Truth goes under the bus

Pot Head

Yawn- Change the Mp3

JR

You know the "truth"?! Are you a conspiracy nut job? McCain must be in on "it" as well. We're all going to hell in a handcart;-)

Worried - Of Slough

Impeach President Obama !

John B

Right on the nail Melanie. Sadly, now the Daily Telegraph has joined in.

Conservative Cabbie

This is the lefts modus operandi - shut down debate.

Try to discuss immigration policy - racist.
Question the dogma of global warming - you get likened to a holocaust denier.
Question the theory of evolution - redneck.

Why do the left fear debate so much?

Ronnie

Well, this is the price to be paid for all those victorious years of knuckle-dragging, smearing, lying, character-assasination, blood-sucking, war-mongering, swift-boating and election-stealing that have gone before.

The country has been torn apart and brought to the very edge of ruin by crazed right-wing extremists like Chenney, Rove, Wolfowitz, Pearl and Rumsfeld. Hundreds of thousands of perfectly innocent people have died in their wars, the future lives of millions put in utter peril.

And still you want more of it. Worse, you think ordinary right-thinking people should want more.

That is what is truly jaw-dropping.

Emmet

How come the lefty loonies like Pot Head and JR always get their comments in first? Do these geeks like in front of a computer screen? Come on guys, get out a bit more. Make some friends.

Isaac

Quod licet Iovi (=left, pesudo-liberals), non licet bovi (the other mortals).
The pseudo-liberal press is gradually evolve into a dictating, non-elected political party.

Huw Thornton

Melanie -

"It is of course jaw-dropping that the left are claiming the McCain camp is inciting hatred when that is precisely what they have done year in, year out, to President Bush, neo-conservatives, the Republican party and anyone and everyone on what they denounce as ‘the right’ whom they vilify as fascists, insane, bloodsuckers, a cancer and the like. And unlike the information about Obama’s radical links, that onslaught by the left is not based on facts and the questions arising from those facts but on character assassination, smears, lies, distortions and gratuitous insults."

I absolutely agree, except that you've done your usual thing about mentioning "the" left rather than certain obnoxious leftist individuals.

They haven't had a great deal of success, generally, have they? I feel that the main reason for this approach not being successful is that most people see through it - they recognise the fantasy and paranoia behind leftist conspiracy theories.

As indeed in mature democracies they see through similar conspiracy theories from the right. If the allegations against Obama have not achieved any purchase in the election campaign, it is because the electorate have seen the mean-minded partisan paranoia involved.

It is certainly not because of any media conspiracy (yet another conspiracy theory). There is something depressingly similar about all conspiracy theories, whether the adherents of any particular theory are rightists, leftists, anti-Israel, anti-flying saucers etc etc.

One of the reasons that I like this blog so much is that it helps me combat anti-Israel conspiracy theorists in everyday life. These particular theories have taken a particular hold amongst almost everybody that I come across on a day to day basis. I am very grateful to regular contributors to this blog who have given me ammunition to argue back.

Unfortunately conspiracy theory adherents believe in different conspiracies - rightists, leftists, anti-semitic, anti-flying saucers etc etc. There is a lot of similarity however in each conspiracy narrative. Often it is only the identity of the people alleged to be behind the conspiracy which are different.

The conspiracy theorists from the right are strangling the McCain campaign. He cannot deny them totally as it would turn off a certain section of his supporters. Equally, he cannot acknowledge them, as he would look like a deluded fantasist amongst most of the electorate. He is a decent man who is being destroyed by those who would speak for him.

Pot Head

Emmet wow being a lefty loonie is a pretty long way right on this blog. I'm a Tory and will casting my vote for David Cameron as soon as I get the chance.

Emmet

Ronnie, as far as I am aware neither Melanie nor anyone else is claiming the left-wing media is involved in an anti-McCain conspiracy. No one believes these guys have sat down and consciously conspired to destroy McCain and western civilization. It doesn't work like that. The lefties really believe they are the good guys. So do all dictatorial fruitcakes. They aren't involved in a conspiracy, because that would require some kind of unity and some kind of awareness that what they're doing is wrong. Nevertheless, they all share a politically-correct mindset which renders them incapable of seeing things as they really are; and their policies are, as Melanie keeps pointing out, undermining the very foundations of our liberty and our civilization. In fact, the only possible outcome of leftist thinking and policies is an Islamic Europe - something which they have been (admittedly unconsciously) working tirelessly to promote over the past half century.

