[JulieInCt]

I would like to hear from others what they think of Palin's attacks on Obama. These attacks have been condoned by the McCain campaign, since they are continuing. It has been reported that crowds are being incited to call Obama a "terrorist". One person yelled out, "Kill him" referring to Obama. At another rally, audience members shouted epilets to an African-American camera man.

(The facts are that Obama was 8 when the bombings occurred. Ayers is a college professor. Obama met Ayers when they were both serving on an educational charity board. There is also the fact that Palin and her husband have some questionable associations in their past, as does McCain.--The conduct of those associates were contemporary to the liasons the republican candidates had with the associates, and not 30 years in the past as with the Obama association.)

My question is whether you think what Palin is doing in her rallies is just politics? Or has she gone beyond what is acceptable?

(Personally, I feel that when she incites the audience at her rallies in this way she has not only lowered herself into the gutter, but she has shamed all of us who believe in participatory democracy. As an American I feel diminished that a candidate on the national stage would do this.)

I recognize that the following is an opinion piece on a democratic-leaning site, but it echoes my feelings about this: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jeffrey-feld...e_b_132534.html

[Thoughtful]

>>The facts are that Obama was 8 when the bombings occurred. Ayers is a college professor. Obama met Ayers when they were both serving on an educational charity board.<<

Let's add a few more facts to the mix...and this does not cover all the facts about Ayers and Obama, such as the party Ayers hosted to introduce Obama as the political heir to Alice Palmer...at Ayers house! Yet Obama grudgingly acknowledges his relationship with Ayers..why?

http://www.nypost.com/seven/10082008/posto...rack_132619.htm


Feldman's piece in the Huffington Post would be laughable if it was not convincing Americans his trash is true. ONE person yelled out? and this means Palin is exhorting crowds to assassinate Obama? The McCain campaign has been very clear why Ayers has been brought up -- Obama's associations as an adult reflect his poor judgment. The problem with Obama is that he refuses to disassociate himself with people like Ayers/Rezko/Wright until it becomes politically expedient to do so.

Palin is raising questions about Obama's character. If you feel Obama is blameless, then why worry?

You state as fact that it has been reported that Palin is inciting crowds to call Obama a terrorist. Please furnish a credible news source rather than the Huffington Post. You state only ONE person cried out...out of how many thousands? To quietly insinuate Palin is raising the issue and attempting to separate Americans on the basis of race is scary. Your post makes me very afraid for the future of America no matter who is elected.

[davislearner94]

I think it is perfectly acceptable to question Palin's motives behind character attacks, even if the information came from the Huffington Post.

The problem is that if she (Palin) can attack Obama then Palin is fair game. I am tired of walking on eggshells for this supposed "new comer" because we have to be careful not to attack her, why because she is a woman? That's not fair in an election that has been one-sided in its character attacks.

There is plenty that Obama isn't bringing up regarding Palin's political foot prints, why? Because they are a waste of time just as the Ayers issue is. I am not scared of the future if people to continue to ask the tough and important questions of both parties.

[JulieInCt]

Thoughtful, I am surprised that you have defended Palin's attacks. I have seen the videos, and have heard the voice in the crowd call,"kill him"and have heard quite a few shout, "terrorist". The videos are on you tube; I'm sure you can find them. I don't think that it is ok for even one person to shout out "kill him". If one person is acceptable, then is 2? 5? 10? 100? In your opinion at what point is it not ok?

Although I didn't mention race, Time Magazine did, see below.

I also didn't mention that Ayers recieved an award as Citizen of the Year (in Chicago) in 1997. I only mention this because it demonstrates that he was not thought of as some kind of wierd radical in Chicago at that time. Rather, he was given this award only 2 years after hosting that small party for Obama. http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/07/oba...?iref=hpmostpop

Additionally, I also didn't mention the reason why the McCain campaign is doing these attacks. Since you brought up the subject, I did a little research on what the McCain campaign said was their reasoning.

