pageok
pageok
pageok
What is the Significance of Obama's Ties to Ayers (and Wright?):

Here's my take: Obama is an extremely ambitious man. He's been interested in a national political career for many years. It's not that surprising that he wouldn't find Ayers and Wright objectionable company--in the very liberal, Hyde Park/Ivy League circles that he's traveled in since attending Columbia, people with such views are more mainstream than, say, the average conservative evangelical Christian. That itself makes Obama far more liberal than the image his campaign attempts to portray.

But what is interesting to me is that not only did Obama not personally find anything especially obnoxious about Wright's radicalism, anti-Americanism, ties to Farrakahn, and so on, or Ayers' lack of regret for his terrorist past, he apparently didn't expect that much of anyone else would care, either. How else do you explain why he didn't jettison these individuals from his life before they could damage his presidential ambitions? How else do you explain how his campaign seemed to be caught flatfooted when Obama's ties to Wright and then Ayers became campaign issues? And, perhaps most tellingly, how else do you explain that when Obama was asked in a debate with Clinton about his ties to Ayers, he analogized his friendship with Ayers to his friendship with Senator Tom Coburn, as if being friends with a very conservative senatorial colleague is somehow analogous with being friends with an unrepentant extreme leftist domestic terrorist?

In short, Obama's ties to Ayers and Wright suggest to me NOT that Obama agrees with their views, but that he is the product of a particular intellectual culture that finds the likes of Wright and Ayers to be no more objectionable, and likely less so, than the likes of Tom Coburn, or, perhaps, a Rush Limbaugh. Not only that, but he has been in his particular intellectual bubble so long that he was unable to recognize just how offensive the views of a Wright are to mainstream America, or how his ties to Ayers would play with the public, especially post-9/11.

Does that mean that Obama would be a bad president, or an extremist president? No, or at least, not necessarily. One 20th century president--Reagan--had a rather extreme worldview, but he was a good enough politician to govern reasonably close to the center, and have a successful presidency. Obama may have similar skills, though he lacks Reagan's advantage of having been an ideological convert from the other side. But in any event, he is clearly not the mainstream partisan of nonideological change that he is running as, and it at least seems worth pointing that out.

Bob Van Burkleo (mail):
Really? You haven't heard black pastors like this? I'm white and probably heard half a dozen - its not serious, its motivational. And to even bring up Wright when Palin gets hands laid on her by a witchhunter reveals an author with massive blinders on.

As far as Ayers he did his time, and its now an asset to his community. No Christian would hold this against Ayers (well a good Christian) so exactly why would any of them expect Obama to?

These are non issues for anyone really concerned with issues that matter today.
10.5.2008 1:02am
John (mail):
An interesting psychological take. There is also the possibility that Obama found their views repellent but played along to advance his career. Of course, that speaks to a different point.
10.5.2008 1:04am
jbn (mail):
How many people did Ayers kill?

How many people did the Weather Underground kill?

How many innocent civilians has Isreal killed in the past 30 years? (I am sure you have a sack full of reasons why it was fine and dandy for Israel to kill those innocent civilians, but that's a different question, isn't it?)

So, should people distance themselves from Israel because of the innocent civilians it has killed?
10.5.2008 1:06am
Brooks Lyman (mail):
Does that mean that Obama would be a bad president, or an extremist president? No, or at least, not necessarily. One 20th century president--Reagan--had a rather extreme worldview, but he was a good enough politician to govern reasonably close to the center, and have a successful presidency.

Yes, but Reagan's stated policy objectives, positions on most issues relating to government and record as Governor of CA were more right-center than extreme. Obama's corresponding positions (and record) are definitely not left-center, but rather far to the left, and his attempts to use the law to stifle criticism open very real questions of whether he might use the official forces of government to stifle criticism as President.

Frankly, the possibility scares me; the apparent acquiescence of the MSM and much of the Democratic Party to this sort of thing scares me even more....
10.5.2008 1:07am
The Difference (mail):
I find Ayers less objectionable than Coburn or some other ultra-right wing sexual fascist. Not that Ayers is a great man. He took part in an idiotic movement when he was a naive kid. But Ayers at least tries to do good for his community now. Coburn and his ilk are currently and actively trying to keep gays second-class citizens. That to me is far more offensive than what Ayers did 40 years ago.
10.5.2008 1:09am
llamasex (mail) (www):
I don't get the Ayers connection issues at all. With Wright I can understand this was someone Obama connected with. With Ayers it is just some guy who was on the board with Obama who hosted a fundraiser for him. I don't do a background check on the people I work with and never heard of Ayers before all this, he wasn't a famous terrorist. Obama wasn't close to him at all, he had a couple connections.

It seems like people are making it bigger than it is to slime Obama which is pretty damn sad.
10.5.2008 1:14am
The Difference (mail):
Good point jbn.

Ayers was involved in a misguided anti-war movement, didn't really hurt anyone, and was let off. McCain on the other hand and many other politicians (including Obama to some extent) cozy up to Israel because of the Jewish lobby - and this is somehow acceptable. Even though Israel is occupying a land that wasn't there's and is torturing and murdering countless Palestinians.
10.5.2008 1:14am
KeyComments (mail):
jbn, Israel did not attack the USA or its government and governmental institutions as the Weather Underground did -- your comments are irrelevant.
10.5.2008 1:15am
U.Va. Grad:
The last time I was back home in southeastern Ohio--back in August--no one gave a damn about Ayers. They were far more concerned about the fact that Obama is a Muslim.

And that may be why Obama isn't particularly concerned with how his ties to Ayers play on Main Street--because he's got so many other hurdles to overcome that spending time worrying about his ties to some guy who might or might not be his good friend and is unrepentant about nasty stuff he did 40 years ago would just be a waste of time.
10.5.2008 1:16am
KeyComments (mail):
Also, the WU bombs DID kill some people -- and not just WU members. Read through the NY Times article and you'll see.
10.5.2008 1:19am
DangerMouse:
Does that mean that Obama would be a bad president, or an extremist president?

Yes. Obama's failure to understand how dangerous radical liberalism is to American freedom, to the economy, and to world peace is a serious liability. He's probably revitalize the FARC, numerous Islamic terrorist movements, Russian nationalism, and would plunge Cuba into another dictatorship - by permitting and actively encouraging all of the leftist elements of those movements. Additionally, his socialist ideologies would seriously destroy the American economy. He'd do nothing to reform Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and would probably encourage the systemic flaws that brought the credit markets down.

Obama is a lot like Ellsworth Toohey.
10.5.2008 1:19am
Kazinski:
The Difference,
That says a lot more about you than it does about Coburn.

Coburn has spent his entire life working within the framework of the political system, while Ayers threw a tantrum as well as bombs, and tried to justify it. Ayers is willing to live by majority rule, Ayers wants to overthrow democracy, years ago by bombs, now by subverting the educational system and brainwashing children. But of course it's for a good cause.
10.5.2008 1:19am
FantasiaWHT:

Obama wasn't close to him at all, he had a couple connections.


How is deciding to launch your political career from someone's HOUSE not a close connection:?
10.5.2008 1:19am
Humble Law Student (mail) (www):
FantasiaWHT,

You ignorant. Launching your political career would only be a close connection if McCain had launched his career from an unrepentant abortion clinic bomber. Only in that situation would there be justifiable outrage. Get a clue!
10.5.2008 1:22am
KeyComments (mail):
Obama is trying to "smear" McCain with a "guilt by association" attack with respect to George Bush -- so why can't the Republicans do so with respect to Obama/Ayers?
10.5.2008 1:22am
Assistant Village Idiot (mail) (www):
Interesting that out of all the nations in the Middle East that kill innocent civilians, jbn, you light on the one that kills the fewest, and that unintentionally. That seems odd.

"Didn't really hurt anyone..."

Bob Van Burkleo - I'm glad you're sure it's not serious. Given the way that you twist facts, I am supposed to believe you - why?
10.5.2008 1:24am
The Difference (mail):
I wasn't defending Coburn Kazinski.

But who said democracy is the right way? You can't just assume that. Democracy very, very often leads to bad results. Slavery??? Are you saying that anti-slave people who committed violent acts were "wrong?" Please.
10.5.2008 1:24am
DangerMouse:
Bernstein's critique of Obama's radicalism mirrors my comment in the other thread:

The problem in trying to shame the left with terrorist associations is that the left isn't shamed by them. The left likes terrorists. They're big fans of Che Guevara, who murdered hundreds of innocent civilians that didn't subscribe to his revolutionary ideology. They love Lynne Stewart, who of course passed messages from the blind shiek terrorist. They're enthralled with Sami Al-Arian, who ran organizations linked to Hamas. They love the FARC. They love Castro. They don't think the war on terrorism is a "real" war.

So leftists like Obama see nothing wrong with paling around with terrorists like Ayers. They think they're chic and it's great fun. They don't give a crap how murderous those people are. They. Don't. Care. The only difference is that while the terrorists have the stomach for violence, people like Obama do not.
10.5.2008 1:26am
mt:
jbn/difference : why is it that that folks, like yourself, always blame the Jews? We are truly not so far from the abyss
10.5.2008 1:38am
PC:
Obama is trying to "smear" McCain with a "guilt by association" attack with respect to George Bush

Er, McCain bragged about voting with Bush 90% of the time on national TV. How is bringing that up "smearing" McCain? Also, Bush is still the leader of the Republican party no matter how much Republicans are trying to run away from him now.
10.5.2008 1:40am
Anon1000:
Obama is trying to "smear" McCain with a "guilt by association" attack with respect to George Bush

No, he's not. He is reminding us that McCain's policies are similar to Bush's and look where that got us. That's a fact.
10.5.2008 1:42am
Alan K. Henderson (mail) (www):
This portion of Kurtz's article Obama and Ayers Pushed Radicalism On Schools demonstrates that Obama and Ayers were more than just two ships passing in the night:

Last April, Sen. Obama dismissed Mr. Ayers as just "a guy who lives in my neighborhood," and "not somebody who I exchange ideas with on a regular basis." Yet documents in the CAC archives make clear that Mr. Ayers and Mr. Obama were partners in the CAC. Those archives are housed in the Richard J. Daley Library at the University of Illinois at Chicago and I've recently spent days looking through them.

...

The Daley documents show that Mr. Ayers sat as an ex-officio member of the board Mr. Obama chaired through CAC's first year. He also served on the board's governance committee with Mr. Obama, and worked with him to craft CAC bylaws. Mr. Ayers made presentations to board meetings chaired by Mr. Obama. Mr. Ayers spoke for the Collaborative before the board. Likewise, Mr. Obama periodically spoke for the board at meetings of the Collaborative.
If someone who had once manufactured bombs intended for abortion clinics and still has no regrets about it today were to cofound a public-private outfit intended to endow educational efforts, would it be immoral to serve as an officer of said organization?
10.5.2008 1:42am
Nathand:
Todd Palin spent a good portion of his life as a member of a political party that openly advocates for seccession - at least arguably treason. The Palin's even attended one of their state conventions. It's arguable from the record that he's never actually repudiated his membership in that party - he only left in order to help his wife's political aspirations.

Somehow, I doubt any of the conspirators will condemn her behavior here.
10.5.2008 1:42am
Matthewccr (mail):
Rage against the the dying of the light, y'all. This is all the right has right now. No new ideas, no direction. Rage, rage, rage.
10.5.2008 1:43am
Bob Van Burkleo (mail):
Bob Van Burkleo - I'm glad you're sure it's not serious. Given the way that you twist facts, I am supposed to believe you - why?

Oh hon, don't worry I don't care if you believe me. My only obligation is to tell the truth, not convince you of it. Of course the real way would be for you to have talked with pastors who use this kind of service rhetoric (I had a discussion with one claiming AIDS was deliberately targetted against black men - turned out he meant it metaphorically). But most likely that is far more effort than you'd be willing to invest.
10.5.2008 1:46am
The Difference (mail):
Mt:

Not blaming the Jews at all. Just pointing out the biggest example of hypocrisy here: it is "mainstream" and okay (in fact it's probably politically suicidal to not) to support Israel, a nation that has no legitimate/democratic/laws of nations/etc. reason to be where it is, and yet it is - and furthermore it has a horrible human rights record.

And yet the suggestion is that Ayers, a former radical who disregarded the rule of law and was undemocratic, is somehow horrible. But Israel is not. Mmmkay.

I'm NOT saying there's not a defense of Israel. It's for the greater good. They stand for democracy. Great. But Ayers thought he was doing that too. And he's at least nominally reformed himself from his old ways.
10.5.2008 1:50am
The Difference (mail):
People who say Obama's connection with Ayers is legitimate: defend Palin's association with the AIP.

I can't wait to hear this, if anyone has the balls to try.
10.5.2008 1:51am
The Difference (mail):
* In post above, I meant to say "people who say Obama's connection with Ayers is a legitimate point to raise against him."
10.5.2008 1:52am
PC:
Rage against the the dying of the light, y'all. This is all the right has right now.

Considering the Obama campaign thinks it can pickup at least one EV in Nebraska, I'd say the McCain camp is plenty worried. In fact, the McCain camp is worried enough they sent Palin to Omaha today to try and rally the Palindrones.
10.5.2008 1:53am
mt:
difference:

The fact is that you are placing blame on them (jews) but under cover of Israel and/or Israeli's. Small 'difference' there.

Your comment thread had no direct connection to the Ayers topic, rather it was failed effort at redirection.
10.5.2008 1:58am
Random Commenter:
"Ayers was involved in a misguided anti-war movement, didn't really hurt anyone, and was let off."

(1) The only reason WU did more damage to its own membership than the public is incompetence. The WU intent to commit mass-murder at Fort Dix has been well-documented and admitted to. The base was spared only because the bomb construction operation ended with several WU members stuck to the ceiling of a Greenwich Village townhouse.

(2) Ayers wasn't "let off" because he was innocent. He was "let off" because of prosecutorial misconduct. His first comment outside the courtroom was a public admission of guilt.
10.5.2008 1:58am
DangerMouse:
If Obama wins, he'll just be another David Dinkins. Guilty white liberals who are voting for him because of his race will abandon him when he runs for re-election, because his bad policies will be evident by then.
10.5.2008 1:59am
Kazinski:
Whatever Palin's association with the AIP was, it isn't much of an issue, they have never participated or advocated violence. That is the bright red line that Ayers crossed, that makes Obama's association with him fair game. Somebody radical enough to throw bombs should not be aided and abetted in indoctrinating school children.
10.5.2008 1:59am
MLS:
Perhaps the RNC could use this as an example of one Obama faithful:

My law prof

The Viet-Nam era had many people who openly challenged the war, and they did so by marches, speeches, placards, etc. (I believe this is protected by the First Amendment). Only a very select few took their challenges to an "explosive" level (I am not aware of the Supreme Court ever having decided that facilitating exothermic reactions is a recognized form of expression protected by the First Amendment).
10.5.2008 2:03am
PDXLawyer (mail):
I think it is pretty clear that Obama has, until the last 3 years or so, lived his life in only one part of the American political spectrum, hardly aware that others existed, except as "the other" whom he'd never met and who were both evil and stupid. I don't find this terribly troubling, in either Obama or Palin. Like Reagan, they know who they are, which gives them tremendous self-confidence, generally very valuable in a leader.

What concerns me about Obama is that he doesn't seem to know many people outside of government and academia. He has no reason in his own experience to doubt that Tony Rezko is a typical businessman. And his contact with ordinary Americans - people will less education and less money than him - seems to be mostly in their role as victims or objects of government aid.

Frankly, my concern is that Obama will be a successful President - that he will, like Reagan, successfully advocate his world-view to the American body politic.
10.5.2008 2:03am
KeyComments (mail):
In further response to those who keep bringing up Israel when it is irrelevant to this thread, it is also the case that Israel does not intentionally attack civilians and when it does it apologizes -- Ayers has yet to apologize for his reprehensible activities. BTW, as Obama himself has observed, the US itself has also, in Afghanistan, "air-raided villages and killed civilians," though apparently Obama did not say that this was unintentional.
10.5.2008 2:05am
Jason F:
Senator Obama's ties to Wiliam Ayers are far more tenuous than Senator McCain's ties to G. Gordon Liddy (talk about dangerous radicals who some don't find objectionable!), but I doubt we'll see a post on that. Senator McCain also may have ties to the Bonanno crime family, but again I doubt we'll see a post on that.
10.5.2008 2:11am
Clint:
<blockquote>But in any event, he is clearly not the mainstream partisan of nonideological change that he is running as, and it at least seems worth pointing that out.</blockquote>

Exactly.
10.5.2008 2:12am
Bob Van Burkleo (mail):
BTW, as Obama himself has observed, the US itself has also, in Afghanistan, "air-raided villages and killed civilians," though apparently Obama did not say that this was unintentional.

No, he said it was because we didn't have enough troops in Afghanistan to do the job right. With enough ground troops we wouldn't be depending on air attacks with inadequate intelligence... If we are going to conduct a war we need to do it right.
10.5.2008 2:15am
Gilbert (mail):
You know perfectly well that you are misrepresenting the analogy to Coburn. I, like most other people have made up my mind about Obama and McCain, but what does it say about you that you would put your name on something like this?
10.5.2008 2:20am
byomtov (mail):
not only did Obama not personally find anything especially obnoxious about Wright's radicalism, anti-Americanism, ties to Farrakahn, and so on, or Ayers' lack of regret for his terrorist past,

How do you know this? Do you associate with people who hold some views you find obnoxious?

Besides, what was Obama supposed to do? Issue denunciations out of nowhere?

You are simply rationalizing McCain's dishonorable decision to base his campaign on personal attacks rather than his own policy ideas, which btw vary not much from Bush's.

Is there anything McCain can do that you would disapprove of? Are you going to give us your opinion of his father-in-law's mob ties?
10.5.2008 2:22am
ponraul:
When did the VC get taken over you far left loons? The first few posters make up facts quicker than Joe Biden. This must be an organized effort. There is no way these people, who seem to not even understand the basic foundation of libertarian/conservative though, could possibly be regular readers of Volokh. Accordingly, I say congradulations to the VC for having the standing to merit such an far left operation.
10.5.2008 2:25am
Bob Van Burkleo (mail):
When did the VC get taken over you far left loons?

Natural law in response to a far right loon post. Karma's a bitch ;)
10.5.2008 2:28am
John Moore (www):
Anyone who calls Ayers a "former radical" isn't paying attention.

In 2001, Ayers stated his regret that he hadn't set off more bombs. In 2001, Ayers posed for a photograph while trampling an American flag. Another Weather Underground member is still associated with the campaign.

Obama until very recently has lived in the heart of a radical community, and as other commenters have shown, had close working relationships with Ayers, a terrorist, and Wright, an outspoken anti-American.

Obama's ties to these people are extremely relevant - to anyone who cares what sort of ideas Obama deems okay, and what sort of people he will surround him with if elected!

Obama is the most radical presidential candidate of the last 75 year. This unfortunately has not been revealed to the public by the media, and of course ont by Obama or his campaign, except by his mistakes - like not realizing that ordinary Americans would be greatly offended by Wright or Ayers.

As for the WU being a "misguided anti-war group" - no, they were a terrorist group intent on bringing down the US government by violence. They killed innocents in their rather incompetent attempts. They worked with the enemy in a time of war. They weren't just "anti-war activists" - they were way beyond that. They were a more extreme splinter of the extremist pro-Communist SDS.
10.5.2008 2:28am
KeyComments (mail):
Bob Van Burkleo, nice try, but Obama's comment still suggests all we are doing right now in Afghanistan is gratuitously and nonchalantly massacring civilians.
10.5.2008 2:32am
Bob Van Burkleo (mail):
still suggests all we are doing right now in Afghanistan

Only to someone with an axe to grind. No 'all', just an example of undesirable consequences from not adequately engaging in the theater.
10.5.2008 2:37am
Random Commenter:
"Are you going to give us your opinion of his father-in-law's mob ties?"

No, and he's not going to render an opinion on McCain's sister-in-law's cousin's friend's apparent friendship with the Hamburglar either.

You're surprisingly curious for someone who's busy telling us we shouldn't wonder why Obama is friendly with someone who touts his own history with a domestic terror group.
10.5.2008 2:38am
Pyrrhus (mail) (www):
I find the evidence of Obama's friendship with Ayers a little underwhelming.

So they worked at the same charity. How is that evidence that Obama felt comfortable with Ayer's extremism? How does it demonstrate closeness between the two? Why isn't it just evidence that the two share charitable interests? It seems unlikely that Obama took the position to get close to Ayers, or that Ayers' position with the charity was at all on his radar when he joined up. Probably he joined because he thought the charity was a worthy one, looked good on his resume, whatever. Do we have any evidence to the contrary? Besides the fact that Ayers is on the board?

Then there is the party at Ayers house. Blogs tend to paint it as if he chose the place out as the proper place to launch his campaign. The truth seems to be something more passive - if I recall correctly, it was his superior, who was in effect passing Obama her spot as she moved up the ladder- who was throwing the party and making the announcement. He could have thrown a stink and demanded that the announcement happen elsewhere, perhaps, but likely he felt obligated to show some gratitude to his boss.

At best, the evidence may suggest he was willing to tolerate Ayers presence when protesting it would have slowed up his political career.

I agree that Obama is far left, and it is possible that he is indeed good friends with Ayers, but the evidence I keep hearing doesn't get us there.
10.5.2008 2:42am
PC:
but the evidence I keep hearing doesn't get us there

The evidence doesn't matter, it's the repetition that counts. McCain's campaign manager is on record saying this campaign is not about the issues. Republicans have nothing left after the last eight years so the best they can do is offer character attacks.

Hopefully Obama will win in a landslide and the Republicans can do some serious soul searching. If Republicans figure out that they should run (and really mean it) on a platform of smaller government and leave behind all of the divisive wedge issues, maybe they will regain the majority and we'll all be better for it.
10.5.2008 2:49am
KeyComments (mail):
Bob Van Burkleo, okay, remove the "all" from my previous post if you prefer and replace it with "what" -- does that really make it any better? Imagine if (as Joe Biden might wonder) President Harry Truman had gone on TV or done a podcast in 1942 and said the same thing about our efforts against Germany and Japan in WWII? Remember, we're talking about Afghanistan here (not even Iraq) from which the 9/11 attacks were launched.
10.5.2008 2:49am
MIke:
"Obama is trying to "smear" McCain with a "guilt by association" attack with respect to George Bush -- so why can't the Republicans do so with respect to Obama/Ayers?"

GUILT BY ASSOCIATION??? This is (unfortunately) a two-party system! One party has been in power for 8 years, has passionately supported its historically damaging executive, helping him get re-elected, and it's a "smear tactic" to bring that up in this election???

Of course every major network wants Obama to win. It's the same reason that every other civilized country in the world wants the Democrat to win. The incumbent party and its leader have caused pain and hardship for millions, have enraged millions of others, and have done so with a combination of corruption, stupidity and apathy for the rest of the world.

Where was the outrage of Republicans when Bush, who they supported at every turn, was indisputably damaging this world?

In the same way I wonder why there is barely any outrage by moderate Muslim societies at the extremist Islamic terrorists, I wonder why there is no outrage by American "conservatives" at a government that has destroyed our economy, killed thousands of American soldiers, ruined the lives of hundreds of thousands of non-Americans, ruined our global reputation and faced no accountability.

Republican politicians and voters can't separate themselves from Bush now because he's "unpopular." They made this happen. They enabled it at every turn. McCain SUPPORTED BUSH in 2004, for chrissakes.

There is NO reason they should win this time.
10.5.2008 2:58am
Bob Van Burkleo (mail):
said the same thing about our efforts against Germany and Japan in WWII?

More slanting generalities "our efforts". Our efforts are to drive out the Taliban and this effort had a result very different from that - something didn't go right, we can agree on that I hope?

Remember, we're talking about Afghanistan here (not even Iraq) from which the 9/11 attacks were launched.

Yep and we are talking about a wedding party and children mistakenly attacked by air. That you would suggest that should be ignored or pretend it didn't happen is mind boggling. The truth is never inappropriate - you can't fix a problem if you pretend there's no problem at all.
10.5.2008 2:59am
EH (mail):
So I'm still unclear on the significance, as per the original post. What I'm reading here is people arguing over whether it's significant or not, with the pro-significance crowd being content just to leave that assertion alone. This is redundant on the post itself.

Frankly, I don't see what possible significance this has. I don't care about associations and (assumed) motivations, I care about what people are doing. Are we supposed to believe that any Ayers proximity means Obama is going to bomb the WH once he's inside? Appoint Ayers to the Supreme Court?

Similarly, I don't care about Palin's associations. That she was a member of the same church as John Ashcroft makes me wonder if she has similar values as him, though. I don't care about McCain's associations, but I do care that he is so chimeric. Biden? Old-school power-whitey. Yadda yadda.
10.5.2008 3:05am
kiniyakki (mail):
Can't speak to Ayers, but for the Wright end of it, the best take on this that I have seen is an article in The Economist. Everybody assumes Wright has been a constant - but The Economist suggests that he has become more extreme after getting attention, that he was not always such an extremist when Obama developed his relationship with him.
10.5.2008 3:06am
KeyComments (mail):
YES, the linking of Bush to McCain is a guilt by association attack -- Obama's argument is in essence the following: "You (i.e., the voter) believe Bush is bad. Bush is a Republican. McCain is also a Republican. Therefore, McCain must also be bad." This is a guilt-by-association attack.
10.5.2008 3:09am
grackle (mail):
Here's the version I like: Ronald Reagan's close friend, Walter Annenberg, gave $50 mil to finance the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, placing Bill Ayers on the distibution committee. So let's see - how could R Reagan have remained friends with a man who was known to associate with 60's radicals, etc.etc
10.5.2008 3:14am
grackle (mail):
Sometimes, with this bottomfeeding, I don't know how David Bernstein can maintain a pretense of self respect.
10.5.2008 3:16am
PC:
This is a guilt-by-association attack.