Sylvia

The extreme word choice used in this article aids to the whipping up of emotions. I know, with all respect, that this is Melanie Phillips' style, but if this article was written in a more calmer tone it might have more effect.

There are two presidential candidates and two vice presidential candidates on offer. It is clear that none of them are perfect. I give you that. It is also clear that bias is at play, ugly racism is at play, the candidates' backgrounds are being dug up, past 'mistakes' in both camps are being exposed. Present howlers of mistakes are being made right in front of us, as shown on the TV news. We can see for ourselves. It is not a pretty sight. So far so extreme. The difference this time is that a non-white presidential candidate and a female vice-presidential candidate are on the ticket. For America this election year is historic. The slurs, the ranting, the disrespect and the totally ridiculing of America by America's own comedians to boot, shows how bad the situation is.

It is for the Americans to wake up, to question all the candidates and to question the presidential candidates' choice of running mate.

The media is focussed mainly on McCain and Palin, especially as soon as Palin opens her mouth. In comparison Obama doesn't get a look in. There are still several weeks to go, and I am sure that Obama's past and past associations will get scrutinised without fail, Melanie. Just wait and see.

I agree with the comment made by Ronnie.

Conservative Cabbie

Thankyou Ronnie for proving my point - "crazed right-wing extremist". It's the first port of call for liberal debating strategy, the insult.

Verity

This is the most puzzling election I have ever witnessed. Obama's a thug, a spiv, a fixer, and his origins and early biography appear to be a work of fiction. His associates are among the most disreputable people in the United States. Ayers, Dorhn, Farrakahn and all the other low-lifes swilling around the ankles of the residents of the windy city.

If he were charming, if he were witty, if he could speak extemporaneously and hold a crowd, one could at least say, "Well, he has charisma". But this individual has nothing but a sulky, thug-like face and a manner so bossy he makes Hitler look tentative. (Remember when his wife shrieked down the mike, "Barack won't LET you sit around! Barack won't LET you be complacement! Barack will MAKE YOU get up and blah blah blah (can't remember)."

And he has sequestered all his private records. That is so amazing that I think people haven't quite taken it in. And Mrs Shrieky's thesis at Princeton was also sequestered for the duration (Princeton has seen sense and released it) because it was judged to radically racist. His birth certificate - the one necessary qualification to stand for the Presidence of the United States - has been sequestered, for God's sake!

This was shocking enough in the Land of The Free. But when I read Charles Moore in The Torygraph-As-Was dancing around and singing this facist's praises, I changed my home page to The Speccie. Then several female columnists and Iain Dale came dancing on to let us know they had seen the light and lo! - it was good. And I haven't been back to The Telegraph since.

But it certainly has been instructive. It's like having a front row seat during the rise of Hitler.

I'll tell you something else, if Cameron gets in, which I sincerely hope he does not, he will simper and caper around Obama and never say him nay. Sarkozy will tell him to buzz off if he feels like it, but Cameron will adopt a permanent stance of obeissance.

Obama is the perfect candidate, because any opposition can be squashed as "racist", so no need to reply to points; no need to reply to criticism, because the person making the criticism must be a primitive racist ape.

Verity

Sylvia, perhaps if you had a minimal command of what I assume is your native language, one would not be so amused by your criticism of Melanie Phillips's writing. Your opening paragraph: "The extreme word choice used in this article aids to the whipping up of emotions. I know, with all respect, that this is Melanie Phillips' style, but if this article was written in a more calmer tone it might have more effect."

Here's another choice bit: " It is also clear that bias is at play, ugly racism is at play, the candidates' backgrounds are being dug up,"

Care to tell us what "ugly racism"? Unless you mean that any criticism is Obama is "ugly racism" and cannot possibly be anchored in sanity?

"The candidates' backgrounds are being dug up." I would certainly hope so! Especially if the candidate himself has had his entire background, including his birth certificate, sequestered.

"The difference this time is that a non-white presidential candidate and a female vice-presidential candidate are on the ticket."

Wrong. There was a female vice-presidential candidate running for the Democrats 20 years ago. Geraldine Ferraro ran with Walter Mondale. Governor Palin even paid tribute to her.