"We're going to get a little tougher," a senior Republican operative said, requesting anonymity because he wasn't authorized to discuss strategy. "We've got to question this guy's associations. Very soon. There's no question that we have to change the subject here." (CNN link below)

The Telegraph (UK):
The move comes amid growing panic in the McCain campaign and signs that Mr McCain’s closest aides do not believe he can win the race for the White House in a “fair fight”.

The Sunday Telegraph knows of at least three occasions in the past month when members of his inner circle have said they fear he is doomed. Voters have flocked to Mr Obama in the economic crisis, and Mr McCain has lost the lead in several key swing states that he must win if he is to have any chance of victory in November.

A former McCain strategist, familiar with the senator’s tactical discussions, told The Sunday Telegraph he would pursue the “nuclear option”, attacking Mr Obama personally in the campaign’s last four weeks.

He said: “We were doing well when this election was all about Obama. The last two weeks have been more about John and we need to shift the focus back. There are real questions for Obama to answer. Also, it’s the only way we win. It’s the nuclear option but votes are firming up. It’s now or never.” (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/uselection2008/sarahpalin/3137197/Sarah-Palin-Barack-Obama-palling-around-with-terrorists.html)


My intention in posting this article was to ask if some attacks go beyond what is acceptable in a presidential race. I think this does. You obviously do not.


Time Magazine: And though she may have scored a political hit each time, her attack was unsubstantiated and carried a racially tinged subtext that John McCain himself may come to regret.
http://www.time.com/time/politics/article/...1847376,00.html



CBS: "In what the AP called “a deliberate attempt to smear Obama” in a way that was “exaggerated at best if not outright false” and at a time when the McCain campaign has been losing ground in the polls, Palin on Saturday told an enormous crowd in Carson, California, that Obama “sees America as imperfect enough to pal around with terrorists.”"
http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2008/10/05/po...ry4502414.shtml


CNN: " Palin's attack delivered on the McCain campaign's announcement that it would step up attacks on the Democratic presidential candidate with just a month left before the November general election.

"We see America as the greatest force for good in this world," Palin said at a fund-raising event in Colorado, adding, "Our opponent though, is someone who sees America, it seems, as being so imperfect that he's palling around with terrorists who would target their own country."

Palin cited an article in Saturday's New York Times about Obama's relationship with Ayers, now 63. But that article concluded that "the two men do not appear to have been close. Nor has Mr. Obama ever expressed sympathy for the radical views and actions of Mr. Ayers, whom he has called 'somebody who engaged in detestable acts 40 years ago, when I was 8.' "

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/04/pal...bama/index.html


You asked why I worry. I am not worried. These attacks are not a true refection of Obama's character. They are, however, a reflection of Palin's and McCain's--and that dismays me. Millions of Americans will vote for them in November...and these attacks diminish all of us when they are considered to just be business as usual.

It is one thing to chant, "USA! USA!" and quite another to incite chants of "terrorist", referring to someone you disagree with politically. (And, if you want to argue that Palin didn't intend that to happen, why didn't she say something to the "kill him" man or stop those shouting, "terrorist"?)


I am going on vacation and will not be posting on this site for a while.

[buzzjosh]

Julie, have a nice vacation. Where are you going? If you are not back before the election, then we will see you when we have a new president - Barack Obama! I wonder who will keep Thoughtful in line while you are gone. LOL See you soon.

[Thoughtful]

Yes, I have seen many of the articles talking about why the attacks on Obama and his questionable associations. I stand by what I said, but just to touch on a few things commented on by davislearner and Julie:

davislearner, I am not sure what you meant about Palin not being attacked. An army of reporters and Obama supporters went to Alaska to dredge up whatever muck they could, and Palin has had to refute many untruths as well as define some of her political actions. Palin has been the centerpiece of some of Obama's ads.

----------------------------

While it is acceptable to question Palin's motives during her speech, it is not right to assign your own motives to them. Character attacks are not an unknown in politics...and asking why a candidate would make the decision to associate with so many questionable people over the years is valid (Obama has distanced himself from both Wright and Rezko and denounced Ayers' radical acts...but only after his associations were presented in the press).

At the very least, Obama's judgment should be questioned, which is what the McCain campaign is doing. Time Magazine viciously assigns the motive of race to Palin's comments, which is outrageous.

