[Vision2020] [Bulk] Re: Bill Ayers & Barack Obama
Paul Rumelhart
godshatter at yahoo.com
Sat Sep 27 08:16:40 PDT 2008
Is there any particular reason why you are hiding your identity? Just
curious.
Paul
No Weatherman wrote:
> Dr. Campbell,
>
> I don't buy your statement that you didn't read the whole post. You
> obviously read looking for a "gotcha" and you found one — I didn't
> quote the exact words of Dylan correctly. Thank you for pointing that
> out. Perhaps we can call it the fallacy of majoring on the minors, or
> harping on the irrelevant, because my misstatement did not affect the
> content of the post. But that's all right, if it makes you feel
> better, because you didn't misquote me — you merely fabricated
> statements and imputed them to me. The logical error you're committing
> is seeing words that don't exist. I rely upon your expertise to find
> the name for this fallacy.
>
> For example, I never used the word McCain and I never said Obama is
> "bad" or that you shouldn't "vote" for him, etc., just as I never
> suggested, implied, or concluded that "it is OK to circumvent the
> democratic process and cheat in getting a president elected as long as
> your side wins." I never tried to justify Liddy's actions; in fact, I
> wrote just the opposite. But these are all words and ideas that you
> imputed to me. And just in case you're tempted to hurl a few more
> personal insults at me, saying you could not understand the meaning of
> my post, please note that Keely followed my point as did Tom and the
> few folks who contacted me offlist. Therefore, I will try it one more
> time.
>
> In my first post I applied your standard of disassociation to Barack
> Hussein Obama and his longtime friend Bill Ayers. I segued to get the
> subject back on point, which seems to be where you lost me. I tried to
> confront you with facts that no liberal wants to address. These are
> facts that no one in the msm has covered, probably for the same reason
> no liberal wants to address them.
>
> 1. My first point was that Obama has a long-standing personal and
> professional relationship with Bill Ayers.
>
> 2. My second point was that msm refuses to cover this fact and other
> disturbing facts about Obama.
>
> For example, it's a simple historical fact that Bill Ayers is a
> notorious domestic terrorist who intended to overthrow the US
> government by violent force and it's a simple fact that Bill Ayers
> launched Barrack Hussein Obama's political career from his living
> room. It's a fact that Obama has written two memoirs and neither one
> of them mentions his first and primary executive experience at CAC,
> which raises honest questions about his role at CAC but apparently
> doesn't register with you or any other liberal on this list. It's a
> fact that a prominent member of the Democratic Party is challenging
> Obama's legal standing to run for POTUS because of his citizenships in
> other countries, but some people are satisfied with a jpg image file
> on the worldwide web. Maybe they're still stuck on the bridge to
> nowhere.
>
> Let me give you a different kind of example. Let's say that you and I
> both agree with candidate X across the board on every position except
> for one minor point — he's a member in good standing of the KKK and he
> proudly dons his robe in public. You can cry "guilt by association"
> all you want, but I'm not going to vote for that man because this is
> where you're wrong. As Kurtz said, it's not guilt by association; it's
> guilt by participation. HE VOLUNTARILY PARTICIPATES IN A RACIST
> ORGANIZATION.
>
> This is the sad reality of Barrack Hussein Obama that no one on the
> left wants to acknowledge — especially the msm and not a few folks on
> this list. Obama was a member in good standing of a virulent
> anti-Semitic, anti-American church for 20 years, yet everyone gives
> him a pass when he claims he never heard any of the toxic vitriol
> spewing from Rev. Wright.
>
> Obama served side by side on CAC's board of directors with its
> founder, Bill Ayers, who just happens to be a domestic terrorist, yet
> everyone gives him a pass when he claims, "he's just a guy who lives
> in my neighborhood."
>
> Obama blew millions of dollars on school reform when he served on
> CAC's board of directors, yet everyone gives him a pass, which is
> especially disturbing given the number of people on this list who are
> education oriented. If Obama's opponent had thrown millions down a rat
> hole in a failed school-reform program, this list would go sideways
> with criticism. But no one says anything, as though it never happened.
>
> The list of Obama's failures is staggering and the list of questions
> surrounding his background is equally staggering, yet few people on
> this list appear to care and none of the msm care.
>
> Tell me Dr. Campbell, how do you account for this apparent black hole
> in the political universe?
>
> I ask this question remembering the words of Dylan:
>
> "We live in a political world
> The one we can see and feel
> But there's no one to check
> It's all a stacked deck
> We all know for sure that it's real." ("Political World")
>
>
> On 9/27/08, joekc at roadrunner.com <joekc at roadrunner.com> wrote:
>
>> Dr. No,
>>
>> A while back I had an exchange with another nameless, radical conservative who claimed to be
>> a former student of mine. It occurs to me that you, too, might be a former student and if you
>> are I urge you to contact me offlist so we can see if we can try to get your money back. Apparently
>> you have not learned a damn thing.