Ronnie

Emmet, I'm sorry but you can't be serious.

Melanie and others have spent the last few months complaining, at the tops of their voices, about the treacherous liberal conspiracy in the MSM against McCain. Its about all they have been saying, apart from abusing and insulting anyone with the nerve to disagree with their sick, paranoid and perverted world view.

The only fantasy and paranoia I've seen in the last eight years has come from the fruitcakes in the White House. When a government continually achieves the exact opposite of its stated aims, in every significant area of its activity, even the most stupid wingnut has to at least try to think it through (apparently not).

The election is lost to the Republicans simply because their current adminsitration has been a complete disaster and a total failure, on all counts. I'm afraid there is not much that Senator McCain can do about that and it has to be faced.

And, Conservative Cabbie, if we hadn't just had to endure eight years of crazed right-wing extremism dragging the USA down into the gutter and setting fire to selected parts of the world then I wouldn't be able to say it, would I?

JR

Huw - you eloquently set out everything I think about this whole situation.

Verity - "Obama's a thug, a spiv, a fixer, and his origins and early biography appear to be a work of fiction." I'd argue the same of George W Bush, and David Cameron! And they managed okay in the polls!

Israel

From Politifact.com c/o The St. Petersburg Times:

Not a radical group, and Ayers didn't run it:

For most of the election, Sen. John McCain's campaign has been somewhat subtle about trying to tie Sen. Barack Obama to the former '60s radical William Ayers.

No longer. A 90-second Web ad released Oct. 8, 2008, features sinister music, side-by-side photographs of Obama and Ayers, and a series of dubious allegations about their past connections, including this one:

"Ayers and Obama ran a radical education foundation together."

Ayers was a founding member of the militant Vietnam-era anti-war group the Weathermen. He was investigated for his role in a series of domestic bombings, but the charges were dropped in 1974 due to prosecutorial misconduct. He is now an education professor at the University of Illinois at Chicago, and actively engaged in the city's civic life.

The McCain campaign said the "radical education foundation" to which they were referring is the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, a charity endowed by publishing magnate Walter Annenberg that funded public-school programs in Chicago from 1995 to 2001.

We'll look at whether the foundation was radical. But first we have to grapple with whether Obama and Ayers ran it.

Obama served on the foundation's volunteer board from its inception in 1995 through its dissolution in 2001, and was chair for the first four years. So an argument can be made that he ran it, though an executive director handled day-to-day operations.

Ayers, who received his doctorate in education from Columbia University in 1987 and is now a professor at the University of Illinois at Chicago, was active in getting the foundation up and running. He and two other activists led the effort to secure the grant from Annenberg, and he worked without pay in the early months of 1995, prior to the board's hiring of an executive director, to help the foundation get incorporated and formulate its bylaws, said Ken Rolling, who was the foundation's only executive director. Ayers went on to become a member of the "collaborative," an advisory group that advised the board of directors and the staff.

However, Ayers "was never on the board of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge," and he "never made a decision programmatically or had a vote," Rolling said.

"He (Ayers) was at board meetings — which, by the way, were open — as a guest," Rolling said. "That is not anything near Bill Ayers and Barack Obama running the Chicago Annenberg Challenge."

Now, was the foundation radical?

The McCain campaign cited several pieces of evidence for that allegation, including a 1995 invitation from the foundation for applications from schools "that want to make radical changes in the way teachers teach and students learn." The campaign appears to have confused two different definitions of the word "radical." Clearly the invitation referred to "a considerable departure from the usual or traditional," rather than "advocating extreme measures to retain or restore a political state of affairs."

The campaign also cited two projects the foundation funded, one having to do with a United Nations-themed Peace School and another that focused on African-American studies.

"That is radical in the eye of this campaign and we imagine in the eyes of most Americans," said Michael Goldfarb, a spokesman for McCain. "It is a subjective thing, and there are going to be people in Berkeley and Chicago who think that is totally legitimate."

Teaching about the United Nations and African-American studies may not be everyone's cup of tea, but it's hardly "radical" in the same way Ayers' Vietnam-era activities were. Moreover, most of the projects the foundation funded (more on that below) were not remotely controversial.

