"I don't see this, or any other controversy relating to BHO, as an "attack"."

Well, they are all attacks. They may be valid attacks or they may be just smear attacks but they are certainly an attack designed to harm his chances of getting elected.

"These are relevent issues of his own doing. He's chosen to associate with people like Wright, Ayers and now El-Hady."

Well, he did associate with them but really to what extent? Wright we know the most about and it appears according to what people say Obama "church shopped" for political gain and this is how he came to be involved with Wright. I don't think Wright "brainwashed Obama" and I think it's obvious both men saw benefits from their relationship. I don't think there is anything at all to be concerned about as far as Wright goes. The other two, really, how involved is/was he with them?

"I think it's very important for the country to see just who this guy hangs around with."

Well, he did hang with Wright a bit it seems but did he "hang around" with the other two? I think they are only related through fund raising. I don't think there's much more to it than that. At least I don't see enough here to think that.

"These are not attacks, they're facts. Real scary ones too. To me, anyway."

I don't deny that the facts show he knows these people but do the "facts" show that he believes or supports things that they may have been involved with? I think that plays to your "To me, anyway." line and that's it exactly. We have to speculate about what these things might mean because there are no "facts" that show they mean anything more than what we want to make them mean. You are correct though, to some people they will read or hear this and they won't like it. That is why they get this stuff out there to put doubt in peoples minds. It's the doubt that counts because Obama has done nothing. He was not in the Weather Underground, he never yelled "God damn America!" and we don't even know if he was there when Wright did or what he may have said to him about it, and we sure have no evidence he supports Hamas.

"Think about this; what if"

These are probably the most important words you've posted on this. They go to the heart of what it's all about. This is the point they want to bring us to...think about it, what if? The seeds of doubt are planted and they get watered and fertilized daily. "We don't know anything about this guy!" the talk shows shout. The truth is they know everything about him because when you are going to run for president they crawl up your ass with a microscope and look at every little thing. His own campaign has investigated him, never mind all the other ones so they know in advance what the attacks may be. Things are released to the public in stages and for effect. This is modern politics.

"How would most Americans react to these revelations?"

They react the way we are reacting. Some people don't like it, others don't care. It depends and that's why they do it. You can't argue with somebody about whether or not they should like something. It goes nowhere.

"I like vanilla."

"I like strawberry."

"What? Vanilla is better!"

"No, strawberry is better!"

"Fuck you, you're an idiot! Vanilla is best!"

"No, fuck you asshole! You've got your head up your ass!"

It can go on forever and really this is where they want us to be. These Obama stories are the same. They prove nothing but they can divide people over whether or not they like him.