Who’s Playing “Guilt by Association” Here?

[5711-Marine]

Who’s Playing “Guilt by Association” Here?
Abe Greenwald - 10.11.2008 - 11:27 AM

If Obama supporters are upset with the guilt-by-association paradigm, they’ve picked a funny way of showing it: holding John McCain and Sarah Palin accountable for every loose nut that shows up to bark a racial slur into a crowd of thousands. It is by now axiomatic on the Left that McCain is stoking racial and religious intolerance in a last ditch effort to save a spiraling campaign. The evidence for this? Two individuals who said hateful things in the audience of two campaign events.

While McCain tries to point to real concerns about associates and partners in Obama’s past–dangerous men who have played indispensable roles in Obama’s political biography, the Left is on fire over two men McCain and Palin likely never met. Yet, they claim it is McCain’s desperation that finds him reaching so improbably for bogeymen in Obama’s history.

In today’s Washington Post, novelist Khaled Hosseini steps it up a notch and baldly lies about the McCain camp’s response to speakers who invoked Barack Obama’s middle name at recent McCain rallies. “The real affront is the lack of firm response from either McCain or Palin,” Hosseini writes in the piece dated October 12. Meanwhile, on October 8, the AP reported the McCain campaign issued a denouncement by email and McCain spokesman Paul Lindsay said,

We do not condone this inappropriate rhetoric which distracts from the real questions of judgment, character and expeience that voters will base their decisions on this November.

Hossieni asks, “Is inaction tantamount to consent?” Good question. Should Americans interpret the years of Obama’s inaction while serving alongside a known terrorists in two different bodies as consent? Actually, we don’t have to bother with interpretation: Obama endorsed Bill Ayers book, so we know he’s a fan. Okay, should Americans interpret Obama’s inaction for two decades sitting in the pews of Jeremiah Wright’s church as consent? Oh yeah, there again we know the answer: Obama told us he could not disown Wright. In Obama’s case, it’s nothing short of guilt-by-endorsement.

So, the question really needs to be put to the electorate. What might you be endorsing if you elect Barack Obama?

[Morel42]

I had written a huge response to that, and then realized it was pointless..

So I say this..

Stop it.

God, I don't know why people are so blind about the damage that this does. The economy tanks.. War sucks our treasury dry... Corruption is rampet.. What do the Republicans do? Scream about a pastor.. Someone who served on a board with Obama. Repeat the same mantra "Democrats will raise taxes.. And Spend more" It doesn't matter if it's the truth or not.. Bush destroyed that.. People see 10 TRILLION in debt.. War, Lies, corruption, and civil liberties destroyed. You've lost your credibility..

You're doing nothing that will help McCain win. In fact, you deliver the presidency to him on a silver platter, while making sure that the Democrats have a huge majority in congress, and you know what the bitch of the matter is.

You're killing the 2nd amendment with it.

You placed all the eggs in one basket..
Instead of trying to convince the Democratic members, you all join the Republican ticket.
Instead of trying to educate young people about this logically and intellegently and talk about fiscal control. You scream about Obama's pastor. Every time you bring this up, it makes everyone in the party look like a tin foil hat wearing loon. It's waste of time, energy, and will end up killing the party, and since you've linked the 2nd amendment with that party, when it falls it takes that right with it.

I'm not saying it very well.. But bear with me if you can please.

The ONLY way.. THE ONLY WAY to ever make sure that the 2nd amendment is protected is to make sure that BOTH parties have major numbers of pro 2nd amendment people enrolled in them. When you throw everything into one party, that party will eventually lose all power. Democrat, or Republican.

McCain is going to lose. Unless Obama makes love to cow on stage in the middle of Central park in New York, it's going to happen. Every post like this, every video that shows people screaming "Commie Fags" only makes this end that much more likely to happen.