The McCain campaign also cited an opinion piece by conservative commentator Stanley Kurtz in the Sept. 23, 2008, Wall Street Journal as evidence of the foundation's radicalism. Kurtz wrote that Ayers was the "guiding spirit" of the foundation, and it "translated Mr. Ayers's radicalism into practice."

But Ayers' views on education, though certainly reform-oriented and left-of-center, are not considered anywhere near as radical as his Vietnam-era views on war. And even if they were, there was a long list of individuals involved with the Chicago Annenberg Challenge whose positions provided them far more authority over its direction than Ayers' advisory role gave him.

Let's look at a few, starting with the funder. Annenberg was a lifelong Republican and former ambassador to the United Kingdom under President Richard Nixon. His widow, Leonore, has endorsed McCain. Kurtz might just as plausibly have accused Obama and the foundation of "translating Annenberg's conservatism into practice."

Among the other board members who served with Obama were: Stanley Ikenberry, former president of the University of Illinois; Arnold Weber, former president of Northwestern University and assistant secretary of labor in the Nixon administration; Scott Smith, then publisher of the Chicago Tribune; venture capitalist Edward Bottum; John McCarter, president of the Field Museum; Patricia Albjerg Graham, former dean of the Harvard University Graduate School of Journalism, and a host of other mainstream folks.

"The whole idea of it being radical when it was this tie of blue-chip, white-collar, CEOs and civic leaders is just ridiculous," said the foundation's former development director, Marianne Philbin.

The foundation gave money to groups of public schools – usually three to 10 – who partnered with some sort of outside organization to improve their students' achievement.

In his opinion piece, Kurtz puts a sinister spin on this: "Instead of funding schools directly, it required schools to affiliate with 'external partners,' which actually got the money...CAC disbursed money through various far-left community organizers, such as the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (or ACORN)."

Rollings said the foundation tried to fund the schools directly, but doing so proved to be a "bureaucratic nightmare." But any external group that received money had to have created a program in partnership with a network of public schools.

And though ACORN is considered a liberal organization, the vast majority of the foundation's external partners were not remotely controversial. Here are a few examples: the Chicago Symphony, the University of Chicago, Loyola University, Northwestern University, the Chicago Children's Museum, the Museum of Science and Industry, the Field Museum, the Commercial Club of Chicago, the Garfield Park Conservatory Alliance and the Logan Square Neighborhood Association.

Had Kurtz chosen to accuse Obama of carrying water for the conservative Annenberg, he might have written: "CAC disbursed money to various business-friendly entities, such as the Museum of Science and Industry and the Commercial Club of Chicago."

See how easy it is?

The programs the foundation funded were designed to allow individuals from the "external partners" – whether the musicians in the symphony or the business leaders in the commercial club – to help improve student achievement. They were along the lines of mentoring by artists, literacy instruction, professional development for teachers and administrators, and training for parents in everything from computer skills to helping their children with homework to advocating for their children at school.

This last activity – something suburban parents practice with zeal – is also suspect in Kurtz's view: "CAC records show that board member Arnold Weber was concerned that parents 'organized' by community groups might be viewed by school principals 'as a political threat.'" That is typical of Kurtz's essay – relatively innocuous facts cast in the worst possible light. That's appropriate for an opinion piece, perhaps, but hardly grounds for a purportedly factual political ad accusing the group of radicalism.

We could go on and on with evidence that the Chicago Annenberg Challenger was a rather vanilla charitable group. For example, under the deal with Annenberg every dollar from him had to be matched by two from elsewhere. The co-funders were a host of respected, mainstream institutions, such as the National Science Foundation, the John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation, the W.K. Kellogg Foundation and the Chicago Public Schools.

In short, this was a mainstream foundation funded by a mainstream, Republican business leader and led by an overwhelmingly mainstream, civic-minded group of individuals. Ayers' involvement in its inception and on an advisory committee do not make it radical – nor does the funding of programs involving the United Nations and African-American studies.

This attack is false, but it's more than that – it's malicious. It unfairly tars not just Obama, but all the other prominent, well-respected Chicagoans who also volunteered their time to the foundation. They came from all walks of life and all political backgrounds, and there's ample evidence their mission was nothing more than improving ailing public schools in Chicago. Yet in the heat of a political campaign they have been accused of financing radicalism. That's Pants on Fire wrong.

And yuet again facts prove they have a liberal bias.

