View Poll Results: Who are You Voting For? And Why if you Care to Elaborate!
Voters: 109. You may not vote on this poll
Obama or McCain? Poll
TMS West Coast Correspondent
Joined: October 14, 2004
Posts: 3,581
Likes: 0
there is nothing new about Obama's views and politics being not only based mainly on the teachings of Alinsky but almost a perfect execution of those teachings. Too bad not many bother to look more into the guy and what's worse is that even though the media is well aware of this they fail to even mention it.
Tasca Super Boss 429 Member
Joined: January 4, 2006
Posts: 3,904
Likes: 32
From NPR:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...oryId=10305695
From the Wiki:
Alinsky was the subject of Hillary Rodham's senior honors thesis at Wellesley College, "There Is Only The Fight...": An Analysis of the Alinsky Model.[9] Rodham commented on Alinsky's "charm," but noted that “one of the primary problems of the Alinsky model is that the removal of Alinsky dramatically alters its composition." [9] Later, in her 2003 biography, Living History Clinton notes that although she agreed with some of his ideas, "particularly the value of empowering people to help themselves" they had a fundamental disagreement: "He believed you could change the system only from the outside. I didn't." [9] Once Hillary Rodham Clinton became First Lady of the United States, the White House asked Wellesley College to restrict access to the thesis for fear of being associated too closely with Alinsky's ideas.[10]
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...oryId=10305695
From the Wiki:
Alinsky was the subject of Hillary Rodham's senior honors thesis at Wellesley College, "There Is Only The Fight...": An Analysis of the Alinsky Model.[9] Rodham commented on Alinsky's "charm," but noted that “one of the primary problems of the Alinsky model is that the removal of Alinsky dramatically alters its composition." [9] Later, in her 2003 biography, Living History Clinton notes that although she agreed with some of his ideas, "particularly the value of empowering people to help themselves" they had a fundamental disagreement: "He believed you could change the system only from the outside. I didn't." [9] Once Hillary Rodham Clinton became First Lady of the United States, the White House asked Wellesley College to restrict access to the thesis for fear of being associated too closely with Alinsky's ideas.[10]
Tasca Super Boss 429 Member
Joined: January 4, 2006
Posts: 3,904
Likes: 32
there is nothing new about Obama's views and politics being not only based mainly on the teachings of Alinsky but almost a perfect execution of those teachings. Too bad not many bother to look more into the guy and what's worse is that even though the media is well aware of this they fail to even mention it.
(See my previous post)
AKA 1 BULLITT------------ Legacy TMS Member
Joined: January 29, 2004
Posts: 7,738
Likes: 361
From: U S A
So, you think these guys are not commies?
Obama's e-mail about WGN-AM
Text of the e-mail the Obama campaign sent to supporters:
August 28, 2008 In the next few hours, we have a crucial opportunity to fight one of the most cynical and offensive smears ever launched against Barack.
Tonight, WGN radio is giving right-wing hatchet man Stanley Kurtz a forum to air his baseless, fear-mongering terrorist smears. He's currently scheduled to spend a solid two-hour block from 9:00 to 11:00 p.m. pushing lies, distortions, and manipulations about Barack and University of Illinois professor William Ayers.
Tell WGN that by providing Kurtz with airtime, they are legitimizing baseless attacks from a smear-merchant and lowering the standards of political discourse.
Call into the "Extension 720" show with Milt Rosenberg at (312) 591-7200
(Show airs from 9:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m. tonight)
Then report back on your call at http://my.barackobama.com/WGNstandards
Kurtz has been using his absurd TV appearances in an awkward and dishonest attempt to play the terrorism card. His current ploy is to embellish the relationship between Barack and Ayers.
Just last night on Fox News, Kurtz drastically exaggerated Barack's connection with Ayers by claiming Ayers had recruited Barack to the board of the Annenberg Challenge. That is completely false and has been disproved in numerous press accounts.
It is absolutely unacceptable that WGN would give a slimy character assassin like Kurtz time for his divisive, destructive ranting on our public airwaves. At the very least, they should offer sane, honest rebuttal to every one of Kurtz's lies.
Kurtz is scheduled to appear from 9:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m. in the Chicago market.
Calling will only take a minute, and it will make a huge difference if we nip this smear in the bud. Confront Kurtz tonight before this goes any further:
Obama's e-mail about WGN-AM
Text of the e-mail the Obama campaign sent to supporters:
August 28, 2008 In the next few hours, we have a crucial opportunity to fight one of the most cynical and offensive smears ever launched against Barack.
Tonight, WGN radio is giving right-wing hatchet man Stanley Kurtz a forum to air his baseless, fear-mongering terrorist smears. He's currently scheduled to spend a solid two-hour block from 9:00 to 11:00 p.m. pushing lies, distortions, and manipulations about Barack and University of Illinois professor William Ayers.
