[Rhodes22-list] POLITICAL - Keating 5

[Jb]

      .
       [ Chap IV ] [ McCain ] [ Chap VI ]
      .


      http://www.arizonarepublic.com/special39/articles/1003mccainbook5.html

      Chapter V: The Keating Five
      By Bill Muller
      The Arizona Republic
      Oct. 03, 1999 12:12:00


      As a war hero and U.S. senator, John McCain's life has been chronicled 
in pictures.

      There are grainy mug shots of a young McCain, printed in U.S. 
newspapers after his jet was shot down over North Vietnam. There are 
black-and-white images of his return, grinning and waving, his hair turned 
prematurely gray by 5 1/2 years of malnutrition and torture in a Hanoi 
prison camp.

      In happier times, there is McCain holding his newborn daughter while 
his wife, Cindy, smiles from her hospital bed.

      But it is an innocent vacation picture that symbolizes McCain's 
Achilles heel and carries the reminder of the scandal that threatened his 
political career.

      In the picture, which was taken in the Bahamas, McCain is seated on a 
bandstand while wearing an outrageous, straw party hat. Next to him on the 
dais, a bottle tipped to his lips, sits Charles Keating III, son of 
developer Charles H Keating Jr.

      McCain calls the Keating scandal ''my asterisk.'' Over the years, his 
opponents have failed to turn it into a period.




      It all started in March 1987. Charles H Keating Jr., the flamboyant 
developer and anti-porn crusader, needed help. The government was poised to 
seize Lincoln Savings and Loan, a freewheeling subsidiary of Keating's 
American Continental Corp.

      As federal auditors crawled all over Lincoln, Keating was not content 
to wait and hope for the best. He'd spread a lot of money around Washington, 
and it was time to call in his chits.

      One of his first stops was Sen. Dennis DeConcini. The Arizona lawmaker 
was one of Keating's most loyal friends in Congress, and for good reason. 
Keating had given thousands of dollars to DeConcini's campaigns. At one 
point, DeConcini even pushed Keating for ambassador to the Bahamas, where 
Keating owned a luxurious vacation home.

      Now Keating had a job for DeConcini. He wanted him to organize a 
meeting with the regulators. The message: Get off Lincoln's back. 
Eventually, DeConcini would set up a meeting between five senators and the 
regulators. One of them was John McCain.

      McCain knew Keating well. His ties to the home builder dated to 1981, 
when the two men met at a Navy League dinner where McCain was the speaker.

      After the speech, Keating walked up to McCain and told him that he, 
too, was a Navy flier, and that he greatly respected McCain's war record. He 
met McCain's wife and family. The two men became friends.

      Charlie Keating always took care of his friends, especially those in 
politics. John McCain was no exception.

      In 1982, during McCain's first run for the House, Keating held a 
fund-raiser for him, collecting more than $11,000 from 40 employees of 
American Continental Corp. McCain would spend more than $550,000 to win the 
primary and the general election.

      In 1983, during McCain's second House race, Keating hosted a 
$1,000-a-plate dinner for McCain, though he had no serious competition and 
coasted into his second term. When McCain pushed for the Senate in 1986, 
Keating was there with more than $50,000.

      By 1987, McCain had received about $112,000 in political contributions 
from Keating and his associates.

      McCain had also carried a little water for Keating in Washington. 
While in the House, McCain, along with a majority of representatives, 
co-sponsored a resolution to delay new regulations designed to curb risky 
investments by thrifts like Lincoln.
      HESITANT PARTICIPANT


      Despite his history with Keating, McCain was hesitant about 
intervening. At that point, he had been in the Senate only three months. 
DeConcini wanted McCain to fly to San Francisco with him and talk to the 
regulators. McCain refused.

      Keating would not be dissuaded.

      On March 24 at 9:30 a.m., Keating went to DeConcini's office and asked 
him if the meeting with the regulators was on. DeConcini told Keating that 
McCain was nervous.

      ''McCain's a wimp,'' Keating replied, according to the book Trust Me, 
by Michael Binstein and Charles Bowden. ''We'll go talk to him.''