Verity

JR - Obama came from nowhere; he has hidden his background; he's a spiv, a fixer and his friends are some of the most unsavoury people in the Western world.

George Bush did not come from nowhere. Neither did David Cameron. George Bush comes from a family with a long, distinguished record of public service. Three generations in elected government. He has a degree, on his own merits - not affirmative action or "reverse discrimination" - from Harvard and another from Yale. He is the only governor of Texas ever to have been elected for two consecutive terms. He can pilot a jet fighter plane. His father piloted fighter planes in WWII.

This man did not come from nowhere.

David Cameron too has a family record that is open and known.

Neither man had parents who were rabid Marxists.

Obama doesn't even have a birth certificate. His young years all the way up until he went to Harvard, are very, very murky; very shadowy. So is his family history. Where did his father go? How many half-siblings does Obama actually have? Does anyone know? Why did he go over and interfere in an election in Kenya, taking the side of the communist? Who's he connected with in that part of the world?

I would say this spiv and confidence trickster came from nowhere.

Sylvia - the multiligual one

"TRUTH goes under the bus".

VERITY, if this is your name, your choice of words and your insults to fellow contributors are so ugly, you must be embarrassing the natives.

If you cannot discuss a subject without staying sensible and civilised, it has no point to respond to your utterings. You are devaluing this blog.

Why do you need to be so aggressive? What ails you?

john doe

I'm a firm believer in free speech.....except when I read Ronnie's worthless troglodytic bilge.

Verity

Israel - Where's Obama's birth certificate proving that he was born on United States soil and is thus eligible to stand for the presidency?

David Lindsay

Verity, you have finally jumped the shark?

Anyway, Obama an "Arab", as McCain had to correct someone for suggesting? He's not. But there are about a million more Arabs than Jews in America.

The lady in question probably meant that he was a Muslim (most of whom are not Arabs, while by no means all Arabs are Muslims). He's not. But what if he were? There are far more Muslims in America than, for example, Episcopalians such as McCain.

The problem is not that many Americans do not know what their own country is really like these days. It is that they do know. Perfectly well.

And the real political issue is this: the continuing hegemony of those, such as the Bushes and the Clintons, who are literally bankrolled by the likes of Kuwait, the UAE and, above all, Saudi Arabia (whence came the 9/11 attacks)? Or Obama, who isn't?

Obamerica or Amerarabia: which is it to be?

Kevyn Bodman

What does 'jump the shark' mean?

David Lindsay

It's from an episode in one of the later series of Happy Days, and means that something has now passed beyond even self-parody.

For example, Verity suggesting that Obama may not have been born in America.

Verity

Kevyn Bodman - You took the question right out of my mouth.

Also, I don't know if David Lindsay's background on the Islamic world was intended for me, but I have not devoted much attention in my posts to claims about his heritage or religion, because there are more immediate issues to worry about. Like is he qualified by birth to stand for the presidency of the US? And various unsavoury associations.

And as John W points out on the thread above, with the print and electronic media almost 100% on his side, swamping the country with pro-Obama propaganda and denying the Reps any publicity at all, Obama should be much, much further ahead with such a wind in his sails. Yet, he's only six or seven points ahead.

Gareth

I have not been so worried since Labour won in 1974. If Obama wins, the end result will be worse than the Winter of Discontent. McCain is far too gentlemanly to deal with him.

Ronnie

The 'reps' have had lots of publicity, its just all been bad because their campaign is spectacularly out of touch with the general mood of the country. The 'reps' base has shrunk now as their broader coalition has fallen apart.

We are down to a few mouth-breathers, knuckle-draggers and red necks...:-) sorry just kidding.

Israel

Verity:

Why don't you do us a favour and post a list of the words which trigger your insane uninformed debunked rants?

That way it will save everyone time posting what is real time and again.

Jaws

Kevyn-When a TV show is over and become ridiculous it has "Jumped the Shark"

The Phrase comes from this scene in Happy Days where Fonzie jumps the shark

http://tinyurl.com/4x9trw

Dave

Vherity: I think the whole birth certificate thing was done to death months ago. But I guess you don't have access to Google at the moment. So just for you... it's Obama's birth certificate;
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/06/obama-birth.html
Now I hear John McCain wasn't born in the US at all...

Alexandrovich

"... but I have not devoted much attention in my posts to claims about his heritage or religion" says Verity.

She's finally flipped.

