Hot Air » Blog Archive » Politico: Obama visited ’60s “radicals” in 1995

Politico: Obama visited ’60s “radicals” in 1995

posted at 10:31 am on February 22, 2008 by Allahpundit
Send to a Friend | printer-friendly

They mean terrorists — we’re talking about the Weathermen here, and Obama’s host that day is on record as wishing he’d set more bombs back when — but Politico’s in for a round of especially obnoxious shrieking from the left for even running this so they probably figured they’d throw them a bone by using “radicals” in the headline instead. Here we find ourselves returned to the argument over Ron Paul accepting money from Nazis: How much knowing contact with scumbags is too much knowing contact with scumbags? The New York Sun’s already been over most of this ground, including the $200 contribution from Ayres to Obama’s campaign and the obligatory denunciation of the Weathermen by Team Barry, but the ‘95 visit is a new detail. Proof that Obama’s a bomb-tossing commie? Er, no. Proof that Obama’s not above schmoozing bomb-tossing commies — excuse me, reformed bomb-tossing commies — to advance his political career? Evidently.

It’s too old and the contact is too slight, I think, to do the Messiah any damage (although the GOP will certainly try), but here’s an intellectual exercise for you in the same vein as my McVeigh analogy in the Che flag post. As you read, substitute McCain and, say, Eric Rudolph for Obama and Ayres and see if you think you’ve got a story the media might take some interest in. If you must, imagine that Rudolph’s been reformed when all the key incidents occur.

In 1995, State Senator Alice Palmer introduced her chosen successor, Barack Obama, to a few of the district’s influential liberals at the home of two well known figures on the local left: William Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn.

While Ayers and Dohrn may be thought of in Hyde Park as local activists, they’re better known nationally as two of the most notorious – and unrepentant — figures from the violent fringe of the 1960s anti-war movement…

Dr. Young and another guest, Maria Warren described [the event] similarly: As an introduction to Hyde Park liberals of the handpicked successor to Palmer, a well-regarded figure on the left.

“When I first met Barack Obama, he was giving a standard, innocuous little talk in the living room of those two legends-in-their-own-minds, Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn,” Warren, wrote on her blog in 2005. “They were launching him–introducing him to the Hyde Park community as the best thing since sliced bread.”

Contacted by e-mail, Warren declined to describe the meeting further and later blogged of her concern that Republicans would use accounts of the event for “left-baiting.”.

“Left-baiting” meaning “complaining about the would-be president gladhanding terrorists.” Although he has said he’d meet personally with Ahmadinejad, without preconditions, once in office, no? So, give him points for consistency.

Incidentally, Young’s now concerned that Obama is too conservative. Exit question: Could Obama not have known who Ayres was?

Blowback

Note from Hot Air management: This section is for comments from Hot Air's community of registered readers. Please don't assume that Hot Air management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment just because we let it stand. A reminder: Anyone who fails to comply with our terms of use may lose their posting privilege.

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

But – unlike some other fringe figures of the era — they’re also flatly unrepentant about the bombings they committed in the name of ending the war, defending them on the grounds that they killed no one, except, accidentally, their own members.

Dohrn, however, was jailed for less than a year for refusing to testify before a grand jury investigating other Weather Underground members’ robbery of a Brinks truck, in which a guard and two New York State Troopers were killed.

“I don’t regret setting bombs; I feel we didn’t do enough,” Ayers told the New York Times in 2001.

