[Vision2020] An Obama Dilemma

lfalen lfalen at turbonet.com
Mon Oct 6 13:23:43 PDT 2008


I think that Ayres, Dohrn and Wright,s Church have all done some good community work. Their unrepentant attitude on past behavior is still a problem.
Roger
-----Original message-----
From: Tom Hansen idahotom at hotmail.com
Date: Mon, 06 Oct 2008 12:04:38 -0700
To: lfalen lfalen at turbonet.com,  Andreas Schou ophite at gmail.com,  "g.crabtree" jampot at roadrunner.com
Subject: RE: [Vision2020] An Obama Dilemma

> Roger -
>  
> William Ayers (whose wife of 45 years, Bernadine Dohrn, was also active in the Weathermen Underground) is a faculty member at the University of Illinois at Chicago.
> http://education.uic.edu/directory/faculty_info.cfm?netid=bayers
>  
> I guess that would suggest that the University of Illinois at Chicago "pals around with terrorists", too.  You would have to ask Jeff Harkins for sure, though.
>  
> Michelle "Fist Bump" Obama is on staff at the Great Cities Institute, University of Illinois at Chicago.
> http://www.uic.edu/cuppa/gci/
>  
> The Obamas and Ayers have been actively involved in charities concerning education and opportunities for inner-city youth.  
>  
> This just wreaks of Al-Qaeda, doesn't it?
>  
> Perhaps you should address your concerns to the administration of the University of Illinois.
>  
> In the meantime, though, perhaps the Barack Obama should do what any other self-respecting candidate does and hire a witch doctor.
>  
> Tom Hansen
> Moscow, Idaho
>  
> 
> 
> 
> > Date: Mon, 6 Oct 2008 11:41:16 -0700> From: lfalen at turbonet.com> To: ophite at gmail.com; jampot at roadrunner.com> CC: vision2020 at moscow.com> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] An Obama Dilemma> > As briefly mentioned in this article: Obama announced his candidacy for the US Senate from Ayers home. This would suggest a some what closer association that you would like us t believe. Even though Wrght's Church has done some good. His rhetoric is still disgusting and 20 years association wth some one who makes those kinds of statements is questionable.> Roger> -----Original message-----> From: "Andreas Schou" ophite at gmail.com> Date: Sat, 04 Oct 2008 20:19:58 -0700> To: "g. crabtree" jampot at roadrunner.com> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] An Obama Dilemma> > > Gary --> > > > Incidentally, this pretty much covers the relationship between Ayers> > and Obama, from top to bottom:> > > > http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/04/us/politics/04ayers.html?_r=2&hp&oref=slogin&oref=slogin> > > > As far as I can t!
 ell, it's
a recapitulation of the incredibly hostile> > Stanley Kurtz article, but without scare quotes and the spurious> > accusation that a Nixon ambassador was funding radical education> > reform. It proves that two people belonging to the same political> > party, who lived within three blocks of each other, who served on a> > board of directors together, crossed paths several times.> > > > -- ACS> > > > On Sat, Oct 4, 2008 at 7:07 PM, g. crabtree <jampot at roadrunner.com> wrote:> > > I'm glad you're managing to keep your sense of humor. I was becoming a bit> > > concerned. From my side of the monitor it looked as though you were having> > > an extremely difficult time with consistency (same old, same old) and as a> > > result der weather dude was enjoying your lunch after all!> > >> > > nighty nite,> > > g> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > ----- Original Message -----> > > From: <joekc at roadrunner.com>> > > To: "g. crabtree" <jampot at roadrunner.com>> > > Cc: <vision2020 at moscow.com>> !
