Obama’s terrorist co-chairman
Advertisement
Text size: small | medium | large
J. Michael Sharman
Published: October 13, 2008
Beginning in 1995, Barack Obama and Bill Ayers served together on the board of the Annenberg Challenge Project. Before it closed in 2003, CNN reports, it had given hundreds of thousands of dollars to social change projects promoted by Ayers. 1
Ayers was the person responsible for getting the Annenberg grant for Chicago. 2 He was one of the three founders of the Project. 3 The Project’s minutes note that Ayers and Obama wrote its bylaws together. 4 Ayers was the co-chair of the Project’s “Collaborative”, which shaped its educational policy. 5
In 1995, a few months after Obama became chairman of the Annenberg Challenge, his political career began when state Sen. Alice Palmer introduced Obama to a dozen-or-so folks gathered in the Hyde Park living room of Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn as the person to take her place in the Illinois State Senate. 6
In 1997, Obama wrote a glowing review in the Chicago Tribune for one of Ayers’ books. 7 CNN also reported that he was listed with Ayers as a panelist at a forum organized by his wife, Michelle Obama. 8
From 1999 to 2001 9 , Ayers and Obama also served together on the board of the Woods Foundation of Chicago, and grants were made from it to Obama’s church, Trinity United Church of Christ, and to the Children and Family Justice Center, which is run by Ayers’ wife, Bernadine Dohrn. 10
So why, during an April 2008 debate with Hillary Clinton, did Obama claim that he knew Ayers simply “as a guy who lives in my neighborhood?” 11
William “Bill” Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn first met in Ann Arbor, Michigan in 1967. Until recently, though, she was the more famous of the two, mainly because of her incendiary speeches: In 1969, when Charlie Manson went on his killing spree, Dohrn told an SDS rally, “Dig it! Manson killed those pigs, then they ate dinner in the same room with them, then they shoved a fork into a victim’s stomach.” 12
It was she who made the public announcement on May 21, 1970: “Hello. This is Bernardine Dohrn. I’m going to read a declaration of a state of war. This is the first communication from the Weatherman Underground. … Within the next 14 days, we will attack a symbol or institution of Amerikan injustice.” 13
In 1970, Ayers’ then-girlfriend, Diana Oughton, and two other people were killed in a bombmaking accident in Greenwich Village. Ayers went underground. By that time, Bernadine Dorhn was on the FBI’s Ten Most Wanted List” 14, and the Weather Underground 15 was listed as a “Domestic Terrorist Organization” by the FBI. 16
Ayers and Dohrn have three children: In 1977 they had Zayd Atheola, named after a Black Panther killed in a shootout with police four years earlier; In 1980 they had Malik Cochise, named after Malcolm X and the Apache war chief; and Chesa, Kathy Boudin’s son, has been raised by Dohrn and Ayers since his mother was jailed for a Brinks robbery when he was 14 months old. 17
In an August 22, 1996 PBS interview with Dorhn and Ayers, they were asked by interviewer Elizabeth Brackett, “As you look back now, the bombings, what the Weathermen did claim credit for, would you do it differently now?” Ayers said, “I doubt it…[W]hat we did was certainly serious and had consequences for us personally, but I don’t think it was, it was anything that was uncalled for. I mean, I think it was called for.”
Dorhn answered, “The movement was never not into violence.” 18
On September 11, 2001, in an incredible ironic coincidence of timing, under the headline, “No Regrets for a Love Of Explosives”, The New York Times published an interview with Bill Ayers that had this now-famous opening line: “‘I don’t regret setting bombs,‘’ Bill Ayers said. ‘I feel we didn’t do enough.’” 19
The NYT interviewer reminded Ayers that in 1970 he had summed up the Weatherman creed by saying, “Kill all the rich people. Break up their cars and apartments. Bring the revolution home, kill your parents, that’s where it’s really at.” He told her, “It was a joke about the distribution of wealth.”
The reason for the NYT interview was to launch Ayers’ new book, “Fugitive Days”, in which he admitted participating in the bombings of New York City Police Headquarters in 1970, the Capitol building in 1971, and the Pentagon in 1972.
