Ayers: Obama Was a “Family Friend”
If someone is a “family friend,” is that like “palling around” with him?
In a new afterword to his 2001 book, Bill Ayers, former leader of the 1960s radical group Weather Underground, describes President-elect Barack Obama as a “family friend” and denies he wished his group had set off more bombs in the 1960s.
. . . .
“We had served together on the board of a foundation, knew one another as neighbors and family friends, held an initial fund-raiser at my house, where I’d made a small donation to his earliest political campaign,” he writes.
Ayers doesn’t make it clear whether they are still family friends, or if not, when they last were. But it certainly suggests that Obama was minimizing when he said:
This is a guy who lives in my neighborhood, who’s a professor of English in Chicago, who I know and who I have not received some official endorsement from. He’s not somebody who I exchange ideas from on a regular basis.
or:
[T]he notion that somehow he has been involved in my campaign, that he is an adviser of mine, that … I’ve ‘palled around with a terrorist’, all these statements are made simply to try to score cheap political points.
Are these “lies”? Well, the first is less than forthcoming, but I don’t know that I’d call it a lie. The second quote is tougher. For this to be true, we’re seeing either a serious disagreement between Ayers and Obama as to the extent of their relationship, or some hairsplitting so fine it rivals Clinton.
That’s not a compliment.
Either way, it seems worth a few more questions, doesn’t it? I bet journalists will be all over that. Just as soon as they get through excoriating Katie Couric for getting coaching about how to interview Sarah Palin from Obama sympathizer Sam Nunn.
One thing at a time.
BUT I THOUGHT YOU SAID HE WAS A GOOD MAN WHO NEVER LIED, PATTERICO!!!!11!!!!!!1!!
Patterico (cc3b34) — 11/13/2008 @ 7:30 pmJust thought I’d get that out of the way.
Patterico (cc3b34) — 11/13/2008 @ 7:31 pmPatrick, I’m not sure that the MSM will care that Ayers doesn’t think Obama threw him under the bus…
BTW, Congressman William Jefferson’s trial may start soon….he only got re-nominated in the Democrat Primary by a 60=40 margin over a hispanic female….running against a Vietnamese Republican in the general election in December….
reff (556669) — 11/13/2008 @ 7:34 pmObama lying? SHOCKA!!!!!!!
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/13/2008 @ 7:40 pm“T]he notion that somehow he has been involved in my campaign, that he is an adviser of mine”
Didn’t he claim to have fired Robert Malley for meeting with Hamas and now Hamas has disclosed that they were meeting with Obama’s people before the election – after Malley was reportedly, theoretically fired? Guess who. Hello.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/13/2008 @ 7:43 pmNice try, Patterico!
Jackie (132051) — 11/13/2008 @ 7:44 pmThat he was only 8 years old when Ayers committed his terrorism is Clinton hairsplitting at it’s finest.
Mary (80d847) — 11/13/2008 @ 7:45 pmThey didn’t just share coffee and muffins. They shared mission.
SarahW (a6e80b) — 11/13/2008 @ 7:45 pmIdeological mission. And perhaps you might seriously weigh yourself now whether they shared authorship of O’s first book, and new each other from at least as far back as Columbia days.
Rashid Khalidi was also another guy who lived in his neighborhood who was not advising his campaign.
Axelrod’s excuse was used a number of times by Obama.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/13/2008 @ 7:45 pmknew. Farg it.
SarahW (a6e80b) — 11/13/2008 @ 7:45 pmLooks like Clinton is going to fall from second place to third place among brazen liars as President. FDR will struggle to keep first place.
SPQR (26be8b) — 11/13/2008 @ 7:47 pmThe book came out in 2001, but it looks like no one actually read it. Paging Michiko Kakutani!
Official Internet Data Office (8360fd) — 11/13/2008 @ 7:59 pmAyers certainly has become quite the little imperialist capitalist running dog, hasn’t he? Maybe he can put his book dough in the same offshore tax haven as Noam Chomsky.
Patricia (ee5c9d) — 11/13/2008 @ 8:02 pmAyers says, “…knew one another as neighbors and family friends, held an initial fund-raiser at my house….”
Obama said in the third debate that it was not true that he began his campaign back then in Ayers’ home.
I guess it all depends on the exact words used, but at least now there is little doubt that this event in Ayers’ home is “documented.”
Micajah (918bfe) — 11/13/2008 @ 8:03 pmI’ll file this away under “Stuff that could have brought to our attention LAST WEEK”.
Techie (62bc5d) — 11/13/2008 @ 8:05 pmOh, sorry–I see now it’s a new Afterword. Never mind.
Official Internet Data Office (8360fd) — 11/13/2008 @ 8:05 pmthat’s a strawman. you never said he “never lied”.
Born Free (b8e3fb) — 11/13/2008 @ 8:15 pmLOL @ #1.
Now, is Obama what he appears to be, or is he what we hope he’ll be? This slate is not the blank one America bought. Who wants to holler out that the Messiah has no clothes?
Pablo (99243e) — 11/13/2008 @ 8:16 pmLie down with dogs and you get fleas. We all used to know that.
Pablo (99243e) — 11/13/2008 @ 8:17 pmSince Obama never really knew him well, from Obama’s perspective, and the election is over, Obama doesn’t really have to disown him like he did Rev. Wright.
Patterico – That first one, yeah, it’s not really very forthcoming at all. Lies of omission and all that good stuff.
They served on a charitable board together – That would be the Woods Fund I assume since Ayers was never on the Board of the Annenberg Challenge.
Obama did not mention that $150 million fiasco of which he served as chairman and Ayers served up the grant proposals for Obama’s approval. Obama conveniently dropped it from his CV for this election until opponents started bringing it up.
Obama also omitted the Joyce Foundation, or maybe I’m confused. Didn’t they serve together there as well?
Obama also blurbed Ayers’ book and they served on panels together.
Just a few teeny tiny ommissions.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/13/2008 @ 8:23 pmLooks like Obama is the Fresh Prince of Bill Ayers
Zelsdorf Ragshaft III (e18128) — 11/13/2008 @ 8:25 pmthat’s a strawman. you never said he “never lied”.
Not only that, I said he did lie.
Won’t keep people from pretending I didn’t.
Patterico (cc3b34) — 11/13/2008 @ 8:28 pmThat someone thinks Obama lied is shocking, shocking I say. Who would believe a man would lie to become President of the United States. The most amazing thing is the information about him was available but none but a few looked. Most believed what his campaign had to say in the face of evidence to the contrary.
Zelsdorf Ragshaft III (e18128) — 11/13/2008 @ 8:31 pmBarack Hussein Obama is a clear and present danger to the Republic. He has no respect for human life, no respect for the secret ballot and no respect for the rule of law. We can kiss the Supreme Court goodbye for a generation.
His revealing cultural and genetic background are unrivaled in the history of American politics. He is the perfect Anti-Christ. The American electorate has no one to blame but themselves.
Lawrence Eagleburger, George H. W. Bush’s Secretary of State, properly identified Obama as a “charlatan” and a product of the Chicago mob. More recently Paul Broun also warned us about Obama but then aplogized, probably out of fear for his family!
Welcome to the U.S.S.A., the United Socialist States of America.
jadavison.wordpress.com
John A. Davison (53a82e) — 11/13/2008 @ 8:34 pmSo we can now assume and rightly so that everything Hussein O said about his friends not being his friends and his criminal associates not being close the him are lies. Put him on trial and let him tell the jury one lie and then try to convince them he’s truthful. Convicted, execution scheduled, as soon as the welfare crowd figures out he lied big time to them also. Democrats always assassinate presidents, even their own.
Scrapiron (c36902) — 11/13/2008 @ 8:51 pm“no respect for the secret ballot”
John – Not true. Democrats in Congress are casting secret ballots for committee chairs. Hypocrisy in action as usual.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/13/2008 @ 8:58 pmIt appears that radical-chic is going mainstream. Next we’ll see Jane Fonda holding a reunion with the anit-aircraft crew that she made the infamous anti-war propaganda photos with. They’ll all gather over Dim-Sum and toast their collective victory over the real terrorist-the marauding US government, of course…
And, it’s becoming painfully clear that O! is a pathalogical, but canny, LIAR…
So if you see his lips moving, he’s probably lying about something…
Also, this is such a blatant example of the lying and collusion of the fouth estate; it’s a shame that this truth will not become wide-spread. And if it does, anyone who talks about it will be admonished for depriving O! of his well deserved electoral honeymoon, will be decried as a Hater!, or denounced! as a…RAAAAAAACIST!
You do know why O! deserves his electoral honeymoon, don’t you…
Because he just Effed us all-reeeeeeall good-in the general election…
I mean, he could have at least kissed us on his way to the White House…
O! is good alright…
A goooooood LIAR!
Bob (99fc1b) — 11/13/2008 @ 9:16 pmPatterico – There is a school of thought out there that advocates throwing caution to the wind and going medieval on the backside of the Democrats. I mean look at what not retaliating got Bush and not using the most potent weapons in his arsenal got McCain. There are plenty of bugfuck crazy progressive examples to follow from the past eight yeears if you wanted to follow that Outlaw approach. Just sayin’.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/13/2008 @ 9:36 pmI don’t care if Sam Nunn, Bill Ayres, or Fidel Castro advised Katie Couric before that interview. Couric didn’t ask an inappropriate question or unfair follow-up, in my opinion, and I watched the whole thing. It’s Katie freaking Couric asking predictable, middle of the road, CBS Sunday with Charles Kuralt-style let’s wake up gently without a bunch of controversy, let’s get to know you questions, and Palin completely biffed it.
I actually felt more awkward for Couric than Palin during that interview, Couric served up if not softballs but questions that should have been expected and got incoherence as a result.
Aplomb (b6fba6) — 11/13/2008 @ 9:43 pmTrue enough. That Gov. Palin didn’t know that the French had kicked Hezbollah out of Lebanon is shockingly ignorant for someone running being considered for the Vice Presidency.
Adriane (b8ecd8) — 11/13/2008 @ 9:49 pmAplomb – Wrong thread.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/13/2008 @ 9:59 pmI agree; there sure are a lot of examples like that. I always thought we made fun of people like that, for being liars and crazy and unhinged. But apparently many of us admired all those characteristics; we just didn’t like those tactics used in the service of left-wing causes.
I have already said that I don’t think we lost because McCain refused to act like the KosKids.
Patterico (cc3b34) — 11/13/2008 @ 10:09 pmOh well.
Not sure it mattered to anyone under 40 anyway…
Ayers has got to be laughing his ass off.
What’s not to like about this country for him?
Perfect.
SteveG (71dc6f) — 11/13/2008 @ 10:11 pmWell, Adriane, if you are referring to a Biden gaffe, I haven’t heard anyone laying blame for any Biden gaffe this campaign on anyone else other than Biden. No one is blaming the questioner of Biden, or anyone who may have advised that questioner in formulating the question. The question was legitimate and people correctly focus on Biden’s response. (And in that case the question was legitimate and Biden’s response was stupid.)
Somehow that standard doesn’t apply to Palin. If Palin said something stupid to a question, we can’t entertain the suspicion that Palin said something stupid to a valid and reasonable question. We have to assume the questioner had it out for her, was asking unfair questions, and was conspiring with shadowy forces to trip her up.
Also, Sam Nunn being the source of far-left partisan gotcha questions is just laughable. He was a moderate to conservative Dem who left the Senate 12 years ago. If you lined up his positions with McCain’s you’d find much more agreement than disagreement.
Aplomb (b6fba6) — 11/13/2008 @ 10:12 pmNot much in the way of fact is conveyed by the “family friend” assertion. We don’t seem to be in a different place than we were on Nov. 4.
Of course, the weight of economic uncertainty remains heavy…
Tim McGarry (9fe080) — 11/13/2008 @ 10:13 pmDaley: how is this the wrong thread? This is the one where Patterico brings up Couric, Nunn and Palin.
Aplomb (b6fba6) — 11/13/2008 @ 10:13 pmAplomb – The only difference being that the media did not call Biden on the 24 gaffes in his debate with Palin, his no new coal plants gaffe, etc., etc. With Palin, people flat made up stuff like the rape kit story to criticize her for. Just minor differences in treatment between the two Vice Presidential candidates. Hardly noticeable if you weren’t looking.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/13/2008 @ 10:16 pmAplomb – This is the Ayers thread.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/13/2008 @ 10:17 pm“Not much in the way of fact is conveyed by the “family friend” assertion. We don’t seem to be in a different place than we were on Nov. 4.”
Tim – Not unless you actually bothered to read Patterico’s post and had a basic understanding of the ommissions in Obama’s various descriptions of the relationship. Other than that, yeah, were in the same place with this additional disclosure. Obama was lying. The right knew it. The left either knew it and didn’t want to believe it or just didn’t believe it.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/13/2008 @ 10:21 pmPatterico – Heh
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/13/2008 @ 10:23 pmdaleyrocks,
I banned a guy this morning for saying: “The more I think about abortion the more I think a bullet in the head of the gyno is justified.” Actually, I didn’t even ban him for that; I gave him a chance to retract it, and he said he stood by it.
After I banned him, he left me a comment in moderation that called me a “cocktail Republican.”
Oh well. There are sites where his brand of violent musings will be welcomed with open arms. Can’t take any option off the table, say some.
Patterico (cc3b34) — 11/13/2008 @ 10:40 pmdaleyrocks, I disagree. “Family friend” is vague and elastic. It’s a characterization, not a set of facts.
Tim McGarry (9fe080) — 11/13/2008 @ 10:43 pmTim,
Do you think the perception of the relationship would have been any different if Obama had used the phrase “family friend” to describe Ayers in a debate?
Patterico (cc3b34) — 11/13/2008 @ 10:45 pmDo you think the perception of the relationship would have been any different if Obama had used the phrase “family friend” to describe Ayers in a debate?
Patrick, I’m not aware that Obama has used that phrase. I don’t know what the perceptions would be if he had and don’t see much point in speculating about it.
Ayers use of the phrase doesn’t add any detail to what’s known about their relationship. It’s vague enough that it could easily appy to casual and superficial relationships. My family and I are close to some neighbors. In the case of others, the relationship is much more casual, even though we count them as friends, too.
I think Obama has adequately disclosed the nature of his relationship with Ayers. I also see no resemblance between his views and the Weatherman view of the world.
Tim McGarry (9fe080) — 11/13/2008 @ 11:10 pmPatterico – I saw that from Rob Rod this morning. He was sort of out of line. I was surprised he didn’t revise his comments when you gave hime the opportunity.
I agree that no option should be taken off the table, but the nuclear bugfuck crazy Bruce Banner into Incredible Hulk transformative ODS Outlaw options probably are not ripe for playing at the current time.
With respect to your #43 to Tim, I believe the responses would have been significantly different had Obama acknowledged that both Ayers and Khalidi were friends of the family and fessed up to the full extent of his working relationship with Ayers. Palin’s choice of words was not an exaggeration on the stump.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/13/2008 @ 11:15 pmPatrick, I’m not aware that Obama has used that phrase.
Nor am I. Nor do I have any idea why you’re even suggesting I said he did.
I don’t know what the perceptions would be if he had and don’t see much point in speculating about it.
Well, I think it goes to your argument about whether it adds anything that Ayers describes their relationship in that way.
I think it would have been a problem for Obama to say that. Not even a close call, in my opinion.
And if that’s so, then it means something for Ayers to describe the relationship that way.
I don’t see any resemblance between Obama’s views and those of Ayers, but I don’t think that was ever the issue — at least not the legitimate issue. The legitimate issue was that this man is an unrepentant terrorist — by now a cliche but a true one — and it showed very bad judgment for Obama to have been as close to him as he was.
Patterico (cc3b34) — 11/13/2008 @ 11:16 pmPalin’s choice of words was not an exaggeration on the stump.
And there, Tim McGarry, daleyrocks makes the other salient point: that the facts are starting to show that Palin was right.
Patterico (cc3b34) — 11/13/2008 @ 11:18 pmWell, I’d amend that by saying the facts already did show it — but it’s now becoming even more clear.
Patterico (cc3b34) — 11/13/2008 @ 11:18 pm“I also see no resemblance between his views and the Weatherman view of the world.”
Tim – There does seem, however, to be a nice overlap between Obama’s views on social justice and education and those of William Ayers and Rev. Jeremiah Wright. Not just coincidence is my thinking.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/13/2008 @ 11:18 pmYou know what else also surfaced today, an old Obama interview, from 2004 I believe, in which he said he attended Trinity Church weekly instead of the once or twice a month he told people this election cycle. That makes it a lot tougher for those who still want to believe his denials of hearing inflammatory statements from Rev. Wright before what circulated on the internet this year.
It’s amazing what is popping up after the election. I wonder what will be next.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/14/2008 @ 12:09 amBut it doesn’t make it tougher, daleyrocks, because it’s politics. People believe what they want to believe.
Find me one person who changes their mind because of that fact. I’d love to see it.
Patterico (cc3b34) — 11/14/2008 @ 12:11 amThe US has jumped the shark. We’ve become so wealthy and spoiled that we’ve elected a evil person solely because he makes us feel good about ourselves. There are consquences for giving the power of the Presidency to scum like Obama.
Roy Mustang (2f688e) — 11/14/2008 @ 12:17 amSo Couric asked Obama those very same questions, right? Do you recall his answers?
Jim Treacher (592cb4) — 11/14/2008 @ 12:22 amJim Treacher:
I’m not sure what you are asking, but if you think Obama somehow got through the Democratic primaries (as the underdog to the Clinton machine no less), months if not years of opposition research by his Democratic and Republican rivals, and countless interviews, profiles, opinion pieces, and talking heads spouting without having to answer the type of innocuous questions Couric asked Palin, then I don’t know what to say.
If Obama submitted to a Couric interview of the same low level intensity in the days just before the Palin interview, people would be complaining about how CBS was handling him with kid gloves, asking him toothless questions he was obviously well prepared to handle concerning his foreign policy experience, the papers he read, etc. If Couric interviewed Obama the same way she interviewed Palin at about the same time, people would be complaining that CBS essentially sponsored an Obama infomercial, giving him screen time to spout off answering basic questions he had answered over and over again.
The Couric-Palin interview was not a shocking example of an attack-dog reporter unfairly trapping a candidate into having to answer impossible, ridiculous charges. If you watch it, Couric was asking basic questions designed to get a feel for who this Sarah Palin person is and what she thought about things. To this day, I haven’t seen anyone identify a Couric question or a follow up that was truly unfair to ask a potential President or VP, or a question or follow up that Obama would not have been able to answer without causing controversy.
Aplomb (b6fba6) — 11/14/2008 @ 1:13 am“Looks like Obama is the Fresh Prince of Bill Ayers”
Spread it round’ Spread it round’!!! That’s Obama’s new name.
xerocky (cf0c5e) — 11/14/2008 @ 3:13 amAplomb, enough dodging and weaving. Palin won’t be an issue until at least 2011. Look at the top of your screen where the thread topic is. When are you going to address Obama’s lies?
L.N. Smithee (16e01f) — 11/14/2008 @ 3:21 amThe left either knew it and didn’t want to believe it or just didn’t believe it.
Comment by daleyrocks — 11/13/2008 @ 10:21 pm
Well it’s either one or the other. The problem is the way they treated it, which just happened to be the same way that the O campaign treated pretty much everything that had to do with his past, his resume, his (lack of) accomplishments, or his voting record. Which was to say, “why are you so fixated on that?” Or “why don’t you just read his policy statements on his website” which were always changing.
As far as the left, and the big media* were concerned, all of the blank space around Obama was a positive thing, and any attempt to fill in that blank space was “going negitive” or worse “racist”.
*I refuse to call them mainstreem.
xerocky (cf0c5e) — 11/14/2008 @ 3:25 amVia the Anchoress. Charles Gibson’s two modes. Obama interview:
How does it feel to break a glass ceiling?
How does it feel to “win”?
How does your family feel about your “winning” breaking a glass ceiling?
Who will be your VP?
Should you choose Hillary Clinton as VP?
Will you accept public finance?
What issues is your campaign about?
Will you visit Iraq?
Will you debate McCain at a town hall?
What did you think of your competitor’s [Clinton] speech?
Palin interview:
Ludwig (cfe50c) — 11/14/2008 @ 3:48 amDo you have enough qualifications for the job you’re seeking? Specifically have you visited foreign countries and met foreign leaders?
Aren’t you conceited to be seeking this high level job?
Questions about foreign policy
-territorial integrity of Georgia
-allowing Georgia and Ukraine to be members of NATO
-NATO treaty
-Iranian nuclear threat
-what to do if Israel attacks Iran
-Al Qaeda motivations
-the Bush Doctrine
-attacking terrorists harbored by Pakistan
Is America fighting a holy war? [misquoted Palin]
‘If someone is a “family friend,” is that like “palling around” with him?’
Yes.
Barry Obama pals around with American-hating, terrorists and traitors.
Good choice as our nation’s commander-in-chief, because we don’t want a guy who will fight terrorists, we want a guy that will sit down with America-hating terrorists, like Bin Laden, and work with him to improve the American education system.
Dave Surls (3139ad) — 11/14/2008 @ 4:34 amNow that Ayers is apparently a trusted source of information, I’m confused about what I’m supposed to believe. Is it:
(a) Both of Ayers’ claims are fully believable now (e.g. that Obama is a “family friend” AND that Ayers never meant that he wished “his group had set off more bombs in the 1960s”). This would seem to contradict the claim that he is an “unrepentant terrorist.”
(b) One of Ayers’ claims is true and one is not (e.g. it is true that Obama is a “family friend” but not true that Ayers never wished his group had set off more bombs)
(c) Ayers is not a particularly reliable source on these matters.
I choose ‘c’.
Tom (008032) — 11/14/2008 @ 5:33 amNone of this is surprising. Any alert citizen already knew this from available evidence long ago.
How did Simon and Garfunkel say it? A man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest.
Amphipolis (fdbc48) — 11/14/2008 @ 5:37 am@61 – exactly. Just like, many will hear that Obama is a family friend, but ignore that the same source also claims he never wished they had set more bombs. “A man hears what he wants to hear and disregards the rest.”
Tom (008032) — 11/14/2008 @ 6:02 amdaleyrocks, you seem to be suggesting that it isn’t possible to unload on the dems without being bugfuck nuts; that you can’t hammer them mercilessly while being principled, rational, sane and correct. I disagree. Occasionally, even the KosKids are right. When that’s the case, I don’t mind being like them. It’s the other 99% of the time that their delusional paranoids we need to avoid. But there’s nothing at all wrong with having sharp elbows.
Pablo (99243e) — 11/14/2008 @ 6:16 amSteve Diamond wrote that an Obama confidante acknowledged that Obama and Ayers maintain an active relationship, with Ayers and Dohrn offering political counsel to him and Michelle during the campaign. 11/2/08 link and 11/4/08 link.
The “confidante” is anonymous, so this story has to be filed under “for what it’s worth.” On the other hand, Diamond has a track record of writing carefully and insightfully about the Ayers-Obama relationship, in my opinion.
Fortunately, mainstream journalists are on the job, always ready to investigate credible allegations. Armed as they are with black-belt Journalistic Ethics, I trust them to do as thorough a job here as they did with John-the-poverty-fighter and Rielle.
AMac (c822c9) — 11/14/2008 @ 6:31 amThis was the typical strawman from their campaign, since nobody suggested that.
The media barely touched it. Compare and contrast the coverage of this with how they would have reacted if President Bush, Sen. McCain, or Gov. Palin had said the exact same thing.
JD (94c827) — 11/14/2008 @ 7:40 amTom, it speaks volumes about Obama that something like Ayers is more honest than he is.
Roy Mustang (2f688e) — 11/14/2008 @ 7:42 amI thought it was fairly clear. How did Obama answer when Couric asked him those same questions?
Jim Treacher (592cb4) — 11/14/2008 @ 7:51 amObama lived on the same block as Ayers while he attended Columbia while Michelle and Barry both interned at the law firm which employed Ayers wife, Bernadine Doern.
Only a simpleton who believes in leftist economics would believe that it was just random chance that Obama and Ayers would show up 25 years later living next to each other in the same neighborhood and working on the same panels and boards in a different city 1,800 miles away.
Facts are that Liberals have been duped into electing a black-nationalist marxist frontman for nuts like Ayers\Doern\Klonsky\Wright\Farrakhan.
As posted earlier:
LogicalUS (742bd0) — 11/14/2008 @ 9:05 amThe Fresh Prince of Bill Ayers in the Age of Farrakhan.
People like Tom could never be convinced of anything other than the rainbow and unicorns brought on by their Baracky love.
JD (94c827) — 11/14/2008 @ 9:09 amI think what Tim and Tom are implying but don’t really want to say is that there are good terrorists and there are bad terrorists. For progressives, Bill Ayers is the good kind of terrorist. They don’t have to actually say it. Bill made the case for himself and reiterated that he is unrepentant during his appearance on Good Morning America today.
It takes me back to the heydays of the 1980s when the height if liberal chic was to have your own pet agrarian reformer (read marxist revolutionary) from Central or South America to trot out at cocktail parties. Yet another legacy of the failed Carter Presidency.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/14/2008 @ 9:14 amPatterico wrote:
If they weren’t concerned someone might change his or her mind, they wouldn’t have taken such pains to lie about it.
L.N. Smithee (d1de1b) — 11/14/2008 @ 10:00 amJust thought I’d get that out of the way.
Patterico, even good men do occasionally lie. They emphatically do not become buddies with unrepentant terrorists with dreams of genocide.
CTD (7054d2) — 11/14/2008 @ 11:47 am@70 – daleyrocks, I’m saying you can’t have it both ways. It seems odd to me that you have no problem taking Bill Ayers at his word when he’s talking about Obama, verses when he’s talking about anything else.
Personally, I really don’t care for Bill Ayers. I don’t know him well enough to assume that he is either “reformed” or “unrepentant.” But it’s telling to see his words lifted up as gospel when – and only when – it’s convenient.
Tom (008032) — 11/14/2008 @ 12:03 pmJD, your unrelenting third person insults about me grow tiresome. If you have a response to something I’ve written, would you please do me the honor of addressing me directly? I promise to treat you similarly.
Tom (008032) — 11/14/2008 @ 12:05 pm…I don’t know him well enough…
Oops, I can tell that if I ever run for office, I’ll be in trouble because of post #73, in which I appear to admit that I know Bill Ayers! Oy vey.
For the record: I do not know Bill Ayers. I’ve heard about him though, and I don’t know enough about him to know if he is “reformed” or “unrepentant.”
Tom (008032) — 11/14/2008 @ 12:09 pmTom, its called admission against interest.
SPQR (72771e) — 11/14/2008 @ 12:10 pmTom – I have tried before, with an utter lack of success.
You can quibble about the difference between Bill Ayers just being a guy in the neighborhood, someone whose kids went to the same school as, palling around, or a family friend. That is what you Baracky supporters do, intentionally overlooking the real point. I get it. You don’t want to talk about it. At least not honestly.
The known facts suggest that Baracky has been, at the very least, less than truthful, and certainly less than forthcoming about their relationship. To argue otherwise is to ignore reality.
Now, the idea that if Bill Ayers tells the truth/lies about one things automatically makes everything else he says to be the truth/lies, is laughable on its face.
The facts as known suggest that his statement that they were family friends is true, and certainly more true than Baracky has cared to address it. At the same time, it is possible that he lied about having not hurt people, killed people, planted bombs. You see, both of the above positions are supported by the known facts, and require no Baracky worship or hate to hold both position simultaneously.
JD (94c827) — 11/14/2008 @ 12:15 pm“@70 – daleyrocks, I’m saying you can’t have it both ways. It seems odd to me that you have no problem taking Bill Ayers at his word when he’s talking about Obama, verses when he’s talking about anything else.”
Tom – I’m not sure what you’re saying here. Bill Ayers certainly continues to feel his terrorism was justied as a Weatherman. He repeated that today and has many other times verbally and in print. Why would I not believe that? He is a marxist. With respect to him being a family friend, I did not actually need Ayers’ confirmation to know that Obama was lying about the extent the relationship. The body of public evidence out there is extensive for those who care to read it. The media and true Obama believers prefer to deny it exists.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/14/2008 @ 12:18 pm“For the record: I do not know Bill Ayers. I’ve heard about him though, and I don’t know enough about him to know if he is “reformed” or “unrepentant.””
Tom – Look at his interview on Good Morning America today and I think you will be able to very quickly determine that he is unrepentant. The U.S. Government was bad, you see, so his terrorism was therefore justified.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/14/2008 @ 12:21 pmJD, thanks. This feels incredibly odd, but…you’re right. On points, on this issue, that is. I don’t agree with all of your assumptions, but you are certainly correct that Ayers’ can tell the truth sometimes and lie other times, and you are also correct that, if one agrees that both of your positions are supported by the known facts, then they can be held simultaneously no matter whether you are an Obama supporter or detractor.
A very strange thing just happened. In order to ask you to change your tone, I had to change mine – and the resulting clarity actually helped communication occur across political lines. Thanks, JD.
Tom (008032) — 11/14/2008 @ 12:27 pmdaleyrocks, haven’t watched the interview, am not interested. I still don’t believe that Obama and Ayers were functional buddies, but then I also didn’t believe that Saddam had any functional relationship with al Qaeda. (Whoa…did I just compare Obama to Saddam or al Qaeda??) 🙂
Tom (008032) — 11/14/2008 @ 12:30 pmI can be reasonable, at times. Would that other of your fellow travelers could be reasonable and disagree at the same time. We rarely agree, but I can be more civil, and will strive to. Problem is that the volume of the fucking asshat trolls wears off on my civility towards people that deserve it. My bad.
JD (94c827) — 11/14/2008 @ 12:33 pmTom @81 – Your assumption about me having it both ways about Ayers, however, misstates my position. I contend that Obama is constitutionally unable to tell the truth, not Ayers. I don’t believe I expressed doubts about Ayers’ honesty, although if I did, please point them out. Public admissions against his own interest, as in the case of murder, I don’t think should really count against that test as pointed out by JD and L.N. above.
If you’re unwilling to watch the interview, how can you find out the facts Tom?
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/14/2008 @ 12:49 pmJD – You’re a racist. I denounce you.
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/14/2008 @ 12:51 pm#70
Daleyrocks, I don’t make the distinction you attributed to me. Like Ayers, I opposed the Vietnam War, but unlike him, I opposed it through democratic and legal means only. Then and now, I believed that the Weatherman resort to terror was completely wrong and immoral (and perverse and stupid, as well). My view of Ayers, then and now, is highly negative. I do not view him as heroic in any way.
