August 26, 2008

Should Obama not respond to attacks based on his association with Bill Ayers?

Here's the Obama response, which Shannen Coffin thinks is terrible:
It starts with: "Why is John McCain talking about the Sixties?" Well, McCain wasn't talking about anything; it was an unrelated (but supportive) group.
Ugh! How awful to set about correcting others for connecting Obama to Ayers and to begin by misstating McCain's connection to the ad.
"Why is McCain trying to link Barack Obama to radical Bill Ayers?" asks the ad? ... [T]his seems to be the first time Obama has described his seemingly close associate as a radical.
Maybe they thought we'd hear "radical Bill Ayers" as the Bill Ayers of the distant past — as distinguished from present-day Ayers, who's become a fine, upstanding, mainstream citizen. But it would be stupid to think Americans have such a subtle picture of Bill Ayers. If they did, you wouldn't need to run the ad at all. So if you're going to wade into this, you have to bring us up to speed at the same time. It's sort of like they thought they could say: If you are aware of this issue, here is our answer. If you're not, please don't start thinking about it.
The ad explains that Obama "denounced Ayers' crime." Whether that is true or not, his recent association with Ayers is not addressed. And again, Obama suggests that it is somehow relevant that the crimes were committed when he was just eight years old. As I recall, Charles Manson was committing crimes in the same time frame, but are any Presidential candidates jumping on the Manson express?
You don't get off the hook for association with a bad person by saying that you denounce whatever bad things he's done. Are we not to judge the candidate by the company he keeps? The point needs to be that Ayers has become a completely different person, one who would never commit the kind of crimes he once advocated.

Jennifer Rubin calls the ad Obama's "biggest goof yet":
He took a story largely confined to the internet, (only briefly raised in the primary) ...
Actually, Rush Limbaugh talks about this story often. Back to Rubin:
... about Obama’s connection to former terrorist Bill Ayers, put it in his own ad, and then filed a claim trying to force the third-party 527 ad that first brought up the Obama-Ayers connection off the air. In the next 24 hours thousands if not millions of voters who never heard of or didn’t understand the extent of the Obama-Ayers relationship are going to get a full education.
Here's the story about the effort to block the 527 ad:
Obama’s campaign has written the Department of Justice demanding a criminal investigation of the “American Issues Project,” the vehicle through which Dallas investor Harold Simmons is financing the advertisements. The Obama campaign — and tens of thousands of supporters — also is pressuring television networks and affiliates to reject the ads. The effort has met with some success: CNN and Fox News are not airing the attacks.

98 comments:

Bob said...

I lost count; has Obama already thrown Ayers under the bus, or not?

Unknown said...

"The point needs to be that Ayers has become a completely different person,"

Really? Does unrepentant mean nothing to you, then?

EnigmatiCore said...

I completely understand why Obama is trying to nip this in the bud. It is specifically because of his associations with Ayers and Wright and Rezko etc that I won't even consider voting for him.

Widmerpool said...

I think you have hit upon The One's difficulty: It is far from clear that Ayers has become a completely different person who would never commit the kind of crimes he once advocated.

Simon said...

Re the effort to block the ad, I think it's refreshing to see how openly and honestly the Obama campaign (pp Bob Bauer) will announce their total contempt for the First Amendment where necessary to stomp on their critics. What a positive, encouraging preview of the way his administration would handle criticism.

Perhaps I'm not charitable enough. Perhaps their goal is to cue up the case that follows WRTL and overrules what's left of McConnell. But I doubt it.

Simon said...

mjsharon said...
"It is far from clear that Ayers has become a completely different person who would never commit the kind of crimes he once advocated."

It's clear that he hasn't. He's made it clear that his only regret is not doing more. He hasn't apologized, and he certainly hasn't said he's wrong. Would do the same thing today? Probably not. But that's not the issue; he doesn't regret doing it, and probably wouldn't decry those who would today.

J. Cricket said...

Guilt by association: alive and well on Althouse!

But of course, it only applies to Democrats.

And don't hold your breath for any posts about the absurdity of sending Cindy McCain to Georgia to "assess to civilian damage."

Unknown said...

While it is possible to justify why Obama has had any kind of relationship with Ayers, it is not possible to do so with the belief that Ayers is a "totally different person". Talk about suspending disbelief.

PatCA said...

I thought the same thing: he took a limited meme and shot it into the popular media. Dumb.

And, yes, someone's political and spiritual advisers say a lot about who that person is. Didn't he learn that after the Wright fiasco?

Kirk Parker said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Kirk Parker said...

rightwingprof, I didn't read Ann as saying that claim is true, just that it's what required to be effective. For me, I take it as a given that Ayers' 9/11 piece clearly demonstrates that he's not repentant.

Peter V. Bella said...

Let me see if I have this straight. Obama and the Obamites do not like an ad calling a former terrorist and former terrorist and that former terrorist’s links to Obama. So, Obama wants the ads pulled and a criminal investigation. The Obamites want to pressure stations into not running the ad(s). Now we are led to believe that this is perfectly acceptable.

So, if Obama or a wealthy Obamite runs an ad that the McCain camp does not like, will turn about be fair play? Or will they cry, moan, yell, swear, and act like the little toddlers they are and spew first amendment violations. Just asking, ya know.

Ann Althouse said...

Kirk: "rightwingprof, I didn't read Ann as saying that claim is true, just that it's what required to be effective."

Correct.

Anonymous said...

Ayer’s 9-11-01 in the NY Times article is worth revisiting if you think he is repentant and transformed. (I can't get the link to embed properly.)

Peter V. Bella said...

Simon said...
It's clear that he hasn't. He's made it clear that his only regret is not doing more. He hasn't apologized, and he certainly hasn't said he's wrong.