>>
>> As far as I could tell from your rambling, psychotic previous post, your point was that (a) you
>> thought that I was suggesting that McCain distance himself from Liddy, or that somehow McCain
>> was bad, or that you shouldn't vote for McCain because of the Liddy connection, and that your
>> response to my post was that Obama distance himself from Ayers, or that Obama is bad, or (more
>> likely) that you shouldn't vote for Obama because of his "connection" to Ayers and other "radical"
>> stuff. That, my friend, is the fallacy of tu quoque.
>>
>> But I was careful to say I wasn't sure. After all, it was a rambling, psychotic post and I have no
>> real clue what the point was. It might be that you were merely committing the fallacy of guilt by
>> association. Maybe it was a mere bad argument or some kind of new wave bad argument that
>> folks on the cutting edge of the kind of rhetoric you favor invent, a fallacy that is so new that it
>> doesn't yet have a name. I'm not sure because I didn't really read the whole post. If you want me
>> to read your whole post, I'm sorry but you're going to have to use your real name.
>>
>> Just to make my own views on this issue clear, I've cut and pasted my summary below.
>>
>>
>> 1. Ayers is bad and Liddy is bad. (I'm not suggesting that Ayers is good.)
>> 2. Liddy is worse than Ayers (one blew up buildings; the other was part of a team that succeeded
>> in winning a presidential election, in part, by cheating).
>> 3. Neither is an issue in the recent election, for guilt by association is a fallacy.
>> 4. If Ayers is an issue (and Republicans have made it an issue), then Liddy is a bigger issue.
>>
>>
>> One last thing. You tried to justify Liddy's action by saying that he was at war. But if he was at
>> war, then who was he fighting? Folks like the Weatherman. And if he was fighting a war with
>> them, it shouldn't be too surprising that they blew things up. Isn't that what you do in a war, blow
>> things up. The problem with this justification of Liddy's action is that it is the same justification
>> that the Weatherman would give. Your bad reasoning is justifying their bad actions. So stop.
>>
>> And, just for the record, the line from the Dylan song is "You don't need a weatherman to know
>> which way the wind blows," not the one you quoted below.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Joe Campbell
>>
>> ---- No Weatherman <no.weatherman at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Dr. Campbell,
>>>
>> >
>> > Au contraire! my point is not "it is OK to circumvent the democratic
>> > process and cheat in getting a president elected as long as your side
>> > wins," and I am rather disappointed with you for your failure to
>> > realize my point, which I repeated, replicated, and reasserted ad
>> > nauseam. But since you missed it, I shall say it again. Barack Hussein
>> > Obama has an absolute moral obligation to divorce himself completely
>> > from Bill Ayers and his ilk, if for no other reason than to reassure
>> > the American people that he and the self-admitted domestic terrorist
>> > do not share the same ideological agenda.
>> >
>> > That was the point of my post.
>> >
>> > I am not calling you a hypocrite and the thought never crossed my
>> > mind. I am not suspicious of your reasoning either. I know you are a
>> > trained logician. I have the utmost respect for you and appreciate
>> > your contribution to our community. I applied the standard you
>> > espoused to Barack Obama's longstanding relationship with domestic
>> > terrorist Bill Ayers. Therefore, please allow me to enlarge upon my
>> > point.
>> >
>> > Not only has Barack Hussein Obama not distanced himself from domestic
>> > terrorist Bill Ayers, he worked closely with him seeking to reform the
>> > Chicago school system. Consequently he cannot distance himself from
>> > Ayers without rewriting history, or else ignoring it as he did in his
>> > two memoirs.
>> >
>> > And the msm has been complicit in helping Obama ignore his past by
>> > refusing to vet him. We have seen the msm agonize over every minute
>> > detail of Sarah Palin's life, to the point that I fully expect an
>> > interview with her kindergarten teacher so that America may learn that
>> > she spilled paste in the classroom. But we don't know boo about Barack
>> > Hussein Obama's so-called "missing years":
>> >
>> > http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/09/obamas_missing_years.html
>> >
>> > He jumped from the Daley Machine to the Daily Kos overnight without
>> > the fourth branch of our government asking any of the hard questions
>> > regarding his relationship with Ayers or how he skyrocketed through
>> > the Chicago system. And the very few people that have asked the hard
>> > questions were met with Chicago-style intimidation tactics:
>> >
>> > http://media.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZmRhYmE3NzFlMTljNTdmZGQ3MjhkYTVjNzdmMjVhMzE=
>> >
>> > File that one under "Free Speech."
>> >
>>
>>
>>> Obama's background is so vague that one US citizen has sought a
>>>
>> > declaratory judgement against him because he has not established his
>> > qualification as a US citizen to run for president:
>> >
>>
>>
>>> http://obamacrimes.com/
>>>
>> >
>> > This guy's probably just another right-wing nut job, Democratic Party
>> > bona fides notwithstanding. He's a former Deputy Attorney General of
>> > Pennsylvania and former Chair of the Democratic Party in Montgomery
>> > County, Pennsylvania.
>> >
>> > I'm sure there's nothing to it, just as I'm sure Obama never heard any
>> > of Rev. Wright's disgusting rants.
