@Back in 52′ 181291 wrote:
http://news.yahoo.com/s/politico/20081016/pl_politico/14641
So here’s Obama tagging up with Ayer’s and pretty much started his career in Ayer’s living room. In case you democrats don’t know who Ayer’s is, he is a home-grown terrorist who bombed Washington in the 60s and is a filthy radical. Now it’s a professor at some university (don’t know what the hell kind of university hires people like that) and supposedly he’s a “changed man”. Although after the 9/11 terrorist attacks, Ayer’s says we should have been bombed even worse. A moron like that should have been tried with treason.
Obama claims he has nothing to do with the guy… Then we have Obama tagging along with his radical priest Michael Pfleger,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mk3LXvVlsI4&feature=related
Obama claims he has nothing to do with this guy. Then you have Obama, Ayers and ACORN trying to cheat with voter fraud.
To me it’s obvious the guy is a radical. He’s connected with so many shady figures but he downplays it constantly with his smooth talk and the democratic media quickly changes the subject. Anyone associated with a terrorist and a priest that says “God damn America” obviously should not have a vote. It’s a pile of horseshit and the democrats are reveling in it.
Anyone who votes for an inexperienced radical who idolizes terrorist gangs of the 60s, cooling it over with smooth talk, rather than a patriotic war hero who has more political and military experience than both VP candidates and Obama combined, is a complete backwards dink.
I consider my self a fairly astute person as well as politcal junkie. I’ve followed all the elections starting with the primaries two years ago. There has been nothing in Obama’s character that has revealed he is a “radical who idolizes terrorist gangs” not one slip up since the primaries, a socialist yes. Same goes for McCain he is a decent man with a lot of intregrity.