 > > Sent:
Saturday, October 04, 2008 3:36 PM> > > Subject: Re: [Vision2020] An Obama Dilemma> > > Wow, talk about getting emotional, Gary!> > >> > > Most of these are versions of the ad hominem fallacy, guilt by association> > > in particular, which> > > you noted was fallacious. And these are the BEST arguments that have been> > > presented!?!> > >> > > I'm not saying that Obama's "connection" with Ayers is good. I'm saying it> > > is irrelevant to whether> > > or not he should be president. And I said it was irrelevant when the issue> > > was first posted.> > >> > > And how could you, or No Weatherman, have the nerve to say that someone's> > > "association" with> > > a "nut ball pastor and mentor" is reason for condemnation? Let's get> > > serious. If it is, you are in> > > a heap of trouble! Since you are not, it is a bad argument. Again, guilt by> > > association.> > >> > > And how about this argument: "McCain was born in Iraq. If I'm wrong, prove> > > it." Is that worthy of> > >
consideration? Is your failure to prove me wrong relevant? No. The argument> > > is a complete joke.> > >> > > The only thing that isn't surprising is that you think that these are all> > > good arguments. Oh, dear!> > > That will keep me laughing for the rest of the day! Thanks!> > >> > > --> > > Joe Campbell> > >> > > ---- "g. crabtree" <jampot at roadrunner.com> wrote:> > >> >"You implied below that No Weatherman's posts we challenging and that is> > >> >why myself and others> > >> >do not respond to them, Gary. Name one good argument that he has given.> > >> >Just one."> > >>> > >> Talk about distorting posts, I said nothing about "good arguments." My> > >> exact quote was "that he has the unmitigated gall to bring up topics along> > >> with> > >> citations that you find uncomfortable and difficult to reconcile."> > >>> > >> That said lets look at some of the topics NW has presented:> > >>> > >> BHO's affiliation with Bill Ayers. Unquestionably a legitimate issue to> > >> e!
 xamine.>
> >>> > >> The One's twenty plus year even closer affiliation with his nut ball> > >> pastor> > >> and mentor, Jeremiah Wright and his crackpot hate whitey/hate America> > >> church.> > >>> > >> Next we have the dual citizenship topic. I would have thought this you and> > >> your pals could have handled immediately. Either your savior does not have> > >> dual citizenship or he does. If not, present your documentation and case> > >> closed, you win your "argument." If so, a definite subject for inquiry and> > >> comment.> > >>> > >> Which of these have you reconciled? Have you made a convincing case that> > >> Ayers isn't a terrorist? Have you squared Wright's rhetoric with a> > >> potential> > >> president of all the people in America, not just the one covered by his> > >> mentors questionable theology? Have you even answered the simple yes/no> > >> question of the dual citizenship?> > >>> > >> To turn the topics into a winnable arguments, which you seem to be so> > >> despe!
 rate to
do, tell me why it's good that our future president be> > >> closely> > >> associated with a bomb planting terrorist. Why it's a boon to a> > >> presidential> > >> resume to spend twenty years as a religious follower of an America hating> > >> racist. Any answer that starts with "Well, McCain...," which is all that> > >> I've heard up to now, is no answer at all, it's a different discussion.> > >>> > >> Have a good weekend,> > >> g> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >> ----- Original Message -----> > >> From: <joekc at roadrunner.com>> > >> To: "g. crabtree" <jampot at roadrunner.com>> > >> Cc: <vision2020 at moscow.com>> > >> Sent: Saturday, October 04, 2008 8:11 AM> > >> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] An Obama Dilemma> > >>> > >>> > >> It is fine with me if you want to distort my posts. I'm powerless to stop> > >> it. But would it be too> > >> much trouble to have some substantive contributions, to attempt to back up> > >> some of your claims?> > >>> > >> You implied below that No Weatherman's posts !
 we
challenging and that is> > >> why> > >> myself and others> > >> do not respond to them, Gary. Name one good argument that he has given.> > >> Just> > >> one.> > >>> > >> He strikes me as a narrow-minded bigot. The fact that you defend him is> > >> curious. So since you> > >> think he is fine and makes good points, list one argument that he made> > >> which> > >> is not fallacious.> > >> Just one. You cannot do it which is why you haven't done so yet.> > >>> > >> --> > >> Joe Campbell> > >>> > >> ---- "g. crabtree" <jampot at roadrunner.com> wrote:> > >> > I didn't say I felt unqualified to say anything about Mr. Witmer, I said> > >> > that I had no idea if he was NW.> > >> >> > >> > I don't believe that I have ever attempted to tell others what it is> > >> > that> > >> > you think. I'm not sure how I possibly could considering the emotional> > >> > nature of your posts.> > >> >> > >> > Lastly, I find your remark '...for someone who finds something to say> > >> > after> > >> > e!