>> >
>> >
>> > On 9/24/08, joekc at roadrunner.com <joekc at roadrunner.com> wrote:
>> > > So your point, Mr. No, if I understand it correctly, is: it is OK to circumvent the democratic
>> > > process and cheat in getting a president elected as long as your side wins. Is that it?
>> > >
>> > > I might be wrong but my guess is that the fallacy in this post -- apart from the obvious appeal to fear -- is the tu quoque fallacy. Here is a description from the Internet Encyclopedia of Philosophy:
>> > >
>> > > The fallacy of tu quoque is committed if we conclude that someone's argument not to perform
>> > > some act must be faulty because the arguer himself or herself has performed it. Similarly, when
>> > > we point out that the arguer doesn't practice what he preaches, we may be therefore suppose that
>> > > there must be an error in the preaching, but we are reasoning fallaciously and creating a tu
>> > > quoque. This is a kind of ad hominem fallacy.
>> > > ...
>> > > Discovering that a speaker is a hypocrite is a reason to be suspicious of the speaker's reasoning, but it is not a sufficient reason to discount it.
>> > >
>> > > Let me know if anyone thinks otherwise.
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > --
>> > > Joe Campbell
>> > >
>> > >
>> > > ---- No Weatherman <no.weatherman at gmail.com> wrote:
>> > > > I hate to be a nattering nabob of negativity, but to be fair, if you
>> > > > read Liddy's biography, as I have, and if you listen to him on the
>> > > > radio, as I do, then you'd know that Liddy justifies his illegal
>> > > > activities by arguing that America was fighting a two-front war at the
>> > > > time — one in Nam and the other on the streets of the US.
>> > > >
>> > > > You don't have to agree with his argument, but it has its merits. For
>> > > > example, the Weather Underground (known as the Weathermen at that
>> > > > time) had declared war on America, ostensibly because of the Vietnam
>> > > > War, and they served notice to the media that they intended to
>> > > > detonate bombs at key strategic targets to make their point. Obviously
>> > > > this does not justify Liddy's illegal activities, but it substantiates
>> > > > his point. America was fighting two wars though not everyone
>> > > > recognized it. (On a side note, I wonder how the Weathermen justified
>> > > > committing illegal activities to prosecute a war against the citizens
>> > > > of the US in order to terminate another war that they deemed illegal.
>> > > > Somehow this strikes me as problematic.)
>> > > >
>> > > > Regardless, I agree with Dr. Campbell's point. Barack Hussein Obama
>> > > > has an absolute moral obligation to divorce himself completely from
>> > > > Bill Ayers and his ilk, if for no other reason than to reassure the
>> > > > American people that he and the self-admitted domestic terrorist do
>> > > > not share the same ideological agenda.
>> > > >
>> > > > For example, Mr. Obama threw Rev. Wright under the bus when he
>> > > > realized that Main Street USA would have none of the "God damn
>> > > > America" stuff, but it took a few weeks of public teeth-pulling for
>> > > > him to finally drop the hammer on the GD preacher. And I'm sure it was
>> > > > sincere, because I for one genuinely believe that Mr. Obama attended
>> > > > that church for 20 years, calling Wright a "father-like figure" all
>> > > > the while, and never once heard him utter any of his well-documented
>> > > > profanities. That's comparable to someone attending Christ Church for
>> > > > the last 20 years and denying that they ever heard Wilson advocate on
>> > > > behalf of the Lost Cause. Or Southern slavery. Or something like that.
>> > > > As I said, it's entirely believable. But that Mr. Obama has thus far
>> > > > refused to banish Bill Ayers to a Wright-like fate should trouble
>> > > > everyone.
>> > > >
>> > > > Yes, Dr. Campbell makes an excellent point when he writes, "Here is
>> > > > another analogy. Should Barry Bonds be elected to the Baseball Hall of
>> > > > Fame? After all, he has more homeruns than anyone in baseball history.
>> > > > Surely he would have hit enough homeruns to gain membership in the
>> > > > Hall even if he didn't cheat. Does that matter? Were you Commissioner
>> > > > of Baseball, would it be appropriate for you to associate with one of
>> > > > the guys who sold him steroids? Or should you, would you, distance
>> > > > yourself from him?"
>> > > >
>> > > > So what reason does presidential candidate Barack Obama give for not
>> > > > distancing himself from Bill Ayers? If you examine the Obama website,
>> > > > you'll see a lot of whitewashing of Ayers' history but no
>> > > > explanations. Moreover, you won't see any account for those missing
>> > > > years when Obama served on the CAC board with Ayers. And as Stanley
>> > > > Kurtz observed, "Despite having authored two autobiographies, Barack
>> > > > Obama has never written about his most important executive experience.
>> > > > >From 1995 to 1999, he led an education foundation called the Chicago
>> > > > Annenberg Challenge (CAC), and remained on the board until 2001. The
>> > > > group poured more than $100 million into the hands of community
>> > > > organizers and radical education activists." (WSJ)
>> > > >
>> > > > http://online.wsj.com/article/SB122212856075765367.html
>> > > >
>> > > > In fact, CAC is Mr. Obama's primary executive experience, which
>> > > > probably explains why he cannot divorce himself from Ayers — he needs
>> > > > him as a reference on his resume. But I wonder, is it acceptable that
>> > > > Obama did not distance himself from Ayers? Was it appropriate for him
>> > > > to obtain this experience by serving on the board of a so-called
>> > > > educational foundation with its founder who happens to be a
>> > > > braggadocios bomb-thrower?