I stated this awhile back. I also stated that he and his wife have benefitted greatly from their crimes; they are respected professors in their fields. They are blatantly unrepentant and unapologetic. They have also woven themselves into the fabric of the local Democratic Party; which gives them a certain cachet and some considerable clout. This is the same party that supported former Black Panther Bobby Rush for congress, another unrepentant soul. Of course the Chicago Democratic party has a long history with criminals going way back before Al Capone. Ya gotta love the Dems; the party of criminals and terrorists.

nrn312 said...

Of course the Chicago Democratic party has a long history with criminals going way back before Al Capone.

You don't say.

William Hale Thompson

Bruce Hayden said...

Peter,

My understanding is that Ayers' father and brother were already well connected to the Chicago machine.

Bruce Hayden said...

The problem as I see it is that Obama and Ayers are not mere acquaintances because they live in the same neighborhood, as originally portrayed, but rather they had a close working relationship esp. at the Chicago Annenberg Challenge (CAC).

Stanley Kurtz in an NRO article: Chicago Annenberg Challenge Shutdown? talks about some of the problems there. He has been trying to get access to the CAC records housed in the Richard J. Daley Library at the University of Illinois at Chicago (UIC). Access to the records was granted, then blocked by forces unknown, and is possibly back on this week.

So, before discounting the connection here, keep in mind that Obama apparently kicked off his career from the house of a pair of unrepentant Weather Underground terrorists, and was placed for it by his appointment by the Ayers family to chair the CAC.

former law student said...

to begin by misstating McCain's connection to the ad.

McCain is far more clearly connected to the ad than, say Obama is connected to Ayers. According to the Associated Press:

http://biz.yahoo.com/ap/080822/anti_obama_ad.html?.v=1

American Issues Project, the sponsor of the ad, is a nonprofit 501(c)4 organization. One of its board members, Ed Failor Jr., was a paid consultant for McCain's campaign in Iowa last year. The campaign paid his firm $50,000 until July 2007. American Issues Project spokesman Christian Pinkston said Failor has no connection to the McCain campaign now.

Imagine that. A man who once was paid to get McCain elected President is once again being paid to get McCain elected President. The only difference is the name on the paychecks.

Ayers thought he didn't do enough to stop the war in Vietnam. Ayers is unrepentant that he attempted to end the war. Well, that war is long over now. The antiwar movement, of which Ayers was a part, succeeded. But 35 years later, apparently McCain is still fighting it.

I'm surprised Ann does not identify with Ayers and Dohrn. Like Ayers, she is a professor at the state university. Like Dohrn, she is a law professor. Was she not radicalized by the events of the 60s? The Civil Rights movement, the War in Vietnam, the assassinations of JFK, MLK, RFK, the Sexual Revolution? Or did she support the Establishment and the status quo? Was Ann, like Hillary, a Goldwater Girl? A Young Republican?

sonicfrog said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Bruce Hayden said...

For some more information about Chicago connections, Michael Barone writes: Obama Needs to Explain His Ties to William Ayers. Here is Barone on the connections here:

That's how William Ayers got where he was. When he came out of hiding after the federal government was unable to prosecute him (because of government misconduct), he got a degree in education from Columbia and then moved to Chicago and got a job on the education faculty of the University of Illinois-Chicago Circle. How did he get that job? Well, it can't have hurt that his father, Thomas Ayers, was chairman of Commonwealth Edison (now Exelon) and a charter member of the Chicago establishment. As Mayor Richard M. Daley said recently, in arguing that the Ayers association should not be held against Obama, "His father was a great friend of my father."

sonicfrog said...

As I recall, Charles Manson was committing crimes in the same time frame, but are any Presidential candidates jumping on the Manson express?

Ha! Funny!!!

I find it appalling that the Dems are giving Ayers a pass on his transgrassions during the 60's.... uhm, wasn't the weather underground active during the 70's? Anyway, if they want to give Ayers and Dorhn and Obama a pass, fine. But I don't want to hear the Democrats whine and moan when, in fifteen years or so, a Republican Pres candidate has a "casual friendship" with a former abortion clinic bomber.

11:08 AM

Simon said...

former law student said...
"I'm surprised Ann does not identify with Ayers and Dohrn. Like Ayers, she is a professor at the state university. Like Dohrn, she is a law professor. Was she not radicalized by the events of the 60s?"

She never tried to kill people, when she makes mistakes she admits them, she isn't a total fuckwit. All of these would seem to stand in the way of identifying with those two, and that's just for starters.

Bruce Hayden said...

FLW

Don't know how you can say that McCain is closer to the person putting out the ad than Obama is to Ayers (and even if he were, so what?)

You seem to be totally ignoring how close the association between Ayers and Obama appears to have been, esp. as Obama was just entering politics. Sure, Ayers is currently riding under the bus, but do we really want a pair of unrepentant members of the Weather Underground sleeping in the Lincoln bedroom?

former law student said...

How did he get that job? Well, it can't have hurt that his father, Thomas Ayers, was chairman of Commonwealth Edison (now Exelon) and a charter member of the Chicago establishment.

Profs get tenure on the basis of their CVs, not their Democratic Party connections. Universities scrutinize candidates for full Professor even harder. Perhaps Ann could describe how tenure and promotion works.

Peter V. Bella said...

Bruce Hayden said...
Peter,

My understanding is that Ayers' father and brother were already well connected to the Chicago machine.


His father was the CEO of Commonwealth Edison in Chicago. So he was heavily connected and interacted with the local Dems, the State Dems and Republicans and both sides in D.C. There were strong rumors circulating at the time that he called in a lot of favors and pulled a lot of strings before his son and daughter in law came out of the underground. He supposedly wanted a done deal ahead of time. Since they suffered no harm, the rumors may be true.

Roger J. said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
woolywoman said...

Ann,

What a hypocrite you are Ann. You proclaim your neutrality and yet your only real associations are with the right wing hacks of the blogosphere. Your comment area is as rich a cesspool as many a freeper thread with people chiming in on Obama's being a Muslim, his "fake" birth certificate, and claiming he is in favor of infanticide. You, of course, are cruelly neutral. Now you talk about this Ayers smear and give it way more credence than it deserves.
(Seen any people running in the subway lately and think they deserve the death penalty?)

former law student said...