So it's an attack when the person is proud of the association? I guess the only question left to ask is: Why is John McCain using a guilt by association attack against John McCain?
10.5.2008 3:23am
Baseballhead (mail):
<blockquote>YES, the linking of Bush to McCain is a guilt by association attack</blockquote><i>Guilt</i> by association? You must have Bush Derangement Syndrome.

/snark
10.5.2008 3:25am
KeyComments (mail):
Also, btw, McCain has consistently tried to disassociate himself from the Bush administration and its policies during this campaign -- constantly talking about "change" and all of that. That is why Obama's attempt to link him with Bush is clearly simply a crude guilt-by-association-type attack.
10.5.2008 3:26am
KeyComments (mail):
Also, Obama for many years was, as we can only assume, an admirer of Ayers' and quite proud of the association as perhaps I suppose McCain might have been in the past with respect to Bush.
10.5.2008 3:30am
PC:
McCainThe Republican Party has consistently tried to disassociate himitself from the Bush administration and its policies during this campaign

Fixt. I wonder why that is? As Baseballhead pointed out, has the entire Republican Party caught a case of BDS?

Of course "trying to distance" is not the same thing as actually distancing. Looking at McCain's policy proposals I'm not seeing a big difference from the Bush agenda. From immigration to tax cuts, it's all pretty much the same.
10.5.2008 3:35am
A.W. (mail):
I think it just comes down to this. Any true patriot would have had nothing to do with that man.

If I met a terrorist in a dinner party, i would walk away from him, at the least. if he tried to get to know me, i would ask if he ever repened of his terrorism. if the answer is no (as it is, here), then i would tell him he is not worth knowing. that would be the polite way of putting it. i might tell him to fuck off.

I wouldn't associate myself with him at all.

But Obama is so deformed in character that he doesn't care, fundamentally about his terrorism. Not even after 9-11, where he would have an excuse for a change in heart. Nope, he only cared when he discovered it was a liability.

Either he is a radical, or a very craven politician. neither one seems like a very appealing explanation.
10.5.2008 3:44am
KeyComments (mail):
Well, PC, I guess that's kind of the whole point right there...I'm hoping Obama's policies as President (should he be elected) would be different from what I suspect Ayers might want, but will they be????
10.5.2008 3:45am
jukeboxgrad (mail):
db:

he apparently didn't expect that much of anyone else would care, either. … How else do you explain how his campaign seemed to be caught flatfooted


The same analysis applies to McCain's very belated recognition that he needed to reject Hagee's endorsement, right?
10.5.2008 3:48am
jukeboxgrad (mail):
fantasia:

How is deciding to launch your political career from someone's HOUSE not a close connection:?


There was an event at Ayer's house. Please show your proof that this event was the "launch" of Obama's political career. And please show your proof that it was Obama, not Palmer, who chose the location for this event.
10.5.2008 3:48am
jukeboxgrad (mail):
henderson:

would it be immoral to serve as an officer of said organization?


Ask Arnold R. Weber, an adviser to Nixon and Reagan, and someone who has contributed $1,500 to McCain, and who also did "serve as an officer of said organization," along with Ayers and Obama.

aw:

I wouldn't associate myself with him at all.


You should have a chat with Mr. Weber.
10.5.2008 3:48am
markH (mail):
I would love for some of these people who "understand the basic foundation of libertarian/conservative thought" to explain how Obama is a leftist extremist to this regular VC reader and Obama supporter. And thank you for allowing us far left loons to post here.

I read VC because usually one can find informed and thoughtful ( and snarky ) discussions with from liberal, libertarian and (mostly) conservative viewpoints. The anti-obama crap is starting to look like parody (lives with radicals, hates America, blah blah blah) Ellsworth Toohey? That's a joke, right?

What "has not been revealed to the public by the media" about his plan to destroy America?

The Ayers slur is "guilt by association". It's an attempt to connect Obama to bombings that occurred when he was 8 years old.

McCain's association with Bush happened in real-time when McCain supported Bush's policies and legislation by voting for them and talking them up on the TV.

Not the same.
10.5.2008 3:51am
Grover Gardner (mail):

Imagine if (as Joe Biden might wonder) President Harry Truman had gone on TV or done a podcast in 1942 and said the same thing about our efforts against Germany and Japan in WWII?


Given Truman's own struggle over the use of the atomic bomb against Japan, not to mention the fierce moral debate that rages to this day, this seems sort of foolish. But suffice it to say that you cannot compare WWII with the current conflict in Afghanistan. We are not engaged in all-out war with the likes of Nazi Germany, but rather a limited conflict with insurgent elements that threaten the stability of a country in which a friendly government has been established. In that respect, excessive civilian casualties pose a serious threat to our interests there. It's a legitimate issue, and Obama isn't the only one to raise it.
10.5.2008 3:51am
jukeboxgrad (mail):
db:

he apparently didn't expect that much of anyone else would care, either


For some strange reason Palin seems to not care about being seen accepting a blessing from a witchhunter (video).

And for some strange reason you seem to not care about the part where he talks about "the wealth of the wicked," and about "the Israelites, that's how they work. And that's how they are, even today." Maybe a President Palin could enlist the witchcraft guy to help out with the wicked Israelites on Wall St.
10.5.2008 3:55am
pmorem (mail):
Barack Obama has chosen who he associates with.

Barack Obama didn't see a problem with Ayers.

Barack Obama didn't see a problem with Wright.

Barack Obama didn't see a problem with Rezko.

Barack Obama doesn't see a problem with sending lawyers to shut down people who criticize him.

Do we see a pattern here?

I find that deeply disturbing.
10.5.2008 3:57am
Barry P. (mail):
Only one of the candidates has used bombs to murder civilians, and it ain't Obama.
10.5.2008 4:01am
EH (mail):
pmorem: So are you saying that there's nobody that McCain doesn't have a problem with?
10.5.2008 4:04am
jukeboxgrad (mail):
Barack Obama doesn't see a problem with sending lawyers to shut down people who criticize him.


How does that compare with someone who sends armed government agents "to shut down people who criticize him?"
10.5.2008 4:12am
Roger Moore:
Bernstein-

This is exactly the type of post that is counterproductive to your assumed goal of moving public opinion against Obama.

When posting partisan hack material you and Zywicki need to be more subtle. Anyone with half a brain sees through this BS for what it is. It is beneath you and the Conspiracy.

If the AP really wanted to be balanced they would have pointed out Palin’s own ties to “terrorist organizations.” I am sure those facts are readily available to you and readers of TVC. If you need more info simply google “AIP and Todd Palin.”
10.5.2008 4:13am
Cornellian (mail):
Here's my take: Bernstein is getting desperate, can't think of anything to say, so he just intends to repeat "Wright/Ayres/Rezko" over and over until election day.
10.5.2008 4:20am
Bob Van Burkleo (mail):
Here's my take: Bernstein is getting desperate, can't think of anything to say, so he just intends to repeat "Wright/Ayres/Rezko" over and over until election day.

Yes and it will fail because the Obama campaign is always just that one step ahead:

McCain officials had said early in the weekend that they plan to begin advertising after Tuesday’s debate that will tie Obama to convicted money launderer Tony Rezko and former Weathermen radical William Ayers.
But Obama isn’t waiting to respond. His campaign is going up Monday on national cable stations with a scathing ad saying:

“Three quarters of a million jobs lost this year. Our financial system in turmoil. And John McCain? Erratic in a crisis. Out of touch on the economy. No wonder his campaign wants to change the subject."

“Turn the page on the financial crisis by launching dishonorable, dishonest ‘assaults’ against Barack Obama. Struggling families can't turn the page on this economy, and we can't afford another president who is this out of touch.”
10.5.2008 4:26am
JB:
As others have said, it is somewhat disturbing that Obama associates with Ayers, but it's more disturbing that the Republicans harp on this. In itself it's a minor question on his judgment, but it's become a dog-whistle for the vilest racist garbage.

When one side openly calls the other side unpatriotic for their mainstream political views, that cannot go unchallenged or it is death to democracy. The only way democracy and the rule of law can flourish is if both sides recognize that the other side has the country's best interests in mind and are just misguided. If your country is being taken over by traitors, the only appropriate response is to rise up in arms against them, and that is the end of democracy. So if you truly believe Obama is an anti-American radical traitor, it is your duty to shoot him. Otherwise, shut up with the bizarre invective and argue against him on the issues.
10.5.2008 4:46am
pmorem (mail):
As others have said, it is somewhat disturbing that Obama associates with Ayers, but it's more disturbing that the Republicans harp on this. In itself it's a minor question on his judgment, but it's become a dog-whistle for the vilest racist garbage.

That's a non-sequiter. I really don't see how questioning Obama's association with Ayers is racist.

So if you truly believe Obama is an anti-American radical traitor, it is your duty to shoot him. Otherwise, shut up with the bizarre invective and argue against him on the issues.

Ethics and judgement are issues in and of themselves. Maybe you don't think they're important, but I do. It matters to me what people do when they think nobody is looking (see ref. Watergate Tapes).

It's not his patriotism I question. It's his judgement.

Maybe it doesn't matter to you, but it does to me.

It matters to others as well.

I'm not calling him a traitor, and I don't think he is one. I'm calling him a fool, and I think the record clearly supports that, in spite of his clear intelligence.
10.5.2008 5:12am
Smokey:
Prof. Bernstein asks:

What is the Significance of Obama's Ties to Ayers (and Wright?)

Simple: we are known by the company we keep.
10.5.2008 5:23am
MSchmahl:
I live in Alaska, and I consider myself a left-leaning Libertarian. I am only 33; I have followed the presidential elections since Bush-Dukakis through the present. But I have never been so aware of the polarizing influence of the national spotlight as I am now.
10.5.2008 5:31am
Dan M.:
jukeboxgrad:

That is an extremely heavy-handed, terrible thing that the Bush administration did.

However, are you implying that because John McCain voted for a lot of legislation that George Bush signed or opposed, that John McCain would use the Secret Service in the same manner as George Bush? I mean, you wouldn't be using a silly guilt-by-association attack to deflect from Obama's assault on the first amendment, would you?
10.5.2008 5:33am
PDXLawyer (mail):
JB: I can understand how a Obama supporter might consider the attacks against Obaba re his association with Ayers "garbage" because (in your view) they are unimportant. Why are they "vile"? Because you don't agree? And, why are they racist? Because any attack against Obama is per se racist?

Also, if calling someone involved in politics "unpatriotic" is the "end of democracy," then what is the appropriate response to someone who proudly poses for a photograph while standing on an American flag (and who himself engaged in violence against an elected US government he disagreed with and says today that he regrets not doing more)?

I can't accept that my only moral options are to either shut up or engage in terrorism. I'm really not sure what it is about Obama that causes some of his supporters to hold such views - I've never heard him say anything remotely like this. Its disturbing.
10.5.2008 5:50am
PDXLawyer (mail):
Dan M:

What makes you think that anyone political in the Bush administration was involved in the cited event? From what I know about the organization of the Secret Service (no inside knowledge, just what I read and what I've seen at political events) they typically deal with things like this without consulting outside their organization. I personally think its the right approach because it (1) is at least a little check on misuse; and (2) aviods being under-active in order to avoid the appearance of heavy-handedness.

When I was in college (early 80s) my fraternity had a couple of British members. We were following the Falklands War in the news. One night, we decided to declare war on Argintina, and mailed their Embassy a letter to that effect. We were young, and probably drunk. A few days later we got a visit from a couple of guys in dark suits and narrow ties. No further action was taken. We later learned that the US Gov't was providing itelligence to Britain, so its pretty clear they weren't secretly in bed with Argentina.

Point is, it isn't Jack Boot Fascism for regular non-secret police agencies to show up and ask, politely, if reports that you intend to commit a crime are correct. And, just because they do that doesn't mean they're driven by political opposition. Maybe they're just trying to prevent crime.

PS: I drove a vehicle for some Bush campaign events and chatted with a few of the Secret Service grunts early in Bush's first term. Did they like Bush? Yes. Why? Not because of his politics, but because he liked to be on time, which made the mechanics of their job a lot easier. Clinton made them stand around for hours because he was often hours late.
10.5.2008 6:08am
Visitor Again:
Bernstein-bot at work again.
10.5.2008 6:37am
Vic:
I'm glad that Prof. Bernstein has broken with the liberal east-coast elite media notion that in this election, or'nery regular small town Americans care about stuff like 1. Which candidate will handle the economy better ?
2. How're the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan going to be won?
3. What's going to happen to their healthcare?
and
4. What should be done about Gas prices

To his credit, Bernstein has looked past the Republican campaign talking points to figure out that the issues that really matter are

1. Does Obama associate with terrorists?
2. Is Obama a Muslim?
3. Is he the AntiChrist?
4. Where is the Michelle Obama "whitey" tape?

i look forward to more detailed, repeated and ultimately inconclusive examinations of these claims by Prof. Bernstein in the days to come.
10.5.2008 6:52am
Smokey:
Visitor Again:
Bernstein-bot at work again.
Thank you for that extremely thoughtful comment regarding a respected VC contributor's opinion.

Perhaps you would like to post something substantive, and worth reading? Or maybe not.

Carry on.
10.5.2008 6:54am
A. Zarkov (mail):
jukeboxgrad:

"How does that compare with someone who sends armed government agents "to shut down people who criticize him?"

In these times anything that even remotely smacks of a threat to the life of a candidate will draw an over reaction. Look at what happened to performance artist Yazmany when he set up an exhibition called “The Assassination of Hillary Clinton/The Assassination of Barack Obama.”
By 9:30 a.m., New York City police detectives and Secret Service agents had shut down the exhibition, and building workers had quickly covered over the inflammatory title with large sheets of brown paper...

The interview was abruptly ended as Mr. Arboleda was led off to the Midtown South police precinct station for what he called an interrogation.

The Secret Service had to do a whole questionnaire with me,” he said. “It was about an hour of questioning. They asked if I owned guns, if I was a violent person, if I had ever been institutionalized.
Note that nothing in the exhibition actually advocated the assassination of anybody. But in your example the students actually said

And I hope that you die and your death'll come soon.
which could be construed as a threat when taken out of context. Of course both incidents were unnecessary over reactions. But I could say that "someone sent armed government agents shut down an art exhibit about Obama, chilling freedom of expression and a violation of the First Amendment."

Don't you think you're being quite a bit one-sided here?
10.5.2008 7:15am
PersonFromPorlock:
The point that this great clot of pro-Obama commenters must have been pointed at VC as a sort of graffiti campaign is a pretty good one and deserves investigation.
10.5.2008 7:26am
Arkady:
Scoured of its (limited) intellectual patina, Bernstein's post is just a lace-curtain version of McCain's strategy in the closing weeks of the campaign. Not being able to win on the issues, McCain and Palin will attack Obama on his "associations". We'll see how the Straight Talk Express degenerates into the Straight Bullshit Express. And it looks like Bernstein's bought a rail pass on it.
10.5.2008 8:27am
pmorem (mail):
I'll try it this way:

Stipulate that Barack Obama is highly intelligent, patriotic, and acting in good faith.

Stipulate further that his statements about "Not the Tony Rezko I knew" are correct.

Stipulate that he did not know Rev. Wright is openly racist, and openly speaks about the US as evil.

Stipulate that he didn't see any problem with Jim Johnson's history as a Washington fixer and being generally corrupt.

Stipulate that he's not bothered by Ayer's history.

The logical conclusion is that somehow he missed the problem.

People claim this isn't an issue.

I say it is. The man is a fool.

Would he ever have noticed the problems with Rezko if his attention hadn't been called to it?

Would have kept Jim Johnson in his inner circle of advisors? Oh, oops, Johnson is still there.

Do you think this man can be entrusted with any serious decisions?

No matter how smart he is, he still can't tell when people are lying to him.

He is a fool.

All the attacks on Bernstein, McCain, Joe Schmoe, or whoever won't change that.

Barack Obama is a fool.
10.5.2008 8:52am
mac7 (mail) (www):
I would love for some of these people who "understand the basic foundation of libertarian/conservative thought" to explain how Obama is a leftist extremist to this regular VC reader and Obama supporter. And thank you for allowing us far left loons to post here.

Really!Well said. The ranting about Ayers reveals most of all the chronic naivety that exists in American conservative circles when it comes to militant activism. The US hasn't experienced a gun-and-bomb campaign outside of the erratic acts of cult leaders and pro-life fanatics. McVeigh was something of an exception and imagined he was acting to defend the Constitution. Sure Ayers and co stirred it up but compared to an intensive IRA campaign lasting many years it was a mere blip on the radar.

The history of this type of thing in the States relates mostly to loony fringe behavior. So naturally American conservatives tend to conflate Ayers into their very own dreadful lefty terrorist - a sort of prototype of all they fear. It's so silly. If these people had lived in N.Ireland for a few months during The Troubles in the 70's, they would understand the meaning of a society in conflict - they would also understand the dynamics that come into play.

Of course the greater irony is that America is gun central - there is a sort of tyranny-of-the-gun which has become a bizarro symbol of freedom etc in the minds of flag waving NRA members. When you couple the gun bearing proclivities of the right with their criminal free marketeering that Buffet likened to 'madmen planting nukes' you realize that perhaps the real terrorists are the right wing nutbars who are into license-to-bear-arms-and-fleece. They are the real threat to America. Their neo-con foreign policy has also taken the world to the brink - and what .... Obama is the guy we should all be afraid of because he had some social contacts with Bill Ayers. It is truly beyond idiocy.
10.5.2008 9:02am
Arkady:
Here's a thought:

What is the Significance of Obama's Palin's Ties to Ayers (and Wright?) A Witchcraft Obsessed Pastor?

Is that a fair question to ask?
10.5.2008 9:05am
TCO:
Liberal association with extremists on their side, even a sort of glamorization has long been socially accepted. Look at the Che shirts.
10.5.2008 9:05am
Anonperson (mail):
Why do the conservatives keep trying to turn the relationship into a friendship? A friendship is when you socialize together. Do they hang out together? Do they watch football games together? Do they go to bars together? That's a friendship. (Also, clearly, most people define "friendly" different "being friends". I'm friendly with many people that are I would not call a "friend".)

People keep trying to make something out of the fact that a party at Ayer's house had something to do with Obama. So, all you people who are trying to do this: Are you going to tell me that you have NEVER been to a party at your boss's house, or a co-worker's house? As to announcing one's political career, again, this is an event in one's PROFESSIONAL life, not one's personal life. If they had held a baby shower in Ayer's house, that would be a different story.
10.5.2008 9:12am
BT:
The damage that Ayers is doing today in the name of education reform far exceeds any that he did 40 years ago as a member of the WU. That is the real issue and one that is directly tied to BO as he and Ayers sat on the same board for the Annenbeg Foundation through most of the 1990s. Ayers has a far left orientation and profoundly anti-american worldview and sees education as a vehicle to indoctrinate students to his world view, in effect using education to lead to revolution as Ayers defines it. BO has not been held accountable and or questioned concerning any of this and due to the PC orientation of the press, is highly unlikely to have to do so. Does BO have the same view point on education as Ayers? Does BO share many of the same anti-american and anti-western culture viewpoints as Ayers? While these viewpoints may be relatively harmless in your tyical college professor or daring poster on VC, I am not so sure that most americans want that in the next president of the US. And it certainly seems that the answers to these questions given the record, are yes.
10.5.2008 9:29am
Glenn W. Bowen (mail):

or Ayers' lack of regret for his terrorist past


forget his past, IT'S HIS PRESENT THAT IS THE PROBLEM- HE'S STILL A RADICAL RED JACKASS, AND MORE INFLUENTIAL NOW THROUGH ACADAMIA AND HIS WEALTHY FAMILY THAN WHEN HE WAS BLOWING UP POLICE STATIONS.


-that is the Ayers Obama knows.
10.5.2008 9:34am
mac7 (mail) (www):
BT ... and a look at the junkyard American school system and the rampant rates of illiteracy would convince anyone that America is a beacon-on-a-hill ... right?

Myopia is great, you can just focus on what you want to see.
10.5.2008 9:44am
BT:
mac7: I don't get your point. Are you saying that the american school system is largely under the thrall of conservative evangelicals, especially in the big cities like Chicago and that is why Ayers is in business?

It seems to me that quite the opposite is true, that the public schools are ruled by teachers unions and other players who support and are supported by D's such as BO. I agree with you that the school system is in bad shape. Here is another other thing. It appears from what research has been done that Ayers and BO (as board memebers of Annenberg) largely ignored requests by groups that wanted to focus on hard sciences such as math and english language skills and instead focused their largess on groups that sought cultural awareness and Peace Studies, etc. If illiteracy is as rampant as you suggest then it seems to be that you would agree with me. I guess, just like me, you are a right wing wacko after all.
10.5.2008 10:00am
BT:
mac7: Now I see your point. To answer your question directly-no I do not see the US as some perfect society that needs no internal criticism and that if the Ayers of the world didn't exist things would be hunky dory. Far from it. I just don't think his and BO's perscriptions are the correct ones.
10.5.2008 10:21am
Kevin P. (mail):

jukeboxgrad (mail):
How does that compare with someone who sends armed government agents "to shut down people who criticize him?"


jukeboxgrad, your event happened in 2004. Did you not read the time?

And as many have pointed out, it was most likely the Secret Service, not the Bush Administration that sent agents out to check out a potential threat to the life of the President.
10.5.2008 10:26am
Kevin P. (mail):

mac7:
Of course the greater irony is that America is gun central - there is a sort of tyranny-of-the-gun which has become a bizarro symbol of freedom etc in the minds of flag waving NRA members. When you couple the gun bearing proclivities of the right with their criminal free marketeering that Buffet likened to 'madmen planting nukes' you realize that perhaps the real terrorists are the right wing nutbars who are into license-to-bear-arms-and-fleece.


LOL, you win the prize for compelling advocacy and argument. Maybe we can call it the Andrew Sullivan award.
10.5.2008 10:29am
Becky (mail):
Shouldn't it be an issue that the Annenberg Challenge, the one that Obama claims executive experience in, and that Ayers was the force behind the cirriculm failed to produce any improvement in educational achievement? I beleive the price tag was 100 million over 5 years in a select area of Chicago. What does that suggest about his credibility in being involved in education nationwide? How much would Mr. Obama's programs cost in improving education on nationwide, and what would be the projected results of that effort?

I can understand that if true and Mr. Ayers had pursued an unconventional approach in cirriculm that was acutually used, it would an important facuet of the failure.
10.5.2008 10:34am
TyWebb:
I would bet that you find Obama's ties to Ayers and Wright significant because you do not want him to become President. You admit that it's not necessarily the other way around. Just a thought.

Oh, and I left you a message on your other post. A couple, actually. It hurts when you don't write back, Professor Bernstein. It makes me wonder if you've run off with some other antagonist moderate, spending all day going back and forth with him, responding to his factual dispassionate analyses with more snark and hackery...

It just makes me so jealous!
10.5.2008 10:46am
Daniel Chapman (mail):
Closing comments until after the election might not be a bad idea. This drivel is unreadable.
10.5.2008 11:00am
metro1 (mail) (www):
The "Obama Doctine" is kind of like the Bush Doctrine - with this difference:

preemption is warranted - so long as we're talking about attacks on the Obama campaign - but not attacks on the USA

See here for more on "The Obama Doctrine"
10.5.2008 11:03am
elim:
let's see-the left's first thought in response to this post revolves around jew hatred. gives you an idea of where they are coming from-then it shifts to terror bombings, no big deal. ayers is a bad guy, just like his fellow death worshipper, dohrn. they are part of obama's social circle and helped give him his start in politics. ayers and obama worked together funnelling money to leftist causes, supposedly in the name of school reform (for the leftist morons above, the Chicago Public Schools are decrepit and failing the "poor" the Dems are trying to assist). for CNN to say they haven't hung out much in the last 3 years is nice but ignores the 15 years before that, when they worked arm in arm. certainly, it ignores him stomping on the flag after 9/11. tell me, if one of your buddies stomped on the american flag and remembered fondly how he didn't kill enough people back in the 60's and 70's, would he still be your buddy. you might as well have Manson for a friend.
10.5.2008 11:04am
Crimso:

Only one of the candidates has used bombs to murder civilians, and it ain't Obama.

I see the Kos kidz and/or the Huffington paint-huffers have discovered the existence of your Conspiracy.
10.5.2008 11:21am
Minotauro (mail):
Obama is the ultimate stealth liberal candidate. His supporters constantly point at his being a "law professor" at the University of Chicago.

But has any one ever met a professor of law who hasn't published a single scholaraly article. Not even one. At any law school I've ever been associated with, you are a nothing in the academic legal field without articles. NOTHING! No legal scholar would ever take you seriously without at least a significant body of publications, not to mention not having a single one.
10.5.2008 11:23am
MartyA:
Each of you look back and think of the good friends that could testify about your good nature. Where are those people from Hussein's past?
There are no fraternity brothers, team mates, Boy Scout leaders, neighbors or class mates who gave come forward. In fact, Hussein has done everything to conceal who he was and who he is today.
Everyone we know of from his past is not a nice person. Even his wife is a flaming racist. And, yet, we do not know who is really manipulating him and pulling his strings. Ayers is important because he is not a nice person but one of the few from Hussein's past that we know about. Who are the South Chicago Daley pols that we haven't met yet?
10.5.2008 11:30am
Suzy (mail):
It is simple to come up with other perfectly reasonable explanations for the questions you asked, if only you aren't determined not to. Like others have said, Obama has had to deal with much crazier rumors and insinuations than these, so perhaps he simply never thought it was necessary to distance himself from these individuals. Maybe he thought people would never take this stuff seriously, since Obama himself has never espoused positions anything like the objectionable ones attributed to these people.

Meanwhile, McCain has chosen not to discuss any serious issue that affects the future of the American people, in favor of turning his campaign towards these flimsy character attacks. Palin flat out lies again and again and nobody here blinks an eye, but we have to endure post #578 on Obama's questionable associations. Rather than furthering the McCain talking points this week, how about someone explain why Sarah Palin said that she was pushing for Alaska to divest from Sudanese interests? A bald-faced lie, since her administration has killed that bipartisan proposal. However, I'm sure she'll repeat it with impunity because nobody calls her out on the lies. We're too busy worrying about this trivia about Obama.
10.5.2008 11:30am
Brooklynite (www):
Glenn W. Bowen:
IT'S HIS PRESENT THAT IS THE PROBLEM- HE'S STILL A RADICAL RED JACKASS, AND MORE INFLUENTIAL NOW THROUGH ACADAMIA AND HIS WEALTHY FAMILY THAN WHEN HE WAS BLOWING UP POLICE STATIONS.


BT:
It appears from what research has been done that Ayers and BO (as board memebers of Annenberg) largely ignored requests by groups that wanted to focus on hard sciences such as math and english language skills and instead focused their largess on groups that sought cultural awareness and Peace Studies, etc.


Becky:
Shouldn't it be an issue that the Annenberg Challenge, the one that Obama claims executive experience in, and that Ayers was the force behind the cirriculm failed to produce any improvement in educational achievement?


elim:
ayers and obama worked together funnelling money to leftist causes, supposedly in the name of school reform


See, I find this fascinating. Each of these comments offers a substantive, issue-oriented assessment of the Obama-Ayers relationship. All four raise questions about how Obama is likely to tackle educational policy, an important part of the president's portfolio and an area in which he has left a paper trail of positions and accomplishments that could be explored and debated.

In short, each of these commenters, excessive capitalization and grammatical manglings notwithstanding, provides a more substantial, more relevant, more serious take on Bill Ayers than either Bernstein or the McCain campaign have chosen to offer.

The voters are interested in talking about the issues facing this country. McCain and his media/blogosphere mouthpieces aren't.

They just aren't.
10.5.2008 11:31am
A. Zarkov (mail):
"... look at the junkyard American school system and the rampant rates of illiteracy..."

The US does not have "rampart rates of illiteracy," and the problem students are largely confined to the underclass. An underclass that would perform poorly in any school system. As such we have student population that's essentially bimodal in character, and as we all know the average is highly atypical of a bimodal distribution. If you look at (say) the upper quartile of student performance it's actually very good, one of the best in the world.
10.5.2008 11:39am
calmom:
The people who got up and walked out of restaurants if OJ Simpson walked in have more morals than Obama. They wouldn't tolerate being in the same room with a criminal for ten minutes, but Obama saw nothing wrong with repeated, continuous meetings and social events. The significance is plain: Obama saw nothing wrong with Ayers activities in the past and nothing wrong with his anti-American views in the present.

Once a man is running for president, voters can't really trust what they say. Look at their past, who are their friends and associates. What did they say and stand for before running for president. That's how you can find the true man.
10.5.2008 11:48am
MarkField (mail):

I see the Kos kidz and/or the Huffington paint-huffers have discovered the existence of your Conspiracy.


If so, they're like Columbus to the Vikings/Freepers.
10.5.2008 11:50am
Just Dropping By (mail):
Israel did not attack the USA or its government and governmental institutions as the Weather Underground did

The Weather Underground, according to the entries on Wikipedia, appears to be responsible for the killings of 5 non-members, including 3 people who were killed after Ayers had left the organization. Israeli forces killed 34 American servicemen (and wounded another 170) during the 1967 attack on the USS Liberty.
10.5.2008 12:19pm
Ken Arromdee:
No Christian would hold this against Ayers (well a good Christian) so exactly why would any of them expect Obama to?

Forgiveness, whether by a Christian or a non-Christian, requires an admission that you're wrong. If Ayers had stated unequivocally that he now believes it wrong to kill his own country's civilians, and there was reason to think he's sincere, then it may make some sense not to hold it against Ayers.
10.5.2008 12:43pm
Brett Bellmore:
There's a clear double standard between actions of people working in government, and people outside government, and if we view them as anarchists would, a Nixon or Clinton is more of a murderer than Ayers even aspired to being.

But, of course, if we approach this as anarchists, why would we be discussing who to vote for?

Approaching this from within the consensual illusion of government, of course, Ayers is a terrorist, while Clinton's bombing of a pharmaceutical plant in Sudan, whatever the motives, was just government in action, to be debated from a policy perspective, not as an example of unapologetic mass murder.

What troubles me about Obama's tolerance, and more than tolerance, of Ayers, (And the tolerance of others, too.) is that it shows that Obama is not particularly troubled by people who resort to violence to advance causes he likes, even if they do so outside socially sanctioned channels.

What's he going to think about resorting to violence inside those channels, once he's Commander in Chief? Or maybe even arranging for a bit of it to happen outside those channels?

Obama seems to me to embody to a disturbing extent the crude act utilitarian tendency to view the end as justifying the means. Ayers' ends were good, so the means can be forgiven. The problem of course, is that Obama is, by definition, going to view his own ends as good.

Is there any reason, then, to think he'd hesitate to use any means whatsoever to advance them, that he thought might work?
10.5.2008 12:46pm
Tony Tutins (mail):

his attempts to use the law to stifle criticism

Imagine the nerve of a candidate attempting to use McCain-Feingold against McCain supporters!

How is deciding to launch your political career from someone's HOUSE not a close connection:?

The wife of Rabbi Wolf, rabbi emeritus of KAM Israel, claims the honor for themselves, as recorded by the New York Times. Many people in Hyde Park-Kenwood hosted "meet the candidate" get-togethers.

Obama is trying to "smear" McCain with a "guilt by association" attack with respect to George Bush -- so why can't the Republicans do so with respect to Obama/Ayers?

McCain's votes reflected Bush's positions 90% of the time. In contrast, Obama has evinced no desire to plant bombs in the Pentagon. The Vietnam war is over. Note that the Iraq war has not inspired Ayers to restart the Weather Underground. He remains Distinguished Professor of Education at the University of Illinois at Chicago.

[Obama would] probably revitalize the FARC, numerous Islamic terrorist movements

Our invasion of Iraq has inspired many Islamic terrorist movements, including an Al-Qaeda in Iraq where none had existed before.

Last April, Sen. Obama dismissed Mr. Ayers as just "a guy who lives in my neighborhood," and "not somebody who I exchange ideas with on a regular basis."

Obama was 100% accurate as far as we know. Senator Obama chaired the BoD of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge in 1995, thirteen years ago. They have had no formal association since 2002.
10.5.2008 12:49pm
Ken Arromdee:
I pretty much agree with most of this article and have already said so before. Obama's association with radicals need not mean that he believes every single thing the radicals say. But it does mean he's far enough to the left that the radicals are just a bit further out.

This came up before for Wright. "Oh, come on, you don't really think Obama believes AIDS is a white conspiracy?" Of course he doesn't. He knows better. But he's so far to the left that he thinks that that belief is just a minor quirk that should be tolerated.
10.5.2008 12:49pm
PC:
Shouldn't it be an issue that the Annenberg Challenge, the one that Obama claims executive experience in, and that Ayers was the force behind the cirriculm failed to produce any improvement in educational achievement?

This is a good question. Does serving on the board of a non-profit that doesn't achieve its goals reflect poorly on Obama? At the time he was on the board of the Annenberg Challenge he was also on the board of the Joyce Foundation, the Woods Fund, the Chicago Lawyers' Committee for Civil Rights Under Law, the Center for Neighborhood Technology, and the Lugenia Burns Hope Center. Obama was also teaching Con Law at the University of Chicago, was of counsel at Davis, Miner, Barnhill &Galland, and became a state senator in 1997.

Of course between all of those duties I'm sure Obama and Ayers were bestest friends.
10.5.2008 12:52pm
sbron:
Ayers and like-minded Education Professors advocate teaching "cultural competency", Social Justice and Spanish to our children. Obama apparently agrees. Meanwhile, the Chinese, Taiwanese, Finns, Israelis, Singaporeans and Japanese are making sure their children learn English, calculus, information sciences and engineering. While we are celebrating diversity and importing more poorly-skilled, poorly educated immigrants the world's economic and military power will disperse to these other nations.
10.5.2008 12:57pm
Crimso:

Note that the Iraq war has not inspired Ayers to restart the Weather Underground.

Perhaps he decided not to tempt fate a second time. That makes him careful, not correct. There never was a second Beer Hall Putsch, now was there? I'm sure you'd feel perfectly comfortable with Eric Rudolph being a "Distinguished Professor of Education at the University of Illinois at Chicago." Your talismans won't work with me (I've been colleagues with people who actually earned the title of "Distinguished Professor").
10.5.2008 1:04pm
Per Son:
You all crack me up. Going on and on about this stuff, while Republicans are tanking! Gosh darn, North Carolina and Virginia can possibly be blue, and you all keep frothing about Ayers and Wright. Go ahead and continue frothing, while my candidate (although I always wanted Richardson) wins the election.

Heck, some Republicans are even talking about 60 Dems in the Senate. You all need to stop these on-line blah fests if you want Obama to lose, and get out and agitate.
10.5.2008 1:07pm
Crimso:

Go ahead and continue frothing, while my candidate (although I always wanted Richardson) wins the election.

I'm sure Nixon would appreciate this sentiment. As would a Mr. Good Will.
10.5.2008 1:13pm
TDPerkins (mail):

Only one of the candidates has used bombs to murder civilians, and it ain't Obama.


None of them have.


How does that compare with someone who sends armed government agents "to shut down people who criticize him?"


Neither Bush nor McCain sent those agents. The Secret Service sent itself, because they never let the chance to use the expense account go un-utilized.


This is exactly the type of post that is counterproductive to your assumed goal of moving public opinion against Obama.


When you are taking flak you are over the target.

Yours, TDP, ml, msl, &pfpp

PS Mr. Moore, who has the AIP tried to blow up?
10.5.2008 1:20pm
Jason F:
Again I will ask -- are those of you bothered by Senator Obama's association with Ayers bothered by Senator McCain's much stronger ties with G. Gordon Liddy?
10.5.2008 1:24pm
Tugh (mail):
Having read Bernstein's and Zywicki's anti-Obama posts, I feel sorry for the intellectual state of conservatism. Being unable to win (or engage) the argument on issues they stoop to filth. Good luck.
10.5.2008 1:24pm
TDPerkins (mail):

When one side openly calls the other side unpatriotic for their mainstream political views, that cannot go unchallenged or it is death to democracy.


Wright's views are not patriotic, Ayer's views are not patriotic. Like most leftists, they are "patriotic" towards an America that has never and can never exist. In Ayer's case, he attempted the use of murderous violence to try to create it.

Accepting that as mainstream is the death of what is worthwhile about this nation.

Obama is in fact just fine with that, as shown by his having no problems with Wright until he became a political liability, and likewise not yet admitted or exposed to just criticism his bathing himself in Ayer's tolerant ideologies.

Yours, TDP, ml, msl, &pfpp
10.5.2008 1:25pm
TDPerkins (mail):

Imagine the nerve of a candidate attempting to use McCain-Feingold against McCain supporters!


Except that's not what Obama is doing. McCain/Feingold is bad enough--incipiently--while Obama is worse so far inpractice.

All other things being equal, I'd be perfectly happy for McCain to be listed MIA--the VC could have kept him for all I care...

...But the Democrats keep on managing to nominate people far worse than the Republicans do.

Why is that?

Yours, TDP, ml, msl, &pfpp
10.5.2008 1:39pm
TDPerkins (mail):

Our invasion of Iraq has inspired many Islamic terrorist movements, including an Al-Qaeda in Iraq where none had existed before. flushed many Islamic terrorists out where we can kill them, including the many terrorists Osama sent into Iraq.


Fixed that for you.

Yours, TDP, ml, msl, &pfpp
10.5.2008 1:44pm
Careless:

Can't speak to Ayers, but for the Wright end of it, the best take on this that I have seen is an article in The Economist. Everybody assumes Wright has been a constant - but The Economist suggests that he has become more extreme after getting attention, that he was not always such an extremist when Obama developed his relationship with him.

The Economist article not really saying what you said it does, and Obama joined Trinity a few years after Wright went with Farrakhan to visit Qaddafi in Libya. I suspect Wright has always been way out there.
10.5.2008 1:55pm
PC:
I do wonder at what point Republicans will start attacking Walter Annenberg? (lifelong Republican and good friend of Ronald Reagan)

Obama is such a far-left, leftist he served on the board of a foundation started by a Republican.
10.5.2008 1:55pm
Elliot123 (mail):
"Again I will ask -- are those of you bothered by Senator Obama's association with Ayers bothered by Senator McCain's much stronger ties with G. Gordon Liddy?"

I haven't bothered. Has Liddy advocated bombing and killing Americans? Has he recently regretted he didn't do more bombing and killing of Americans? Maybe if he did, Obama would go to his house for campaign kick-offs, then say he's just a guy in the neighborhood.
10.5.2008 2:03pm
Elliot123 (mail):
"I do wonder at what point Republicans will start attacking Walter Annenberg? (lifelong Republican and good friend of Ronald Reagan)"

When he advocates bombing and killing Americans.
10.5.2008 2:04pm
Railroad Gin:
Will someone explain how "Ya, but what about Israel?" is in any way responsive to the the concerns over Ayers and Obama. This is the best Obama supporters can come up with?
10.5.2008 2:04pm
PubliusFL:
Arkady: "What is the Significance of Obama's Palin's Ties to Ayers (and Wright?) A Witchcraft Obsessed Pastor?"

Yeah, fair question. And the answer is "much less significance than the ties in the original question."

A pastor who speaks about witchcraft like that seems a little bit kooky. A pastor who spouts anti-American racist filth is evil. A terrorist bomber is evil. Is it that hard to see the difference?
10.5.2008 2:10pm
Dan M.:
Yeah, it's so dirty to call someone unpatriotic for political gain. Like when Nancy Pelosi called House Republicans unpatriotic for not showing up to a meeting that the Democrats forgot to invite them to.
10.5.2008 2:10pm
PC:
When he advocates bombing and killing Americans.

And since Obama hasn't advocated bombing and killing Americans we can agree this entire thing is a non-story. Who said arguing on the internet is pointless?
10.5.2008 2:20pm
KeyComments (mail):
Just Dropping By, the USS Liberty incident was unintentional (acknowledged to be so by President Johnson) whereas the Weather Underground's attacks were not -- duh!
10.5.2008 2:23pm
Brett Bellmore:
Oh, I'm pretty sure there are circumstances under which both McCain and Obama would have the government killing Americans; It's not like law enforcement doesn't entail this occasionally. The real question is what those circumstances are, for each of them.

What's troubling about the Ayers business is that it suggests that Obama doesn't consider private citizens killing other Americans to be that big a deal, if they're doing it in what he thinks is a good cause.
10.5.2008 2:34pm
Jason F:
Eliot123 --

Liddy subverted the electoral process and plotted murder (but not through bombings, so I guess it's OK). He's also advocated that people kill federal agents. Senator McCain's ties to Liddy are far closer than Senator Obama's to Ayers, and Liddy has been as welcomed back into the mainstream (if not moreso) than Ayers. Some details here; more here and here.
10.5.2008 2:37pm
KeyComments (mail):
Anyway, at least we can perhaps assime that, since as we know Obama does like to consort with terrorists, and, from what many of you on here seem to think, Israel may be the greatest terrorist of them all, Obama may turn out to be a lot more pro-Israel than we thought...
10.5.2008 2:39pm
CB55 (mail):
No matter how Liberals want to spin it they can not win on the values thing. Republicans got that one locked up and would rather talk about that because on the issues we know that big issues got ran over by a big red truck driven by 8 years of GOP control (Liberals know they can not get a bill passed this year with out a GOP cross over). Ayers and Rev Wright is our way of not talking about issues that matter because frankly we tried everything, we are hoping that Americans have a sudden bout of amnesia and forget these rotten times and think about the sunny side of the GOP.

When we Conservatives talk about Obama's fitness to rule we are talking about his ability to rule White people and we doubt most right thinking White people are that happy to vote for him --- and if they do or will they are going to hold their noses. The very thought of a Colored man in the office shocks and scares many and we are counting on them and the values thing to come around. That's why this is a close race because Obama knows if he were a White man he would be miles ahead of our man, McCain.

We can forgive, spin, forget, and explain the many sins, evils and scandals associated with McCain because that's something we are good at. When all else fails we make up excuses up. Maybe torture causes him to have a morals lapse like dumping his wife for a younger, richer, better looking blond model or having a connection to the Keating-5, having a son connected to bank failure, lobbyist favoritism and Ms Vicki Iseman, and being married to a wife hung up on pills, diamonds and fashion.

If the Wright and Ayers thing does not work, we got the Palin Doctrine, but that is another byline.
10.5.2008 2:44pm
Thomas_Holsinger:
I agree with David Bernstein about Ayer. Obama really does not see any moral difference between Ayers and Senator Tom Coburn. And that makes Obama unfit to be President. He's more morally blind than Bill Clinton.

Obama' association with Reverend Wright, though, I see more as political opportunism coupled with Wright being quite charismatic as well as spiritually uplifiting. I believe Obama about Wright having a profound spiritual effect on him.

But Wright also taught other and morally disastrous lessons.
10.5.2008 2:45pm
wuzzagrunt (mail):
David Bernstein wrote: One 20th century president--Reagan--had a rather extreme worldview, but he was a good enough politician to govern reasonably close to the center, and have a successful presidency.

It's kinda hard to make the case that Reagan's worldview was "rather extreme" when he won the Presidency by what can be considered (by national election standards) landslides. In 1980, Reagan beat Carter 489 electoral votes to Carter's 49, and 50.7% to 41% in the popular vote. In 1984, Reagan beat Mondale 525 electoral votes to Mondale's 13, and 58.8% to 40.6% in the popular vote. [Numbers as per Wiki]

He must have been able to tap into the mainstream worldview (by definition) in order to poll numbers like that--unless you consider a large majority of American voters to be similarly extremist.

It's worth noting that Reagan's worldview was extremely well known...for decades before the election of 1980. He gave speeches--that he wrote himself--and had a high profile political job. He didn't move to the center very much at all in his presidential run. He certainly never backed away (or tried to obfuscate) his core beliefs the way Obama is doing. Yeah, he governed more as a centrist than his views would suggest, but that is pretty much built into the system of government we have to work with.
10.5.2008 2:46pm
Glenn W. Bowen (mail):

the Annenberg Challenge, the one that Obama claims executive experience in, and that Ayers was the force behind the cirriculm failed to produce any improvement in educational achievement? I beleive the price tag was 100 million over 5 years in a select area of Chicago.


Again, this is off point as far as Ayers is concerned- what you cite is indeed indicative of failure if improvement in educational achievement is your goal; if lining the pockets of radical organizations is your goal, Ayers, Obama, and Co. were wildly successful at it.

If your organization was one that aimed to improve algebra scores, you weren't considered for a CAC grant. If your organization sought to increase racial awareness in students, was political in nature, issues dear to Ayers' heart, well, that was worthy of part of the 100 million dollars+ available.

It was about installing radical politics in schools, not about improving students academic standing. It was about indoctrination, by way of a well-worn page in the radical playbook.
10.5.2008 2:48pm
Bob Van Burkleo (mail):
If Ayers had stated unequivocally that he now believes it wrong to kill his own country's civilians,

Well considering the stated goal of the Weather Underground attacks were against property , not attacks on civilians, why would you think he ever did think it was ok?


This came up before for Wright. "Oh, come on, you don't really think Obama believes AIDS is a white conspiracy?" Of course he doesn't. He knows better. But he's so far to the left that he thinks that that belief is just a minor quirk that should be tolerated.

Oh please Ken, with the introduction of the Palin and her wacky religous concepts that whole line of discussion is out the window. Lets rephrase:

"Oh, come on, you don't really think Palin believes in witches" Of course she doesn't. She knows better. But she's so far out there that she thinks that that belief is just a minor quirk that should be tolerated.

Do you really go around 'correcting' all the 'erroneus' notions of your friends and colleagues? If so you don't get invited out much I would suspect.
10.5.2008 2:48pm
jbn (mail):
When I first saw this yesterday, I just thought that Mr. Bernstein was just off on another nutter: Bringing up Ayers again? Didn't we go through this months ago.

Then I watched the Sunday news shows and I realilzed that this is one of the new McCain talking points. Apparently Palin raised this issue yesterday.

So this isn't just Mr. Bernstein's weird obsession: it is a bona-fide issue, I guess. Nevermind the economy. Nevermind the failing war in Afghanistan. Let's focus on what is really important to America, some washed up hack from the 1960s.

Didn't Palin say something in the debate about looking to the future and not focusing on the past?
10.5.2008 3:01pm
Per Son:
Heh heh heh. Keep frothing - hee hee.
10.5.2008 3:06pm
PC:
Next up: hard hitting analysis of the kerning on Obama's birth certificate.
10.5.2008 3:08pm
CB55 (mail):
jbn:

You are a wonder. If Bernstein and Palin can keep voters away from the big issues that matter, bingo, our man Mccain wins. It has worked for over 12 years. The media can not hold the nations attention on no more than one subject at a time. Last week it was 24/7 bail out. If we can make the news all about Ayers or and Wright all the time - we can see the Obama bounce go bye bye.
10.5.2008 3:14pm
Grover Gardner (mail):

Forgiveness, whether by a Christian or a non-Christian, requires an admission that you're wrong.


Jesus would disagree.


Has Liddy advocated bombing and killing Americans? Has he recently regretted he didn't do more bombing and killing of Americans?


Has he regretted anything he did in the past to undermine the American political system and bring disgrace to the highest office in the country? What about his various plans to kill a respected journalist, seduce and blackmail Democratic politicians, firebomb the Brookings Institute, and other treacherous plots and activities? I don't recall that he's apologized for any of these things.

What about Oliver North, who shredded government documents, secretly sold arms to a hostile government and facilitated the sale of deadly drugs to American citizens, and who has since hosted radio programs, run for the Senate and profited from public appearances and sales of his books?

The political and social rehabilitation of dangerous and destructive personalities is not solely a phenomenon of the left.
10.5.2008 3:16pm
CB55 (mail):
PC:

With a birth name like Obama one can not be sure if his mama is all red white and blue American. Maybe she was a Commie plant?
10.5.2008 3:17pm
wuzzagrunt (mail):
jbn:
When I first saw this yesterday, I just thought that Mr. Bernstein was just off on another nutter: Bringing up Ayers again? Didn't we go through this months ago.

The question has been banging around for some time. Obama refuses to address it, or addresses it dishonestly. The nature of the relationship, if any, is worthy of a complete and open examination. The Obama campaign's threats against broadcast outlets that air political ads referencing this, and the temporary withdrawal of CAC records from UC library, tells me there is something there.

That waves of internet election trolls have a) tried to make it seem like questions of Ayers relationship with Obama are merely a rightwing fantasy, and: b) tried to argue that Wm. Ayers and Jerimiah Wright are really good guys and much less repellent than support for Israel, tells me that people who believe that America is the locus of evil in the world have some reason to think Obama is one of them. I'd like to know why they think so. I already know why I think so.
10.5.2008 3:25pm
PC:
With a birth name like Obama one can not be sure if his mama is all red white and blue American. Maybe she was a Commie plant?

It's worse than that. I have it from very reliable sources that she was a Commie-Muslim plant that indoctrinated Obama with a gay, abortion agenda. It's part of a multi-generational conspiracy to overthrow the white power structure and turn the US into a Sharia nation. Why do you think "black helicopters" are black?
10.5.2008 3:31pm
Lily (mail):
The problem is his comfort with a stridently Anti-Amercian crowd, which includes Ayers. What does this say about Obama's view of our country? I don't think he likes the ideals upon which this country was founded. He wants us to be quite different, in a leftish, big government, 'people as subjects of the government' sort of way. That's the change he wants.
10.5.2008 3:33pm
jukeboxgrad (mail):
smokey:

Thank you for that extremely thoughtful comment regarding a respected VC contributor's opinion.


Bernstein is "respected?" By whom besides the same people who think you are "respected?"
10.5.2008 3:34pm
jukeboxgrad (mail):
Ethics and judgement are issues in and of themselves


Todd Palin used to be a member of the Alaska Independence Party. Sarah Palin also has ties to this group. AIP openly promotes this belief:

I'm an Alaskan, not an American. I've got no use for America or her damned institutions.


Not long before Todd joined this group, the group's founder was killed "in a plastic-explosives sale gone bad." Why is the founder of this group dealing in explosives? Why are Sarah and Todd Palin associating with this group of radical extremists? What does this tell us about their "ethics and judgment?"

td:

who has the AIP tried to blow up?


Tell us why their founder and hero was making a deal involving plastic explosives. Is it a new way to hunt moose?
10.5.2008 3:34pm
jukeboxgrad (mail):
dan:

That is an extremely heavy-handed, terrible thing that the Bush administration did.


Thanks. Only a shockingly small number of Republicans seem willing to acknowledge that.

are you implying that because John McCain voted for a lot of legislation that George Bush signed or opposed, that John McCain would use the Secret Service in the same manner as George Bush?


Bush and McCain are peas in a pod. Likewise for Palin. The burden is on them to explain what makes them different from Bush. They haven't done so.

It would be great if you could show any evidence that McCain or anyone else in the GOP was the slightest bit upset about this "extremely heavy-handed, terrible thing that the Bush administration did."

Obama's assault on the first amendment


The 'evidence' I've seen on that point is transparently bogus. Which you would know if you take a close look at VC threads here and here.
10.5.2008 3:34pm
jukeboxgrad (mail):
pdx:

What makes you think that anyone political in the Bush administration was involved in the cited event?


That's a fair question. Here's the answer: the fact that I find it really hard to think of any similar incident under any other president. Can you? People have been singing folk songs for a long time. This particular folk song was written in 1963.

I don't think your anecdote about the letter is comparable.

it isn't Jack Boot Fascism for regular non-secret police agencies to show up and ask, politely, if reports that you intend to commit a crime are correct


There was no need to make a show of appearing in person, at the school, very visibly. That was intimidation. The whole situation could have been easily addressed with a discreet phone call to the school principal.
10.5.2008 3:35pm
jukeboxgrad (mail):
zarkov:

In these times anything that even remotely smacks of a threat to the life of a candidate will draw an over reaction.


I'm not sure what makes "these times" worse than the 1960s, when multiple public figures were actually assassinated. And it hasn't happened since (here). 1963 is when the song was written. Lots of other protesting went on in the 1960s. Please show us an anecdote about the "over reaction" of the Secret Service in that era.