      Keating had other business on the Hill and did not reach McCain's 
office until 1:30. A DeConcini staffer had already told McCain about the 
wimp comment.

      When he arrived, Keating presented McCain with a laundry list of 
demands for the regulators.

      McCain told Keating that he would attend the meeting and find out 
whether Keating was getting treated fairly, but that was all.

      ''Keating gave me the clear impression that he expected me to do 
more,'' McCain said later. ''He had several specific requests.''

      When Keating questioned his courage, McCain invoked his POW 
experience. He told Keating that he didn't spend 5 1/2 years in the Hanoi 
Hilton to be called a coward.

      The two argued, then Keating stormed out.

      Despite the dust-up, McCain attended not one but two meetings with the 
regulators. McCain later explained that he thought it was the right thing to 
do, because Keating was a constituent.

      McCain would live to regret it.

      The first meeting, on April 2 in DeConcini's office, included Ed Gray, 
chairman of the Federal Home Loan Bank Board, as well as four senators: 
DeConcini, McCain, Alan Cranston, D-Calif., and John Glenn, D-Ohio.

      The meeting had a clandestine air. Gray came alone. None of the 
senators brought their aides. DeConcini asked Gray to withdraw a regulation 
in order to help Lincoln. Gray shook his head.

      For Keating, the meeting was a bust. Gray told the senators that as 
head of the loan board, he worried about the big picture. He didn't have any 
specific information about Lincoln. Bank regulators in San Francisco would 
be versed in that, not him. Gray offered to set up a meeting between the 
senators and the San Francisco regulators.

      The second meeting was on April 9. The same four senators attended, 
along with Sen. Don Riegle, D-Mich. Also at the meeting were William Black, 
then deputy director of the Federal Savings and Loan Insurance Corp., James 
Cirona, president of the Federal Home Loan Bank of San Francisco, and 
Michael Patriarca, director of agency functions at the FSLIC.

      In a recent interview with The Republic, Black said the meeting was a 
show of force by Keating, who wanted the senators to pressure the regulators 
into dropping their case against Lincoln. The thrift was in trouble for 
violating ''direct investment'' rules, which prohibited S&Ls from taking 
large ownership positions in various ventures.

      ''The Senate is a really small club, like the cliche goes,'' Black 
said. ''And you really did have one-twentieth of the Senate in one room, 
called by one guy, who was the biggest crook in the S&L debacle.''

      Black said the senators could have accomplished their goal ''if they 
had simply had us show up and see this incredible room and said, 'Hi. 
Charles Keating asked us to meet with you. 'Bye.' ''
      'ALWAYS HAMLET'
      The five senators, including McCain, seemed like a united front to 
Black.

      ''They presented themselves as a group,'' Black said, ''and DeConcini 
is the dad, who's going to take the primary speaking role. Both meetings are 
in his office, and in both cases it's 'we' want this, with no one going, 
'What do you mean we, kemo sabe?' ''

      According to nearly verbatim notes taken by Black, McCain started the 
second meeting with a careful comment.

      ''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.''

      Black said the comment had the opposite effect for the regulators. It 
made them nervous about what might really be going on.

      ''McCain was the weirdest,'' Black said. ''They were all different in 
their own way. McCain was always Hamlet . . . wringing his hands about what 
to do.''

      Glenn, a former astronaut and the first American to orbit the Earth, 
was not as tactful.

      ''To be blunt, you should charge them or get off their backs,'' he 
told the regulators. ''If things are bad there, get to them. Their view is 
that they took a failing business and put it back on its feet. It's now 
viable and profitable. They took it off the endangered species list. Why has 
the exam dragged on and on and on?''

      Added DeConcini, ''What's wrong with this if they're willing to clean 
up their act?''

      Cirona, the banking official, told the senators that it was ''very 
unusual'' to hold a meeting to discuss a particular company.

      DeConcini shot back: ''It's very unusual for us to have a company that 
could be put out of business by its regulators.''