She never tried to kill people

I never condoned terrorism to stop the war, either. But of the men of draft age I knew, all but a few opposed the war. The rest tried their hardest to avoid combat in Vietnam. The two I knew with political clout (well-connected daddies) served in the Air National Guard, like W.

David said...

I've met Bill Ayers a few times, at basically nonpolitical events--cocktail parties, literary events, etc. One time involved a lengthy and well lubricated conversation with him and Bernadette Dohrn. We had mutual friends from the distant past.

Both Bill and Bernadette are charming, smooth and outgoing. They were born to it--both come from families with affluence and influence. Bernadette is still a very attractive woman. I had a crush on her when she was a young and notorious public figure, as did many young men (including one of our mutual friends, a law school classmate and navy vet who had flown numerous carrier based missions over North Vietnam. His crush overcame his political distaste for her.)

Bernadette wears easily in conversation. She can connect and seem interested in others. She was a well liked faculty member at Northwestern.

Bill is harder to take. He has a edgy charisma about him, but he seems intensely self aware, attuned to the impression he is making, needful of attention and recognition. A man in full (of himself.) He was quick with the lefty quips, which always had an element of sneer to them.

That said, it's easy to see Bill Ayers fitting into a more mainstream life, seeming to be just another sourly convinced left winger. He is at base a self-promoter. His notorious 9/11 article in the New York Times was designed to promote his book, (an ill timed debut if there ever was one.) My guess is that he was using the "unrepentant" line as an outrageous hook to get publicity and sell the book. Bad move.

Ayers was and is not a big force in south side politics. He's far more important in his own mind than in that of others, and probably greatly enjoying the current dust up.

It's a bit of a win for Ayers. Obama used Ayers, as all politicians use others, as an entrance to a particular group in his south side neighborhood. He took what he could from Ayers and moved on to bigger things, but Ayers stuck to him, and now Ayers is getting the satisfaction of publicity, something he surely loves.

Roger J. said...

I finished reading Roger Simon's piece on Politico about how smart the Obama campaign was during the primaries compared to team Hillary

That said, they are making a hash of the general; from the trip to europe, the faux presidential seal, the 3 AM text message, and now this. They learned nothing from Kerry and the swiftboaters--The next ad writes itself from Obama's words. It is going to parse Obama's words which were nothing but misdirection and subject changing, and hit him again even harder--this time with an updated timeline on the associations--including Mayor Daley's comment the other day. and it will ask "Why is Obama trying to silence this ad?" in that ominous tone of voice.

Why in the world are they distracting attention from their convention by coming out with this ad and attempting to muzzle political speech? This is politics and it ain't beanbag. Terrible response from Team BHO.

This Ayers thing is going to be another theme the republicans can work for the next 65 days to great success I think. And Obama, having misrerpresented that association as "a guy who lives in my neighborhood," will have to be more forthcoming or face more questions and more attack ads and press conference questions from the righties.

Peter V. Bella said...

former law student said...
I'm surprised Ann does not identify with Ayers and Dohrn. Like Ayers, she is a professor at the state university. Like Dohrn, she is a law professor. Was she not radicalized by the events of the 60s?


Point: Dohrn is not a professor at a state university. She is a professor at Northwestern University School of Law, one of the better and prestigious law schools in the country.

Point: Dohrn is not an attorney. She is not licensed to practice law.

Some people eventually grow up and live in the real world, even if they were affected by events of forty years ago. Some people keep living out their youthful fantasies. This is why we have asylums.

SGT Ted said...

Note that Obamas response to free speech isn't more free speech; it's to use lawyers to try and silence his critics. Ayers is still a radical terrorist emeritus, along with his crazy wife.

"First they killed those pigs, then they stuck a fork in them. Wild!"

This is Ayers WIFE praising Charles Manson's murder gang. Yes, these are such great people. But, CIndy McCain, now, THATS evil.

SGT Ted said...

For something a bit lighter...


"We, in Ireland , can't figure out why you people are even bothering to hold an election in the United States .
On one side, you had a pants wearing female lawyer, married to another lawyer who can't seem to keep his pants on, who just lost a long and heated primary against a lawyer, who goes to the wrong church, who is married to yet another lawyer, who doesn't even like the country her husband wants to run!
Now...On the other side, you have a nice old war hero whose name starts with the appropriate 'Mc' terminology, married to a good looking younger woman who owns a beer distributorship!!!
What in God's name are ya lads thinkin' over in the colonies ? ! "

Peter V. Bella said...

nrn312 said...
Of course the Chicago Democratic party has a long history with criminals going way back before Al Capone.

You don't say.

William Hale Thompson



Sorry to urinate on your wikitikidiki parade, but, the City Council was Democratic, and the most powerful wards were controlled by the Democrats hand in hand with the criminals. Thompson was in with the Dems right up to his arm pits.

As for Capone, he supported everyone who would take his money.

And Anton Cermak was no paragon of honesty. If it wasn’t for organized crime he would have still had a push cart.

SGT Ted said...

Now you talk about this Ayers smear

Ayers is an unrepentent terrorist and Obama culitvated a relationship with him in a radical non-profit for political gain.

It's not a smear if its true.

Crimso said...

"Profs get tenure on the basis of their CVs, not their Democratic Party connections. Universities scrutinize candidates for full Professor even harder. Perhaps Ann could describe how tenure and promotion works."

I know how it's supposed to work, and it can vary somewhat from one institution to another, but it's not at all entirely about your CV (unless maybe you've got a Nobel Prize on it). I've seen some people who clearly deserved tenure have it denied (often for petty and vindictive reasons), and some who clearly didn't deserve it get it anyway. I've been in enough tenure and promotion committee meetings to know the system is far from perfect, and to also know firsthand that not everyone who is tenured should be.

former law student said...