Neither of us were on the stage, Julie...so we don't even know if Palin heard the person who shouted "Kill him." Your conclusion, that she didn't denounce what the person said means that she wishes to incite people to that level of hate...that is taking history and writing it to suit your own perception. Titling the string with the word "hate" and assigning that perception to a candidate is, as I stated in my first post, scary. Palin may have taken the accusation too far with the use of the word "palling", depending upon your definiton of the word...but to accuse her of hate, of inciting crowds to murder...is wrong.

[buzzjosh]

I cringe anytime anyone accuses a political candidate of inciting anyone to violence. I find Palin des-picable for many reasons but I do not believe she would ever purposefully incite violence against Mr. Obama. I prefer to believe that in the huge crowd of that day that she did not hear what was caught on tape regarding the crowd comments.

[NUMBER1]

AFTER THIS BIG MESS,COME NOVEMBER THE PEOPLE OF THE UNITED STATES WILL SAY WE'VE HAD ENOUGH AND A LAND SLIDE VICTORY WILL ELECT OUR NEWXT COMMANDER & CHEIF.

[DelusionalAngel]

I think the McCain camp in general needs to be very careful in questioning associations. It's got me very riled up this week

If you watch Olbermann you may have heard him mention that McCain went to a dinner in OR for the OCA where a woman who spoke before him praised the woman who shot an abortion doctor, that woman was called a terrorist by the judge. Well, even if you ignore THAT aspect of the dinner... I lived in Oregon when OCA was active. It was well known as a hate group.

There is a list of known hate groups in OR here: http://www.againstha.../hategroups.htm you'll notice it's pretty much white supremacy groups... and OCA.

McCain was advised by OR politicians not to attend the OCA dinner. They were gaining NATIONAL attention back when he went to their dinner.

Here's a YouTube video about what they did to OR back then: http://www.youtube.c...h?v=p5BLU0KSvq8 (warning anti-gay language in the video).

I saw it up close and personal. We had what was seen as a gay friendly coffeehouse in a community not so gay friendly during their BS. We got threatening phone calls. We had a family friend leave school, move, etc. And McCain supported them my going to a dinner that raised money for them?

How is that better than sitting on a board with someone 30+ some years later when the man is now basically a community leader? McCain supported some of the most hateful people you can imagine, while they were active, when they were to the gay community what the KKK is to blacks. If you didn't bother watching the video I linked to, well... people DIED during campaigns they ran in the state of OR and most of us attribute it to them. See groups like the KKK at least like to keep their hate hush hush and press away from them, OCA would be loud and proud about theirs, they encouraged a war against gays in OR and begged for media coverage to spew it as loudly as possible. I find McCain going to one of their dinners much worse than Obama sitting on an education board with someone.

I'm honestly starting to believe all the McCain camp has is hate... It's dangerous, it's scary. And if they don't personally denounce very very loudly some of these yells for the death of their opponent I'm going to assume they approve of it. I know they're aware of it by now. I've seen their campaign folks asked about it on tv over and over and they act OFFENDED people would ask about how violent the supporters are getting when Palin and McCain keep just hammering home this TERRORIST TERRORIST TERRORIST message. And then they just say so Obama does need to answer why he is friends with a TERRORIST. But I never see them denouncing it, in fact it was clear from the look on McCain's face when the guy Yelled that Obama was a TERRORIST, he heard it and instead he just went on to say Obama just answers questions with angry insults... uhh what? Your people just called him a TERRORIST and you clearly heard it, who is responding with nothing but angry insults?

I know they can't control all of their supporters but seriously... Given all I've seen lately... the reactions they're getting and their silence on those reactions... I do feel that silence is deafening. It's the same as saying it's ok with them.

Sorry for the long reply. Told you I'm worked up this week. This attack Obama thing so hard on Ayers when I personally was affected by the OCA and McCain helped them raise money by going to that dinner? Well... I'm upset at the total hypocrisy on this one.