      The meeting went on. McCain was quiet, while DeConcini carried the 
ball. The regulators told the senators that Lincoln was in trouble. The 
thrift, Cirona said, was a ''ticking time bomb.''

      Then Patriarca made a stunning comment, according to transcripts 
released later.

      ''We're sending a criminal referral to the Department of Justice,'' he 
said. ''Not maybe, we're sending one. This is an extraordinarily serious 
matter. It involves a whole range of imprudent actions. I can't tell you 
strongly enough how serious this is. This is not a profitable institution.''

      The statement made DeConcini back off a little.

      ''The criminality surprises me,'' he said. ''We're not interested in 
discussing those issues. Our premise was that we had a viable institution 
concerned that it was being overregulated.''

      ''What can we say to Lincoln?'' Glenn asked.

      ''Nothing,'' Black responded, ''with regard to the criminal referral. 
They haven't, and won't be told by us that we're making one.''

      ''You haven't told them?'' Glenn asked.

      ''No,'' said Black. ''Justice would skin us alive if we did. Those 
referrals are very confidential. We can't prosecute anyone ourselves. All we 
can do is refer it to Justice.''

      After the meeting, McCain was done with Keating.

      ''Again, I was troubled by the appearance of the meeting,'' McCain 
said later. ''I stated I didn't want any special favors from them. I only 
wanted them (Lincoln Savings) to be fairly treated.''

      Black doesn't completely buy that argument. If McCain was concerned 
about Keating asking him to do things that were improper, why go to either 
meeting at all?

      Black said McCain probably went because Keating was close to being the 
political godfather of Arizona and McCain still had plenty of ambition.

      ''Keating was incredibly powerful,'' Black said. ''And incredibly 
useful.''

      McCain's reservations aside, Keating accomplished his goal. He had 
bought some time, though the price was very high.
      SHORT-LIVED REPRIEVE
      A month later, the San Francisco regulators finished a yearlong audit 
and recommended that Lincoln be seized. But the report was virtually ignored 
because of politics on the bank board.

      Gray was being replaced as chairman by Danny Wall, who was more 
sympathetic to Keating.

      The audit, which described Lincoln as a thrift reeling out of control, 
sat on a shelf.

      In September 1987, the investigation was taken away from the San 
Francisco office, away from Black and Patriarca. In May 1988, it was 
transferred to Washington, where Lincoln would get a new audit.

      It was a win for Keating. A battle, not the war.

      In Phoenix, the move sparked a triumphant party at the posh 
headquarters of American Continental.

      Someone hurled a computer from the second floor, shattering a window. 
Keating, all 6-feet-5 of him, struck a Superman pose and ripped open his 
shirt to display a hand-drawn skull and crossbones over the letters FHLBB - 
the Federal Home Loan Bank Board.

      A secretary climbed onto a desk to take photos, and American 
Continental executive Robert Kielty joined her. Keating grabbed a roll of 
tape and lashed their legs together.

      Potted plants were knocked over. Beer and champagne were spilled on 
the carved wood desks. Kielty took a bottle of champagne and poured it down 
another secretary's blouse.

      ''Get this champagne colder,'' Keating yelled.

      Back in San Francisco, Black was fuming.

      ''Clearly, we were shot in the back,'' he would say later.

      Despite the reprieve, Keating's businesses continued to spiral 
downward, taking the five senators with him. News of the meeting leaked out, 
and now all five men were answering some very embarrassing questions.

      ''Did you lean on regulators for Charlie Keating?''

      ''Did you get campaign contributions in exchange for your 
cooperation?''

      ''Why did you protect Keating?''

      Together, the five senators had accepted more than $300,000 in 
contributions from Keating, and their critics added a new term to the 
American lexicon:

      Keating Five.

      As the S&L failure deepened, the sheer magnitude of the losses hit the 
press. Billions of dollars had been squandered. The Keating Five became 
shorthand for the kind of political influence that money can buy. The five 
senators were linked as the gang who went to bat for an S&L bandit.

      S&L ''trading cards'' came out. The Keating Five card showed Charles 
Keating holding up his hand, with a senator's head adorning each finger. 
McCain was on Keating's pinkie.

