“Kill him!”? “Sit down, boy!”?

This isn’t just unethical, it’s beginning to look evil and terrifying.

My column isn’t usually devoted to U.S. politics, but I couldn’t help but comment on the McCain/Palin inciting hatred and death threats, all with a glossy finish of faux feminism on top, no less.

If anyone shouted “kill him” when Obama spoke on McCain, Obama would be in Gitmo already.

Of course, as your post makes obvious, the same standards simply don’t apply to McCain or, for that matter, Palin.

http://www.salon.com/opinion/feature/2008/10/07/palins_unamerican/index.html?source=rss&aim=/opinion/feature

carry on though, just wanted to throw that in there

They’re just doing this to distract from the fact that our country’s economy is melting down. Pointing fingers only gets you so far.

Also, choice means making decisions and planning. Which I would argue extends beyond reproductive rights. It means recognizing when you have enough resources to commit to something like: buying a home, going on a trip, having a baby. Frankly if everyone exercised a little more long term planning, we’d all be in better shape right now. Just like an over-leveraged market, not being intentional about your choices leads to the disaster of mismanagement our country is experiencing now.

Whatever you think about Obama’s limited contact with Bill Ayers, there hasn’t been any evidence that Ayers ever condoned or promoted terrorism in Obama’s presence. There hasn’t been any evidence that Obama ever met with Ayers during his presidential campaign, or that Obama is still willing to lend Ayers a sympathetic ear.

while i appreciate the work being done to give extra attention to McCain’s support of and connections to anti-choice terrorists, the way Ayers is referenced in the quote is ill-informed and perpetuating the validity of the debate through continued demonization.

First, to claim that Ayers has not “condoned or promoted terrorism in Obama’s presence” suggests that Ayers is some version of the radical, yet non-violent radical, that he was almost 40 years ago. This is by all rational accounts not an issue. Ayers is a very mainstream (sorry, Bill), though very vigilant, crusader for social justice – his 60s-era radicalism is clearly of the past.

Second, and ideologically – not factually – problematic, is your unfortunate claim that Obama ought not seek Ayers’ council. If you are familiar with Ayers’ writings and beliefs you would certainly want Obama to listen to Ayers regarding education policy. Ayers is for giving dignity to students who are in the most difficult situations. Ayers is supportive of teachers everywhere for the difficult job they do and the very mixed support they receive throughout society. Ayers is against the NCLB testing regime that suggests more tests and “accountability” will solve the racist, classist, and sexist issues students face daily in the schools. related, there is unfortunate talk that Obama might have a sympathetic ear for the highly problematic, and effectively conservative, Arne Duncan, CEO of Chicago Public Schools, who is gung-ho for understanding schooling as a business practice, ushering in privatizing and typical “solutions” of the “marketplace”.

perhaps most importantly for many readers of this excellent blog, Ayers is a conscientious feminist. as a current PhD student that works with him, and a long-time reader (and infrequent commenter) on this blog, i feel very disheartened that he should be treated in such a way as to diminish him as a cipher in Obama’s quest for the presidency. Ayers’ classroom is one of the best learning environments i have experienced in my too-long tenure as a student. Ayers’ openness to and caring for people and their needs has kept him exceptionally busy over the five years that i have known him, and in that time he has shown time and again that his (home’s) door is always open and he will always make time for anyone who asks – he is without a doubt the most giving person i have known as a teacher.

please rethink your use of Ayers as “that terrorist Obama doesn’t know” – he, and we, deserve so much more. also, please consider visiting this blog of support for Ayers, signed by students, peers, and others who not only want to challenge the current McCain tactics of demonizing Ayers and Obama, but want to highlight the conservative move to villify progressive voices in the academy, as well as society-at-large

thanks

where does this come from? seriously? can i turn on my TV and order an abortion right after the latest episode of “Trueblood”???

fucking morons.

It’s not politically correct to say so, but John Mccain bombed heavily populated urban areas in Vietnam. He was involved in actual terrorism.

I am a bit wary of such overly broad usage of the term “terrorism” as it is reminiscent of overly broad statements I heard from many of the same progressive undergrads whose ignorance/deliberate omission of historical context/factors meant that they often lambasted the American air campaign in such a way to portray Imperial Japan as a put upon innocent country…..ignoring/omitting the fact that Japan’s colonialist adventurism from 1931 onwards was a huge factor……especially the militarists’ initiation of what they thought would be a “short easy” colonialist war in China which eventually snowballed into the Second Sino-Japanese War/WWII.

And next time, if there is one, please cite a reliable source.

(Sorry to feed the troll, Jill.)

I agree that the pre-emptive doctrine is a form of terrorism. I disagree that most americans wouldn’t understand the argument that Bush is an international terrorist. I think they might disagree, but that’s really different from “not understanding.” I think claiming that most people wouldn’t understand your position is taking the easy way out. Even extremely complicated ideas can be made to be understandable if the person presented them is committed enough to trying to get the idea across.