[Vision2020] Questions for No. Weatherman

[Chasuk]

I asked:

>> 1.  Why, No. Weatherman, do you choose to post anonymously?

Your answer, trimmed of excess, and slightly re-arranged:

> I chose anonymity to force one particular subject to the front of the
> conversation and to leave personalities out of it... without letting other
> distractions enter into the conversation, like the identity of the
> person on the other side of the screen.

Is that an accurate summary?

I asked:

>> 2.  Would you vote for a Muslim to serve as President of the United States?

I think you answered yes, but that you are not currently aware of any
Muslims in US politics for whom you would likely vote.

Is that accurate?

You then asked whether Obama  -- by his own standards -- is obligated
to throw Ayers "under the bus," as he did with Farrakhan, Wright, and
Rezko.

This is a complicated question, but I don't want to inflate the
answer, so I'm going to leave things out.  Short answer: no, but only
because he wasn't obligated to throw Farrakhan, Wright, or Rezko under
the bus, either.  That he did was cowardice driven by political
expediency, which I loathe, always.  I don't loathe it enough to swing
my vote from Obama to McCain.

Now I'm going to ask you a favor.  I enjoy dialogue, but only when it
really is.  For my very busy schedule, I need dialogue to be
constrained to one topic at a time, and streamlined, with little or no
digression.

Can we agree to restrict this thread to respectful debate, one subject
at a time, striving to avoid loaded questions and insinuations,
leaving intentional provocation at the door, and abjuring logical
fallacies?

Note that there is nothing accusatory in my request.

Chas