The Assassination of Hillary Clinton/The Assassination of Barack Obama.


There is more than one material difference. Saying I "hope" you die is very different than using the word "assassination." I could be hoping that God makes you choke on a pretzel. I could be hoping that God gives you a heart attack while you're on your ranch clearing brush. I could hope that you break your neck falling off a Segway. Also, in your example the target is named explicitly. Not so, in the folk song.

And I hope that you die and your death'll come soon.


Those are the actual words of the actual song. Always have been, always will be. And the song is on an album that is one of the top-selling albums of all time. In 2003, the album was ranked number 97 on Rolling Stone magazine's list of the 500 greatest albums of all time. And the album was one of 50 recordings chosen in 2002 by the Library of Congress to be added to the National Recording Registry. As of today, this album's sales rank at Amazon is #665. Not bad, given that it was first released over 45 years ago.

It's beyond ludicrous that lyrics from this album were treated as a reason to send armed men to a high school. We expect something like that to happen in North Korea.

Don't you think you're being quite a bit one-sided here?


No.

kevin:

your event happened in 2004. Did you not read the time?


I know when it happened. What's your point?

as many have pointed out, it was most likely the Secret Service, not the Bush Administration that sent agents out to check out a potential threat to the life of the President.


Exactly one person (pdx) "pointed [that] out" (as of the time you posted your commnet). That's "many?" Your grip on basic facts is tenuous. And now you can see what I said to him.

td:

Neither Bush nor McCain sent those agents. The Secret Service sent itself, because they never let the chance to use the expense account go un-utilized.


See what I said above to pdx.
10.5.2008 3:35pm
jukeboxgrad (mail):
person:

this great clot of pro-Obama commenters must have been pointed at VC as a sort of graffiti campaign


What accounts for the "great clot" of absurd anti-Obama posts from allegedly intelligent law professors?

Speaking of astroturf, what ever happened to McCain's effort to get people to spread his talking points on blogs?
10.5.2008 3:35pm
jukeboxgrad (mail):
pmorem:

The logical conclusion is that somehow he missed the problem. People claim this isn't an issue. I say it is. The man is a fool.


You're claiming that Obama is a bad judge of character, because, for example, he should have known that Rezko would later be indicted. Let's put aside two painfully obvious examples (Keating and Liddy) and look at something else that's pointedly unreported by that darn liberal media.

Here are some things that Sarah Palin said about Mike Wooten in 2005: that he is "a loose cannon" and "a ticking timebomb" (pdf).

Here are some things that Palin had said about Wooten (pdf), prior to the above statement:

It is my pleasure to provide character reference examples for Mr. Mike Wooten. Since I have become acquainted with Mike I continue to be impressed with his integrity, work ethic, community spirit and trustworthiness.

Mike has assisted the City of Wasilla with community events … Mike is a strong supporter of the youth in our community … Mike gained respect for his patience and dedication to the young men in his care [coaching football, age 7-9] …

… I have witnessed Mike's gift of calm and kindness towards many young kids … I have never seen him raise his voice, nor lose patience, nor become aggitated [sic] in the presence of any child. Instead, Mike consistently remains a fine role model for my own children, and the other young people in Wasilla. I wish America had more people with the grace and sincerity that mirrors the character of Mike Wooten … we would have a much kinder, calmer, trustworthy nation as a result.

I beleive [sic] the United States Air Force has been fortunate to have the services of Mike these past 10 years. His work ethic, his American patriotism, his obvious dedication to traditional values, and his strong faith in God and truth is witnessed in Mike's everyday living.

It is an honor to know Mike and I am confident he will continue to grow in character and internal strength as he moves through life. I do not hesitate in praising this man …


I guess Palin somehow "missed the problem." Either that, or her later statements about Wooten are exaggerations and lies. Choose your poison.
10.5.2008 3:35pm
jukeboxgrad (mail):
elim:

the left's first thought in response to this post revolves around jew hatred


If you have a problem with "jew hatred," you should tell us what you think about Palin's witchhunter's comment about the "Israelites."

pub:

A pastor who speaks about witchcraft like that seems a little bit kooky. A pastor who spouts anti-American racist filth is evil.


What about a pastor who talks about "the Israelites" and the "wealth of the wicked?"
10.5.2008 3:35pm
jukeboxgrad (mail):
mino:

But has any one ever met a professor of law who hasn't published a single scholaraly article. Not even one.


You apparently read so many posts by nieporent and others boldly proclaiming that Obama never published anything that you actually came to believe that Obama never published anything. Trouble is, he did.
10.5.2008 3:35pm
jukeboxgrad (mail):
marty:

Everyone we know of from his past is not a nice person.


There's lots of proof that you're utterly wrong. Here's one example:

Mr. Obama arrived at the law school in 1991 thanks to Michael W. McConnell, a conservative scholar who is now a federal appellate judge. As president of The Harvard Law Review, Mr. Obama had impressed Mr. McConnell with editing suggestions on an article
10.5.2008 3:36pm
jukeboxgrad (mail):
calmom:

Once a man is running for president, voters can't really trust what they say. Look at their past, who are their friends and associates. … That's how you can find the true man.


Good point. McCain and Keating had a close personal relationship going back to 1981. Cindy invested $359,100 in a Keating shopping center. McCain and his family made nine trips at Keating's expense, including vacations in the Bahamas. Keating cost the taxpayers billions.

You should also pay attention to what's been said in this thread about Liddy.

Thanks for reminding us how important this is.
10.5.2008 3:36pm
jukeboxgrad (mail):
friedman:

Remember, Nixon bombed Cambodia after the people had pushed Congress to ban it, and escaped punishment


Those bombs were OK, because they were being used to kill "gooks."
10.5.2008 3:36pm
jukeboxgrad (mail):
ken:

If Ayers had stated unequivocally that he now believes it wrong to kill his own country's civilians


Why are you implying that Ayers ever did "kill his own country's civilians?"

If you admit you're wrong for making this false allegation, it "may make some sense to not hold it against" you.

elliot:

Has he recently regretted he didn't do more bombing and killing of Americans?


Why are you implying that Ayers did "killing of Americans?"

Obama would go to his house for campaign kick-offs


In this and the other thread, there have been roughly half-a-dozen claims that the event at Ayers's house was Obama's campaign 'kick-off.' Where is the proof for this claim? And where is the proof that Obama, not Palmer, chose the location? And why are you implying there was more than one event?
10.5.2008 3:36pm
PC:
For anyone that is still on the fence about Obama, here is a hard hitting piece that conclusively proves Obama is the Anti-Christ. It has numbers and everything.
10.5.2008 3:39pm
DangerMouse:
jukebox,

You missed a couple of posts. Care to respond to everyone in the entire thread? And you have to type faster and pound your keys harder, or people won't listen to you.
10.5.2008 3:40pm
Michael Edward McNeil (mail) (www):
Portraying Bill Ayers as merely a relict of third-of-a-century-old ancient history presents a completely distorted picture of the present man. Beyond his more recent 9-11-2001 outrageousness, all one must do to acquire perspective on Ayers' current predilections is go to his own web site (notice first of all the emblem at the top of every page), where he proudly presents a speech he delivered in Venezuela in November of 2006, addressing Hugo Chavez. As Ayers proclaimed there less than two years ago:
Amamos la revolucion Bolivariana!

This is my fourth visit to Venezuela, each time at the invitation of my comrade and friend Luis Bonilla, a brilliant educator and inspiring fighter for justice. Luis has taught me a great deal about the Bolivarian Revolution and about the profound educational reforms underway here in Venezuela under the leadership of President Chavez. We share the belief that education is the motor-force of revolution, and I've come to appreciate Luis 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 as you seek to create something truly new and deeply humane. […]

’We can't have education without revolution. We have tried peace education for 1,900 years and it has failed. Let us try revolution and see what it will do now.’

I walked out of jail and into my first teaching position — and from that day until this I've thought of myself as a teacher, but I've also understood teaching as a project intimately connected with social justice. After all, the fundamental message of the teacher is this: you can change your life — whoever you are, wherever you've been, whatever you've done, another world is possible. As students and teachers begin to see themselves as linked to one another, as tied to history and capable of collective action, the fundamental message of teaching shifts slightly, and becomes broader, more generous: we must change ourselves as we come together to change the world. Teaching invites transformations, it urges revolutions small and large. La educacion es revolucion!
Love that “new and deeply humane” world that Hugo Chavez and the rest of the “revolucion Bolivariana” are busily creating — not.

Ayers also suggested at his creepy blog just a week ago that McCain’s brief suspension of campaigning while the sudden financial meltdown could be addressed in Congress is a likely presage to “suspending” the election itself. Right.

The fact is, as the foregoing makes clear to all who can see, that Bill Ayers is not (or not just) an unrepentant Weather Underground bomber from a third of a century ago, but is still a modern day communist revolutionary, seeing his present role as a part of the hard-left propaganda wing, one who — rather than hurling physically explosive bombs these days — now tosses verbal bombs whilst exerting every effort to turn students their way.
10.5.2008 3:42pm
CB55 (mail):
PC:

I'll check out Fox News on this story because the story is too hot for the bias Liberal media. If Fox can throw enough old manure (gossip, old news and rumor) at Obama some will stick by election day.
10.5.2008 3:48pm
Bruce Hayden (mail) (www):
Why are Wright and Ayers of interest here?

I would suggest because Obama is a cipher. He is whatever one wants him to be. I routinely hear people assume that he will take opposite sides of important issues, I assume because they want to believe that he would.

Who is the real Barack Obama? This late in the election, we really don't know. All we really know is that he gained his political maturity in Chicago politics, and hung around some people whom most Americans would not think of hanging around. Is that significant? Is that the real Obama? Or was he just hanging around them for convenience, and what he could gain from them?

The man has so little background, besides the obvious biographical details. I think this late in the campaign, we know a lot more about Sarah Palin than we do Barack Obama, ans what motivates the two of them. And, of course, we know a lot more about Sens. Biden and McCain that we do about either of the other two candidates.

So, who is the real Barack Obama? What are his core principles? Who helped him form his world view?
10.5.2008 3:51pm
CB55 (mail):
"So, who is the real Barack Obama? What are his core principles? Who helped him form his world view?"

Obama is what ever you the viewer wants him to be. Everything you and I know about about Palin, Obama, Biden or Mccain is via another party, person or group. It's a snap shot of words and pictures. Just as you are defined by data stored in data bases, Obama is defined by mass media. Obama has no more control over what or who he is than you do when you complete a credit application or earn your driver's permit
10.5.2008 4:00pm
Guest12345:
Next up: hard hitting analysis of the kerning on Obama's birth certificate.


Maybe someone could do an analysis of Obama's friendly association with drug dealers and his contributions to their criminal activities.

Or his inability to not engage in self destructive smoking. I would expect that the majority of people have seen smokers become much less effective in stressful situations before running away to get a hit of their drug.

As far as Ayers goes, the question shouldn't be does Obama approve of Ayers, it should be does Ayers approve of Obama?
10.5.2008 4:00pm
PC:
Guest12345, those are some valid points. I would also suggest we look into Obama's ties to Satanism. Obama may not drink the blood of children, but he hasn't denied it. Why won't the Lieberal MSM ask him?
10.5.2008 4:08pm
CB55 (mail):
PC:

While we are at it, I wish to know when did Cindy stop eating pills and what was McCain's take for being a gopher guy with the Keating-5 and did he have oral sex with Ms Vicki?
10.5.2008 4:13pm
jukeboxgrad (mail):
dangermouse:

You missed a couple of posts.


Some posts, like yours, evince such a complete absence of substance that they're not worth reading, let alone responding to. They're just a waste of innocent electrons. But every now and then I make a special exception.
10.5.2008 4:21pm
jukeboxgrad (mail):
mcneil:

Bill Ayers is not (or not just) an unrepentant Weather Underground bomber from a third of a century ago, but is still a modern day communist revolutionary


I guess that means he won't get your vote. Is he running for something?
10.5.2008 4:21pm
jukeboxgrad (mail):
hayden:

The man has so little background, besides the obvious biographical details.


Make sure to pay no attention to the 800 bills he sponsored. And oddly enough, some people think it's possible to learn things about him by reading the two books he wrote (on his own, unlike the books McCain co-wrote). Or by reading his 33-page Blueprint for Change (pdf), or the other extensive material he's posted at his site.

If you don't know much about Obama, it's because you're bending over backwards to be willfully ignorant.
10.5.2008 4:21pm
jukeboxgrad (mail):
guest:

Maybe someone could do an analysis of Obama's friendly association with drug dealers and his contributions to their criminal activities


Maybe someone could post an iota of evidence that what you're saying is true.

his inability to not engage in self destructive smoking


If you have a problem with bad habits, you should let us know what you think of someone who plays craps for 14 hours at a time.
10.5.2008 4:21pm
jukeboxgrad (mail):
I wish to know when did Cindy stop eating pills


It's not just that Cindy has a history of addiction. It's that she got her drugs by stealing them from a charity. And it's that she probably escaped penalties because of her position of wealth and privilege.
10.5.2008 4:21pm
Guest12345:
I would also suggest we look into Obama's ties to Satanism.


Why? Has he written about his Satan worship in one of his books the way he wrote about his drug use? Or are you claiming that the drug dealers loved him so much that they gave him coke and weed for free?

And he's an admitted smoker who has "fallen off the wagon in recent months." Michelle asked him to quit and he loves her so much that he didn't do so. Tells us that he either doesn't think much of his marriage or he lacks the ability to control his urges and handle stress.

When we don't know something about Obama we can consider the opinion of third parties who may know him better than we do. So why shouldn't people question why Ayers supports Obama. Maybe we can learn something from that support.
10.5.2008 4:26pm
PC:
While we are at it, I wish to know when did Cindy stop eating pills and what was McCain's take for being a gopher guy with the Keating-5 and did he have oral sex with Ms Vicki?

John McCain was unable to have oral sex or engage in corruption for five and a half years.

Because he was a POW.

In Vietnam.

What I want to know is why Obama didn't answer his country's call and serve in Vietnam? Was he too busy paling around with Bill Ayers?
10.5.2008 4:27pm
Smokey:
Ayers

Obama

If they don't hate America, why do they act like they do?
10.5.2008 4:28pm
Bob Van Burkleo (mail):
If you have a problem with bad habits, you should let us know what you think of someone who plays craps for 14 hours at a time.

Such compulsive behavior is fairly common with those suffering PTSD, as well as the temper outbursts, poor ethical choices like Keatings 5 and sexual indiscretions and adultery we've seen. Add in his obvious early dementia and the man is a just this side of being a danger to himself let alone the country if in the horrific chance he got elected.

Gosh this biased spin stuff is fun, I can see why Bernstein likes it.
10.5.2008 4:31pm
A.W. (mail):
Jukie-pukie

mendacious as usual. even if the secret service is wrong, what on earth does it even have to do with mccain. indeed, it has nothing to do with bush. they take everything that smells like a threat seriously, even when a person draws a cartoon sympathetic to the president, but being depicted as being murdered by his enemies.

They are statutorily bound to do so.
10.5.2008 4:31pm
PC:
Has he written about his Satan worship in one of his books the way he wrote about his drug use?

He hasn't, which is exactly why we should be asking him about it!

And he's an admitted smoker who has "fallen off the wagon in recent months."

I'm not so worried about his habits with tobacco, because everyone knows that smoking tobacco is a good, wholesome, American past time. I'm more interested in learning if Obama still smokes the marijuana. We all know what smoking the marijuana leads to: listening to jazz; dancing; and cavorting with the Negroes.
10.5.2008 4:33pm
KeyComments (mail):
Let's not forget Republican George Allen was essentially disqualified by the liberal MSM from the VA Senate race for just a single word "macaca" (whatever that means) uttered on one single occasion and yet we have loads of damaging material like Ayers about Obama and the Obama pod people say it's out of bounds to bring any of it up.
10.5.2008 4:33pm
CB55 (mail):
jukeboxgrad:

You know you are the by product of an unlucky sperm because you do 5 years to life and the lucky sperm child gets Club Med and a hand shake for doing the same crime.
10.5.2008 4:33pm
Yankev (mail):

"Ya, but what about Israel?" is in any way responsive to the the concerns over Ayers and Obama. This is the best Obama supporters can come up with?
Railroad Gin, how touchingly naive! Don't you realize that the evil Karl Rove sent jbn, Keycomment and similar posters in order to frighten the racist Jews out of voting for Obamessiah? bwaa-ha-hah-ha.
10.5.2008 4:34pm
Donny:
This line is so deeply disingenuous: "But in any event, he is clearly not the mainstream partisan of nonideological change that he is running as, and it at least seems worth pointing that out."

Point it out? You're making an extremely tenuous argument based almost exclusively on your supposition that Obama didn't explicitly denounce Ayers because Obama didn't see Ayers as extreme. Whatever the merits of that argument might be you are not "pointing out" anything.

That's like writing, "McCain's campaign has behaved erratically lately. Therefore John McCain is dangerously unstable. It might not matter, but I just wanted to point that out." Can you not see how condescending the tone of that is?
10.5.2008 4:39pm
CB55 (mail):
PC:

Does this mean that McCain had sex with a monkey. I think Obama being born in 1961 would have been a good boy Marine in 1975 when the war in Vietnam ended. Black boys are just midget adults and can carry guns and fight, right?
10.5.2008 4:39pm
Johnny Canuck (mail):
jukeboxgrad:
I realize you derive great pleasure trying to straighten out the benighted of the far right. Didn't Obama "address" the Ayers connection during the primaries, and denounce his violent past? Do you have the link or transcript?
10.5.2008 4:41pm
PC:
I think Obama being born in 1961 would have been a good boy Marine in 1975 when the war in Vietnam ended. Black boys are just midget adults and can carry guns and fight, right?

Since Obama is the Anti-Christ, as I showed earlier in the thread, I'm sure he could have done anything he wanted to. Of course he wouldn't have fought for the US in Vietnam because he hates America and wanted the Communists to win.
10.5.2008 4:42pm
Yankev (mail):
PC

What I want to know is why Obama didn't answer his country's call and serve in Vietnam? Was he too busy paling around with Bill Ayers?


Okay, even someone who disagrees with Obama on virtually every position knows that one -- because Obama was not old enough to serve until some 5 years after the the US left Viet Nam. Now, please send my gift certificate to - - - evacuated
10.5.2008 4:45pm
Guest12345:
I wish to know when did Cindy stop eating pills


It's not just that Cindy has a history of addiction. It's that she got her drugs by stealing them from a charity. And it's that she probably escaped penalties because of her position of wealth and privilege.


Stop... Stop... No more... Please stop...

You've convinced me. I'll not vote for Cindy McCain for president.

Now that I'm not voting for Cindy, can you tell me why I should vote for a Obama? A man incapable of upholding his promises to his wife and unable to control his body's need for nicotine? A man who can't legally work for multiple government agencies because of his drug use?

I guess I'll just have to settle for the guy who spends his own money to engage in legal entertainment. A form of entertainment that doesn't require he dash off from important activities to get quick fix. A form of entertainment that isn't going to shorten his life span by years.
10.5.2008 4:46pm
Jason F:
Let's not forget Republican George Allen was essentially disqualified by the liberal MSM from the VA Senate race for just a single word "macaca" (whatever that means) uttered on one single occasion and yet we have loads of damaging material like Ayers about Obama and the Obama pod people say it's out of bounds to bring any of it up.


That's funny. I was under the impression that the voters of Virginia chose not to return Senator Allen to Washington. No doubt in part that was because of his casual racism, though in part it was one aspect of the broader movement across the country to oust Republicans from Congress. In any event, it's good to know that it was all a plot by the dread Em Ess Em, with their magical ability to disqualify people from Congress.
10.5.2008 4:47pm
CB55 (mail):
PC:

Obama is the real Manchurian Candidate. That's why Mccain could not look him in the eye during the debate - he sees fear and pure evil. They are going to have to give him something so he can face his fear on Tuesday.
10.5.2008 4:48pm
KeyComments (mail):
Donny, Obama has acknowledged that the "financial crisis" was just that -- a crisis ("greatest since the Great Depression," don't ya know). The definition of the word "erratic" from Dictionary.com is "deviating from the usual or proper course in conduct". Isn't that what one essentially MUST do in a true "crisis"?
10.5.2008 4:51pm
CB55 (mail):
Guest12345:

I think a vote for McCain is like a vote for the return of Jesus Christ ---- things must get worse for the return of Jesus. So thanks from Jesus.
10.5.2008 4:51pm
PC:
They are going to have to give him something so he can face his fear on Tuesday.

I would suggest Holy Water and a cross. Or maybe Gov. Palin could call up her witch hunter buddy. I bet if the witch hunter showed up at the debate, Obama would grow horns and wings and fly away. The election would be in the bag for McCain after that.
10.5.2008 4:54pm
PC:
KeyComments, I wouldn't trust anything called "Dictionary.com." Dictionaries are full of words, words that were put there by ivory tower elitists.
10.5.2008 4:56pm
Donny:
KeyComments, you missed my point. Please re-read my post and try again.
10.5.2008 5:00pm
KeyComments (mail):
For Obama, btw, the only true crisis would be a drop in his poll numbers -- that is of course why he kept right on campaigning as usual throughout the financial crisis as if nothing had happened.
10.5.2008 5:00pm
A.W. (mail):
Barry P.

> Only one of the candidates has used bombs to murder civilians, and it ain't Obama.

But you support the troops, right?

Schmuck.
10.5.2008 5:04pm
Toby:
One of the most attractive notions, to me, of Obama’s platform is his focus on innovation and markets in Energy. I feel, as does Thomas Friedman (not exactly a right winger), that Energy Technology (ET) is at the core of the third industrial revolution. Whoever leads this revolution, whichever nation they are in, is the predominate country for the next century.

What troubles me, is that if Obama believes this, and believes in the importance of new energy technology, then he should be on the front lines of expanding math competence, and expanding science competence a the earliest ages he can. Children who do not have the fundamental in grammar school are disadvantaged in middle school. Those behind in middle school will be unable to take the classes needed to even apply for colleges with the curricula that will create these new technologies; they will not come from us all buying carbon credits from each other.

Much the same is true for his economic policies of re-industrializing the country. Those new jobs he likes to talk about are not going to the innumerate. But I find the arguments strongest in the area of Energy Technology, where my own efforts have been for the last half dozen years.

So, what I see in this mess is that in the key issues for the nation going forward as identified by Obama, that is Energy and Reindustrialization, Obama had place himself a decade ago at exactly the right place where a difference can be made. When given the position, and the tools, he chose to dilute the effort, dilute the curriculum, be focusing the schools on leftist socialization. When given the opportunity to address the skills that would help the children live outside the underclass, he blinked.

This miscalculation or misunderstanding is, at best, so profound, that it calls into question his judgment and ability to lead because it suggests he has no idea how to get where he wants to go. That is, of course, if his campaign positions are where he wants to go.

By following Ayres, and expanding the reach of Ayers approach to education, he has undermined the few concrete goals he actually has claimed.
10.5.2008 5:07pm
CB55 (mail):
PC: I would suggest Holy Water and a cross. Or maybe Gov. Palin could call up her witch hunter buddy. I bet if the witch hunter showed up at the debate, Obama would grow horns and wings and fly away. The election would be in the bag for McCain after that.

Obama has proven that Palin is a fake --- no one in the whole of Alaska has a voice or an accent like that unless they live in a trailer park and worship Gawd in the wrong places while eating beaver tongues. The last time McCain did not sleep thru church was on his wedding day. Ask him to quote the first words of the Bible and he goes all dead in his eyes. I think Palin is from some escapee - maybe some wild science and military project made by Karl Rove and some egg heads from Alaska Tech High School
10.5.2008 5:09pm
CB55 (mail):
KeyComments:

I'm shocked that Obama can multitask - holding down a day job and running for president must be tough....and you got that right being president means you never have a day off like fighting a war and managing a domestic natural disaster.
10.5.2008 5:13pm
KeyComments (mail):
Donny, all right, but the Obama campaign is still making that argument regardless of whether you agree with it or not (or support Obama more generally or not)...
10.5.2008 5:15pm
davod (mail):
The Obamites are frisky today.

There is a different problem with Ayers and Obama's association with the Anenburg Chicago education project. They ran through 160 million dollars without improving the education system.

If he could achieve nothing with $160 million, imagine how he could misuse the federal budget.
10.5.2008 5:24pm
Bob Van Burkleo (mail):
Donny, all right, but the Obama campaign is still making that argument regardless of whether you agree with it or not (or support Obama more generally or not)...

Another context-challenged right winger. Key, key key, I'm pretty sure that they are using this definition from Dictionary.com:

having no certain or definite course; wandering; not fixed

Oddly enough I am not very surprised you missed it.

I wonder if Bernstein has the same questions about John Sidney McCain the 3rd's questionable associations? (and traits, and personality flaws, and...)
10.5.2008 5:28pm
davod (mail):
Mr. Bernstein:

This has been a usefull post. A number of Obmites have spent their time here instead of holding up pictures of vaginas at a Palin ralley, or slashing the tires, of those silly enough to place McCain/Palin stickers on their vehicles.
10.5.2008 5:28pm
CB55 (mail):
"There is a different problem with Ayers and Obama's association with the Anenburg Chicago education project. They ran through 160 million dollars without improving the education system.

If he could achieve nothing with $160 million, imagine how he could misuse the federal budget."


Shall we call the last 8 years a 6 trillion dollar misunderstanding disaster sweeten by war, scandal and corruption.
10.5.2008 5:32pm
PC:
A number of Obmites have spent their time here instead of holding up pictures of vaginas at a Palin ralley, or slashing the tires, of those silly enough to place McCain/Palin stickers on their vehicles.

It also helps keep Palindrones from calling Obama a "N*gger" in front of school children.
10.5.2008 5:35pm
Shertaugh:
Why did McCain buddy up to mega-crook Keating? Not convicted yet, is that the difference? But taking money to be improperly influenced, that was okay, right?

Oh, and McCain's (current) wife . . . the convicted one. Shows he supports illegal drug use by association.

YES, THIS COMMENT IS TONGUE IN CHEEK. BECAUSE THIS POST IS SO RIDICULOUS.
10.5.2008 5:37pm
jukeboxgrad (mail):
guest:

he wrote about his drug use


In what he wrote, he "never quantified his illicit drug use or provided many details." And interviews with people who knew him indicate that his drug use was so light that they were barely aware of it.

And Palin has admitting smoking pot, too. So what was your point again?

are you claiming that the drug dealers loved him so much that they gave him coke and weed for free?


Did Palin get her weed for free?

A man who can't legally work for multiple government agencies because of his drug use?


There are agencies that say you can't work for them if you ever did drugs, even decades ago? I didn't know. Details, please. Anyway, how does this make him different from Palin?

I guess I'll just have to settle for the guy who spends his own money to engage in legal entertainment.


McCain and his family made nine trips at Keating's expense, including vacations in the Bahamas. That wasn't "his own money." Anyway, I'm glad to know that a 14-hour craps game fits your concept of 'normal.'

he lacks the ability to control his urges


Does this mean you're going to vote for the guy who ran off with someone barely half his age, leaving behind his kids and his disfigured wife? Because I guess you think this demonstrates that McCain has "the ability to control his urges?"

A man incapable of upholding his promises to his wife


You're outdoing yourself in the unintentional humor department.

Stop... Stop... No more... Please stop...

You've convinced me. I'll not vote for Cindy McCain for president.


Stop... Stop... No more... Please stop...

You've convinced me. I'll not vote for Ayers for president.
10.5.2008 5:39pm
jukeboxgrad (mail):
aw:

they take everything that smells like a threat seriously


The album is currently in millions of American homes. If I play it loud, and the Secret Service is walking by, will they bust down the door? Or only if I'm singing along?
10.5.2008 5:40pm
jukeboxgrad (mail):
key:

Let's not forget Republican George Allen was essentially disqualified by the liberal MSM from the VA Senate race for just a single word "macaca"


Allen also gave himself a big boost when he said that talking about his Jewish heritage was "making aspersions." That gave us more information about his true beliefs than he actually wanted us to have.

he kept right on campaigning as usual throughout the financial crisis as if nothing had happened


You mean instead of coming up with a stunt like a phony suspension that wasn't really a suspension?
10.5.2008 5:40pm
jukeboxgrad (mail):
yankev:

Don't you realize that the evil Karl Rove sent jbn, Keycomment and similar posters in order to frighten the racist Jews out of voting for Obamessiah?


Then who was it who sent the witchhunter to see Palin so he could talk about "the Israelites" and the "wealth of the wicked?"
10.5.2008 5:40pm
jukeboxgrad (mail):
johnny:

Didn't Obama "address" the Ayers connection during the primaries, and denounce his violent past? Do you have the link or transcript?


I'm not sure what statement you mean, but a lot of relevant information is here.
10.5.2008 5:40pm
jukeboxgrad (mail):
They are going to have to give him something so he can face his fear on Tuesday.


Information about the pills McCain takes is in this video.

I think a vote for McCain is like a vote for the return of Jesus Christ ---- things must get worse for the return of Jesus. So thanks from Jesus.


I think we're experiencing the natural result of putting the government in the hands of people who are in a hurry to see the world end so they can have their Rapture.
10.5.2008 5:40pm
jukeboxgrad (mail):
davod:

They ran through 160 million dollars


Hmm, let's see. McCain helped Bush spend an amount several thousand times greater than that, and succeeded in replacing a secular thug with an Islamist thug. The former was an enemy of Iran, and the latter is a friend of Iran. In fact, we solved Iran's biggest problem, a problem they tried very hard to solve on their own, and could not. And aside from the money, it only cost us 34,811 casualties! Heckuva job, GOP.

And speaking of the end of the world, we should realize that McCain has only two paths to victory: Bush starts another war, or OBL knocks down some more buildings. So we should be very afraid.
10.5.2008 5:40pm
Elliot123 (mail):
Anybone here think David Duke is mainstream?

Anyone here think someone who regrets more blacks weren't lynched is mainstream?

Anyone here think someone who regrets he didn't do more bombing of Americans is manistream?
10.5.2008 5:53pm
jukeboxgrad (mail):
elliot:

bombing of Americans


This is not the first time it's been pointed out to you that Ayers exclusively bombed things, not people. Therefore you are now in the category of people who intentionally make false statements for the purpose of deception. Everyone knows what people like that are called. I'm not sure if 'Republican' is the right word, but it's another word that's very close in meaning.
10.5.2008 6:02pm
wuzzagrunt (mail):
I'm not sure what statement you mean, but a lot of relevant information is here.

A campaign website that quotes dishonestly partisan attacks on Stanley Kurtz. That clears up any questions I had.
10.5.2008 6:06pm
Perseus (mail):
you actually came to believe that Obama never published anything. Trouble is, he did.

Obama never did manage to publish anything during his years as a law professor, though, as a law student, he did publish one short case note. Meanwhile, over a single weekend, Sunstein and Posner can write 17 and 30 page scholarly pieces, respectively. A scholar, Obama is not (unless you count as scholarship the preening, vapid autobiographies that politicians of all stripes like to publish). That said, I would be more than happy to see a university put the country first and hire him as a lecturer to spare the country an Obama presidency.
10.5.2008 6:10pm
darrenm:
This is (unfortunately) a two-party system! One party has been in power for 8 years, ...

Republicans have been in power for 6 years Jan. 2001 to Jan 2007. Democrats have controlled both the House and Senate since that time. If Obama is elected, they'll control the Presidency as well, the same situation as 2001 only with the Democrats in control. I have to wonder about the mindset (or sanity) of anyone who thinks this is a substantial improvment.
10.5.2008 6:13pm
elim:
I love the lie, sorry, "talking point", that the WU was only interested in property crime-it is such a despicable load of nonsense. nail bombs are to kill people-that is what they were aiming to do. tell me, jbg, has any person in your circle of friends professed an admiration for Charles Manson? for instance, speaking admiringly of his murder of Sharon Tate? referring to the woman murdered as a pig? well, the lady who inaugurated Obama into the fine world of political fundraising did-you think that's normal.
10.5.2008 6:14pm
darrenm:
This is (unfortunately) a two-party system! One party has been in power for 8 years, ...

Republicans have been in power for 6 years Jan. 2001 to Jan 2007. I'll assume this claim was made out of ignorance. Democrats have controlled both the House and Senate since that time. If Obama is elected, they'll control the Presidency as well, the same situation as in 2001 only with the Democrats in control.
10.5.2008 6:19pm
Guest12345:
McCain and his family made nine trips at Keating's expense, including vacations in the Bahamas. That wasn't "his own money."


Did I at all say that he paid for those trips? In fact did I even mention those trips at all? No, I don't think I did. Yet for some reason that's the argument you present. I wonder why that is? Do you have some kind of problem focusing on the topic at hand? Perhaps I should reconsider reading and responding to your claptrap. Maybe I'm enabling someone with a mental disorder.

Anyway, I'm glad to know that a 14-hour craps game fits your concept of 'normal.'


Did I say normal? Gosh, no I didn't. I said legal.

A man incapable of upholding his promises to his wife

You're outdoing yourself in the unintentional humor department.


Where's the humor? He's on the record as quiting at the request of his wife. He's on the record as smoking after quiting. 1 + 1 = 2. Get over it.

You've convinced me. I'll not vote for Ayers for president.


Your response would be clever as hell if I'd brought up a non-candidate's habits. But I didn't bring up Ayers' smoking or drug use. I brought up Obama's smoking and drug use. So your response isn't near as effective.

How much strength of will does it show that Obama can't control himself? How good can Obama's judgment be if he fails to make the correct choice about lethal habits? The effects of smoking are entirely understood with zero question as to the end result and yet he makes the wrong decision. Is he incredibly short sighted or just self delusional and believes it won't happen to him.
10.5.2008 6:21pm
SenatorX (mail):
It is disturbing the pass Obama is getting from 90% of media on his relationships. I wonder if they will continue to favor him if he wins the election. Are we looking forward to years of president, congress, and press all in agreement? Scary.

They seem to be bending over backwards to clear him on his relationship to Ayers. Particularly the pushing of the meme that they just ran into each other in the course of work an had no relationship at all. Did Obama go to his house or not? Another omission is to say Ayers charges were dropped to infer he wasn't guilty. Or that Ayer's has changed as if he was either falsely accused way back when or if he is a different man these days. In reality the man just changed his tactics but not much else. Is there any doubt at all that Obama is aware of what Ayers is about? The indoctrination of children into a political system to achieve "social justice". Maybe Obama can put Ayers in charge of the kid's mandatory volunteer program.
10.5.2008 6:24pm
Federal Dog:
"Sometimes, with this bottomfeeding, I don't know how David Bernstein can maintain a pretense of self respect."

Projection is funny -- in a sickening way.
10.5.2008 6:27pm
elim:
www.city-journal.org/2008/eon0430jm.html

here, take a look at the courage of the WU and the good natured hijinks they engaged in back in the day-now, of course, they can do more harm to children with their educational reforms.
10.5.2008 6:30pm
Random Commenter:
"This is not the first time it's been pointed out to you that Ayers exclusively bombed things, not people."

I'm sure the widow of SFPD Sgt Brian V McDonnell will be comforted to know that the nail-and-bullet packed explosive device that WU terrorists set off on a window ledge outside a police station on Feb. 16, 1970 was strictly intended to destroy property.

Seriously - this claim was debunked 38 years ago. How long are you going to keep making an idiot of yourself repeating it?
10.5.2008 6:53pm
blcjr (mail):
I wonder how many of you will still be regular visitors/posters here after the election?
10.5.2008 6:54pm
r.friedman (mail):

Meanwhile, over a single weekend, Sunstein and Posner can write 17 and 30 page scholarly pieces, respectively

Scholarly my ass, they're just bloggers a Lexis/Nexis account and power.

Maybe Ayers is less repentant on 9-11 because it's the anniversary of the US-backed coup against Allende.
10.5.2008 7:01pm
elim:
jbg will keep making the claim because it's the current talking point/lie out there on the internet-living rent free in his parent's basement, it's his only semi-connection to reality. seriously, do any of the folks posting here have friends that have bombed their fellow citizens in this country(abortion clinics, police stations, whatever). would you have such friends? even you, jbg, if one would visit the basement? what is the SOL for befriending such folks and using them/being used for political ends?
10.5.2008 7:02pm
Ed Scott (mail):
B. Hussein Obama's associations and actions define who he is and what he believes.

He was proud of America and proud to be an American only after becoming a candidate for president of the United States of America.
10.5.2008 7:03pm
PC:
B. Hussein Obama's associations and actions define who he is and what he believes.

Barack Hussein the Anti-Christ Osama is going to bring doom to us all. DOOM! He also has two black children.
10.5.2008 7:06pm
Lily (mail):
Barack Hussein the Anti-Christ Osama is going to bring doom to us all. DOOM! He also has two black children
That was rather juvenile
10.5.2008 7:08pm
CB55 (mail):
The GOP must ensure that voter turnout be suppressed by caging, intimidation and voter challenges. Luckily, Osama Bin Laden always can give the GOP assistance before elections by a Red Alert or taking out a shopping mall in downtown Bagdad or in LA. If that fails go to the Palin Plan with attacks on Obama's values and judgment and turn the page away from issues. Make the case for White Christian values. Sure mistakes were made by Bush, but that only shows he is the Son of God and not God.
10.5.2008 7:10pm
Tony Tutins (mail):

Ayers business is that it suggests that Obama doesn't consider private citizens killing other Americans to be that big a deal

This is a non-sequitur. Ayers never killed anyone, nor did he ever try to kill anyone.
10.5.2008 7:11pm
elim:
ok, PC, how many domestic bombers are on your friends list? obama allegedly hasn't had any real contact with ayers in the last 3 years. what about before that? did the topic of why you were stomping on an american flag in an alley in Chicago not come up-might be too judgmental? given Obama's intellectual heft, wouldn't he have asked his new education minded friend what he did back in the 60's? is having someone as hateful and murderous as ayers and dohrn even a cause of concern to you?
10.5.2008 7:13pm
scottynx:
The Southern Poverty Law Center constantly calls people and organizations racists for "6 degrees of separation"-like associations as weak or weaker than Obama's ties to Ayers.
10.5.2008 7:13pm
CB55 (mail):
If Obama is elected he is going to make Ayers a Supreme Court judge, or give him some high government job such as Secy of State, Defense or Attorney General, maybe FBI director. That makes Cons choke, whine and stay up at night
10.5.2008 7:16pm
PC:
elim, you don't have to convince me. I'm a convert. It's obvious that Obama is an evil, Commie, Muslim, Anti-Christ, socialist that is farther to the left than the illegitimate love child of Stalin and Mao. If Obama is elected he will put the US under Sharia law and make us all get gay married and have forced abortions. Obama hates America, the American flag, freedom, democracy and puppies. Obama is a dangerous radical that has been as successful as he has thanks to his magical, Satanic powers and affirmative action.
10.5.2008 7:20pm
wuzzagrunt (mail):
Maybe Ayers is less repentant on 9-11 because it's the anniversary of the US-backed coup against Allende.

Too bad about ol' Sal. I can see why little Billy Ayers and his fellow travelers look back on him with such fondness. I'm sure a similar fate is their sincerest hope for the USA. Except that, you know, they'll win this time.

From the Economist:
LINKY

The temporary death of democracy in Chile will be regrettable, but the blame lies clearly with Dr Allende and those of his followers who persistently overrode the constitution

President Allende did not become a martyr, even if it is true that he took his own life on Tuesday. The bombing and storming of his presidential palace and the seizure of power by the commanders of Chile’s armed forces put a bitter end to the first freely-elected marxist government in the west. And the fighting may have barely begun. With most of Chile’s links with the outside world still severed, it was difficult to take the full measure of the apparently continuing violence. But if a bloody civil war does ensue, or if the generals who have now seized power decide not to hold new elections, there must be no confusion about where the responsibility for Chile’s tragedy lies. It lies with Dr Allende and those in the marxist parties who pursued a strategy for the seizure of total power to the point at which the opposition despaired of being able to restrain them by constitutional means.

What happened in Santiago is not an everyday Latin American coup. The armed forces had tolerated Dr Allende for nearly three years. In that time, he managed to plunge the country into the worst social and economic crisis in its modern history. The confiscation of private farms and factories caused an alarming slump in production, and the losses in state-run industries were officially admitted to have exceeded $1 billion last year. Inflation rose to 350 per cent over the past twelve months. Small businessmen were bankrupted; civil servants and skilled workers saw their salaries whittled away by inflation; housewives had to queue endlessly for basic foods, when they were available at all. The mounting desperation caused the major strike movement that the truck-drivers started six weeks ago.

10.5.2008 7:20pm
Tony Tutins (mail):

that is of course why [Obama] kept right on campaigning as usual throughout the financial crisis

McCain has to conserve cash for TV commercials. Appearing on all three networks to announce he was suspending his campaign allowed him to substitute free publicity for expensive publicity.
10.5.2008 7:24pm
A.W. (mail):
Jukie

It wasn’t just the song. Please, stop lying. There was more to the context than that.

But yes, you convinced me. I won’t vote for Bush for president again.
10.5.2008 7:25pm
Tony Tutins (mail):

A campaign website that quotes dishonestly partisan attacks on Stanley Kurtz.

Dishonestly partisan attacks? In The Chicago Tribune? ("An American Paper for Americans. T H E W O R L D ' S G R E A T E S T N E W S P A P E R") The Trib has supported exclusively Republicans for President since Lincoln.
10.5.2008 7:31pm
PC:
CB55, it's ridiculous to say Obama would appoint Ayers to any of those positions. Ayers would be the Sec. of Education. I think an Obama cabinet would look something like this:

Sec. of Education - Bill Ayers
Sec. of Treasury - Tony Rezko
Sec. of State - Jeremiah Wright
Sec. of Defense - Osama bin Laden
Atty. General - Al Sharpton
Sec. of Interior - Ward Churchill

Feel free to add to the list.
10.5.2008 7:32pm
Tony Tutins (mail):

that the nail-and-bullet packed explosive device that WU terrorists set off on a window ledge outside a police station on Feb. 16, 1970

Was most likely set by the Black Liberation Army, which made a practice of attacks on police and police stations, not the Weather Underground, which focused on federal buildings.
10.5.2008 7:34pm
CB55 (mail):
PC:

I did not see Angela Davis as Secy of Homeland Security. Oprah as Secy of Health and Human Services. Ayers would pass on the job because he wants to see real money as Secy of Comm if he can beat out Earl Graves for it. Oprah may give a shout out as Secy of Edu or HUD.
10.5.2008 7:40pm
PC:
Wait until Fox News gets wind of this shocking story: Obama has a history of paying Americans to leave America!
10.5.2008 7:47pm
CB55 (mail):
PC:

After Obama takes over we'll stone McCain to death for adultery and give Cindy a whipping at the public plaza. We'll take the Palins to court on vice charges. The daughter and her lover will be put to death for fornication according to the laws of Moses. Rev Wright and Rev Hagee will sit as judges.
10.5.2008 7:49pm
jukeboxgrad (mail):
wuzza:

A campaign website that quotes dishonestly partisan attacks on Stanley Kurtz. That clears up any questions I had.


If you're in a position to highlight a particular statement and prove it's dishonest, that would be helpful. Otherwise, your comment is pure wind.

Let me show you how it's done. See here and here for proof that a
falsehood is being promulgated by the McCain campaign, Byron York of NR, and Jim Lindgren of VC.
10.5.2008 7:56pm
richard cabeza:
I'm sorry, David Bernstein, but you'll have to speak up. It's getting quite loud down here in the echo chamber.
10.5.2008 8:00pm
PubliusFL:
Tony Tutins: This is a non-sequitur. Ayers never killed anyone, nor did he ever try to kill anyone.

Guess you forgot about the bomb that killed his girlfriend and a couple of other WU members.

"The bomb, Ayers writes, was packed with screws and nails and was intended for a nearby Army base. Had it been detonated, he admits, it would have done 'some serious work beyond the blast, tearing through windows and walls and, yes, people too.'

"It belied the group’s claims that its targets were buildings, not people. 'We did go off track … and that was wrong,' Ayers now says."

http://articles.latimes.com/2001/sep/30/news/mn-51464
10.5.2008 8:06pm
elim:
seriously, PC, would you associate yourself with an abortion clinic bomber? would Eric Rudolph be a perfectly legitimate friend to have, if your parent's let you have friends over in the basement.
10.5.2008 8:26pm
RJonesFree (mail):
Answer to: Obama was only 8 years old when the unrepentant terrorist, Bill Ayers and his wife, Bernardine Dohrn, bombed the Pentagon and US Capital. When Obama was 8, he was a MUSLIM with an Indonesia citizenship by the Name of Barry Soetoro. Obama is not a US citizen.
www.obamacrimes.com (received over 17 million hits)

Unrepentant terrorist Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_Ayers
10.5.2008 8:27pm
Chuck Pelto (mail) (www):
TO: David Bernstein, et al.
RE: Perhaps

In short, Obama's ties to Ayers and Wright suggest to me NOT that Obama agrees with their views, but that he is the product of a particular intellectual culture that finds the likes of Wright and Ayers to be no more objectionable, and likely less so, than the likes of Tom Coburn, or, perhaps, a Rush Limbaugh. -- David Bernstein


But tell US....

[1] How much money did Senator Obama give to the Church of Limbaugh for 20 years?
[2] Did he faithfully show up for Rush's 'sermons'?
[3] How many Pentagons did Coburn try to blow-up?

There's something of a difference between 'intellectual insulation' and acts of violence and donations of money.

Hope that helps....

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[People put their money where their heart is.]
10.5.2008 8:28pm
CB55 (mail):
elim:


Do you wish to see my short list of scum, convicts, excons and scoundrels that are know as respected members of their communities or parties?
10.5.2008 8:31pm
jenny2:
In their own words. The only thing they learned was that the bombs didn't work. It matters little how old Obama was when they were doing their bombing. These are the same people working the alternative to the same end; destruction of the US government and capitalism. Now they are using Obama.
Weather Underground - Video
I was in college then. I remember what it was like. There were and still are dangerous and serious as a heart attack.
10.5.2008 8:41pm
Ken Arromdee:
Why are you implying that Ayers ever did "kill his own country's civilians?"


You're very carefully wording that question. He didn't, of course, kill his country's civilians. He did, however, try to. Trying to and failing speaks only to his competence, not to his morality.
10.5.2008 8:42pm
CB55 (mail):
RJonesFree:

Here we go again. Those Liberals are hiding the real truth about Obama. They out foxed the FBI, CIA, the IRS as to the place of birth and his true citizenship. One would think that both Bush, Karl Rove and McCain would know these things
10.5.2008 8:48pm
Anderson (mail):
I myself am a little puzzled by Ayers's mainstream acceptance in Chicago, but since he's worked with Mayor Daley, is an apparently respected professor, and generally seems to be treated (rightly or wrongly) as someone with a bad past who's made good, I can't quite follow why anyone would sincerely believe that rather thin connections to Ayers make Obama questionable.

N.b. "sincerely."
10.5.2008 8:54pm
Anderson (mail):
These are the same people working the alternative to the same end; destruction of the US government and capitalism. Now they are using Obama.

The stupider I learn that Obama's opponents are, the more I like Obama.

I mean, damn.
10.5.2008 8:56pm
Asher (mail):
I'd say Reagan was more of an ideologue. Surely you've seen on some of the blogs that Palin's closing statement about freedom was borrowed from an ad Reagan did for the AMA about how Medicare would lead to socialism, and eventually to a system where the government would tell us where to work.
10.5.2008 8:56pm
jenny2:
These are the same people working the alternative to the same end; destruction of the US government and capitalism. Now they are using Obama.

The stupider I learn that Obama's opponents are, the more I like Obama.

I mean, damn.


Thanks. Where were you in 1969?
10.5.2008 8:58pm
Anderson (mail):
Where were you in 1969?

Where are you *now*? How long has your institution been allowing you internet access? I think they may need to re-evaluate your care plan.

Anyone who thinks that Obama is a tool for "destruction of the US government and capitalism" is right up there with 9/11 denialists and the kind of people who think the Protocols of the Elders of Zion is the real McCoy.
10.5.2008 9:01pm
Jeffersonian22 (mail):
I read the post and whistled, knowing this would really bring out the mouth-breathers and I haven't been disappointed. Is there a single unfounded rumor about Palin that hasn't been recycled? A snarl against Israel that hasn't been rehearsed?

Good post, David. Spot on.
10.5.2008 9:02pm
jenny2:
I am not a 9/11 denier or believe in the Protocols of the Elders. But I do believe in anarchists and have seen them in action.

Again, I'm interested to know where you were in 1969.
10.5.2008 9:05pm
Anderson (mail):
But I do believe in anarchists and have seen them in action.

Right. Obama ----> anarchy.

Troll away, Jenny2.
10.5.2008 9:09pm
jenny2:
I am not a troll. I guess I have a different opinion than you about Obama and his ties to Ayers and the Weather Underground.

Why don't you want to answer my question about 1969? I just want to know what you were doing and remember about the events of those days? I think it is a legitimate question.
10.5.2008 9:15pm
NattyB:
Didn't the US Government kill millions of innocent Vietnamese civilians?

Or do we just forget that fact? Communism's a bitch, thus, we can just ignore the fact that literally, millions of Vietnamese needlessly died at the hands of US aggression.

Sorry guys, but William Ayers is more of a man than either McNamara or Kissinger. He stood up for what he believed in. Maybe if we had more William Ayers today, we wouldn't have gotten in this more recent, stupid and unnecessary quagmire that we're in in Iraq. Instead, wars are sold here like the next contestant on Dancing with the Stars.
"Who do you think will win?"

"I gotta go with Rocco DiSpirito over Lance Bass"

"Oh that's right, you always root for the underdog."

"Yah, I'm rooting for an attack on Venezuela over Iran. Everyone's thinks it's going to be Iran, but fuck it, I think Venezuala's the bigger threat, they're in our hemisphere."

"Ha, you really think so."

"Yah, after we get Chavez, we can make our way towards Morales too. The Terrorists won't see it coming!"

"I do wonder though if all these wars could have a negative impact on our economy?"

"No dumbass, war is good for economy, WWII took us out of the Great Depression."


Or wait, we've only been fighting in Iraq since 2007 it seems, now that the surge is a success and we've essentially won. Now let's conveniently forget that the peace has come by buying off the terrorists, like one's who've actually killed American Soldiers, unlike Bill Ayers; and by the ethnic cleansing of Iraqi neighborhoods - but we ignore the civilian deaths b/c to acknowledge them is considered unpatriotic. Despite the fact, that speaking the unpopular truth is necessary for a vibrant democracy as well as to achieve our foreign policy objectives. To wit, killing bridal parties is not the way to win hearts and minds.

If University of Illinois at Chicago has no problem with Ayers, then why should Obama? So they sit on some board together that dispenses funds for community projects. GOTCHA! So Alice Palmer staged her handing off reception at his house. They are neighbors. And right, the same community, which is an indictment of what again? That he's liberal? That he didn't slap William Ayers the first time he met him? That he somehow owes William Ayers, in the form of what? A grant for low-income community groups? or something more sinister?

But go on conservatives. Call Obama the radical. Let's get all worked up about some rantings of his preacher. "Oh my god, He hates America." (And let's ignore Sarah P.'s witch exorcism.)Let's harp on the liberal, elite, intellectual circles that he has rolled in. Which somehow excludes the nearly ten year he spent lecturing at University of Chicago, the hallmark conservative legal institution in the United States. I guess he wasn't really part of that community, or his time spent their listening to diverse opinions on law and society, probably aren't as influential as, ya know, the rantings of his pastor.

I like my leaders liberal, intelligent, and well educated. I don't have a problem with these supposedly troubling associations. I like decision makers who are comfortable with a broad spectrum of viewpoints, even if many of them seem out of the mainstream.

I do have a problem with entitled, mediocre rich kids, who fail their way up because of their connections. McCain 08!

But seriously, our economy is going to shit, McCain is rambling about earmarks (which helped pass McCain's - I call it McCain's because he took the lead on it, didn't he- bailout legislation and comprise very little of our budget's discretionary spending in the aggregate), and has taken his campaign 100% negative. So go ahead, highlight that his middle name is Hussein, call him a terrorist lover, a Manchurian candidate (although I think we've had the Manchurian President for the past 8 year), who secretly hates America (ya know, the country that has given him everything he has); go on with the Us v. Them narrative; please David Brooks and Broder, tell me what Real Americans think. And with that, you'll have some grade A artifacts of why the GOP brand is absolute shit.

If you guys actually cared about issues and not just optics then you'd concern yourself more about Obama's connection with individuals named, Stiglitz, Rubin, Summers, Volcker, Buffet, and Galbraith. Since scrutinizing those relationships might actually tell something about how he'd govern. Or maybe you guys already like the idea of Phil Gramm as Treasury of the Secretary. You know, Phil Gramm of Graham-Leach-Bliley fame, the law which in large part facilitated the regulatory breakdown and subsequent economic clusterfuck (yes, WJC signed, it, but it's still Gramm's baby). The guy, who was the VP of a Swiss Investment Bank after leaving the Senate and has called those who are concerned about the economy emblematic of how "we've become a nation of whiners," meanwhile 80% of Americans are at least somewhat or very worried that the financial crisis will have a major negative impact on them.

Let's not even get started on foreign policy advisers. I'd take Scowcroft, Brzezinski, Dennis Ross and Powers over the Kagans, Schneuenmann, the Neo-con's responsible for taking us to Iraq, those wise guys from the PNAC, and the latest interns from Heritage and AEI. Remember when Conservatives cared about a realist foreign policy and accountability. Oh wait, that was just a dream.

What about that association with Douglas Kmiec? Please dicuss.
10.5.2008 9:17pm
Chuck Pelto (mail) (www):
TO: jenny2
RE: Why No Answer

Why don't you want to answer my question about 1969? -- jenny2


I'd say probability is high that he wasn't even amongst the living at that time. His discourse here seems rather 'youthful'. That's a euphemism for 'immature'.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[You are only young once, but you can be immature forever.]
10.5.2008 9:19pm
Chuck Pelto (mail) (www):
P.S. I was, in July, watching Neil Armstrong set foot on the surface of the Moon, while living in the basement of the house we were refurbishing.
10.5.2008 9:20pm
Chuck Pelto (mail) (www):
TO: NattyB
RE: [OT] Millions and Millions

Didn't the US Government kill millions of innocent Vietnamese civilians? -- NattyB


Please cite your source for this information. You're reminding me of that article in the Lancet about 650,000 dead Iraqis.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[In the absence of evidence, there is evidence of a lie.]
10.5.2008 9:22pm
Chuck Pelto (mail) (www):
P.S. Additional Item....

If University of Illinois at Chicago has no problem with Ayers, then why should Obama? -- NattyB


And if everyone else you know is drinking the Jonestown kool-aide, you should drink it too.

Great logic, that.....
10.5.2008 9:24pm
CB55 (mail):
Gore Vidal said we should be called the United Sates of Amnesia. In the late 20th century we had a maverick president that was a disaster, but in 2008 we seek another or at least look like one not of the Belt Way. We should be careful for which we ask the gods for.

The general voter has forgotten that we did have a such a president that was more like them. He was a peanut farmer. His younger brother was the source of social scandal for his beer guzzling. The president was a Sunday going church Baptist that did from time to time lust after
certain women. He was not part of the Washington DC party crowd. He was not known to be a political crony. Our former president had limited political experience as southern governor beyond his home state, and never held prior federal office. Unlike Palin he was not known as a great hunter, as rumor has it he was attacked by a rabbit.
He was caught on camera passing out after a foot race.

Some say that he made up for a disappointing term of office by doing good for peace and the poor - and with that he gets cash, book deals and prizes, but the DNC would rather he not show up for national speeches.
10.5.2008 9:27pm
Tim McDonald Tennessee (mail):
Y'all are all worked up over nothing. Obama is not going to win this election. My mother, who has NEVER voted Republican for President, asked me if Nader was going to be on the ballot in TN. She couldn't bring herself to vote for McCain, but she refuses to vote for Obama. If Obama has lost my mother, he has lost the race.

They will stop cooking the polls in the last week before the election to avoid embarrassment, until then, ignore them.

I could care less about SamiBamis pastor or Ayers. I do think if Rezko bribed him with $200,000 toward his house he should go to prison, but that is another issue.

My concern is with his politics, in that he thinks government is the answer and not the problem. McCain does too, but at least he will be less agressive about it. And McCain has pledged to appoint judges like Alito and Roberts, which is more important to me.

Since the liberal wing of the court no longer believes in property rights, which is the basis of our system, I fear an Obama presidency would see the end of the United States as we know it today.
10.5.2008 9:28pm
Tim McDonald Tennessee (mail):
Y'all are all worked up over nothing. Obama is not going to win this election. My mother, who has NEVER voted Republican for President, asked me if Nader was going to be on the ballot in TN. She couldn't bring herself to vote for McCain, but she refuses to vote for Obama. If Obama has lost my mother, he has lost the race.

They will stop cooking the polls in the last week before the election to avoid embarrassment, until then, ignore them.

I could care less about SamiBamis pastor or Ayers. I do think if Rezko bribed him with $200,000 toward his house he should go to prison, but that is another issue.

My concern is with his politics, in that he thinks government is the answer and not the problem. McCain does too, but at least he will be less agressive about it. And McCain has pledged to appoint judges like Alito and Roberts, which is more important to me.

Since the liberal wing of the court no longer believes in property rights, which is the basis of our system, I fear an Obama presidency would see the end of the United States as we know it today.
10.5.2008 9:29pm
Soundbyte (mail):
So how do Ayers and Wright compare to, say, McCain's associate G. Gordon Liddy. Obama may have lived in a world where Ayers and Wright weren't toxic, but could one say the same about the McCain world in which it's acceptable, even desirable to rub elbows with a convicted felon, kidnap plotter and proponent of violent resistant against the government (see http://mediamatters.org/items/200810040004?f=h_top).
10.5.2008 9:31pm
Jim Ryan (www):
Worst. Thread. Ev-vaar. Post was okay, but yeesh.
10.5.2008 9:35pm
elim:
"scum, convicts, excons and scoundrels"

I'll settle for one proponent of murder of fellow citizens/Manson family admirer you roll with. isn't it time for you, PC and jbg to move out your folks' basement?
10.5.2008 9:38pm
Chuck Pelto (mail) (www):
TO: Soundbyte
RE: Liddy

So how do Ayers and Wright compare to, say, McCain's associate G. Gordon Liddy. -- Soundbyte


How many military installations did Liddy blow up?

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[This calls for a very subtle blend of psychology and extreme violence. -- Ayers (one might think)]
10.5.2008 9:41pm
jenny2:
IMO G Gordon Liddy was/is a second rate burgler/bungler and a blowhard. I have no idea why McCain has any association with him. But there is no moral equivalency with Ayers and the WU.
10.5.2008 9:46pm
Dave N (mail):
But Jenny2, you don't understand, in the KosKoolaid drinking land of some of the posters, the U.S. can do absolutely no good. They believe the trope that everything the United States has ever done is bad. So they end up spouting moronic talking points that sound somewhere between idiotic and creepy outside of Kosland.
10.5.2008 9:52pm
CB55 (mail):
elim:

"I'll settle for one proponent of murder of fellow citizens/Manson family admirer you roll with. isn't it time for you, PC and jbg to move out your folks' basement?"

As long as my folks keep the lights on I'll shine your shoes.
10.5.2008 9:52pm
elim:
come on, CB, you're a worldly guy, you probably are so hard core you have dozens of buddies just like ayers-could you just give us, not that I doubt your credibility.
10.5.2008 9:57pm
Smokey:
Isn't jukeboxgrad cute? I notice that this week he's been up for several hours straight after midnight, barking at both readers of his posts.

Today he's posting inhis usual wacked-out frenzy: eight straight posts between other commenters, then five, then thirteen straight, etc. Plus a huge number of other posts.

I no longer read jbg's crazed rants, but I like to count them as I scroll past. I believe he has no job [how could he?], lives in his mom's basement, and posts on the internet twenty+ hours a day, frantically convincing no one of anything. Between his posts, he probably cracks his knuckles, thinking, "They will pay... they will PAY!!"

heh. JMHO.
10.5.2008 10:05pm
The General:
Ayers is an anti-American communist, whackjob. Obama didn't just work on some board with him, he was hand picked by Ayers to serve on the funding side of the CAC, and subsequently, Obama funded Ayers's communist educational projects that politicized education policies in Chicago, and he praised and promoted Ayers and those same projects and policies.

And Ayers is about as mainstream as the John Birch Society was in the early 60's when Reagan was running for governor. The differences is that Reagan wasn't a Bircher and he went out of his way to criticize them and marginalize them from American politics, and he succeeded.

Obama on the other hand, has not done any of this. To the contrary, Ayers and his anti-American elitist breed are a fast growing segment of the Democratic Party, which is becoming a party of nuts. That's why Obama won the primary. Far from being marginalized, Ayers and the other liberal whackjobs form the backbone of Obama's followers and he reflects their views. They will have a place at the table in his administration, which is more proof that he should not be allowed anywhere near the White House.
10.5.2008 10:08pm
CB55 (mail):
KeyComments:

I do like to see those group hugs of two old men (McCain and Bush) hugging and kissing like gurly men. You do wonder where this ends up - mutual love and deep affection. Never mind Bush dissed his wife and family, McCain more often returned the favor as senator. Two men of the same party do have more in common with each other than they do with Obama, other wise why would McCain remain in the GOP. During the GOP big tent meeting, Bush was given the penalty box - not often seen and not often spoken. Bush it seems still remains the Great Leader because after all he is the president
10.5.2008 10:22pm
Johnny Canuck (mail):
Jenny2: are you still there or have you given up on Anderson?
10.5.2008 10:24pm
CB55 (mail):
elim:

Bush and McCain must be doing something right - their are plenty men and women like you that will die for them. Any one that can do that has bigger male gonads than mine
10.5.2008 10:30pm
jukeboxgrad (mail):
perseus:

A scholar, Obama is not


Too bad he only made it out of Harvard Law School with high honors. I guess he compares unfavorably with the guy who finished close to the bottom of his college class, and the gal who attended five colleges in six years.
10.5.2008 10:33pm
jukeboxgrad (mail):
elim:

the lady who inaugurated Obama into the fine world of political fundraising


Show your proof that Dohrn "inaugurated Obama into the fine world of political fundraising."

referring to the woman murdered as a pig


She was trying to make a joke. That's explained here. McCain has also told some incredibly tasteless jokes.
10.5.2008 10:33pm
jukeboxgrad (mail):
guest:

Where's the humor?


The humor is that you complain about "a man incapable of upholding his promises to his wife," while seemingly not noticing that McCain cheated on Carol multiple times.

The effects of smoking are entirely understood with zero question as to the end result and yet he makes the wrong decision.


McCain has talked about the "hard-drinking days of his youth." His father had a drinking problem. How much does McCain still drink? Do you really know for sure? What's your basis for suggesting that Obama's tobacco is a bigger issue than McCain's alcohol? Maybe you didn't notice that Obama is not a 72 year-old cancer survivor. It's also possible that you didn't notice that Obama picked a running mate who's qualified to take over for him. McCain didn't.
10.5.2008 10:33pm
jukeboxgrad (mail):
random:

SFPD Sgt Brian V McDonnell


Let us know when you're in a position to show proof regarding Ayers' role in that.
10.5.2008 10:33pm
jukeboxgrad (mail):
scott:

The Southern Poverty Law Center constantly calls people and organizations racists for "6 degrees of separation"-like associations as weak or weaker than Obama's ties to Ayers.


Examples, please.
10.5.2008 10:33pm
jukeboxgrad (mail):
aw:

It wasn’t just the song. Please, stop lying. There was more to the context than that.


Really? Tell us what.
10.5.2008 10:33pm
jukeboxgrad (mail):
publius:

'We did go off track … and that was wrong,' Ayers now says.


So I guess the people who routinely describe him as 'unrepentant' are lying, right?
10.5.2008 10:34pm
jukeboxgrad (mail):
cb55:

Do you wish to see my short list of scum, convicts, excons and scoundrels that are know as respected members of their communities or parties?


There's no need to constantly bring up Bush, Cheney and Rove.
10.5.2008 10:34pm
jukeboxgrad (mail):
ken:

He didn't, of course, kill his country's civilians.


Then why do you and others imply that he did?

He did, however, try to.


The evidence behind that claim is murky, at best. And to the extent that people would get hurt, he said "that was wrong." So let me remind you of what you said before:

if Ayers had stated unequivocally that he now believes it wrong to kill his own country's civilians, and there was reason to think he's sincere, then it may make some sense not to hold it against Ayers.
10.5.2008 10:34pm
jukeboxgrad (mail):
didn't the US Government kill millions of innocent Vietnamese civilians?


They were just "gooks."
10.5.2008 10:34pm
jukeboxgrad (mail):
chuck:

Please cite your source for this information


See here:

The Hanoi government revealed on April 4 that the true civilian casualties of the Vietnam War were 2,000,000 in the north, and 2,000,000 in the south. Military casualties were 1.1 million killed and 600,000 wounded in 21 years of war. These figures were deliberately falsified during the war by the North Vietnamese Communists to avoid demoralizing the population.
10.5.2008 10:34pm
jukeboxgrad (mail):
chuck:

And if everyone else you know is drinking the Jonestown kool-aide, you should drink it too.


Serving on the board with Ayers and Obama was Arnold R. Weber, an adviser to Nixon and Reagan, and someone who has contributed $1,500 to McCain. Quite a "kool-aide" drinker.

Why would Obama think he needed to be more intolerant of Ayers than Weber was? Because he should have anticipated the late-campaign desperation of people like you?
10.5.2008 10:34pm
jukeboxgrad (mail):
tim:

They will stop cooking the polls in the last week before the election


Yes, thank goodness Obama was able to convince Fox to 'cook' their polls for him. That's why they show him ahead in VA by 3%. In the last 80 years, only three D candidates (for president) have won VA: LBJ, Truman, and FDR. Number of times Kerry polled a lead in VA, in 2004: zero.
10.5.2008 10:34pm
jukeboxgrad (mail):
elim:

I'll settle for one proponent of murder of fellow citizens


McCain's friend Liddy was involved in multiple murder plots. Gosh, that was easy.

chuck:

How many military installations did Liddy blow up?


The same number as Ayers: zero.

jenny:

Liddy was/is a second rate burgler/bungler and a blowhard. I have no idea why McCain has any association with him. But there is no moral equivalency with Ayers and the WU.


Indeed. Liddy was convicted of crimes, and Ayers was not.
10.5.2008 10:35pm
jukeboxgrad (mail):
general:

he was hand picked by Ayers


Wrong. "Obama was recommended for the CAC chairmanship by Deborah Leff, nominated by Pat Graham, and elected by the original Annenberg board."
10.5.2008 10:35pm
Smokey:
Canuck:
Jenny2: are you still there or have you given up on Anderson?
Anyone who hasn't given up on Anderson long ago needs help. Imagine, Anderson calling Jenny2 a troll! If that isn't projection, what is??
10.5.2008 10:36pm
Smokey:
Sixteen more consecutive posts by jbg! How does he have time to pop his pimples? The term "get a life" takes on new meaning!

Over and out.
10.5.2008 10:39pm
elim:
jbg just got back from supper-his longsuffering parents still cook for their version of the Comicbook Guy. I am sure Dohrn would now say it was a joke-didn't seem to be back then right after the Manson murders when you are actually an advocate for more killing. dohrn and ayers hosted his first little political gathering-I heard dohrn spiced it up with jokes about folks killed by richard speck and john wayne gacy, this being a chicago meeting. it had them rolling in the aisles. CB, I thought you were a real hard case who would have his facebook friends list stocked with murderers and manson admirers. I am disappointed-you're just Comicbook Guy 2.0.
10.5.2008 10:43pm
jenny2:
Johnny Canuck

Still here. But not too interested in bickering over Obama's or McCain's human imperfections.
10.5.2008 10:54pm
jukeboxgrad (mail):
smokey:

Over and out.


Promises, promises.
10.5.2008 10:56pm
jukeboxgrad (mail):
elim:

dohrn and ayers hosted his first little political gathering


In this thread and the other, there have been many claims that it was the "first." And there have been many requests for proof. And proof has been shown this many times: zero. Do you have any? I guess not.

And do you have any proof that Obama, not Palmer, chose the location? That's what I thought.

Speaking of proof, I notice you have no proof for this claim, either: that Dohrn "inaugurated Obama into the fine world of political fundraising."

I thought you were a real hard case who would have his facebook friends list stocked with murderers and manson admirers


Unlike McCain, I don't have any friends who plotted multiple murders, like Liddy.
10.5.2008 10:56pm
CB55 (mail):
elim:

"CB, I thought you were a real hard case who would have his facebook friends list stocked with murderers and manson admirers. I am disappointed-you're just Comicbook Guy 2.0."

Do you wants some curly fries with that comment?
10.5.2008 11:04pm
jenny2:
jukeboxgrad (mail):
general:
he was hand picked by Ayers
Wrong. "Obama was recommended for the CAC chairmanship by Deborah Leff, nominated by Pat Graham, and elected by the original Annenberg board."

I have no proof one way or the other about whether Ayers hand-picked Obama, but I've been on Boards and the 'minutes of the meeting' may indicate who served the requirements of Robert's Rules, it does not necessarily indicate the reality of the event. All you can be sure of is that the Board voted.
10.5.2008 11:07pm
Psalm91 (mail):
This thread reflects the decision of the McCain campaign to go dirty in the last thirty days. I'm sure it will get worse.
10.5.2008 11:14pm
jukeboxgrad (mail):
Hmm, let's see, I guess no one has mentioned McCain's own little terrorist connection:

Otto Reich was said to have been instrumental in the release of Orlando Bosch, a Cuban exile, from jail where he was serving a 10-year sentence for blowing up Cubana de Aviación Flight 455 on October 6, 1976 while en route from Barbados to Havana, killing 73 people. …

Otto Reich now serves as a policy adviser on Latin America for the John McCain's presidential campaign.


Why is McCain taking advice from someone who helped free the killer of 73 airplane passengers?
10.5.2008 11:40pm
CB55 (mail):
Psalm91:

Liberals do not get it. The Wright and Ayers stories have nothing to do with facts but the frame of metaphysical items such as values and the emotions that charge them. For Conservatives all politics is both personal and moral. Liberals must come to terms with the fact that people make most choices based on emotions and personal values not cold objective facts.
10.5.2008 11:47pm
Johnny Canuck (mail):
Jenny2: "I'm interested to know where you were in 1969.
I realize it is Anderson you are interested in."

In 1968 I was sitting in a graduate level seminar with Professor Jean Edward Smith learning about US foreign policy in general and Viet Nam in particular. We studied the transcripts of the Senate hearings which had authorized the bombing of North Viet Nam, and the subsequent hearings. I was learning that Pres Johnson and his administration had mislead the senators about the Gulf of Tonkin incident.

and then there was the headline "we had to destroy the village to save it.

I thought the election of Nixon was the best way for a quick end to the war. Boy, was I wrong.

And then there was the Kent State incident.

I can understand why some people might think conclude extreme action had to be taken.

enough about the past
I find it incredible though that anyone can think Obama is controlled by Ayers.
10.6.2008 12:05am
Kurt A (mail):
I'd amend CB55's comment to reiterate that not just people in general, but especially liberals make most choices based on emotions and personal values and not cold objective facts.

Also, with regard to the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, I'd echo Glenn Bowen's argument that:

It was about installing radical politics in schools, not about improving students academic standing. It was about indoctrination, by way of a well-worn page in the radical playbook.

Anyone who has ever read any left-wing pedagogy has a good idea what sort of nonsense the CAC was investing in. That should tell us a lot about Obama's values and the sort of projects he believes are worth funding.
10.6.2008 12:10am
A.W. (mail):
Jukie

> Really? Tell us what.

Why don't you read the f---ing article, you idiot.

And you still haven't explained how it has anything to do with anything.
10.6.2008 12:33am
Shelley (mail):
Read this blog, all of it, for a thorough analysis of the relationship between Obama and Ayers. Steve Diamond was a source for the NYT story, he's a progressive Democrat and he has been researching the relationship for months.

If, after reading this blog, you still think that Obama is fit to be President, then you are beyond help.

http://globallabor.blogspot.com/
10.6.2008 12:35am
CB55 (mail):
Kurt A:

Liberals were very weak in the knees in recent when it comes to Liberal --- they lost the will to toss and use the word to describe their group. Obama and Clinton will never use said word in their context to describe their group. Cons are very proud people and that's why we were popular for over 20 years. Bush just corrupted his party and the Conservative movement which is for personal freedom and not the expansion of government power, for fiscal responsibility and not a budget based on debt. The party of Lincoln has lost it's way because of race and class issues, not the if it is to be the party of the future it must put aside these thorny issues.
10.6.2008 12:38am
Orson2 (mail):
What utterly astonishes me about these law-savvy types commenting here (above) is their utter inability to argue both sides, and inability to see the outrageousness of the counterfactual case.

Namely, a Senator for US president named "John McCain served on a board with David Duke. John McCain had a fund raiser at David Duke's house. John McCain says, he's just a guy I know in the neighborhood." [as 'Knees' wrote on your companion thread]. Their kids attended school together, are but in fact about 20 years apart in age.

And he was nurtured in activist politics by a member of the American neo-Nazi Party. In fact, he attended an Aryan Nations church for 20 years, and took the title of his second book form his pastor's sermon. No credulous links.

Truly, nothing to see her folks, move along. "See no evil, hear no evil," just embracing an evil double standard. No wonder Shakespeare used lawyers as his foil for educated idiocy.
10.6.2008 12:46am
Elliot123 (mail):
"This is not the first time it's been pointed out to you that Ayers exclusively bombed things, not people."

Good. We have established Obama pals around with bombers. So, is Ayers mainstream?
10.6.2008 12:47am
Jmaie (mail):
jukeboxgrad asks,

Bernstein is "respected?" By whom besides the same people who think you are "respected?"


Eugene Volokh?
10.6.2008 12:51am
Mike99 (mail):
Obama wouldn't be a bad president? Oh dear. Ronald Reagan's views were hardly those of one on the far, lunatic right, that bunch having been all but completely excised from the conservative body long ago. He was a solid conservative who was unafraid to stand up for conservative principals, loved and supported America, spoke simply yet eloquently (his plan to win the Cold War: "We win; they lose.") and he had no known associations anything like Ayers, Wright, or any of the other lunatic socialists, communists, terrorists, etc. like them.

Indeed, Obama's decades long associations with these people do indicate that they are his kind of people, people with whom is is completely comfortable, and who seem, like him, to share the beliefs and attitudes that all decent, right thinking human beings should have. Yet Obama knew enough of the real world to tell Wright to stay out of the spotlight when he began to run for president, and abandoned him only when he forcefully reentered the spotlight without Obama's permission. Remember during Obama's world-changing race speech when he claimed that he could no more disown Wright than his white--average white person--grandmother. Both have bus tire tracks all over them.

Obama's associations do indeed reveal what kind of president he would be because they are suffused with hatred of America, racism, class hatred and manipulation, love for America's foreign and domestic enemies, victimhood, irrationality about virtually any meaningful issue of politics, science or religion, a blame America first reflex, and the most stunningly blatant case of malignant narcissism I've ever seen. And this compares with Ronald Reagan?
10.6.2008 12:53am
Monch:
Too many people are harping on this “guilt by association” rhetoric in order to question Obama’s character and judgment. However, it is very misleading when a VC contributor fails to consider any candidate’s “associations” in its entirety.

Following a lot of the reasoning that I have read in the preceding posts, it seems that everyone from Ted Kennedy to Rick Warren will be guilty of whatever they are alleging Obama of being guilty of because they “associate” with Obama. What about Obama’s association with Rick Warren? What about Obama’s many other associations? And let us not ignore his interactions with fellow Senators, politicians, and others who are part of the Washington political machine. What conclusion can you reach about a guy who interacts with people of disparate views? Personally, I consider that person to be well-rounded.

Being in physical proximity to someone, even on a frequent basis, does not mean you share that person’s ideologies. Similarly, learning about disparate ideologies does not mean that you subscribe to them. Learning is essential to being an informed scholar. But in the current political atmosphere, intelligence has become villanized and ignorance eulogized.
10.6.2008 12:54am
jenny2:
Johnny Canuck (mail):
I was an undergrad bio major and not very politically aware. That changed. 1969 was like a lightening bolt for me. Then there were no words to describe Kent State. Torn between having family and friends in the service as well as feeling outraged by the war, I was still horrified by the domestic violence. I graduated with dual Sociology/Psych.

Richard Nixon inspired my interests in conspiracy theories.(heh) I'd been fascinated with this campaign and had this gnawing feeling about it that I just couldn't figure out. So I started reading and researching as much as I had time for. There are just too many coincidences in this unraveling tale of Obama, going back to his Mother, Father, and Franklin Marshal Davis; Ayers/WU, Ali Abunimah, Rashid Khalidi, Saul Alinksy, The Woods Foundation, CAC, ACORN, Public Allies, Cloward-Piven Strategy, Occidental, Columbia U, Pakistan, Harvard. The visual and emotional focus/nature of his campaign. Things don't just happen, they happen for a reason. All the ingredients finally made sense to me. Whether others agree or not or think I'm nuts, is their choice. I've been called worse. It was nice chatting with you. Later.
10.6.2008 12:54am
JosephSlater (mail):
I prefer the David Bernstein who used to muse that Obama would be in big trouble if he didn't get to 50% in the polls after the conventions.

