Patterico's Pontifications

10/6/2008

Josh Marshall Is a Liar

Filed under: 2008 Election,General,Scum — Patterico @ 7:26 pm

Josh Marshall:

So we have McCain today getting his crowd riled up asking who Barack Obama is and then apparently giving a wink and a nod when one member of the crowd screams out “terrorist.”

And later we have Sarah Palin with the same mob racket, getting members of the crowd to yell out “kill him“, though it’s not clear whether the call for murder was for Bill Ayers or Barack Obama. It didn’t seem to matter.

These are dangerous and sick people, McCain and Palin. Whatever it takes. Stop at nothing.

Here’s the video of the alleged wink and nod. I’d call it a disapproving flinch, but then, I’m not a liar like Josh Marshall.

But Marshall’s lies get even clearer than that.

Click on the link to the words “kill him” and you’ll see that a) it’s one man and not “members” of the audience; b) Palin didn’t “get” that one man to yell that out; and c) it’s crystal clear that the call referred to Bill Ayers and not Barack Obama.

“And, according to the New York Times, he [referring to Ayers — P] was a domestic terrorist and part of a group that, quote, ‘launched a campaign of bombings that would target the Pentagon and our U.S. Capitol,'” [Palin] continued.

“Boooo!” the crowd repeated.

“Kill him!” proposed one man in the audience.

Let’s assume that we know the man was not a Democrat planted near the reporters. We don’t know that, but let’s assume he’s not.

In that case, it’s still crystal clear that the story refers to one man, and not “members” of the audience. Palin said nothing that a rational person would interpret as a call for members of the audience to yell for the man to be killed, unless criticizing terrorists is automatically an act trying to encourage calls for murder.

And it’s 100% clear that the “Kill him!” reference was to Ayers. Saying it might have referred to Obama, and that it didn’t seem to matter, is 100% bullshit, completely made up by Josh Marshall.

And that is why I say that Josh Marshall is a liar.

164 Responses to “Josh Marshall Is a Liar”

  1. “unless criticizing terrorists is automatically an act trying to encourage calls for murder.”

    But this…
    Images of two guns were printed on the shirt, along with phrases including, “United States Terrorist Hunting Permit No Bag Limit.”

    apparently is…
    “There is no constitutionally protected political message contained in Donald’s shirt but there is a message of use of force, violence and violation of law in the form of illegal vigilante behavior,” Gardner wrote.

    http://www.mcall.com/news/local/all-tshirt1003-cnap,0,620873.story?track=rss

    4horsemen (5c89c1)

  2. And this is a surprise, how?

    EW1(SG) (d635e1)

  3. Methinks you doth protest too much.

    Josh Marshall is a jerk, but let’s accept that OUR CANDIDATE and his VP NOMINATION and the collective campaign apparatus have shifted into pushing the idea that Barack HUSSEIN Obama is a terrorist – and that he shouldn’t win the presidency because as a TERRORIST he is unqualified to govern.

    If that’s not what our party is doing today, I swear I’ll start going back to church.

    I for one am deeply disheartened by the fact that this is where we are today – and I came here to this particular conservative blog because I thought this was an outpost of genuine conservativism.

    Come on, guys. This is bad.

    Embarrassed Republican (b8c7e2)

  4. Moby, don’t you have an album to finish?

    SPQR (26be8b)

  5. Embarrassed – Are you a lifelong concerned christian conservative? Nobody called Obama a terrorist. Get a life.

    daleyrocks (d9ec17)

  6. Embarrassed Republican

    Right.

    Run along now and leave the critical thinking to adults.

    And no, someone whose political actions display a desire to fundamentally change a nation’s character and makeup shouldn’t win the presidency.

    EW1(SG) (d635e1)

  7. Not a concerned christian, daleyrocks.

    The John McCain that I voted for in the primary was a man of personal integrity. If this is what we’ve become in the wake of our Bush disaster, I don’t want any part of it.

    Embarrassed Republican (b8c7e2)

  8. “our Bush disaster”? Yep, Moby.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  9. EW1SG:

    “And no, someone whose political actions display a desire to fundamentally change a nation’s character and makeup shouldn’t win the presidency.”

    That’s more like it.

    Embarrassed Republican (b8c7e2)

  10. I don’t want any part of it.

    Nobody is buying any of your bologna.

    What is it that motivates you to waste your time attempting to fool adults into believing your made up stories?

    EW1(SG) (d635e1)

  11. Embarrassed Democrat:

    Give it up. Nobody’s buying it.

    Patterico (b0723a)

  12. That’s more like it.

    Specifically, since you seem to dense to pick it up on your own, BHO shouldn’t even be running in this race.

    He is incapable of upholding the standards required of a local dogcatcher, let alone the Presidency.

    EW1(SG) (d635e1)

  13. Hmmph. Wish I could say my poor grammar is a result of my mother teaching me to be parsimonious with certain vowels, but such is not the case.

    EW1(SG) (d635e1)

  14. Wait – you’re saying now that nobody yelled “terrorist”? I thought that was the point of the post – that somebody yelled “terrorist.” Does the video not show that? Huh?

    Embarrassed Republican (b8c7e2)

  15. We’re down 10 points in the polls and down 90 in the electoral college prediction and 59% of Americans think BARACK OBAMA is the person who can shore up the economy and you’re *surprised* when a frustrated Republican shows up?

    Embarrassed Republican (b8c7e2)

  16. Specifically, since you seem to dense to pick it up on your own, BHO shouldn’t even be running in this race. He is incapable of upholding the standards required of a local dogcatcher, let alone the Presidency.

    Because he’s a terrorist?

    Embarrassed Republican (b8c7e2)

  17. play it in slow mo and you can see the instant that mccain’s self respect disappears

    blm (4c0391)

  18. Methinks you doth protest too much.

    Wethinks you doth Troll and Astroturf too much. But hey, thanks for playing.

    play it in slow mo and you can see the instant that mccain’s self respect disappears

    Read this in slo mo and you can see the instant that your collective IQ vanishes.

    Dmac (cc81d9)

  19. He’s had tea with terrorists, and would meet unconditionally with others.

    Al (b624ac)

  20. Embarrassed Republican = Lifelong Democrat “randomly” chosen to be interviewed by the NYT.

    Perfect Sense (9d1b08)

  21. Let me see if I can follow the argument.

    Someone out hundreds, if not thousands of people at a McCain rally yells out what psychoacoustically sounds like “kill him” or “terrorist” or “right on!” or “yikes, bees!” and somehow…somehow, Sarah Palin incited the comment and John McCain approves by…I couldn’t even tell where the wink was let alone have a direct conduit into his mind.

    Meanwhile, Obama’s working with Ayers, worshiping at Mr. Jeremiah Wright’s “chruch,” and buying real estate with Tony Rezko is “distracting” at best and racist at worst?

    No wonder fake Republicans are so cross!

    CW Desiato (614aa7)

  22. “Embarrassed Republican”‘s behavior on this thread aside, I don’t think this is ever a safe assumption:

    Let’s assume that we know the man was not a Democrat planted near the reporters.

    I can’t think of a single instance in which that’s occurred, yet it’s what both sides claim happens every time they’re embarrassed by one of their own. (I suppose Gannon comes close, but that won’t help your case.) The tactic ought to be put to rest. Better we all act like adults and not try to claim that no lunatic fringes exist.

    That said, I think Marshall’s made one strong point: it doesn’t matter whether someone at a McCain or Palin event cheered on the murder of Obama or Ayers, because in both cases the thought is repellent and shouldn’t be a part of our political discourse. Think what you will about Ayers’s behavior in the ’60s and ’70s—and put aside that tripe about him being happy on 9/11, because he was clearly saying “we didn’t do enough to stop the war,” not “we didn’t bomb enough empty buildings”—he’s become a respectable and productive member of society. Just because you vehemently disagree with his political ideology doesn’t mean McCain/Palin should stomach people calling for his death at their rallies. (KC Johnson’s sound on this point.)

    There’s a larger point to be made here, but I don’t have time to do it in full. The short version is: when you import political statements of the ’60s and early ’70s into modern political discourse, you denude them of the urgency felt the Old Left, the New Left, and Nixon and the Law and Order crowd. What do you end up with? The angry remarks of teenagers and young professionals who’d themselves been or had seen those they’d loved been sent halfway around the world to die. Whether or not you agree with the righteousness of the cause, the simple fact is that emotions run hire when there’s conscription, because the sense of helplessness runs so much deeper.

    SEK (072055)

  23. Dude, you had me at “Josh Marshall.”

    I for one am deeply disheartened by the fact that this is where we are today – and I came here to this particular conservative blog because I thought this was an outpost of genuine conservativism.

    That’s beautiful, ER; what else does it say in Axelrod’s script?

    As for what McCain’s saying? In the words of a Democrat you might remember: “I don’t give ’em hell. I just tell the truth and they call it hell.”

    Jim Treacher (592cb4)

  24. “Embarrassed Republican”? Uh…no.

    Embarrassing yourself? YES!

    L.N. Smithee (cddba2)

  25. “Embarrassed Republican”’s behavior on this thread aside, I don’t think this is ever a safe assumption:

    Do you mean, you think it is always a safe assumption?

    Because you seem to go on to argue that it is a safe assumption.

    Me no understand your point.

    Patterico (cc3b34)

  26. Mebbe SEK needs to read what I said again?

    Patterico (cc3b34)

  27. “the collective campaign apparatus have shifted into pushing the idea that Barack HUSSEIN Obama is a terrorist”

    You missed the memo… ALL WE ARE QUESTIONING IS OBAMA’S JUDGMENT. He cavorted with extremists (Wright, Ayers) and corrupt shysters (Rezko). He was a leftwing Alinksyite community activist. Then he does left-radical education reform with an extremist who is still unrepentent about his terrorist ‘salad days’ and who feted Chavez last year. Ayers was and is a extremist. Obama was on a board with him for several years. And Ayers funded him and had a fundraiser.

    but its not just that work. Obama *ALSO* was on the Joyce Foundation board, while they engaged in egregious violations of law review ethical standards in ‘buying’ law review journal issues to push anti-2nd-amendment ‘scholarship’ (that was shoddy).

    ” – and that he shouldn’t win the presidency because as a … leftwing anti-2nd-amendment pro-abortion extremist tax-hiking drunken-sailor-style-spending foreign-policy-sucking empty suit … he is unqualified to govern.

    “If that’s not what our party is doing today, I swear I’ll start going back to church.”

    Get yer butt in the pew next Sunday then. you lied.
    But when you do donate, be careful what they spend it on:
    http://travismonitor.blogspot.com/2008/10/obama-left-wing-alinsky-method-product.html

    Travis Monitor (cfa2f1)

  28. SPQR wrote: Moby, don’t you have an album to finish?

    Uh-uh. He finally figured out Eminem was right — “It’s over. Nobody listens to techno.”

    L.N. Smithee (cddba2)

  29. Axelrod is a red diaper baby, too. Check it out. What wonderful associates doth have the Messiah.

    lawrence franko (dfea8c)

  30. Classic Moby

    JD (f7900a)

  31. Hey, great work, Pat. You have an audience member at Sarah Palin’s VP rally calling for extrajudicial killing, and Sarah Palin, profile in courage and moral clarity that she is, doesn’t attempt to make a wildly obvious statement like, “that’s an ugly and wrong sentiment and I reject it” in any way, and….

    and if Josh Marshall hadn’t drawn a secondary, judgmental conclusion about the event you personally feel to be inacccurate, you wouldn’t have said a word freakin’ one about it.

    and…since he did… your sole conclusion is “Josh Marshall is a liar”. You apparently have no objection whatsoever for calls for extrajudicial killing, endorsed by the presence and passive acquiesence of the Republican VP nominee.

    Congradulations. Sarah Palin has given us a world-class example of how easy it is to commit the sin of tolerance of barbarism that you keep hanging on Barack Obama’s neck. And you’re so deep in the tank, you utterly failed to notice.
    You’re in no way whatsoever morally superior, nor do you behave more honorably, nor demonstrate clearer or more consistent ethics or values, than any of those who you would call moonbats.

    glasnost (a6ffe0)

  32. I’ll take Josh Marshall’s argument that a single individual speaks for the entire crowd. That one rogue screamed “kill him” is representative of the group.

    A single individual, Bill Ayers, actually conspired to kill people and said he was disappointed they didn’t bomb and kill more. He said he still loathes this country. Per Josh’s model, he clearly speaks for all of the Obama campaign (not to mention the Democratic party).

    If you’re a Democrat, Josh says you’re a country-hating terrorist.

    redherkey (9f5961)

  33. glasnost, claiming that Patterico does not object to calls for murder is frankly more dishonest than even Josh Marshall.

    Congrats for showing that you can go lower than Marshall.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  34. Let’s assume that we know the man was not a Democrat planted near the reporters.

    I can’t think of a single instance in which that’s occurred

    Oh, you can’t? Well, never mind then.

    Think what you will about Ayers’s behavior in the ’60s and ’70s—and put aside that tripe about him being happy on 9/11, because he was clearly saying “we didn’t do enough to stop the war,” not “we didn’t bomb enough empty buildings”—he’s become a respectable and productive member of society.

    Behavior? You make it sound like he had one too many bong hits at a party and said something nice about Nixon. Planning bombings and bank robberies, inciting a violent overthrow of the government… how gauche.

    The short version is: when you import political statements of the ’60s and early ’70s into modern political discourse, you denude them of the urgency felt the Old Left, the New Left, and Nixon and the Law and Order crowd. What do you end up with? The angry remarks of teenagers and young professionals who’d themselves been or had seen those they’d loved been sent halfway around the world to die.

    Ayers hasn’t been a teenager for a long, long time. And yet, to this day, he stands by what he did.

    There’s a larger point to be made here, but I don’t have time to do it in full.

    Do hurry back.

    Jim Treacher (592cb4)

  35. glasnost – I have never heard you denounce Bill Ayers, therefore, we must assume you support his actions in killing innocent Americans.

    JD (f7900a)

  36. SEK wrote: [Ayers has] become a respectable and productive member of society.

    Oh, really? Because he hasn’t blown anything up lately? That’s a pretty low hurdle for respect.

    I might entertain your vapid thought if it weren’t for the fact that he has paid NO debt to the society of which he supposedly is a productive member. He acknowleges he is a terrorist, although he sees himself differently, but while his Manson-loving spouse can say she’s done her time, quoth Ayers in the book he was plugging on 9/10/01, “Guilty as sin — free as a bird.” And while he has thusfar limited his subversive activities to classrooms and boardrooms, he has NEVER renounced violence.

    L.N. Smithee (cddba2)

  37. “Respectable….” where’s my dictionary?

    I’ll give you productive in an excremental way.

    Oh yeah and don’t think that Ayers cause was righteous, or that emotions ran high because conscripts were sent halfway around the world and faced death and somehow that excuses Ayers…
    Ayers was another over priveleged kid who without his fathers money and power was nothing.

    I grew up in the 60’s. I was against the war. I wasn’t a zealot about it, but growing up here on the coast I knew plenty who were. The worst of that crowd were the rich white kids who were arrogant, cowardly people. I used to blame their parents for having the black nanny wipe their butts until they were 8 years old, but unlike their apologists on the far left, once they started burning and bombing and doing adult crimes I switched the blame to the adult who chose to be a violent asshole.

    SteveG (71dc6f)

  38. glasholenost wrote: You have an audience member at Sarah Palin’s VP rally calling for extrajudicial killing, and Sarah Palin, profile in courage and moral clarity that she is, doesn’t attempt to make a wildly obvious statement like, “that’s an ugly and wrong sentiment and I reject it” in any way, and….

    Holy grasping at straws, Batman! You guys ARE scared of this issue!

    L.N. Smithee (cddba2)

  39. Do you mean, you think it is always a safe assumption?

    I mean I don’t ever think it isn’t a safe assumption, i.e. it’s never not a safe assumption not to make. Like, duh.

    (Actually, I mean we can’t assume every embarrassing voice out there is a plant. It’s better to work from the assumption we know to be true; namely, that left and right alike must suffer the embarrassments of their lunatic fringe.

    SEK (072055)

  40. SEK – Marshall acknowledges that McCain may not have heard the individual in the crowd shout terrorist. The voice was clearer as I recall in the Palin clip I watched, but only one voice. I’m not sure either were teachable moments to stop campaign rallies as you suggest because they should not countenance such things. If the cries were taken up by others, perhaps.

    If bombings are the political statements you are referring to importing into the current era, I see no translation problems. Emotions still run high on both sides. Your interpretation of Ayers words about not doing more is interesting to say the least.

    Marshall has been over the top for at least several months now. I am surprised Patterico has not picked on him before this post.

    daleyrocks (d9ec17)

  41. SEK wrote: [Ayers has] become a respectable and productive member of society.

    I do not even know where to begin, or how to respond to that.

    JD (f7900a)

  42. Marshall has been over the top for at least several months now

    That is like saying Excitable Andy can be prone to a touch of hyperbole, from time to time.

    JD (f7900a)

  43. SEK,

    I think you’re trying to say, in your inscrutable way, that I was right to make that assumption.

    Patterico (cc3b34)

  44. The radical right is a psychotic bunch for sure. We’ve seen this kind of over the top hate from wingers in the past. Remember how you all flipped out over the Dixie Chicks?

    Bob Wolfe (ceab83)

  45. Actually, Bob, a lot of ordinary middle of the road Americans “flipped out” over the Dixie Chicks.

    But that’s fine, we are used to Democrats trying to rewrite history.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  46. #38- I grew up in the 60’s. I was against the war… but … once they started burning and bombing and doing adult crimes I switched the blame to the adult who chose to be a violent asshole. Comment by SteveG

    And tens of thousands of others agreed with Steve, one reason why the anti-war movement lost momentum after the 1970 bombing of Sterling Hall at the University of Wisconsin, except for the few like the Weatherman, who felt betrayed when the student masses decided to no show for the revolution.

    MD in Philly (3d3f72)

  47. I do not even know where to begin, or how to respond to that.

    JD, this isn’t that difficult: someone who wrote about being a terrorist and belonged to a group that carried out bombings can become a respectable member of society, just like a junky/murderer/rapist who’s been rehabilitated can. In fact, since Ayers never actually killed anyone, I’d say it’s easier to believe that forty years down the line he wouldn’t recommend taking on the Man by blowing up His buildings.

    You know how I know this? Because he started working within the system, soliciting funds from conservatives like Annenberg. I’m still amused—but a little depressed—by the fact that conservatives are focusing on Ayers connection to Obama instead of Annenberg’s association to Ayers. I mean, what would the Great Man Himself, Ronald Reagan, thought of that?

    I think you’re trying to say, in your inscrutable way, that I was right to make that assumption.

    No, I don’t think you were. In terms of likeliness, I put:

    A. Member of Party X’s lunatic fringe shouting something loony above

    B. Covert Ops from Party Y have infiltrated Party X’s event in order to shout something loony.

    I was just being silly with double and treble negatives up there.

    SEK (072055)

  48. And tens of thousands of others agreed with Steve, one reason why the anti-war movement lost momentum after the 1970 bombing of Sterling Hall at the University of Wisconsin, except for the few like the Weatherman, who felt betrayed when the student masses decided to no show for the revolution.

    MD, if you’d like to have a conversation about the divisions that arose within the SDS, then the Weathermen, then the Weather Underground—esp. as relates to the “Days of Rage”—we could do that, but it wouldn’t help the case that Ayers is an unrepentant domestic terrorist, given when and why he bailed out.

    SEK (072055)

  49. “a psychotic bunch for sure. … Remember how you all flipped out over the Dixie Chicks?” Comment by Bob Wolfe

    Hmm, equating terrorists who blow up things and kill people with a music group… that’s an interesting association.

    MD in Philly (3d3f72)

  50. “he’s become a respectable and productive member of society”

    That’s a repulsive and disgusting statement.

    Ayers is still an extremist turd. He is still a socialist. It’s just that now he’s an extremist turd who poisons the mind of future educators and does it on the taxpayer dime and using the money of dead capitalists that are now controlled by leftist hacks running foundations.

    Travis Monitor (cfa2f1)

  51. Actually, Bob, a lot of ordinary middle of the road Americans “flipped out” over the Dixie Chicks.

    “Middle of the road Americans” don’t make death threats as far as can tell.

    Bob Wolfe (ceab83)

  52. Thanks SEK, here’s hope for me yet!

    Mumia Abu-Jamal (e58a6d)

  53. “just like a junky/murderer/rapist who’s been rehabilitated can. ”

    You know, if *ONLY* we had given OJ just a little more *respect* he wouldnt have fallen off the wagon like that. Oh my.

    I repent of my ways of attacking bill Ayers. who knows, if we are too hard on him, he might relapse and bomb a post office or something.

    Travis Monitor (cfa2f1)

  54. Patterico does not object to calls for murder is frankly more dishonest than even Josh Marshall.

    Yeah. It’s very dishonest. I mean, Pat’s objection is right there in the post. Right? Oh, wait. It’s not.

    I should just know that, right? Just like I should assume that about Sarah Palin. And just like you folks have been so consistently kind as to just know that about Barack Obama your favorite right-wingers whenever they pal around with folks calling for extrajudicial killings.

    This has nothing to do with how Pat or Sarah Palin might respond to a test question on this subject or what they might say on a stage. In the real moment, someone at her rally called for extrajudicial killing, and she expresses no disapproval. In fact, she tolerates it with her continued presence. And Pat tolerates it by utterly failing to bother to point out that it is wrong. You can look right into is post and it’s absolutely logical to conclude that he is no way bothered by the event that occurred. I call that – if I’m… oh… someone like you sanctimonious pr*cks… a “character-revealing moment”.

    Now, whether it’s really a character revealing moment.. or whether it’s just exactly the kind of faux-revealing moment that you folks like to hang up on your treehouse here all the time and beat people over the head with.. I’m agnostic.

    It’s the exact same sin that you folks have written 100,000 words in the past week, blaming BO for. Oh, someone condemned America, and (shudder) Barry O did nothing!
    Oh, someone’s in the room who was a politically violent thug 30 years ago! And Barry O did nothing! Oh! The moral blindness! The naivete! The disgusting tolerance and failure to act!

    Pot, suck on kettle.

    — and to briefly drop the scorn, in a nicer setting, I’d probably have suggested more politely that perhaps this little episode demonstrates how the sins that seem to be so large and important when we seem them in people we already consider our enemies, don’t seem so important when we see them in ourselves. And that this might lead us to be a little less quick to assume we know how much of a terrible person the other guy is, but we aren’t. You know, a classic hippie push for a little more understanding and a little less name calling.

    But that’s not how I do this, because that’s not the kind of place this is. This kind of place leads me to want to rub it in your face, instead of explain to you. Take a bow.

    glasnost (a6ffe0)

  55. The radical right is a psychotic bunch for sure. We’ve seen this kind of over the top hate from wingers

    Who exactly is spewing hate here? And while you are at it, Bob Wolfe, what exactly is wrong with not liking Bill Ayers?

    SEK – Shall we assume that you are going to be able to give us some kind of history lesson on how Bill Ayers is remorseful? Bundy could have been a great man, were it not for all of those dead people he left behind. Dahmer was destined for big things, and since he has not killed anyone in a while, we should just overlook the whole fava beans and chianti thing?

    JD (f7900a)

  56. just know that about Barack Obama your favorite right-wingers

    Corrected sentence from above post.

    glasnost (a6ffe0)

  57. glasnost, justifying your dishonesty. How droll.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  58. Axelrod is a red diaper baby, too. ”

    DANG! Termites (and Red ones too!) everywhere in this hulking infestation of a campaign and candidate!

    Didja know Obamas leftwing community activist mentor was an Alinsky acolyte?

    http://travismonitor.blogspot.com/2008/10/obama-left-wing-alinsky-method-product.html

    Travis Monitor (cfa2f1)

  59. glasnost did not denounce goat-buggering, therefore, it is clear that he not only approves, but practices same, and traffics in the distribution of goat-buggering videos.

    JD (f7900a)

  60. Strikethrough tag works in preview, not in post. for me. probably b/c I’m screwing it up.

    just know that about (strikethrough) Barack Obama (end strikethrough) your favorite right-wingers… etc.

    glasnost (a6ffe0)

  61. That’s a nice load of bile from glasnost all because DRJ didn’t respond to his last turd drop.

    daleyrocks (d9ec17)

  62. SEK- Don’t we have Ayers on tape from the last 2 years or so regretting he didn’t “do more”?

    If he is so reformed why did Obama feel the need to lie about his relationship to him?

    When a quarterback stops throwing passes and instead hands-off to the running back, he hasn’t given-up on being a quarterback or the goal of beating his opposition, he just has changed tactics. I see no evidence that Ayers has changed his underlying opinion of the US.

    MD in Philly (3d3f72)

  63. Lots of noise, hard to hear.

    All I noticed is that once John McCain gave that speech, named names and looked like he’s got a chance to take on Obama and win … and the stock market started rising.

    Travis Monitor (cfa2f1)

  64. Who exactly is spewing hate here? And while you are at it, Bob Wolfe, what exactly is wrong with not liking Bill Ayers?

    I’m not saying it’s not okay to dislike Ayers. I’m saying that some radical righties have the same psychotic tendencies as the Weathermen. That is all.

    Bob Wolfe (ceab83)

  65. Notice how glasnost continues to fail to denounce Ayers’s terrorism.

    We have no evidence that Sarah Palin heard the one man in the crowd. We know that glasnost had Ayers’s terrorism put RIGHT IN HIS FACE and yet he FAILED TO DENOUNCE IT.

    Ergo, glasnost supports Ayers’s terrorism.

    QED.

    I, of course, have already pre-condemned the angry man in the crowd. In fact, I have already condemned everything, just to be on the safe side.

    glasnost didn’t tell you THAT, did he?!?!?!?

    Patterico (cc3b34)

  66. “and to briefly drop the scorn, in a nicer setting, I’d probably have suggested more politely”

    I’ve seen no evidence to support this is a believable statement. You are a high maintenance, hostile troll.

    daleyrocks (d9ec17)

  67. ROFL at embarrassed. Good job pretending to be a Republican, but stressing things that mainstream Republicans just don’t care about.

    The name “Hussein,” for example. McCain took that off the table a long time ago, and he was right to do so. Obama is being criticized for his actions, not his name.

    Daryl Herbert (4ecd4c)

  68. No, I don’t think you were. In terms of likeliness, I put:

    A. Member of Party X’s lunatic fringe shouting something loony above

    B. Covert Ops from Party Y have infiltrated Party X’s event in order to shout something loony.

    I was just being silly with double and treble negatives up there.

    SEK,

    I know you’re not stupid, because we have spoken.

    I would order A and B the same way.

    That is why I made the assumption I did.

    Please read it again.

    And please stop arguing with me when we already agree.

    Patterico (cc3b34)

  69. If you want to know what an unrepentant terrorist looks and sounds like, check out last Saturday’s America’s Most Wanted. I mean it: Click here, go to 34:00 into the show. The final fugitive of the night was Leo Burt, one of four men that (allegedly) bombed a U of Wisconsin building containing a physics lab in 1970. A physics student that stayed in the lab that night perished in the massive fertilizer car bomb blast, the largest in American history at that point. Burt’s partner in crime Karleton Armstrong — who now operates a juice stand not far from the bomb site after serving prison time — has never considered himself a criminal for what he helped do, and told an AMW correspondent that they should leave Burt alone because he was doing his “patriotic duty.”

    L.N. Smithee (cddba2)

  70. Bob Wolfe – Haven’t the lefty eco-terrorist bombers supplanted the Bill Ayers on the psychotic political statement scale. I think you have your equivalencies mixed up.

    daleyrocks (d9ec17)

  71. glasnost,

    In a nicer setting, I would say that you are making an attack on me that, if you took a step back and reflected on it, is really unfair, since I have given zero indication that I would agree with such an asshole as the anony-man in the crowd — and I have 5 1/2 years of blogging showing me to be someone who would NOT agree with such an ugly sentiment.

    That’s what I’d say in a nicer setting.

    This being the snake pit that it is, I’ll simply note that you’re being a dick.

    Patterico (cc3b34)

  72. SEK – In fact, since Ayers never actually killed anyone

    Yes, just like John Gotti. He may have planned to kill people, or conspired to kill people, but, hey, let’s not argue and bicker over who killed who, right?

    What’s the best way to stop a war? Blow up students and soldiers!

    Oh, and his lovely wife thought that the cool Manson family was really groovy. “Dig it!” she exclaimed – “They killed those pigs and then ate dinner in the same room!”

    Manson’s plan? To start a race war that the Blacks would win. After enough time had passed, Manson and his followers would emerge to lead the earth, because, you know, those blacks can’t run anything. Besides being absolutely racist, one might assess the Manson plan as something less than brilliant.

    But it sure impressed Bernadine Dohrn.

    Maybe that’s the ‘twinkle’ Bill saw in her, and what they both saw in Obama.

    The left will justify anything.

    Apogee (366e8b)

  73. daleyrocks:

    That’s a nice load of bile from glasnost all because DRJ didn’t respond …

    What have I missed, and where was it?

    DRJ (c953ab)

  74. Billy stole Bernadine from me. Guilty as hell-dead as a doornail!

    Ghost of Ted Gold (e58a6d)

  75. Patterico, a very close – errr, intimate – friend of mine wants me to write in and complain about being compared to glasnost.

    SPQR (26be8b)

  76. As a life-long Democrat, I have to say that I am just appalled at glasnost’s ridiculous behavior. I was formerly an Obama supporter, since I have voted the Democrat ticket for 40+ years without fail. However, glasnost’s behavior is the last straw. I am voting for John McCain.

    Click on my name to see the pro-McCain site I have established in tribute to my newfound allegiance to John McCain.

    Embarrassed Democrat (cc3b34)

  77. DRJ – It was a couple of nights ago I think. It might have been on the fact checking Biden thread. He said he only spent 10 minutes on a comment, didn’t have time to do a good job and then whined about not getting a response. It was a real crap comment to begin with. If you don’t find it let me know.

    daleyrocks (d9ec17)

  78. I’m saying that some radical righties have the same psychotic tendencies as the Weathermen.

    Cite, please. Specifics.

    Patterico – I case you forgot, I have a standing denunciation and condemnation in place.

    Sorry, SPQR. I tried my best to keep your goat out of this 😉

    JD (f7900a)

  79. Haven’t the lefty eco-terrorist bombers supplanted the Bill Ayers on the psychotic political statement scale. I think you have your equivalencies mixed up.

    How soon we forget. Here’s yet another example of radical right psychosis run a muck just earlier this year. Remember in Knoxville, TN, an out-of-work truck driver opened fire at a Unitarian church, killing two people. A note he left behind suggested that he targeted the congregation out of hatred for its liberal policies.

    Bob Wolfe (ceab83)

  80. Bob Wolfe – I’m saying that some radical righties have the same psychotic tendencies as the Weathermen.

    And we’re saying that if McCain were friends with Tim McVeigh, there would be a big problem. But McCain isn’t friends with anyone like that, and your distraction that ‘there’s lots of crazies’ is worthless due to your inability to apply it to Obama, who is currently running for President, and has been attempting to hide his association with one married couple of ‘crazies’.

    Apogee (366e8b)

  81. Apogee and everyone else – They do not care. It is all about the reclamation of power to them, something they feel was stolen from them in 2000. That is gets all wrapped up in pseudo post-racial post-partisan BS is just an added bonus. As I have often said, you have a better chance of screaming at a brick wall and demanding that it learn to speak Mandarin than you do using reason with one of the Obamatrons.

    JD (f7900a)

  82. SEK, Ayers did kill people.

    Without any doubt. He founded that group, the Weathermen. He didn’t just have ties, but founded it and designed their bombs. With those designs and plans, Ayers’s underlings (for sure), and probably Ayers himself (though we can’t prove it), killed people.

    End of story. Osama Bin Laden murdered people on 9/11, even if his subordinates flew the planes. This isn’t very complicated.

    Ayers was happy to have disrupted Vietnam air operations, which also probably killed sailors and led to more POWs (Ayers admits this in his screeds, and shows jharp-like gloating about it). For this deed, the NVA gave Ayers a ring made from a Navy bomber they shot down, that Ayers famously wore (wears?) with pride.

    He is unrepetant, he advocated further bombings in 9/11/2001, and his educational plan is simply another side to his violent goals of overthrow. He and Obama together advocated for the abolition of the US prison system that is ‘racist’ and ‘evil’ (Obama through endorsing Ayers’s book on the subject). They together spent an ungodly sum of money forcing kids to take less math and learn more about how violent and racist the USA is (a la Rev. Wright’s God Damn America chants).

    Ayers is still a terrorist. He only encourages you and me to do his dirty work now, (though that’s probably also what he did when he killed a cop). Obama has his support (and would not be running for prez today with Ayers’s initial help). Ayers also has Obama’s eternal unending support… Obama has never criticized the man, Ayers, only deplored his violent methods.

    It’s not unclear at all that Obama is without excuse, and Ayers is still a horrible man with no merit to him. He has not made himself a good part of society just because he works for a university.

    Juan (4cdfb7)

  83. Oh, Juan. Ayers has plenty of merit now, because they are like minded in their political views.

    JD (f7900a)

  84. JD – you have no faith. Why, just minutes ago, my sheetrock remarked: “民主人士憎恶说谎的坏蛋.

    Apogee (366e8b)

  85. And we’re saying that if McCain were friends with Tim McVeigh, there would be a big problem.

    Well. Okay. But I think your bigger problem is McCain’s associations with the lobbyists and de-regulators running his campaign. McCain ought to be mopping the floor with the black Muslim terrorist sympathizer. But he is not.

    Bob Wolfe (ceab83)

  86. Apogee – Remarkable. My cedar shake siding told me yesterday, “Baracky’ ; les disciples de s sont les robots bêtes programmés ne penser plus pour eux-mêmes, et dire, ” ; Merci, monsieur, peut j’avoir l’another”.

    JD (f7900a)

  87. But I think your bigger problem is McCain’s associations with the lobbyists and de-regulators running his campaign.

    Such a steaming pile of hooey. In the Leftist world, having staffers be lobbyist for a group is somehow worse than being bought and paid for by the group.

    JD (f7900a)

  88. Bob Wolfe – black Muslim terrorist sympathizer.

    Please refrain from religious bigotry and racist statements. Your attempts to plant them here show your true intent in commenting.

    Barack Obama has associated with an unrepentant terrorist, and has attempted to conceal that association.

    His skin color makes no difference, nor do your assertions that he is a secret ‘Muslim’.

    What matters is that Obama, along with the media, have obstructed (yes, obstructed) investigation into his associations with Bill Ayers, someone who continues to espouse the same views that he did when committing acts of terrorism and treason, even if he always used others to carry out his actions.

    Apogee (366e8b)

  89. black Muslim terrorist sympathizer

    Funny how it is always the Dems that bring this stuff up, and in the same breath, accuse us of being racists.

    Racists.

    JD (f7900a)

  90. Maybe we really are a nation of whiners JD. And this is all just a mental recession…

    Bob Wolfe (ceab83)

  91. Fine. I stand corrected. Barack Obama is a only a terrorist sympathizer. Better?

    Bob Wolfe (ceab83)

  92. Nope, still dishonest, Bob. Baracky has a long lasting political and working connection with Bill Ayers, an unrepentant domestic terrorist.

    JD (f7900a)

  93. “A note he left behind suggested that he targeted the congregation out of hatred for its liberal policies.”

    Bob – You are right. Some did suggest that the way they usually do when a lone gunman goes on a shooting rampage. I usually know where I can find the people making those helpful suggestions. How soon we forget.

    daleyrocks (d9ec17)

  94. Bob – Are you suggesting Baracky is a bad person and unfit to be President or are you just constructing strawmen nobody here has erected.

    daleyrocks (d9ec17)

  95. Bob Wolfe – Barack Obama is a only a terrorist sympathizer. Better?

    No Bob, not better, because again, it’s a distraction.

    I don’t care who Barack Obama sympathizes with, because sympathy isn’t action. And it’s his actions involved with Bill Ayers that are cause for concern. It’s his actions in allocating money to front groups like ACORN, which has a history of embezzlement and voter fraud, that worry me. Especially since the ‘guise’ of the action was ‘education’. How Obama could bypass not only schools, but organizations with a strong history of imparting math and science knowledge, in order to funnel money to corrupt organizations like ACORN is very troubling.

