Skip to main content

Where should I start...Ayers, Rev. Wright, Pelosi's puppet, Pro-Abortion -born alive act, where he has let babies from botched abortions die without medical assistance. he's a bad guy and it'll be scary if he wins the election. with his ties to Muslim terrorists and wanting to sit down with the USA's enemies, like Chavez and the President of Iran is a SCARY Thing ! Also, Where is Obama's Birth Certificate??
Also, have them read about what a Socialist Government is, because that's what will happen to the USA if he gets in - say good-bye to Democracy!!

just a little - hope that this can help.

--- A High School Classmate of mine.

This was her answer to a question on "Do you have any Dirt on Obama that I can use for the Dems in my office" from a third high school classmate on Facebook.

What can you say to this? The person who wrote this is a nice, wonderful woman, whom was generally nice to me in High School, and she says this? To fight back would be playing into the trap that was created by the meme’s to begin with. To divide and inspire hate. To let it go, it will propagate a dangerous rumor that, if left alone, also breeds contempt and hate. I know my politics differ from hers (and many from my high School days), and the last thing I want to do create a storm.

So how to proceed?

Note: I know that some of my views will not be completely liked by all here the DKos... I am a moderate/Independent at heart with progressive leanings, but the overall sentiment is the same.

Hey! I saw your note here on Facebook, and I had to comment. I wanted to say that I am a little dismayed at your knee jerk reaction to Obama. I understand that you do not support him, and I am completely cool with that. I believe that people can disagree with their politics while still agreeing with each other. Only when politics become personal that things become untenable. I just wanted to point out some falsehoods in some of your points, if only to bring some balance to things.

Most of the points you make in your post have been proven false. The accusations of his ties to Muslim terrorists, and casting doubt of his Citizenship have been proven false over and over again. I have worked with the State Department and in the Passport Agency, and they would have spotted any forgery of a Birth Certificate when he applied for a Passport (which he has had a passport since he was an infant). With each successive renewal of his passport, they often refer back to a copy of the original documents for verification. Believe me, if the Bush Administration had evidence of him not being an American Citizen, it would have been brought up now. He is an American Citizen, just like McCain is an American Citizen despite being born in the Panama Canal Zone.

Your point of the Partial Birth Abortion Bill is simplistic: There is a lot more that is involved in the story, and while on its face, he did vote against the ban, there are substantial ideological reasons for his vote. I know you are anti-abortion (and that is perfectly fine) and you do not agree with his fundamental position. In the end however, he is for lowering the number of abortions which everyone agrees should be done. Outlawing Abortion will not stop it unfortunately.

Finally, your worry about him meeting with certain foreign leaders, I believe is misplaced. During the Cold War, Kennedy, Nixon, Carter, and Reagan all met with Communist powers on a variety of subjects. The Bush Administration negotiated with the Libyans and North Koreans as well. Grandstanding and refusing to speak with someone doesn’t help things. I find us not talking to people we don’t like is akin to kids fighting in grade school for no good reason. For me, refusing to even come to the table is a scary thing, because then the US has no voice, and no real chance to avoid potential conflict. Talking to someone doesn’t preclude an endorsement. Teddy Roosevelt said himself "Speak softly and carry a big stick." He believed in peace before conflict, he won a Nobel Peace Prize because of that sentiment. Talking to your enemy is not a show of weakness, it is a show of strength and maturity.

Finally, democracy is not in danger with an Obama Presidency, nor is it in danger with a McCain Presidency. Anyone who says that is only trying to scare people into not supporting the other candidate. Fear is a powerful weapon, and it is a dreadful weapon to use on your own citizens. The use of fear leads to Americans being wiretapped. Fear leads to search and seizures without cause. Fear has lead to people being held without cause for years without due process, American and foreigner alike. Fear has made us become more like the enemy, and that is truly unfortunate.

Whatever the outcome of this elect, there are some very tough times ahead of us, and what we, as a nation, does in response to these challenging times is what we will be remembered for. Regardless of who wins, there will need to be a coming together of both sides, and work together to fix this mess. It is not going to be easy, or simple, and there will be things that you don’t like, and there will be things that I don’t like...but together, we can figure out the best way forward for this nation. It serves nothing to repeat untruths, and try to sew the seeds of fear about someone who has done nothing to deserve it. I get that you disagree with his policies, and that is fine, dissent is the cornerstone of this nation, and it is vital that we exercise it. I would please ask, however, to consider that he actually has some good ideas for this country, and that they are worth working on together.