“Everything was absolutely ideal on the day I bombed the Pentagon,” he wrote.
In his book, Ayers also claimed responsibility for breaking Timothy Leary out of jail. Writer Richard Stern, reports of another prison break Ayers was involved in: during dinner with Dohrn and Ayers, Ayers was describing to Stern how “they’d gotten Eldridge Cleaver from a California prison to a Morocco haven” before Dohrn stopped him from saying more. 20
After Malik’s birth in 1980, they decided to come out of hiding. Their Federal charges had been dropped years earlier due to prosecutorial misconduct, and Dorhn pleaded guilty to reduced state charges and got a fine and three years probation. A few months later, when she was asked to testify about Kathy Boudin’s Brinks robbery, she claimed she knew nothing about it. The feds then asked for a writing sample, Dorhn refused, and she was given 7 months for refusing to testify. “I felt grand juries were illegal and coercive,” said Dorhn, a law school graduate. 21
It was during a jail furlough that Dorhn and Ayers married. 22
The August 2001 issue of Chicago Magazine had an article about Ayers titled “No Regrets” accompanied by a posed photo of Ayers in an urban alleyway, nonchalantly standing on a crumbled American flag.
In that month before 9/11, the article recites his past of domestic terrorism and reports: “This—violence, death, and white-hot rhetoric—is his past and Ayers insists he has no regrets. ‘I acted appropriately in the context of those times,’ he says.” 23
Three days after 9/11, David Horowitz wrote of an interview he did with Ayers ten years before: “Ayers reviewed his activities as a terrorist for my tape recorder. When he was done, he broke into a broad, Jack Horner grin and summed up his experience: ‘Guilty as hell. Free as a bird. America is a great country.’” 24
In 2003, the film “The Weather Underground”, with interviews of Dorhn, Ayers, and two other Weather Underground members, was nominated for an Academy Award for Best Documentary.
In a January 2004 interview of Dorn and Ayers posted on the film’s website, they were asked, “Would you do it again under similar circumstances?”
Ayers answered, “Being almost 60, it’s impossible to not have lots and lots of regrets about lots and lots of things, but the question of did we do something that was horrendous, awful?… I don’t think so.”
Dorhn’s answer was, “At the end of the day, I feel like we were lucky to be in that history. We were lucky to be in that history. We were lucky to be in that moment where there was hope and a sense of libratory possibility.” 25
In 2006, Bill Ayers took his fourth trip to Venezuela to speak to educational “reformers” who are part of Hugo Chavez’ Bolivarian Revolution. On Ayers’ website is the content of his speech. He said, “We share the belief that education is the motor-force of revolution…” He encouraged them to “continue to overcome the failings of capitalist education as you seek to create something truly new and deeply humane… Capitalism promotes racism and militarism – turning people into consumers, not citizens.”
In Spanish, Ayers told his fellow reformers, “La educacion es revolucion! Viva Presidente Chavez! Viva La Revolucion Bolivariana! Hasta La Victoria Siempre!” 26
Chairman Obama. Co-Chairman Ayers. They are more than simply two guys who live in the same neighborhood.
J. Michael Sharman is an independent columnist who practices law in Culpeper. His column appears Tuesdays in the Star-Exponent.
