you have no idea what my personal political prejudices are.

Don't you think it would be possible to make inferences from your posts? Or don't you think? Or are all your posts intentionally deceptive?

I think it would be possible for an intelligent person to make inferences from my posts, but I see nothing that would incline me to put you in that category. But if you are really interested in all my posts, just click on the little link that says "[Read Frankly, my dear, ...'s other letters]". If you're having difficulty finding it, it's right under the signature at the bottom of the post. After you read the archive, you can come back and tell me what inferences you draw from my posts.

I'm all in favor of evidence — how about providing some?

And just what evidence would you find credible, neocon?
— walter_map

Oh, anything from a reliable news source that someone who can reasonably be connected with the Republican Party said something defamatory about William Ayres. Keeping in mind, of course, that calling him an "unrepentant terrorist" is not defamatory because that is what he is. He prefers to refer to himself as a revolutionary, but that's just semantics. In fact, you might be interested in what he himself has to say about it most recently See: <http://www.inthesetimes.com/article/4028/what_a_long_strange_trip_its_been>. You'll note (or perhaps you won't) that he says nothing about having been defamed by the Republican Party. He says the Republican Party was self-defeating by pushing the matter, but that's entirely different.

The evidence clearly shows otherwise. And you can add reckless endangerment in addition to defamation in view of the death threats.

Perhaps next time you should look at the evidence and not rely on your personal political prejudices.
— walter_map

I'm all in favor of evidence — how about providing some? Your claim, your burden of proof.

And unless you have a black belt in mind reading, you have no idea what my personal political prejudices are.

Why isn't William Ayers suing the Republican party for defamation?

The Republicans didn't defame him. All they called him was an unrepentant terrorist. He doesn't deny it. It's not like they called him a pedophile or said he beats his wife (he wouldn't dare).

In some places unrepentant terrorists get to be heads of state, but generally that's only in places that have a long history of terrorism and violence like Ireland, Israel, and Egypt. And then of course there's Josip Broz Tito, but I hesitate to call anyone resisting the Nazis a terrorist.

Personally, I think Obama should put Ayres in charge of Homeland Security (if he doesn't abolish it). Set a thief to catch a thief.

George W. Bush added more to the national debt in the past 8 years than all previous presidents combined. He doubled it.

Yeah, funding liberal entitlements passed decades ago.
— THawk7

The wars against Iraq and Afghanistan are liberal entitlements? — Who knew?
The expansion of our prison system is a liberal entitlement? — Who knew?
Tax cuts for the rich are liberal entitlements? — Who knew?

When Clinton left office, he left behind essentially a pay-as-you-go government, increasing the national debt by a paltry $18 billion and with a $236 billion budget surplus. If Al Gore had been allowed to take office after being elected president, this fiscal responsibility would have continued and in eight years the national debt would have been paid down considerably. Instead, the Supreme Court put Bush into the office of president and not only is the surplus gone but the country has plunged to record deficits and the national debt has doubled in the same period. Liberal entitlements my ass.

It's all right to torture people to death as long as you don't eat them after they are dead.

And while we're on the subject of Lord Acton:

The man who prefers his country before any other duty shows the same spirit as the man who surrenders every right to the state. They both deny that right is superior to authority.
— Lord Acton

Perhaps if the McCain Gang had had more familiarity with the philosophy of governance they might have realized that "Country First!" was not such a great campaign slogan (except in the neocon universe). They might as well have used "Absolute Power!" as a campaign slogan.

The most certain test by which we judge whether a country is really free is the amount of security enjoyed by minorities.
— Lord Acton

You'll remember Lord Acton — he's the "absolute power corrupts absolutely" guy.