« O's for Obama | Main | A Rare Glimpse of Sanity in Our Legal System »

Please read the Politifact.com article on the subject.
http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/article/2008/oct/10/radical-ayers-allegation/

Did you ever think you'd live in a time when the president of France was a free market conservative, and the president of the USA was a radical socialist?

V the K...How nice to see your name. I was wondering if you choose to label the Democratic candidate a Socialist for being left of center, would you prefer that we call McCain a National Socialist or a Fascist for being on the right?

Anonymous. I prefer to call Obama something much much worse than a Socialist. He is an American Black Culturist. He is interested in the specific purpose of destroying America so that his Afrocentrist/kill-the slave-master cronies can grab the pieces. From chaos comes opportunity. The screams of many are bliss for the few. Watch some tapes of the Watts riots as they grab TV sets out of broken storefront windows. Now magnify it 100,000 times to include all of America. Watch what happens when it is the congress and courts doing the rioting and leading the pack!!

Socialist is as socialist does, to paraphrase Forrest Gump. Do tell, what is the difference between a socialist and a national socialist, eh? They're both at odds with capitalism, you know, both on the left. It's only the lefties that fancy they have controlled the debate over the last 60 years that put fascism to the right. Certainly not the fascists themselves... just look at the publications Benito Mussolini worked for!

I choose to label the rat candidate a socialist not just because he is left of center, but because his proposals, his philosophies both declared and hidden, and his voting record, are in accord with this label.

Will the day ever come when the leftists will come to understand that in theory National Socialism and Fascism are left wing movements that share the common goal of supremacy of the state over the individual just like Socialism and Communism?

Guys, so what do you call someone on the extreme right? jim johnson, what do you propose to do to stop Obama?

Barack Obama calls himself a "Progressive" which is a code-word for "radical socialist." Mussulini was also a "progressive."

What's ironic is that Bush has governed much more like a blue-dog Democrat than a conservative Republican, but he's still labeled an extreme conservative. Dick Cheney was regarded as a moderate Republican before he became vice president.

The left defines as right-wing extremists people who are Christians (or at least tolerate them), people who own guns, and people who believe government should be limited to powers enumerated in the Constitution. In short, our Founding Fathers were right-wing extremists.

V the K...I see that we agree somewhat on something. Good progress. I see two sets of Republicans. True conservatives, of which you appear to be an example, and neo-conservatives. We clearly saw the true conservatives during the debates on the bail-out.

My issues are with the neo-conservatives, like Bush and Cheney. They use fear, divisiveness, family values, Christianity, and true conservative values only as tools to fool people into giving them power and control.

I have heard from many progressives who believe gun ownership is a right of all and who own guns themselves.

Amendment 10 of the Constitution assigns powers not enumerated in the Constitution to the states and to the people. I see many of the things done by the Federal government, which are not specifically granted by the Constitution, as having been given to them by the people.

In the view of those in power at the time, I see the Founding Fathers as progressives, changing the current state of affairs.

On a separate note, can you help me understand why there is suddenly so much polarization and hate? When the "other side" move from "people with whom we do not see eye to eye" to "they are a danger to our way of life"?

Roald. All we can legally do is vote against him and anything else that even looks or sounds like a democrat. As to the other point, we don't have any real right wing choices. We have a choice of a really horrible liberal and a middle of the road barely not a liberal. If we really did have an extreme right wing choice, I'd call him a miracle. (Extreme right wing defined as support the Constitution, believe in God, and protect America from foreign enemies, internal enemies and swarms of illegal immigrants.)

We want nothing to do with ether the UN or any of the terrorists supporting nations and we dont want any NORTH AMERICAN SOVIET UNION

jim.. Thanks for getting back to me. I do appreciate that. I agree with you that going to the extreme on the left is bad, but am baffled that you believe that the extreme right is good.

Would you prefer to hold the line on progressive encroachments or reverse them? If you would like to reverse, how far?

Would it be OK for a state to assume the powers not granted to the US, including what you believe are progressive mistakes?

