first-degree murder because of his involvement in the Tate/LaBianca murders.

    I fully support your right to protest the Vietnam War, or anything else which might land on your radar screen. However, there is a HUGE difference between peacefully protesting a war, compared to planting bombs in the Pentagon and murdering police officers.

    As we all would, I hope.

    Bill Ayers is an unrepentant terrorist who (in my opinion) killed people, and who was, without a doubt, a member of a group that murdered police officers.

    He should be behind bars, IMO, yet he now has the ear of the President-Elect. :rolleyes:
  18. Bill Huffman

    Bill Huffman Well-Known Member

    An interesting statement, it could be irrational, no, probably more likely just combative. :) What have I said that indicates to you that I like Bill Ayers?

    I agree that based on the very little that I know about Bill Ayers that he should probably have been sent to prison. Although I did also admit that at least some of my understanding of him was untrue and gained after being bombarded by the false and misleading political rhetoric perpetuated for political gain. As for the assertion that he now has the ear of the President-elect, this is an unfounded conclusion, in my view. A conclusion without reasonable support, something that you want to believe so you do despite the lack of facts and deductive reasoning. In fact, the convincing evidence seems to indicate to me that it's not true.
  19. Bruce

    Bruce Moderator Staff Member

    So, why are we having this debate? ;)
  20. Bill Huffman

    Bill Huffman Well-Known Member

    Okay, since you're being more conciliatory, I guess you force me to try to be more combative. :D In that regard I've read the following on Bill Ayers to see if we can continue the debate.

    After reading the above, my conclusion is that if the full truth were known then I assume that Bill Ayers should probably have been sent to prison like I previously supposed. Perhaps more debatable though, the following political rhetoric that I've heard is probably false. I've concluded that saying that Bill Ayers is an "admitted unrepentent terrorist" is false. This is a change in my view since reading the above Wikipedia articles. I'm also convinced that Bill Ayers is probably not a terrorist today nor has he been committing felonies probably after about 1980.

    I also didn't see anything that indicated to me that my conclusions regarding the Ayers - Obama relationship needed to be reevaluated.

Share This Page