[Thoughtful]

And, of course, there are always the facts:

Secret Service says "Kill him" allegation unfounded

By Andrew M. Seder aseder@timesleader.com
Staff Writer

SCRANTON – The agent in charge of the Secret Service field office in Scranton said allegations that someone yelled “kill him” when presidential hopeful Barack Obama’s name was mentioned during Tuesday’s Sarah Palin rally are unfounded.

The Scranton Times-Tribune first reported the alleged incident on its Web site Tuesday and then again in its print edition Wednesday. The first story, written by reporter David Singleton, appeared with allegations that while congressional candidate Chris Hackett was addressing the crowd and mentioned Obama’s name a man in the audience shouted “kill him."

News organizations including ABC, The Associated Press, The Washington Monthly and MSNBC’s Countdown with Keith Olbermann reported the claim, with most attributing the allegations to the Times-Tribune story.

Agent Bill Slavoski said he was in the audience, along with an undisclosed number of additional secret service agents and other law enforcement officers and not one heard the comment.

“I was baffled,” he said after reading the report in Wednesday’s Times-Tribune.

He said the agency conducted an investigation Wednesday, after seeing the story, and could not find one person to corroborate the allegation other than Singleton.

Slavoski said more than 20 non-security agents were interviewed Wednesday, from news media to ordinary citizens in attendance at the rally for the Republican vice presidential candidate held at the Riverfront Sports Complex. He said Singleton was the only one to say he heard someone yell “kill him.”

“We have yet to find someone to back up the story,” Slavoski said. “We had people all over and we have yet to find anyone who said they heard it.”

Hackett said he did not hear the remark.

Slavoski said Singleton was interviewed Wednesday and stood by his story but couldn’t give a description of the man because he didn’t see him he only heard him.

When contacted Wednesday afternoon, Singleton referred questions to Times-Tribune Metro Editor Jeff Sonderman. Sonderman said, “We stand by the story. The facts reported are true and that’s really all there is.”

Slavoski said the agents take such threats or comments seriously and immediately opened an investigation but after due diligence “as far as we’re concerned it’s closed unless someone comes forward.” He urged anyone with knowledge of the alleged incident to call him at 346-5781. “We’ll run at all leads,” he said.

-- from http://www.timesleader.com/news/breakingne...unfounded_.html

[DelusionalAngel]

So one incident can't be verified? I've not heard anyone deny the others happened. That was the second time "Kill him" was supposed to have happened, the first being hmm I want to say a week ago? Most of the other incidents have been caught on video. So one of the claims not being verified doesn't mean it's not happening. It clearly is.

And given the new possibly illegal robo calls from McCain about the washed up terrorist he doesn't care about... ( http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/10/16/m...y_n_135348.html ) being placed which seem to imply put Obama in the white house and you're putting a terrorist in the white house, I'd suspect it'll just get worse.

As I said, McCain has a lot of ties to answer for as well, the difference is Obama isn't using fearful politics to try to win. McCain is pushing this into dangerous territory. That phone call? Sure sounds to me like it's meant to target people who would believe Obama or Dems would be likely to side with terrorists. They're encouraging the hateful behaviour, playing on fear, playing to the paranoid nuts... It's scary.

[johannah1993]

I think that this should be titled Palin's SUPPORTERS' Politics of Hate.

It was not Palin who was yelling "kill him" or "terrorist," it was the people who attended the rally.
Thats all I have to say.

[buzzjosh]

I would add that I would have to be absolutely sure that Gov. Palin heard the shouts (above the general chaos at a rally) and did nothing before I would heap as much damaging remarks on her as I have thus far heard. For the record, I decided about three weeks ago that I am voting for Barack, but smear goes both ways so please let us be sure before we say things that are very harmfull to people, reputations, and our country. That is the Last thing I will say on this issue UNLESS new and verifiable facts come forth or if simillar situations occur in the future and are verifiable.

[DelusionalAngel]

I agree it's their supporters, the only one I am willing to bet on they definitely heard as it happened is the Terrorist one, the look on McCain's face gave it away and the fact he stopped and looked sort of in the direction it came from. I do think the fact the videos of it are all over the place though = they are aware it's happening and should be out there very vocally saying this is NOT ACCEPTABLE and DO NOT DO THIS AT OUR EVENTS. Yelling it at events as they start, whatever, making it clear it hurts their cause with that stuff all over YouTube, the news, blogs, etc. so please don't. Can they stop it? Of course not but they don't seem to be truly discouraging it either.

