"Don Klipstein" wrote in message
...
In ,
wrote:
On Apr 18, 2:08 pm, (Don Klipstein) wrote:
In ,

wrote:
On Apr 16, 6:47 pm, "Robert Green" wrote:

He turned them over and
people still were not satisfied. Efforts then continued and even
more were released under the Freedom of Information Act.
That process continued for many years, with govt officials
consuming countless hours and continuing to find and
release documents. In other words, the press did their
job and the issue was fully vetted. In the case of Obama
he's been give a free ride, so naturally people have reason
to be more suspicious.

"Free ride"? Not by the "Birthers" he got one! They're still dogging
him at 2 years, 3 months after his inauguration!



He got a free ride by the media and the mainstream press, which
is where most people get their information. Few
people paid any attention to the birthers, or those of us that were
concerned what kind of man would sit in Rev Wright's church
for 20 years, or launch his political career in a friends house
who is a former Weather Underground bomber. Did you see any
stories on CBS, NBC, ABC, NY Times, CNN, MSNBC, etc looking
into that? I saw plenty of coverage on the issue of Bush's
service. Anyone remember Dan Rather?

I heard plenty about the birth and the Rev. Wright issues on ABC,
and in the Philadelphia Inquirer and the Philadelphia Daily News.

Me too. It was done to death and the only thing that came out of it was an
attempt to create guilt by association. I know because I kept reposting
links to Saddam and Rummy shaking hands in a DoD publicity photo at the time
and adding that if knowing someone is a crime, then Rummy and Saddam must
have had something conspiratorial going. The hubbub died out after a while
because you can't push guilt by association very far. People just weren't
buying it and it ended up having little effect on the election.

--
Bobby G.

On Apr 25, 7:45*pm, "Robert Green" wrote:
"Don Klipstein" wrote in message

...





In ,
wrote:
On Apr 18, 2:08 pm, (Don Klipstein) wrote:
In ,

wrote:
On Apr 16, 6:47 pm, "Robert Green" wrote:

He turned them over and
people still were not satisfied. Efforts then continued and even
more were released under the Freedom of Information Act.
That process continued for many years, with govt officials
consuming countless hours and continuing to find and
release documents. In other words, the press did their
job and the issue was fully vetted. In the case of Obama
he's been give a free ride, so naturally people have reason
to be more suspicious.

"Free ride"? Not by the "Birthers" he got one! They're still dogging
him at 2 years, 3 months after his inauguration!

He got a free ride by the media and the mainstream press, which
is where most people get their information. * *Few
people paid any attention to the birthers, or those of us that were
concerned what kind of man would sit in Rev Wright's church
for 20 years, or launch his political career in a friends house
who is a former Weather Underground bomber. *Did you see any
stories on CBS, NBC, ABC, NY Times, CNN, MSNBC, etc looking
into that? *I saw plenty of coverage on the issue of Bush's
service. *Anyone remember Dan Rather?

* I heard plenty about the birth and the Rev. Wright issues on ABC,
and in the Philadelphia Inquirer and the Philadelphia Daily News.

Me too. *It was done to death

BS. I watch both CBS and ABC national news and far from covering it
to
death, there was hardly any mention of it.


and the only thing that came out of it was an
attempt to create guilt by association.

Oh, please. Who you associate with does in part define who you are.
It says everything about your values and who you are. In Obama's case
he saw fit to spend 20 years in a church run by a hate spewing racist
who uttered classic lines like "God damn America". Every decent
American would have left that church long ago. Instead, the weasel
Obama sat there for 20 years, then threw Wright under the bus during
the election.

Same thing with his association with the terrorist Bill Ayers.




*I know because I kept reposting
links to Saddam and Rummy shaking hands in a DoD publicity photo at the time
and adding that if knowing someone is a crime, then Rummy and Saddam must
have had something conspiratorial going. *The hubbub died out after a while
because you can't push guilt by association very far. *People just weren't
buying it and it ended up having little effect on the election.



A very lame attempt at avoiding the issue. Rumsfeld didn't sit
listening to
Saddam lectures about right vs wrong for 20 years, did he? Did he
launch
his political career in Saddam's house and call him a good friend?
Following
your logic, it's perfectly fine to associate with anyone, regardless
of who
they are or what they stand for. I say most of us don't believe that
for a minute.



--
Bobby G.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -