The Ayers Attacks
Over at my other blog, I did a write-up of why I don’t expect the Ayers attacks to gain much traction, if anyone’s interested.
Remember, I do this to entertain me, not you.
Uncle Pays the Bills
 |
|
Find Local
|
Categories
- ATF (769)
- Death Match (10)
- Eminent Domain (225)
- In the bag (9)
- Notes to Junior (546)
- Poker (74)
- Recipes (142)
- Shotgun Noob (11)
- The Airing of Grievances (19)
- uncategorized (47,725)
October 10th, 2008 at 1:41 pm
The lack of traction is due to the reporting. People against Obama don’t care and people for Obama don’t care.
If it was reported the undecided would care.
Forest and trees.
October 10th, 2008 at 2:01 pm
The question isn’t whether or not Obama knew Ayers was a terrorist and whether or not they have a close relationship — the question is why won’t he be forthcoming on the topic, as well as other associations and periods of his career that are pretty much blank as far as most people are concerned.
Ayers was not “just some guy in the neighborhood” but rather someone he had a long relationship with, whether that relationship was close or not we don’t know because he won’t talk about it.
And, the followup quesiton, if he won’t talk about that, what else is he not talking about?
Despite the fact that I’m an “against Obama”-type, I *do* want these questions answered. After all, if the man gets into office, I want to know who he is now rather than find out later.
October 10th, 2008 at 2:10 pm
So… what exactly is the fear here? I don’t think any (rational) person really thinks Obama is a closet terrorist. Imagine Obama were completely forthcoming about his relationship with Ayers and it was bad news. What would that news look like?
October 10th, 2008 at 2:49 pm
Number 9:
See, that’s exactly the problem, though. “The undecided” count for about 10% of the population. You’re not going to get ratings reporting incessantly about a subject that 90% of your viewership doesn’t care about. Especially when that subject is already viewed by many as “old news.” Further, recent polls indicate that nearly two thirds of undecideds don’t care about the Ayers issue. So where’s the incentive for a ratings-driven organization to devote time to it?
Fox News, for their part, has been all over it. But again, their “undecided” viewers are torn between McCain, Barr, and not voting.
Lornkanaga:
From what I can tell, Obama’s relationship with Ayers is no more profound or deep than that of several Republicans, including Annenberg. As Brutal Hugger points out, what “there” do you really expect to be there? Plenty of ink has been spilled over this, and there’s just no evidence of a close relationship, another reason why this doesn’t stick. There’s at least as much (and probably a lot more) to link Sarah Palin to the secessionist AIP as there is to link Obama to Ayers, but you almost certainly dismiss the Palin/AIP link as a non-issue. I don’t see why Obama/Ayers is any different.
The Obama/Ayers line is a classic smear tactic: Guilt by association, using lack of evidence as evidence of conspiracy/cover-up. I just don’t see how it sticks.
October 10th, 2008 at 3:10 pm
The difference between the AIP and the Weathermen is that the AIP has never tried to kill anyone or destroy anything. From what I understand, the AIP is trying to convince Alaskans to *vote* to secede from the United States, not start a violent uprising.
As for what might come out regarding the Ayers/Obama relationship, who knows? Jerome Corsi(sp?) has just come back from Kenya with loads of papers that supposedly link Obama with the current dictator there (who is Obama’s cousin) and his violent rise to power, to include showing that Obama helped with planning the violence. Please note the word “supposedly” used in my last sentence–I’m not going to believe it until I see proof, but here’s just one more question.
Community organizers are pretty much glorified activists. Yes, they help people out with aid programs, but for the most part they work to agitate people into protesting for this, that, or the other thing.
To get back to the Ayers/Obama question–just how much of an activist was Obama while he was a community organizer, and has he ever even tacitly approved of violence as a form of activism?
Lastly, if McCain had any past associations with say, David Duke, wouldn’t the press be all over him with questions about it?
October 10th, 2008 at 3:21 pm
Lornkanaga:
If Ayers is still carrying out or advocating acts of violence, that would be a story. And the bigger story wouldn’t be his passing relationship with Obama, but his very direct relationship with the University of Chicago.
As for Corsi, pheh. He’s a two bit hack whose work simply cannot be taken seriously by anyone with even an ounce of intellectual honesty. It would be like citing Michael Moore as an authoritative source.
In any case, you’re proof of the point I’m trying to make: the only people who really care about any of this stuff are people who aren’t going to vote for Obama anyway. It’s like the Bush-AWOL stuff in reverse (except that there was a lot more evidence that Bush really was AWOL) — nobody really cares except for the people who have already made up their minds.
Finally, the press has asked Obama questions about Ayers. If they thought there was any “there” there, either in terms of substance or especially in terms of ratings, they’d be staying on it.
October 10th, 2008 at 3:35 pm
tgirsch,
I take it you see Ayers as an unrepentent former terrorist — you do know that he’s stated repeatedly that he doesn’t regret anything he did in those days and believes the Weathermen didn’t do enough. However, I don’t see him that way; to me he’s not a former terrorist just because he hasn’t bombed anything recently, he’s an unrepentent terrorist, period.
As for the press not wanting to cover the story “because there is no story”, do you remember Edwards affair and supposed love child? The press knew about that affair for ages but kept silent; it wasn’t until someone broke the story on the internet that they finally wrote about it, and then it wasn’t for a few weeks. Why was the press mum? Could it possibly be because Edwards is a…gasp…democrat?
October 10th, 2008 at 3:42 pm
Lornkanaga:
I don’t think that first sentence says what you wanted it to say. I’m not saying that I see Ayers as “repentent” or anything else. What I’m saying is that I don’t see Obama as a terrorist or terrorist sympathizer, and neither will any other rational person. Of course, if Obama’s past association with Ayers does make him a terrorist sympathizer, then the country is crawling with terrorist sympathizers, including anyone who’s ever taught at the University of Chicago while Ayers was there.
As for the Edwards affair, the MSM broke the news as soon as they had solid evidence to go on. They’d been burned before on that count (remember the McCain affair kerfuffle?), and if Spitzer is any indication, being a Democrat — even a popular one — doesn’t make you immune to the “liberal” media reporting negatively about you. (And of course, by the time Edwards’ affair was being alleged, he had already dropped out of the presidential race, so he was a second-tier figure.)
October 10th, 2008 at 5:11 pm
After all, if the man gets into office, I want to know who he is now rather than find out later.
You say this with a (presumably) straight face, even as Sarah Palin has stopped doing interviews with the press. How will we get to know who Sarah Palin is if she isn’t willing to do press conferences and interviews with what John McCain has referred to as his base?
The difference between the AIP and the Weathermen is that the AIP has never tried to kill anyone or destroy anything
Well, other than their founder being killed in an explosives sale gone, which I’m sure he planned to use for the most innocent of purposes. Not to mention his collaboration with Iran to get himself a speaking slot at the United Nations to spew his anti-American rhetoric.
But that misses the point completely. Obama met this guy and worked with on educational projects only later learning about his past. The quotes in Sept 2001 by Ayers happened 7 years after Obama first met him. Obama would have needed a crystal ball to realize who he was dealing with and what he would ultimately say.
Todd Palin joined the AIP 2 years after Vogler was killed. He clearly knew what the AIP stood for and its history.
the AIP is trying to convince Alaskans to *vote* to secede from the United States, not start a violent uprising.
What happened the last time that states voted to secede from the the United States?
October 10th, 2008 at 5:24 pm
I think we’re getting off the point I was trying to make about the Ayers/Obama relationship, or lack thereof, or whatever.
I want to know who Obama is before he’s elected, because IMO there’s a chance he will be elected. I don’t want surprises. When the Monika Lewinski(sp?) kerfuffle occurred, I wasn’t the least bit surprised; in fact, I was surprised so many people expressed shock in Clinton’s behavior. I’d done my homework–I didn’t like the man because he was a pig. I just want to do my homework with Obama.
I don’t like the fact that he won’t admit to anything unless the evidence is staring him in the face and he knows everyone else sees it too. I don’t like the fact that he won’t be forthright about his medical records, college records, work records, political relationships, personal relationships.
If there’s nothing bad in his background, why does he hide it? If there is something bad, let’s talk about it — how does he feel about whatever happened now?
Talk to me, Obama. These are questions an *American Citizen* wants to know about her future president, and I have a right to know these things!
I hope I’ve made my point this time.
October 10th, 2008 at 5:36 pm
Sarah Palin hasn’t stopped doing interviews with the press. I guess you’re not reading/listening to/watching those that are out there. Or, do you just consider any interview not done at CNN, CBS, ABC, NBC, or MSNBC to not be an interview worth checking out?
However, I do see your point, Mannish.
BTW, people who live in the city usually don’t need explosives, unless they work in demolition or construction. However, people who live in really rural areas have uses for explosives, lots of uses.
October 10th, 2008 at 6:10 pm
Lornkanaga:
I can understand wanting to “know who Obama is,” but the obsession with Ayers doesn’t seem terribly consistent with someone who wants to “get to know” someone. It’s more consistent with someone who wants dirt on someone. If you want to learn about Barack Obama, he has a public record that dates back to 1997, with voting records, floor speeches, etc. There’s plenty out there. Now, I suspect that you won’t like the overwhelming majority of what you find there. But that makes the obsession with Ayers more puzzling, not less so. If there’s plenty you can find to dislike in the public record, I don’t think playing Six Degrees of Kevin Bacon with Ayers is really going to sway you one way or the other.
If there’s any “there” there concerning Obama and Ayers (or Obama and Rev. Wright, for that matter), it’s going to involve Obama’s political opportunism, not any closet radical tendencies. If Obama were truly a radical at heart, his discipline in managing to completely conceal that fact from his record of public service would be quite impressive indeed.
I don’t like the fact that he won’t be forthright about his medical records
Err, and McCain has been forthright about his medical records?
Sarah Palin hasn’t stopped doing interviews with the press.
No, just the mainstream press. She’ll gladly take softballs from right-wing propaganda outlets, however. And in any case, you’ve completely ducked Manish’s point. If you’re afraid of an Obama presidency because you “don’t know him,” you should be shitting your pants with fear at the prospect of Palin being a heartbeat away…
October 10th, 2008 at 6:38 pm
Sarah Palin hasn’t stopped doing interviews with the press. I guess you’re not reading/listening to/watching those that are out there.
Getting thrown soft ball questions from Rush doesn’t count. Obama went on O’Reilly and answered tough questions. I’d like to see Palin answer questions from Rachel Maddow or even Brokaw. I’d like to see Palin take some tough questions, you know like what newspapers do you read?
I want to know who Obama is before he’s elected, because IMO there’s a chance he will be elected.
Fair enough..with regards to Ayers, Obama is someone who volunteered his time to serve on the board of a non-profit dedicated to increasing the quality of education. He served on this board with many conservatives and the primary funder of this organization was Ambassador Walter Annenberg, a Republican who was close to Nixon and Reagan.
After finding out that one of the board members, who was an expert on education, was a former terrorist, he chose to continue to serve on this charitable board to try to further its mission rather than quitting which would have helped no one.
people who live in the city usually don’t need explosives, unless they work in demolition or construction. However, people who live in really rural areas have uses for explosives, lots of uses.
whatever you say.
October 10th, 2008 at 6:38 pm
Hmmm. How shall I explain my acceptance of Palin. Woman’s intuition? Nah, that doesn’t even fly with me. Let’s just say that the more I learn about her the more I like her. Whereas with Obama, the more I learn about him (politics aside) the less I like him.
I was the same way with Bill Clinton. Amazingly enough, I used to lean left before Clinton — his presidency convinced me the right was the place to be. The more I learned about Bill Clinton, the less I liked him, and the less I liked the left. That’s not to say I was ever a Democrat, rather I was a centrist who leaned ever so slightly left, but believe me by the time “Baby Bush” came along I was a solid conservative.
I like Sarah Palin’s politics, and I feel quite comfortable with her a “heartbeat away” from the presidency.
I don’t like Obama’s politics, and I feel *really* unconfortable with the thought of him as our next president. I like him less than I ever disliked Bill Clinton before he got into office, which makes me wonder how much more I could dislike Obama if he ever gets into the highest seat in the land.
October 10th, 2008 at 8:09 pm
I would like to know when the liberal press, the same press that is supporting Obama through very favorable coverage, is the moral arbiter of who should be president or not. If we have to throw out Palin’s fair interviews in the right wing media, I do not see why we have to accept the interviews about Obama from the left.
As far as i know, Palin had the Gibson and Couric interviews. I believe Obama has only O’reilly as a challenging one. And I do not think O’reilly gutted his interview like Gibson or Couric.
Not that it matters either way for me. There is no spinning the fact that the Obama wants to take my guns away.
October 11th, 2008 at 12:46 am
TGirsch:
I think you’re confusing “would” with “should.” Ayers has never renounced his acts of violence, only reiterated that his only failing was in not going far enough. The University of Chicago should never have hired that criminal bastard, and having done so they should can him today, but again, should != would.
Of course they won’t, silly. There’s an election to win. If John McCain had had the exact same relationship with Tim McVeigh or David Duke, and had made the same lame excuses that he didn’t know about their background, the press would be on this like white on rice.
October 11th, 2008 at 2:38 am
Dan..give me a break. The liberal press (i.e. dailykos, the Nation) have no more influence than the conservative press (i.e. Fox, National Review). On the other hand, the MSM (a group that McCain has referred to as his base) threw Palin soft balls (like what newspapers do you read) and she still messed them up.