Pip

I was beginning to have some hope for the Republicans, but this weekend, for me, McCain blew that little hope I had, out of the window.

What a sad state of affairs when a politician decides to back down on the truth about his opposition.

The man should retire and hand the reigns to Palin. She has backbone, McCain's had crumbled.

John Montgomery

Israel, if you really believe that Ayers' radical education programme in Chicago was all harmless fun, then you are very naive. Any association with the left would prove to you that they live in a world of conspiracy and plotting to overthrow the white male hegemony and capitalism. THey are good at putting up fronts and covering their tracks admittedly. Obama has been groomed for this since the 1980s which was when he truly met Bill Ayers for the first time. Ayers should be in prison along with Retsko and Farrakhan and Frankin Raines.

Ronnie, your view of extremists running the USA over the past 8 years is just that: your opinion. I disagree. I think Bush has prevented more 9/11 attacks, is right to be bringing democracy and stability to the Middle East (a sort of Marshall Plan), is right about Iran and is right about Israel and a 2 nation solution. The current banking collapse can be traced to Fannie Mae and Bill Clinton (no wonder he is laying low).

But it is what happens in the next few years if Obama gets in. The Middle East will regress 50-100 years, Iran will invade Iraq and Israel will attack Iran whilst also defending herslef from Syria and Hetzbollah and Hamas. On the economy, capital will flee America and Obama's taxes and the stock market rally will fail. White people will leave the cities in droves.

And George Bush won't be around for you to blame.

Douglas

Huw Thornton Thank you. An erudite analysis. I too have a fondness for Melanie's blog, in particular, the informed contributions on Israel.

The American election appears to have addled an excellent brain. A pity. This rhetoric is a mirror-image of the anti-Semetic tropes detested and confronted by all friends of Israel.

Sylvia - 'the multilingual one'. I enjoyed and am in agreement with your thoughtful contribution.

You are equally correct on other matters. Verbal diarrhoea, while devoid of substance is repetitive and embarrassing. Best ignored. The woman is a parody. The Thatcher 'nouveau' class, self-constructed, bloated with conceit, ignorant of civilized codes; an ill-mannered bully desperate to be 'included'. Repugnant, but at the same time pitiful.

Verity

Dave - No, "the birth certificate thing" wasn't done to death months ago. What was cobbled up was some sort of "certified" copy that didn't even look like an American birth certificate.

John McCain was born on US soil at a US navel base in Panama, as I believe every fule no.

Dave

Vherity: Because if you were faking a birth certificate you'd really want to make sure it didn't look like the real thing wouldn't you?
[shakes head]

daustins

There is an infantile whine to the left--of entitlement and rage. The world will be what they want it to be because THEY demand it to be so. One of the things that I've noticed over the years is that the principal characteristic of the left is to unlink actions from consequences--they get their power by determining who pays for what. Playing God, as it were.

Childish, and as brutal as a child without the sense that there are other people in the world besides itself.

Israel

John Montgomery:

For the last 12 of 14 years the REPUBLICANS have been in charge of the US Congress. For the last 8 years bush has been president of the US with complete control of all three branches of government (until '06). Even in the States they have dropped the "it's all Clinton's fault" mantra as it's now concidered too stupid to continue with because of the time scale. I love the fact that you gloss over years and years of deregulation of the US financial market to allow the banks to cash in on the sub-prime mortgage cash bonanza and that little amendment to the financial bill slipped in on xmas eve 2000 by Texas congressman Phil Gramm (what HE doing now, l wonder?) or the actions of others linked to the republicans who were in charge throughout the main part of the start of this crisis. Maybe people should have listened to one of the few men who saw this coming, namely Paul Krugman. What was it that happened with him yesterday? Oh yeah, he was awarded the NOBEL PRIZE for ECONOMICS.

As for your claims of me being naive when it comes to the Annenberg Challenge in Chicago, well l must be on a very large list of republicans INCLUDING the Annenberg family, Nancy Reagan and all those republicans who were also involved in it. The growing group of people who believe this is a conspiracy has now got to be be bigger than those who belive that the moon landings were faked, the Illuminati are in control and that bush ordered 9/11. The next thing is to see you all conspiracy theorists in David Icke style purple shellsuits!!

