Home     Contact Us    
Main Board Job Seeker's Board Job Wanted Board Resume Bank Company Board Word Help Medquist New MTs Classifieds Offshore Concerns VR/Speech Recognition Tech Help Coding/Medical Billing
Gab Board Politics Comedy Stop Health Issues
ADVERTISEMENT




Serving Over 20,000 US Medical Transcriptionists

No matter how long ago it was, Ayers still has the same beliefs sm

Posted By: MeMT on 2008-10-26
In Reply to: More Republican propaganda s/m - gourdpainter

He has shown that by not apologizing, but even saying right after 09/11 in 2001 saying that he still didn't feel they had done enough and wished they had done more. People died in those bombings. He was and is a terrorist right here in homeland. He has posed in recent years with himself standing on top of a crumpled American flag - and yet we buy Obama's excuses as to why he won't acknowledge respect of our flag? You really think those two things are not related? That Obama on national television is in essence giving a "wink and a nod" to his cohorts? It screams obvious. And now all the voter fraud with Acorn, and I guess Obama is just coincidentally involved with them too?


Complete Discussion Below: marks the location of current message within thread

The messages you are viewing are archived/old.
To view latest messages and participate in discussions, select the boards given in left menu


Other related messages found in our database

Actually, even though Ayers' terrorism was that long

ago, he was quoted on 9/11/01 in the NYT as saying he feels "we didn't do enough." 


See link below for the article.


Let bygones be bygones?  NOT.  He is only out free because of a legal technicality. 


Does it really matter in the long term.......... sm
who is blamed if this goes into effect? It will still negatively impact healthcare for all Americans, but more especially those who are elderly and have multiple comorbid conditions or anyone whom the government deems "terminal." Again, we have an instance of the government taking over an area in which they have no expertise. What's next?
Any group that insists its beliefs are the only true beliefs,
works actively to force those beliefs on me, have reduced sex to "expression" and the more partners the better, needs to control their reproductive organs a little bit better, not my enemies either, but their way is not the only way...hellooo democracy...it's part of your name isn't it?

As to Jehovah's Witnesses, I take their booklet, thank them kindly, and throw it in the trash.

No one is forcing anything on you.
You'll be waiting a long, long time, then, cuz she's going to do

He died a long, long time ago! (If he was ever
Don't force your beliefs on others. It further devalues your faith in the eyes of others.
Christian beliefs. sm
Then, I suppose my next question would be, why do posters who do not agree with how boards are handled and who do not agree with the political spirit continue to come here?  And my second question would be why, with two boards, posters could not have maintained their thoughts to those boards.  Objectively, I believe that is why TWO boards were set up.  The people you seem to have the biggest problem with made a pact not to come here.  They kept that pact. By the way, I see sickness of spirit on both sides.  There were occasions on the other board when posters were were wished death and to burn in hell.  Would you fight back against that?  Personally, I would have left then.  Both of these boards are a mess.  And it solves nothing to sit here and talk about posters who will no longer be here.  Move on. 
I am not pushing my beliefs on you...
I am merely standing for what I believe in, just as you do. You seem defensive, and when people are defensive, that generally means they feel guilty. If you believe in a woman's right to choose to abort a child, that is your right, and you do not need me to endorse that. Just as I do not need you to endorse my feeling that life does begin at conception, I believe the soul begins at the same time. I do not believe a child growing in the womb is soul-less. We agree to disagree.
This is where our beliefs differ...sm
*...and we need to support our country's efforts in Iraq and support the men and women who are there trying to keep just this thing from happening.*

Your Rush Limbaugh cup runneth over. Sure anything can happen in America, but it is ridiculous to believe that us pulling out of Iraq is going to be our death certificate. That somehow we will just lie down and surrender the USA to Arabs.