      As the Keating investigation dragged through 1988, McCain dodged the 
body blows. Most landed on DeConcini, who had arranged the meetings and had 
other close ties to Keating, including $50 million in loans from Keating to 
DeConcini's aides.

      But McCain made a critical error.

      In spinning his side of the Keating story, McCain adopted the blanket 
defense that Keating was a constituent and that he had every right to ask 
his senators for help. In attending the meetings, McCain said, he simply 
wanted to make sure that Keating was treated like any other constituent.

      Keating was far more than a constituent to McCain, however.

      On Oct. 8, 1989, The Republic revealed that McCain's wife and her 
father had invested $359,100 in a Keating shopping center in April 1986, a 
year before McCain met with the regulators.

      The paper also reported that the McCains, sometimes accompanied by 
their daughter and baby-sitter, had made at least nine trips at Keating's 
expense, sometimes aboard the American Continental jet. Three of trips were 
made during vacations to Keating's opulent Bahamas retreat at Cat Cay.

      McCain also did not pay Keating for the trips until years after they 
were taken, when he learned that Keating was in trouble over Lincoln. Total 
cost: $13,433.

      When the story broke, McCain did nothing to help himself. When 
reporters first called him, he was furious. Caught out in the open, the 
former fighter pilot let go with a barrage of cover fire. Sen. Hothead came 
out in all his glory.

      ''You're a liar,''' McCain snapped Sept. 29 when a Republic reporter 
asked him about business ties between his wife and Keating.

      ''That's the spouse's involvement, you idiot,'' McCain said later in 
the same conversation. ''You do understand English, don't you?''

      He also belittled the reporters when they asked about his wife's ties 
to Keating.

      ''It's up to you to find that out, kids.''

      And then he played the POW card.

      ''Even the Vietnamese didn't question my ethics,'' McCain said.

      The paper ran the story a few days later. At a news conference, McCain 
was a changed man. He stood calmly for 90 minutes and answered every 
question.

      On the shopping center, his defense was simple. The deal did not 
involve him. The shares in the shopping center had been purchased by a 
partnership set up between McCain's wife and her father.

      But McCain also had to explain his trips with Keating and why he 
didn't pay Keating back right away.

      On that score, McCain admitted he had fouled up. He said he should 
have reimbursed Keating immediately, not waited several years. His staff 
said it was an oversight, but it looked bad, McCain jetting around with 
Keating, then going to bat for him with the federal regulators.

      Meanwhile, Lincoln continued to founder.

      In April 1989, two years after the Keating Five meetings, the 
government seized Lincoln, which declared bankruptcy. In September 1990, 
Keating was booked into Los Angeles County Jail, charged with 42 counts of 
fraud. His bond was set at $5 million.

      During Keating's eventual trial, the prosecution produced a parade of 
elderly investors who had lost their life's savings by investing in American 
Continental junk bonds.
      'THE ULTIMATE SURVIVOR'
      In November 1990, the Senate Ethics Committee convened to decide what 
punishment, if any, should be doled out to the Keating Five.

      Robert Bennett, who would later represent President Bill Clinton in 
the Paula Jones case, was the special counsel for the committee. In his 
opening remarks, he slammed DeConcini but went lightly on McCain, the lone 
Republican ensnared with four Democrats.

      ''In the case of Senator McCain, there is very substantial evidence 
that he thought he had an understanding with Senator DeConcini's office that 
certain matters would not be gone into at the meeting with (bank board) 
Chairman (Ed) Gray,'' Bennett said.

      ''Moreover, there is substantial evidence that, as a result of Senator 
McCain's refusal to do certain things, he had a fallout with Mr. Keating.''

      McCain, the ultimate survivor, had dodged another missile.

      Among the Keating Five, McCain received the most direct contributions 
from Keating. But the investigation found that he was the least culpable, 
along with Glenn. McCain attended the meetings but did nothing afterward to 
stop Lincoln's death spiral.

      Lincoln's losses eventually were set at $3.4 billion, the most 
expensive failure in the national S&L scandal.