Don't know how you can say that McCain is closer to the person putting out the ad than Obama is to Ayers

McCain signed Failor's paychecks, to the tune of $50,000; Obama never paid Ayers a dime. Ayers did give Obama $200 once, however.

The Drill SGT said...

Point: Dohrn is not an attorney. She is not licensed to practice law.

As I understand it, she can't pass the morals test in the bar application. specificly, she won't repent her previous bomb making and declaration of war on the US.

There is video of Bill and Bern from an SDS reunion in 2007 where they are preaching to the converted. fascinating, still talking overthrow of the government and capitalism. She and Bill made a decision years ago, that their high-value contribution was to teach and train bomb throwers rather than throw bombs themselves. That is why they work where they do.

dohrn
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y2yYXVmrj5A

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=46PdO3yEXdU&feature=related

ayers
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HP15wJl9YPo&feature=related

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kNzYDnlpBDc&feature=related

nrn312 said...

Sorry to urinate on your wikitikidiki parade, but, the City Council was Democratic, and the most powerful wards were controlled by the Democrats hand in hand with the criminals.

And as long as we are talking a walk down Memory Lane....

Black Friday
Whiskey Ring
Sanborn Incident
Crédit Mobilier of America scandal
Teapot Dome scandal

If it wasn’t for organized crime [Anton Cermak] would have still had a push cart.

Or a beer garden.

McCain fortune traced to organized crime

Too many jims said...

Simon,

So Obama's lawyers asking the Justice Department to look into whether a newly formed organization potential electioneering activities represents an antipathy toward the first amendment? Getting lectured by a McCain apologist on this issue is hilarious. If you don't like Obama's position on the first amendment you have to hate McCain's position. Where do I start?

I didn't go through Mr. Bauer's letter in its entirety but I am fairly certain that some of the sections referenced were part of McCain-Feingold. Further, McCain was an appellant in the (I think) most recent WRTL supreme court case.

Finally, comparing this ad and this group to WRTL is really an insult to WRTL. Go back and re-read Roberts Opinion in FEC v. WRTL (specifically section III-C second paragraph). Do you really think that ad fits?

former law student said...

A little clicking around shows that the "American Issues Project" is a 501 (c) organization, and not a 527:

http://www.politico.com/static/PPM106_keeney.html

Further, this is not like the NRA-ILA trying to defeat gun control; the only "issue" the American Issues Project advocates is the defeat of Barack Obama. I'm pretty sure this violates McCain-Feingold. (Whatever happened to that McCain guy?)

SGT Ted said...

McCain signed Failor's paychecks, to the tune of $50,000; Obama never paid Ayers a dime. Ayers did give Obama $200 once, however.

So what? Ayers still did what he did and Obama thought it was a good idea to associate with a known violent leftwing terrorist who hates America and prefers Marxism.

Signing someone's paycheck for ordinary routine political work is hardly extreme, nor is it anywhere the moral equivalent to cultivating political relationships with terrorists, except to extremist Marxists who think capitalism is a "crime" against humanity.

SGT Ted said...

nrn312 said... McCain fortune traced to organized crime


Father of the much future McCain wife convicted in 1948.


Thats some pretty weak beer there, nrn.

former law student said...

Signing someone's paycheck for ordinary routine political work is hardly extreme
The issue is closeness not extremism. Signing someone's paycheck turns an "associate" into a "henchman."

Father of the much future McCain wife convicted in 1948.

So the statute of limitations on guilt-by-association is somewhere between 40 years and 60 years? Or is having a criminal associate ok if you're a Republican? Did Obama ever cheat on his wife with an Ayers-Dohrn daughter?

Trooper York said...

I want a criminal investigation and the courts to stop those Burger King Commercials with the Burger King guy with the big plastic head who plays football and ends up in bed with people and stuff.

That freaks me out man.

The Drill SGT said...

FLS said...So the statute of limitations on guilt-by-association is somewhere between 40 years and 60 years?

the key operative words are:

Bill Ayers
- Bomb
- declare war on US
- Capitol
- terrorist
- Unrepentant

Jim Hensley
- falsifying liquor records
- post-war rationing regulations.
- suspended sentence

see any differences?

Peter V. Bella said...

Or a beer garden.

McCain fortune traced to organized crime


Using World Net Daily as a source for anything is about as dumb as Wiki, Media Matters, KOS, and Huffington.


The Drill SGT said...
…see any differences?

Sarge, they cannot see any differences. They just want to be right. If you mention FDR, Truman, the Kennedys in relation to criminals they get all upset; like you were trying to steal Mother Teresa’s hymen or something. They are so wrapped up in their identity politics that if true evil itself ran on the Democratic ticket they would support himherit.

SGT Ted said...

Signing someone's paycheck turns an "associate" into a "henchman."

Does my receiving a paycheck from the Government make me their "henchman"? No, it makes me an employee. Henchman implies(infers?) criminality.

But, Bill Ayers is still a terrorist who's friendship was cultivated by Obama. Obama didn't marry Ayers daughter 45 years after the Weather Underground terrorist acts.

You are really reaching for the moral equivalence by inferring that a relationship with the daughter of someone who broke liquor laws is the same as associating with a known terrorist for political reasons.

EnigmatiCore said...

"Ayers thought he didn't do enough to stop the war in Vietnam. Ayers is unrepentant that he attempted to end the war. Well, that war is long over now. "

Ayers' wife celebrated the Manson murders. Thrilled that they ate in the same room as the bodies and then stuck a fork into the stomach of one victim, she adopted a three finger fork gesture as a sort of greeting.

This is who that family is. That speaks to their souls. This is who Obama chose to surround himself with.

That they are unrepentant is not mitigated by the fact that the Vietnam war is over. They remain radical to the core. They may never commit another crime, but in their hearts they remain radicals.