where our beliefs differ....
I don't listen to Rush Limbaugh on a regular basis (unlike some liberals, I am fully capable of forming an opinion without the help of others), and the opinion I stated is my own. Ever heard the old saying the journey of a thousand miles begins with one step...? Well, every time we pull out of somewhere or ignore an opportunity (like Bill Clinton did out of Somalia, like Bill Clinton did in NONreponse to HOW many terrorist attacks during his presidency) we lay the groundwork for defeat. What makes you think that the same waffling liberals now won't be the same waffling liberals who run to Canada or anywhere else they can if we are attacked here? Tell me, Democrat, why should I believe you or put faith in your party who want to run yet again, to NOT to just lie down and surrender the USA to terrorists? Please tell me how I can have confidence in that? Because you SAY you will?? You need to understand these people...every weakness you show empowers them. They would see us pulling out now as a great victory. Maybe YOU want to give them that. I DO NOT.
False beliefs
On the flip side, what good will the war do us when we lose our house, our jobs, can no longer afford the food in the stores, can't buy gas to get to work (if you still have a job), you and your family now have to find a campground or shelter to live at (or worse) and the banks close and now you can't get any of your money out that you may have in there (this has already happened somewhere - would have to research again to find the exact location but its here in the US). This is exactly the scare tactics/agenda McCain is trying to push (gotta keep up the war, keep up the war, everyone is the enemy, lets keep it going for 100 years) - give me a break! They are trying to get enough people to be afraid (which is in itself a form of terrorism) that we are going to be attacked again. You know what...get our troops home and we will have more troops to protect our borders and increase security here in the US) Well first the economy is the most important issue (at least to me), unless of course you plan to pack up your stuff and go join the service and fight over there. If the economy collapses where are you going to be. How bout your parents/grandparents who cannot just pick up so easily and move to another area. McCain keeps pushing the war issue because he has no clue about the economy. He doesn't even remain consistent with his issue on gay marriage. My feeling is I don't care if George & John down the street or Mary & Sue down the road want to get married - that will not effect my day-to-day life however the economy does, my job does, eating and paying bills does affect me each day. McCain was at a meeting and he said he was for gay marriage, then 11 minutes later he said he was not for gay marriage. He's too old and out of touch with reality. Do you really want someone with his temper ready to hit the launch button in in whim? He is not a stable man (in my opinion).
Christian beliefs

The Lord's Prayer:
...Thy will be done, on earth as it is in Heaven....


This is a Christian prayer, for those of you who are unfamiliar.  There is nothing radical about what she is saying.  She is a faithful Christian woman. 


OP said not to force beliefs on others...
if you don't want to read religious toned posts, don't open them.
We know your beliefs....... O lover
If you're not an O lover, then one must be pyschotic. At least they're not led by a nose ring.
Exactly and that's the basis for my beliefs. n/m
x
Sorry you have no religious beliefs....... that is sad!
--
Though I think this is more beliefs than political . . .
I would never want to be kept alive like that. Would you? I have voiced this to my whole family, and they are well aware that when God tells me it is time to go, they need to let me go. I would much rather starve to death than be kept here on earth miserable in my own flesh.
Not at all. I was summing up Chomsky's beliefs. sm
In direct response to your remark about the quotes I posted. 
An example - UW professor still under attack for beliefs.sm
http://www.madison.com/wsj/home/local/index.php?ntid=90930&ntpid=1
Religious beliefs are not the issue here...
We were discussing the law...the phrase concerning Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness is actually in the Declaration of Independence, and does not mention "citizens" at all. Regardless of your religion or lack thereof, I'm not aware of any nation in which murder or the taking of a human life is not outlawed.