But Obama's polling numbers -- and Palin's apparent inability to move them them, even after she managed to exceed the lowest expectations ever for a VP candidate in a debate -- have obviously made the McCain campaign, and those who echo it's talking points increasingly desperate.
10.6.2008 12:58am
Elliot123 (mail):
Has anyone noticed Palin has managed to turn the national conversation to Obama and Ayers?
10.6.2008 1:23am
Psalm91 (mail):
This is all pretty silly stuff, particularly the purported "conservatives" talking about values in support of McCain. This part of the campaign will last as long at the Obama campaign push back on Keating and McCain's various adult associations. It's all diversion stemming from McCain's drop in the polls.
10.6.2008 1:26am
MLS:
As difficult as it may be, I can get past Obama/Ayers/Dorhn.

It is his initial election in 1996 to the Illinois Senste that gives me great pause about an individual who constantly referes to himself as an instrument of change for politics as usual.

I am one who believes character counts, and Obama's ascension into political office does make me wonder if he really is the instrument of change he purports to be.
10.6.2008 1:30am
KeyComments (mail):
Among the news headlines at www.yahoo.com at this moment we have BOTH "Obama accuses McCain of using smear tactics" and "Obama to link McCain to 'Keating Five' savings-and-loan scandal" -- boy, is Yahoo sure in the tank for Obama!
10.6.2008 1:49am
Mac (mail):
Shelly, thanks for the Diamond information. Fascinating article, the more so as it is written by a Democrat.

I don't believe in black helicopters or that the exhaust from jets is a government plot to use ozone (or is it benzene) to kill us, or that anyone but Lee Harvey Oswald shot JFK or that 9/11 was a government plot.

However, Obama terrifies me.

Ayers, Ali Abuninah, Rashid Khalidi, Saul Alinsky , Wright, Father Phleger, Resko and what was that Iraqi who put up the money for Resko to buy the lot next to his house doing in this picture? The one who escaped from an Iraqi prison after we took over and somehow got a visa and landed in Chicago in time to help Resko help Obama. I can't recall his name, but am sure someone here knows it.


Then there is ACORN. Holy cow! That relationship is as dirty as it gets. Plug in the CRA and you have a Democrat made disaster waiting to happen which it did with more help from Franks, Dodd and Schummer. Then, you have Johnson and Reines advising him on economics? The same guys who ruled Fannie and Freddie from the early 90's to 2004 and drove it into the ground while they got stinking rich? Holy S**t!

The question is, has he ever associated with anyone normal besides his grandparents?

Soros has been trying to buy the White House since 2000 and has had nothing to show for all the money he put up.

I am afraid he is about to finally get his man. The only problem for him is that Obama is owned by so many folks, Soros may have to stand in line. He won't even stand out as the crazy one in that crowd.

ACORN and it's relationship with Obama and vice versa is worthy of a post all it's own.
10.6.2008 1:57am
Henry679 (mail):
I guess the late-in-the-day rehashing of these "issues" is a sure sign McCain &Co. are certain they are dead in the water on the real issues facing the nation.
10.6.2008 2:21am
Grover Gardner (mail):

If, after reading this blog, you still think that Obama is fit to be President, then you are beyond help.


If, after reading that blog, you can even begin to sort out the byzantine relationships between Bill Ayers, Walter Annenberg, Deborah Leff, Patricia Graham, Adele Simmons, Warren Chapman, Anne Hallett, Vartan Gregorian, the Governor of Illinois, the Mayor of Chicago, the Superintendent of the Chicago school system, the Executive Director of the Woods Fund, the Executive Director of the Polk Bros. Foundation, the Chancellor of the University of Illinois at Chicago, and the Council of Chicago Area Deans of Education--all of whom, apparently, love terrorists--you win the Grand Prize, a solid tin Mobius Strip painted the color of your choice.

And if, after reading that blog, and trying earnestly to credit each and every "It's possible" and "I believe" and "I think" and "It can be demonstrated"
and "I have presented," you even care anymore who nominated Obama to the board of the CAC, or when, or why; and you can quickly recite your full name, address and cell phone number, you will receive an extra bonus--a Special Edition Brass Plated Alaska State Collapsible Spyglass with Vladimir Putin's face painted on the lens so it appears to be ever looming on the horizon.
10.6.2008 2:33am
Grover Gardner (mail):

Shelly, thanks for the Diamond information. Fascinating article, the more so as it is written by a Democrat.

I don't believe in black helicopters or that the exhaust from jets is a government plot to use ozone (or is it benzene) to kill us, or that anyone but Lee Harvey Oswald shot JFK or that 9/11 was a government plot.

However, Obama terrifies me.


And we have a winner! Mac, step up, grab that Mobius Strip and hold it up for the folks to look at.
10.6.2008 2:40am
Grover Gardner (mail):

Ayers, Ali Abuninah, Rashid Khalidi, Saul Alinsky , Wright, Father Phleger, Resko and what was that Iraqi who put up the money for Resko to buy the lot next to his house doing in this picture? The one who escaped from an Iraqi prison after we took over and somehow got a visa and landed in Chicago in time to help Resko help Obama. I can't recall his name, but am sure someone here knows it.


Hmmmm! No doubt a clever composite of Aiham Alsammarae, the corrupt former Iraqi Electricity Minister appointed by Paul Bremer, who escaped from an Iraqi jail with the aid of Blackwater; and Nadhmi Auchi, the Iraqi oil billionaire who was knighted by Pope John Paul II.
10.6.2008 3:08am
Grover Gardner (mail):
Umph. Urk. Must...try...to...keep...conspiracies...straight!
10.6.2008 3:14am
Syd Henderson (mail):
Why stop at the Weather Underground? Let's look for ties with the Symbionese Liberation Army, the SDS and the Surrealists.

And the Jacobins, Jacobites and Freemasons.

And the Hussites, Lollards and Albegensians.

And those Manicheans? What about Obama's ties with them? Inquiring minds need to know.
10.6.2008 3:20am
Vermando (mail) (www):
Ahhh! Another post by DB about Senator Obama?!? Why, why I ask? Someone please stop the madness - my ears are bleeding!! Ahhhh!
10.6.2008 4:21am
Hart Williams (mail) (www):
Horse dead.
Stop beating.
Only make you look like fool.
10.6.2008 7:31am
Glenn W. Bowen (mail):

Why stop at the Weather Underground? Let's look for ties with the Symbionese Liberation Army, the SDS and the Surrealists.

And the Jacobins, Jacobites and Freemasons.

And the Hussites, Lollards and Albegensians.

And those Manicheans? What about Obama's ties with them? Inquiring minds need to know.


Outta bullets... and so soon.
10.6.2008 8:13am
Mr. Forward (mail):
"Bernardine Dohrn, Cathy Wilkerson, Ayers and the other Weathermen have spent most of their lives working to improve the lives of others -- "The true revolutionary is guided by a great feeling of love." (Che Guevara)"

Explain the roofing nails.
10.6.2008 9:37am
Pug (mail):
Obama's failure to understand how dangerous radical liberalism is to American freedom, to the economy, and to world peace is a serious liability.

And George W. Bush and radical Republicanism have been such a boon "to American freedom, to the economy and to world peace".

Blinders are for horses.
10.6.2008 10:03am
A.W. (mail):
Pug

Ah, so you think the smart thing would be to give AQ a country. Gotcha.
10.6.2008 11:01am
jukeboxgrad (mail):
shelley:

Read this blog, all of it, for a thorough analysis


Diamond is roughly as logical and coherent as Ted Sampley. If you believe one-tenth of what Sampley says about McCain, you could never vote for him.
10.6.2008 11:19am
Adam J:
A.W.- "Ah, so you think the smart thing would be to give AQ a country. Gotcha."

Wow, with posts like this you're quickly undermining your credibility.
10.6.2008 11:25am
jukeboxgrad (mail):
elliot:

We have established Obama pals around with bombers.


What we have established is that nothing you say can be trusted, because you repeatedly made a false statement, even though you knew it was false. And you haven't taken responsibility for doing so. There's a word for people who do that.

is Ayers mainstream?


Ask Gov. Sanford (R) of South Carolina, who is the ex officio Chairman of the Board of the University of South Carolina, which has granted to Ayers the title of Distinguished Scholar.

You can also ask Arnold R. Weber, an adviser to Nixon and Reagan, and someone who has contributed $1,500 to McCain, and who served on the same board as Ayers and Obama.

By the way, is Gordon Liddy mainstream? Unlike Ayers, he actually went to jail. And he plotted murders. And he's McCain's pal. Why does McCain pal around with convicts who plot murders?
10.6.2008 11:25am
jukeboxgrad (mail):
elliot:

We have established Obama pals around with bombers.


What we have established is that nothing you say can be trusted, because you repeatedly made a false statement, even though you knew it was false. And you haven't taken responsibility for doing so. There's a word for people who do that.

is Ayers mainstream?


Ask Gov. Sanford (R) of South Carolina, who is the ex officio Chairman of the Board of the University of South Carolina, which has granted to Ayers the title of Distinguished Scholar.

You can also ask Arnold R. Weber, an adviser to Nixon and Reagan, and someone who has contributed $1,500 to McCain, and who served on the same board as Ayers and Obama.

By the way, is Gordon Liddy mainstream? Unlike Ayers, he actually went to jail. And he plotted murders. And he's McCain's pal. Why does McCain pal around with convicts who plot murders?
10.6.2008 11:25am
jukeboxgrad (mail):
oops, sorry about the echo.
10.6.2008 11:31am
jukeboxgrad (mail):
mac:

Then there is ACORN. Holy cow!


I notice you're beating one of your favorite drums. Back here I challenged you to show proof for a false claim you made. You disappeared from that thread. I wonder why.

Here's an idea: try making some claims that are actually true.
10.6.2008 11:32am
ejo:
any explanation, jbg, for the nails in the bomb-was it going to be a crash program for Habitat for Humanity? again, Obama had many years, while funnelling money to leftist causes in Chicago, to question the wisdom of stomping on the flag-you don't find it objectionable. most folks, even your folks who wait on you hand and foot, do.
10.6.2008 11:35am
Yankev (mail):

Didn't the US Government kill millions of innocent Vietnamese civilians?
And how many innocent civilians did the Viet Cong and the North Vietnamese kill? Before, during and after the US involvement? You can tell something from a post's inability (or unwillingness) to express an idea without using profanity.


and then there was the headline "we had to destroy the village to save it.
And then there was the revelation decades later that this supposed quote was fabricated.
10.6.2008 11:59am
Elliot123 (mail):
"What we have established is that nothing you say can be trusted, because you repeatedly made a false statement, even though you knew it was false. And you haven't taken responsibility for doing so. There's a word for people who do that."

Well, don't be shy. Tell us the word.

Ayers says he wishes he had bombed more Americans, and he said that Sept 11, 2001. Obama tells us Ayers is mainstream. Can you tell us if Ayers is mainstream?

If Obama thinks Ayers is mainstream, what does this tell us about Obama?
10.6.2008 11:59am
Yankev (mail):

Didn't the US Government kill millions of innocent Vietnamese civilians?
And how many innocent civilians did the Viet Cong and the North Vietnamese kill? Before, during and after the US involvement? You can tell something from a post's inability (or unwillingness) to express an idea without using profanity.


and then there was the headline "we had to destroy the village to save it.
And then there was the revelation decades later that this supposed quote was fabricated.
10.6.2008 12:00pm
Ben Franklin (mail):
I have postulated for a while that the defining characteristic of the modern day left is its inability to feel shame. The posters supporting the likes of Ayers and his ilk have made my case for me.

How can a man support the war on terror when he pals around with, and shares the ideals of a man who has done EXACTLY the same thing as Osama and his crew did? They both tried to bomb the capitol and waged terror campaigns to get what they wanted politically. Obama and Ayers are close enough ideologically that they have worked on indoctrinating children into Marxist causes through their "education" foundation.

The left, as supported by the comments on this blog attempting to justify that which is abhorrent to anyone with a conscience (or a brain for that matter), doesn't see anything wrong with Ayer's behavior because that is who they are. When every "solution" your party promotes involves forcibly separating someone from their cash and limiting the choices they can make for themselves then it is only natural to be drawn to the petty thugs and tyrants like Obama and Ayers who promise to let you in on the spoils.

The means by which those spoils are acquired is of no consequence to a person who cannot feel shame.

Let's be frank, the right would have never nominated a man with such close associations to an unrepentant abortion clinic bomber or who attended Klan rallies in the way Obama attended his racist "church" services. As a libertarian, this is the main difference I see between the parties given the Republican repudiation of its economic principles in voting for the bail-out and covering for the architects of the massive market interference that caused it.
10.6.2008 12:22pm
Johnny Canuck (mail):
Yankev:

and then there was the headline "we had to destroy the village to save it.

And then there was the revelation decades later that this supposed quote was fabricated.


Please provide source.
10.6.2008 12:54pm
richard cabeza:
orson2, try reading more closely. That is the hypothetical about McCain. Of course, fabrications can't get in the way of the One.
10.6.2008 1:17pm
LN (mail):
I think we're looking at this the wrong way.

Seven years after 9/11, the Democrats have nominated a black guy whose dad was from Kenya, whose middle name is Hussein, whose pastor said "God damn America," who apparently "launched his political career" in the living room of a guy who was in a terrorist group.

The result? They're going to easily win the Presidency and have commanding majorities in both the Senate and the House.

That's how out of touch the Republicans are right now. And Sarah Palin can wink at Joe Sixpack all she wants, it's not going to change that.
10.6.2008 1:31pm
Dee (mail):
Everyone please VOTE! Dont worry about the polls! Just get out and Vote! Vote early, Dont wait until the last minute! Make yourself heard!
10.6.2008 1:48pm
Grover Gardner (mail):

The left, as supported by the comments on this blog attempting to justify that which is abhorrent to anyone with a conscience (or a brain for that matter), doesn't see anything wrong with Ayer's behavior because that is who they are.


Ah, I see where you're confused.


Let's be frank, the right would have never nominated a man with such close associations to an unrepentant abortion clinic bomber or who attended Klan rallies in the way Obama attended his racist "church" services.


No, they've just nominated a man who blandly accepted money and favors from one of the biggest crooks in American history, a man who almost single-handedly brought down the savings and loan industry and cost the American taxpayers billions of dollars. They've nominated a man whose own party subjected him to one of the vilest, most racist campaign attacks in modern history, and who now resorts to the same tactics. They've nominated a man who claims as an associate and "old friend" a convicted felon who severely weakened the highest office in our land, undermined America's reputation around the globe, plotted murders and bombings, and even today trumpets his own peculiar brand of "patriotism" in books and on radio programs. They've nominated a man whose closest advisors have consistently worked against America's interests and the interests of American citizens through their lobbying and "consulting" activities. They've nominated a man who has chosen as his running mate one of the most vapid, inexperienced, untrustworthy politicians we've seen in decades.


As a libertarian, this is the main difference I see between the parties given the Republican repudiation of its economic principles in voting for the bail-out and covering for the architects of the massive market interference that caused it.


Assume Bill Ayers (along with dozens of other misguided do-gooders) frittered away a private foundation's money and failed to accomplish anything significant in the way of changing the face of public education. Assume the 8000 members of Trinity Church supported their radical minister. Compare that to the imminent collapse of the global economy. Is this the difference you're talking about, Ben?
10.6.2008 2:05pm
ejo:
ah, the keating talking points make an appearance, irregardless of the fact that McCain was found to have committed no misconduct and Robert Bennett, counsel for Congress and a Democrat, thought he shouldn't have been included. might I add that one knuckle dragging right wing site has pointed out that John Glenn is an Obama surrogate in Ohio (guess what he and McCain have in common). in any event, on the scale of villainy, he cost the taxpayers a lot less money than Franklin Raines and Jim Johnson (whose campaign are they affiliated with?). GG, are you bright enough to do anything other than spout what Kos and the other left wing sites tell you to spout.
10.6.2008 2:12pm
ejo:
by the way, not to make light of the losses, but the Lincoln collapse cost taxpayers 3.4 billion per my quick google. the FM/FM debacle with its fallout continuing is costing hundreds of billions with some saying costs will approach a trillion dollars (Raines, Johnson-whose campaign are they affiliated with? is it John McCain's? maybe Bob Barr's or Cynthia McKinney's?) again, do you really want to get into this argument when you know (or maybe you don't because kos didn't tell you) that McCain was trying to stop the FM/FM losses/mismanagement?
10.6.2008 2:20pm
Elliot123 (mail):
"Assume Bill Ayers (along with dozens of other misguided do-gooders) frittered away a private foundation's money and failed to accomplish anything significant in the way of changing the face of public education."

I don't think we have to assume that; the record speaks for itself. But, I agree that doesn't matter much. What I want to know is why Obama says a guy who regrets he didn't bomb more Americans is mainstream. Is he mainstream?
10.6.2008 2:24pm
JosephSlater (mail):
I guess the late-in-the-day rehashing of these "issues" is a sure sign McCain &Co. are certain they are dead in the water on the real issues facing the nation.

Yes, and the denials on this thread don't make this observation any less obviously correct.

The good news is that it isn't working. Obama ticked up a point in Gallup and Rasumussen today.
10.6.2008 2:35pm
Mac (mail):

You disappeared from that thread. I wonder why.


jbg,

Because I have a life, for pete's sake. You know, work, responsibilities, family, friends, fun.

All of which you do not appear to have.
10.6.2008 2:44pm
Yankev (mail):
Source April 1, 2003 column by Mona Charen:

This is hardly Arnett's first slip. As it happens, Arnett makes an appearance in my book Useful Idiots for his reporting from Vietnam. Remember the phrase "We had to destroy the village in order to save it"? It has become totemic. Arnett was the originator of the phrase. The trouble is, as first B.G. Burkett and then I discovered after a little investigation, the report was wrong. It wasn't the U.S. that destroyed Ben Tre, (a town, not a village) but the Vietcong. And the soldier Arnett was most likely quoting remembers saying "It was a shame the town was destroyed," not the fatuity Arnett made famous.

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/charen040103.asp
10.6.2008 2:53pm
Yankev (mail):
Johhny Canuck, my source is an April 2003 columbn by Mona Charen:

This is hardly Arnett's first slip. As it happens, Arnett makes an appearance in my book Useful Idiots for his reporting from Vietnam. Remember the phrase "We had to destroy the village in order to save it"? It has become totemic. Arnett was the originator of the phrase. The trouble is, as first B.G. Burkett and then I discovered after a little investigation, the report was wrong. It wasn't the U.S. that destroyed Ben Tre, (a town, not a village) but the Vietcong. And the soldier Arnett was most likely quoting remembers saying "It was a shame the town was destroyed," not the fatuity Arnett made famous.


Well, as the reporter said at the end of Man Who Shot Liberty Valance - - -


http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/charen040103.asp
10.6.2008 2:55pm
Yankev (mail):
Sorry for the echo -- the page disappeared from my browser before I finished the post, and the partial did not appear when the page came back.
10.6.2008 2:59pm
Grover Gardner (mail):

What I want to know is why Obama says a guy who regrets he didn't bomb more Americans is mainstream.


Why do so many Americans now consider Gordon Liddy "mainstream" when thirty-five years ago he was the embodiment of political corruption? How could a bum like Oliver North even *think* of running for the Senate? The fact is, like it or not, Bill Ayers *is* mainstream. He's got jobs and degrees and appointments out the wazoo. I personally have no idea why this is so, and it's certainly worth trying to understand how he got where he is today, but I don't think Obama had much of a hand in it. I think it was a fait accompli by the time he came along. As I said above, political and social rehab of unrepentant sinners is not a phenomenon limited to the left. America is, if nothing else, the land of Personal Reinvention--for better or worse.
10.6.2008 3:05pm
Yankev (mail):

a man who almost single-handedly brought down the savings and loan industry and cost the American taxpayers billions of dollars.


Do facts matter to you, Grover? As was pointed out, McCain was fully exonerated in connection with the S&L collapse. Obama, on the other hand, has his fingerprints all over the Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac collapse. See Thomas Sowell http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/sowell100308.php3
10.6.2008 3:12pm
richard cabeza:
Why do so many Americans now consider Gordon Liddy "mainstream" when thirty-five years ago he was the embodiment of political corruption?

One could argue that political corruption is mainstream, while terrorism campaigns are not (and was not throughout Ayers' career). Ignoring any of their later acts, this remains true.

Of course, one could also bring up that Liddy went on to a career of political show business, while Ayers went on to spread his ideology through schools. I know which is more destructive, but both seem one-dimensional in the sense that their purposes haven't changed -- Liddy is still the partisan patriot, doing what he thinks it takes; Ayers is still the leftist revolutionary, doing what he thinks it takes.
10.6.2008 3:19pm
Chuck Pelto (mail) (www):
TO: jukeboxgrad
RE:

Serving on the board with Ayers and Obama was Arnold R. Weber, an adviser to Nixon and Reagan, and someone who has contributed $1,500 to McCain. Quite a "kool-aide" drinker. -- jukeboxgrad


Sounds like it to me.

And maybe he kept his association with Ayers a secret, like whatzhername did about writing a book praising Obama from the GOP when the VP candidate debate moderator was being negotiated.

People have been known to withhold critical information about themselves at times. Even to lie. I recall one former professor from CU who was dismissed not to long ago for lying about his 'credentials'.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
10.6.2008 3:39pm
Chuck Pelto (mail) (www):
TO: jukeboxgrad
RE:

Serving on the board with Ayers and Obama was Arnold R. Weber, an adviser to Nixon and Reagan, and someone who has contributed $1,500 to McCain. Quite a "kool-aide" drinker. -- jukeboxgrad


Sounds like it to me.

And maybe he kept his association with Ayers a secret, like whatzhername did about writing a book praising Obama from the GOP when the VP candidate debate moderator was being negotiated.

People have been known to withhold critical information about themselves at times. Even to lie. I recall one former professor from CU who was dismissed not to long ago for lying about his 'credentials'.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
10.6.2008 3:39pm
Tony Tutins (mail):

Obama, on the other hand, has his fingerprints all over the Fannie Mae/Freddie Mac collapse. See Thomas Sowell http://www.jewishworldreview.com/cols/sowell100308.php3

Is this the correct link? Because it proves only that Obama once sought advice from former Fannie Mae head Raines. And (although the column does not mention this) like other Democratic candidates for President Kerry and Hillary Clinton, Obama received $100K in campaign donations from Fannie Mae employees and associated PACs.

Obama must have been wearing rubber gloves, there are no fingerprints there.

Note further that Obama received no Fannie/Freddie money for his 2004 Senate campaign. Only Presidential candidates can attract such large sums of money.

Sowell lists a number of facts, by the way, including this one:
It was Senator Dodd, Congressman Frank and other liberal Democrats who for years refused requests from the Bush administration to set up an agency to regulate Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

But he leaves out this fact: It was Republican Senator Richard Shelby and Republican Congressman Oxley who for years chaired their respective committees in the Republican controlled-Congress who for years kept bills locked in committee that would have set up an agency to regulate Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac. In fact, it was not till 2007, with a Democratic Congress, did a bill pass to set up an agency to regulate Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

The author of this bill? Speaker Nancy Pelosi.

But Sowell leaves out these salient facts.
10.6.2008 3:42pm
Chuck Pelto (mail) (www):
TO: All
RE: Apologies...

....for the double post. This system wasn't showing me that it had actually posted my reply to jukebox.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
10.6.2008 3:42pm
Chuck Pelto (mail) (www):
TO: jukeboxgrad
RE: Say WHAT?!??!?!!!

The Hanoi government revealed on April 4 that the true civilian casualties of the Vietnam War were 2,000,000 in the north, and 2,000,000 in the south. -- jukeboxgrad


And YOU BELIEVE THEM?

That's 1/3d of all the Jews Hitler killed. That would require gas-chambers and herding people into concentration camps.

Furthermore, who KILLED them all?

You said US killed them. But your article just says 2M. But we're lead to believe that US killed them all.

In short, your source has the credibility of a pile of moldering merde. It's worse than the Lancet on casualties in Iraq.

Try again....

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[Fib, n., a lie that hasn't cut its teeth yet.]
10.6.2008 3:46pm
ejo:
forgot about jim johnson, TT? left him off the talking point? again, who stood for regulating FM while who didn't amongst the presidential contenders-are you honest enough to answer that one or do you need to go back to kos for how to handle it?
10.6.2008 3:50pm
Chuck Pelto (mail) (www):
TO: All
RE: jukeboxgrad, the Liar

"The same number as Ayers: zero." -- jukeboxgrad on how many bombings of military installations Ayers was involved with.

Ayers confessed to being involved with bombing the Pentagon.

Whereas jukeboxgrad has disabused me of Ayers being convicted, and that is appreciated, Ayers confession to involvement is tantamount to OJ confessing to the double murder of his ex-wife and her lover. But both of them got off not being convicted of their crimes.

Look upon them as miscarriages of justice.

And look upon jukeboxgrad as one of the lowest forms of life on this blog. A liar.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[Every violation of truth is not only a sort of suicide in the liar, but is a stab at the health of human society. -- Ralph Waldo Emerson]
10.6.2008 3:51pm
David Warner:
"it's certainly worth trying to understand how he got where he is today"

The above referring to Ayers. It's no mystery, given who his father was.

CEO's, Admirals, Presidents: pick the right father, one can't not rise.
10.6.2008 4:08pm
Mac (mail):
Tony,

In fact, it was not till 2007, with a Democratic Congress, did a bill pass to set up an agency to regulate Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac


What bill was that?.
10.6.2008 4:09pm
Johnny Canuck (mail):
Yankev:

and here's someone who claims he heard the statement being made by Major Booris:
http://www.nhe.net/BenTreVietnam/
10.6.2008 4:15pm
Christopher Cooke (mail):
I am glad this blog is discussing the changes in the law and judiciary that an Obama presidency or a McCain presidency might bring about, so that it stays focused on the professors' areas of expertise. I would hate for the blog to descend into an amateur politics blog reflecting the bloggers' personal political biases.
10.6.2008 4:16pm
Johnny Canuck (mail):
Yankev:

and here's someone who claims he heard the statement being made by Major Booris:
http://www.nhe.net/BenTreVietnam/
10.6.2008 4:16pm
richard cabeza:
I am glad this blog is discussing the changes in the law and judiciary that an Obama presidency or a McCain presidency might bring about, so that it stays focused on the professors' areas of expertise

Didn't you hear? The Judicial Confirmation Network ad is "utterly illogical and just dumb." And it's probably racist, too.

