Look Who Wants America to Fail

[Little Stevie]

Originally Posted by The2Dogs

A President that is...disbarred, and allowed to remain the President,...

Disbarred link?

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

I just don't want to hear about that "evil" Mitch McConnell anymore. Obama's best friend wants America to fail.

Best friend link?

Put up or shut up!

[joe bloe]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Gawd, this is funny! You people are hilarious! Trying to deny that Obama and Ayers are friends, when everyone already knows that Ayers ghost wrote Obama's first book, at least. They served together on a number of projects, were guests in each other's homes. No one has denied that Obama announced his first political run for office in Ayers' home!

But you're right, they never met. Never even heard of each other. LOL! God, you live in a fun world!

Watching liberals deny provable facts is amazing. At some point, I think liberals cross over into the realm of the psychotic. Their political zealotry makes them crazy. Emotion clouds reason. Liberal's political views are grounded in emotion. For many liberals their politics is essentially a religion.

[Little Stevie]

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Geez, Doofe, if you and the others would quit posting such stupid stuff, I could leave peacefully. But as long as there are idiots to be educated, I will have to keep posting.

I'm doing quite well, actually. Thank you for asking.

COG, you have proven NOTHING but your own STUPIDITY since I've been on ECCIE!

[Little Stevie]

Originally Posted by joe bloe

Watching liberals deny provable facts is amazing. At some point, I think liberals cross over into the realm of the psychotic. Their political zealotry makes them crazy. Emotion clouds reason. Liberal's political views are grounded in emotion. For many liberals their politics is essentially a religion.

Au Contraire! Above is a perfect self-diagnosis of the cloud in which you operate.

Show me where I denied Ayers and Obama knew each other well. I said Ayers is not a "player". You STILL don't read well, do you?

[CuteOldGuy]

Originally Posted by Little Stevie

Au Contraire! Above is a perfect self-diagnosis of the cloud in which you operate.

"I know you are, but what am I." LOL! Brilliant!

Try to have an original thought occasionally. It will hurt at first, but you will get used to it.

[joe bloe]

Originally Posted by Little Stevie

Au Contraire! Above is a perfect self-diagnosis of the cloud in which you operate.

Show me where I denied Ayers and Obama knew each other well. I said Ayers is not a "player". You STILL don't read well, do you?

What you wrote was: "You've got proof that Obama knew Ayer's AND NOTHING MORE..." Obviously, there is enormous proof that Obama and Ayers didn't just know each other; they were clearly connected. Why not read the articles I provided links to. You might learn something. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but they're not entitled to their own facts.

Why not be a big boy and admit you're wrong. Attempting to defend an indefensible position just makes you look foolish, possibly even psychotic.

[JONBALLS]

Originally Posted by Little Stevie

IDIOT! There is no LINK to anything Google proved at that site!

thanks, cause i didnt bother reading it!!

[JONBALLS]

Originally Posted by Doove

Then i guess Rush Limbaugh wrote "Rush Limbaugh Is A Big Fat Idiot".

I wouldn't know but YOUR the one that quotes Rush and tries to pawn it off as your own!...Ill go grab THAT proof if anybody wants to read it!!
Rush is soo far into Dooves head he even recites his landlord word for word!!
those are some LINKS I CAN provide!!

[Munchmasterman]

Originally Posted by joe bloe

There is abundant proof that Obama and Ayers were connected. Obama held his first fundraiser in Ayer's home. Ayer's chose Obama to run the Chicago Annenberg Challenge. Obama and Ayers both served on the Wood's Foundation Board.

Ayer's wife, and fellow terrorist, Bernadine Dohrn worked at the same law firm as Michelle Obama (Sidley & Austin).

The connection between Obama and Ayers is undeniable. Even if you concede the point, you'll just say it doesn't matter. So he has a twenty year relationship with an unrepentant Marxist/terrorist, so what.

http://www.nationalreview.com/articl.../stanley-kurtz#

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/A...eredo1031.html

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybens...iser_for_obama

http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/...und_of_ch.html

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner...stin/ed-whelan

[quote=joe bloe;2487591]There is abundant proof that Obama and Ayers were connected. Obama held his first fundraiser in Ayer's home. Ayer's chose Obama to run the Chicago Annenberg Challenge. Obama and Ayers both served on the Wood's Foundation Board.

Ayer's wife, and fellow terrorist, Bernadine Dohrn worked at the same law firm as Michelle Obama (Sidley & Austin).

The connection between Obama and Ayers is undeniable. Even if you concede the point, you'll just say it doesn't matter. So he has a twenty year relationship with an unrepentant Marxist/terrorist, so what.