Given that two men holding Obama signs outside a Palin event were beaten to the point that one has a black eye and now Palin makes statement about how security maybe shouldn't escort a protester out maybe they should leave him so he can learn something from the crowd? Yeah.. It's bordering on encouraging this.

[buzzjosh]

If the last paragraph is true (about securitymen escorting...) and I mean verifiable then I agree that is over the line. There should be no room for this kind of action/words in our republic. This is not after all Zimbabwe. BUT, it must be verified. I am not doubting you but did you see it on tape or is it just something you heard. This campaign has had more half-truths on both sides than any I have ever follwed. Shamefull!!

[DelusionalAngel]

buzzjosh, on Oct 17 2008, 12:41 AM, said:

If the last paragraph is true (about securitymen escorting...) and I mean verifiable then I agree that is over the line. There should be no room for this kind of action/words in our republic. This is not after all Zimbabwe. BUT, it must be verified. I am not doubting you but did you see it on tape or is it just something you heard. This campaign has had more half-truths on both sides than any I have ever follwed. Shamefull!!

Can't find it on YouTube since security and Palin searches bring up a lot of silly things and not sure if these change as the Countdown videos change daily etc but http://www.msnbc.msn...36677/#27229369 it's 1:55 or so into that video. I'm sure by learning something from her crowd she meant just chat and hug it out... But given the reports about the chants from her crowds etc lately? I doubt that's what they'd take it as. Hence my it's being encouraged opinion. Yeah it's just an opinion, but not screaming out DO NOT DO THIS KIND OF THING AT OUR EVENTS and then stating I should let security allow this protester to stay so he can learn something from all of you following by cheering? That to me seems like encouraging it.

[buzzjosh]

I believe if it were me and I saw all the news about what is happening at the rallies that I would indeed start the rallies with a stern disclaimer/ warning that the election should not have these kind of things going on. Yes, I understand that you are saying that by not being proactive about these kind of despicable crowd actions that the "aura" of duplicity attaches to the McCain-Palin ticket.

When I was younger my grandfather gave me some advice that I have kept close. He said that to guard your honor you must always be careful to guard against even the hint of dishonor. I am afraid that the Govenor failed in this case.

No more arguments from me. If they had ben forcefull from the very first incident this garbage would not be infecting this election as it now is. I do not understand the reasoning behind their silence. Surely, they must understand that this is turning people off in droves.

Thanks for sticking with this issue and trying to provide the evidence to support your interpretations. I suspect my grand-dad would have found you honorable.

[Thoughtful]

Too many judgments here based on assumptions...very sad to see.

Let's talk about hate based on facts:

http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburgh...g/s_594853.html
http://www.thepittsburghchannel.com/news/1...356/detail.html

[alexpinca]

Tonight in an interview with Brian Williams, Sarah Palin refused to come out and call those who bombed abortion clinics as terrorists and yet she was very quick to call Aire's as a terrorist. One third of our nation can not see that fundamental inconsistancy so we are left no choice but to dismiss them and attempt to direct this nation with the other 2/3's. Problem is that periodicly the patrioticly infirmed are able to reach another 10 to 20%. The clear thinking moderates and progressively need to understand that we are fighting for the hearts of that 10 ot 20% and tell the radical right to get lost. I will negotiate, I will compromise, I will work with that 10 to 20% but I can not compromise with the radical right.

[buzzjosh]

What is it about inconsistency that some people just do not get? As for Gov. Palin, after her misinformed statements about what the role of the VP is in our Republic, the clothes issue and the interview with Williams (yes, I saw it) I will no longer comment about her. She is a drag on the Republicans and at this stage, I view her as the Dems added weapon. She was, is and until she learns something about our country a non-issue in my book. A more interesting thing that has happened is Sen. McCain renouncing the Bush presidency. It will avail him for naught - he will lose those who still support Bush (another lost breed) and his chances are pretty much done.