You doubt? In his memoir, published in 2001, he said America "is not a just and fair and decent place" and "it makes me want to puke."

And Obama chose to be a fellow traveler.

That you are trying to defend this speaks to your own radicalism rather than to the fact that Ayers' views are old news or somehow not radical to this day.

nrn312 said...

Using World Net Daily as a source for anything is about as dumb as Wiki, Media Matters, KOS, and Huffington.

Fox News is OK with you then?

Gahrie said...

Guys, a party that practically defies the Kennedy clan does not want to start talking about liquor, mob ties and law breaking. Joeph Kennedy Sr. began his fortune by smuggling booze during prohibition. And that's not even getting into JFK having sex with a mob moll in the Whitehouse.

Gahrie said...

that should be deifies, not defies.

Simon said...

Laura, you should be ashamed of yourself.

Too many jims said...
"So Obama's lawyers asking the Justice Department to look into whether a newly formed organization potential electioneering activities represents an antipathy toward the first amendment? Getting lectured by a McCain apologist on this issue is hilarious. If you don't like Obama's position on the first amendment you have to hate McCain's position. Where do I start?"

Oh, I'm well aware that McCain is just as bad as Obama on the First Amendment, and that McCain can't credibly attack Obama for doing this. But I can. I think they're both wrong, for the reasons more than adequately explained by Justice Scalia in McConnell, and I think that what saved McConnell in WRTL is that Roberts and Alito are genuinely committed to the idea that a case should only decide those issues necessary to the disposition of that case, which didn't include overruling, for example, Flast in Hein or McConnell in WRTL. I think there's now a solid majority on the court that is very dubious about the McCain-Feingold Incumbent Protection Act, and the only division is over how to get rid of it.

former law student said...

Ayers' wife celebrated the Manson murders. Thrilled that they ate in the same room as the bodies and then stuck a fork into the stomach of one victim, she adopted a three finger fork gesture as a sort of greeting.

What's your source for that? FreeRepublic or Powerlineblog?

This is who Obama chose to surround himself with.

Obama has no time machine. He associated himself with the present-day teacher of schoolteachers and with the law professor working to improve the juvenile justice system, not with the sixties radicals. Obama's Ayers and Dohrn work to help kids, not stop the Vietnam war.

Roger J. said...

So none of the Obamaphiles, just like their candidate, have addressed the question of Obama's forthrightness about his association with Ayers--just a guy who lives in his neighborhood. And none of them have addressed the issue of Obama's lawsuit to shutdown political speech. We have diversions into the history of political corruption, McCain's position on the first amendment via McCain Fiengold, but nothing on the particulars of Obama's evasive answers.

The Drill SGT said...

FLS said...He associated himself with the present-day teacher of schoolteachers and with the law professor working to improve the juvenile justice system, not with the sixties radicals

Look at youtube for dohrn or ayers or at my post above. You can seen both last year talking about the US being the "belly of the beast", most racist country, evil, etc...

it's not old news

The Dohrn quote was:
'Dig it! Manson killed those pigs, then they ate dinner in the same room with them, then they shoved a fork into a victim's stomach.'

AlphaLiberal said...

Well, McCain's allies' ads are just dumb. Are they holding Obama responsible for what Ayers did 40 years ago? Pretty dumb.

Oh, they're saying Obama should have nothing to do with any organization that has anything to do with Ayers? So, Obama should let Ayers constrain his actions? Dumb.

Or is it the simple slimy (McCarthyite) tactic of guilt by association? Bingo.

Republicans spew lies. It's what they do and now they come out and admit it.

Unknown said...

FLS: "Ayers thought he didn't do enough to stop the war in Vietnam. Ayers is unrepentant that he attempted to end the war. Well, that war is long over now. The antiwar movement, of which Ayers was a part, succeeded."

The WU was started because Ayers, Dohrn and the others were unhappy with the relative non-violence of the SDS. They craved and needed more "action".

Ayers, et al, ultimate goals were not about stopping the Vietnam war. Their anti-war efforts were a means to other ends - a timely and convenient method for generating a supportive environment and anti-American fervor amongst both the less intelligent and those earnest, thinking people who actually were about ending the war. Both of those groups were used by Ayers/Dohrn.

Mark Rudd, the leader of both SDS and Weathermen, stated that their goal was communist revolution in the US and the overthrow of the government.

Ayers/Dohrn actually declared war on the US (and have never rescinded that declaration). Dohrn: "Hello. I'm going to read a declaration of a state of war... Within the next 14 days we will attack a symbol or institution of American injustice".

Attempts to minimize Ayers/Dohrn's anti-American malice and unrepentant evil are either deluded or calculated. The true injustice of the matter is that they are not dead or imprisoned for life.

Had Obama refused to enter Ayers' home and never consented to working with Ayers on CAC, one could respect his integrity and patriotism for taking a difficult stand right in the very face of anti-American terrorists even when it was not politically or personally expedient to do so. But he chose to do otherwise.

The issue is Obama's judgment - not guilt by association.

EnigmatiCore said...

"What's your source for that?"

Why? Want to attack the source because you can't defend the statement?

Try the History News Network. Or Chicago Magazine from back in 1993, when they carefully planted some obvious BS to discredit Obama, should he ever rise to prominence.

What did Obama see in these people that made him want to work with them?

What did these people see in Obama that they wanted to kick off his political career?

Why doesn't it bother you?

Why do you want to dismiss them as being perfectly fine US citizens now?

Roger J. said...

Wow, Alpha--with such insight as was demonstrated, no wonder you rely on Talking Points Memo. That was positively breathtaking journalism.

chickelit said...

AlphaLiberal said: republicans spew lies

It's true. We spit them out.

You're the guys that swallow lies.

EnigmatiCore said...

"Recently, when Ayers sat for yet another Times interview — this one to discuss the triumph of Chesa’s Rhodes Scholarship — he showed up wearing a red-star revolutionary pin. "

That was in 2002.