Hayward Maberley

Melanie et al.
So what truth is under the bus?
McCain, who was a member of the “US Council of World Freedom” from around 1982-1986-an organization which was funding such “humanitarians” as the Contra Rebels in Nicaragua and the Death Squads of El Salvador. McCain’s chief adviser-Charles Black Jr-was a high paid lobbyist acting in the name of such “good souls” as Marcos and Mobutu, as well as such terrorist organizations as UNITA and the Contra rebels. So, if Obama’s tenuous links to Ayers makes him unfit for High Office, then McCain’s strong links to these repugnant people should be even more of a put off for voters. Yet guess which is the stuff most raved about by Melanie et al.

Ronnie

John Montgomery, I'm not really sure what to say to you. Yes, we obviously disagree but I genuinely wonder where you've been for the last eight years.

Who knows if Bush has prevented any more 9/11s, he will certainly claim to have done so. However Bin Laden is still out there and there seems no prospect of him being caught and brought to justice. I find that incredible and just wonder why that state of affairs has been allowed to exist.

Instead of sealing the deal in Afghanistan and taking Bin Laden out for good, Bush diverted all his resources to Iraq, which had nothing to do with 9/11. Now Afghanistan is close to being back where it started. A failure.

Do you honsetly think that western liberal (Judeo/Christian) democracy can be forced on middle eastern (Muslim) countries by invasion? Do you see a spread of democracy across the middle east right now? Have any of the dynasties in place when Bush entered the White House been replaced? What on earth are you talking about here?

Ironically, the only example of a half-proper election resulted in a victory for Hamas. A result the west refused to recognise. It is quite likely that if proper elections were held in currently western-friendly countries like Egypt and Saudi Arabia, parties hostile to the west would make huge gains and we would refuse to recognise them too. That particular policy is a failed nonsense.

In the case of Iraq, the 'democracy' that is emerging after the invasion is chaotic and schismatic at best. Failure.

Iran won the gulf war and is now in a position of much greater strength in the region as a result of Bush's brainless policies. Iran doesn't actualy need to invade Iraq, it just has to wait... Failure.

Actually, the case of Iran, the great enemy, puzzles me. Reagan sold missiles to Iran to fund his illegal activities in central America. Bush willfully created the strategic conditions in which Iran could become stronger and much more influential. Are you sure that Iran is an enemy in the eyes of the Republican party or is it all just rhetoric?

In the case of Israel it seems obvious that the two state solution is the most sensible and yet deep down you feel that neither side want that. The fundamental issues remain unresolved over a long period of time - security, settlement building, land apportionment, the return of refugees and the status of Jerusalem. I feel that Bush hasn't tried very hard but, to be fair, I don't think it would have made much difference as the parties are simply not ready to agree for a variety of reasons. Not a failure but very far from a success.

I'm afraid that the financial crisis is about a lot more than Fannie Mae etc. It can't be right that our financial system is based on gambling to the extent that the lifes' work of millions of people can go up in smoke over night, every twenty years or so. A regime of poorly regulated credit on a global scale is simply not stable or sensible. This current situation is the result, markets go down as well as up but you have to thnk that we can do better than this.

As for extremism, well I think that uneccessary and pointless war is extreme behaviour. I think that to care so little for human life that you don't even keep a count of civilian deaths during your pointless war, is extreme. I think that subverting your own legal system by subcontracting the torture of suspects to other countries, is extreme. I think that kidnapping and then holding people for years without charge is extreme by western standards. I think that firing attorneys who may not agree with you is extreme. I think that breaking the cover of your own CIA operatives to get petty revenge is extreme.

In the past I thought that funding murderers in central America who then killed an archbishop among thousands of others, and raped and murdered nuns, was extreme. I thought that training South American regimes to torture trade unionists and then throw them into the ocean from helicopters was extreme.

I could go on...

Do you, John, think that the leaders of the free world should behave like that?

Louise

As John B mentions, even the right-of-centre British "Daily Telegraph" has joined in with these slurs on McCain. Almost from the day she was selcted as running-mate, its female columnists, bitchy-style, have been deriding and trivialising Sarah Palin. At this point "Stop the world, I want to get off!" seems the only option for those of us who dread seeing Obama as leader of the (for the present) Free World!

