Why Should Obama/Ayers Make Us Concerned?

[Kathianne]

http://volokh.com/archives/archive_2008_09_28-2008_10_04.shtml#1223178667


[David Bernstein, October 4, 2008 at 11:51pm] Trackbacks
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. Links to be found at site.

[avatar4321]

Because we are sane.

[bullypulpit]

Because Grampy Mc Cain and Milfy McMooseburger are getting beaten to death on the issues and they don't have any other intellectual ammunition?

And how's about that Keating Five scandal? Wasn't John McCain up to his eyeballs in that little scandal...? You remember the one that led to the collapse of the S&L industry?

[red states rule]

Because Grampy Mc Cain and Milfy McMooseburger are getting beaten to death on the issues and they don't have any other intellectual ammunition?

And how's about that Keating Five scandal? Wasn't John McCain up to his eyeballs in that little scandal...? You remember the one that led to the collapse of the S&L industry?

So now it is OK for a Dem to be friends with a terrorist, but it is inappropriate for a US SEn to have ties to a banker

BP here is Obama's buddy in his own words. Note the date this interview was published


No Regrets for a Love Of Explosives; In a Memoir of Sorts, a War Protester Talks of Life With the Weathermen

By DINITIA SMITH
Published: September 11, 2001
''I don't regret setting bombs,'' Bill Ayers said. ''I feel we didn't do enough.'' Mr. Ayers, who spent the 1970's as a fugitive in the Weather Underground, was sitting in the kitchen of his big turn-of-the-19th-century stone house in the Hyde Park district of Chicago. The long curly locks in his Wanted poster are shorn, though he wears earrings. He still has tattooed on his neck the rainbow-and-lightning Weathermen logo that appeared on letters taking responsibility for bombings. And he still has the ebullient, ingratiating manner, the apparently intense interest in other people, that made him a charismatic figure in the radical student movement.

Now he has written a book, ''Fugitive Days'' (Beacon Press, September). Mr. Ayers, who is 56, calls it a memoir, somewhat coyly perhaps, since he also says some of it is fiction. He writes that he participated in the bombings of New York City Police Headquarters in 1970, of the Capitol building in 1971, the Pentagon in 1972. But Mr. Ayers also seems to want to have it both ways, taking responsibility for daring acts in his youth, then deflecting it.

''Is this, then, the truth?,'' he writes. ''Not exactly. Although it feels entirely honest to me.''

But why would someone want to read a memoir parts of which are admittedly not true? Mr. Ayers was asked.

''Obviously, the point is it's a reflection on memory,'' he answered. ''It's true as I remember it.''

Mr. Ayers is probably safe from prosecution anyway. A spokeswoman for the Justice Department said there was a five-year statute of limitations on Federal crimes except in cases of murder or when a person has been indicted.

Mr. Ayers, who in 1970 was said to have summed up the Weatherman philosophy as: ''Kill all the rich people. Break up their cars and apartments. Bring the revolution home, kill your parents, that's where it's really at,'' is today distinguished professor of education at the University of Illinois at Chicago. And he says he doesn't actually remember suggesting that rich people be killed or that people kill their parents, but ''it's been quoted so many times I'm beginning to think I did,'' he said. ''It was a joke about the distribution of wealth.''

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9F02E1DE1438F932A2575AC0A9679C8B 63

[Kathianne]

Because Grampy Mc Cain and Milfy McMooseburger are getting beaten to death on the issues and they don't have any other intellectual ammunition?

And how's about that Keating Five scandal? Wasn't John McCain up to his eyeballs in that little scandal...? You remember the one that led to the collapse of the S&L industry?

The media well covered the Keating 5, including McCain. After investigation it was found that McCain had done nothing wrong, other than associating with the wrong people-the appearance of impropriety.

Obama and Ayers is relevant, due to the nature of Ayers' philosophy regarding schools' purpose. That Obama seems to share that philosophy, in deeds not words, is of concern for the American people.

[Yurt]

Because Grampy Mc Cain and Milfy McMooseburger are getting beaten to death on the issues and they don't have any other intellectual ammunition?