You killing yourselves.. The world has changed.. People have changed.. Youth either no longer cares about anything but superficial things, or they've been convinced that gun control is a good thing.
There is a culture change happening in this country.. People are more connected.. And more divided. More informed, and know more then ever before. The image of the old log cabin, apple pie, and the flag waving bravely with pride have been destroyed by the last 8 years of Bush in the eyes of the youth of this nation.
The day of reckoning isn't quite here yet.. But in 10 years, the 2nd amendment will be dead if you keep this going.

It's so hard to describe what I'm trying to relate.. It's a mood.. a wave if you will.. A shift in the thinking of every day people.. I talk to people, and the few people (other then here) that I talk to who support McCain, can't tell me why.. They say "I don't trust that SOB" or "he's not like me" or other some idiotic reason.. No plan that they disagree with, no stance other then abortion (which is pointless) or even pure racist ideas.

I'm not trying to say negative things about anyone.. I'm really not. What I'm trying to convey is that... Grrr.. I don't have the words..

I'm trying to convey that this sort of thing doesn't matter.. You can't use hate and attack and fear on someone like Obama. He's too cool, he's too logical.. He's exactly the opposite of what Bush has been. And the Republicans have never understood that.

I know you love your country.. I would never question that. I'm not even attacking your party, I'm trying to give a warning. That if that the Republican party doesn't change, they'll fall so hard, they'll take every ideal that people linked with them down too.

Sorry for the confusing rambling of this post.. But damn, it's not easy to put into words lol

[5711-Marine]

You're killing the 2nd amendment with it.

You placed all the eggs in one basket..
Instead of trying to convince the Democratic members, you all join the Republican ticket.
Instead of trying to educate young people about this logically and intellegently and talk about fiscal control. You scream about Obama's pastor. Every time you bring this up, it makes everyone in the party look like a tin foil hat wearing loon. It's waste of time, energy, and will end up killing the party, and since you've linked the 2nd amendment with that party, when it falls it takes that right with it.

[snip]

The day of reckoning isn't quite here yet.. But in 10 years, the 2nd amendment will be dead if you keep this going.

It's so hard to describe what I'm trying to relate.. It's a mood.. a wave if you will.. A shift in the thinking of every day people.. I talk to people, and the few people (other then here) that I talk to who support McCain, can't tell me why.. They say "I don't trust that SOB" or "he's not like me" or other some idiotic reason.. No plan that they disagree with, no stance other then abortion (which is pointless) or even pure racist ideas.

Your post is the perfect example of why Obama is in the lead in the polls. Reread the OP and note that the gist of the article says that Obama complains about McCain questioning some of the associations that may have played a role in forming Obama's politics. Yet the same person who claims guilt by association, tries to hold McCain accountable for things said by a few nuts in a large crowd at a campaign rally? Then you jump in and claim

God, I don't know why people are so blind about the damage that this does. The economy tanks.. War sucks our treasury dry... Corruption is rampet.. What do the Republicans do? Scream about a pastor.. Someone who served on a board with Obama.

Obama has lied about each of these associations. Ayers is just a guy in my neighborhood.

Please explain how I or anyone who supports McCain have tied the 2nd Amendment to a single party? The facts are clear based upon past voting records for McCain and Obama which candidate supports the 2nd Amendment.

Tying 2A support to a candidate is not tying it to a party.

Furthermore I certainly can provide you with issues I completely disagree with from the Obama Campaign.

First and foremost, I completely reject the class warfare which is the standard campaign tactic of the Democrat party. Vote for me and I will tax the rich and give you more.

Other issues I completely disagree with him on:

1. Diplomacy: Obama supports tough, direct presidential diplomacy with Iran without preconditions. (still on his website today, after multiple lies about him never saying it)

2. Taxes: he is full of shit that he will deliver a "middle class" tax cut, even when asked what he would not be able to do given the current economic crisis he said in the last debate he would slow his spending not cut it.

3. His voting record: McCain may have voted 90% of the time with his party. Obama has voted 96% of the time with his party.

4. Foreign Policy: "Obama and Biden will bring foreign policy decisions directly to the people by requiring his national security officials to have periodic national broadband town hall meetings to discuss foreign policy. " (from his website) This is a really bad idea.