Verity

Dhave writes: "Vherity: Because if you were faking a birth certificate you'd really want to make sure it didn't look like the real thing wouldn't you? [shakes head]"

Hello? Did I write that he "faked" a birth certificate, meaning he presented a document purporting to be a birth certificate? Or did I make reference to a copy?

It was supposed to be an attestation, by someone who had seen Obama's birth certificate. It was not supposed to be an actual copy (for which we have photocopy machines). It was from some supposed government office, not the Registrar's office.

Why he had to show a "copy" and not the original has not been explained. Surely the Registrar's office has a real, certified copy? Surely the hospital in Honolulu, if that is indeed where he was born and I am not convinced, has a record of the birth? It was in the 1960s, for heaven's sake! Surely the Registrar's office has a copy of the certificate on file, if indeed there is one.

As this is the prime qualification for standing for the presidency of the United States, this lack of proof is quite disturbing on several levels, not the least of which is the arrogant assumption that the rules and laws do not apply to Barack Obama.

Obama's behaviour is disturbing in many ways. Why has he not released his medical records? The other three candidates have. Although it is not a legal requirement, it has become routine. Not with our precious boy, though, who doesn't have to adhere to the norms because he is just so darn special. Obama sent in a doctor's note to say he was fine.

Ronnie

Oh God Verity, you are so boring.

With A Wink from Sarah Palin!

Ronnie - The simple solution is, don't read my posts. I don't read yours. (I read that rare single sentence post above before I saw your name.)

the objective thinking media

As an American I get pretty sick of the obvious liberal bias in the main stream media. I understand that no article or piece of information from another human being in 100% free of biased. However, the amount of liberal lies and spin on the truth in ridiculous. The pro-Obama news outlets are so busy smearing Sara Palin for everything from her daughters pregnancy to her inexperience (Obama has only been a US senator for 3 years with no executive experience whatsoever)that they cannot report on things like:
Nancy Pelosi's husband funneling at least $100,000 dollars in campaing money to his business;
Chris Dodd taking favors from Countrywide before it had problems;
William Jefferson (a democratic congressman from Louisiana) accepting bribes from executive officials in Nigeria;
or John Edwards cheating on his wife after she had been diagnosed with breast cancer not to mention he was running for president during the afair (by the way, what was he planning to do had he become the nominee?)You would have to been pretty dumb to say their isn't an extreme liberal biased in the main stream media. They are propaganda machines that lie to millions of people everyday.

just another liberal fascist

Why won't the American main stream media report on things like:
Nancy Pelosi's husband funneling at least $100,000. in campaign money to his business;
Chris Dodd taking favors from Countrywide before it started having problems;
or William Jefferson (a democratic congressman from Louisiana) accepting bribes from executive officials in Nigeria;
or John Edwards cheating on his wife after she had been diagnosed with breast cancer not to mention he was running for president during the afair (by the way, what was he planning to do had he become the nominee?). They won't report on these things because they are self-imposed propaganda machines. They refuse to shine light on yet alone dig into what Obama's true beliefs are (i.e. black liberation theology, and ACORN). It's sad that the American media has so willingly let the American public down. However, there are days when I wonder if Americans would pay attention to the truth even if it was given to them. I fear that as long as they have McDonalds to eat at and a football game to watch they won't care how broken down their education system and health care system become. Nor will they care how many times their civil liberties get taken away from them before it is to late. I fear the consequences of this carelessness is coming soon.

Ronnie

Sadly, Verity/With a Wink From Sarah Palin! or whatever you want to call yourself, my not reading your awful posts will not make you less boring.

just another liberal facist

good article. it has lots of truth; something you don't find in main stream american media.

phil

Could it just be that those that prefer Obama are not left wing radicals ,moonbats or other choice expressions bandied around by the fragrant one and her pals -Perhaps they are those that do not think sen MCain is the right person for the job and that his running mate is off the scale entirely.I
have said elsewhere that we have a choice of only two ,so can I assume the fragrant one (V)would be glad to accept a president who is not fit for purpose even though he is a very nice man ? I for one do not wish to be ruled by the thoughts of Verity,a person A plus in sarcasm but not wit and one whose political judgement bears no resemblance to common sense

phillip

Freedom-loving Americans need to keep a few simple facts in mind:

1) Our freedoms come from God, not Democrats

2) Those freedoms are every bit as worthy of our defense now as they were in 1776

Jeff

Your exactly right Melanie.
Good article.