....
that was rex's question. are you ok?
I was just showing that I didn't dodge a question. To answer your question specifically let's put it this way, I would rather be trapped on an elevator with someone who might preach angry rhetoric every couple of years than a felon who might assasinate me. How about you?
mem, with the various topics being brought up re: obama's "sketchy" past (quotations on an as-needed basis), without getting into the specifics of who did what, and at what level, etc. wouldn't you prefer barrack just say "hey, listen, it was a few years ago. it was a lapse in judgement. i've since seen the error of my ways, and will continue trying to repair any damage caused"?
maybe he thinks he's done wrong, maybe he doesn't. but, clearly, large groups of people do. and, i think often, with some valid reasonings. as a political motive for him, or even as a "peace of mind" reasoning for you and other supporters, wouldn't that be a smarter path for his campaign to take?
No. For starters the people that are upset were not going to vote for Obama anyway. And I don't think he needs to apolagize for sitting on a couple of charity boards with Ayers. The press investigated this & their not best buds. Obama spoke out against the things Ayers did. Unless you believe Obama secretly condones those things that should be good enough for anyone.
i didn't mean just in the ayers case. obama has a few skeletons, real or otherwise. rev. wright, to name another.
still, wouldn't it be advantageous to his campaign, his credit, and his credibility to make that type of dismissal? and it doesn't have to be "an apology", per se. i'm sure someone in the political higher-ups can write one of those crafty, eloquent message that dismisses accusations, separates the claims, apologizes for "perceived" associations, and moves on. and to pre-empt the notions of "he's already done that", i would eagerly claim the opposite.
and i'm not passing judgement, just reacting to the overall situation and how it's being carried out.
i think its a disservice to yield to simple notion that public minds are already made up. surely, some have wavered in either direction, just as surely as there are those still yet undecided.
there has been a lot of time and money defending (and explaining, and comparing, etc) questionable actions, relations, and situations. i'd think making the above statement would not only show a top-level, executive-like decisive ability, but also appease current supporters and garner new ones.