5. Fiscal Responsibility: Exactly how does he plan to pay for all of his new spending? "by rolling back the Bush tax cuts for Americans earning more than $250,000 per year and retaining the estate tax at its 2009 level." also from his website.

6. Defense: He has no clue about the military but he uses it well with other Americans who are also ignorant about the military.

7. Retirement Savings: "Create Automatic Workplace Pensions: The Obama-Biden retirement security plan will automatically enroll workers in a workplace pension plan. Under their plan, employers who do not currently offer a retirement plan, will be required to enroll their employees in a direct-deposit IRA account that is compatible to existing direct-deposit payroll systems."

8. Energy: "Enact a Windfall Profits Tax to Provide a $1,000 Emergency Energy Rebate to American Families. " -- With oil below $80 a barrel this idea is dead. And BTW the public utilities commission allows the phone companies to make a 13% profit but an oil company making 10% profit is obscene?

[Morel42]

Your post is the perfect example of why Obama is in the lead in the polls. Reread the OP and note that the gist of the article says that Obama complains about McCain questioning some of the associations that may have played a role in forming Obama's politics. Yet the same person who claims guilt by association, tries to hold McCain accountable for things said by a few nuts in a large crowd at a campaign rally? Then you jump in and claim



Obama has lied about each of these associations. Ayers is just a guy in my neighborhood.

Please explain how I or anyone who supports McCain have tied the 2nd Amendment to a single party? The facts are clear based upon past voting records for McCain and Obama which candidate supports the 2nd Amendment.

Tying 2A support to a candidate is not tying it to a party.

Furthermore I certainly can provide you with issues I completely disagree with from the Obama Campaign.

First and foremost, I completely reject the class warfare which is the standard campaign tactic of the Democrat party. Vote for me and I will tax the rich and give you more.

Other issues I completely disagree with him on:

1. Diplomacy: Obama supports tough, direct presidential diplomacy with Iran without preconditions. (still on his website today, after multiple lies about him never saying it)

2. Taxes: he is full of shit that he will deliver a "middle class" tax cut, even when asked what he would not be able to do given the current economic crisis he said in the last debate he would slow his spending not cut it.

3. His voting record: McCain may have voted 90% of the time with his party. Obama has voted 96% of the time with his party.

4. Foreign Policy: "Obama and Biden will bring foreign policy decisions directly to the people by requiring his national security officials to have periodic national broadband town hall meetings to discuss foreign policy. " (from his website) This is a really bad idea.

5. Fiscal Responsibility: Exactly how does he plan to pay for all of his new spending? "by rolling back the Bush tax cuts for Americans earning more than $250,000 per year and retaining the estate tax at its 2009 level." also from his website.

6. Defense: He has no clue about the military but he uses it well with other Americans who are also ignorant about the military.

7. Retirement Savings: "Create Automatic Workplace Pensions: The Obama-Biden retirement security plan will automatically enroll workers in a workplace pension plan. Under their plan, employers who do not currently offer a retirement plan, will be required to enroll their employees in a direct-deposit IRA account that is compatible to existing direct-deposit payroll systems."

8. Energy: "Enact a Windfall Profits Tax to Provide a $1,000 Emergency Energy Rebate to American Families. " -- With oil below $80 a barrel this idea is dead. And BTW the public utilities commission allows the phone companies to make a 13% profit but an oil company making 10% profit is obscene?

I wasn't talking about you specifically man when it came to having good reasons..

But as far as the 2nd amendment being tied to the Republican party, by a large margin it is.. At least in Congress.. Local and State level Gov'ts do have a mixture of pro-2nd Democrats in office, which is a great thing.
A majority of Democrats there support some sort of Gun Control. Not ALL, but a majority.. Not only that, the shift in culture among the youth is toward the left.
Fast forward 10 years and the picture isn't looking too rosy.. All i'm saying is that the strategy that is being used by the Republican party is likely going to end up causing them long term, along with hurting the issues that are mainly associated with them.

[5711-Marine]

I wasn't talking about you specifically man when it came to having good reasons..