As far as the ultimate decision resting with God, of course all decisions ultimately rest with God. But does that mean we should not govern ourselves or our behavior while we are here on this earth? Of course not. Laws protect the innocent - few are as innocent as an unborn child. It never ceases to amaze me that people can condone the killing of unborn babies, but are horrified if someone kills one that is 3 days old...or leaves one in a dumpster shortly after birth...or on the doorsteps of a church. I think it has been drilled into our heads for so long that this is a choice for women and our RIGHT that we actually never step back and think about the fact that we are talking about killing babies. If someone were to propose a law that men...simply because they were men...had the right to, oh, kill 3 year olds, people would laugh their heads off at the absurdity of it. Yet that is exactly what we are doing - giving women the right to kill their own children, simply because they are women and the child is in their body. Why not give the fathers the right to abort the child? After all, it is half theirs? Again, an absurd notion. But because we are women and the children grow in our bodies, we have the right to kill them? I'm sorry, I can never understand the justification for this. There are alternatives. There are choices. Choosing to kill the child should not be an option. In what other situation is it acceptable to kill another human being as a viable choice? I can think of only one - self-preservation. Self defense. So I supposed under the law, if the unborn child is killing you, you should probably be able to protect yourself. I would have to agree with that argument, but sadly, that is rarely the reason for an abortion.
not questioning your ideas or beliefs -
I am just wondering how is that? Are you and your husband both American? I am just being nosy and I guess you don't have to answer me if you don't want to... just curious how that happened or how it works and if it was something you chose.
Polygamy isn't just religious beliefs
There are others, such as "swingers" who engage in group sex. Who's not to say that they wouldn't start to fight for the right to marry, even if only for the massive tax break they would get?


No, it's not a human right.....contrary to your beliefs
marriage is supposed to be a gift from God for those that actually understand what that means in the first place. No where in the Bible does it talk about 2 men or 2 women having a relationship as blessed by God, but it sure tells us it is WRONG!

How do you manage to be so screwed up that you don't know the difference between homosexuality and difference in color of skin? Last time I checked, blacks go to school with whites and have for a long time, at least they do in my community.... blacks have every right whites have..... homosexuals have every right we ALL have.


I personally feel that our beliefs

of right vs wrong come from our own personal upbringing.  I was raised in a very strict family.  My mom attended church every Sunday and took us three kids with her.  Dad smoked and swore and refused to go to church on Sunday because he didn't want to be a hypocrit because he wasn't going to give up his cigarettes, etc.  My dad believed in God, but he just didn't want to be one of the people in the pews on Sunday talking about how great of a Christian he was when he knew he was going to walk outside and light up a cigarette. 


My husband is an atheist.  He believes in evolution and says that he doesn't need a higher power or supreme being to tell him what is right and what is wrong.  However, he has no problem with his two boys going to church because he feels the morals that are taught at church are good for the boys.  If they believe in God, he has no problem with that.  If they decided not to, he has no problem with that.  I don't push religion on my husband and he doesn't push his beliefs or lack thereof on me either and we've been happily married for 8 years now with two wonder boys and another baby on the way.


I feel that rules do change with time.  We no longer stone people who commit adultry.  We don't cut hands off of people who steal.  We don't kick people out of our communities for being "unclean" even though there are a few I'd like to kick out.  LOL!  I don't see anyone sacrificing virgins or children either.


I feel that right and wrong should be based upon what is best for the majority of people and not small minority groups.  We are never going to do everything that makes everyone happy, but we have to do what is best for a majority of people. 


They stop trying to push YOUR beliefs on
--
Who belittled Kfir's Jewish beliefs?

I might be missing something here but I can't find posts by Kfir discussing her Jewish faith.  It was all about the war.  It was about the state of Israel not about the Jewish religion.  Isn't that 2 different things?


Stay out of my bedroom, my beliefs and my uterus first of all.
Then, provide a sound infrastructure (low crime rate, low poverty rate) with my hard earned and eagerly paid taxes with is all a citizen can do for his country besides obeying the laws and living the Golden Rule.
"Muslim is wrong?" "I don't judge anybody or their beliefs?"
explaining away the conflict in this statement TO YOURSELF before you take it upon yourself to explain it to others.
Emanuel had beliefs that align with both parties.
he is not necessarily a president's top advisor.

Rahm Emanuel supported Bush on Iraq from the get go. "Lefties" NEVER did...not for a single moment. His poolitical views align with the Democratic Leadership Council, the core belief of which is that the party should shift itself away traditional populist positions and toward the more "third way" centrist views. It has been called the "republican wing" of the democratic party by progressives and the left of centers. His views on Israel are decidedly republican and are more extreme than even the shrub.