1 http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/07/obama.ayers/
2 http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/10/05/fact-check-is-obama-palling-around-with-terrorists/
3 Kurtz, Stanley “Founding Brothers: What’s behind Obama’s early rise?” Sep 24, 2008 http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=NTM4ZmU1NGFkODJlMjhmYjkxMjg4Y2Q0NTVlYjAzMmY=
4 Chicago Annenberg Challenge Board Of Directors Minutes, 3/15/95
5 Kurtz, Stanley “Obama and Ayers Pushed Radicalism On Schools” Wall Street Journal, Sep 23, 2008
6 http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/07/obama.ayers/
7 Chicago Tribune, 12/21/97
8 http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/07/obama.ayers/
9 http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/10/05/fact-check-is-obama-palling-around-with-terrorists/
10 http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/07/obama.ayers/
11 http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/10/07/obama.ayers/
12 Smith, Dinitia “No Regrets for a Love Of Explosives; In a Memoir of Sorts, a War Protester Talks of Life With the Weathermen”, The New York Times, September 11, 2001
13 http://www.lib.berkeley.edu/MRC/pacificaviet/scheertranscript.html
14 Smith, Dinitia “No Regrets for a Love Of Explosives; In a Memoir of Sorts, a War Protester Talks of Life With the Weathermen”, The New York Times, September 11, 2001 http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F02E1DE1438F932A2575AC0A9679C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all
15 “The FBI’s analysis of its motivations, beliefs, and international travels are outlined in this summary.” http://foia.fbi.gov/foiaindex/weather.htm
16 http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/10/05/fact-check-is-obama-palling-around-with-terrorists/
17 http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/weather/radicals_8-22.html, TALES FROM THE UNDERGROUND, AUGUST 22, 1996, TRANSCRIPT; and Smith, Dinitia “No Regrets for a Love Of Explosives; In a Memoir of Sorts, a War Protester Talks of Life With the Weathermen”, The New York Times, September 11, 2001 http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F02E1DE1438F932A2575AC0A9679C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all
18 http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/weather/radicals_8-22.html, TALES FROM THE UNDERGROUND, AUGUST 22, 1996, TRANSCRIPT
19 Smith, Dinitia “No Regrets for a Love Of Explosives; In a Memoir of Sorts, a War Protester Talks of Life With the Weathermen”, The New York Times, September 11, 2001 http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F02E1DE1438F932A2575AC0A9679C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all
20 http://rossdouthat.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/10/the_william_ayers_he_knows.php
21 Smith, Dinitia “No Regrets for a Love Of Explosives; In a Memoir of Sorts, a War Protester Talks of Life With the Weathermen”, The New York Times, September 11, 2001 http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F02E1DE1438F932A2575AC0A9679C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all
22 Smith, Dinitia “No Regrets for a Love Of Explosives; In a Memoir of Sorts, a War Protester Talks of Life With the Weathermen”, The New York Times, September 11, 2001 http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F02E1DE 1438F932A2575AC0A9679C8B63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all
23 Coburn, Marcia “No Regrets” Chicago Magazine, August 2001 http://www.chicagomag.com/Chicago-Magazine/August-2001/No-Regrets/
24 Horowitz, David “Allies in War”, FrontPageMagazine.com , September 14, 2001 http://www.islet.org/horowitz/20010914.htm
25 “The Weather Underground: Exclusive Interview : Bernadine Dorhn and Bill Ayers” , January 2004 http://www.pbs.org/independentlens/weatherunderground/interview.html
26 http://billayers.wordpress.com/2006/11/07/world-education-forum/
Post a Comment
The commenting period has ended or commenting has been deactivated for this article.
Can't find what you're looking for? Try our quick search:
Reader Reactions
Posted by ( buddy ) on October 20, 2008 at 3:29 pm
Gerneral Colin Powell has endorsed Barack Obama. That is all I need to know. He said Mc Cain was inconsistent and his jugdement is lacking.
Bill Ayers is ancient history and as Colin Powell said, it is trivial, a diversion of the countrie’s real issues.
End of story.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( OrdinaryWoman ) on October 20, 2008 at 12:43 pm
Of course, nothing you could say would change my mind, especially questioning my actions or intelligence against yours. You just resort to name calling.
No one, not even Obama has refuted the facts, and this so called “conclusion” as everyone knows, was a use of Obama’s own explanation of his relationship with Ayers. Which we all know now was his was of distancing, and not being forthright.
Until you can prove with “facts” Sharman is wrong, please move on.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( El Debibble ) on October 20, 2008 at 7:25 am
Hey sheep, I agree with you about the college transcripts. W released his and they showed he was pretty much a C student. For Ivy league schools that translates to dullard. The fine eight years he has given us reinforces dullard. Obama needs to release his transcripts so we cab be sure he isn’t as dumb as the current prez.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( El Debibble ) on October 20, 2008 at 7:05 am
Ordinarywoman, you have done no research. If you have and reach the erroneous conclusion you have then…
You and your 32 friends are all sheep. Getting others to look at it to make you feel better about being a sheep (and wrong) just makes it obvious to more people that you are a sheep.