Years ago I read an excellent book by Thomas Powers about Diana Oughton, a member of the Weatherman faction and Ayers’ former girlfriend who was killed in a New York townhouse explosion in 1970, apparently as a result of something going wrong in the bomb-making process. Powers offers a very clear-headed and damaging appraisal of Ayers as a person (basically as a dangerous and irresponsible child of privilege) and that’s the view of the man that has remained with me.
The difference between you and me has to do with the view each of us takes with respect to the relationship between Ayers and Obama, a relationship which, in view of the known facts, doesn’t seem close or worthy of the attention it got in the recent campaign. I believe Obama has been reasonably frank in discussing the relationship. I don’t believe Ayers exerts any significant influence over him.
Contrary to your suggestion above, I do not propound the view that there is good terrorism and bad terrorism. I firmly believe It is not a morally legitimate way to effect change in a democracy. I condemn what Ayers and the Weatherman faction did during the Vietnam years.
Tim McGarry (9fe080) — 11/14/2008 @ 1:43 pmI believe in Santa Claus.
Despite the fact that this is a complete strawman …
JD (94c827) — 11/14/2008 @ 1:49 pm“I don’t believe Ayers exerts any significant influence over him.”
Tim – Thanks for the response and your views on the Weathermen. From my perspective it is debatable whether or not Ayers has any influence over Obama. I’m nor going to quibble over words like significant. What does not seem debatable, as I mentioned earlier, is that they share similar views, along with Rev. Wright, on social justice and education. I would refer you to the excellent investigative work done by Steve Diamond and Stanley Kurtz for information about that, work which Obama attempted to supress during the campaign. Why did Obama try to have that information supressed Tim?
daleyrocks (5d22c0) — 11/14/2008 @ 1:58 pmJust like Clinton didn’t inhale, Obama didn’t actually eat those commie muffins when he was socializing with Ayers! What a bunch of leftist illuminati garbage!
Jeff (337860) — 11/14/2008 @ 4:50 pmAyers still call himself a “revolutionary communist” and he supports the Chavez dictatorship
in Venezuela,
These days ayers promotes revolutionary communism by bringing even more ant-Americanism and “blame whitey” into K-12 nationwide in his role as an “respected” educator. Is there any objective evidence that Ayers ever did anything to improve education anywhere? Certainly not in the CAC. But Ayers and his kind aren’t really concerned about test scores.
icr (849ed5) — 11/14/2008 @ 11:40 pmOn Ayers’ “education” career:
icr (849ed5) — 11/14/2008 @ 11:59 pmhttp://www.city-journal.org/2008/eon1006ss.html
Never in the history of American politics have we elected a President with such abhorrent credentials. Not only is his genetic heritage a complete disaster, his ethical chronology is a nightmare of America damning, flag stomping, moral degenerates like Reverend Jeremiah Wright and William Ayers but also includes convicted felons like another of his mentors, Tony Rezko. This guy is genetic “trash” just as was vividly documented in “Obama’s Mama”
John A. Davison (f7936b) — 11/15/2008 @ 7:21 amTim McGarry writes: “I believe Obama has been reasonably frank in discussing the relationship.”
And I’m wondering just how anyone would be able to write that with a straight face?
SPQR (26be8b) — 11/15/2008 @ 8:24 amObama, as president, will meet with many people, leaders of other countries, who have done, or believe things that obama, and our country as a whole do not agree with. But you have to be able to sit down and talk to someone and listen to someone whose opinions differ from yours. Most conservative republican americans lack that ability, which is why they will never understand or accept anyone unlike themselves. Like Ayers said, you have to be able to talk to people from all walks of life, and still see things for yourself. Obama is of a strong character and he is diplomatic. Whatever his relationship with Ayers, he is a man who will form his own opionions based on intelligence and his own brain. And besides, i’d rather hear what Ayers has to say raher than “Joe the Plumber” anyday.
Steph (5b0f70) — 11/15/2008 @ 7:07 pmDid I miss where Bill Ayers was elected the head of some state?
If you don’t understand the difference between conducting foreign policy with heads of state and being friendly with a civilian who doesn’t regret acts of terrorism against his own country, there really isn’t any point in debating with you.
Steverino (db5760) — 11/15/2008 @ 7:34 pmComment by Steph — 11/15/2008 @ 7:07 pm
Have any other bigotry you would like to lay on us?
Another Drew (bb1716) — 11/15/2008 @ 7:36 pm