But as far as the 2nd amendment being tied to the Republican party, by a large margin it is.. At least in Congress.. Local and State level Gov'ts do have a mixture of pro-2nd Democrats in office, which is a great thing.
A majority of Democrats there support some sort of Gun Control. Not ALL, but a majority.. Not only that, the shift in culture among the youth is toward the left.
Fast forward 10 years and the picture isn't looking too rosy.. All i'm saying is that the strategy that is being used by the Republican party is likely going to end up causing them long term, along with hurting the issues that are mainly associated with them.

So I should not post items of concern about a Presidential Candidate for fear of harming the 2A support in my country?

[Morel42]

So I should not post items of concern about a Presidential Candidate for fear of harming the 2A support in my country?

No no no, not what I meant at all.

What I was trying to point out, is that maybe instead of going back and forth with articles about who's more corrupt, and who's more of a sleezebag, maybe we can start planning what to do AFTER the election..

If it's Obama, how to make sure that if they want get elected in 4 years they won't have the HUGE advantage of being able to use Bush.. Clean out the Republican party so it becomes attractive again (get back to basics) so the Democrats will have to court the pro-2nd amendment demographic..

And if it's McCain, well.. I don't know where to even start.. Start another war? Tax cuts for the rich? 5 trillion more in debt? etc etc.. He has to know that this country cannot withstand another Bush like presidency.. the very thought drives me to drink...

[5711-Marine]

No no no, not what I meant at all.

What I was trying to point out, is that maybe instead of going back and forth with articles about who's more corrupt, and who's more of a sleezebag, maybe we can start planning what to do AFTER the election..

If it's Obama, how to make sure that if they want get elected in 4 years they won't have the HUGE advantage of being able to use Bush.. Clean out the Republican party so it becomes attractive again (get back to basics) so the Democrats will have to court the pro-2nd amendment demographic..

And if it's McCain, well.. I don't know where to even start.. Start another war? Tax cuts for the rich? 5 trillion more in debt? etc etc.. He has to know that this country cannot withstand another Bush like presidency.. the very thought drives me to drink...

The election has not happened yet and I refuse to sit back and let Obama fly under the radar. Trust me I am doing much more than simply posting on this site. I have gone door to door with many local candidates for my township, state rep, state senate, and US House. I will be working on getting out the conservative vote between now and the 4th as well as serving as a poll watcher for my Ward.


The two sections I have made bold make absolutely no sense to me. Let me ask you this, what are YOUR core principles, those which you are not willing to compromise when it comes to electing someone to represent you?

I will offer this much, McCain was not my first choice, but when compared to Obama there is no doubt in my mind who I will vote for on November 4th.

Once you sit back and take inventory of your beliefs and core principles, ask yourself who is on the ballot that more closely represents me and my values. Then cast your vote accordingly.

Conceding an election before it has happened, is not the way to go, there will be plenty of time to consider what to do if the election goes to Obama. Now is the time to fight if for nothing else, at least our common respect for the 2nd Amendment.

[adymond]

I just want to respond to the "tying 2A to the republican party" comment. There is plenty to comment on other than that, but let me focus on just that. Morel, I disagree with you on pretty much every political idealogy possible but I respect that you try to think things through and hold both sides to the same level of honesty.

I think you are blaming the wrong people for tying the 2A to a party. The Democratic party is tied to anti-gun groups due to heavy funding and voting based on lobbying by anti's. If there is a Democrat who supports the 2A they are run out of office on a national level. Give me one example of a Democrat on the national stage who supports 2A and has not faced national condemnation.

[Morel42]

I just want to respond to the "tying 2A to the republican party" comment. There is plenty to comment on other than that, but let me focus on just that. Morel, I disagree with you on pretty much every political idealogy possible but I respect that you try to think things through and hold both sides to the same level of honesty.

I think you are blaming the wrong people for tying the 2A to a party. The Democratic party is tied to anti-gun groups due to heavy funding and voting based on lobbying by anti's. If there is a Democrat who supports the 2A they are run out of office on a national level. Give me one example of a Democrat on the national stage who supports 2A and has not faced national condemnation.