Questioning my education level is another indication that you are a sheep. A standard tactic is to attack the messenger when it pokes holes in what you want to believe. There is a reason I use old English variants on a lot of words, but your assumption of ignorance definitely proves ignorance on someone’s part.
Your explanation of “scared” makes you look lame. Hey at least is shows you are something other than just a sheep!
It looks like the majority of the US doesn’t even think that Obama’s relationships are an issue. Claiming the world makes you even more wrong. Wait, with my education I should have said wronger? Either way you show again that you are a sheep because there is no other explanation for the “God and the whole world” comment.
Once again, Sharman posted references, not facts and he reached a conclusion that is questionable to any one other than a sheep. You need to learn the difference between facts and opinions and why references aren’t facts.
Why did you pass up proving that Sharman reached no conclusion? You were pretty sure of it. Did my quoting “They are more than simply two guys who live in the same neighborhood.“ change your mind?
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( OrdinaryWoman ) on October 18, 2008 at 8:26 pm
Ciudadano, I’ve done my research on this topic. You don’t have to speak for El Debibble, as if she (or you) know what I’ve done. I also do not fault you on whatever vocation you are involved in. You read, you interpreted wrong, by saying something that was not said in the article, and I just pointed this mistake to you, so that you could rethink.
Furthermore, if Obama has nothing to hide, then he should release the records on the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, and his college transcripts.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( Ciudadano ) on October 18, 2008 at 1:42 pm
By the way Ordinary Woman as El Debibble said you can not think by yourself please go out and do some research and see the real issues.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( Ciudadano ) on October 18, 2008 at 1:35 pm
Ordinary Woman
I do not claim to be newsman… I read and interpret what is written and that is what I understood.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( OrdinaryWoman ) on October 17, 2008 at 11:29 am
You really had to stretch to explain your “judgment” spelling. The use of this variant is rare in American colleges and judicial systems. I just pointed it out to show your current education level. Which does affect your ability to stay on issue and present sources that disprove what Sharman’s article said. (Since you’ve not yet provided any sources to disprove or support.)
I tried to keep you on the issue, which was the article. God and the whole world now know that Obama’s relationships are at issue, and are important. You went off on your tangents and what you want to believe, because you are a sheep that wants to follow down diversionary paths by asking stupid questions. Obama himself does not deny the facts. His response to the factual history is to distance himself or make fun of the messengers. Like I said before, you can’t re-write history. And “they are more than simply two guys who live in the same neighborhood.“ And this is not an attempt at slander, but a fact. And Obama’s Pastor has been preaching the same anti-American stuff for many, many years. And if you think Obama didn’t know it, than you better give yourself some more homework. The fact that Obama has more than 3 relationships that would call into question his character, make each relationship support the other as a conclusion that ones associations over many, many years, usually suggest more like-mindedness on issues rather than polarizing. Like you and your friends…are you really going to hang around people that you share no basic commonality with? Are you going to directly financially support someone that you don’t believe in what they’re doing with that money? Obama knew that Ayers was writing an educational book with his beliefs in it, and Obama wrote an endorsement for that book. And that book states way too many things that go against our democracy.
The insinuation I conveyed by using the word “scared” was very well understood by those that I’ve directed to our post. (That’s about 32 people who are enjoying watching you show yourself.) But since your naivety could not grasp it - I’ll explain by saying I used it to convey the opposite in a sarcastic way, in meeting the tone you used with me.
I thanked the person who pointed out my mistake, I could have been like you, though, and be unable to admit, but I wouldn’t want your personality to rub off.
You don’t have a “whole story”. You just want to be obstinate and add to Sharman’s story by trying to always discredit him. There is nothing wrong with Sharman’s stated facts and supporting sources. Your problem, as pointed out before, is that you have a long-standing dislike of him because of your different stances on things of the past and on your own personal religious beliefs being different.
I do not have “persons” I follow. Neither Sharman, McCain, or Obama. I have stated many times that we are given candidates that make it hard to choose which evil would be better to have in office. Obviously, since the polls are leaning back towards McCain, and since Obama has not won over the average American, many also do not believe Obama’s relationships of the past are healthy or have been fully disclosed, and his programs for the future—though some are good, the other 50% of American’s must be questioning—will they really work or be passable?