I didn’t mean to make this so long. So I apologize. I hope you and your family are well, and you have a wonderful day.


That is what I said to her. And it is something that I believe.

8 Days left and if Obama wins, we begin a new challenge: Bringing those who are fearful and scared to the realization that Obama is not a boogeyman. He will not Abort your Babies, convert the nation to Islam, or make us the Communistic States of America.

Originally posted to acluka on Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 09:27 AM PDT.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

    •  To be honest (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      You should ignore some of your political disagreements. Tell her you disagree on abortion and end it there. These are the arguments that nobody wins.

      On the other hand, you can gently correct the nonsense, the Obama is a Muslim terrorist socialist by arming yourself with the facts.

      "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." (Edmund Burke)

      by resa on Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 09:39:11 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  regarding partial birth abortion (10+ / 0-)

    didnt Barack say there was already ample policy on record that provided care for children in that circumstance? Meaning the only reason it was brought up at all was to infringe on roe-wade?

    Purely politics

    •  I know (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      and we are both from Illinois, so she should know better.

      She is working with a campaign in Indiana (where she lives). She has drunkt he Kool Aide pretty throughly.

      "Just when you think you are in control..." - Ok Go

      by acluka on Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 09:33:50 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I grew up in Indiana, and I fight w/former (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        gustynpip, soms, Xtatic

        classmates constantly on F/B. As far as the abortion meme goes, I've simply started referring to the "pro-life" crowd as "anti-choice". This seems to throw them off their game long enough to rail against the smears much more effectively.

        I'm Joe the Plumber, and I suck at life.

        by Relevant Rhino on Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 09:36:17 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Still, even though she's from IL, (0+ / 0-)

        she may not know all the facts. The fact is, there was already a Federal law on the books (as of 2002) that protected babies born under those circumstances. I think that's something you should point out to her. It was a law that wasn't needed. If it had been needed, and it protected Roe v Wade, I'm sure Barack would have voted for it. He does not favor late-term abortions, except for the life and health of the mother.

        A relevant concept that most people may not think of often, but is really essential to our democracy, is that laws should not overlap. In other words, if there's already a law against assault, you don't need a law against hitting someone with a baseball bat, especially if that law says that you cannot even carry a baseball bat around, on the chance that you'd use it to assault sometone. That is over-legislating and infringing on people's freedoms. It is going too far.

        This situation was similar to that. Both Federal and state laws already existed that doctors had to protect the life of the late-term baby. This bill was a stealth attempt to outlaw late-term abortions in all cases, even if the mother's life was at risk. It was also an attempt to denigrate all abortion rights, even in the first trimester. Ask this woman, if her daughter discovered in her third trimester that she was going to die from carrying a non-viable baby to term, would she want her to do it? Knowing that there was a law already on the books protecting the unborn child in the event that it was viable, would she want her daughter to carry the baby to term, to risk her daughter's own life? No? Then she should've opposed that law, like Barack did. Like the Illinois doctors did.


        And in fact, the 2005 version of the Illinois bill, which passed the Senate 52 to 0 (with four voting "present") after Obama had gone on to Washington, included an additional protective clause not included in the federal legislation: "Nothing in this Section shall be construed to affect existing federal or State law regarding abortion." Obama campaign spokesman Tommy Vietor says that Obama would have voted for that bill if he had been in state office at the time. (emphasis added)

        The documents from the NRLC [Natl Right to Life Committee] support the group’s claims that Obama is misrepresenting the contents of SB 1082. But does this mean – as some, like anti-abortion crusader Jill Stanek, have claimed – that he supports infanticide?

        In discussions of abortion rights, definitions are critically important. The main bills under discussion, SB 1082 and the federal BAIPA, are both definition bills. They are not about what can and should be done to babies; they are about how one defines "baby" in the first place. Those who believe that human life begins at conception or soon after can argue that even a fetus with no chance of surviving outside the womb is an "infant." We won't try to settle that one.