      McCain also looked good in contrast to DeConcini, who continued to 
defend Keating until fall 1989, when federal regulators filed a $1.1 billion 
civil racketeering and fraud suit against Keating, accusing him of siphoning 
Lincoln's deposits to his family and into political campaigns.

      In the end, McCain received only a mild rebuke from the Ethics 
Committee for exercising ''poor judgment'' for intervening with the federal 
regulators on behalf of Keating. Still, he felt tarred by the affair.

      ''The appearance of it was wrong,'' McCain said recently. ''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.''

      McCain noted that Bennett, the independent counsel, recommended that 
McCain and Glenn be dropped from the investigation.

      ''For the first time in history, the Ethics Committee overruled the 
recommendation of the independent counsel,'' McCain said. ''I'm sure it had 
nothing to do with the fact that I was the only Republican of the five and 
the Democrats were in the majority (in the Senate).''

      But McCain owns up to his mistake:

      ''I was judged eventually, after three years, of using, quote, poor 
judgment, and I agree with that assessment.''





      sounds like crooked politics to me.

      Jb








----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Brad Haslett" <flybrad at gmail.com>
To: "The Rhodes 22 Email List" <rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org>
Sent: Thursday, October 09, 2008 8:10 PM
Subject: Re: [Rhodes22-list] POLITICAL - Peter and Robert