As in the past, you take what I write and give it new meanings, so that you can continue your obstinate ways. I didn’t say people were bored reading our discourse, I said I that I’ve written and “explained in enough detail as to why it was not important to go off on your unrelated questions, so I’ll not bore others again” with constantly repeating; especially since that is what you do.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( El Debibble ) on October 17, 2008 at 6:11 am
ordinarywoman, you are typical in that when you see your position starting to slide you attacked the messenger with piddly stuff like spelling, and grammar. It is much easier than adressing the issue.
BTW - Meriiam Webster Main Entry: judg·ment
Variant(s): or judge·ment \ˈjəj-mənt\
Function: noun
Date: 13th century
Maybe you ain’t the best speller in the world afterall. I will ignore all of your other attempts to defer from my postulation that you are a sheep.
Sharman led you to a conclusion? Are you saying that it wasn’t his conclusion as much as he has trashed Obama? Who are you kidding? His conclusion was weak and your is worse becasue you did not research the issue you took his attempt at slander at face value. In case you missed the last sentence of Sharman’s post (plus the two incomplete sentences)I will refresh your menmory - “Chairman Obama. Co-Chairman Ayers. They are more than simply two guys who live in the same neighborhood.“
You would not say that you were not scared unless you percieved a threat. There is no other reason to make the statement.
You admitted the primary “mistake” after insinuating that I lied and after SOMEONE ELSE pointed it out to you.
No one else is bored. Several people have enjoyed watching you fully show that you are a sheep, unwilling to think for yourself, or question the validity of anything posted by someone who you want to believe.
I would not have even known about the “rest of the story” except that when Sharman posted I knew we couldn’t be getting the whole story (as usual) and I went to look for it.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( OrdinaryWoman ) on October 16, 2008 at 1:29 pm
AGAIN, I’LL RESPOND WITH YOUR OWN WORDS SO YOUR SILLINESS IS CLEAR TO ALL:
sillywoman, (clear and direct name calling) YES, WE KNOW WHAT YOU GET YOUR HIGHEST GRADE MARKS IN. I am not calling Sharman’s facts into question. THAT’S THE FIRST YOU’VE SAID THIS. BEFORE IT WAS ALWAYS “LOSELY LINKED” SO CLOSE TO A LIE.” I am calling his conclusions, as well as yours into question. MR SHARMAN’S ARTICLE DIDN’T DRAW A CONCLUSION, HE LET US DRAW IT FOR OURSELVES. COMPREHENSION PROBLEM AGAIN. Why can’t you get that into your head? My assertion that you are logically inconsistent is based on how obvious you make it your posts. You can’t (I’M SURE YOU MEANT (CAN”) rant all you want but the proof is in you posts. You still have provided no clear or factual data. I AGREED WITH HISTORY AND CHECKED OUT SHARMAN’S REFERENCES, SO THERE’S NO NEED TO PROVIDE YOU MORE. YOU NEED TO PROVIDE FACTS TO BACK UP WHAT YOU SAY THAT IS NOT TRUE ABOUT WHAT SHARMAN SAID. AND YOU’VE NOT DONE THAT. (references that may or may not be correct). I am not calling Sharman’s facts into question. I am calling his CONCLUSIONS, as well as yours, into question. Why can’t you get that? I am saying that a presentation of your conclusion would not hold up in front of a jury. YOU DIDN’T NEED TO REPEAT YOURSELF HERE, BUT I UNDERSTAND IF YOU GOT LOST IN YOUR HEAD AS TO WHERE YOU WERE.
You found a fact and then you built a story around it. I DIDN’T. YOU TRIED GOING OFF ON A TANGENT AND BUILD SOMETHING, BUT I REFUSED TO GO ON THE RIDE WITH YOU BECAUSE IT WAS OFF TOPIC. I EXPLAINED IN ENOUGH DETAIL AS TO WHY IT WAS NOT IMPORTANT TO GO OFF ON YOUR UNRELATED QUESTIONS, SO I’LL NOT BORE OTHERS AGAIN. IF the story cannot be supported, which it can’t THEN you’re story is faulty. Part of your faulty logic is that you are unwilling to apply to other who have supported Ayers or been invovled with him the same logic and standards that you demand be applied to Obama. Instead you would rather try to dismiss the questions which is typical of koolaid drinkers from either side.
“owning” you in court is not a threat. I NEVER SAID IT WAS A THREAT. IS THAT A COMPREHENSION PROBLEM OR are YOU PUTTING WORDS IN TO ALTER MEANING? I SAID YOU DIDN’T SCARE ME. AND BELIEVE ME, YOU WOULD NOT OWN ME IN COURT EITHER WITH THIS CRAP. It is an estimate of how foolish you would look when I finished busting your conclusions into little pieces. You are reaching. Just like you are with the following:
I can spell bettter than you. I can’t type. So what? A TYPO IS ONE THING, WE ALL DO THAT. BUT YOU SPELLED JUDGMENT WITH AN “E” IN THE MIDDLE CAUSE YOU REALLY THOUGHT IT WAS SPELLED THAT WAY, WHICH TELLS ME YOU ARE NO LAWYER OR JOURNALIST, AND YOUR EDUCATION IS LACKING WHEN YOU THINK THE WORDS “BUZZWORDS” AND “CLICHES” ARE DEFINED AS FACTS. NOT TO MENTION YOUR COMPREHENSION PROBLEM.
Feel free to point out the misuse of words. Odds are they came from my inability to type. SEE ABOVE
It is not naive to accuse you of being biased and blind since if you REALLY cared you would look it up. You don’t and you won’t and it doesn’t matter what you do for a living. My refusing to provide you such easy to find data just proves it. If you had accused me of what I just accused you of I would be hunting it to see if maybe I should admit I might be wrong, or in you case just shut up since I doubt you will admit to being wrong . I found it. I went as far as to tell you WHAT to look for. Shouldn’t that indicate there might be something out there that contradicts the conclusions reached by Sharman’s “facts” ? BTW - they are references, not neccesarily facts. THIS WORD SHOWS YOUR EDUCATION LEVEL—IT IS SPELLED NECESSARLIY. OH DO SHARE YOUR PROOF, WE’VE BEEN WAITING.
Your insistence that “THE FACT AT HAND WAS THAT THE MONEY WENT TO A KNOWN TERRORIST AS FUNNELED THROUGH THE HANDS OF OBAMA, NOT WHERE THE MONEY CAME FROM OR WHO ELSE THEY MAY HAVE SUPPORTED” is not important is utterly ridiculous. You are completely hypocritical to carry on about Obama and terrorosts (LOOKS LIKE A TYPO HERE) while ignoring that those of your own party have the same associations. I NEVER TOLD YOU THAT I WAS A REPUBLICAN. SO FOR YOU TO TRY TO PULL IN OTHERS THAT ARE NOT RELATED TO THE PEOPLE IN THE ARTICLE, IS A DISTRACTION. AS EXPLAINED BEFORE, WE KNOW HOW “FOUNDATIONS” WORK. YOU TRYING TO SPREAD THE GUILT, AND THUS MINIMIZE THIS RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN AYERS & OBAMA IS HYPOCRITICAL. THERE’S NOTHING INCONSISTENT ABOUT THE FACT THAT OBAMA FUNNELED MONEY TO AYERS.
I believe you insinuated that I was lying about voting for McCain. NO, I ASKED YOU TO CLARIFY WHERE AND WHEN YOU VOTED FOR HIM AND SINCE YOU WOULD NOT ANSWER I ASKED AGAIN, AS HE’S ONLY RAN TWICE AND YOUR CHOICE OF WORDS MADE IT SOUND LIKE EVERY TIME HE RAN FOR AN OFFICE, YOU WERE THERE TO VOTE FOR HIM. BUT I DID ACKNOWLEDGE MY MISTAKE THAT IN FORGETTING VA WAS AN OPEN PRIMARY STATE. I BET IT’S VERY HARD FOR YOU TO ADMIT A MISTAKE HUH?
Report Inappropriate Comment