>> > > >
>> > > > In asking these questions, I'm not implying that Obama wants to be
>> > > > known as Obomba; I'm simply saying that something's amiss. Obama did
>> > > > not separate himself from the founder of the Weathermen and he still
>> > > > has not done so.
>> > > >
>> > > > And this makes me wonder why Bill Ayers targeted public education for
>> > > > reform. After all, this is the street radical who called upon his
>> > > > generation to "kill their parents," and if you peruse his blog
>> > > >
>> > > > http://billayers.wordpress.com/
>> > > >
>> > > > you'll see that time has done little to dull his edge (don't let the
>> > > > Communist star bother you, I'm sure it's purely decorative). What
>> > > > could this man possibly want to impart to youth and why did Obama
>> > > > serve with him on his board 13 years ago? Do they share the same
>> > > > worldview?
>> > > >
>> > > > These are all fair questions but the question I want Mr. Obama to
>> > > > answer is the one posed by Dr. Campbell: "Should you, would you,
>> > > > distance yourself from him?"
>> > > >
>> > > > But since Mr. Obama has not answered this question, and since the
>> > > > Weathermen named themselves after Dylan's trademark line in the song
>> > > > "Subterranean Homesick Blues," allow me to leave you with it: "You
>> > > > don't have to be a weatherman to know which way the wind is blowin'."
>> > > >
>> > > > You can sing it with me or, if you prefer, you can sing along with the
>> > > > Weather Underground on their recently released songbook, "Sing a
>> > > > Battle Song: The Revolutionary Poetry, Statements, and Communiqués of
>> > > > the Weather Underground 1970–1974." Who knows — if Barack Obama has
>> > > > his way, the public school near you may be teaching these words to
>> > > > your children.
>> > > >
>> > > > http://www.amazon.com/Sing%20Battle%20Song%20Revolutionary%20Underground/dp/1583227261/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1221582294&sr=8%201
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > >
>> > > > On 9/24/08, joekc at roadrunner.com <joekc at roadrunner.com> wrote:
>> > > > > Roger,
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Watergate is significant not for the event itself but because it revealed a host of other illegal
>> > > > > activities performed by the Committee to Re-Elect the President (CREEP). I won't list these since
>> > > > > Andreas already mentioned many of those activities. Or you could just google "Watergate" and
>> > > > > find out the list for yourself. Again, it was not just Watergate. Liddy was part of a team that
>> > > > > performed numerous illegal activities to steal a presidential election.
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Suppose that you were running for office and you found out that a group of Democrats rigged the
>> > > > > primary so that you would win (thinking you had the worse chance of winning in the main
>> > > > > election), stole and released private files indicating that your campaign manager had psychiatric
>> > > > > problems (I'm trying to find the closest analogy to a VP in your case), performed illegal wire taps,
>> > > > > and broke into your campaign headquarters. Later you are crushed in the election, loosing by a
>> > > > > landslide. Are you really going to tell me that you would shrug it off and say, "Oh, well, it doesn't
>> > > > > matter since the election wasn't even close!"
>> > > > >
>> > > > > The fact is that we'll never know how close the election would have been were it not for the
>> > > > > actions of CREEP (including Liddy and others).
>> > > > >
>> > > > > Here is another analogy. Should Barry Bonds be elected to the Baseball Hall of Fame? After all, he
>> > > > > has more homeruns than anyone in baseball history. Surely he would have hit enough homeruns to
>> > > > > gain membership in the Hall even if he didn't cheat. Does that matter? Were you Commissioner of
>> > > > > Baseball, would it be appropriate for you to associate with one of the guys who sold him steroids?
>> > > > > Or should you, would you, distance yourself from him?
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > > --
>> > > > > Joe Campbell
>> > > > >
>> > > > > ---- lfalen <lfalen at turbonet.com> wrote:
>> > > > > > Joe
>> > > > > > I dont condone the watergate group, but it did not change the election. Do you also condemn Linden Johnson and the Chicago Democratic machine who have stolen elections?
>> > > > > > Roger
>> > > > > > -----Original message-----
>> > > > > > From: joekc at roadrunner.com
>> > > > > > Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2008 07:25:01 -0700
>> > > > > > To: lfalen lfalen at turbonet.com
>> > > > > > Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Bill Ayers & Barack Obama
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > > Roger,
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > How can the destruction of property be worse, less democratic, than directly subverting an election?
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > --
>> > > > > > > Joe Campbell
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > ---- lfalen <lfalen at turbonet.com> wrote:
>> > > > > > > > Elections have been stolen from the beginning of this county. Linden Johnson stole the election in his first run for congress (missing ballot boxes) and the chicago machine (dead people voting). None of this is right and the people responsible should have been prosecuted. The destruction of property (with it's implicit danger of killing people) to provoke a change is also a subversion of the democratic system and is much worse. Both should be roundly condemned.