    I do not worry about Obama and Ayers assembling explosive devices. My concern about their association is that Ayers has admitted that he has simply switched tactics – and Obama has not denounced those secondary tactics. He not only worked closely with Ayers to further social goals that Ayers admits are an extension of his earlier beliefs, but he has attempted to conceal that work.

    Barack Obama has given a lot more than just sympathy to Bill Ayers and his new tactics. He has given assistance.

    Apogee (366e8b)

  96. The point is not, in fact, Pat, what you personally believe. In fact, to make this less personal, let’s substitute Sarah Palin for “you”.

    By the standards applied to, say, for example, Barack Obama – by certain people, like, for example, you.. what S. Palin personally believes is irrelevant; even if they’ve made their views on the action very clear on the record, this is in fact, not the point. Whatever S. Palin believes about advocacy of extrajudicial killing being wrong, in the abstract, is not what’s being pointed out here.

    What’s being pointed out is that S. Palin “palled around” with this sort of suggestion by being in its presence and failing to object. Obviously, whatever she says she believes or thinks she believes, her actions demonstrate that she’s in fact quite chummy, by way of not being offended, with people who act this way.

    That’s exactly the hook on which you’ve been hanging B.O.

    Indifference to barbaric conduct or the endorsement of said conduct is a mortal sin.. on the part of the other guy. But not your guy. When S. Palin can’t be bothered to object, that’s because.. everyone knows she’s not down with that, fer sure. So really, why bother?

    There is, I agree, a good case that I am being a dick. I’m being the exact same kind of dick that you and most of your movement has been on the front page all week. Month. Per Ayers post. Etc.
    I consider it mission accomplished, if you now associate this kind of flimflam that I, and you, have been pulling, with demagoguery.

    glasnost (a6ffe0)

  97. What’s being pointed out is that S. Palin “palled around” with this sort of suggestion by being in its presence and failing to object. Obviously, whatever she says she believes or thinks she believes, her actions demonstrate that she’s in fact quite chummy, by way of not being offended, with people who act this way.

    That’s exactly the hook on which you’ve been hanging B.O.

    Exactly. Because failing to stop your speech to denounce a single comment by a single lunatic in a crowd, who you may or may not have heard, is EXACTLY the same as going to the home of and serving on a board with a man you know was a terrorist.

    EXACTLY.

    Patterico (cc3b34)

  98. I think glasnost believes his comment made sense. I’m glad I don’t frequent the blogs he does.

    daleyrocks (d9ec17)

  99. glasnost – That’s exactly the hook on which you’ve been hanging B.O.

    Only in your mind. Write back when Palin been chosen by such an individual, and then ‘works’ with them for years, and then attempts to conceal the relationship.

    A heckler at a speech? That’s an association?

    Of course, it couldn’t possibly be a PLANT.

    Apogee (366e8b)

  100. Bob Wolfe wrote:

    How soon we forget. Here’s yet another example of radical right psychosis run a muck just earlier this year. Remember in Knoxville, TN, an out-of-work truck driver opened fire at a Unitarian church, killing two people. A note he left behind suggested that he targeted the congregation out of hatred for its liberal policies.

    Oh yeah, that guy. I forgot about him. And what were the names of his accomplices?

    What’s that? He had no accomplices? Not even an accomplice? No manifesto? He didn’t have a posse?

    That’s not really a terrorist in the Ayers/Dohrn tradition. That’s a loser with a gun and expired prescriptions.

    dick glasnost wrote:

    There is, I agree, a good case that I am being a dick. I’m being the exact same kind of dick that you and most of your movement has been on the front page all week. Month. Per Ayers post. Etc.
    I consider it mission accomplished, if you now associate this kind of flimflam that I, and you, have been pulling, with demagoguery.

    If your mission was to be a dick, I agree. Mission accomplished.

    L.N. Smithee (cddba2)

  101. Comment by glasnost — 10/6/2008 @ 10:39 pm

    Another teenager who refuses to grow-up.

    Sorry, but the gene pool does need thinning; and, like the 30’s, this could just be the prelude.

    Another Drew (8f95f7)

  102. Nice bit of projection SEK
    You “know” that because someone appears to be working within the system that they are now respectable and rehabilitated even though their public statements indicate a total lack of remorse.
    An “I’m sorry and was really wrong” would go a lot further in my book than soliciting a grant, but you are the PhD

    SteveG (71dc6f)

  103. glasnos has a disturbing association between a certain person and a certain activity.

    The evidence:
    32 “…the sin of tolerance of barbarism that you keep hanging on Barack Obama’s neck.”
    Comment by glasnost — 10/6/2008 @ 8:57 pm

    55 “that you folks like to hang up on your treehouse here all the time”
    Comment by glasnost — 10/6/2008 @ 9:34 pm

    95 “…that’s exactly the hook on which you’ve been hanging B.O
    Comment by glasnost — 10/6/2008 @ 10:39 pm

    Sigmund Freud (0edfdb)

  104. My bet is that “Embarrassed Republican” has never been a Republican in his life and is more likely an Axelrod stooge.

    Sharpshooter (aa1ea1)

  105. My bet is that “Embarrassed Republican” has never been a Republican in his life and is more likely an Axelrod stooge.

    That would be as good a bet as doubling down on a hard 11 against a 7 (in blackjack).

    Michael Ejercito (a757fd)

  106. Sorry about that—and I mean this sincerely—but I thought you weren’t being sarcastic when you wrote this:

    Let’s assume that we know the man was not a Democrat planted near the reporters. We don’t know that, but let’s assume he’s not.

    That’s why we’re not agreeing that we (don’t? do?) agree. So yes, you—I mean we, as we’re equally awesome and—are absolutely correct.

    Juan,

    Ayers did kill people.

    No, he didn’t. You can’t prove that he did without lying through all your teeth.

    He founded that group, the Weathermen.

    No, he didn’t. You can research the history of the SDS and the various splinter groups the ’68 convention gave birth to, or you can continue to make politically convenient statements that you can’t back. Don’t believe me? Ask yourself:

    With those designs and plans, Ayers’s underlings (for sure), and probably Ayers himself (though we can’t prove it), killed people.

    Would you believe someone who qualified (for sure) (though we can’t prove it) everything he said? I know you’re committed to getting McCain elected, but please, have a little more respect for yourself and the facts. Put differently: if you conjecture wildly while attacking others for conjecturing wildly, people might not take you seriously. I’m just saying…

    He is unrepetant…

    And you are, literally, repeating McCain’s talking points. Care to say something you didn’t read in an email?

    he advocated further bombings in 9/11/2001

    LIAR. I say this with confidence that Pat’ll back me. He’s an actual—I can’t believe I’m saying this—maverick, er, independent thinker. He drinks no Kool-Aid. Ayers statements about “not having done enough to stop the war” were taken before 9/11. If you insist on claiming they were meant as a comment on 9/11, you’re a liar, plain and simple.

    Ayers is still a terrorist.

    Proof please? Seems to me he’s been grabbing conservative grants since the mid-’80s, as that’s the Annenberg grant he brought Obama onto the board of. So if he’s still a terrorist, why has he tried to further his ideological goals via grant application?

    He only encourages you and me to do his dirty work now, (though that’s probably also what he did when he killed a cop).

    Please, for the record, give us the name of the cop Ayers personally executed. Hell, give us the name of the cop who died in the non-violent bombing Ayers helped plan. (You do remember that hippies preached non-violence, don’t you? And that when they finally preached violence, it was in the waning years of the Vietnam War, when draftees were upset about still being sent to die against their will?

    It’s not unclear at all that Obama is without excuse

    Your grammar speaks volumes.

    He has not made himself a good part of society just because he works for a university.

    I didn’t claim he did. Care to check out the link I posted up there? It’s to a conservative hero, you know. Indicates I…never you mind, continue as you were.

    Sorry, but the gene pool does need thinning; and, like the 30’s, this could just be the prelude.

    Woo! Eugenics! Woo! Wait—what?

    SEK (eb0c0e)

  107. Exactly. Because failing to stop your speech to denounce a single comment by a single lunatic in a crowd, who you may or may not have heard, is EXACTLY the same as going to the home of and serving on a board with a man you know was a terrorist.

    First – once again, when the topic is Sarah Palin, we can think of all kinds of exculpatory context. Maybe she didn’t hear him, maybe she thought he was shouting, “Cool, him!”, etc. But obviously we can assume B.O. sat through an annual 17-hour documentary on W. Ayers’ culpability in 1990. Etc.

    Second – at best – to be as charitable as possible to your POV – it’s a difference in degree, not in kind. Heck, S. Palin’s failure is more obvious and clear – the incident happened right there in the room, not 30 years later, and she’s a VP candidate whose example arguably matters, not a random Joe Six-Pack whose symbolic protests would have had no practical value whatsoever.

    glasnost (a6ffe0)

  108. glasnost, Oh, then where is your criticism of Obama for sitting through 20 YEARS of Rev. Wright’s rants???? Right, you are a deaf and blind Democrat.

    PCD (1df2b5)

  109. SEK – Good to see you come down on the side of Bill Ayers. Great company you are keeping these days …

    glasnost – It takes no creative thinking to come up with exculpatory context here. None. Zero. Zip. Nada. Prove she heard it. If she did hear it, prove that she endorsed it, and then went about working with the fellow that said it for years.

    So now Ayers is some random Joe 6-pack? Are you suggesting that the smartest Dem candidate EVAH had no idea who Ayers and Dorhn were? If so, it shows a remarkable lack of intellectual curiosity, something usually only Republicans are accused of. It also makes me wonder what Baracky did once he found out who they were. Having said that, given their history, I do not buy the idea, for even a moment, that the Great Baracky, Teh One, did not know exactly who these people were.

    See, folks, glasnost is still a proponent of buggering goats.

    JD (f7900a)

  110. PCD – Baracky was not at the services where Rev. Wright went crazy. Apparently, all of teh krazy was unleashed only when Baracky missed services.

    JD (f7900a)

  111. “Let’s assume that we know the man was not a Democrat planted near the reporters.”

    – Patterico

    Yes, let’s assume that, especially since there’s no fucking evidence to indicate otherwise.

    Leviticus (ab6dbd)

  112. Leviticus wrote: Yes, let’s assume that, especially since there’s no fucking evidence to indicate otherwise.

    Do you have a point, or did you just feel like throwing a “f*ck” in there?

    Feel better now?

    L.N. Smithee (cddba2)

  113. Well. Okay. But I think your bigger problem is McCain’s associations with the lobbyists and de-regulators running his campaign

    The Wolfman, when cornered with his BS, quickly begins a desperate backpedelling maneuver, replete with strawmen to distract from his idiocy.

    not a random Joe Six-Pack whose symbolic protests would have had no practical value whatsoever.

    We’ve now heard this hackneyed term of “Joe Six – Pack” ad nauseum by the Trolls here – it must be on Axelrod’s Talking Points Memo on a daily basis by now.

    Dmac (cc81d9)

  114. since there’s no fucking evidence to indicate otherwise.

    I’ve noticed that this particular commenter has only come on to the site recently to vent his ginormous spleen. There doesn’t appear to be any other reason for him/her/it/amoeba to post here anymore.

    Dmac (cc81d9)

  115. So where was Josh during Palin’s speech? Maybe he knows more about it than he lets on.

    Amphipolis (fdbc48)

  116. “Do you have a point, or did you just feel like throwing a “f*ck” in there?”

    – L.N. Smithee

    “No”, and “yes”, respectively… but wasn’t the whole point of this post was to flail around to no ultimate end?

    I just thought a lawyer like our host might have some…I dunno, moral qualms – about casting such unsubstantiated aspersions as these in so blindly partisan a manner.

    Guess not.

    Leviticus (ab6dbd)

  117. Wow

    The apex of rehabilitative science…
    Applying for, and receiving a grant to further ideological goals.
    The academic left at work. Solicit a gift. Produce nothing. Tear down from within under the guise of progress.
    Productive.
    Burn baby burn

    SteveG (71dc6f)

  118. I just listened to this again.

    The guy isn’t yelling “kill him.”

    He’s yelling “tell us” or “tell it.” It’s obviously a “t” rather than a “k” on the beginning of the word. The end has a bit of sibilance which would indicate a “t” or “s” coupled with crappy audio compression.

    This isn’t even in the same league of inappropriate as suggesting Sarah Palin needs to be raped by a bunch of black men who are all siblings or many other violations of her person played off as “humor.”

    Recommend not listening to “Stairway to Heaven” backwards if you heard “kill him.”

    CW Desiato (614aa7)

  119. “Yes, let’s assume that, especially since there’s no . . . evidence to indicate otherwise.”

    OK.

    That’s what I did.

    Oh, are you upset that I even alluded to the *possibility* that a Democrat might pose as a Republican to make Republicans look bad?

    You’re right: that can be ruled out as *impossible* because it *never* happens.

    Just ask “Embarrassed Republican.”

    You and SEK seem to have a hard time understanding that I’m not arguing that the guy was a plant, or that there’s any evidence of it. That’s why I said we should assume it’s not the case.

    Patterico (d95c8f)

  120. For those that are historically challenged on the fine art of political dirty-tricks,
    I recommend researching the life and career of Dick Tuck!

    Another Drew (d30543)

  121. “Ayers is still a terrorist.

    Proof please? Seems to me he’s been grabbing conservative grants since the mid-’80s, as that’s the Annenberg grant he brought Obama onto the board of. So if he’s still a terrorist, why has he tried to further his ideological goals via grant application?”

    SEK – I don’t understand how your point is supposed to prove the opposite. What are conservative grants? Ayers was in charge of the Chicago Collaborative, the grant submitting and vetting operation for the Annenberg Challenge. The approved grants have been characterized as supporting left wing educational projects. It seems the grants Ayers received from the Woods Foundation and the Annenberg Challenge were to further radical agendas.

    daleyrocks (d9ec17)

  122. “the incident happened right there in the room”

    glasnost – Trying to be as charitable to your POV as possible, I helped you out with the above clause:

    the incident happened right there in an outdoor stadium among 15,000 people,

    daleyrocks (d9ec17)

  123. “You and SEK seem to have a hard time understanding that I’m not arguing that the guy was a plant, or that there’s any evidence of it. That’s why I said we should assume it’s not the case.”

    – Patterico

    No, Patterico. I have a hard time understanding how the mere proximity of an essentially meaningless election can bring out the bitter sniping partisan in someone as level-headed as you.

    And since we’re on the topic: what’s the comment pool look like of late? Where have all the level-headed commenters (nk, Pablo, Psyberian, aphrael, etc.) gone?

    I mean, I’ve still seen them around, but the fact is that the overall tone of this site has changed from civil forum to perpetual pissing match in the past four or five months, to the point that I’m trying to avoid it if I can (although old habits die hard).

    Leviticus (ab6dbd)

  124. You may want to look in the other direction, Pally – what commenter has completely dominated the threads over the past few months here? (psst, he’s currently in moderation).

    And would you care to offer any speculation as to the incredible degree of Trolling and Astroturfing that’s been occuring during the same time period? These attacks are not coming from the regular commenters, nor are they originating from the GOP side of the ledger. After you can explain why this dynamic has been occuring, then b-itch all you wish.

    Dmac (cc81d9)

  125. Proof please?

    He doesn’t think what he did was wrong, and he won’t rule out doing more of the same in the future. He’s still a terrorist. Does a murderer stop being a murderer because he hasn’t killed anybody in a while?

    Jim Treacher (592cb4)

  126. Leviticus wrote:

    but wasn’t the whole point of this post was to flail around to no ultimate end?

    Good lord, man, did you not watch the video? Since we’re talking about “casting … unsubstantiated aspersions,” if you were a juror and were shown that video and asked under oath if you saw “a wink and a nod” coming from McCain, what would your answer be?

    Obama partisans are so desperate to turn this issue around they tried to create a counterattack from whole cloth. An AP “analysis” mangled Palin’s statements about a white radical terrorist and tried to portray it as a smear against black Muslims. Marshall, who perhaps thought that was too disingenuous, instead faults McCain and Palin for not breaking the flow of their speeches to argue with supposedly anonymous intolerant individuals in an audience of thousands.

    Now THAT’S what I call “flailing.”

    the fact is that the overall tone of this site has changed from civil forum to perpetual pissing match in the past four or five months, to the point that I’m trying to avoid it if I can (although old habits die hard).

    Gee, thanks for showing up to drop an f-bomb. That helps a lot.

    L.N. Smithee (d1de1b)

  127. “juror” should have been “witness.”

    L.N. Smithee (d1de1b)

  128. He founded that group, the Weathermen.

    No, he didn’t.

    Okay, co-founded. Any other details about moronic leftist ’60s groups you want to nitpick?

    Jim Treacher (592cb4)

  129. Treach – They were not murderers. They were manslaughterers. They did not intend to kill people. It just kind of happened.

    JD (f7900a)

  130. Don’t you understand? It doesn’t matter what their actual intentions were – what matters was the greater truth in their motives.

    All Hail Dear Leader!

    Dmac (cc81d9)

  131. “non-violent bombing”

    This was a particularly interesting turn of phrase from SEK. What the fuck is a non-violent bombing? It sounds like an oxymoron to me, but I’m not the Phd candidate. I guess property rights mean nothing to progressives as long as the cause is advanced. WTF?

    daleyrocks (d9ec17)

  132. It’s a non – violent bombing when it accidentally kills someone who was not the original intended target. Let’s hope McCain asks The Messiah about that one tonight.

    Dmac (cc81d9)

  133. “…I guess property rights mean nothing to progressives…”

    BINGO! We have a winner.
    Of course they don’t mean anything to progressives socialists, as there is no concept of private property in their unattainable paradise on Earth.

    Another Drew (d30543)

  134. Personally, I like the overly intellectual conceit of “…a non-violent bombing...”

    I don’t mean to be combative, but that phrase translates rather simply:

    Something unpleasant that I don’t like discussing and need to excuse.” Or “Something of which I approve but don’t want to admit doing so.”

    All bombings are violent, of course. But the usual progression is that “The Man made me do it…it’s The Man’s fault.” Real revolutionaries own what they do.

    Fact is, bombers choose to bomb. And they should be up front about taking responsibility for it.

    Personally, I would never want to associate with someone who tried to bomb buildings. I would feel the same way if the bomber justified her or his actions from the Right. It’s a terrorist act, no matter what spin people try to place upon it. Even more so when the bombers never actually admit that bombing buildings is a bad thing.

    And that goes for supporters of bombers, for a very good reason: if it is justifiable to bomb a building and run the risk of killing innocent people for Cause A, why isn’t it also justifiable for Cause B? It’s terrorism, pure and simple. There are other ways to register dissent. The ends do NOT justify the means.

    Which takes me back to “non-violent bombing.”

    It reminds me of Rocky and Bullwinkle, with the great line: “Army Intelligence? Sounds like a contradiction in terms.”

    Eric Blair (2708f4)

  135. From the mouth of William Ayers himself (in italics), from the interview published in the New York Times September 11, 2001 (bold mine):

    ”I don’t regret setting bombs,” Bill Ayers said. ”I feel we didn’t do enough.

    (snip)

    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.”

    (snip)

    ”Everything was absolutely ideal on the day I bombed the Pentagon,” he writes. But then comes a disclaimer: ”Even though I didn’t actually bomb the Pentagon — we bombed it, in the sense that Weathermen organized it and claimed it.” He goes on to provide details about the manufacture of the bomb and how a woman he calls Anna placed the bomb in a restroom. No one was killed or injured, though damage was extensive.

    Between 1970 and 1974 the Weathermen took responsibility for 12 bombings, Mr. Ayers writes, and also helped spring Timothy Leary (sentenced on marijuana charges) from jail.

    (snip)

    Today, Mr. Ayers and Ms. Dohrn, 59, who is director of the Legal Clinic’s Children and Family Justice Center of Northwestern University, seem like typical baby boomers, caring for aging parents, suffering the empty-nest syndrome. Their son, Malik, 21, is at the University of California, San Diego; Zayd, 24, teaches at Boston University. They have also brought up Chesa Boudin, 21, the son of David Gilbert and Kathy Boudin, who are serving prison terms for a 1981 robbery of a Brinks truck in Rockland County, N.Y., that left four people dead. Last month, Ms. Boudin’s application for parole was rejected.

    So, would Mr. Ayers do it all again, he is asked? ”I don’t want to discount the possibility,” he said.

    (snip)

    The love affair seems to have continued into adulthood. Even today, he finds ”a certain eloquence to bombs, a poetry and a pattern from a safe distance,” he writes.

    (snip)

    During his fugitive years, Mr. Ayers said, he lived in 15 states, taking names of dead babies in cemeteries who were born in the same year as he. He describes the typical safe house: there were usually books by Malcolm X and Ho Chi Minh, and Che Guevara’s picture in the bedroom

    (snip)

    And if there were another Vietnam, he is asked, would he participate again in the Weathermen bombings?

    By way of an answer, Mr. Ayers quoted from ”The Cure at Troy,” Seamus Heaney’s retelling of Sophocles’ ”Philoctetes:” ” ‘Human beings suffer,/ They torture one another./ They get hurt and get hard.’ ”

    He continued to recite:

    History says, Don’t hope

    On this side of the grave.

    But then, once in a lifetime

    The longed-for tidal wave

    Of justice can rise up

    And hope and history rhyme.

    Thinking back on his life , Mr. Ayers said, ”I was a child of privilege and I woke up to a world on fire. And hope and history rhymed.

    L.N. Smithee (d1de1b)

  136. Where did he get this sick mind?
    What in his upbringing (of privilege) could create such a monster?
    Contrast this piece of scum with someone who grew up in real poverty and hardship:
    Justice Clarence Thomas.
    Why do we tolerate such a person (Ayers) in civilized society, and reward him so?

    disgusted (d30543)

  137. Bravo, LN. Clearly, you are an unabashed racist.

    JD (f7900a)

  138. #131, JD, the bomb intended for the NCO club at Fort Dix was a nail bomb. Of course, it blew up ahead of schedule and slaughtered it’s makers, but it was clearly a device disigned to murder soldiers, to catch them unaware, and to kill, maime, and mutilate as many as possible.

    Don’t anyone ever try to put a happy face on the Weatherman Organization. They were rich kids, Marxists, murderers: Dispicable scum who conducted a domestic reign of terror while the US was at war. The Weatherman Organization attempted to intimidate the Federal government for the benefit of world communism, and to undermine the elected government of the USA. They should have been shot, or hanged, in public, each and everyone of them.

    Ropelight (36617f)

  139. JD wrote: Bravo, LN. Clearly, you are an unabashed racist.

    You probably know by now that I am a black man, but that doesn’t immunize me from that charge. Bob Herbert recently ended one of his toxic columns by saying Clarence Thomas hates himself.

    Naah, Bob. You just hate Justice Thomas.

    BTW, here’s the link to the article, titled “No Regrets for a Love of Explosives.” Read and share.

    L.N. Smithee (b048eb)

  140. I think we are going to see a flood of Axelrod trolls now that the campaign has begun to turn to Obama’s associations. We can see it it here today. If Rezko starts talking, and the delay in his sentencing suggests he may have, expect more server problems with the troll floods. Obama said “Get in their faces” and glasnost, et. al show up.

    Mike K (d8deba)

  141. From Wikipedia:
    In his 2001 book about his Weatherman experiences, Bill Ayers stated his objection to describing the WUO (Weather Underground Organization) as “terrorist”. Ayers wrote: “Terrorists terrorize, they kill innocent civilians, while we organized and agitated. Terrorists destroy randomly, while our actions bore, we hoped, the precise stamp of a cut diamond. Terrorists intimidate, while we aimed only to educate. No, we’re not terrorists.”

    See, he’s always been an educator.

    SteveG (71dc6f)

  142. LN – I am well aware of that, though it makes your usually eloquent words no more, or no less, eloquent 😉

    JD (f7900a)

  143. Right. He’s JD, not a certain vice-presidential JB.

    Leviticus (41975c)

  144. The point of this post was to provoke Polk Award winner Josh Marshall into responding. Call him a liar. Liar. Liar. Push him. Punch him. Jab him. Oh, Marshall, who gets noticed by millions (can anyone say market forces), seems not to have noticed. He neither blinked nor nodded. Harrumph.
    So much for Patterico’s transparent bid for a bit of street cred. So much for his desire to signify and get linked. What Patterico just did seems a bit like the downward-spiral tack taken by McCain-Palin. (BTW, Wasilla premium rape kits for cheap now on eBay. Watch that story get traction now that it has been thoroughly un-debunked.)
    Actually Mr. Patterico, I’m sure the response from Josh Marshall is in the snail-mail, along with a recording of the al-Malike interview with Der Spiegel.
    Tee-hee-hee.

    Larry Reilly (d11f9a)

  145. Addendum:
    For the nuance or obvious impaired: The average person on the street has a tremendous knowledge of sports, meaning stats, standings and analysis. They know bupkus about politics and current events.
    (This is where dimrox and his like come in with short, inarticulate comments and say, “Yeah, you’re talkin’ ’bout yerseff. Ha. Ha. Ha. Go Patterico, go. You de man.”)
    Take note that Josh Marshall prefaced his statement with the word “apparently.”
    So let’s do it like in the NFL, sports knowers, and review the play, which means look at the video.
    In no way is it definitive in the sense that Patterico imputes. As a matter of fact, if McCain were as high-road as he promised and has claimed, he would have stopped and said something like: “No, my friend, I am not saying Obama is a terrorist”…….and then gone ahead and fomented same. But he just kept going.
    That means: After further review: The call on the field stands.

    Larry Reilly (d11f9a)

  146. Larry – What rape kit story was undebunked? Got any links?

    daleyrocks (d9ec17)

  147. If it’s beyond those poles you sniff and pee, then it’s beyond your ken.

    Larry Reilly (d11f9a)

  148. Larry Reilly,

    What kind of a comment is your #149? Either provide a link for your claim that “(BTW, Wasilla premium rape kits for cheap now on eBay. Watch that story get traction now that it has been thoroughly un-debunked.)” or you’re on vacation.

    DRJ (c953ab)

  149. Leviticus #125,

    Well for one thing Patterico’s has been invaded by a few more Red State Orthodoxy trolls (Dmac, Eric Blair) who are here to make sure that all the “conservative” sites stay as “conservative” as possible i.e. on message (Lib bad! Con Good! We are always right no matter what!). And going off message is instantly pounced on.

    For example- When Patterico had some misgivings about Sara Palin’s inability to BS properly thus screwing up her image…and posted them…. well! The HUE AND CRY! You’d have thought that he had publicly denounced capitalism and joined the Aztlan Now! California Communist Cadre for Chavez fundraising committee.

    People FFFFFFFFFFRRRRREAKED!!!!!!!OUT!!!!!! It was all… How DARE Patterico question the next Vice President about anything!!!!! Liberal!!!! LIIIIIIBERAAALLLL!!!

    Plus Free Market Capitalism just showed it ass, everyone’s broke or heading that way…no…yes…no..yes, the press, even the “con-lite” press is sneering at JMc’s running mate, and it’s just too close to the election, so tempers are sort of running high.

    EdWood (3d4773)

  150. Leviticus,

    You have one good point and, with all due respect, one silly point.