Just the sort of person I want working on ways to change the education of our, but especially my, children. Or not.

This is who they are. The minor question is why did Obama like them, and the major one is why did they like Obama.

Mortimer Brezny said...

You don't get off the hook for association with a bad person by saying that you denounce whatever bad things he's done.

Why not? Jesus caroused with whores and lepers.

Too many jims said...

Simon said...
I think there's now a solid majority on the court that is very dubious about the McCain-Feingold Incumbent Protection Act, and the only division is over how to get rid of it.


If by solid you mean 3 (maybe 4) I think you are right.

EnigmatiCore said...

"Jesus caroused with whores and lepers."

Did he vote for one of them to be Caesar? Did he tell them that their sins were no big deal? Did they hang out with him because they thought he supported their whoring efforts?

Or did he rehabilitate them, tell them to repent and to sin no more?

Just askin'.

Revenant said...

Jesus caroused with whores and lepers.

Jesus caroused with whores and lepers? Which version of the Bible is THAT Gospel in?

MarkW said...

If you thought Ayers left his revolutionary days long behind him, there's this -- on Ayers's web site:

http://billayers.wordpress.com/2006/11/

He ends his speech by exclaiming:

Viva Mission Sucre!
Viva Presidente Chavez!
Viva La Revolucion Bolivariana!
Hasta La Victoria Siempre!

This is the guy Obama worked on education reform in Chicago with? No wonder he wants us just to think Ayers was just some 'guy in the neighborhood'.

former law student said...

Ayers, et al, ultimate goals were not about stopping the Vietnam war. Their anti-war efforts were a means to other ends... their goal was communist revolution in the US and the overthrow of the government.

[Obama should have] refused to enter Ayers' home and never consented to working with Ayers on CAC

So instead of being an attempt to improve Chicago's wretched public schools, the Chicago Annenberg Challenge was a conspiracy to overthrow the United States by force and violence? Or -- maybe, just maybe -- Ayers and Dohrn had left their dreams of violent revolution back with their bell bottoms and their ankle bracelets.

Simon said...

"maybe, just maybe -- Ayers and Dohrn had left their dreams of violent revolution back with their bell bottoms and their ankle bracelets."

Clearly not. See, inter alia, Mark W's post above.

Joe said...

Jo[s]eph Kennedy Sr. began his fortune by smuggling booze during prohibition.

Not remotely true. By prohibition, Joseph Kennedy Sr. was already a rich man. There is no evidence he imported alcohol during prohibition and any effect on his massive fortune would have been minor.

blake said...

ECore: Ayers' wife celebrated the Manson murders. Thrilled that they ate in the same room as the bodies and then stuck a fork into the stomach of one victim, she adopted a three finger fork gesture as a sort of greeting.

FLS: What's your source for that? FreeRepublic or Powerlineblog?

FLS, are you denying this? Are you suggesting that Ayers and Dohrn were not violent radicals?

Seems to me there are several points of possible attack: A&D weren't radicals; A&D were radicals but aren't any more; A&D are still radicals but Obama's connection to them is unimportant.

I don't think the first point is going to fly.

The second point might, though, if you position them as cynically exploiting their radical roots.

The third point seems the most likely to work. And it has the advantage of being probable. It doesn't reflect well on Chicago politics that Obama had to associate with terrorists to get his start, but what does reflect well on Chicago politics (what ever has?).

Roger J. said...

I fear Mortimer has not read nor understood new testament scripture in quite a while!

blake said...

So instead of being an attempt to improve Chicago's wretched public schools, the Chicago Annenberg Challenge was a conspiracy to overthrow the United States by force and violence?

The answer there could be found in the question, did they improve Chicago's wretched public schools?

I'm guessing not or the Obama campaign is to be blamed for not publicizing what would be Obama's greatest achievement.

If they didn't, then, what did they do?

Infiltrating educational systems is hardly a new tactic for the left.

EnigmatiCore said...

"So instead of being an attempt to improve Chicago's wretched public schools"

You say you want a revolution,
Well, you know
We all want to change the world.
But when you talk about destruction,
Don't you know that you can count me out!

You say you'll change the constitution
Well, you know
We all want to change your head
You tell me it's the institution
Well, you know
You better free your mind instead

But if you go carrying pictures of Chairman Mao
You ain't gonna make it with anyone, anyhow.

The Chicago public schools don't need the help of a red revolutionary, and that Ayers is one is highly relevant. Why was Obama drawn to him, and why is he so supportive of Obama? What views do they share? It is highly relevant, and not old news.

EnigmatiCore said...

"Are you suggesting that Ayers and Dohrn were not violent radicals?"

No, his goal was to try to dismiss the line as coming from what he sees as the fringes, and to dismiss me, a guy who wanted Giuliani and won't vote for McCain if his VP is someone like Romney or Huckabee, as a wingnut.

It was a rather weak attempt, wasn't it?

Unknown said...

FLS: "So instead of being an attempt to improve Chicago's wretched public schools, the Chicago Annenberg Challenge was a conspiracy to overthrow the United States by force and violence?"

How lame. I neither said nor implied any such thing. The CAC was a failed attempt to 'improve' Chicago schools. And, as far as we know right now, nothing more.

However, Ayers definition of 'improve' is probably not the same as that of most American's.

Ayers stated in 2004 in a speech at the "World Education Forum" that "We share the belief that education is the motor-force of revolution, and I’ve come to appreciate Luis (Bonilla) as a major asset in both the Venezuelan and the international struggle... I look forward to seeing how he and all of you continue to overcome the failings of capitalist education..."

What "revolution" and "struggle" do you think Ayers is referring to?

Kind of makes you wonder why they wouldn't let Kurtz have access to the CAC records though doesn't it?

EnigmatiCore said...

