Bill Ayers Turns on Obama

[jordan179]

Courtesy of David Jackson, USA Today "Ayers condemns Obama for 'War Crimes'"

Ayers, the 1960s radical from Chicago whom Republicans have often tried to link to Obama, says the president should be tried for "war crimes," and that his use of drones and other counterterrorism activities amount to "acts of terror."This is hilarious for several reasons

Comments

[ford_prefect42]

It's setup. By going against Obama now, in his lame duck phase, it allows the next president to run as "the new savior".

[marycatelli]

Yeah. Unless there's a real landslide in 2014, he's not going to be impeached.

[ford_prefect42]

Which constitutes the final nail in the chances of *any* democrat ever receiving my vote. Partisan hacks to a man.

[metaphorsbwithu]

Good point. I wrote somewhere else how the Democrats ran against Obama in the 2010 midterms, pretending they were moderate/conservative and still got their butts kicked (over 700 Dems kicked out nationwide).

The survivors got right back on the bandwagon after that and now they're positioning themselves for 2014 hoping to take the House, give Obama a rubber stamp and let 2016 take care of itself depending on what happens next year.

[philmophlegm]

Over on this side of the Atlantic, we've seen this all before. Exactly the same thing happened with Tony Blair. The left saw him as someone who could bring them electoral victory after more than a decade in opposition because he seemed respectable and presentable. He was never going to be as left-wing as most of his party wanted him to be, and it didn't take them long to start undermining him (while he was still winning elections for them). Nowadays, Blair is hated by the left almost as much as the Conservative Party is.

[ford_prefect42]

Thing is, the left REALLY wants an omnipotent, marxist, god king that will magically unicorn fart all the problems away. It's impossible, so no one will hold the support of the left after actually *getting* the job, mostly because leftism is stupid from the start, and there are advisors and people across the table that actually *do* know how shit works. "No, Mr president, you cannot just give all the foreclosed homes to the homeless, that would totally destroy the banking sector, there would be food riots in a week". No, Mr President, you don't have the authority to deport all the conservatives". That kind of thing.

[metaphorsbwithu]

The further left someone is the more he or she has to gripe about because even someone like Obama can't do as much as he'd like to do - PLUS he has to depend on crony capitalism and a media that will excuse virtually anything he does in order to gain and maintain power.

Example: the debacle that is ObamaCare - Obama's REAL goal is a socialized single payer system populated and run by good faithful little leftists.

The left will not so much "defect" (to whom?) as much as they will try to either "nudge" him more clearly to their positions OR get something for being "squeaky wheels" - like helping run all those health insurance "exchanges" where they can advance their ideology.

[rhjunior]

They voted for a man who promised free cookies for everyone. Now they're turning on him because they're finding out that, like always, the guy who promises free cookies for everyone only means everyone in his little crowd....

[gothelittle]

Yes indeed -- not only that, but to ensure that his little crowd has more cookies, he has to take them away from the rest of us, because his methods do not include *production*, only *redistribution*.

(I wonder if that's why liberals think wealth cannot be created. The only way they seem to understand how to obtain it is through forced redistribution, which is pretty much the *only* way that it is gained without being created.)