Uh, I think it’s highly unlikely that Barry Hussein Obama didn’t know who these folks are/were. Anybody who would tell the NY Times that he felt that he “didn’t do enough” is also gonna brag about his coolness to friends and acquaintances.

funky chicken on February 22, 2008 at 10:41 AM

As Politico points out, lefties tend to moderate before they run for prez. While Obama repeats this tendency, it’s the velocity of his change that’s disturbing. It’s the velocity that calls into question his authenticity. Is there an angry extremisit lurking underneath the rhetorical flourish? (One other than his wife, that is.)

petefrt on February 22, 2008 at 10:45 AM

This just all fits in with the Michelle Obama issues from this week, ably discussed by Peggy Noonan in the WSJ this morning, and that AP did a post on yesterday. It is becoming clear that the Obama’s are part of the elite liberal establishment that simply sees America as a force for evil in the world, and have likely been cocooned in it since their days in the Ivy League. This is emerging as the way to beat him in November. McCain will hold the middle, and we’ll marginalize Obama as the radical leftist that he actually is. McCain can say with conviction to the middle of the electorate that he has reached across the aisle and gotten things done (even though we don’t like many of these things), and then turn to Obama and ask him how he intends to do the same when he has the most liberal set of policies of anyone in the Senate.

Combine that with the Commander in Chief disparity between the two, and we’ve got a winning combination.

Dudley Smith on February 22, 2008 at 10:48 AM

“When we end this war, we can recapture our unity of effort as Americans. The American people have the right instincts on Iraq. It’s time to heed their judgment. It’s time to move beyond Iraq so that we can move forward together. I will be a President who listens to the American people, not a President who ignores them.” — Barack Obama

This is why you hate him. And, alas this is why you will fold and support McCain in November.

Drum on February 22, 2008 at 10:49 AM

If a columnist at the Times of London can see this guy’s a radical, why can’t our own media see it? Yeah, yeah…I know…

flipflop on February 22, 2008 at 10:51 AM

This story sounds juicy to old farts like me. The Panthers, SDS, SLA, WU….woot! We get another go at em! But to my 35 yo daughter, it’ll be a yawner unless Barry and Ayers can be found to have discussed fuse timing techniques.

Limerick on February 22, 2008 at 10:53 AM

Yawn is right

TOPV on February 22, 2008 at 10:55 AM

One doesn’t have to be an angry leftist to start pardoning these murderers if one is the POTUS. Frankly, the prospect of all these terrorists (and technically most acts of terrorism occurred in the 70s and 80s)getting out of prison scares me. They are unrepentant and they have a strong social network to put them in positions of relative power. Nobody who can top the left for rewarding people for being sociopaths.

Blake on February 22, 2008 at 10:55 AM

I guess it goes without saying that you can definitely tell a lot about a person by the company they keep.

Dr.Cwac.Cwac on February 22, 2008 at 10:56 AM

…here’s an intellectual exercise for you …As you read, substitute McCain and, say, Eric Rudolph for Obama and Ayres…

Or for a general purview of the ludicrousness of progressive claims to “repression” and the status of “underdog” are, you can just compare Eric Rudolph to the Weather Underground. It works out like this:

The lone nut, Eric Rudolph killed seven in 41 bombings over the course of ten years and ended up in prison universally reviled.

The organized coalition of political progressive terrorists which were the Weather Underground killed six in 43 bombings over the course of ten years and it’s various members are free, some making six-figure sallaries as state university professors, and all are honored by an academy award nominated film.

Hiney Von Pewps on February 22, 2008 at 10:57 AM

the truth is out there, but will anyone listen?
barry = vapidity
michelle = hillary

jimmer on February 22, 2008 at 10:58 AM

I’d expect these folks are the type who have framed copies of their mug shots prominently displayed in their home. You know, to show to the whole world how proud they are that they resisted “the Man” whoever that is.

funky chicken on February 22, 2008 at 10:59 AM

Na na na na… na na na na… hey hey hey… Oh-bomb-er

Sugar Land on February 22, 2008 at 11:02 AM

Sounds like he was just meeting with the base.

Asher on February 22, 2008 at 11:02 AM

If a columnist at the Times of London can see this guy’s a radical, why can’t our own media see it?…

flipflop on February 22, 2008 at 10:51 AM

The REAL question is when will the media pay a little more attention to Larry Sinclair?

I’ve just listened to the Jeff Rense interview, and I find Mr. Sinclair to be frighteningly believable. This has just gone up on Youtube thanks to twiottle; check this out…

http://www.youtube.com/results?search_query=obama+larry+sinclair&search_type=

singlemalt_18 on February 22, 2008 at 11:04 AM

And the Woods Foundation, on which Obama and Ayers worked shoulder to shoulder, is like the payroll department for full-time adgitators in the Chicago area.