 veryone
one of my posts..." curious. You do realize that since the last> > >> > couple of meltdowns & protracted pouts I only respond to the posts in> > >> > which> > >> > you address me specifically by name don't you?> > >> >> > >> > g> > >> > ----- Original Message -----> > >> > From: <joekc at roadrunner.com>> > >> > To: "g. crabtree" <jampot at roadrunner.com>> > >> > Cc: <vision2020 at moscow.com>> > >> > Sent: Friday, October 03, 2008 6:37 AM> > >> > Subject: Re: [Vision2020] An Obama Dilemma> > >> >> > >> >> > >> > See what I said! I knew you would help me to make my point! I find it> > >> > interesting that, since> > >> > you've never met Chris Witmer, you don't feel qualified to say anything> > >> > about him. Yet, even> > >> > though you've never met me, you do feel qualified so say something!> > >> >> > >> > Again, there are lots of people from churches who post on Vision 2020,> > >> > myself included. All I> > >> > really have a problem with is dishonesty, and hypocrisy, and unwa!
 rranted>
> >> > arrogance. But don't> > >> > let me stop you from telling everyone what I really think since you're> > >> > the> > >> > expert there!> > >> >> > >> > I'm amazed that for someone who finds something to say after everyone> > >> > one> > >> > of> > >> > my posts, you> > >> > never answer the serious questions or challenges. Just yesterday there> > >> > were> > >> > two.> > >> >> > >> > 1) What was wrong with my abortion analysis?> > >> >> > >> > 2) Name one valid argument for a worthwhile point that Dr. No has given?> > >> > Just one.> > >> >> > >> > --> > >> > Joe Campbell> > >> >> > >> > ---- "g. crabtree" <jampot at roadrunner.com> wrote:> > >> > > From what I've read in your previous posts I take it that you believe> > >> > > that> > >> > > No Weatherman is a nom de guerre that hides the identity of Chris> > >> > > Witmer.> > >> > > I> > >> > > suppose that this could be the case but, having never had the pleasure> > >> > > of> > >> > > meeting Mr. Witmer, I certainly c!
 ouldn't
say with any degree of> > >> > > confidence> > >> > > that it is or isn't and I'd love to see or hear the evidence that you> > >> > > might> > >> > > have to support your conviction. It could just as easily be someone> > >> > > else.> > >> > > For all I know it could be you setting up the ultimate straw man and> > >> > > for> > >> > > all> > >> > > you know it could be me padding the visions ranks. I seriously doubt> > >> > > you> > >> > > have anything other than a gut feeling and I'm afraid that is not> > >> > > something> > >> > > that is going to sway me very much. So, now that I've "made your> > >> > > point"> > >> > > what> > >> > > was it exactly? It reads as though you have a problem with an> > >> > > individual> > >> > > who> > >> > > may or may not be affiliated with a local church posting topics and> > >> > > expressing a point of view regarding the democrat candidate for> > >> > > president> > >> > > and I'm perplexed as to how this would wad up your panties or d!
 rive> >
>> > > you> > >> > > "fricken nuts." People from churches get to have and express opinions> > >> > > just> > >> > > the same as everyone else. Maybe I'm not as intelligent as you give me> > >> > > credit for since I really don't understand why it upsets you the way> > >> > > you> > >> > > claim that it does.> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > g> > >> > >> > >> > > ----- Original Message -----> > >> > > From: <joekc at roadrunner.com>> > >> > > To: "g. crabtree" <jampot at roadrunner.com>> > >> > > Cc: <vision2020 at moscow.com>> > >> > > Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2008 9:33 PM> > >> > > Subject: Re: [Vision2020] An Obama Dilemma> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > > I have supported J. Ford for personal reasons. But as has been pointed> > >> > > out.> > >> > > Other than that I'm> > >> > > not sure what you're talking about. But since you seem to have all of> > >> > > my> > >> > > posts saved and> > >> > > categorized -- or one of your friends does -- no doubt you'll bring> > >> > > one> > >> > !
