[Rhodes22-list] POLITICAL Re: Ben C., thank you for your reply...

[Ben Cittadino]

Ed;

You have raised two legitimate questions for me to wrestle with so let me
give it a shot.  As I understand it you want to know what I think on the
issue of whether Sen Obama is using "deception or evasion about his prior
economic and politcal concepts".  As a corollary to that, you posit that if
he is being deceptive or evasive does that disqualify him on honesty and
integrity grounds from being entitled to our vote.

I don't think I have ever suggested that inquiry into the Senator's past
associations is improper.  The problem I have is that I don't carry the same
suspicion of the MSM as you and some others do.  I think back to Woodard and
Bernstein and Watergate and I conclude that any reporter who could "nail"
Obama with a credible story of the kind of involvement with Ayres which
would be significant would win a Pulitzer,
be the toast of the town, get all the great women, and be a
multi-millionaire forever. Who could resist that? 

There is plenty of rumor, innuendo, and conspiratorial stuff out there, but
I don't see persuasive proof.  I think Colin Powell, as a former National
Security Advisor probably has sources better than ours which would steer him
away from this endorsement if there were anything to worry about.  Powell is
old, rich, respected.  He has lived his life.  All he has is his legacy.  I
can't believe a man like him or the other prominent Americans who have
vouched for Obama's patriotism would or could be mislead.

Look, there are lots of reasons to vote for John McCain.  If his policies
are closer to yours that's just fine.  I just think it would be a shame to
reject Obama solely because, what?, he hasn't made a full enough disclosure
of , what?, some plot to turn us into welfare state zombies?  

I don't see the persuasive, proof, the weight of the evidence that we have
anything to worry about.  

On your second point, if he lied about something important, then I won't
vote for him.

Ben C. 

Tootle wrote:
> 
> Ben,
> 
> Start from the top.  I did not call you a Marxist.  The ‘he’ was referring
> to Obama, if you go back and read the whole paragraph.  Furthermore, I do
> not know if Obama is a Marxist.  But he fails to distinguish himself from
> them so that a dummy can tell whether he is or is not.
> 
> I agree that that association alone does not make him a Marxist.  However,
> his stated political philosophy one ago year ago was parallel to Marxist
> style thinking, also know as Socialist thinking.  That is, his taxing
> proposals intimate a Marxist style or Socialist style thinking. 
> Specifically, tax the hell out of those earning a high income and spread
> the wealth.  Or were his words, share the wealth?
> 
> I have a problem with this concept for several reasons.  First, it takes
> property in the form of money from one group and gives it to another
> group.  What ever the reason, it is using the huge coercive power of the
> government to take property from one group and give it to another.  Now
> all kinds of social reasons can be given for doing this.  Bob Skinner is
> good at explaining some of them.
> 
> However, another reason I recognize it as a problem is that that kind of
> transfer of wealth kills or severely harms individual initiative.   I
> recognize that it is people, both ordinary and extra ordinary that thru
> personal effort, also called initiative, has made great strides in raising
> the standard of living or wellbeing of all people.  
> 
> My question to you is still to discuss if Obama is using deception or
> evasion about his prior economic and political concepts?    
> 
> You are one guy who should be able to discuss that issue from all sides. 
> Understand to some it is an honesty or integrity question.
> 
> Please take your time to do so, and Thank You.
> 
> Ed K
> Greenville, SC, USA
> (Sorry Andrew no attachment)
> 
> 
> 

-- 
View this message in context: http://www.nabble.com/Ben-C.%2C-thank-you-for-your-reply...-tp20095304p20101707.html
Sent from the Rhodes 22 mailing list archive at Nabble.com.