Having said that, the chief of staff is not primarily and advisory position. In fact, the nature of the position is primarily defined by the president himself, and the chief of staff can operate only within the parameters that his president allows. JFK did not even have a COS. Obama has not indicated one way or the other how he views his relationship with the COS or how much he will or will not rely on him for advice.

For every single other aspect of those job responsibilities, Rahm Emanuel is undeniable strongly qualified by his experience. The president's chief of staff first and foremost must be trusted by the President, perhaps more than any other person in his cabinet or ministry. I would say the most important qualification for that job is that of impeccable discretion. We have no evidence to indicate that Rahm Emanuel does not posses that trait.

I don't understand...you are saying Hitler's beliefs are factual and sane?
I am very puzzled.  When challenged on your historical knowledge, you cite Hitler as a source for your information?  Remember, he also planned to exterminate the Poles and all Catholics eventually.  I don't think the reasons he cites for hating the Jews are really the basis for any historical reality. He was, after all, one the greatest propagandists.
You're right, I cannot change your beliefs, not directed solely at you (sm)
But at anyone who supports partial birth abortion really.  It is just an overwhelmingly horrible thought to me.
Ayers

barack was 8 years old when Ayers was active.  I would not hold anyone responsible for knowing an acquaintance's history that remote.  The real question in this election is how is the country doing under repub administration?.  Are things going well for your family and neighbors?  Are you for endless war, repeal of women's right to chose, and putting Social Security in the hands of Wall Street?  Do you want your country in the hands of people who insist on presenting messages about decades-old news and accusations of "celebrity" and think that economically we are basically okay?


 


Big O and Ayers...

http://globallabor.blogspot.com/2008/08/obama-ayers-top-ten-10-highlights-of-20.html


 


 


Well, Ayers is bad enough but what about his
Ayers' wife is Bernadine Dohrn. This woman is also a radical nutjob, a member of the Wethermen Underground terrorists, of which she has proudly proclaimed to be.

Now, these two are VERY involved with Obama; they helped launch his political career and have been throwing money at it, as well as directly related to jumpstarting his fundraiser.

And for this man to sit there and say he doesn't know them that well at all...

I'm sure most of our mother's told us to choose your friends wisely because you will be judged by the company you keep.

This man sat in the HOME of Ayeres and Dohrn and announced his first campaign for the Illinois State Senate. Yet he says he has NEVER been in their home, has never been friends with them, just sat on a board with them. Bull crap!!

And when backed in a corner he says, "I assumed he had been rehabilitated".

Ayers's wife publically professed that she thought the Charles Manson murders were wonderful! What kind of person uses anything and anyone in order to further his career. That is just unsettling. The Weatherground Underground were largely responsible for those sick people standing around while our Vietnam vets came home and they spit on them and called them murderers.

How can Obama think Ayers was rehabilitated when Ayers has NEVER shown any remorse for his crimes?

Ayers was asked again in 2001 if he would bomb again and he said he wouldn't discount that possibility. Obama thought he was rehabilitated?

And now Obama's campaign is back peddling just a couple of days ago, saying Obama must have been talking about his education work when he thought Ayers had been rehabilitated. Huh?
Ayers: Here we go
So according to Ayers interview he and Obama were family friends, they did a fund raiser together and Ayers donated money to Os earliest campaign.  NOT what O said.  Not at all what O said.  So, if this was a lie, what is next?  Hamas and O are not too hard to believe.  You guys just wait, the truth will all come out.  When i posted about the required statement on his website, i was bashed that this was not true, but look IT WAS. 
Obama and Ayers
http://blog.washingtonpost.com/fact-checker/2008/02/obamas_weatherman_connection.html
It is not about how old Obama was when Ayers was ....
bombing things...it is his adult associations with the man. Either you have not researched the relationship other than the mainstream media and connected the dots, or have connected the dots, know there is a relationship and don't care. Some of us DO care.

I am not as concerned about the above post as I am about the radicalism of Bill Ayers that Barack Obama shares. He will not be up front about that because he knows it would cost him the election. It does not take a rocket scientist to figure that out.
They tried to put Ayers in jail! He got off on a
nm
ayers is a jerk
x
What is even scarier is those who would believe Ayers...