FLS has me all riled up again. I get that way when people try to pass off radicals as just everyday folks who we should ignore as harmless while they burrow into positions that impact the lives of others.

I don't want any revolutionaries anywhere near any role or position that involves governance or teaching or anything that involves molding or influencing people or especially children. That Ayers wanted to be involved in education is not admirable, it is deplorable because his goal was not to make better, more successful Americans but to make more people ready, willing and eager to bring on the revolutionary changes he desires.

And this is who saw potential in Obama and kick-started his political career?

Unknown said...

EnigmaticCore: "That Ayers wanted to be involved in education is not admirable, it is deplorable because his goal was not to make better, more successful Americans but to make more people ready, willing and eager to bring on the revolutionary changes he desires."

Exactly.

Peter V. Bella said...

Revenant said...
Jesus caroused with whores and lepers.

Jesus caroused with whores and lepers? Which version of the Bible is THAT Gospel in?



It is the second edition of the Revisionist Progressive New Testament. It is based on a theory of what Jesus would have really been like from a progressive American perspective. That version of the bible. It is like those versions of history books that our kids are being forced to study. Same people.

Peter V. Bella said...

Joe said...
There is no evidence he imported alcohol during prohibition and any effect on his massive fortune would have been minor.

You really do not read much do you? Joe Sr. was involved in smuggling Scotch up to his eyeballs. Joe Sr. was all about making money any way he could and too much was never enough. He was also heavily involved with the mob. This has been documented not only in several reliable books on the subject, but from transcripts of the illegal wiretaps that the FBI used to investigate mob activities. Old Joe was a venal, amoral, rapacious criminal. He just never got caught.

Revenant said...

What's your source for that? FreeRepublic or Powerlineblog?

The New York Times discusses the matter in the famous 9/11/01 article on Ayers.

Obama has no time machine. He associated himself with the present-day teacher of schoolteachers and with the law professor working to improve the juvenile justice system, not with the sixties radicals.

If John McCain was buddy-buddy with a guy who used to lynch blacks for the Klan and still bragged about it today would you say "oh, but he's done some excellent community work since then"? Of course not. Only leftie terrorists get a pass. It's digusting.

Obama associated himself with two people who were, and as of at least 2001 still were, unrepentant terrorists, proud of the bombings they carried out and unwilling to rule out future bombing if American politics didn't go their way. Tell me, how much time would have to pass before you considered, say, a unrepentant former serial rapist to be friendship material?

Obama's Ayers and Dohrn work to help kids, not stop the Vietnam war.

They worked together. Evidence that their work helped kids is elusive. And tell me, how exactly was bombing the Pentagon "working to stop the Vietnam War"?

Revenant said...

So instead of being an attempt to improve Chicago's wretched public schools, the Chicago Annenberg Challenge was a conspiracy to overthrow the United States by force and violence?

Because it is completely unthinkable that violent revolutionaries might want to encourage the teaching of revolutionary sentiments in schools. Just because pretty much every left-wing revolutionary in history has wanted this doesn't mean it might be true of Ayers. Even if he himself has spoken in favor of the idea.

Or -- maybe, just maybe -- Ayers and Dohrn had left their dreams of violent revolution back with their bell bottoms and their ankle bracelets.

In their own words, their dreams of revolution continue. The past violence of that revolution has not been apologized for, nor has future violence been ruled out.

garage mahal said...

Interesting no one has mentioned the scumbag that funded the Ayers ad has been sued by his own daughters for forging their names for political contributions. A "brilliant businessman and rotten father". Also interesting they are Obama supporters who maxed out to his campaign.

Back to your bizarre Future Left Wing Revolutionary Plots.

blake said...

garage,

Care to elaborate?

The Drill SGT said...

Revenant said...They worked together. Evidence that their work helped kids is elusive. And tell me, how exactly was bombing the Pentagon "working to stop the Vietnam War"?

Google "Broadway baby dohrn"

she was linked to the Brinks robbery, but not charged on that, she went to jail for refusing to testify. Link: She was the Manager of a NYC store, the Broadway Baby, from which two identities were taken from patrons, which resulted in fake driver's licenses being gotten, and the getaway cars rented. That was 1981. The Communists had been camped in Siagon "reeducating people" for 6 years by then. She wasn't a terrorist to end the war. She was a terrorist to overthrow the American and Capitalist systems.

former law student said...

Are you suggesting that Ayers and Dohrn were not violent radicals?

No, I'm saying that your statement was not credible, because it was cartoonishly grotesque, reminiscent of Lord of the Flies.

Old Joe was a venal, amoral, rapacious criminal. He just never got caught.

W.'s grandfather, Prescott Bush, made a tidy sum by running an American bank, UBC, as a front for German industrialist and Hitler financial supporter Fritz Thyssen. Prescott continued to work for the Union Banking Corporation after the US entered the war, stopping only in October, 1942, when the US seized its assets under the Trading With the Enemy Act.

The trouble started on July 30 1942 when the New York Herald-Tribune ran an article entitled "Hitler's Angel Has $3m in US Bank". UBC's huge gold purchases had raised suspicions that the bank was in fact a "secret nest egg" hidden in New York for Thyssen and other Nazi bigwigs. The Alien Property Commission (APC) launched an investigation.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/sep/25/usa.secondworldwar

Joe Kennedy may have been crooked, I don't know. But at least he was never the "Nazis' American banker" like George HW's dad was.

blake said...

FLS,

No, I'm saying that your statement was not credible, because it was cartoonishly grotesque, reminiscent of Lord of the Flies.

Actually, that was my first post on the subject. I assume you mean EnigmatiCore's statement about the fork in the corpse. I agree it's grotesque.

You've broadly swept the assertions aside and what I'm trying to get out of you is, specifically, what you are dismissing?

Are you denying that any such...uh...forking took place? Is that it? The rest--about WA&BD's terrorist activities--you concede?

garage mahal said...

blake
Elaborate on? The guy funding the Ayers ads? Or ironically that his daughters sued him and are Obama supporters.

blake said...