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/225348/chicago-annenberg-challenge-shutdown/stanley-kurtz#

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/Articles/chicannenbergchallengeredo1031 .html

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2011/11/30/confirmed_bill_ayers_hosted_a_ fundraiser_for_obama

http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/07/obama_and_the_woods_fund_of_ch .html

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/171459/michelle-obama-bernardine-dohrn-and-sidley-austin/ed-whelan[/quote]

I can say it doesn't matter for 3 quick reasons.

1. Because it doesn't matter.
2. Politfact says it doesn't matter.
3. Much of the information post is provably wrong.

The Annenburg Challenge was funded by a conservative republican. Ayers did help get it started but never was on the board. Neither he or Obama were involved in the day to day operation of the Challenge.
The politifact article directly addresses Kurtz's article and proves it to be wrong or misleading at point after point.


You'll just say it doesn't matter. You'll continue to believe what you want to. You'll continue to claim you are right.
We can spend a bunch of time proving your sources incorrect. But why should we? This earned a "Pants on Fire" for McCain's group. How can you say you have an open mind when this evidence clearly proves your position to be wrong?

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2008/oct/10/john-mccain/not-a-radical-group-and-ayers-didnt-run-it/

In March 1995, Obama was named chair of the six-member Chicago Annenberg Challenge board that distributed the grants. A New York Times review of archives of the Chicago Annenberg project found that the two attended six board meetings together.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2008/oct/06/sarah-palin/obama-and-ayers-round-ii/

Later that year, the Ayers’ hosted a coffee at which Illinois State Sen. Alice Palmer, who planned to run for Congress, introduced Obama to some of her long-time supporters as her chosen successor. According to the New York Times story, it was one of several neighborhood events held that year on Obama’s behalf, and it was not the first.

Originally Posted by CuteOldGuy

Geez, Doofe, if you and the others would quit posting such stupid stuff, I could leave peacefully. But as long as there are idiots to be educated, I will have to keep posting.

I'm doing quite well, actually. Thank you for asking.

Politifact refutes the majority of the statements and completly refutes the idea of these 2 men having any kind of close association. Politifact also states there has been no contact between the 2 since 2005.

So if you want to "feel like" your concepts of their close relationship are true, have at it.
But remember you are factually incorrect on the subject.

[Doove]

Originally Posted by JONBALLS

I wouldn't know but YOUR the one that quotes Rush and tries to pawn it off as your own!...Ill go grab THAT proof if anybody wants to read it!!
Rush is soo far into Dooves head he even recites his landlord word for word!!
those are some LINKS I CAN provide!!

Please do.

[acp5762]

Originally Posted by nevergaveitathought

the other day i posted just a few of the reasons i find it easy to decide which side to be on and how its inexplicable that anyone could vote for obama...

i wish some obama supporter would a post a list of reasons to support him... after "he props up unions and i want to keep raking it in and i dont give a shit about the country long as my benefits keep coming" i wonder what #2 on the list would be

If you support the idea of a one world government, socialism, ect. You vote for Obama. If you still believe in America and what this country truly stands for, eg. Peace, Liberty and Justice, then vote for a candidate who shares those fundamental American values.

[Doove]

Originally Posted by Munchmasterman

You'll just say it doesn't matter. You'll continue to believe what you want to. You'll continue to claim you are right.
We can spend a bunch of time proving your sources incorrect. But why should we? This earned a "Pants on Fire" for McCain's group. How can you say you have an open mind when this evidence clearly proves your position to be wrong?

As i said:

Originally Posted by Doove

Defending Obama's (non)relationship with Ayers to any idiot who would make an issue of Obama's (non)relationship with Ayers is relatively pointless.

[joe bloe]

[quote=Munchmasterman;2487809]

Originally Posted by joe bloe

There is abundant proof that Obama and Ayers were connected. Obama held his first fundraiser in Ayer's home. Ayer's chose Obama to run the Chicago Annenberg Challenge. Obama and Ayers both served on the Wood's Foundation Board.

Originally Posted by joe bloe

Ayer's wife, and fellow terrorist, Bernadine Dohrn worked at the same law firm as Michelle Obama (Sidley & Austin).

The connection between Obama and Ayers is undeniable. Even if you concede the point, you'll just say it doesn't matter. So he has a twenty year relationship with an unrepentant Marxist/terrorist, so what.

http://www.nationalreview.com/articles/225348/chicago-annenberg-challenge-shutdown/stanley-kurtz#

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/Articles/chicannenbergchallengeredo1031 .html

http://townhall.com/tipsheet/guybenson/2011/11/30/confirmed_bill_ayers_hosted_a_ fundraiser_for_obama

http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/07/obama_and_the_woods_fund_of_ch .html

http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/171459/michelle-obama-bernardine-dohrn-and-sidley-austin/ed-whelan[/quote]

I can say it doesn't matter for 3 quick reasons.