 > up> >
>> > > if I'm mistaken!> > >> > >> > >> > > I am not reading Dr. No's posts for the simple reason that what little> > >> > > I> > >> > > did> > >> > > read contained, as I> > >> > > noted, obvious and numerous fallacies. There is not much of a> > >> > > challenge> > >> > > there and little interest.> > >> > >> > >> > > He does get my panties in a wad, I'll admit. But not because of his> > >> > > arguments, or even his insults.> > >> > > I still can't get over how a local church could so blatantly act like> > >> > > a> > >> > > political machine. That they> > >> > > can continue to do so while most people, intelligent though most may> > >> > > be,> > >> > > fail to notice what> > >> > > strikes me as being so dang obvious.> > >> > >> > >> > > Just to make my point, I'll ask you straight up, Gary. Are you really> > >> > > going> > >> > > to tell me that you don't> > >> > > know who No Weatherman is, and with what church he is affiliated? We> > >> > > may> > >> > > have our dif!
 ferences>
> >> > > but, previous name-calling aside, I certainly consider you to be> > >> > > intelligent. But my guess is, you'll say "No" and "No." And that just> > >> > > makes> > >> > > my point. I am stunned that they could pull the wool over> > >> > > even your eyes, a crafty, no-nonsense man of the people. Just thinking> > >> > > about> > >> > > it, let alone being> > >> > > reminded of it on a daily basis, drives me fricken nuts.> > >> > >> > >> > > And since I'm not reading Dr. No's posts and you consider him to be so> > >> > > challenging, could you just> > >> > > repeat for me what you take to be his best point, and the best> > >> > > argument> > >> > > for> > >> > > that point. Just one.> > >> > > If it is not an easily identifiable fallacy, I'll be shocked. But> > >> > > prove> > >> > > me> > >> > > wrong! Just one example.> > >> > >> > >> > > --> > >> > > Joe Campbell> > >> > >> > >> > > ---- "g. crabtree" <jampot at roadrunner.com> wrote:> > >> > > > What is not so much of!
 fensive
as hilarious is someone who chooses to> > >> > > > hop> > >> > > > up> > >> > > > onto their moral high horse concerning one anonymous contributor> > >> > > > while> > >> > > > having ignored or lauded so many others. Where was your massive> > >> > > > concern> > >> > > > when> > >> > > > we were regularly receiving missives from B. Herodotus, P.Place, T.> > >> > > > Scimitar, J. Flores, and last but far from the least (prolific)> > >> > > > J.Ford?> > >> > > > I> > >> > > > seem to recall several instances of your leaping to the defense of> > >> > > > at> > >> > > > least> > >> > > > one of these miscreants. Clearly the problem that you are having> > >> > > > with> > >> > > > Mr.> > >> > > > Weatherman is that he has the unmitigated gall to bring up topics> > >> > > > along> > >> > > > with> > >> > > > citations that you find uncomfortable and difficult to reconcile.> > >> > > > So,> > >> > > > rather> > >> > > > then respond to the matter at hand, you attempt to divert the!
 > > >> >
> > discussion> > >> > > > with phony outrage at the commentators anonymity and/or his> > >> > > > potential> > >> > > > affiliations. I guess if you can't answer the questions, attack and> > >> > > > vilify> > >> > > > the questioner. I personally prefer to evaluate the argument, taking> > >> > > > into> > >> > > > consideration the lack of a name or a face as just one more piece of> > >> > > > information. So far, the mysterious nature of the anti-weather dude> > >> > > > has> > >> > > > no> > >> > > > bearing on BHO's unsavory affiliations and his and his supporters> > >> > > > inability> > >> > > > to account for them.> > >> > > >> > >> > > > g> > >> > > > ----- Original Message -----> > >> > > > From: <joekc at roadrunner.com>> > >> > > > To: <vision2020 at moscow.com>> > >> > > > Sent: Thursday, October 02, 2008 12:33 PM> > >> > > > Subject: Re: [Vision2020] An Obama Dilemma> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > > > > I'm not reading this but I just wanted to point out that if Dou!
 g> > >> >
> > > Wilson> > >> > > > > thought that this was> > >> > > > > inappropriate, then the posts would stop in a heartbeat.> > >> > > > > Otherwise,> > >> > > > > I'm> > >> > > > > not sure what to say> > >> > > > > about No Wetherman's bad joke on the Courtney blog. {Just because> > >> > > > > you> > >> > > > > don't use your name, Dr.> > >> > > > > No, it does not mean that many of us do not know who you are.}> > >> > > > >> > >> > > > > So, I ask you Area Man and Roger Falen, Harkins and Crabtree: do> > >> > > > > you> > >> > > > > not> > >> > > > > find it offensive that> > >> > > > > someone might post such comments without revealing his name? If it> > >> > > > > turns> > >> > > > > out that this person> > >> > > > > was affiliated with a church, one that might be a political group> > >> > > > > instead> > >> > > > > of a religious one, would> > >> > > > > that offend you? Do you think that such groups should reap the> > >> > > > > benefits> > >> > > > > sanctioned by the f!