    Your good point is that the commenters have been especially strident lately. I have asked a couple of times for them to tone it down. I don’t like it, and you are right that the tone has deteriorated.

    Your point that I find silly is that my statement:

    Let’s assume that we know the man was not a Democrat planted near the reporters. We don’t know that, but let’s assume he’s not.

    Merits:

    a) an f-bomb from you right out of the gate;

    b) you questioning my morals, and accusing me of casting “unsubstantiated aspersions” in a “blindly partisan . . . manner” making me a “bitter sniping partisan.”

    Let’s review.

    Josh Marshall writes a post designed to show that Republicans are evil. He cites a guy who he assumes is a Republican, who shouts “Kill him!” (although a commenter above takes issue with that; I haven’t seen the video); and the old Greenwaldian FAILURE TO DENOUNCE by Palin and McCain.

    I note that, even assuming the guy in the crowd is a Republican — which we don’t know, but which I’m willing to assume absent any evidence showing otherwise — we still have a situation where Josh Marshall has written an utterly dishonest post that distorts the facts in numerous ways, clearly documented in my post.

    You come on here and don’t dispute a single point I make about Marshall’s dishonesty. Instead, you curse and question my morals because I point out that we don’t KNOW ABSOLUTELY 100% FOR SURE that the dude in the crowd is on the right.

    I even say in the post: let’s assume he is. I AM NOT ARGUING THAT HE ISN’T. I am just pointing out the obvious fact that, sometimes, people pose as people from the other side, to make the other side look bad.

    And, right on cue, a horribly obvious example lumbers onto the thread to make that exact point for me, in the form of “Embarrassed Republican.”

    You and SEK seem to think I made the opposite argument of the one I made: that we should assume the guy is NOT a Republican. If you’re not misreading me in that manner, then I have no idea what in the world you’re so upset about.

    Actually, I can — but it has nothing to do with me. As to the thing you wrote me about, I wrote that person expressing my disapproval.

    But criticizing me so harshly for this seems over the top. I’d think you’d give me a little credit for my history, just as I give you credit for yours.

    Patterico (cc3b34)

  151. Wow. I am now apparently some kind of purist:

    “..Well for one thing Patterico’s has been invaded by a few more Red State Orthodoxy trolls (Dmac, Eric Blair) who are here to make sure that all the “conservative” sites stay as “conservative” as possible i.e. on message (Lib bad! Con Good! We are always right no matter what!). And going off message is instantly pounced on….”

    I guess I missed the memo on that one. Glad to know that I have such power.

    I’ll tell you what I do think is bad: trolls who write insulting things about their opponents, lie about what other people have written, and then change the subject when caught. I’ll match my own record in this area any time.

    But if folks want to think of me as that powerful, I would sure like the check from Karl Rove and our Secret Cabal. But I would prefer not to be lumped in with the new crop of trolls who all seem to be pretty pro-Obama and continually comment how eeevvvviillll Rethuglicans are.

    Dmac, want to take our Capitalist Tool proceeds and invest in the Grand Caymans? I’ll even kick back some to Patterico.

    Eric Blair (e60b98)

  152. #138 – What in his upbringing (of privilege) could create such a monster?

    The lack of opposition. I can guarantee you that Ayers has never had to fight for his life, in all his life.

    Apogee (366e8b)

  153. Leviticus – You have obviously forgotten about this election season’s earlier scandal involving Hillary Clinton’s team planting answers from the ‘random’ crowd at an event.

    The idea, especially in this election, that there is no one capable of conjuring a ‘plant’, is to deny existing evidence.

    Even so, Patterico made the assumption that it was not a plant.

    As someone who knows about such things, let me assure you that the audio feed that you hear in a recording can be quite a bit different than what someone on the scene hears. Cardioid, Half-Cardioid, Super-Cardioid, Omni, Bi-Directional, Half-Unidirectional – all produce different pick up patterns. Especially when they are mixed at a board and combined into a usable signal.

    You aren’t stupid, and your failure to recognize such an obvious possibility is something that I would normally equate with commenters beneath your capabilities.

    Apogee (366e8b)

  154. Comment by EdWood — 10/7/2008 @ 11:49 pm

    That was entertainingly moronic.

    Jim Treacher (592cb4)

  155. “But criticizing me so harshly for this seems over the top. I’d think you’d give me a little credit for my history, just as I give you credit for yours.”

    – Leviticus

    *sigh*

    You’re right. I’m sorry. Again, my frustration is due more to the general downward rhetorical spiral – here and elsewhere, which I’ve unfortunately contributed to on more than one occasion – than it is about any specific action on your part. It was wrong of me to impugn your motives.

    Yes: of course the guy yelling “Kill [Ayers]!” could’ve been a plant. However, he was at a Republican rally yelling something that I’ve heard expressed numerous times by commenters on this very site… so why on Earth would you hint that this guy could’ve been a Demindisguise? I mean, isn’t it more likely that he’s just an I-don’t-know-how-prevalent violence-advocating conservative?

    If you’re in a courtroom, and you hint at something that you know the jury (i.e the audience) is going to like – even though the preponderance of the evidence points the other way – can’t you expect a lawyer from the other side to object, in one fashion or another?

    And thank you for letting me know that you’ve expressed your disapproval. With that, the whole thing’s a done deal, in my book.

    Leviticus (ab6dbd)

  156. As a follow up, I would argue that the example of Embarrassed Republican supports my argument more than it does yours: although Embarrassed Republican could possibly be a real embarrassed Republican, he/she says things a Republican wouldn’t typically say, in a way that indicates (a posteriori) that he/she’s not really a Republican. Can you say the same thing for the “Kill [Ayers]!” guy?

    I mean, if I went to DKos and stated that a commenter at Patterico’s Pontifications had claimed that he/she was “deeply disheartened by the fact that this is where [conservatives] are today”, and then said “Let’s assume we know that this isn’t a genuine, everyday conservative who’s finally seen the light. We don’t know that, but let’s assume that it’s not”… what would you expect the commenters at DKos to assume about Embarrassed Republican? And wouldn’t you cry foul as to the wording of my disclaimer?

    Leviticus (ab6dbd)

  157. However, he was at a Republican rally yelling something that I’ve heard expressed numerous times by commenters on this very site…

    Leviticus, what commenter on this site has advocated extrajudicial killing of Bill Ayers? The only ones I have seen using rhetoric are the fake Republican trolls like “glasnost” et al. They bear a huge responsibility for the downward rhetorical spiral, as they are excitable young people being exhorted daily by their leaders (Obama, Kos, etc.) to “get in their faces” and what not.

    carlitos (74ba2c)

  158. Leviticus – Commenters at DKos regularly advocate the extrajuducial killing of Bush Administration officials. Why are you even going down this road?

    daleyrocks (d9ec17)

  159. I think the crazy guy with the bird names said something like that once not too long ago. I meant to do something about it, but couldn’t when I saw it, and forgot about it subsequently.

    That’s the only time I remember something like that. I think I’ll try to go find it and do something about it, now that I’m reminded.

    Patterico (cc3b34)

  160. Leviticus, while you’re on the thread, puhleeeeze be honest with me and tell me: Did you see the “wink and a nod” Marshall says he saw McCain give, or didn’t you?

    I don’t, and don’t think Pat would have titled this thread what he did if he wasn’t just as confident Marshall is trying to make something out of nothing to distract from the issue of Obama lying about his relationship with Ayers.

    I’ve said it before, I’ll say it again: Someone’s gotta write a book or make a documentary about this campaign and the unbelievable media bias. This can’t be allowed to be flushed down the memory hole.

    L.N. Smithee (d1de1b)

  161. “Leviticus, while you’re on the thread, puhleeeeze be honest with me and tell me: Did you see the “wink and a nod” Marshall says he saw McCain give, or didn’t you?”

    – L.N. Smithee

    No, I didn’t – nothing even remotely resembling a wink and a nod, in fact, even in the abstract sense of “an empathetic gesture”.

    It looks like McCain is restraining a smile, though, and Cindy McCain doesn’t even bother. In all likelihood, both smiles are of the “What a Dumbass” variety – but, in my opinion, both the sentiment that Obama is a terrorist and the bubbly reaction of the crowd to that same sentiment are deserving of excoriation… which is the bigger point, I think: McCain, in years past, would (probably) have let that guy have it for his stupidity, but because the pedal’s to the metal he let it slide. That’s the mentality that bugs me so much, on this site and in general: we’re getting close to the election, so we’re lowering the standards of productive communication and putting up with a bunch of stuff which we normally wouldn’t.

    The “kill him” link is broken, so I haven’t seen that part of the video.

    “I’ve said it before, I’ll say it again: Someone’s gotta write a book or make a documentary about this campaign and the unbelievable media bias. This can’t be allowed to be flushed down the memory hole.”

    – L.N. Smithee

    I agree. Obama has enjoyed and McCain has suffered a great deal of media bias over the course of this cycle, and that bias should be chronicled and challenged. However – and again, this is my main point – such things shouldn’t be done in a manner that intensifies an already extreme discursive devolution. In short, we shouldn’t lower our expectation for respectful and constructive dialog (which I myself have done on occasion) just because the world around us is engaging in a bitter rhetorical brawl.

    Leviticus (ab6dbd)


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.5485 secs.