That settles that!
10.6.2008 4:31pm
Chuck Pelto (mail) (www):
TO: Mac
RE: Not Just THAT

In fact, it was not till 2007, with a Democratic Congress, did a bill pass to set up an agency to regulate Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac



What bill was that?.
-- Mac


But HOW did it, if it exists, 'regulate' Fannie and Freddie? Require the two to provide money to the Dodd, Frank and/or Obama campaigns?

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[The devil is always in the details.]
10.6.2008 5:05pm
jukeboxgrad (mail):
elliot:

I see you're determined to keep shredding your own credibility.

Ayers says he wishes he had bombed more Americans


Except that Ayers never "bombed … Americans" and never said "he wishes he had bombed more Americans." And what he did say was taken out of context.

Can you tell us if Ayers is mainstream?


Ask Gov. Sanford and Arnold Weber.
10.6.2008 5:56pm
jukeboxgrad (mail):
yankev:

how many innocent civilians did the Viet Cong and the North Vietnamese kill?


There are all sorts of criminals all over the world. Always have been, always will be. But I have a special duty to deal with the ones who happen to be on my payroll.

And then there was the revelation decades later that this supposed quote was fabricated.


Do you have a reliable source? Undocumented, uncorroborated claims by Mona Charen don't count.

McCain was fully exonerated in connection with the S&L collapse


That's a bit of an oversimplification. He was cleared of the charges against him, but he was criticized for exercising "poor judgment." That seems to be an ongoing problem for him. McCain also admitted that what he did "was the wrong thing to do."
10.6.2008 5:57pm
jukeboxgrad (mail):
ben:

the right would have never nominated a man with such close associations to an unrepentant abortion clinic bomber or who attended Klan rallies


Here's some information about the man the right nominated:

THE COMPANY THAT HE KEEPS.... Here's John McCain's latest line of attack: "Americans need to ask themselves if they've ever befriended an unrepentant terrorist, or had a convicted felon help them buy their house." Substantively, this is ridiculous, of course, but everyone, everywhere, knew this was coming.

We can, however, take this a step further.

Americans need to ask themselves if they've ever befriended a convicted felon who advised his supporters on how best to shoot federal officials in the head. John McCain has.

Americans need to ask themselves if they've ever used the money of a convicted criminal to help them buy their house. John McCain has.

Americans need to ask themselves if they've ever befriended a radical televangelist who has lashed out at the Roman Catholic Church, calling it, among other things, "the great whore" and "a false cult system." John McCain has.

Americans need to ask themselves if they've ever sought economic advice from a far-right former lawmaker who "has diminished American solvency and power beyond the wildest dreams of anti-American terrorists." John McCain has.

Americans need to ask themselves if they've ever befriended a radical televangelist who blamed the attacks of Sept. 11 on Americans. John McCain has.

My point isn't that the presidential campaign should be based on who the candidates have met; my point is that we could probably play this foolish game all day long. And on balance, McCain's ties to a pretty motley crew are far more direct and meaningful than Obama's. So maybe we can just skip it and debate substance for the next month?

Rezko? Keating. Ayers? Liddy. Wright? Hagee. Hell, we've barely started to talk about some of the high-priced lobbyists on McCain's campaign staff and their controversial client lists. This is what McCain and his cronies want to spend the last 29 days of the campaign debating, because to them, anything beats talking about the economy. How very sad.

The Republican strategy of making the rest of the campaign about Bill Ayers and Tony Rezko is very tiresome, painfully unnecessary, and as Ezra explained last night, probably self-defeating.

[McCain's latest] assault probably will fail, and it probably will be defeated. Because the Obama campaign has figured out something pretty basic about it: Though the attacks work to touch something very deep and very real and a little bit scary in the American psyche, they're fundamentally pretty stupid. Stupider, I'd guess, than the voters, who may find a campaign based on reference to aging radicals and Columbia professors and crimes from the 1960s a bit esoteric amidst a financial crisis.


That's without getting into Palin's ties to an organization that openly promotes this belief:

I'm an Alaskan, not an American. I've got no use for America or her damned institutions.


Or Palin's witchhunter who talked about "the Israelites" and the "wealth of the wicked." Shortly before he gave her an anti-witch blessing.

Or Palin sitting through "a sermon by the founder of Jews for Jesus, who argued that the Palestinian terrorist acts against Israel were God's 'judgment' on the Jews because they hadn't accepted Jesus."

Anyway, McCain is going to be sorry that he handed Obama a giant opening to spend the next few weeks talking about Keating. The intro video on that subject has been viewed over 500,000 times since yesterday.
10.6.2008 5:57pm
jukeboxgrad (mail):
ejo:

ah, the keating talking points make an appearance, irregardless of the fact that McCain was found to have committed no misconduct and Robert Bennett, counsel for Congress and a Democrat, thought he shouldn't have been included.


Ah, trotting out Bennett's statement, without mentioning that at the time he made that statement he was working as McCain's lawyer.

the Lincoln collapse cost taxpayers 3.4 billion per my quick google


See here:

By November 1989, the estimated cost of the overall savings and loan crisis had reached $500 billion


The issue went beyond Keating.

the FM/FM debacle with its fallout continuing is costing hundreds of billions with some saying costs will approach a trillion dollars


What a shame that McCain's campaign manager was in bed with them, and tried to hide it.
10.6.2008 5:57pm
jukeboxgrad (mail):
mac:

Because I have a life


That's funny. But you still have time to make a false claim, and then show up here to offer a lame excuse for why you have never taken responsibility, even now, for making that false claim. In other words, you're not too busy to lie. You're just too busy to tell the truth. Interesting how that works.
10.6.2008 5:57pm
jukeboxgrad (mail):
pelto:

maybe he [Weber] kept his association with Ayers a secret


He didn't.

like whatzhername did about writing a book praising Obama from the GOP when the VP candidate debate moderator was being negotiated


That was no secret either. Ifill's book was discussed in the press on multiple occasions. For example, she discussed her book publicly on 5/8. Things that are published in the newspaper are not usually referred to as "secret."

Ayers confessed to being involved with bombing the Pentagon.


Not exactly. He has made contradictory statements on that. One statement is this:

I didn't actually bomb the Pentagon


Also, the question you asked was this:

How many military installations did Liddy blow up?


That implies success. The Weathermen didn't succeed in blowing up the Pentagon. They got as far as wrecking a women's bathroom.
10.6.2008 5:57pm
Grover Gardner (mail):

Do facts matter to you, Grover? As was pointed out, McCain was fully exonerated in connection with the S&L collapse.


More than they do to you, apparently. McCain was NOT "fully exonerated"--he was criticized by the Senate Ethics Committee for exhibiting poor judgement. He should NOT have gotten involved with Keating. But he DID. Those are the FACTS.

On the other hand, you propose that Obama, who's been in the Senate all of three years, has his "fingerprints all over" the collapse of Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae. Maybe you could provide some FACTS about that--because the Sowell article is woefully short of them. Here are some FACTS:


According to the Senate Lobbying Database, the lobbying firm of Charlie Black, one of McCain's top aides, made at least $820,000 working for Freddie Mac from 1999 to 2004. The McCain campaign's vice-chair Wayne Berman and its congressional liaison John Green made $1.14 million working on behalf of Fannie Mae for lobbying firm Ogilvy Government Relations. Green made an additional $180,000 from Freddie Mac. Arther B. Culvahouse Jr., the VP vetter who helped John McCain select Sarah Palin, earned $80,000 from Fannie Mae in 2003 and 2004, while working for lobbying and law firm O'Melveny &Myers LLP. In addition, Politico reports that at least 20 McCain fundraisers have lobbied for Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, pocketing at least $12.3 million over the last nine years.

For years McCain campaign manager Rick Davis was head of the Homeownership Alliance, a lobbying association that included Fannie Mae, Freddie Mac, real estate agents, homebuilders, and non-profits. According to Politico, the organization opposed congressional attempts at regulation of Fannie and Freddie, along the lines of what John McCain is currently proposing. In his capacity of president of the group, Davis went on record in 2003 and insisted that no further reform of the lenders was necessary, in contradiction to his current boss's sentiments. "[Fannie and Freddie] are subject to an innovative and stringent risk-based capital stress test," Davis wrote. "The toughest in the financial services industry."
10.6.2008 6:01pm
Elliot123 (mail):
"The fact is, like it or not, Bill Ayers *is* mainstream. He's got jobs and degrees and appointments out the wazoo."

Well, that's interesting. Suppose a guy with an equally enlerged wazoo says he lynched blacks and regrets he didn't lynch more blacks? Is he mainstream, too?
10.6.2008 6:15pm
A.W. (mail):
Jukie

Do you really think you have any credibility left after you cite NVA numbers?

Hey and Baghdad Bob backs you up, too. So does Tokyo Rose!
10.6.2008 6:23pm
ejo:
more silliness from grover, sockpuppet of the Obama campaign. gg, who received the big bucks from our friends at fannie and freddie? who has two of the defrauders working with his campaign? do the names raines (economic advisor) and johnson (vp vetter) ring any bells? exonerated means being found not to have engaged in any misconduct-isn't that what happened, gg? or, are you just making things up again. do you have any shame?
10.6.2008 6:27pm
jukeboxgrad (mail):
aw:

Do you really think you have any credibility left after you cite NVA numbers?


Their numbers are probably somewhere in the ballpark. If you have a better source, let's see it. Oh, I forgot. Your typical approach to the issue of sourcing is to quote no sources at all.
10.6.2008 6:55pm
jukeboxgrad (mail):
ejo:

exonerated means being found not to have engaged in any misconduct


Not exactly. It means "free from guilt or blame." If the result of a judicial process is to determine that someone exercised poor judgment, that's definitely a kind of blame. And that's the situation McCain was in. And he admitted himself that what he did was wrong. In other words, he accepted blame.
10.6.2008 6:57pm
Fury:
jukeboxgrad writes:

"That was no secret either. Ifill's book was discussed in the press on multiple occasions. For example, she discussed her book publicly on 5/8. Things that are published in the newspaper are not usually referred to as "secret."

I believe your point is not germane. Hopefully a person would affirmatively indicate that they are writing such a book to the debate commission, instead of leaving it up for others to determine, which appears to be what you are advocating. The affirmative declaration would seem to be the most ethical thing to do.
10.6.2008 7:02pm
Elliot123 (mail):
For red meat fans of any persuasion, take a look at the McCain speech linked on PowerLine. Obama and McCain have both been blathering about taking off the gloves, and I'm glad someone has finally done it. Eagerly awaitimg a response from The One.
10.6.2008 7:09pm
JosephSlater (mail):
Elliot123:

I suspect you will find your answer in the polls. And I suspect it is an answer you will not like.
10.6.2008 7:22pm
jukeboxgrad (mail):
fury:

your point is not germane


I was responding to someone who claimed the book was a "secret." That claim is false.
10.6.2008 7:23pm
richard cabeza:
And I suspect it is an answer you will not like.

If making a campaign issue out of this is bad news for McCain votes, he'll still be more respected in the end.
10.6.2008 7:37pm
Yankev (mail):

There are all sorts of criminals all over the world. Always have been, always will be. But I have a special duty to deal with the ones who happen to be on my payroll.
There was a war going on. If there is any credible evidence that McCain committed war crimes, I haven't seen it.



Do you have a reliable source? Undocumented, uncorroborated claims by Mona Charen don't count.
After following the link you posted, I am persuaded that Mona Charen appears to have been mistaken.
10.6.2008 7:41pm
A.W. (mail):
Jukie

You relied on the "official" number of a totalitarian regime. you are officially a nitwit.
10.6.2008 7:48pm
JosephSlater (mail):
If making a campaign issue out of this is bad news for McCain votes, he'll still be more respected in the end.

I suspect just the opposite. For a guy who promised a respectful campaign, McCain has spent far too much time doing counter-productive, negative attacks. The attacks won't stick. People, or at least the overwhelming majority of them, don't think Obama is some crazed radical, because he's quite obviously not. And McCain will be known as the guy pushing that false meme as the economy was tanking around him. Outside the shrinking "base" of the Republican party, it will be (correctly) seen as an act of political cynicism and desperation.
10.6.2008 7:58pm
jukeboxgrad (mail):
yankev:

If there is any credible evidence that McCain committed war crimes, I haven't seen it.


I didn't mean to imply that McCain committed war crimes. I think it's likely that he killed civilians, but I realize that's not necessarily a war crime. I was referring more generally to the idea of why I would focus special attention on what the US does, as compared with what another country does.

After following the link you posted, I am persuaded that Mona Charen appears to have been mistaken.


Thank you for graciously acknowledging this. But it's Johnny Canuck, not me, who gets credit for posting the helpful link.
10.6.2008 7:59pm
richard cabeza:
The attacks won't stick. People, or at least the overwhelming majority of them, don't think Obama is some crazed radical, because he's quite obviously not.

That's true. Radicalism is mainstream, and Leftism is just "the truth" now. The destruction of a society of voluntary association and laws is sown into every equality-of-outcome-based institution, PSA, and piece of redistributionary legislation.

I'm sorry that you think this is a good thing. Those of us out here who still think that government's job is anything but social justice will still be here to rebuild when your Left kills itself off, much like it tried to do early last century.
10.6.2008 8:04pm
jukeboxgrad (mail):
aw:

You relied on the "official" number of a totalitarian regime


I'm inclined to think that a questionable source might be better than no source at all. But I guess you feel differently, since no source at all is typically what you provide.
10.6.2008 8:06pm
jukeboxgrad (mail):
cabeza:

redistributionary legislation


You mean like TARP?
10.6.2008 8:12pm
richard cabeza:
I have to buy my tarps at Home Depot and Lowe's like everybody else, so no. I don't see where you're going with this.
10.6.2008 8:15pm
jukeboxgrad (mail):
I guess it's possible you're not joking. TARP.
10.6.2008 8:26pm
richard cabeza:
That's far from the most redistributionalist legislation in history, but it comes close. Usually wealth redistribution leverages theft in order to finance inner-city thugs and undermine the market at the individual level; the bailout is a wholesale market risk adjustment, which undermines it at the investment-bank level.

What is your point?
10.6.2008 8:47pm
Tony Tutins (mail):

again, who stood for regulating FM

Glad you mentioned that. McCain's belated co-sponsorship of the Hagel housing reform bill failed to persuade the Republican-dominated banking committee to send the bill to the floor.

forgot about jim johnson?

Thomas Sowell does not mention a Jim Johnson in the linked article.

What bill was that?

The "HOUSING AND ECONOMIC RECOVERY ACT OF 2008, Public Law 110-289, 110th Congress

7/30/2007 Introduced in House
8/4/2007 Passed/agreed to in House: On passage Passed by recorded vote: 241 - 172
4/10/2008 Passed/agreed to in Senate: Passed Senate with an amendment and an amendment to the Title by Yea-Nay Vote. 84 - 12.
7/30/2008 Signed by President.
7/30/2008 Became Public Law No: 110-289

A relevant excerpt:

TITLE I—REFORM OF REGULATION OF ENTERPRISES

Subtitle A—Improvement of Safety and Soundness Supervision

SEC. 1101. ESTABLISHMENT OF THE FEDERAL HOUSING FINANCE AGENCY.

The Federal Housing Enterprises Financial Safety and Soundness Act
of 1992 (12 U.S.C. 4501 et seq.) is
amended by striking sections 1311 and 1312 and inserting the following:

``SEC. 1311. ESTABLISHMENT OF THE FEDERAL HOUSING FINANCE AGENCY.

``(a) Establishment.—There is established the Federal Housing
Finance Agency, which shall be an independent agency of the Federal
Government.
``(b) General Supervisory and Regulatory Authority.—
``(1) In general.—Each regulated entity shall, to the
extent provided in this title, be subject to the supervision and
regulation of the Agency.
``(2) Authority over fannie mae, freddie mac, the federal
home loan banks, and the office of finance.—The Director shall
have general regulatory authority over each regulated entity and
the Office of Finance, and shall exercise such

[[Page 122 STAT. 2662]]

general regulatory authority, including such duties and
authorities set forth under section 1313, to ensure that the
purposes of this Act, the authorizing statutes, and any other
applicable law are carried out.
10.6.2008 8:53pm
Elliot123 (mail):
"I suspect you will find your answer in the polls. And I suspect it is an answer you will not like."

You mean The One isn't going to respond? He told us when he won the primary that the waters had begun to recede and the planet had begun to heal itself. Then he told us he was The One we had been waiting for. And he doesn't know how to take off the gloves? That's OK. Maybe Putin pals around with Ayers, too. Perhaps they shop for roofing nails together.
10.6.2008 10:43pm
JosephSlater (mail):
Elliot:

I didn't say Obama doesn't know how to take off the gloves. I said it increasingly appears that he doesn't need to go the low road McCain is going.
10.6.2008 11:49pm
richard cabeza:
Politicians aren't supposed to tell the truth. Why would McCain stoop so low?
10.7.2008 12:04am
A.W. (mail):
Jukie

Sorry, but when indicting your own country, you need a better source than the word of THE NORTH VIETNAMESE.

And yes, sometimes that means you have no source of information at all. Don't like it? Take it up with THE NORTH VIETNAMESE REGIME.
10.7.2008 1:15am
Elliot123 (mail):
"I didn't say Obama doesn't know how to take off the gloves. I said it increasingly appears that he doesn't need to go the low road McCain is going."

What's low about investigating a candidate's past associations, accomplishments, and statements?
10.7.2008 1:16am
Grover Gardner (mail):

Suppose a guy with an equally enlerged wazoo says he lynched blacks and regrets he didn't lynch more blacks? Is he mainstream, too?


Example, please.


more silliness from grover, sockpuppet of the Obama campaign. gg, who received the big bucks from our friends at fannie and freddie? who has two of the defrauders working with his campaign? do the names raines (economic advisor) and johnson (vp vetter) ring any bells? exonerated means being found not to have engaged in any misconduct-isn't that what happened, gg? or, are you just making things up again. do you have any shame?


Re Raines: FACTS, please. Re Johnson: He's gone. Response to McCain FACTS, please.


For red meat fans of any persuasion, take a look at the McCain speech linked on PowerLine.


Oops. forgot to respond to FACTS.


I'm sorry that you think this is a good thing. Those of us out here who still think that government's job is anything but social justice will still be here to rebuild when your Left kills itself off, much like it tried to do early last century.


Meanwhile, on the Republican BAILOUT front...


He told us when he won the primary that the waters had begun to recede and the planet had begun to heal itself.


And what did McCain tell us about the economy. three hours before he contradicted himself?


While the Obama camp talked of how the bankruptcy of Lehman Brothers Holdings and selloff of Merrill Lynch posed a threat to the nation's economy, McCain initially told supporters in a speech in Jacksonville, Fla., that while there was trouble on Wall Street, the nation's economy was still strong.


See the Wall F*cking Street Journal.
10.7.2008 1:22am
Grover Gardner (mail):
McCain is BURIED in this crisis.
10.7.2008 1:26am
richard cabeza:
Republican BAILOUT front

You do know that (percentage and absolutely) more Democrats than Republicans voted for it, right? And that Barney Frank was porking Fannie Mae's exec?

Or are you joking? I can't tell because you don't make many complete sentences, and you make no complete ideas.
10.7.2008 1:55am
A.W. (mail):
Jukie

I could picture you as a detective.

Me: so we have this person they call Pallin’ Sarah, active in her local chapter of GOP for America.
You: arrest her!
Me: she is dead.
You: are you sure she isn’t faking?
Me: (sigh.) Yes. We are investigating who killed her.
You: oh, look at these condoms. She clearly is a complete slut.
Me: she’s married and this is their bedroom.
You: you mean she has sex with her husband? Disgusting.
Me: Moving on... So right now, we have no witnesses.
You: oh, well, we have Mr. Ho Chi Minh. He says he saw the whole thing and that Officer George Walker did it.
Me: I already talked to Minh. He’s a known pathological liar. In fact, he told me he was the queen of England.
You: I believe him.
Me: The time of death was 11 p.m. last night. We have him on surveillance video robbing an convenience store at that exact time. He saw nothing.
You: But without him, we have no source of information! George Walker will run free!
Me: How do you know he did anything wrong at all?
You: Well, he shot Madam Hussein.
Me: We have been over this before. Hussein had just killed 17 nuns and was pointing a gun at him.
You: Yeah, but the gun had no bullets!
Me: And how would officer Walker know that?
You: Because Walker is a republican. So Walker shot an unarmed man. And lied later saying we found a weapon on her. He is a liar.
Me: Actually, we also found a bloody knife on Hussein’s corpse and the nun’s blood all over it.
You: Don’t you get it? He’s a republican. So he is guilty! Guilty! Guilty!
Me: How did you become a cop again?
10.7.2008 2:02am
Grover Gardner (mail):

You do know that (percentage and absolutely) more Democrats than Republicans voted for it, right?


Whose bill is it?


I can't tell because you don't make many complete sentences, and you make no complete ideas.


I think what I'm saying is pretty clear.
10.7.2008 2:16am
richard cabeza:
No, you're being opaque, probably to prove a point that doesn't exist.
10.7.2008 2:27am
Mac (mail):
It looks right now that Obama is going to win. A lot can happen between now and election day, so there is room for doubt. However, I think we are in for a very rough time if Obama wins.

What I want to know is, is there anyone who keeps tabs on how Congress invests? I am resigned to the country going down the tubes, but I don't intend to go down with it. I am sure Democrat politicians don't intend to either even as they lead us to destruction.
10.7.2008 2:58am
Grover Gardner (mail):

No, you're being opaque, probably to prove a point that doesn't exist.


Whose bailout is it again, richard?
10.7.2008 3:16am
Grover Gardner (mail):

What I want to know is, is there anyone who keeps tabs on how Congress invests?


Why, yes, Mac, there is!

http://www.opensecrets.org/
10.7.2008 3:20am
Chuck Pelto (mail) (www):
TO: All
RE: jukeboxgrad

The character who believes what Hanoi tells him about 4 million dead in Viet Nam is expecting US to believe what he says about anything? Without citing supporting evidence?

I wonder what color of crayola he's smoking.

Regards,

Chuck(le)
[A lack of evidence is evidence of lying.]
10.7.2008 9:13am
A.W. (mail):
Chuck

Its worse than that. You should see the crazy he has been shovelling in other threads. See here, here and here.

My personal favorite exchange (over several comments):

> [him] Conceiving Trig was an irresponsible act

> [me] How do you know that was intentional?

> [him] I didn't say it was, but it doesn't matter. Unless you want to claim that their act of sexual intercourse was unintentional.

> [me] Oh wow, so you are promoting an abstinence only approach to birth control... in a marriage. You are mad that Todd actually had sex with Sarah!

> [me, cont.] That is [laughter] pretty remarkable.

But i have to honestly thank you. You have coaxed him into giving us the ultimate gift. What a maroon!
10.7.2008 9:47am
Strand:
Why in the world does any of this matter *right now*?
10.7.2008 12:58pm
A.W. (mail):
Strand

You are right. What possible relevance could it be that Obama apparently doesn't take terrorism very seriously?
10.7.2008 1:46pm
Mac (mail):
But HOW did it, if it exists, 'regulate' Fannie and Freddie? Require the two to provide money to the Dodd, Frank and/or Obama campaigns?

Also, sex. Franks was in bed, literally with Moses who was a "Fannie Mae executive at the forefront of the agency's push to deregulate Fannie Mae throughout the 1990's."

They lived together until 1998. Am unsure when they started, but Moses was calling himself a Congressional spouse in 1991.

And, that great icon of the Republican Party, Bill Clinton, had this to say re this mess.


Although Frank now blames Republicans for the failure of Fannie and Freddie, he spent years blocking GOP lawmakers from imposing tougher regulations on the mortgage giants. In 1991, the year Moses was hired by Fannie, the Boston Globe reported that Frank pushed the agency to loosen regulations on mortgages for two- and three-family homes, even though they were defaulting at twice and five times the rate of single homes, respectively.

Three years later, President Clinton’s Department of Housing and Urban Development tried to impose a new regulation on Fannie, but was thwarted by Frank. Clinton now blames such Democrats for planting the seeds of today’s economic crisis.

"I think the responsibility that the Democrats have may rest more in resisting any efforts by Republicans in the Congress or by me when I was president, to put some standards and tighten up a little on Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac," Clinton said recently.


Republicans should have taken action sooner, yes. They are not blameless. But, just blaming them will not get you very far in figuring out what really went wrong.

Here is the full article.
www.foxnews.com/printer_friendly_story/0,3566,432501,00.html

PS You are right about the bill in 07. However, the meltdown had begun and it was way too little too late.
10.7.2008 1:58pm
Mac (mail):
Grover,

Thank you very much. That appears to be an excellent site.

Now, to determine who is invested somewhere because they are bought and paid for, who is invested because they plan on giving sweetheart deals and who is invested because they are smart and know the company is a good bet. So few of the latter, I fear.

Smart and Congress, such an oxymoron.
10.7.2008 2:51pm
A.W. (mail):
Mac

I always liked this joke:

If pro is the opposite of con, then what is the opposite of congress?
10.7.2008 3:31pm
Mac (mail):
A.W.

Made my day.

Still laughing.
10.7.2008 5:22pm
A.W. (mail):
Mac, well allegedly it is a Paul Harvey quote, whoever that is. Funny, i thought it was someone else.

source.
10.7.2008 5:53pm
Yankev (mail):

Republicans should have taken action sooner, yes. They are not blameless. But, just blaming them will not get you very far in figuring out what really went wrong.
But if your goal is to win an elesction by distracting voters from figuring out what really went wrong, you can get very far indeed.
10.7.2008 8:00pm
Mac (mail):
Yes, Yankev, you are sp right. Depressing, isn't it?
10.8.2008 1:37am