I read into your comments that a conservative atheist or agnostic cannot exist. Could there be a conservative Muslim or Hindu?

Thanks in advance.

"Would it be OK for a state to assume the powers not granted to the US,"

And just WHO grants the United States powers? Do you think there is some great authority that distributes powers to all the governments of the world?

KHarn... US Constitution...Amendment X

The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the states, are reserved to the states respectively, or to the people.

KHarn...Sorry I misread your comment. The people of the United States granted the United States powers when they accepted the US Constitution. Ammendment X limits those powers. My questions still stand.

MAYBE I'VE GOTTEN THIS ALL WRONG - JUST BEING AN AVERAGE MIDDLE CLASS AMERICAN.

THIS MAN WANTS OUR VOTE FOR U.S. PRESIDENT - HIS FATHER WAS
A KENYAN, AND A BLACK- WE SAW ALL THOSE PICTURES OF HIS NICE AFRICAN FAMILY.

HIS MOTHER IS KANSAN, ATHEIST, AND WHITE. SO - WHERE ARE ALL THOSE PICTURES OF HIS NICE WHITE MOTHER AND HIS NICE WHITE KANSAS GRANDPARENTS - THE ONES WHO RAISED HIM ALL THOSE EARLY YEARS?

LETS SEE - HIS FATHER DESERTED HIS MOTHER AND HIM WHEN HE
WAS VERY YOUNG AND MOVED BACK TO LIVE WITH HIS FAMILY IN KENYA (THAT'S THE ONES IN THE PICTURES).

HIS WHITE MOTHER THEN MARRIED AN INDONESIAN MUSLIM AND TOOK HIM TO THE CITY OF JAKARTA WHERE HE WAS FIRST SCHOOLED IN A MUSLIM SCHOOL .

HIS MOTHER THEN MOVED TO HAWAII AND HE WAS RAISED BY HIS WHITE MIDDLE CLASS - AMERICAN GRANDPARENTS THERE.

UMMM..NOW HERE'S THE BEGINNING OF THE HARD PART FOR ME
(HELP ME OUT HERE, IF YOU CAN):

SOMEHOW, SUDDENLY - HE WENT TO THE BEST HIGH DOLLAR PREP
SCHOOLS IN AMERICA , AND NEXT HE GOT INTO A TOP IVY LEAGUE COLLEGE , AND LATER, INTO HARVARD LAW SCHOOL - HOW? WHO SPONSORED HIM? WHO PAID FOR ALL THAT SCHOOLING?

(HAVE YOU LOOKED AT TUITION EXPENSES TO ATTEND UNDERGRADUATE YALE LATELY?

HOW ABOUT HARVARD LAW SCHOOL ? SOMEBODY PAID A LOT OF BUCKS FOR THIS KID'S IVY LEAGUE EDUCATION.......)

WHO? HE APPARENTLY DID NOT HAVE SCHOLARSHIPS THAT PAID IT
ALL FROM WHAT WE READ.

HE ALSO DID NOT HAVE TO BORROW FOR COLLEGE , ALSO FROM WHAT WE READ. SO???

THAT BRINGS US TO THE MORE CURRENT YEARS,

A U.S. SENATOR'S SALARY IS NOT THAT GREAT, BUT THIS YOUNG MAN AND HIS YOUNG WIFE JUST RECENTLY BOUGHT A $1.4 MILLION DOLLAR HOUSE THAT HE ACQUIRED THROUGH A 'DEAL' WITH A WEALTHY FUND RAISER, A FUND RAISER WHO APPARENTLY IS A CRIMINAL LAW BREAKER PER THE NEWS.

WHAT SORT OF 'DEAL'?
AND, RIGHT OUT OF HARVARD LAW, HE 'WORKED' AS A CIVIL RIGHTS ACTIVIST IN CHICAGO . WHAT KIND OF PAY IS THIS, WE CAN ASSUME IT IS LITTLE OR NOTHING PAY WISE! OR IS THERE OTHER KIND OF PAY INVOLVED??