        What we can say is that many other people – perhaps most – think of "infanticide" as the killing of an infant that would otherwise live. And there are already laws in Illinois, which Obama has said he supports, that protect these children even when they are born as the result of an abortion. Illinois compiled statute 720 ILCS 510/6 states that physicians performing abortions when the fetus is viable must use the procedure most likely to preserve the fetus' life; must be attended by another physician who can care for a born-alive infant; and must "exercise the same degree of professional skill, care and diligence to preserve the life and health of the child as would be required of a physician providing immediate medical care to a child born alive in the course of a pregnancy termination which was not an abortion." Failure to do any of the above is considered a felony. NRLC calls this law "loophole-ridden." (emphasis added)

        Notice how these wingnuts say that this bill is "loophole-ridden." Basically, they will never be satisfied until an effort is made to resuscitate every aborted fetus, even a 2-month-old one.

        Obama, Senate floor, 2001: Number one, whenever we define a previable fetus as a person that is protected by the equal protection clause or the other elements in the Constitution, what we’re really saying is, in fact, that they are persons that are entitled to the kinds of protections that would be provided to a – a child, a nine-month-old – child that was delivered to term. That determination then, essentially, if it was accepted by a court, would forbid abortions to take place. I mean, it – it would essentially bar abortions, because the equal protection clause does not allow somebody to kill a child, and if this is a child, then this would be an antiabortion statute.

        Obama's critics are free to speculate on his motives for voting against the bills, and postulate a lack of concern for babies' welfare. But his stated reasons for opposing "born-alive" bills have to do with preserving abortion rights, a position he is known to support and has never hidden.  

        Clearly, these bills were a stealth attack on abortion rights. Tell your friend that she has every right to oppose abortion. But for her to insist that everyone who supports abortion rights in the first trimester is thereby a supporter of "infanticide" is truly disgusting.

        Wer kämpft, kann verlieren. Wer nicht kämpft, hat schon verloren. (Who fights, can lose. Who does not fight, has already lost. -Bertolt Brecht, via MoDem)

        by Late Boomer on Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 11:30:51 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

    •  Yeah it's explained here (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Sychotic1, sccs, soms, Late Boomer

      Here’s the truth about Barack Obama and the bill:

         * At the time Barack voted against a bill containing language designed to protect infants who were "born alive," such protection was already on the books as Illinois state law.[1]
         * The accusations against Barack are so reckless that not even the Republican state senator who sponsored the bill will support them. In fact, he freely admits that "None of those who voted against SB-1082 favored infanticide."[2]
         * The bill was opposed by many legislators and groups like the Illinois Medical Society because of the unintended impact it would have had on other laws and legal precedents in Illinois.[3]
         * Barack is on the record[3] saying that he would have supported a similar bill that came up in Congress -- but that didn’t pose a threat to a woman’s right to choose the way the Illinois bill did.[4]

      Change will not come if we wait for some other person or some other time. We are the ones we've been waiting for. We are the change that we seek.

      by Xtatic on Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 09:37:19 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  I look forward to the day years from (0+ / 0-)

    know when you can tell her - I told you so!

    Change will not come if we wait for some other person or some other time. We are the ones we've been waiting for. We are the change that we seek.

    by Xtatic on Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 09:32:29 AM PDT

  •  Thank you for replying! (5+ / 0-)

    It's easier not to, but we need to get that information out there. We can't assume that "someone else" will. I canvass every Saturday for the Obama campaign, and - really - there are still people out there that are surprised to hear the things you laid out in your message.

  •  Join this facebook group (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    I already voted for Barack Obama

    Obama = Mario, Biden = Luigi

    by acsguitar on Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 09:35:49 AM PDT

  •  Ask for McCain's birth certificate n/t (0+ / 0-)
  •  Don't forget that McCain met with Pinochet (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    soms, Late Boomer

    look up diaries from late last week - he did it in '85, I think.

    Also look up diaries about Timmons, the guy McCain has chosen to lead his transition team.

    Also - I'd suggest using the blockquote feature to separate text out (the txt of her entry and your reply) from your commentary - makes it easier to read.

    ...there is the bottom of the ocean --Talking Heads

    by MsGrin on Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 09:40:38 AM PDT

  •  I share your sentiment. That said... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Sychotic1, saralee, Lady Libertine

    ...I'm not sure your note is going to reach her.  If you're not interested in getting a message across, but rather just turning off someone who disagrees with you, then buzzwords are a good tool.  But if you refer to someone's "kneejerk reaction," particularly right at the beginning of a letter, it's unlikely they're going to read what you have to say with an open mind.  Likewise, referring to a point someone has made as "simplistic" is likely only to escalate tensions.

    It's always good to reply to these things, but if you think there's any hope of getting through to the other person, then be nice.  Otherwise, you risk coming off as hostile or condescending, which is no way to enter into a dialogue!

