Secret Svc links Palin speeches to spike in death threats

spc wrote:

stockingfull wrote:Wow, I'd sure like to know the comparably incendiary things said by Obama and/or Biden in this campaign.

McCain/Palin didn't pal around with a terrorist.

Oh yes he did...G. Gordon Liddy




(& if living near a guy who once blew up a statue (Ayers) is considered "Paling Around" with "Terrorists" then I guess Mother Theresa "Paled around" with murderers because there were a few living near her in Calcutta.)

I don't know where you got that from and it has nothing to do with his color. Anybody entering the political arena can expect this whether you're white, black or purple with pink pok-a-dots. Unfortunate but that is the way it is, don't blame me. Blame the media and the people who suck it up. I can care less about who he slept with back in 1980 and frankly the amount of scrutiny that politicians have to endure about their private lives is ridiculous. However if you want to be President I think your College years and any political groups you have had ties with in the past is fair game. Hiding that information or not releasing can only lead to speculation.

You said he may have contributed to the problem. So let's change the way we think about politicians by rejecting microscopic levels of scrutiny when it comes to their private lives. So, in your opinion anything from college years on is fair game? What issues? I'm not saying I know the answer to this question, but it seems to me what I did in college has so little to do with who I am now and many other people I would say, unless they stopped growing as a human being at age 21 or 22. While I could draw a line with the political parties, what else should he divulge? That he was abused by a man, or he had a homo relationship or he snorted coke? Should we use a lie detector to determine if he was really born in the US since we can't even agree what proves he was not born elsewhere? What other issues should be laid out Richard? Maybe we should create a litmus test for all candidates to answer and then investigate all the answers. Bet we would have a mad dash of candidates qualified to be President.

Devil505 wrote:(& if living near a guy who once blew up a statue (Ayers) is considered "Paling Around" with "Terrorists" then I guess Mother Theresa "Paled around" with murderers because there were a few living near her in Calcutta.)

Keep telling yourself BO didn't have a relationship with Ayers.



State senator book critic.

Richard S. wrote:She may have created an atmosphere for idle threats but that's about it.

Please explain how someone creates "an atmosphere for idle threats" but manages to thread the needle & stop short of creating an atmosphere for "meaningful" threats?

spc wrote:

Devil505 wrote:(& if living near a guy who once blew up a statue (Ayers) is considered "Paling Around" with "Terrorists" then I guess Mother Theresa "Paled around" with murderers because there were a few living near her in Calcutta.)

Keep telling yourself BO didn't have a relationship with Ayers.

obama_ayers_review.jpg

State senator book critic.

Too far off topic here

Richard S. wrote:

kootch88 wrote:Come on, that makes no sense at all. You saying that he is at fault for being half black and not spilling his entire life on the floor for the likes of this forum and the public to digest? So who sets this incredible standard as to what and is not divulged? Do we have to list every woman or girl we bop before marriage in order to qualify for office? Do we have to try and list every item that wasn't exactly the truth in our life? How far back do we go, to prenatal days? What else do we have to vomit up for the public? Who decides what is and is not acceptable, the guys from this forum? Great, we know how bipartisan they can be. That train of logic just doesn't work.

I don't know where you got that from and it has nothing to do with his color. Anybody entering the political arena can expect this whether you're white, black or purple with pink pok-a-dots. Unfortunate but that is the way it is, don't blame me. Blame the media and the people who suck it up. I can care less about who he slept with back in 1980 and frankly the amount of scrutiny that politicians have to endure about their private lives is ridiculous. However if you want to be President I think your College years and any political groups you have had ties with in the past is fair game. Hiding that information or not releasing can only lead to speculation.

Well, here are my comparable issues, none of which were used by Obama/Biden against McCain:

1. the 36 vids McCain made for the North Vietnamese during his stay at the Hanoi Hilton (you know, the ones that caused some of his fellow guests there to rename him "Songbird McCain." (Google that one. They supposedly are the reason he's been so very and inexplicably mean to the MIA folks who simply sought records pertaining to their lost loved ones.) and

2. the implications of his failure to meaningfully release his medical records, which bore directly on two issues absolutely central to his fitness to be President:
a. his well-documented propensity for losing his temper (evidence of PTSD flowing from his stay in Hanoi?), and
b. the stage and exact status of his melanoma.

The Democrats went to none of those places, all of which were far more relevant to McCain's fitness and candidacy than sitting on a charitable board run by a stalwart Republican (Walter Annenberg) in Chicago with Bill Ayers was to Obama's.

Yet the "pit bull with lipstick" was sent out to dog Obama on this junk nonetheless. And -- surprise! -- death threats spiked.

In retrospect, it's become a positive on paper, because it's now obvious that the public rejected the attacks, whether because they didn't believe them or because they didn't think them relevant, or they simply thought them so low as to be a negative for McCain. So it's not news anymore, except to the extent that there are crazies with guns out there who think they should do the country a favor.

Which is the point of this thread: that this kind of thing has no place in our political discourse, because the risk of some basket-case doing something terrible is just too high when this kind of crap is thrown around.

kootch88 wrote:So let's change the way we think about politicians by rejecting microscopic levels of scrutiny when it comes to their private lives.

Agree 100% but the Ayers issue would not be something I would consider private.

So, in your opinion anything from college years on is fair game?

If it's politically related. I'd disagree that most people are different once they get to that age. They gain wisdom and may find some of their ideas were foolish but the basic foundation for ones political views has already been laid. They'll certainly be refined over time but I think for most people they aren't going to stray too far from it.

stockingfull wrote:Which is the point of this thread: that this kind of thing has no place in our political discourse, because the risk of some basket-case doing something terrible is just too high when this kind of crap is thrown around.

Sorry but I disagree, Ayers is a political person by his very nature. If you're running for office then you can expect your past politics and associations to be brought up. It most certainly is fair game. As far as McCain bringing besides his health anyone of those points would have been political suicide.

My friend when you have the MSM behind you, just sit back & let them do the dirty work.