> Jb,
>
> The issue is/was, did someone accept money to effect a regulatory
> change in favor of a S&L owner?  The Senate ethics committee decided
> that in the case of three, yes.  In the case of Glen and McCain, no.
> McCain later admitted that just the appearance of wrong doing was
> reason enough not to have gotten involved.  He described it as being
> worse than his POW experience because his honesty and integrity was at
> stake. Did McCain know what was going on with the S&L business?  I
> don't know the answer to that, but he did know what was going on with
> Fannie & Freddie and that is why he proposed legislation in 2005 to
> reign them in - maybe he learned his lessons from the S&L problems.
>
> No money was found in the freezer by the way.
>
> Ayers admits he was guilty and brags about it with his statement,
> "guilty as hell, free as a bird".
>
> Brad
>
> On Thu, Oct 9, 2008 at 9:57 PM, Jb <j.bulfer at jbtek.com> wrote:
>> Brad,
>> That's like saying "Bill Ayers wasn't found quilty of any wrong doing" so
>> he's innocent.
>> I don't care what they found, he was Keatings good buddy & knew what was
>> going on & supported him.
>> Alot of people lost everything. He was exonerated by his Senate buddies,
>> they seem to stick together.
>>  Do you really believe that experience was worse than being a POW for 5
>> years?
>>  That's hard to believe.
>> Jb
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "Brad Haslett" <flybrad at gmail.com>
>> To: "The Rhodes 22 Email List" <rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org>
>> Sent: Thursday, October 09, 2008 5:33 PM
>> Subject: Re: [Rhodes22-list] POLITICAL - Peter and Robert
>>
>>
>>> Jb,
>>>
>>> Not true!  Neither McCain or John Glen "were in it up to their neck".
>>> Neither were found guilty of any wrongdoing, in fact, the investigator
>>> suggested that McCain be dropped but the Democrats didn't want it to
>>> be an all Democratic affair and the Republicans fought against Glenn
>>> being dropped without McCain.  They, McCain and Glen, WERE guilty of
>>> bad judgement for being present for a total of two meetings, but both
>>> were exonerated by the Senate. McCain described it as the worst
>>> experience of his life, worse than being a POW for 5+ years.  It
>>> changed him forever and influenced his subsequent support for campaign
>>> finance reform (McCain-Feindgold) and eventually accepting public
>>> financing for his Presidential race. Ironically, John Glen introduced
>>> Bruce Springsteen at an Obama fundraiser last week.  Glen was in the
>>> wrong place at the wrong time. Senator Glen is a good man and his
>>> reputation was unnecessarily stained.  Ditto McCain.
>>>
>>> Brad
>>>
>>> On Thu, Oct 9, 2008 at 6:43 PM, JbTek <j.bulfer at jbtek.com> wrote:
>>>> Herb,
>>>> I remember that scandle well. McCain was involved up to his neck.
>>>> I remember shaking my head in disgust when he was re-elected again.
>>>> McCain is no better than Keating....he should have gone to jail also.
>>>> He just got away with it......again, our legal system at work.
>>>> Jb
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> From: "Herb Parsons" <hparsons at parsonsys.com>
>>>> To: "The Rhodes 22 Email List" <rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org>
>>>> Sent: Thursday, October 09, 2008 4:19 PM
>>>> Subject: Re: [Rhodes22-list] POLITICAL - Peter and Robert
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> Pete
>>>>>
>>>>> Is it your assertion that because Ayers wasn't convicted, that he 
>>>>> wasn't
>>>>> involved?
>>>>>
>>>>> And yes, Keating was convicted. What exactly did McCain have to do 
>>>>> with
>>>>> what Keating did?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> petelargo wrote:
>>>>> > more time has been spent looking into this than anything else 
>>>>> > because
>>>>> > it
>>>>> > would be a game changer. but they just can't find anything, so the
>>>> tactic is
>>>>> > to only conjecture about it and question obamas 'character' as
>>>> un-american,
>>>>> > rather than dealing with the very real crisis issues that we are
>>>>> > facing.
>>>>> > ayers was not convicted of anything. keating sure as hell was. 
>>>>> > mccain
>>>> helped
>>>>> > destroy thousands of peoples finances during the S&L crisis and we
>>>>> > paid.
>>>> PS.
>>>>> > I am very very sorry for your terrible family tragedy.
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> > Just bent wrote:
>>>>> >
>>>>> >> So why isn't he on Fox telling his story? I'm sure very few people
>>>>> >> know
>>>>> >> these kind of details. I think it would have a big impact.
>>>>> >>  I know it would with anyone who has been a victim of violent 
>>>>> >> crime.
>>>>> >> Jb
>>>>> >> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>> >> From: "Brad Haslett" <flybrad at gmail.com>
>>>>> >> To: "The Rhodes 22 Email List" <rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org>
>>>>> >> Sent: Thursday, October 09, 2008 2:38 PM
>>>>> >> Subject: Re: [Rhodes22-list] POLITICAL - Peter and Robert
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>> Jb,
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>> Here's a would be victim in his own words.
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>> http://www.city-journal.org/2008/eon0430jm.html
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>> You can draw your own conclusions.
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>> Brad
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>> On Thu, Oct 9, 2008 at 10:52 AM, JbTek <j.bulfer at jbtek.com> wrote:
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>>> Ed wrote:
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>>> Bad or evil can be differentiated into degrees of badness.  Not 
>>>>> >>>> all
>>>> bad
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >> or
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>>> evil is of the same level of wrong.  A thief is bad.  A murderer 
>>>>> >>>> is
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>> more
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>>> bad.  An unrepentant terrorist is most bad.
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>>> Ed,
>>>>> >>>> My brother was robbed, then shot in the back & left to die 3 days
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>> before
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>>> Christmas. He was 37 years old with 2 kids. His youngest son shot
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >> himself in
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>>> the chest last Christmas & died.
>>>>> >>>> Are you telling me that this unrepentent terrorist, who killed no
>>>> one,
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >> is
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>>> more evil than the person that devistated our family?
>>>>> >>>>  I don't think so.
>>>>> >>>> Jb
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>>> >>>> From: "Tootle" <ekroposki at charter.net>
>>>>> >>>> To: <rhodes22-list at rhodes22.org>
>>>>> >>>> Sent: Thursday, October 09, 2008 3:40 AM
>>>>> >>>> Subject: [Rhodes22-list] POLITICAL - Peter and Robert
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>>>> Peter and Robert:
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>>>> Ayers comments published on September 11, 2001, Ayers had this 