No, Joe wasn't the Nazi's banker.

He was a big booster, though. Ended his political career.

blake said...

Let's not forget Joe lobotomized his daughter.

Can we stop digging up graveyards now?

blake said...

Elaborate on? The guy funding the Ayers ads? Or ironically that his daughters sued him and are Obama supporters.

Oh, I see what you're saying. I misread the original message you wrote.

Interesting that they would file a lawsuit. Wouldn't something like that be a police matter?

sonicfrog said...

So instead of being an attempt to improve Chicago's wretched public schools, the Chicago Annenberg Challenge was a conspiracy to overthrow the United States by force and violence? Or -- maybe, just maybe -- Ayers and Dohrn had left their dreams of violent revolution back with their bell bottoms and their ankle bracelets.

They may have left their dreams of violent revolution behind, but I still find them revolting!!!

Ha, get it - revolting!!!!

BTW. Joe Kennedy was very much a Nazi sympathizer and a, scratch that, THE bootlegger of Boston. My Grandfather was in Boston's Italian mafia during the twenties and thirties (Joe Lombardo, the "Daper Don" was his uncle). They were set to run booze when prohibition hit and were mighty peeved when Joe beat them to the punch. They HATED the Kennedys ever since. I don't think I could write some of the interesting terms my Papa used to describe them. (Hint, Jackie O was a money grubbing whore).

Funny that the Democrats vilify Wall Street profit; that is where Joe made his fortune. His methods of gaining wealth were the same as others who sold paper with no backing during the twenties. Joe Kennedy was smart enough to get out before the bottom fell out of the market, and was able, through political connections, to pass the blame on to others.

Revenant said...

W.'s grandfather, Prescott Bush, made a tidy sum by running an American bank, UBC, as a front for German industrialist and Hitler financial supporter Fritz Thyssen. Prescott continued to work for the Union Banking Corporation after the US entered the war, stopping only in October, 1942, when the US seized its assets under the Trading With the Enemy Act.

That's a highly disingenuous, if not outright dishonest, way of describing Bush's activities.

First of all, it is not known how much, if any, money Bush made from his role as Vice President of UBC. Secondly, by the time WW2 began Thyssen was anti-Nazi, and by the time America entered the war he had been imprisoned for his criticism of the state, eventually winding up in Dachau. The notion that he was a "Nazi bigwig" as of 1942 is quite insane.

I would also like to point out that responding to criticism of Joe Kennedy by bringing up Nazis isn't very bright. Kennedy openly spoke in favor of Nazi persecution of Jews and lost his job as US Ambassador to Britain by being too pro-Nazi. He ended up sitting out the war because nobody in government would trust him.

EnigmatiCore said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
EnigmatiCore said...

"I'm saying that your statement was not credible, because it was cartoonishly grotesque, reminiscent of Lord of the Flies."

Assuming that you are talking about the quote I laid out, it is an incredible quote, but it also happens to be true, despite being reminiscent of the Lord of the Flies.

This is the Ayers family.

This is who Obama has called "mainstream" and "respectable," and who you were defending.

Of course, she admits to saying it, but claims it was taken out of context (a claim that I am certain FLS will now pretend to lap up, since he is agenda-driven):

" At the end of 1969, SDS held a "National War Council," in Flint, Michigan. Dohrn, who was known as a charismatic and theatrical speaker, was one of the first to address the group. As described in Destructive Generation, "Bernardine mounted the platform wearing a brown mini-jumpsuit and thigh-high Italian leather boots" and declared there was going to be an "armed struggle." She lacerated the more moderate SDS leaders and cited the Charles Manson family. " 'Dig it,''' Collier remembers her saying. '"First they killed those pigs, then they ate dinner in the same room with them, then they even shoved a fork into a victim's stomach! Wild!'" Then she held up three fingers in a Manson fork salute.

Today, Dohrn says, "I'd love to forget it and I wish I hadn't said it. But it was completely ripped out of context. What I was trying to say, of course, was that Americans love to read about violence." At around that time, Chicago state's attorney's police made their deadly raid on the Black Panther headquarters and the government unleashed a massive bombing attack on Vietnam. "What I was trying to say was that the front pages instead were filled with stories of the Manson murder. . . when the real violence was being done not by serial killers but by our government, in the name of our citizens.""


Wild! From now on, let's give each other three-finger fork salutations, like she and her cohorts did to each other after that episode. It will be our little way of saying the real violence is done by our government.

That explanation is what is not credible. These are anti-American revolutionaries, completely unrepentant, and belong in jail. Barring that, they deserve to be shunned by anyone with half of a bit of sense, and the people who choose to associate with them as well.

That includes the Obamas.

EnigmatiCore said...

Let's give some more on the same incident.

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2190

"At a 1969 "War Council" in Flint, Michigan, Dohrn gave her most memorable and notorious speech to her followers. Holding her fingers in what became the Weatherman "fork salute," she said of the bloody murders recently committed by the Manson Family in which the pregnant actress Sharon Tate and a Folgers Coffee heiress and several other inhabitants of a Benedict Canyon mansion were brutally stabbed to death: "Dig it! First they killed those pigs, then they ate dinner in the same room with them. They even shoved a fork into the victim's stomach! Wild!" The "War Council" ended with a formal declaration of war against "AmeriKKKa," always spelled with three K's to signify the United States' allegedly ineradicable white racism."

It became the Weatherman "fork salute." Which makes it really hard for sentient beings to take her "taken out of context, we were talking about how Americans love to read about violence" excuse seriously.

It just isn't credible. Even a former law student would have to admit that, if honest.

EnigmatiCore said...

Oh.

And this is why Obama is desperate to head off any traction on the Ayers angle.

He's been hanging with some really, really bad people, who, for some strange reason, really, really want him to gain political power.

And the details are incredibly hard to believe, but are completely true.