And how's about that Keating Five scandal? Wasn't John McCain up to his eyeballs in that little scandal...? You remember the one that led to the collapse of the S&L industry?

you randy goat, you think she is a milf :laugh2:

[actsnoblemartin]

wow real mature

who cares, if the savior hangs out with terrorists, and associates with anti american preachers and pretends not to be aware of it, if this were a republican lol :laugh2:


Because Grampy Mc Cain and Milfy McMooseburger are getting beaten to death on the issues and they don't have any other intellectual ammunition?

And how's about that Keating Five scandal? Wasn't John McCain up to his eyeballs in that little scandal...? You remember the one that led to the collapse of the S&L industry?

[mundame]

I think Obama's close political ties to a known communist agitator is a very, very bad sign.

Sheeeeeeeeeeeesh, and people complained because Hillary once wrote a paper at conservative Wellesley College on Saul Alinsky!! But Obama owes his political start to an actual communist and one-time revolutionary, and that's supposed to be just fine.

I think this far-left thinking is bound to influence his reign.

[bullypulpit]

you randy goat, you think she is a milf :laugh2:

Yep...I got my satyr costume all ready for her. wink, wink...nudge, nudge.

[bullypulpit]

The media well covered the Keating 5, including McCain. After investigation it was found that McCain had done nothing wrong, other than associating with the wrong people-the appearance of impropriety.

Obama and Ayers is relevant, due to the nature of Ayers' philosophy regarding schools' purpose. That Obama seems to share that philosophy, in deeds not words, is of concern for the American people.

The only documented links between Ayers and Obama is their living in the same neighborhood, serving on a volunteer board and on a schools project. Oh, and Ayers once hosted a kaffee klatsch for Obama's first run for office.

Ayers is relevant only to the right wing talking heads, and the McCain/Palin campaign, as a foil to distract from the very real issues they are being beaten to death with. If you will cast your mind back to the Democratic primary, the Clinton campaign bandied these same empty charges about in an attempt to secure the nomination...to no avail.

You would be better served by actually reading the <a href=http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/04/us/politics/04ayers.html?_r=2&th=&emc=th&pagewanted=print>NY Times Article</a> Palin refers to instead of the right wing drivel you have been reading and listening to.

[Kathianne]

The only documented links between Ayers and Obama is their living in the same neighborhood, serving on a volunteer board and on a schools project. Oh, and Ayers once hosted a kaffee klatsch for Obama's first run for office.

Ayers is relevant only to the right wing talking heads, and the McCain/Palin campaign, as a foil to distract from the very real issues they are being beaten to death with. If you will cast your mind back to the Democratic primary, the Clinton campaign bandied these same empty charges about in an attempt to secure the nomination...to no avail.

You would be better served by actually reading the <a href=http://www.nytimes.com/2008/10/04/us/politics/04ayers.html?_r=2&th=&emc=th&pagewanted=print>NY Times Article</a> Palin refers to instead of the right wing drivel you have been reading and listening to.
As I implied, you really appear clueless about the philosophy that links them. At this point, it's not worth my bothering for links, as I've posted them before and you are unwilling to break free from the herd.

[bullypulpit]

As I implied, you really appear clueless about the philosophy that links them. At this point, it's not worth my bothering for links, as I've posted them before and you are unwilling to break free from the herd.

I followed your link, dear lady...to a blog full of innuendo and supposition unsupported by any outside documentation. The links are ALL self-referencing to other posts on the same blog.

I don't know why you've succumbed to this mindless drivel being vomited forth by the GOP, the McCain campaign, and their various apologists, but it saddens me to see this. You are better than that.

As to the relevance of McCain's involvement in the Keating Five scandal, it is very relevant. It shows, very clearly, that McCain failed to learn anything from his involvement in the deregulation of the S&L industry and the financial havoc that exercise in deregulation wrought...a drop in the bucket compared to what the deregulation of the banking industry by then Senator Phil Gramm, McCain and others in the GOP dominated Congress of 1999...has brought us to.

[red states rule]

I followed your link, dear lady...to a blog full of innuendo and supposition unsupported by any outside documentation. The links are ALL self-referencing to other posts on the same blog.

I don't know why you've succumbed to this mindless drivel being vomited forth by the GOP, the McCain campaign, and their various apologists, but it saddens me to see this. You are better than that.

