Wednesday, October 15, 2008

Where Did Obama Launch His Political Career?

During the debate, there was the following exchange:
"You launched your political campaign in Mr. Ayers' living room," McCain responded.
"That is absolutely not true," Obama retorted.

I've been following the whole Ayers thing, and especially where Obama launched his campaign, because it seems so silly to me to make an assertion you can't possibly know is true. McCain and his campaign constantly throw this "fact" out, but have never once tried to back it up. Do they have Obama's diary where it says "On this date, I launched my campaign at Ayers' house?" Do they have his calendar where it shows that day was the first day ever that Obama talked about a political career? Look, Obama has said he had a meet and greet coffee meeting at Ayers' house. If McCain would stick with that, I would have no problem with it. That is factual. But to exaggerate the story to score cheap political points, that's not straight talk.

By the way, I have tried to figure out when and how Obama launched his political career. This article from the Chicago Sun-Times seems to be the best I can do. They provide a sketchy timeline, but nonetheless, it doesn't appear that Obama's political career was launched in Ayers' front room.


Anonymous said...

Doesn't matter where he launched his career. Fact is he was in this mans living room. A man that 100% admits he was involved in bombing innocent people in the US and wishes he could have done more. No matter what you say that is a fact!

karenzipdrive said...

Why are the anonymous commenters always the stupidest ones?
Here's a clue for you: there is no statute of limitations on murder, so if Ayres admitted to bombing and presumably killing people, why is he now a tenured professor and a member of a community board that included Obama as well as several prominent Republicans?
And why are you too chicken to sign your name to your preposterous statement?

Don't bother bringing your ignorant grunts to my blog- I delete cowards who hide behind anonymity.

SBVOR said...

Let’s pretend the Chicago Sun-Times timeline and associated conclusions are correct. Why haven’t we heard it from Obama?

Why is Obama hiding so much of his past, including everything and anything about his college days (see the opening minutes of the first segment of this series).

In response to a Constitutionally pertinent legal challenge, why has Obama not even produced his birth certificate?

What about the FACT that Obama’s plan WILL for CERTAIN harm the economy?

What about Obama’s plan to gut national defense?

You want documentation on Obama and Ayers (as well as all the proof any rational person would need of Obama’s radical Socialist ideology)? Knock yourself out. But don’t cheat (yourself). Read every last link!

None of this concerns you?

Typical tool (and much, much worse)!

SBVOR said...


Ever heard of “double jeopardy”?

Educate yourself on the facts.

Ayers freely admits/boasts at the end of his own autobiography that he is “Guilty as hell, free as a bird”.

You should purchase a copy. It sounds like just your kind of reading.

What scares me is that ignorant/arrogant morons like you might actually vote.

Straight Talk on McCain said...

Welcome to democracy, something sbvor is perhaps not too keen on, for I can't find my comments on his blog. Maybe they'll appear, but who knows. To address just a couple of things, Obama has produced his birth certificate and it's posted on a website. Heck, the announcement from a Hawaii newspaper has even been posted. Look, you can disagree with Obama (I do, and it's why I'm not voting for him) but if you want to be taken seriosuly, rise above this. 100 economists don't know anything for certain. If economists did, we probably wouldn't be in the mess we are in. Though it is interesting that The Economist,a right wing magazine, ran a study where economists said Obama was better for the economy. I'd take it with a grain of salt, but you might find it interesting. As for Obama being a socialist, it's a great boogeyman to throw out, just like calling someone a Commie Faggot. It means you don't have to argue anymore. My friend used to call it the bullshit response. If at anytime during an arguement you can't defend yourself anymore, just say "That's bullshit.' Because really, how can anyone respond to "That's bullshit?" Plus, it's hard to throw the label at Obama when McCain and Bush argued for a bill that will effectively nationalize the US banking system if they do as they now suggest.

SBVOR said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
SBVOR said...

Crooked Talk on McCain,

1) IF you are not voting for Obama, my guess is you will be voting to the Left of Obama. Cynthia McKinney perhaps? I’m voting McCain/Palin. Who will you vote for?

2) As best I recall, the one comment you offered on my blog presented a slew of utterly unsubstantiated smears against McCain. I don’t tolerate that and I say so plainly in my profile information. If you want your comments published on my blog, at least ATTEMPT to substantiate them.

3) Offering a photocopy of a purported birth certificate absent a seal is NOT sufficient! The FACT is that Obama has been challenged in a court of law and has NOT produced the ORIGINAL birth certificate. WHY would Obama NOT want to settle this issue (assuming he COULD)?

Watch the video!

4) Economists did not get us into this mess, the overwhelming body of evidence PROVES that DEMOCRATS DID!

5) The Economist is NOT a “right wing” magazine. As I recall, the article you cited in a previous post was published on the Economist web site, but was written by the extremely biased Associated Press.

If there is even ONE economist who supports Obama’s economic plan, show me the NAME and the CREDENTIALS! ONLY McCain has done that!

6) Your moronic response on the Socialist charge only serves to prove that you have NOT examined the evidence .

Rather, you display the usual indoctrination which, in ignorant/arrogant knee jerk fashion, blindly assumes there are no Socialists among the Democrats. Even the extremely “Liberal” Time Magazine knows better!

Try again. This time, EXAMINE THE EVIDENCE! Pay special attention to this series and this series.

7) I supported Bush on many issues, voted for him twice and would do so again (as the lesser of available evils). I also freely acknowledge that Bush 43 proved to be the single most Socialist President since LBJ (who somehow managed to out Socialist the infamous FDR). This housing bailout is a travesty.

However, in the long run, the housing bailout will (hopefully) be peanuts compared to signing into law the single largest expansion of Entitlements since LBJ (Medicare Drug Entitlements). The “Big Three” Entitlements are killing us! Expanding Entitlements was the single BIGGEST mistake of the Bush Presidency (and history will prove it so).

That said, Bush was FAR LESS of a Socialist than either Gore or Kerry would have been. These days, I settle for the lesser of evils. Until the American voters better educate yourselves, that will remain our only option.

8) On Iraq, the American people were certainly lied to. But, Bush was NOT the liar!

9) Stop drinking the Kool-Aid! EDUCATE YOURSELF!


P.S.) Click here for a slightly broader survey of just how awful AP is.

Jeannine Aversa is, in my opinion, very close to being THE WORST excuse for a “journalist” EVER!

Although, Walter Duranty is hard to top. It is utterly inexcusable that the New York Times STILL honors this blatant Soviet propagandist!

Kay Dennison said...

Small minds. Narrow thoughts.