>> > > > > > > > Roger
>> > > > > > > > -----Original message-----
>> > > > > > > > From: Donovan Arnold donovanjarnold2005 at yahoo.com
>> > > > > > > > Date: Sat, 20 Sep 2008 12:16:48 -0700
>> > > > > > > > To: joekc at roadrunner.com, "g. crabtree" jampot at roadrunner.com
>> > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Bill Ayers & Barack Obama
>> > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > Gary,
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > You are factually incorrect here.
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > "2. Ayers is worse than Liddy in that he recklessly endangered lives and
>> > > > > > > > > property while Liddy orchestrated a failed break in. McGovern was never a
>> > > > > > > > > viable candidate and what occurred at the Watergate hotel did not alter the
>> > > > > > > > > outcome of the election in '72. Both men were attempting to "circumvent
>> > > > > > > > > the democratic process" but only one was willing to risk the lives of those
>> > > > > > > > > who had nothing to do with his goals."
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > Nixon was not after McGovern, he was after Muskie. Muskie was the leading candidate for the Democratic Nomination in 1972. McGovern was a dark horse who did well in caucuses. Muskie was a serious threat to Nixon. Nixon had established at Dirty Tricks Campaign against Muskie.
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > Subverting justice and attempting to rig a national election is a very serious crime.
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > Best Regards,
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > Donovan
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > --- On Sat, 9/20/08, g. crabtree <jampot at roadrunner.com> wrote:
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > From: g. crabtree <jampot at roadrunner.com>
>> > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Bill Ayers & Barack Obama
>> > > > > > > > > To: joekc at roadrunner.com
>> > > > > > > > > Cc: "vision2020" <vision2020 at moscow.com>
>> > > > > > > > > Date: Saturday, September 20, 2008, 7:20 AM
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > I disagree with your summary somewhat. I would modify it as follows:
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > 1. What Ayers did was bad and what Liddy did was bad.
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > 2. Ayers is worse than Liddy in that he recklessly endangered lives and
>> > > > > > > > > property while Liddy orchestrated a failed break in. McGovern was never a
>> > > > > > > > > viable candidate and what occurred at the Watergate hotel did not alter the
>> > > > > > > > > outcome of the election in '72. Both men were attempting to
>> > > > > > > > > "circumvent
>> > > > > > > > > the democratic process" but only one was willing to risk the lives of
>> > > > > > > > > those
>> > > > > > > > > who had nothing to do with his goals.
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > 3. Neither is a major issue in the upcoming election but, you are judged by
>> > > > > > > > > the company you keep. Ayers is an unrepentant communist terrorist.
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > 4. If Liddy is an issue (and, as you pointed out, he's not) Ayers still is.
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > He, along with Barry's other friends and mentors Frank Marshall Davis, Saul
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > Alinsky, Jeremiah Wright, etc. give us a major insight into what we can
>> > > > > > > > > expect from the anointed one and many, myself included, do not like what is
>> > > > > > > > > revealed.
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > g
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
>> > > > > > > > > From: <joekc at roadrunner.com>
>> > > > > > > > > To: "g. crabtree" <jampot at roadrunner.com>
>> > > > > > > > > Cc: "vision2020" <vision2020 at moscow.com>
>> > > > > > > > > Sent: Friday, September 19, 2008 7:32 PM
>> > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Bill Ayers & Barack Obama
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > Gary (if I may),
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > I'm sorry for suggesting that you don't know anything about American
>> > > > > > > > > history. It was a sarcastic
>> > > > > > > > > comment, a failed attempt at humor: "If you think that Nixon resigned
>> > > > > > > > > because of a botched
>> > > > > > > > > burglary, then ..."
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > Nonetheless, Liddy was not a "foot soldier." He was a chief
>> > > > > > > > > operative. Maybe
>> > > > > > > > > not a general (Nixon)
>> > > > > > > > > or a lieutenant (Dean) but not a private, more like a sergeant, like William
>> > > > > > > > > Cally. Certainly others
>> > > > > > > > > were perhaps more responsible, but weren't Cally and Liddy also responsible
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > for their actions?
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > Lastly, I'm not trying to suggest that McCain should "disassociate
>> > > > > > > > > himself
>> > > > > > > > > from the man." I believe
>> > > > > > > > > in redemption. I can wrap my head around the idea that Liddy is reformed.
>> > > > > > > > > I'm not asking McCain
>> > > > > > > > > to distance himself from Liddy (though were I running, I'd want to make it
>> > > > > > > > > clear that cheating is
>> > > > > > > > > not the American way).
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > You've forgotten about the initial thread. The point is that
>> > > > > > > > > Republican's
>> > > > > > > > > have been suggesting
>> > > > > > > > > that the Obama-Ayers connection is an issue. If you google "Obama Ayers
>> > > > > > > > > controversy" you get:
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obama–Ayers_controversy
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > But if you google "McCain Liddy controversy" there is no similar
>> > > > > > > > > wikipedia
>> > > > > > > > > listing. Or any listing
>> > > > > > > > > that deals with this "controversy" since it is not a controversy.