>>>>> >>>>> to
>>>> say
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>>> about
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>>>> his bombing past, "I don't regret setting bombs; I feel we 
>>>>> >>>>> didn't
>>>>> >>>>> do
>>>>> >>>>> enough."
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>>>> Obama keeps saying what Ayers did 40 years ago or 20 years ago 
>>>>> >>>>> is
>>>> not
>>>>> >>>>> important.
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>>>> I would have fewer problems with Obama's association if in fact
>>>> Ayers
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >> was
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>>>> repentant and repudiated his actions when he was in his 20's.
>>>>> >>>>> Some
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >> people
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>>>> do make mistakes and grow up.  However, Obama associates with an
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>>> unrepentant
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>>>> terrorist, Bill Ayers.
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>>>> The above were reported public comments made just seven years 
>>>>> >>>>> ago.
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >> Just
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>>>> after a terrorist attack on USA.
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>>>> Obama said he would sit down with foreign terrorist groups to
>>>> resolve
>>>>> >>>>> grievances.  He would sit down with Akmenijad.  Obviously he 
>>>>> >>>>> would
>>>> sit
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>>> down
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>>>> with them because he still sits down with an American Terrorist,
>>>>> >>>>> his
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>>> fellow
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>>>> board member, Bill Ayers.  He does not see any problem with
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>> terrorists.
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>>>> The issue here is Ayers is an unrepentant and unchanged American
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>>> terrorist.
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>>>> How can you justify supporting evil?
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>>>> Evil or the difference between good and bad is not defined by
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >> individual
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>>>> choice.  Moral clarity is not necessarily a religious issue.  "A
>>>> lack
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >> of
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>>>> moral clarity is why people living in free societies can come to
>>>>> >>>>> see
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >> their
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>>>> fellow citizens as their enemies and foreign dictators as their
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >> friends."
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>>>> Natan Sharansky
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>>>> Evil or the difference between good and bad is not necessarily a
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >> religious
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>>>> topic.  Different societies have by various paths come to 
>>>>> >>>>> similar
>>>>> >>>>> definitions of good and evil.  By acceptable definitions,
>>>> unrepentant
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >> evil
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>>>> is bad.  Freely associating with a person who by most standards 
>>>>> >>>>> is
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>> evil
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >> is
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>>>> wrong.  Supporting an evil person, for whatever reasons, is
>>>> assisting
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >> in a
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>>>> conspiracy of evil.
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>>>> Bad or evil can be differentiated into degrees of badness.  Not
>>>>> >>>>> all
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>> bad
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >> or
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>>>> evil is of the same level of wrong.  A thief is bad.  A murderer
>>>>> >>>>> is
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >> more
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>>>> bad.  An unrepentant terrorist is most bad.
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>>>> Ed K
>>>>> >>>>> Greenville, SC, USA
>>>>> >>>>> [no addendum for Andrew]
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>>>> --
>>>>> >>>>> View this message in context:
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>
>>>> http://www.nabble.com/POLITICAL---Peter-and-Robert-tp19896352p19896352.html
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>>>> Sent from the Rhodes 22 mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>> >>>>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list
>>>>> >>>>> go
>>>> to
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>>>>
>>>>> >>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>> >>>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list 
>>>>> >>>> go
>>>> to
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>>>
>>>>> >>> __________________________________________________
>>>>> >>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list 
>>>>> >>> go
>>>>> >>> to
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>> __________________________________________________
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >>>
>>>>> >> __________________________________________________
>>>>> >> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go
>>>>> >> to
>>>>> >> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>>> >> __________________________________________________
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >>
>>>>> >
>>>>> >
>>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to
>>>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to
>>>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>>> __________________________________________________
>>>>
>>> __________________________________________________
>>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to
>>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>>> __________________________________________________
>>
>> __________________________________________________
>> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to 
>> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
>> __________________________________________________
>>
> __________________________________________________
> To subscribe/unsubscribe or for help with using the mailing list go to 
> http://www.rhodes22.org/list
> __________________________________________________ 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: image/gif
Size: 2391 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://www.rhodes22.org/pipermail/rhodes22-list/attachments/20081009/fb933ea5/attachment.gif