Tell WGN that by providing Kurtz with airtime, they are legitimizing baseless attacks from a smear-merchant and lowering the standards of political discourse.
Call into the "Extension 720" show with Milt Rosenberg at (312) 591-7200
(Show airs from 9:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m. tonight)
Then report back on your call at http://my.barackobama.com/WGNstandards
Kurtz has been using his absurd TV appearances in an awkward and dishonest attempt to play the terrorism card. His current ploy is to embellish the relationship between Barack and Ayers.
Just last night on Fox News, Kurtz drastically exaggerated Barack's connection with Ayers by claiming Ayers had recruited Barack to the board of the Annenberg Challenge. That is completely false and has been disproved in numerous press accounts.
It is absolutely unacceptable that WGN would give a slimy character assassin like Kurtz time for his divisive, destructive ranting on our public airwaves. At the very least, they should offer sane, honest rebuttal to every one of Kurtz's lies.
Kurtz is scheduled to appear from 9:00 p.m. to 11:00 p.m. in the Chicago market.
Calling will only take a minute, and it will make a huge difference if we nip this smear in the bud. Confront Kurtz tonight before this goes any further:
AKA 1 BULLITT------------ Legacy TMS Member
Joined: January 29, 2004
Posts: 7,738
Likes: 361
From: U S A
Commies. part 2:
American Issues Project Responds to Obama Campaign's Efforts to Compel TV Stations, Government to Censor Ad
Last update: 11:49 a.m. EDT Aug. 26, 2008
WASHINGTON, Aug 26, 2008 /PRNewswire-USNewswire via COMTEX/ -- Obama team fails to convince stations to kill ad in spite of
threats, harassment and false claims.
The Barack Obama campaign has resorted to a campaign of intimidation and legal threats to convince television stations and the federal government to force off the air an ad by the American Issues Project detailing the link between Sen. Obama and remorseless domestic terrorist William Ayers.
The Obama campaign has been contacting stations running American Issues Project's ad in an unsuccessful attempt to compel them to pull the spot. The Obama campaign also sent a letter yesterday to the Department of Justice asking the government to investigate American Issues Project, its officers, board of directors, and donors. With no success on either front, the campaign has begun running its own ad in response. Notably, this ad fails to dispute a single fact in the American Issues Project's initial ad.
"The Obama campaign knows it can't argue the facts of the link between Obama and Ayers, so it is instead resorting to a desperate campaign of intimidation and legal threats," said Ed Martin, American Issues Project's president. "The scary question this raises is if Barack Obama demonstrates this little regard for free speech from his opponents during the campaign, what could the American people expect from him as a president?"
"The tremendous amount of time, money and effort the campaign is expending to run its own ads on the Ayers controversy and dispatch its hired guns all over the country - during the Democratic convention - speaks to the fear they must have that this issue is resonating with American voters."
American Issues Project sent a letter today to the Department of Justice responding to the Obama campaign's claims. Key points from the letter: AIP is organized as a qualified nonprofit corporation as that term is defined in the regulations of the Federal Election Commission ("FEC") 11 C.F.R. A114.10. As such, AIP enjoys the protections of the provisions of the Supreme Court's decision more than twenty years ago in FEC v. Massachusetts Citizens for Life, Inc., 589 F. Supp. 646 (D. Mass. 1984), aff'd, 769 F.2d 13 (1st Cir. 1985), aff'd, 479 U.S. 238 (1986)... AIP complies with each and every one of the provisions outlined by the Supreme Court in the MCFL case, as well as the regulations of the FEC promulgated subsequently... Counsel for the Obama Campaign is undoubtedly fully knowledgeable of the reporting and compliance responsibilities of qualified nonprofit corporations, such as NARAL-Pro Choice America ("NARAL"), an organization that, ironically, also claims protection as an entity described in Massachusetts Citizens for Life v. FEC... AIP functions in exactly the same manner as NARAL and any other qualified nonprofit corporation. NARAL has made substantial independent expenditures in opposition to Sen. McCain's presidential candidacy during the 2008 election cycle and continuing through the present time. Yet, no objection to those expenditures has been raised by the Obama campaign...
Surely we have not come to a point where the government and its agencies are used to protect presidential candidates from citizens' speech, essentially destroying the very purpose, meaning and historical essence of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.
American Issues Project Responds to Obama Campaign's Efforts to Compel TV Stations, Government to Censor Ad
Last update: 11:49 a.m. EDT Aug. 26, 2008
WASHINGTON, Aug 26, 2008 /PRNewswire-USNewswire via COMTEX/ -- Obama team fails to convince stations to kill ad in spite of
threats, harassment and false claims.
The Barack Obama campaign has resorted to a campaign of intimidation and legal threats to convince television stations and the federal government to force off the air an ad by the American Issues Project detailing the link between Sen. Obama and remorseless domestic terrorist William Ayers.
The Obama campaign has been contacting stations running American Issues Project's ad in an unsuccessful attempt to compel them to pull the spot. The Obama campaign also sent a letter yesterday to the Department of Justice asking the government to investigate American Issues Project, its officers, board of directors, and donors. With no success on either front, the campaign has begun running its own ad in response. Notably, this ad fails to dispute a single fact in the American Issues Project's initial ad.
"The Obama campaign knows it can't argue the facts of the link between Obama and Ayers, so it is instead resorting to a desperate campaign of intimidation and legal threats," said Ed Martin, American Issues Project's president. "The scary question this raises is if Barack Obama demonstrates this little regard for free speech from his opponents during the campaign, what could the American people expect from him as a president?"
"The tremendous amount of time, money and effort the campaign is expending to run its own ads on the Ayers controversy and dispatch its hired guns all over the country - during the Democratic convention - speaks to the fear they must have that this issue is resonating with American voters."
American Issues Project sent a letter today to the Department of Justice responding to the Obama campaign's claims. Key points from the letter: AIP is organized as a qualified nonprofit corporation as that term is defined in the regulations of the Federal Election Commission ("FEC") 11 C.F.R. A114.10. As such, AIP enjoys the protections of the provisions of the Supreme Court's decision more than twenty years ago in FEC v. Massachusetts Citizens for Life, Inc., 589 F. Supp. 646 (D. Mass. 1984), aff'd, 769 F.2d 13 (1st Cir. 1985), aff'd, 479 U.S. 238 (1986)... AIP complies with each and every one of the provisions outlined by the Supreme Court in the MCFL case, as well as the regulations of the FEC promulgated subsequently... Counsel for the Obama Campaign is undoubtedly fully knowledgeable of the reporting and compliance responsibilities of qualified nonprofit corporations, such as NARAL-Pro Choice America ("NARAL"), an organization that, ironically, also claims protection as an entity described in Massachusetts Citizens for Life v. FEC... AIP functions in exactly the same manner as NARAL and any other qualified nonprofit corporation. NARAL has made substantial independent expenditures in opposition to Sen. McCain's presidential candidacy during the 2008 election cycle and continuing through the present time. Yet, no objection to those expenditures has been raised by the Obama campaign...
Surely we have not come to a point where the government and its agencies are used to protect presidential candidates from citizens' speech, essentially destroying the very purpose, meaning and historical essence of the First Amendment to the United States Constitution.
Last edited by 1 COBRA; Aug 28, 2008 at 08:30 PM.
Post *****
Joined: October 9, 2007
Posts: 32,808
Likes: 163
How about the ABC News producer that was arrested on a public sidewalk in Denver for taking photos of Democratic party Senators meeting with fat cat lobbyists in a hotel? They'll even arrest one of their own who steps out of line. Remind anyone of...oh I dont' know...Stalin?
Team Mustang Source
Joined: March 22, 2005
Posts: 178
Likes: 0
From: Sin City
)
you make me sick
I lust for a M24
Joined: November 6, 2004
Posts: 7,042
Likes: 4
From: Football HOF, Canton OH
On another note, I saw a funny poster today. It's only borderline appropriate for this site, so I'm just going to post a link. Be warned, it has the 'A' word if you're at work.
http://www.flickr.com/photos/sully_a...a2/2640535942/
Tell me, as a boy in High School, what would've been your thoughts if she was teaching in your classroom.
Post *****
Joined: October 9, 2007
Posts: 32,808
Likes: 163
She is a hotty! And she's common sense smart which obviously Obama and Biden aren't. And she's actually held an executive office before. I think this is the smartest move McCain could make and has made so far. It's brilliant quite frankly. Besides wouldn't you rather have this with brains as your VP, than Biden. Poor Obama, he gets what he deserves.
The Man... keeping you down.
Joined: August 15, 2004
Posts: 823
Likes: 1
From: Stealin' ur internetz
I'm just going to drop this one out here and see how many of you "get it" in terms of technology. Since I work in the field I'm a little biased on these issues, but I want TMS users to think real hard about the implications of Sen. Biden's proposed laws and actions will mean in your personal use of technology.
http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquir...hollywood-sock
Is this someone you would want in the White House? What about next successor to the President? 
http://www.theinquirer.net/gb/inquir...hollywood-sock
Originally Posted by Obama picks Hollywood sock-puppet for running mate
Anti-pirate, anti-privacy, anti-encryption, not too sure about net neutrality.
By Nick Farrell: Monday, 25 August 2008, 10:15 AM
BARACK OBAMA has chosen one of the most rabid pro-music and film industry senators in the business to be his running mate in the forthcoming presidential elections.
Joe Biden has been selected as Obama's choice for vice presidential candidate over the weekend.
While his boss might have glowing credentials on technology, Biden has spent most of his career allied with the FBI and copyright holders. He ranks toward the bottom of CNET's Technology Voters' Guide, and has come up with some of the worst anti-privacy legislation.
Biden has been one of Hollywood and the recording industry's biggest fans and has been working to expand copyright laws. In 2002 he tried to make it a felony to trick certain types of devices into playing unauthorized music or executing unapproved computer programs. The law was caned by almost every technology outfit in the land and was quietly dropped.
Later he wrote to the Justice Department demanding that it use taxpayer money to do the work of the RIAA and MPAA to drag P2P users into court. Fortunately this was ignored by the DoJ.
Last year, Biden sponsored an RIAA-backed bill aimed at restricting Americans' ability to record and play back individual songs from satellite and Internet radio services. This was in support of his chums at the RIAA who were suing satellite radio companies at the time.
Biden has refused to answer questions on technology. This might have something to do with the fact he supports Internet taxes and censoring libraries and schools, which is a wee bit different from Obama's official stance.
He has also sponsored the anti-privacy Violent Crime Control Act which was anti-encryption and demanded users turn over encryption keys to the government. It was a reaction to this bill, which failed, which lead to the creation of PGP.
In 2001 he took the FBI's stance during the debates on the Patriot Act although this changed last year when Democrats wanted to embarrass President Bush over warrantless wiretapping. At the time his conversion on the road to Damascus was seen as trying to court liberals in his party at a point where he was thinking of running for President himself.
He seemed to go back to his own ways recently when he demanded the government spend $1 billion in US tax dollars so police can monitor peer-to-peer networks for illegal activity.
As far as Net neutrality is concerned, Biden has stood back claiming it was not necessary to have laws to protect it.
Fortunately the history of US Vice-presidents usually indicates that they are not there to actually do anything unless the President is shot, or caught assisting in a burglary. µ
By Nick Farrell: Monday, 25 August 2008, 10:15 AM
BARACK OBAMA has chosen one of the most rabid pro-music and film industry senators in the business to be his running mate in the forthcoming presidential elections.
Joe Biden has been selected as Obama's choice for vice presidential candidate over the weekend.
While his boss might have glowing credentials on technology, Biden has spent most of his career allied with the FBI and copyright holders. He ranks toward the bottom of CNET's Technology Voters' Guide, and has come up with some of the worst anti-privacy legislation.
Biden has been one of Hollywood and the recording industry's biggest fans and has been working to expand copyright laws. In 2002 he tried to make it a felony to trick certain types of devices into playing unauthorized music or executing unapproved computer programs. The law was caned by almost every technology outfit in the land and was quietly dropped.
Later he wrote to the Justice Department demanding that it use taxpayer money to do the work of the RIAA and MPAA to drag P2P users into court. Fortunately this was ignored by the DoJ.
Last year, Biden sponsored an RIAA-backed bill aimed at restricting Americans' ability to record and play back individual songs from satellite and Internet radio services. This was in support of his chums at the RIAA who were suing satellite radio companies at the time.
Biden has refused to answer questions on technology. This might have something to do with the fact he supports Internet taxes and censoring libraries and schools, which is a wee bit different from Obama's official stance.
He has also sponsored the anti-privacy Violent Crime Control Act which was anti-encryption and demanded users turn over encryption keys to the government. It was a reaction to this bill, which failed, which lead to the creation of PGP.
In 2001 he took the FBI's stance during the debates on the Patriot Act although this changed last year when Democrats wanted to embarrass President Bush over warrantless wiretapping. At the time his conversion on the road to Damascus was seen as trying to court liberals in his party at a point where he was thinking of running for President himself.
He seemed to go back to his own ways recently when he demanded the government spend $1 billion in US tax dollars so police can monitor peer-to-peer networks for illegal activity.
As far as Net neutrality is concerned, Biden has stood back claiming it was not necessary to have laws to protect it.
Fortunately the history of US Vice-presidents usually indicates that they are not there to actually do anything unless the President is shot, or caught assisting in a burglary. µ
I lust for a M24
Joined: November 6, 2004
Posts: 7,042
Likes: 4
From: Football HOF, Canton OH
No, not yet, although this very surprising pick does interest me. It's a huge risk that McCain needed to take to stay in the running. A VP debate w/ Joe needspunchedinface Biden and Palin could be very interesting. On thing's for sure, McCain just said to Obama, "Game On!" Which is kinda cool, but it's also kinda just more politics BS.