>> > > > > > > > > That was
>> > > > > > > > > the initial point of the
>> > > > > > > > > post, namely. that if the former is a controversy, then so should be the
>> > > > > > > > > latter.
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > I'm happy to say that McCain-and-Liddy is fine (though I find it odd that
>> > > > > > > > > someone who is running
>> > > > > > > > > for the presidency of the US doesn't distance himself from someone who has
>> > > > > > > > > tried to circumvent
>> > > > > > > > > the democratic process). But then what is all this hay about
>> > > > > > > > > Obama-and-Ayers?
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > To summarize:
>> > > > > > > > > 1. Ayers is bad and Liddy is bad. (I'm not suggesting that Ayers is good.)
>> > > > > > > > > 2. Liddy is worse than Ayers (one blew up buildings; the other was part of a
>> > > > > > > > > team that
>> > > > > > > > > succeeded in winning a presidential election, in part, by cheating).
>> > > > > > > > > 3. Neither is an issue in the recent election, for guilt by association is a
>> > > > > > > > > fallacy.
>> > > > > > > > > 4. If Ayers is an issue (and Republicans have made it an issue), then Liddy
>> > > > > > > > > is a bigger issue.
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > All the best, Joe
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > ---- "g. crabtree" <jampot at roadrunner.com> wrote:
>> > > > > > > > > > I know a bit about American history and Watergate in particular. Are you
>> > > > > > > > > > trying to tell me that Watergate was all about G. Gordon Liddy? Liddy was
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > a
>> > > > > > > > > > minor player in the Watergate scandal, a foot soldier who ended up bearing
>> > > > > > > > > > the brunt of the punishment for people above him. John Dean, A Watergate
>> > > > > > > > > > principal who has been held up on this forum as a man whose opinion is
>> > > > > > > > > > worthy of respectful consideration, had far more to do with Watergate and
>> > > > > > > > > > it's subsequent cover up then Liddy ever did. Liddy readily admitted
>> > > > > > > > > that
>> > > > > > > > > > he did the crime, he did the time, he paid his debt to society and has
>> > > > > > > > > > gone
>> > > > > > > > > > on to lead a decent life. That McCain should have to move heaven and earth
>> > > > > > > > > > to disassociate himself from the man seems unreasonable.
>> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > g
>> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > ----- Original Message -----
>> > > > > > > > > > From: <joekc at roadrunner.com>
>> > > > > > > > > > To: "g. crabtree" <jampot at roadrunner.com>
>> > > > > > > > > > Cc: "vision2020" <vision2020 at moscow.com>
>> > > > > > > > > > Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2008 6:38 PM
>> > > > > > > > > > Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Bill Ayers & Barack Obama
>> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > > You are twisting the argument. No one is sticking up for Ayers. The
>> > > > > > > > > > > point
>> > > > > > > > > > > is that if Ayers matters
>> > > > > > > > > > > to Obama's reputation, Liddy should matter to McCain's.
>> > > > > > > > > Another point is
>> > > > > > > > > > > that, relatively speaking,
>> > > > > > > > > > > Ayers is not worse than Liddy and Liddy is not better than Ayers. I
>> > > > > > > > > > > think
>> > > > > > > > > > > Liddy is far worse.
>> > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > > Watergate revealed a much deeper threat to American democracy. The
>> > > > > > > > > > > simple
>> > > > > > > > > > > fact is that Nixon
>> > > > > > > > > > > cheated in a broad number of ways. Cheated in winning the
>> > > > > > > > > presidential
>> > > > > > > > > > > election. Look up "Watergate," do a bit of research, and
>> > > > > > > > > learn something
>> > > > > > > > > > > about American history. Are you trying to
>> > > > > > > > > > > tell me that that Nixon resigned the presidency merely because of an
>> > > > > > > > > > > unsuccessful burglary?
>> > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > > What does democracy stand for if not for fair elections for the
>> > > > > > > > > > > presidency
>> > > > > > > > > > > of the US, where the
>> > > > > > > > > > > people may be certain that the choice is the product of their will
>> > > > > > > > > and
>> > > > > > > > > > > not
>> > > > > > > > > > > the will of a select few?
>> > > > > > > > > > > Do you think that Barry Bonds deserves the home run king crown if it
>> > > > > > > > > > > turns
>> > > > > > > > > > > out that he took
>> > > > > > > > > > > steroids? No. He cheated. At the very least, Nixon cheated in his
>> > > > > > > > > second
>> > > > > > > > > > > presidential bid, cheated
>> > > > > > > > > > > in an election for the president of the US. He won unfairly and Liddy
>> > > > > > > > > > > helped.
>> > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > > And Ayers did not get off scot free. The charges were dropped. Why?
>> > > > > > > > > > > Prosecutorial misconduct.
>> > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > > --
>> > > > > > > > > > > Joe Campbell
>> > > > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > > ---- "g. crabtree" <jampot at roadrunner.com> wrote:
>> > > > > > > > > > >> I guess since the argument being put forward is that Ayers should
>> > > > > > > > > be
>> > > > > > > > > > >> given a
>> > > > > > > > > > >> bye because he didn't really cause any harm, the same slack
>> > > > > > > > > needs to be
>> > > > > > > > > > >> granted to Mr. Liddy. After all, the Watergate break in was
>> > > > > > > > > > >> unsuccessful
>> > > > > > > > > > >> and
>> > > > > > > > > > >> the burglars (a fairly incompetent bunch) were all arrested. So,
>> > > > > > > > > since
>> > > > > > > > > > >> no
>> > > > > > > > > > >> presidential campaign was hijacked and no vote was taken out of
>> > > > > > > > > the
>> > > > > > > > > > >> hands
>> > > > > > > > > > >> of
>> > > > > > > > > > >> the people it seems to me that you are holding G.Gordon to a much
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > > > >> higher
>> > > > > > > > > > >> standard. At the very least Ayers committed an act of gross
>> > > > > > > > > vandalism
>> > > > > > > > > > >> and
>> > > > > > > > > > >> reckless endangerment and got off Scot free. Liddy was complicit
>> > > > > > > > > in a
>> > > > > > > > > > >> failed
>> > > > > > > > > > >> break in and did five and a half years. He did the crime and he
>> > > > > > > > > did the
>> > > > > > > > > > >> time. Throwing in some silly disclaimer whenever his name comes
>> > > > > > > > > up
>> > > > > > > > > > >> seems
>> > > > > > > > > > >> as
>> > > > > > > > > > >> daft and unnecessary as saying "setting off bombs designed
>> > > > > > > > > to maximize
>> > > > > > > > > > >> injury and death in public places is a very, very bad thing.
>> > > > > > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > > > > > >> g
>> > > > > > > > > > >> ----- Original Message -----
>> > > > > > > > > > >> From: <joekc at roadrunner.com>
>> > > > > > > > > > >> To: "vision2020" <vision2020 at moscow.com>
>> > > > > > > > > > >> Sent: Thursday, September 18, 2008 7:20 AM
>> > > > > > > > > > >> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Bill Ayers & Barack Obama
>> > > > > > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > > > > > >>
>> > > > > > > > > > >> > What would be worse: a terrorist from another land blowing
>> > > > > > > > > up some
>> > > > > > > > > > >> > buildings or a terrorist from
>> > > > > > > > > > >> > another land hijacking a presidential campaign and ensuring
>> > > > > > > > > that one
>> > > > > > > > > > >> > candidate wins over
>> > > > > > > > > > >> > another? I think that hijacking a presidential campaign is
>> > > > > > > > > about the
>> > > > > > > > > > >> > worst
>> > > > > > > > > > >> > thing that anyone can
>> > > > > > > > > > >> > do in a democracy. I'm a bit shocked that not everyone
>> > > > > > > > > sees it this
>> > > > > > > > > > >> > way.
>> > > > > > > > > > >> > Like Donovan I'm no fan
>> > > > > > > > > > >> > of Ayers but to post anything on this topic without
>> > > > > > > > > condemning Liddy
>> > > > > > > > > > >> > seems
>> > > > > > > > > > >> > to be an insult to our
>> > > > > > > > > > >> > form of government. Why not at least throw in a "Oh, by
>> > > > > > > > > the way
>> > > > > > > > > > >> > taking
>> > > > > > > > > > >> > the
>> > > > > > > > > > >> > vote for president out
>> > > > > > > > > > >> > of the people and putting it into the hands of a few is a
>> > > > > > > > > very, very
>> > > > > > > > > > >> > bad
>> > > > > > > > > > >> > thing."
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >
>> > > > > > > > > > >> > --
>> > > > > > > > > > >> > Joe Campbell
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >
>> > > > > > > > > > >> > ---- "g. crabtree" <jampot at roadrunner.com>
>> > > > > > > > > wrote:
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> Read what I wrote. I did not claim that he killed
>> > > > > > > > > anyone. I said
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> that
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> the
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> act of setting off explosives wrapped in nails in public
>> > > > > > > > > places is
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> akin
>> > > >; > > > > > > >> >> to attempted murder. If I light your apartment building
>> > > > > > > > > on fire and,
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> by
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> the grace of God, no one is injured or killed am I
>> > > > > > > > > mearly guilty of
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> failure to obtain a permit for an open burn?
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >>
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> g
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> ----- Original Message -----
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> From: Donovan Arnold
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> To: Andreas Schou ; vision2020 ; g. crabtree
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2008 11:46 PM
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Bill Ayers & Barack
>> > > > > > > > > Obama
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >>
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >>
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> Gary,
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >>
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> I don't condone the actions of Ayers. But he
>> > > > > > > > > never killed
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> anyone.
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> To say he did is an incorrect statement. If you can
>> > > > > > > > > demonstrate to
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> me
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> (an
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> online article etc.) he killed someone, I will accept
>> > > > > > > > > your statement
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> as
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> fact. Otherwise, I say your judgment and understanding
>> > > > > > > > > on this
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> matter
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> is
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> deeply in question.