Ayers called Obama a family friend


http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/nationworld/chi-talk-ayers-14nov14,0,2979315.story


ayers isn't scary
He's a big fat jerk who belongs in jail.  He probably feels stupid about what he did in the late 60s, realizing there really isn't anything hip or cool about it.  College students shouldn't be allowed to use government money to classes from a terrorist. 
This should be posted under the Ayers garbage.
x
Okay, now explain away Bill Ayers.
nm
another endearing thing about Ayers...
described himself as communist with a small "c." Ahem.
Why is Obama friends with Ayers?
http://ca.youtube.com/watch?v=sTy00vCy9d0&NR=1
Like Ayers and Wright and ACORN?
xx
and brezinski, ayers, obama, and
x
I will reserve any opinion on the Ayers thing...
until the documents are made public that Columbia University just released regarding Ayers and Obama. Obama may have been 8 when Ayers was active, but just looking at the people Barack was connected with during that time I don't entertain any doubts that he knew exactly who Ayers was and what he had done. If it was in the past, that's one thing. But the man still says he is not a bit sorry that he did what he did. And if he has Obama's ear in any way...that would be a problem for me. But, that being said, it would just be one more thing, because I am not voting for him anyway.

With all due respect, the last few years have been under a democratically-controlled congress, and it has been in the last few years that things got really bad. Not saying it is all their fault, but they certainly haven't done anything to try to fix it. If they are going to be able to suddenly miraculously fix it if a Democrat is elected...all that tells me is that they are dragging their feet at our expense. The American public knows that...that is why Congress' numbers are lower than Bush's.

As a matter of fact, things are going pretty well for my family and my neighbors. The biggest thing, of course, is gas, but I remember when Clinton was in office we had a really LONG run of household fuel (for oil furnaces) was higher than it is now. I am not saying it was Clinton's fault because I don't think turns in the economy are any one man's fault. It is up to Congress to fix that sort of thing, not sit on their hands during a political season. I would be saying the same thing if it was a Dem administration. Has nothing to do with the party, it has to do with a lazy inactive Congress...which is, of course, made up of folks from both parties.

As to endless war...this country has had soldiers in other countries during most administrations since Viet Nam...Clinton had them in Kosovo and Somalia. Might have been "peacekeeping missions" but Americans still died there. And by the way, McCain did not say that the war in Iraq could go on for 100 years. What he said was that there might be an American presence there, like bases. We still have bases where we fought many wars. We had bases in Germany for many years. That has often been misquoted. That being said, he is not my favorite either; however, he fits the bill, for me, better than Obama.

In deference to my erstwhile fellow posters, I will not go into the abortion issue. :-)

The only thing I know about social security and wall street is it was proposed that if someone wanted to, they should be allowed to have control of their social security money and invest it if that was their choice. I have never heard anyone say it was mandatory. Personally, I would like to have control of mine to put into CD's where Congress couldn't raid it to pay for other things. If we had privatized it before, it would still be there because Congress couldn't have gotten their grubby paws on it to "borrow" it. Which, by the way, was done during a Democrat administration.

As to the celebrity and all that, I don't pay attention to attack ads on either side. I have seen some from Obama's side that are pretty harsh and about as silly. I wish they would both stop that stuff and stick to the issues...but that is just me.
Obama's Ayers Problem Deepens

Obama’s Ayers problem deepens


By Michelle Malkin  •  August 27, 2008 09:34 AM


"


The Chicago bully tactics aren’t going to work. While Obama sics his lawyers and Kossack minions on TV stations that dare to air an independent ad about his close relationship with Weather Underground terrorist-turned-academic Bill Ayers, the truth is seeping out. Thanks to the efforts of NRO’s Stanley Kurtz, blogger Steve Diamond, and intense pressure from Internet readers and talk radio listeners, the University of Illinois - Chicago was forced to release a trove of papers that a former official attempted to shield from public view. There are some 140 boxes and 1,000 files to sift through — and MSM outlets have barely scratched the surface. Kurtz is in Chicago to review the documents and will report tonight on his findings for two hours on Chicago station WGN’s Milt Rosenberg Show. (Good background here, too, in an in-depth discussion on the malign influence of Ayers’ educational philosophy and practice.)


