Yeah, stopped listening at the hating america part.

Did I listen to the same MP3 as you?

Didn't the guy also say his wife wasn't proud of america or some such irrelevant bullshit?

Look, if you're going to attack a guy, attack his policies. It's not that hard. This shit about ayers, his pastor.. As long as Obama says "Yeah what that guy did was wrong", I don't give a flying fuck about it. It's totally ridiculous.

You defended Palin when people started talking shit about her family issues or whatever, why can't you see the irrelevance of Obama's supposed associations with these "nefarious characters"? Show me one mainstream politician that hasn't associated with a shady person. They're all taking money from fucking corporations and PACs and promising to give back handouts when they get into power, what's so special about Obama associating with some pussy who bombed a statue? Why is the fact that Obama's ex-pastor a racist fuck of immediate importance? Are you really that threatened by these people? Show me a photo of Obama shaking Bin Laden's hand and I'll be concerned, but this shit is totally ridiculous.

Bristol, Piper, Track, Willow, Trig.
She's as desperate that her children get attention as she is to get attention, herself. I think that says something about her character. But what would you expect of someone who took part in the Miss Alaska pageant? You know those dumbass bimbos who trip all over the stage at the Miss America pageants? Yeah... that's what she was going for.

As for the people around her..
Her husband was a member of the Alaskan Independence Party who, among other things, is known for its considerations of seceding from the US, either to join Canada or become a Canadian territory.

You can find something in every facet of this woman's life that makes her a questionable candidate.

Yes, Ayres is essentially a Timothy McVeigh who beat the rap because the prosecutor dropped the ball, and got off on a technicality.

As to Obama's denouncing it, he's dodged the issues by saying things like "I never heard Reverend Wright say those kinds of things," he's said he doesn't agree with them, but he hasn't denounced them in the sense of condemning what they did/said.  Really, though, it's beside the point in my position that I don't trust what any politician says.

To quote a friend of mine:  Why are these associations important? Do I think Obama is as corrupt as Rezko? Or shares Wright's angry racism or Ayers's unreconstructed 1960s radicalism?

No. But that does not make these associations irrelevant. They tell us two important things about Obama.

First, his cynicism and ruthlessness. He found these men useful, and use them he did. Would you attend a church whose pastor was spreading racial animosity from the pulpit? Would you even shake hands with -- let alone serve on two boards with -- an unrepentant terrorist, whether he bombed U.S. military installations or abortion clinics?

Most Americans would not, on the grounds of sheer indecency. Yet Obama did, if not out of conviction then out of expediency. He was a young man on the make, an unknown outsider working his way into Chicago politics. He played the game with everyone, without qualms and with obvious success.

Obama is not the first politician to rise through a corrupt political machine. But he is one of the rare few to then have the audacity to present himself as a transcendent healer, hovering above and bringing redemption to the "old politics" -- of the kind he had enthusiastically embraced in Chicago in the service of his own ambition.

Second, and even more disturbing than the cynicism, is the window these associations give on Obama's core beliefs. He doesn't share the Rev. Wright's poisonous views of race nor Ayers's views, past and present, about the evil that is American society. But Obama clearly did not consider these views beyond the pale. For many years he swam easily and without protest in that fetid pond.

Until now. Today, on the threshold of the presidency, Obama concedes the odiousness of these associations, which is why he has severed them. But for the years in which he sat in Wright's pews and shared common purpose on boards with Ayers, Obama considered them a legitimate, indeed unremarkable, part of social discourse.

Do you? Obama is a man of first-class intellect and first-class temperament. But his character remains highly suspect. There is a difference between temperament and character. Equanimity is a virtue. Tolerance of the obscene is not.

It just bugged me when Obama said he had no idea Wright gave those kinds of sermons.

And AIDS is a secret government engineered virus that was tested on black people?