I agree that it should be covered - factually, as you say. But if Obama is the one to do it, it should be at the very end of the debate. Let's see if McCain is going to have the nerve to walk bravely into what he must know by now is a well-set trap. -- And let him be anxious about how or when to do it - or what the effect will be if he doesn't while he's answering questions on other things. My fear is that Bob Schieffer will make it easy for him (McCain) and bring it up in a question.

I also hope that the John Lewis comment comes up, preferably from McCain. **Someone** needs to point out that Lewis wasn't calling them segregationists -- he was warning about VIOLENCE. The Civil Rights violence is America's historical example, and Lewis' standing to speak about it. The threat of violence could as well be there with a white candidate who was being accused of "palling around with terrorists" and other questionable, possible treasonous behavior. If Lewis had made the same comment in that situation, his meaning would have been very clear.

I respectfully disagree. I do not believe Obama should initiate conversation about Ayers. Ayers is not the economy. If McCain brings up Ayers, McCain loses. If McCain doesn't bring up Ayers, McCain loses. Obama's comments regarding Ayers should come ONLY by way of response.

Obama doesn't need to say a thing. The thing is pretty well delineated, in language we can all understand; Palin:"He Pals around with terrorists" McCain: "I'll whip his you-know-what!"

Obama: "Say it to my face"

And the debate is McCain's chance to do it. Obama doesn't need to open his mouth, and shouldn't. If his stance is that the Ayers connection is trivial, than there's no reason for him to bring it up if McCain doesn't. McCain, after all is the one who thinks the connection is significant enough to base ads around, and threaten Obama with exposure at the last debate. Obama should go through the debate like he's never heard of Ayers. Make McCain make good on his promise, that he can deliver a game-changing indictment via Ayers.

McCain is screwed.

Has anyone identified the offenders? They could be PLANTS to smear McCain. And just remember, McCain cannot control what others do.

I believe it is very prudent that questions on background be put forward. Now is the time to do it! We do not know Obama. I like his persona, too, but we have to enter into this marriage with open eyes! After election will be too late!

The rhetoric called “HATE” needs to be displaced with the term “CONCERN” for our future! Obama has openly lied, changed positions, didn’t know his own convictions early-on having to wait and feel out the public and opponents, and seems to say what he thinks his audience wants to hear. “Words, only words.” We certainly cannot believe he was a member of that congregation for twenty years and did not know went on. Why are so many of his associates questionable? He has given no substantiated evidence of his background and activities. Where are lifelong friends who should be vouching for him? He seemingly is a wolf in sheepskin to those of us who haven’t joined the ban wagon, keeping their eyes open!

He supports abortion and is willing to kill his own grandchildren. He most likely will lead us to assisted deaths/suicides to relieve the country of other burdensome beings: old people, mental patients, disabled, who knows who. Perhaps you or your child who is in a comma from an accident! For the most important job in the world, how can you trust someone who openly defies moral right and would be refused by the Secret Service or the FBI with his questionable background?

Personally, I endorse McCain because he has displayed an upright position on issues, knew his own convictions from the beginning, and has loved beyond self for unnumbered, unknown others with great sacrifice. He adopted; not out of his need, but out of love, empathy, and caring for others, despite his own frailty and weaknesses. Obama has shown his love through his rhetoric. Words are easy.

Obama has fought dirty politics, too, but has had to go to the VP position to do it! Why? Because of McCain’s clean record and years of front-and-center profile in the country! Both men have smears of adultery. The only times I have heard McCain and his supporters called liars is in the name of “hate” which really should be termed “concern for our country.”

I dare to say that Chicago politics has taught Obama a lot of dirty; like “plants” in the opposing rallies to build negativism toward McCain. Obama certainly has had the budget to hire others to do his dirty work! Twenty years with Pastor Wright would have taught him to seed the term “hate” for the term “concern!” McCain has not had such exposure and is and always has been an upright candidate for the most important job in the world!

DECENCY IS THE ONLY WAY TO PROMOTE VIGOROUS SELF-ESTEEM, PEOPLE, AND COUNTRY! Keep your eyes open and be concerned!

We've been round and round and round this here. There's no doubt we disagree about Obama, about the way he ran his campaign, about the relevance of Ayers, Wright, and others, about Obama's bipartisanship, and about unity in the democratic party and this country. There's been dozens of posts and I think my argument in those dozens of posts was sufficient. I don't expect to change anyone's mind here. I just resent someone telling those who disagree to, "Be honest" like I and others haven't been fucking honest. You can take your fucking be honest and fucking shove it.

Perhaps Obama can just thank John for trying to tone down the retoric at the outset of the debate. Would that neutralize/prevent John from making an attack later in the debate?