 irst> >
>> > > > > amendment? Warning: If you say that this is OK, then you are> > >> > > > > sanctioning> > >> > > > > a> > >> > > > > similar approach by> > >> > > > > a pro-Obama spokesman, perhaps on a national level. What do you> > >> > > > > think> > >> > > > > in> > >> > > > > this light?> > >> > > > >> > >> > > > > --> > >> > > > > Joe Campbell> > >> > > > >> > >> > > > > ---- No Weatherman <no.weatherman at gmail.com> wrote:> > >> > > > >> At the risk of offending those of you who have already taken> > >> > > > >> offense> > >> > > > >> by my cowardly, anonymous, and purely factual presence in this> > >> > > > >> one-sided conversation, please allow me to ask a terribly awkward> > >> > > > >> question that I hope will cut to the heart of this issue about> > >> > > > >> when> > >> > > > >> life begins.> > >> > > > >>> > >> > > > >> We all know that Barrack Hussein Obama is the illegitimate son> > >> > > > >> (one> > >> > > > >> of> > >> > > > >> many) of a Kenyan father who kno!
 cked up a
teenager from Kansas.> > >> > > > >>> > >> > > > >> Let's say that Roe v. Wade was in place back then and that> > >> > > > >> Obama's> > >> > > > >> mother attempted to terminate her pregnancy, via a saline> > >> > > > >> abortion,> > >> > > > >> but things went sadly awry — the baby, or as some on this list> > >> > > > >> prefer> > >> > > > >> to call it, the "potential human being," refused to die.> > >> > > > >>> > >> > > > >> What moral obligations, if any, do you believe should be on the> > >> > > > >> attending physicians:> > >> > > > >>> > >> > > > >> 1. Kill the baby.> > >> > > > >> 2. Abandon the baby (which is number 1 by another name).> > >> > > > >> 3. Save the baby.> > >> > > > >> 4. Other.> > >> > > > >>> > >> > > > >> As I said, this is a terribly awkward question but it helps put> > >> > > > >> flesh> > >> > > > >> and bones on this sensitive subject and it's not beyond the realm> > >> > > > >> of> > >> > > > >> possibility because it happens more often than
Americans want to> > >> > > > >> know:> > >> > > > >>> > >> > > > >> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=anieuWFWe8s&feature=related> > >> > > > >>> > >> > > > >> Barrack Hussein Obama said that this question was above his pay> > >> > > > >> grade,> > >> > > > >> but we all know he was just avoiding the uncomfortable truth.> > >> > > > >> That> > >> > > > >> "potential human" in the womb is a precious human life and Obama> > >> > > > >> should get on his knees every night and thank his maker that his> > >> > > > >> mother couldn't resort to Roe v. Wade to kill him.> > >> > > > >>> > >> > > > >> Part of the daily fudge.> > >> > > > >>> > >> > > > >> =======================================================> > >> > > > >> List services made available by First Step Internet,> > >> > > > >> serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.> > >> > > > >> http://www.fsr.net> > >> > > > >> mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com> > >> > > > >> ======================================================!
 => > >> >
> > >> > >> > > > > =======================================================> > >> > > > > List services made available by First Step Internet,> > >> > > > > serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.> > >> > > > > http://www.fsr.net> > >> > > > > mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com> > >> > > > > =======================================================> > >> > > >> > >> > > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> >> > >> >> > >> >> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >> > >> > > =======================================================> > > List services made available by First Step Internet,> > > serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.> > > http://www.fsr.net> > > mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com> > > =======================================================> > >> > > > =======================================================> > List services made available by First Step Internet, > > serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994. > > http://www.fsr.net > > mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com> >
=======================================================> > > > =======================================================> List services made available by First Step Internet, > serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994. > http://www.fsr.net > mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com> =======================================================
> 



More information about the Vision2020 mailing list