A perrenial recipient is the Public Action Foundation, which is the research and education arm of these guys:
http://www.citizenaction-il.org/election.htm

Should a non-profit be farming candidates?

Hiney Von Pewps on February 22, 2008 at 11:04 AM

What leftwing radicals haven’t met with reformed terrorist?

Bill Keller has his crack team of supersleuths pinning the story down as we speak. Probably a big expose forthcoming in the Style section this Sunday.

JammieWearingFool on February 22, 2008 at 11:05 AM

Meh; don’t really see this gaining a lot of traction. There’s no reason the GOP shouldn’t try to use this, but it won’t end up having much meat on it. A mere meeting isn’t enough to paint a broad “guilt by association” connection with “reformed” (but unrepentant) terrorists from the 60’s.

Hollowpoint on February 22, 2008 at 11:06 AM

singlemalt_18

That’s f**king nonsense and you are almost certainly a troll.

Hiney Von Pewps on February 22, 2008 at 11:07 AM

funky chicken on February 22, 2008 at 10:41 AM

…Barry Hussein Obama…

Seriously, dude… what’s the f’ing point of that other than trying to make us all look like idiots?

DaveS on February 22, 2008 at 11:10 AM

This is simple . . . Obama is a left wing activist and a dedicated Marxist. He must be soundly defeated lest the Republic as we know it will cease to exist.

rplat on February 22, 2008 at 11:10 AM

Exit question: Could Obama not have known who Ayres was?

Not just Ayers! We would have to believe he didn’t know who Bernardine Dohrn was either, which is impossible for me to believe.

Moreover, Obama served with Ayers on the Woods Fund until 2002 - a year after Ayers made his remark 9/11 remark that he hadn’t bombed enough.

Buy Danish on February 22, 2008 at 11:11 AM

excuse me, reformed bomb-tossing commies

What do you mean, reformed? Doesn’t being reformed have to include recognition that he was wrong in the past?

Attila (Pillage Idiot) on February 22, 2008 at 11:13 AM

rplat on February 22, 2008 at 11:10 AM

This is simple . . . Obama is a left wing activist and a dedicated Marxist. He must be soundly defeated lest the Republic as we know it will cease to exist.

Captain Hyperbole, are you not aware that Obama is running for President of the United States? He isn’t running for Earth Czar.

DaveS on February 22, 2008 at 11:13 AM

That’s f**king nonsense and you are almost certainly a troll.

Hiney Von Pewps on February 22, 2008 at 11:07 AM

Manmade global warming is nonsense… and I didn’t just pop out from under a bridge at the mere mention of it.

If the story is not what it appears, then let that be R E P O R T E D .

singlemalt_18 on February 22, 2008 at 11:15 AM

Captain Hyperbole, are you not aware that Obama is running for President of the United States? He isn’t running for Earth Czar.

Wonderful . . . now what’s your point?

rplat on February 22, 2008 at 11:15 AM

Senator Obama’s anti-war speech was at an International ANSWER event in Chicago. That tiny, swift reformation did not begin in 1995. It started after he was elected as a Senator.

I’d like to see one of the major papers report on this event. Obama touts the speech on the trail, so why not investigate how his speech came to be and how he delivered it on a stage generated by Stalinists.

How bout it old Gray Lady?

gabriel sutherland on February 22, 2008 at 11:17 AM

singlemalt_18 on February 22, 2008 at 11:15 AM

Go “report” your embarrassing truther conspiracy crap elsewhere.

Hiney Von Pewps on February 22, 2008 at 11:19 AM

OT: motorcycle cop killed in Clinton motercade on the way to Dallas rally.

carbon_footprint on February 22, 2008 at 11:19 AM

It’s too old and the contact is too slight, I think, to do the Messiah any damage (although the GOP will certainly try)

I’m not so sure about that. This is the perfect setup for another “I was tied up at the time” moment from McCain, although this time it would have a little bit more bite.

