Too bad Good Morning America didn’t think to interview, or talk about, Obama’s buddy Bill Ayers before the election. Cuomo asks a few tough questions, but I wish he were a little tougher. He didn’t bring up the fact that Bill Ayers has called himself a communist. He didn’t bring up the fact that the Weather Underground’s plan was to take over our country and send Americans to re-education camps and eliminate those Americans who refused to be re-educated. Ayers defended his past acts because (in his view) the US was killing innocents and he didn’t do enough to stop it. Too bad Cuomo didn’t follow up with this question “Why weren’t you protesting communists, who were responsible for the deaths of hundreds of millions of innocents?”
Observations from a conservative in a blue state. With a little help from my friends!
Is America the only country in the world to coddle its enemies? This is a vile human being. As a human being. He is the kind of person who should be permanently stripped of his civil liberties—why would we extend those ‘civil liberties’ to a person whose sole purpose in life is to destroy the country and kill people? He is walking, talking, breathing Communism (with a big ‘c’) and all the evils it breeds.
And he “teaches higher education”…..I think it’s about time for a Fairness Doctrine in every classroom, side by side teaching maybe. Because lots of students are getting only THIS in the classroom. Pffffft.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Daneen – That’s the best idea I’ve heard in months! Especially the history and economics classrooms. Oh yeah, and health and social studies. We can probably leave gym alone, but wait….we’ll need someone to make sure competitive sports aren’t ruled out. Good grief!
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
“whose sole purpose in life is to destroy the country and kill people’
Uh, Daneen? You’re actually allowed to be a Communist in the United States (and all the other free democratic nations of the world, as a matter of fact). It’s a cool thing called political freedom.
As for Ayers killing people, he hasn’t, and in fact he’s never even been accused of killing anyone.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Hey Pete, perhaps you missed this. http://www.lonelyconservative.com/2008/10/24/ayers-isnt-important-some-of-think-he-is/
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
My point is not to defend Ayers’ actions. My point is to defend the idea of the United States of America as a free nation and a nation of laws. As to your citation, alas, Ayers fell a mere 25 million souls short of his goal. (And, by the by, it’s Grathwahl, not Grothwahl.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Pete, as a parent I find it’s wise to choose your battles. Bill Ayers broke the laws of this nation, and got off due to a technicality. He doesn’t even deny it. Should I toast him for escaping justice? You may want to fight another battle. As far as a typo, now you’re just wasting your time.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Between Ayers, Lonely and Daneen, who presents the least threat to my country? I don’t know any more about Ayers than anyone else. But if he commited criminal actions I think he would have been arrested and punished — with a punishment that fit the crime, which is one of our rights. But neither Lonely nor Daneen seem to have heard of the 1st amendment. Daneen suggests that Ayers should be “permanently stripped of his civil liberties,” an idea straight from the mouth of Mao, Stalin or Bin Laden. Like Daneen’s “fairness doctrine.” The designers of our constitution gave us the greatest “fairness doctrine” ever written. And it says that people are free to hold whatever views they want. For all the claims about Ayers being a terrorist, why isn’t he in prison? The protesters who did commit crimes did time for it — unless they blew themselves up first. If Ayers killed people he would still be in jail. But if all he did was voice his views, he was within his rights. Too bad if you don’t like the views, but we don’t strip people of their rights because we don’t like their views. That’s what Stalinists did. So, Lonely, why wasn’t Ayers protesting communism? Maybe because Ayers is an American who, with thousands of young people in the Sixties, hated what THEIR government was doing in Vietnam. And we were dead wrong about Vietnam. Our young soldiers shouldn’t have been sent there. I may not like the tactics of some of the people who protested the war, but they were closer to the truth than people who think any government, even the U.S., has the right to steamroller any other government. That’s unAmerican, and our forefathers hated it. That’s why they protested against, and fought against England. England was acting toward the colonies in the late 18nth century the way America acted toward Vietnam in the mid 20th century. If you were in favor of the Vietnam war, you would probably have favored England’s attempt to impose monarchy, and taxes, on the colonies.
If you claim to love freedom, the U.S. Constitution, the Bill of Rights, and the USA, you have to know them and align your thinking with those principles. And people who talk about stripping other U.S. citizens of their civil rights, and who use tactics like guilt by association, punishment without trial, ostracism, public shaming and character assassination do not love America. This is a nation of laws, rights, responsibilities and freedom. Before we talk about others, we ought to be taking a look at how we ourselves stand in relation to what America is really about.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Ayers got off on a technicality. He doesn’t deny setting bombs. Why waste your time sticking up for the guy. I wasn’t “for the Vietnam war” because I wasn’t born yet. But I do know how to read.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
I trouble the discussion with a few facts — for instance, that Ayers never killed anyone — and immediately I’m accused of “sticking up for the guy.” Did you miss the part where I said I do not defend Ayers’ radical methods?
Anyway, Lonely, if you found it “wise to choose your battles,” what are you doing beating the Ayers horse? Memo to Lonely: The American people heard the cries of “palling around with terrorists” and rejected them. Soundly, at that.
Moving on….
The “technicality” you reference, that would be the, uh, Bill of Rights. The government dropped its charges against Ayers because the Nixon administration had conducted “illegal activities, including wiretaps, break-ins and mail interceptions.” Dude, to me, an out-of-control government completely flouting our Constitutional liberties is a far greater threat than a bunch of aging former hippie radicals.
(As for the typo, the only reason I mentioned it was because you spelled the guy’s name incorrectly twice and I thought you might actually want to know the correct spelling. Somehow I’m not surprised to hear I was wasting my time in helping you get it right!)
Like or Dislike:
0 
0
Hello. It is test.
Like or Dislike:
0 
0