    A conservative is just a liberal who hasn't needed a second chance yet.

    by Larry McAwful on Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 09:44:38 AM PDT

    •  Wow. And here I was, incredibly impressed (0+ / 0-)

      with how courteous and polite she managed to be.  I think she did a fabulous job -I'd never have managed to be that nice over such idiocy.

      •  Oh, it was nice, sure. (0+ / 0-)

        But put yourself in the shoes of the letter recipient.  If you got a letter from someone who called your opinions "kneejerk reactions" and "simplistic," how inclined would you be to hear that person out?

        A conservative is just a liberal who hasn't needed a second chance yet.

        by Larry McAwful on Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 10:50:19 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  Let's face it - you could have a letter (0+ / 0-)

          from God and it wouldn't have convinced this woman.  The purpose served, IMO,is more for other readers and to send the woman a message that such claptrap isn't socially acceptable - so maybe she'll think about what she writes the next time.  Sure, perfection in a response would be better - but I don't think the effect would have been any different.

          •  Convincing her of the truth isn't an option. (0+ / 0-)

            However, convincing her that we're not such bad people might have value.  I'm not convinced, though.

            My point isn't that we shouldn't be rude to such people, but that we shouldn't claim we're being nice when we're really not being nice.  I believe many of them know what they're doing by spreading lies or email screeds with more holes than a truckload of Swiss cheese.  I'd probably have been rude, though I've responded nicely to these emails from time to time.  But using condescending language--though appropriate sometimes--is not nice.

            A conservative is just a liberal who hasn't needed a second chance yet.

            by Larry McAwful on Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 12:50:12 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

          •  I also posted it publically (0+ / 0-)

            so that everyone can read it. I wanted to make sure that people other than her read it. I feel that it is important to speak out.

            "Just when you think you are in control..." - Ok Go

            by acluka on Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 04:02:50 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  Yeah, I probably should've avoided using the word (0+ / 0-)

      "wingnut" in my comment above. Whoopsie.

      Acluka, I urge you to remove that word if you send my response to your friend.

      Wer kämpft, kann verlieren. Wer nicht kämpft, hat schon verloren. (Who fights, can lose. Who does not fight, has already lost. -Bertolt Brecht, via MoDem)

      by Late Boomer on Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 11:37:58 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

  •  tell the truth (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Larry McAwful

    just the facts ma'am. I wouldnt bother to counter-attack McC much, just defend the smears. for example:

    The accusations of his ties to Muslim terrorists

    they have NEVER (that I recall) actually said (out loud, exactly) that BHO has ties to Muslim Terrorists. They claim that his assoc w Ayers reps a tie to a "domestic" terrorist, and let people draw this conclusion on their own. Which they do, quite erroneously. Becusae of his middle name presumeably.

    the sheer stupidity is astounding and annoying and Im getting very close to the end my my patience and Being Nice so mostly I just keep my mouth shut. but thats me.

    We will end it by telling the truth - forcefully, repeatedly, confidently - and by trusting that the American people will embrace the need for change. 5/6/08

    by Lady Libertine on Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 09:51:19 AM PDT

    •  You haven't seen the email (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Larry McAwful

      about Barack going to Pakistan with his Muslim roommates from Occidental college and the query about "who paid for the trip" and on and on and on. They are convinced he is a manchurian candidate.
      I personally believe Palin is one.

      My middle name is Hussein!

      by regis on Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 10:01:22 AM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  I replied to that one. (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        regis, saralee, Lady Libertine

        This was forwarded to me by an Obama supporter who isn't that deeply engaged.  Since I wasn't trying to convince anyone who ought to have known better, I chose a more cavalier tone, with the intention of rallying the troops.  I said:

        --The Obamas paid for their education through taking out huge loans, as many people (including myself) do.  They made rapid progress in paying off those loans through book royalties.

        --The Obamas purchased their current house in 2005, long after they paid off those loans, and during a year when their combined income was $1.6 million.  (Note: under Barack Obama's tax plan, he and his wife will not see a tax cut!)

        --The Rezkos are not longtime associates of the Obamas.  They're neighbors, and they did happen to buy their houses in Chicago on the same day, but that's it.

        --Further, the garbage email below implies some sort of sinister Arab connection by pointing out for no apparent reason that Tony Rezko was born in Aleppo, Syria.  While this is true, and while Rezko is an Arab, he's a Christian, born into a prominent Christian family in Aleppo.