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >>
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> Best Regards,
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >>
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> Donovan
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >>
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> --- On Wed, 9/17/08, g. crabtree
>> > > > > > > > > <jampot at roadrunner.com>
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> wrote:
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >>
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> From: g. crabtree
>> > > > > > > > > <jampot at roadrunner.com>
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Bill Ayers &
>> > > > > > > > > Barack Obama
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> To: donovanjarnold2005 at yahoo.com,
>> > > > > > > > > "Andreas Schou"
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> <ophite at gmail.com>, "vision2020"
>> > > > > > > > > <vision2020 at moscow.com>
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> Date: Wednesday, September 17, 2008, 5:30 AM
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >>
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >>
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> "Are you insinuating that Bill Ayers
>> > > > > > > > > tried to kill
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> people?"
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >>
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> No, I am not insinuating I am saying it flat
>> > > > > > > > > out. Placing
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> anti
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> personnel bombs in public places is attempted murder.
>> > > > > > > > > When the
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> vermin
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> in
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> Baghdad or Sader City or Fallujah set of IED's they
>> > > > > > > > > don't know the
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> names
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> of those they are attempting to murder and maim. Is it
>> > > > > > > > > your
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> contention
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> that they are not trying to kill people?
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >>
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> g
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> ----- Original Message -----
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> From: Donovan Arnold
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> To: Andreas Schou ; vision2020 ; g. crabtree
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2008 1:42 AM
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Bill Ayers &
>> > > > > > > > > Barack Obama
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >>
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >>
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >>
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> "No small accomplishment. Oh
>> > > > > > > > > yeah, he has never
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> attempted to slaughter soldiers and police via the
>> > > > > > > > > cowardly practice
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> of
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> hiding and detonating explosives wrapped in nails."
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >>
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> Are you insinuating that Bill Ayers
>> > > > > > > > > tried to kill
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> people? I am no fan of Ayers. But I think you are off
>> > > > > > > > > base saying he
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> killed, or even attempted to kill people. If you think
>> > > > > > > > > this, please
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> provide us with the names of people Ayers attempted to
>> > > > > > > > > kill, or who
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> he
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> killed.
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >>
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> The people that McCain worked for
>> > > > > > > > > between 1979 and
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> 1992
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> harmed more people than Ayers.
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >>
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> Best Regards,
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >>
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> Donovan
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >>
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> --- On Tue, 9/16/08, g. crabtree
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> <jampot at roadrunner.com> wrote:
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >>
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> From: g. crabtree
>> > > > > > > > > <jampot at roadrunner.com>
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Bill Ayers
>> > > > > > > > > & Barack
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> Obama
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> To: "Andreas Schou"
>> > > > > > > > > <ophite at gmail.com>,
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> "vision2020"
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> <vision2020 at moscow.com>
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> Date: Tuesday, September 16, 2008,
>> > > > > > > > > 7:24 PM
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >>
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >>
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> So what's your problem with the G-Man? The guy did
>> > > > > > > > > his time in
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> anything
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> but
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> country club conditions until your hero, James Earl
>> > > > > > > > > Carter, commuted
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> his
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> sentence. He never ratted out his associates and
>> > > > > > > > > he's managed to
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> support
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> himself and his family as an ex-con. No small
>> > > > > > > > > accomplishment. Oh
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> yeah,
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> he
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> has never attempted to slaughter soldiers and police via
>> > > > > > > > > the
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> cowardly
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> practice of hiding and detonating explosives wrapped in
>> > > > > > > > > nails. All
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> things
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> considered, I know that I would much rather associate
>> > > > > > > > > with a man who
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> served
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> his time and was released from prison than an
>> > > > > > > > > unrepentant attempted
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> murderer
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> whose only regret is that he couldn't cause more
>> > > > > > > > > carnage and mayhem.
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> Of
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> course that's just me.
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >>
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> g
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> ----- Original Message -----
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> From: "Andreas Schou" <ophite at gmail.com>
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> To: "vision2020" <vision2020 at moscow.com>
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2008 6:32 PM
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> Subject: [Vision2020] Bill Ayers & Barack Obama
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >>
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >>
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> > They both knew each other. They were both appointed
>> > > > > > > > > to co-chair an
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> > education panel by Mayor Daley, and the prior state
>> > > > > > > > > Senator from
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> > Obama's seat introduced him at Bill Ayers'
>> > > > > > > > > house. No large,
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> ongoing
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> > connection. But here's the thing:
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> >
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> > Why isn't John McCain's friendship with G.
>> > > > > > > > > Gordon Liddy a campaign
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> > issue? Is there any defensible reason for treating
>> > > > > > > > > Liddy like a
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> > rehabilitated member of the community, rather than
>> > > > > > > > > as a threat to
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> > the
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> > Republic? If so, why?
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> >
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> > -- ACS
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> >
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> >
>> > > > > > > > > =======================================================
>> > > > > > > > > > >> >> > 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
>> > > > > > > > > =======================================================
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > > =======================================================
>> > > > > 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