As to the relevance of McCain's involvement in the Keating Five scandal, it is very relevant. It shows, very clearly, that McCain failed to learn anything from his involvement in the deregulation of the S&L industry and the financial havoc that exercise in deregulation wrought...a drop in the bucket compared to what the deregulation of the banking industry by then Senator Phil Gramm, McCain and others in the GOP dominated Congress of 1999...has brought us to.

Why the hell would anyone defend A terrorist?

Why would you not ask Obama why he had dealing with this jerk who wanted to violently overthrow the US government?

Obama was so desperate to attain gain power he befriends a terrorist and libs could not care less

There is party politics and then there is just plain stupidity. Like MFM, libs have put their party ahead of the country in their quest for power

BTW, Democrats cleared McCain of any wrongdoing in the Keating mess

[Kathianne]

I followed your link, dear lady...to a blog full of innuendo and supposition unsupported by any outside documentation. The links are ALL self-referencing to other posts on the same blog.

I don't know why you've succumbed to this mindless drivel being vomited forth by the GOP, the McCain campaign, and their various apologists, but it saddens me to see this. You are better than that.

As to the relevance of McCain's involvement in the Keating Five scandal, it is very relevant. It shows, very clearly, that McCain failed to learn anything from his involvement in the deregulation of the S&L industry and the financial havoc that exercise in deregulation wrought...a drop in the bucket compared to what the deregulation of the banking industry by then Senator Phil Gramm, McCain and others in the GOP dominated Congress of 1999...has brought us to.

http://debatepolicy.com/showpost.php?p=306229&postcount=4

[bullypulpit]

Why the hell would anyone defend A terrorist?

Why would you not ask Obama why he had dealing with this jerk who wanted to violently overthrow the US government?

Obama was so desperate to attain gain power he befriends a terrorist and libs could not care less

There is party politics and then there is just plain stupidity. Like MFM, libs have put their party ahead of the country in their quest for power

BTW, Democrats cleared McCain of any wrongdoing in the Keating mess

Please, by all means, submit documented evidence of Obama 'defending' the actions of William Ayers in the Weather Underground.

As for associations, let's look at G. Gordon Liddy's association with John McCain, which seems to be more substantial than that of Obama and Ayers. Liddy held a fund-raiser for McCain at his home...Greeted McCain as an "old friend" on his radio show. Never mind that he helped plan the Watergate break in and advised the Branch Davidians in defending themselves that when firing at ATF agents they be "...better off shooting for the head". Does this mean McCain adocates the shooting of ATF officers in the head? McCain has his own radical associations, this one in particular, far more substantial than any supposed relationship between Obama and Ayers.

[bullypulpit]

http://debatepolicy.com/showpost.php?p=306229&postcount=4

Indeed, McCain's actions in the Keating scandal were exercises in "poor judgment". But then, that's long been a trait of McCain's.

<center><a href=http://www.latimes.com/news/politics/la-na-aviator6-2008oct06,0,7633315.story>Mishaps mark John McCain's record as naval aviator</a></center>

[Immanuel]

Please, by all means, submit documented evidence of Obama 'defending' the actions of William Ayers in the Weather Underground.

As for associations, let's look at G. Gordon Liddy's association with John McCain, which seems to be more substantial than that of Obama and Ayers. Liddy held a fund-raiser for McCain at his home...Greeted McCain as an "old friend" on his radio show. Never mind that he helped plan the Watergate break in and advised the Branch Davidians in defending themselves that when firing at ATF agents they be "...better off shooting for the head". Does this mean McCain adocates the shooting of ATF officers in the head? McCain has his own radical associations, this one in particular, far more substantial than any supposed relationship between Obama and Ayers.

This is at least the second liberal that has brought Liddy up this afternoon.

Anyone want to take a guess as to what this morning's Democratic Talking Points were or what smear tactics Obama will be using in the near future? :laugh2:

Immie

[bullypulpit]

This is at least the second liberal that has brought Liddy up this afternoon.

Anyone want to take a guess as to what this morning's Democratic Talking Points were or what smear tactics Obama will be using in the near future? :laugh2:

Immie

Ya don't need talking points to point out the obvious.

[stephanie]

Expect to see Bill Ayers and others like him in the Obambam administration if the wins..

this country is headed for deep doo doo..

sad days ahead