1. Because it doesn't matter.
2. Politfact says it doesn't matter.
3. Much of the information post is provably wrong.

The Annenburg Challenge was funded by a conservative republican. Ayers did help get it started but never was on the board. Neither he or Obama were involved in the day to day operation of the Challenge.
The politifact article directly addresses Kurtz's article and proves it to be wrong or misleading at point after point.


You'll just say it doesn't matter. You'll continue to believe what you want to. You'll continue to claim you are right.
We can spend a bunch of time proving your sources incorrect. But why should we? This earned a "Pants on Fire" for McCain's group. How can you say you have an open mind when this evidence clearly proves your position to be wrong?

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2008/oct/10/john-mccain/not-a-radical-group-and-ayers-didnt-run-it/

In March 1995, Obama was named chair of the six-member Chicago Annenberg Challenge board that distributed the grants. A New York Times review of archives of the Chicago Annenberg project found that the two attended six board meetings together.

http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2008/oct/06/sarah-palin/obama-and-ayers-round-ii/

Later that year, the Ayers’ hosted a coffee at which Illinois State Sen. Alice Palmer, who planned to run for Congress, introduced Obama to some of her long-time supporters as her chosen successor. According to the New York Times story, it was one of several neighborhood events held that year on Obama’s behalf, and it was not the first.



Politifact refutes the majority of the statements and completly refutes the idea of these 2 men having any kind of close association. Politifact also states there has been no contact between the 2 since 2005.

So if you want to "feel like" your concepts of their close relationship are true, have at it.
But remember you are factually incorrect on the subject.

Politifact, that you seem to think is a definitive source of truth, is a biased left wing site. Quoting Politifact proves nothing. Yes, the Annenberg Challenge was funded by a foundation started by a Republican, so what. Walter Annenberg was 85 when he approved the funding. I seriously doubt that he knew exactly how it was going to be used. Obama and the rest of the board members used the funding exclusively to promote radical left wing propaganda in the Chicago public schools. Part of the grant money was given to Acorn. Had Annenberg known exactly how the money was going to be used, I doubt he would have funded it.

http://politifactbias.blogspot.com/

http://archive.frontpagemag.com/read...px?ARTID=36198

[IIFFOFRDB]

I see the 3 stooges are back. Doochee, Munchee, and Stevagina. LOL

[Munchmasterman]

[quote=joe bloe;2487951]

Originally Posted by Munchmasterman

Politifact, that you seem to think is a definitive source of truth, is a biased left wing site. Quoting Politifact proves nothing. Yes, the Annenberg Challenge was funded by a foundation started by a Republican, so what. Walter Annenberg was 85 when he approved the funding. I seriously doubt that he knew exactly how it was going to be used. Obama and the rest of the board members used the funding exclusively to promote radical left wing propaganda in the Chicago public schools. Part of the grant money was given to Acorn. Had Annenberg known exactly how the money was going to be used, I doubt he would have funded it.

http://politifactbias.blogspot.com/

http://archive.frontpagemag.com/readArticle.aspx?ARTID=36198

You saying a source is a left-wing blah, blah, blah means nothing. They document their sources, they explain their methodology, and they use a logical explanation to report their conclusions.

What documented proof do you have to prove they are wrong? They have made mistakes in the past and have always corrected them. To dismiss them as inaccurate, you should easily be able to provide 5 certifiable examples of incorrect results. Make it 2.

Like I said, they correct any mistakes they make and they show the sources of all their information (Too bad everyone doesn't do that). It is very telling you dismiss their information and offer a blog as proof they are wrong. All you have proven with these links is that you know 2 places to get incorrect info that has no documented sources.

Politifactbias offers no examples. You would think having both political philosophies pissed at you shows you favor neither. They see it as a dodge. And they leave their “dodge” intact by not asking for any examples while they have the guys there. If they asked and they received examples, they would have to conceal or concede. The Politico quote about it being a good time to be in the fact checking business was almost certainly taken out of context and not directed at politifact as Politico and Politifact have a good working relationship. If it had been directed at them, the article would have stated it.

Like I said (which you said first), you will say it doesn't matter what they say. You will not have sources and you won't correct your mistakes.

You correctly predicted me saying that. And I came fully armed to back up my position with sources and links.

Your turn.

You guys act like used car salesmen being asked for a Carfax. Which is unfair, to Politifact. Carfaxes are frequently wrong.

Until you can show real proof Politifact is inaccurate, it will be my source of choice.

Originally Posted by IIFFOFRDB

I see the 3 stooges are back. Doochee, Munchee, and Stevagina. LOL

I see we got a response out of you. A predictably low brow shot at us backing our positions up while you have nothing but rhetoric. Surprise, surprise.