        --I saw the George Stephanopoulos interview where Obama made the slip of the tongue where he said "my Muslim faith."  He was responding to Stephanopoulos about the Muslim charges, and had previously been talking about his Christian faith.  To make a big deal out of this is as dishonest as making a big deal about how John McCain said the other day that he "couldn't agree more" that the people of western Pennsylvania deserve to have lots of rotten things said about them.  He clearly meant the opposite, just like Obama didn't mean to claim a Muslim faith.  However, General Colin Powell put it best last Sunday when he said, "The answer to these claims that Barack Obama is a Muslim is obviously 'No.'  But the better answer is, 'So what if he were?'"

        Basically, McCain's supporters have run out of steam, ideas and time, so crap like this is the best they can come up with.  It's disgraceful, it's transparent, and it's un-American to push this slime.  This is no way to act in a democracy.

        I sent this as a reply to a number of sympathetic voters.  Anyone who wants to should feel free to borrow from this post.  I certainly wouldn't mind!

        A conservative is just a liberal who hasn't needed a second chance yet.

        by Larry McAwful on Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 10:06:45 AM PDT

        [ Parent ]

      •  Palin... (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        If Palin were a Manchurian candidate, whose would she be working for?  Well, we already know that she "palls around with" Alaskan separatists.  So, assuming for the sake of argument that a President Palin to grant Alaskan independence, who would benefit?  Who would benefit most from Alaskan independence?  Obviously its Arctic neighbours - Russia and Canada.  So who's more likely to be pulling the strings?  What was the only company invited to bid for the contract to build the Alaska Gas Pipeline?  It was TransCanada Pipelines, not Gazprom?  And like Palin, Harper has links to the religious right...

        Interesting... :)

  •  buying into their rhetoric. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    daser, RLF, gustynpip

    there is no such thing as "partial birth abortion". This is like the "Pro life" bull that they use.

    It also demonizes and terrorizes women that have had to make terribly difficult decisions.

  •  Reason won't work (0+ / 0-)

    with these people.  People like this, your old classmate, acluka, are hopeless.  Rather than being persuaded by facts and valid arguments, they are persuaded by emotional appeals to their predispositions to believe certain things about the world.  You can more quickly and permanently persuade someone like your old classmate by shocking her prejudices than by reasoning using facts and values.

    Furthermore, in my experience people like this cannot actually articulate the objects of their belief; it's a circular mesh of talking points and "conventional wisdom."  You ask, "What is freedom?"  A person like your old classmate might answer, "What our troops protect," "free markets," "prayer in schools," and so on, each time offering a different and equally mindless response, the credibility of which to her consists only in the number of times she has heard it in a similar context, and which is ultimately defensible by her only in terms of other vapid political catchphrases.  There is little difference between a person caught in the debased grips of this kind of mindlessness and a computer program that recites pre-programmed political talking points.  The operational difference is that a person has the potential to come to her senses.

    How can she?  I think the most effective way to persuade people like your old classmate, acluka, is for politicians who endorse an ideology your old classmate does not to make a material difference in her life.  Of course, this will too be measured in terms of her values, so it's a tough task.  The more challenging project would be to change her values - which conceivably could be done with a combination of material improvements to her life and "if it ain't broke, don't fix it" reasoning - but even this would have a hard time competing with the institutions in your old classmate's life that reinforce her current values.

  •  My Recipe (0+ / 0-)

    for Barack after he takes office:

    1. Start fixing the healthcare issue. Assemble ingredients and start baking. While this is baking:
    1. Pull troops out of Iraq and send to Afghanistan and find Bin Laden.

    If he can start healthcare and winding down Iraq and find Bin laden at the same time, perhaps the wingnuts will STFU and then he can concentrate on even more important housecleaning.

    Bring it on, Old Man - and your Little Maverick Dog, too.

    by Prosediva on Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 10:18:13 AM PDT

  •  i deleted a comment (0+ / 0-)

    from an ex-co-worker on Facebook who replied to my post that it meant something when even the Chicago Tribune endorsed Obama.  His comment that I erased?

    "Yeah, time to buy a Shorty AR2" - which is apparently some sort of gun.  I used to like this guy until he went all nuts with guns.

    My cat had $200,000 in a 401K but then the market eated it.

    by nightsweat on Mon Oct 27, 2008 at 10:24:22 AM PDT

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site