Thanks for the Complement

Oh yea, the Democrats have huge amounts incoming from the anti's. But there are a decent amount (not nearly close to the number of Republicans mind you) of Democrats who actually get Good grades from the NRA (Best resource I could find at short notice).

Here's the thing.. In Primaries many times there is a pro-2nd amendment Dem who ends up losing since only democrats can vote in them.. Since a majority of Pro-gun owners are Registered Republican you have no control over this. So the anti's control who gets put up.. PA (with a handful of other places) is an exception to this rule somewhat..

The truth is, Democrats don't give a rats ass about the 2nd amendment, since they know that they'll never get those votes anyways (heavy Republican based issue) Just like Republicans Pro-Life base. They own that issue so you'll never see a Republican who's staunch Pro-Choice. (I'm sure somewhere there is an exception though heh)..

As for my own personal viewpoint..

God.. I want logic, common sense, and fiscal control to return to the country. Tight regulation of Wall street, more consumer rights (free enterprise, but not if they are literally abusing the position) Competition in the free market place, but with heavy oversight if you get my meaning..

More Education, science, heavy investments in the future, more immigration control, pull back military spending, stop being the worlds police force (get back to making tanks and planes, instead of insane wastes of money like Iraq) Start out thinking our "enemies" instead of walking into the brick wall. Get out of the middle east completely. Let it implode.. Israel is extremely capable in defending itself. Sell them arms and weapons sure. But thats it..

Kick out all APAC's and other foreign organizations giving money to our "leaders" End Nafta, strengthen ties to Canada (come on, gotta love them ) Welfare REFORM (not just cuts) Enable a safety net that make sense, but doesn't create a welfare generation.

Eliminate Jail time for some non-violent crimes so the real scum never see daylight again.. Make Weed legal (come on, its no worse then Booze) but harden jail time for people who do stupid things while on anything (DUI's etc)

Keep religion out of schools, Get back to Math, and History.. Give tax breaks to small businesses so they can compete with Fing Walmart Big Box Stores.. (like almost no taxes as long as they reinvest the money) Get rid of the DHD, and give the FBI back its domestic role.. Strengthen Privacy and legal oversight to So called "Anti-Terrorist) laws.. KILL the Patriot Act, Get rid of the War Powers Act.. And I can understand the need to give licenses but If I go through a training class and background checks, I want to carry my weapon anywhere, on planes, court houses, you name it.. Oh and the Enviroment, I don't care if you believe in Global warming or not, regardless.. I want protection of wildlife, of forests, or our lakes and rivers. I'm of the mind of Teddy Roosevelt... Our natural wonders are a treasure that needs to be protected, even if it means economic loss..

Ok all I can think about now.. lol

[Morel42]

The election has not happened yet and I refuse to sit back and let Obama fly under the radar. Trust me I am doing much more than simply posting on this site. I have gone door to door with many local candidates for my township, state rep, state senate, and US House. I will be working on getting out the conservative vote between now and the 4th as well as serving as a poll watcher for my Ward.


The two sections I have made bold make absolutely no sense to me. Let me ask you this, what are YOUR core principles, those which you are not willing to compromise when it comes to electing someone to represent you?

I will offer this much, McCain was not my first choice, but when compared to Obama there is no doubt in my mind who I will vote for on November 4th.

Once you sit back and take inventory of your beliefs and core principles, ask yourself who is on the ballot that more closely represents me and my values. Then cast your vote accordingly.

Conceding an election before it has happened, is not the way to go, there will be plenty of time to consider what to do if the election goes to Obama. Now is the time to fight if for nothing else, at least our common respect for the 2nd Amendment.

Oh sorry, forgot to include that.

What I meant by "not being able to use Bush" is that in 4 years, people will be voting back to the people running.. McCain isn't just running against Obama. McCain has to realize that Bush=ANY Republican in the eyes of alot of people.. In 4 years, this advantage will be almost gone. The Democrats won't have that advantage when Election time comes up again.