October 11th, 2008 at 11:43 am
Lornkanaga:
Thanks for making my point. Your mind is completely made up, so at this point you’re just looking for more confirmation bias. You don’t like Obama, and are looking for more reasons to not like him (and, if you’re lucky, convince other people to also not like him).
Xrlq:
I’ve come to expect conservatives whining and crying about the so-called “liberal media” (tell that to Al Gore), but I really expect better from you. It can’t possibly be because people like the liberal candidate better. Must somehow be the media‘s fault.
And the comparisons to McVeigh or Duke won’t fly, either. To make that comparison stick, At a minimum you’d have to pick some other extremist that 90% or more of the general public would have to Google up to figure out who the hell you’re talking about.
Finally, if the media really were eager to pounce on McCain’s associations with “criminal bastards,” they’d be making a huge deal about the fact that Kissinger is an adviser! 🙂
October 11th, 2008 at 1:19 pm
“Dan..give me a break. The liberal press (i.e. dailykos, the Nation) have no more influence than the conservative press (i.e. Fox, National Review). On the other hand, the MSM (a group that McCain has referred to as his base) threw Palin soft balls (like what newspapers do you read) and she still messed them up.”
– Uhhh, ok. Anyone that does not think the ‘major’ (i.e. liberal) media is in the tank for Obama is delusional. Get back to me when someone in the right-wing press gets a tingly feeling up his leg at the mention of McCain.
October 12th, 2008 at 8:58 pm
Anyone that does not think the ‘major’ (i.e. liberal) media is in the tank for Obama is delusional.
How is the media in the tank for Obama? Because they had the audacity to ask Palin tough questions like what news sources she uses? Because there has been wall-to-wall coverage of the report stating that Palin abused her power? (Oh wait, that didn’t seem to happen.)
Get back to me when someone in the right-wing press gets a tingly feeling up his leg at the mention of McCain.
well Rich Lowry apparently was masturbating during the VP debate. Beyond that McCain has referred to the MSM as his “base”.
October 13th, 2008 at 12:31 am
The University of Chicago should never have hired that criminal bastard, and having done so they should can him today
By that logic, the Annenberg family shouldn’t have given Ayers $50 million. Leonore Annenberg gave $2300 to the McCain campaign and she is listed as 1 of 100 former Ambassador’s that has endorsed McCain. Why is the McCain campaign palling around with people who have given $50 million to terrorists?
October 13th, 2008 at 10:39 am
Manish, you’re rapidly devolving into a parody of yourself. Yes, the Annenbergs should have told Ayers to take a flying leap (three flying leaps, actually, consisting of one for his criminal past, another for his terror-suympathizing present, and a third for the radical and counterproductive uses he had for the money requested), but no, their failure to propriately vet Ayers is not a reason for McCain to shun *them,* any more than Obama’s active engagement with the same terrorist is a reason to shun every Democrat who votes for Obama. Harping on six degrees of separation is silly. Harping on *one* longstanding degree of non-separation, followed by lame denials, isn’t.
October 13th, 2008 at 11:35 am
I may have to reassess my opinion on this one. On Friday, the perennially-wrong Ramesh Ponnuru went on The News Hour and said pretty much exactly what I just said about why these attacks won’t work. Ponnuru is up there in Bill Kristol territory, insofar as when you agree with him, it’s time to reconsider.
October 13th, 2008 at 12:37 pm
FYI, Ayers is a “professor” at the University of Illinois-Chicago, not the University of Chicago. Only a state-run university would give that sick man a job.
October 13th, 2008 at 1:21 pm
X..some critical thinking on your part would recognize that I’m not really criticizing McCain for his association with terrorists but merely mocking his characterization of Obama as such.
their failure to propriately [sic] vet Ayers is not a reason for McCain to shun *them,* any more than Obama’s active engagement with the same terrorist is a reason to shun every Democrat who votes for Obama
The Annenberg’s gave $10 million a year for 5 years. Surely, they would have found out about his past at some point and stopped the gravy train. By that definition, the Annenberg’s are palling around with terrorists much more than Obama as $10 million per year is a bigger contribution than a few hours of your time.
But let me put it this way…what if Obama accepted campaign contributions or trumpeted the support of Sami Al-Arian another funder of terrorists? How is this different than accepting money and trumpeting the endorsement of the Annenbergs? If I am to believe that helping Ayers long after his despicable acts is akin to supporting terror, than the Annenbergs are just as guilty. And there should be no difference in McCain accepting the support of terror supporters as if Obama had done the same thing.