Big S on February 22, 2008 at 11:21 AM

rplat on February 22, 2008 at 11:15 AM

Wonderful . . . now what’s your point?

I thought it was pretty self-explanatory… was it not? The “Republic as we know it” will almost certainly NOT “cease to exist” merely because of an Obama presidency. That’s an incredibly stupid thing to say.

DaveS on February 22, 2008 at 11:24 AM

Exit question: Could Obama not have known who Ayres was?

No, he knows his pedigree. Obama is a scary socialist. Look at his rhetoric and how he slithers away from criticism. He has not had to defend his liberal record of his politcal ideologies at all. He simply slides away from the genesis of his ideas and paints them as American. Listening to him speak you would think the founding fathers meant for the federal government to meet all our needs. Ho Chi Minh, Karl Marx, et al are laughing manically from the grave.

He really frightens me.

Theworldisnotenough on February 22, 2008 at 11:25 AM

gabriel sutherland on February 22, 2008 at 11:17 AM

Was that the March rally?

Hiney Von Pewps on February 22, 2008 at 11:32 AM

You Don’t Need a Weatherman to Know Which Way the Wind Blows.

This is worse than Paul’s Nazi contributors. The Weathermen actually robbed banks, blew up buildings and actually killed people. There’s a very good documentary on this group. Watch it and note how many times former members use the word ‘cult’ to describe the movement. It’s was a classic Leninist cell of intellectuals straight out of pre-revolutionary Russia. Dostoyevsky described exactly this mindset.

The McVeigh analogy is close. But the Weathermen were a rather large, complex group, with sympathizers, donors and safe houses across the country. Nevertheless, the principles are identical: two groups of extremists for whom America is an oppressive evil.

That Barry met with an unapologitic Weather cult member is beyond belief. Is he a pen-pal of the Unabomber too? We are about to elect an anti-American radical egghead to be commander-in-chief. This is unprecendented. I always wondered how the inevitable decline would begin. Now I know.

Vote Sauron 08 on February 22, 2008 at 11:32 AM

All it took for me to see the Obombmas *as they are* was hearing Michelle say that ‘as a black man her husband risks his life pumping gas at the AM/PM’. I assume he hasn’t pumped his own gas lately.
*Black, far-left, elite racists.*
I just found out that they are childless, which may be something they can’t help, but it adds to my gut feeling that they haven’t passed a very important test for a leader: to put someone else ahead of yourself…No insult intended to those who have grown up without having children. I just know that it took me years to grow up and become a conservative parent.

Christine on February 22, 2008 at 11:41 AM

Here’s more on Bill Ayers, from November 2001 from the WSJ.

Buy Danish on February 22, 2008 at 11:41 AM

Limerick: remember this stuff? It might resonate with your daughter

More on Bill Ayers
Timothy Noah
Posted Wednesday, Sept. 19, 2001, at 6:51 PM ET
In the wake of Sept. 11, Chatterbox has developed a morbid fascination with Bill Ayers’ foiled publicity campaign for Fugitive Days, his memoir of the Weather Underground. As Chatterbox noted before, Fugitive Days tries to pass off armed rebellion against the United States as a sort of lark. In the book, Ayers maintains that he was not a terrorist because terrorists “kill innocent civilians, while we organized and agitated.” Chatterbox demurs. Any group that sets off two dozen bombs, including one at the Pentagon and one at the U.S. Capitol, as the Weather Underground did during the early 1970s, ought to be called a terrorist group. (The Weather Underground doesn’t appear to have killed anybody, unless you count the accidental deaths by explosives of a few of its members, but the lack of other casualties seems largely to have been a matter of luck.) Remember, too, that Ayers told his followers, “Kill all the rich people. Break up their cars and apartments. Bring the revolution home, kill your parents, that’s where it’s really at.” This earns Ayers at least some spiritual kinship to Osama Bin Laden. (In last Sunday’s New York Times Magazine, which of course went to press before Sept. 11, Ayers maintains that this was “a joke.” In a more serious vein, Ayers was quoted by another Times interviewer as saying, “I don’t regret setting bombs. I feel we didn’t do enough.” As Chatterbox noted earlier, Ayers had the misfortune to see this hit the presses on Sept. 11.)