Despite only partial review of the papers, some outlets are pooh-poohing the disclosures. The Chicago Tribune writes: “A partial examination of the documents did not reveal anything startling about the link between Obama, the Democratic presidential contender, and Ayers, a founder of the Weather Underground, a Vietnam-era anti-war group that claimed responsibility for several bombings.”


And yet:



The UIC records show that Obama and Ayers attended board meetings, retreats and at least one news conference together as the education program got under way. The two continued to attend meetings together during the 1995-2001 operation of the program, records show.


At a Democratic debate this year when the association between Obama and Ayers was raised, Obama said: “This is a guy who lives in my neighborhood. . . . He’s not somebody who I exchange ideas from on a regular basis.” Obama called Ayers’ past radical acts detestable.


But critics note that Obama visited Ayers’ home for a meeting at the start of his first state Senate bid in the mid-’90s.


The UIC records showed that Ayers was instrumental in securing the $50 million education grant to reform Chicago Public Schools, part of a national initiative funded by the late Ambassador Walter Annenberg. . After Chicago was awarded the money, Obama served as president of the Challenge’s board of directors, the fiscal arm that disbursed the grants to schools and raised private matching funds. Ayers participated in a second entity known as the Chicago School Reform Collaborative, the operational arm that worked with the grant recipients.


Fox News’s James Rosen uncovered more of Ayers’ unrepentant, radical face while researching his latest book:



William Ayers, who was a founder of the 1960s and 1970s radical group the Weather Underground, told FOX News correspondent James Rosen in a candid 2004 interview that he still believed he was “on the side of justice” years after the group’s wave of attacks.


In the interview, conducted three years after the September 11 attacks, Ayers argued the U.S. government had carried out “many other acts of terror … even recently, that are comparable,” and claimed he and his bomb-planting comrades were “restrained” in their actions.


Ayers, now a professor at the University of Illinois, Chicago, served with Barack Obama on the board of the charitable Woods Fund of Chicago for three years and helped launch Obama’s political career in Illinois by hosting in his Hyde Park home an informal campaign event for the future state senator in 1995.


Ayers claimed the Weathermen were driven by “hope and love,” not despair, and said he did not think the group’s violent acts, targeting federal officials and local law enforcement officers, were “a big deal.”


…Interviewed in May 2004 in connection with Rosen’s book “The Strong Man: John Mitchell and the Secrets of Watergate,” published recently by Doubleday, Ayers affirmed that 9/11 was “an act of pure terror,” one that had caused him to weep, and that terrorism is “always wrong, always evil.” But Ayers also condemned the Bush administration for using the attacks “to advance a right-wing agenda on every front: every uterus must be examined, every tree chopped down, every oil well dug. I mean, it’s absolute madness.”


“I mean, the only group of people that I know who weren’t weeping for the next several weeks [after 9/11] were the people who were busy typing legislation into their computers,” Ayers continued.


When asked about some Palestinians who had been captured on videotape dancing in the streets after the attacks, Ayers said coverage of those individuals had been “overwrought” in the U.S. media, and added: “[E]verybody in the world knows that Americans are geographically challenged and historically challenged. We don’t have a sense of who we are or where we are. So I think every American that I know was weeping over the next several weeks, and devastated and shocked. Was that an act of pure terror? It absolutely was.


“And there are many other acts of terror carried out by our government, even recently, that, that are comparable.


Ayers is not only a flag-trampling apologist for domestic terror. He’s an inveterate liar. Andy McCarthy refreshes your memory.


Obama can wrap himself in the flag and attempt to gag his critics, but his false portrayal of Ayers as just a guy in the neighborhood is not going to fly. Obama’s friend is America’s enemy.


And America deserves to know.


I have found all liberals this way. Avoid Ayers,
nm
Go Big Red!!!!....My hometown kicks Ayers to the curb...sm



UNL cancels speech by Ayers

By Henry J. Cordes and Khristopher J. Brooks
Published: Saturday, October 18, 2008 4:28 AM CDT
Midlands News Service

LINCOLN - The University of Nebraska-Lincoln on Friday evening rescinded its speaking invitation for 1960s radical-turned-educator William Ayers.

University officials cited "safety reasons" for canceling Ayers' Nov. 15 appearance.

Spokeswoman Kelly Bartling declined to elaborate on what safety concerns would keep Ayers from addressing a College of Education and Human Sciences event.

Earlier Friday, Gov. Dave Heineman strongly condemned the invitation and called on the NU Board of Regents and President J.B. Milliken to block it.

An Omaha charitable foundation announced it was pulling all of its contributions to the university. Several other donors also have indicated to university fundraisers that there could be a financial cost if Ayers speaks.

And Nebraskans by the hundreds continued to register their opposition with university administrators and others, lighting up phone lines and filling e-mail boxes.

Heineman said Ayers' invitation was "an embarrassment" to the state and that it goes beyond the bounds of the university's mission.

"Our citizens are clearly outraged and want action," Heineman said in an interview. "This is their university. This isn't even a close call. The university should immediately rescind the invitation."

Dean Marjorie Kostelnik said she spoke Thursday night with UNL Chancellor Harvey Perlman about "the climate around this issue."

She said she also has spoken with representatives of Milliken's office.

Other public officials weighed in about Ayers on Friday, a day after the UNL speech was announced.

Both Sen. Ben Nelson, a Democrat, and Rep. Lee Terry, a Republican, called for cancellation of the speech.

"The invitation made to William Ayers to speak at my alma mater in the midst of a heated national election when he is such a highly controversial figure is an outrage," Terry said.

Nelson said the visit would not promote the unity now needed in the nation.

Said Attorney General Jon Bruning: "Academic freedom doesn't require us to lose our good judgment and common sense."

State Auditor Mike Foley sent the university a long request for information on Ayers' trip, its planning and how it is being funded. UNL officials have said Ayers' appearance would be privately funded.

Ayers was a member of the Weather Underground, a radical group that staged domestic bombings to protest the Vietnam War. Ayers was charged with conspiracy to incite riots, but the charges were dropped because of misconduct by prosecutors.

Ayers went on to gain respect in the education field and become a scholar known for his ideas on school reform. At UNL, the plan was for him to limit his speech to graduate education students to that topic.

The invitation to Ayers was extended in February, long before he became a household name in this year's presidential election because of his ties to candidate Sen. Barack Obama through their shared work a few years ago with a school reform effort.

The Gilbert M. and Martha H. Hitchcock Foundation in Omaha told the university Friday that it would halt all contributions to the university unless the UNL education faculty rescinded Ayers' invitation. The foundation has given millions to the university in the past.

While other donors haven't been as explicit, Clarence Castner, who leads the University of Nebraska Foundation, said it became clear that other contributions were "in jeopardy."

Scholars said a decision to pull an invitation to Ayers could be seen by educators nationally as a school-sponsored curb on academic freedom.

It would make UNL a less attractive school to the faculty members it seeks to recruit, said David Moshman, a UNL education professor writing a book on academic freedom.

Heineman said Friday that "there is no way" the university should lose contributions over Ayers. There are plenty of other respected educators the university could invite to speak, he said.



http://www.nptelegraph.com/articles/2008/10/18/news/60001219.txt
I did hear him explain his relationship with Ayers

other than just saying he lived in the neighborhood and it seemed logical enough to me.


I really believe we are on the brink of a Civil War.  I fully expect that if the 95% of blacks who support Obama don't get their man in office they'll pitch a major hissy fit.  And don't think the white supremists will sit idlely by if Obama is elected.  The biggest difference as I see it is 95% of whites don't support McCain.  So with that 95% it isn't hard for me to believe this race is about race whether anyone wants to admit it or not.


It's been said that the South will rise again and I believe truer words were never spoken although I don't think this Civil War will be anything like the last one.


This is just my opinion so need in calling me a racist.  I've already said I'll take a chance on the unknown and vote against McCain.