Obama Criticizes McCain for Personal Attacks, Responds With Personal Attack Onslaught

If you’ve been watching the news for the past few days, you know that the McCain campaign has become more aggressive and is now criticizing Obama for his connections to domestic terrorist William Ayers. Of course, the Obama campaign was not too happy about that:

Sen. Barack Obama said today that, while his rival John McCain seeks to “distract you with smears” and “Swift Boat-style attacks” in the last weeks of the campaign, he would keep focused on economic issues and what he described as McCain’s shortcomings.

( Source -> )

Curiously, around the same time that Obama tried to portray himself as one who was taking the moral high road, his campaign released an ad, a documentary, and launched a web site (link) smearing McCain for his connections to the Keating Five scandal ( Source ). I guess Obama figured that since the Keating Five scandal was related to economic issues, he could pass off this obvious and massive smear campaign as a legitimate focus on economics rather than an exercise in blatant hypocrisy.

Now for a little background on the Keating Five scandal. Charles H. Keating, Jr. was the chairman of the Lincoln Savings and Loan Association that collapsed in 1989. Lincoln had earlier been the subject of a regulatory investigation that five senators, McCain included, were accused of having inappropriately intervened in. These senators became the subject of an investigation by the Senate Ethics Committee.

McCain, who had been friends with Keating since 1981 and had received numerous political contributions from him, did indeed meet with regulators on Keating’s behalf. One of the regulators, William Black, took detailed notes during the second meeting with the senators, which stated that McCain made the following comments:

“One of our jobs as elected officials is to help constituents in a proper fashion,” McCain said. “ACC (American Continental Corp.) is a big employer and important to the local economy. I wouldn’t want any special favors for them. . . .

“I don’t want any part of our conversation to be improper.”

( Source -> )

McCain said later that he was only there to ensure that Lincoln Savings and Loan was treated fairly. Once he found out about the criminal referral being made against Lincoln, McCain cut ties with Keating. The Senate Ethics Committee determined that no action should be taken against Senator McCain. An excerpt from their statement:

Based on the evidence available to it, the committee has given consideration to Senator McCain’s actions on behalf of Lincoln Savings and Loan Association. The committee concludes that Senator McCain’s actions were not improper nor attended with gross negligence and did not reach the level of requiring institutional action against him. The committee finds that Senator McCain took no further action after the April 9, 1987, meeting when he learned of the criminal referral.

Senator McCain has violated no law of the United States or specific Rule of the United States Senate; therefore, the committee concludes that no further action is warranted with respect to Senator McCain on the matters investigated during the preliminary inquiry.

( Source -> )

Robert Bennett, the Democrat who served as special counsel to the Senate Ethics Committee, now says that McCain should never have been included in the investigation in the first place ( Source ). On top of that, McCain has expressed regret for his actions as well:

“The appearance of it was wrong,” McCain said. “It’s a wrong appearance when a group of senators appear in a meeting with a group of regulators because it conveys the impression of undue and improper influence. And it was the wrong thing to do.”

( Source -> )

So now let’s take a look at the facts. Barack Obama is attacking John McCain for his involvement in the Keating Five scandal. But McCain was long ago exonerated of any wrongdoing in the matter, and the Democratic special counsel to the ethics committee says he should never have been investigated in the first place. Despite all this, McCain still takes responsibility for the appearance of his actions and regrets doing what he did. This amounts to nothing more than a smear campaign against McCain by the Obama campaign. The fact that Obama is bashing McCain for his personal attacks while simultaneously leading this smear onslaught against him just makes this even more despicable.

But what about William Ayers? Is associating him with Barack Obama fair? For anyone who doesn’t know who he is, here’s a bit about him:

Ayers, 63, spent 10 years as a fugitive in the 1970s when he was part of the “Weather Underground,” an anti-Vietnam War group that protested U.S. policies by bombing the Pentagon, U.S. Capitol and a string of other government buildings.

( Source -> )

His wife, Bernadine Dohrn, was also a member of the terrorist group. Both of them in written and television interviews have indicated that they do not regret what they did and wish they had done more. This family is a class act, right? Perhaps the most condemning connection to Obama, which is mentioned in the article I cited above, is the party that Ayers and Dohrn hosted for him in their home at the beginning of his political career to introduce him to the neighborhood. You have to think…what does it say about a man who is going to associate himself with proud anti-American terrorists? I know I would never give Ayers or Dohrn the time of day, whether it was simply acknowledging them in a friendly manner or serving on a board or on a panel at a university with one of them (as Obama did with Ayers). Why would Obama do this?

One possibility is that he agrees with the radical terrorist acts they committed. I certainly hope not. Another possibility would be that he is apathetic about it. In other words, maybe he doesn’t care about the horrible things they have done and was more worried about his political career. And a final possibility is that he is appalled by their terrorist acts but decided that advancing his political career was more important to him than his principles.  But that explanation wouldn’t make much sense, would it?  If he deemed his political career more important, then he wouldn’t have any upstanding principles.  It would seem that the only explanations are that he agrees with the terrorist acts they committed or that he was too politically ambitious to care about standing up for what was right.

Obama is still not open and honest about the aspects of his relationship with Ayers, dismissing any references to it as smears or irrelevant, and has yet to apologize for his associations with him and Dohrn.  Is attacking Obama for these associations fair?  Of course it is.  And if we have to, maybe we can disguise our personal attacks as a focus on economic issues as the Obama campaign does.  How about this?  Ayers was a member of a Communist terrorist group and to this day is proud of what he did.  Obama was associated with him.  Does Obama want to change our economy from capitalist to communist?  You know, that question wouldn’t really be that far out there considering the socialist agenda that liberals like him tend to pursue.

Advertisements
Explore posts in the same categories: Current Events

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

You can comment below, or link to this permanent URL from your own site.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: