I've been seeing this letter around pretty frequently nowadays, which is odd considering that it's not a very good attack on Obama. I already wrote a reply to this that I posted somewhere else, so I'll go ahead and repeat it here.

To Barack Hussein Obama,

Right off the bat, the writer establishes himself as the type of conservative who thinks that a man's name is sufficient for presidential disqualification. I love this country, but dolly if there aren't some silly mindsets in it.

The New York Times carried a story on Saturday, October 4, 2008, that proved you had a significantly closer relationship with Bill Ayers than what you previously admitted.

There are no specifics on this and the claim is made without substantiation. It furthermore barrels ahead without any substantiation and then accuses Obama of lying without ever proving the initial charge. This is the model throughout the first half.

The Chicago Sun reported on May 8, 2008, that FBI records showed that you had a significantly closer relationship with Tony Rezko than what you previously admitted.

There are no specifics on this and the claim is made without substantiation.

Your speech in Philadelphia on March 18, 2008, about “race” contradicted your statement to Anderson Cooper on March 14 when you said that you never heard Reverend Wright make his negative statements about white America.

This is a deliberate conflation of two statements. Obama told Cooper that he had never heard Wright say negative things about white people. In the "race" speech he said he had certainly heard him be a "strong critic of American policy." It's telling that the author considers "America" and "white people" to be the same thing.

In your 1st debate with John McCain, you said that you never said that you would meet with the leaders of Cuba, Venezuela, Iran, and North Korea without “preparations” at lower levels … Joe Biden repeated your words in his debate with Sarah Palin … while the video tape from your debate last February clearly shows that you answered “I would” to the question of meeting with those leaders within 12 months without “any” preconditions.

"Preconditions" and "preparations" are two separate things, and again they are deliberately and dishonestly conflated. When obama says he will meet with leaders without "preconditions" what that means is he will not demand that they agree to some policy before he deigns to talk to them. "Preparations" refers to the diplomatic process of engaging lower-level diplomats before talking to the major leaders. It also barrels ahead as everything does.

On July 14, 2008, you said that you always knew that the surge would work

No he did not, and the claim is made without substantiation. You don't think mccain would have brought this up during the debate, instead of saying the exact opposite?

You now claim that your reason for voting against funding for the troops was because the bill did not include a time line for withdrawal, while the video tapes of you from more than a year ago show that you voted against additional funding because you wanted our troops to be removed immediately …

Obama never favored immediate withdrawal, this is a bold-faced lie.

You claim to have a record of working with Republicans while the record shows that the only bill that you sponsored with a Republican was with Chuck Lugar … and it failed.

This is a complete lie, here's just one other example, drawn from two seconds of googling.

http://www.nytimes.com/2008...

The record shows that you vote 97% in concert with the Democrat party

No it doesn't, also "Democrat party".

and that you have the most liberal voting record in the Senate.

Amazing how the Democrats always manage to nominate the most liberal whatever isn't it.


In the primary debates of last February, 2008, you claimed to have talked with a “Captain” of a platoon in Afghanistan “the other day” when in fact you had a discussion in 2003 with a Lieutenant who had just been deployed to Afghanistan . You lied in that debate.

He probably had two separate conversations with two different people. This occasionally happens!

In your debates last spring, you claimed to have been a “professor of Constitutional law” when in fact you have never been a professor of Constitutional law.

Bold-faced lie.

You and Joe Biden both claimed that John McCain voted against additional funding for our troops when the actual records show the opposite. You distorted the truth.

Actually McCain did vote against additional funding and admitted as much during the debate, because the bill proposed contained a phased-withdrawal timetable. When Biden brought it up, incidentally, it was to point out how ridiculous it was to accuse anyone of "voting to underfund the troops" over disagreements on spending.

You and Joe Biden claim that John McCain voted against funding for alternate energy sources 20 times when the record shows that John McCain specifically voted against funding for bio fuels, especially corn

So this person is accusing obama of lying when he didn't lie at all. Haha.

and using corn to make ethanol increased the price of corn from $2 a bushel to $6 a bushel for food.

No economist in the world agrees with this assessment.

You and Joe Biden claim that John McCain voted like both of you for a tax increase on those making as little as $42,000 per year while the voting record clearly shows that John McCain did not vote as you and Joe Biden. You lied to America .

Have no idea what this is referring to, is almost certainly a lie, considering Obama's tax plan is kind of the opposite of a tax increase for low-income households.

You and Joe Biden claim that John McCain voted with George W. Bush 90% of the time when you know that Democrats also vote 90% of the time with the President (including Joe Biden) because the vast majority of the votes are procedural.

Hahahaha, most democrats do not vote with the President 90% of the time, especially on major issues. This is because Bush is the most radically conservative president this nation has ever had. Procedural votes are not the same thing as voting with/against the president.

You are one of the few who has not voted 90% of the time with the president because you have been missing from the Senate since the day you got elected.

John mccain has missed more votes as of late than anyone in the Senate. Find a nice, non-biased record of voting histories. Though I do forget sometimes, apparently the truth has a liberal bias in this country.

You did not take an active role in the rescue plan. You claimed that the Senate did not need you while the real reason that you abstained was because of your close relationships with the executives of Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, Countrywide, and Acorn

Ooh ACORN, spoooOOOOooky. In related news, the Michigan Republican party has admitted to it's own brand of voter disenfranchisement: http://emptywheel.firedogla...

You forgot to mention that you personally represented Tony Rezko and Acorn. Tony Rezko, an Arab

An Arab, huh? Hahahahahahaaa come on America, we can do bettter than this.

During your campaign, you said: “typical white person.”

No he didn't. Find the videoclip, read the quote.

“They cling to their guns and religion.” “They will say that I am black.”

What does the first statement have to do with race? Also, "they" did say he was black. And that he has a funny name. And Arab friends.

You tried to label any criticism about you as racist.

When.

You divide America .

Obama's entire campaign message is the opposite.

You claim that you will reduce taxes for 95% of America , but you forgot to tell America that those reductions are after you remove the Bush tax reductions.

This is a lie and any outside research can confirm it.

You have requested close to $1 billion in earmarks and several million for Acorn.

ooooooOOOOOOOOOOOOOoooooooooOOOOOoooo

Your social programs will cost America $1 trillion per year and you claim that a reduction in military spending ($100 billion for Iraq ) can pay for it.

This is massively dishonest, it's the figures for all social programs put together including the current budgets as of today, not an Obama increase.

While your economic plan of adding 30% to the size of our federal government

This is a pretty scary figure, you'd think some republican somewhat possibly might have mentioned it if it were accurate, possibly during a debate or something. Wait.

Yet today, you say that you have always been for more oil and more nuclear.

When.

Mr. Obama, you claimed that you “changed” your mind about public financing for your campaign because of the money spent by Republican PACs in 2004. The truth is that the Democrat PACs in 2004, 2006, and 2008 spent twice as much as the Republican PACs (especially George Soros and MoveOn.org). You are lying to America .

Why is "changed" in scare quotes.

Mr. Obama, you have done nothing to stop the actions of the teachers union and college professors in the USA .

Uh oh Ma best get the cows inside! Looks like a ternada of crazy's on the way.

They eliminated religion from our history.

haha

They teach pro gay agendas and discuss sex with students as young as first grade.

haha

They brainwash our children.

haha

They are in it for themselves …not America .

Haha yeah they must really have an eye on that 35k-a-year pie.

Now let me compare your record of lies, distortions, race baiting, and associations to John McCain: War hero.

Haha

Annapolis graduate

Fifth from last from class, only did not wash out because of Daddy.

with “Country first.”

What

Straight talk.

Haha

Maverick.

Haha

Never asked for an earmark.

McCain has asked for one earmark, a great deal less than most politicians. $10 million for the University of Arizona.

Mr. Obama, it is time for us Americans to put aside our differences on political issues and vote against you because of your dishonest character.

Haha.

Would these same people vote for the anti-Christ if the anti-Christ promised them riches?

Ha.

and because some (especially our young people) are consumed by your wonderful style and promises for “change” like the Germans who voted for Adolf Hitler in 1932.

Are you kidding.

Mr. Obama, John McCain does not have as much money as your campaign to refute all of your false statements.

Ask yourselves why that is.

Mr. Obama, in a democracy, we get what we deserve. And God help America if we deserve you.

You're not kidding. Hahahahahaaaaa

jamadhouse,

You evidently didn't do the kind of  research I did. The comments Obama has made in speeches and in debates is pretty much on the record. You just have to do the work to dig it out. It took me a couple of days to look at everything I wanted to check on, but most of it is on the Internet if you know where to go. You can also try snopes.com to check on various comments attributed to just about anyone.

I'm not mad at Obama, I don't have any axes to grind, but I have done my research. Michael Master's letter certainly has been widely circulated, but it is only one of the many sources I have studied. I even wrote a letter to the editor dealing with my research of the accomplishments of the troops in Iraq, which Obama refuses to relate to the American people in spite of the fact he went there and was shown what is going on. Hopefully it will be printed in the next week or two.

He simply isn't qualified to be leading this country. My purpose in trying to bring Obama's shot comings to light isn't to change anyone's vote, but to make sure I do what I can to inform people and tell them where they can learn more.

If you can't make your case without personal attacks you have no case and I can rest mine.

Marci,

Thanks for your comments. I'm not sure we are in the minority. I sure hope not. There are not any Obama supporters in the crowd that I spend most of my time with and very few that I have talked to during the past month. I think the race is much tighter than the media would have us believe. I guess we will see pretty soon. 

Smokey,

Now that President Barack Hussein Obama will soon be in the Oval Office, do you pledge to support him and work with his administration to better our country?

-- Michael

Michael,

I'm in sort of a wait and see mode right now. If and when he tries to do things I would like to see done, I will support those efforts. During his campaign, he espoused socialist thinking that I do not agree with and will not support. I continue to be concerned with his associations with the likes of Bill Ayers, Bernadine Dohm, Rashid Khallidi, Tony Rezko and ACORN.

He is also a Punative Liberal, meaning that he thinks the United States is responsible for the worlds problems. He has a bad attitude toward the U.S. and feels the country needs to make amends. He isn't as proud of The U.S. as I think a president ought to be.

He has also stated that he would like appoint more Supreme Court Judges like Ruth Bader Ginsberg and John Paul Stevens, who have shown a desire to legislate from the bench.

He has also tapped one member of the Chicago political machine as his Chief of Staff, and is considering several appointees from the previous Clinton Administration. That concerns me also.

So, I guess the answer to your question is, I know what direction I would like to see our country go,and will be letting my representatives in Congress know of my hopes and concerns. If Obama wants to work for the same ideals, I will welcome him. If he wants to lead the charge for those Ideals, I can live with that.

I'm pretty much the same as I always was. When I'm headed somewhere people can follow, lead or get out of the way. When people try to be an obstacle in my way, I just ignore them and hunker down and bore through.

I'm just waiting to see whether Obama is ally or an obstacle, but I am already moving in the direction I want to go.

That's good.

It is a form of support to work within the system, through our elected representatives, to offer honest intellectual criticism of policies.

I saw Ayers interviewed last night, and he said that his association with Obama was a fundraiser when Obama was running for state senator in Illinois. The occassion was a "coffee night" that took place at Ayers house. Ayers said that Obama must have visited 20 other houses that evening.

Hence, Ayers claims that the Republicans are blowing this "relationship" out of proportion for mere mudslining.

Do you know any more about the alleged "association" between the two?

Michael,

I have dug into it as much as I can. It is true that Obama was pretty young when Ayers and Dohm bombed the Pentagon, and had nothing to do with that issue. However, they were both on a couple of the same community committees. After first claiming that he had only met Ayers once, Barack finally conceded that they had been on a couple of committees together. In and of itself, that may not be too serious, but why not admit it right up front and leave us no where else to go on that issue. In the case of Bill Ayers, I have an uneasy feeling because of the way Obama denied knowing him very well and then conceded that he had worked on a couple of committees with him. That feeling hasn't gone away. 

Of greater concern to me is his relationship with close friend Tony Rezko, who was convicted of real estate transactions that bilked millions of tax dollars from the Illinois government for renovation projects that Obama sponsored as State Senator.

Obama also granted funds from the Woods Fund, which he directed to Rashid Khallidi's pro PLO group, "The Arab American Group", which has been under investigation for terrorist funding. Rashid Khallidi is a former PLO spokesman.

Since he has been elected President, the best I personally can do is hope for the best, but stay alert and vigilant. In my training it is refered to as being in, " Condition Yellow. " Relaxed but alert. So, I'm not stressing out, nor will I. I'm just ready to write lots of letters.