HE THEN ENTERED POLITICS AT THE STATE LEVEL WHICH CERTAINLY IS A LOW PAYING JOB, AND THEN MOVED RIGHT TO THE NATIONAL LEVEL. DID HE 'FUND RAISE' TO GET THE FUNDS TO GET ELECTED? WHAT KIND OF PROMISES DID HE MAKE?

NOW, HE SCRAMBLES TODAY WITH A NICE SMILE BUT VERY MINIMAL EXPERIENCE IN ANYTHING - WHILE OTHER PEOPLE WRITE HIS RAH-RAH SPEECHES FOR HIM.

IN ALL HIS MINIMAL TIME IN THE STATE, AND NATIONAL LEGISLATURES - HE'S NEVER LAUNCHED ANY IMPORTANT LEGISLATION, NONE WHATSOEVER.

MOSTLY, OF LATE FOR SOME TWO YEARS, HE'S BEEN OUT RUNNING FOR PRESIDENT.

THEN COME THE ENDORSEMENTS FOR HIM FROM OTHER COUNTRIES, ONES THAT ARE NOT EXACTLY USA FRIENDS, LIKE THE IRAN PRES, FRENCH PRES, THE IRAQ MINISTER THAT WANTS USA OUT. HMMM WHAT DO THEY SEE IN HIM THAT THEY LIKE?

HE CLAIMS TO BE 'PROUD OF HIS AFRICAN HERITAGE' -- NICE BUT -- IT SEEMS THAT HIS ONLY CONNECTION WITH AFRICA WAS THAT HIS AFRICAN FATHER GOT A WHITE AMERICAN GIRL PREGNANT AND THEN DESERTED HER.

UMMM....WHERE IS THE OUTSPOKEN PRIDE IN HIS WHITE HERITAGE?
AFTER ALL - IT WAS WHITE GRANDPARENTS THAT RAISED HIM!

HE IS PRESENTLY A MEMBER, OR WAS UNTIL POLITICS NECESSITATED A CHANGE, FOR OVER 20 YEARS OF AN 'AFROCENTRIC' CHURCH IN CHICAGO
THAT SEEMINGLY HATES WHITES, HATES JEWS, AND BLAMES AMERICA FOR ALL THE WORLD'S FAULTS.

HE REPEATEDLY COVERED UP FOR THAT PASTOR AND THAT CHURCH SAYING THAT HE CAN SEPARATE THE RELIGION FROM THE POLITICS, WHEN HE HEARS A HATE-WHITEY SERMON.

HE CLAIMED THAT HE WAS SIMPLY UNABLE TO CONFRONT HIS PASTOR OF 20+ YEARS ABOUT THE PASTOR'S DEMONSTRATED UN-AMERICAN BIAS.

BUT -- HE WANTS US TO BELIEVE THAT HE CAN CONFRONT NORTH KOREA AND IRAN AND RUSSIA WHEN THE TIME ARISES TO TAKE AMERICA 'S SIDE.

YEAH - WITH HIS BACKGROUND AND EXPERIENCE, HE 'HOPES' THAT HE COULD BE A 'UNITER' AND BRING US ALL TOGETHER;

BUT - WE ARE LEFT TO THINK THAT THE REAL 'HOPE' IS, THAT HE REALLY HOPES THAT NO ONE WILL PUT ALL THESE PIECES TOGETHER, AT LEAST NOT UNTIL AFTER THE ELECTION.

YOU MIGHT SEND THIS TO EVERYONE YOU KNOW AND - GET OUT AND VOTE.

Roald. Sure a conservative can be a Moslem, Hindu, agnostic, or whatever. They usually aren't. They can be a vegetarian. They might even hate guns. But, they usually aren't and don't. But what they can't be is a liberal who wants to trample on the rights of others including the unborn, gun owners, and working people who want to earn a living and have equal opportunity. They can't demand rights that infringe on the rights of others. And they do understand that there is a Constitution and it actually has meaning and shouldn't be interpreted by people who are trying to satisfy some whim of social engineers at any given moment.