Except for Chatterbox and New York Post columnist John Podhoretz, most news outlets seem initially to have given Fugitive Days a pretty favorable reception. The Chicago Tribune ran a largely glowing profile, accompanied by a lengthy book excerpt, in its Sept. 16 issue (which also went to press before the terrorist attack). Mysteriously, the usually peerless Ron Rosenbaum gave the book a sympathetic write-up in the Aug. 27 New York Observer. Carolyn See reviewed it favorably in the Washington Post on Aug. 31.

funky chicken on February 22, 2008 at 11:41 AM

Incidentally, Young’s now concerned that Obama is too conservative. Exit question: Could Obama not have known who Ayres was?

Considering his naivitae and blatant fabrocations in last night debate, I’d say Obama is an easily fleeced fleecer.

BKennedy on February 22, 2008 at 11:42 AM

Radical Chic Resurgent
Timothy Noah
Posted Wednesday, Aug. 22, 2001, at 6:24 PM ET
The astonishing luck of Bill Ayers, unrepentant former Weather Underground revolutionary, continues unabated. Today the state of New York refused to grant parole to Kathy Boudin, another Weather Underground radical, convicted 20 years ago of second degree murder for participating in a Brink’s truck robbery in which two policemen and a security guard were killed. That’s bad news for Boudin, who by all accounts has been a model prisoner. But it’s great news for Ayers–who, with his wife, Bernardine Dohrn, jointly raised Boudin’s son–because it’s bound to help Ayers sell his new memoir, Fugitive Days.

Chatterbox isn’t sure he’s ever read a memoir quite so self-indulgent and morally clueless as Fugitive Days. (He’s certainly never before read one festooned with glowing blurbs from respectable folk like Scott Turow–”a gripping personal account.”) “Memory is a motherfucker,” begins Ayers, establishing the book’s literary tone and unreliability in one compact sentence. Throughout Fugitive Days, Ayers reminds his readers that he’s had to omit or change many facts throughout his narrative because they describe actions on his part that are, well, illegal. In the turbulent early 1970s, Ayers helped set off bombs in two dozen places, including the Pentagon and the U.S. Capitol.

Bernardine Dohrn’s famous reaction to the Manson killings, as conveyed by journalist Peter Collier: “Dig it. First they killed those pigs, then they ate dinner in the same room with them, then they even shoved a fork into a victim’s stomach! Wild!”

funky chicken on February 22, 2008 at 11:45 AM

Christine—the Obamas have at least one child, a daughter.

funky chicken on February 22, 2008 at 11:47 AM

It seems Obama is as much a disciple of Alinsky as Hillary, which supports speculation about his authenticity as a mainstream candidate.

MOST AMERICANS never heard of Saul Alinsky. Yet his shadow darkens our coming election. Democrat frontrunners Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama both worship at the altar of Alinskyism.

In a 1971 book called Rules for Radicals, Alinsky scolded the Sixties Left for scaring off potential converts in Middle America. True revolutionaries do not flaunt their radicalism, Alinsky taught. They cut their hair, put on suits and infiltrate the system from within.
–Hillary, Obama and the Cult of Alinsky

Can you imagine an Alinsky/MoveOn/Soros president with a fillibuster-proof Congress?

petefrt on February 22, 2008 at 11:48 AM

Interesting that the NY Times website no longer has their glowing profile of Ayers published on 9/16/2001 available via Google.

You have to do the archives thing, which I will neither register nor pay for. Anybody got an archived copy of their own?

funky chicken on February 22, 2008 at 11:51 AM

petefrt, uh oh. The “Obama’s the same as McCain” crowd is gonna rush in here and say you are a scare-monger.

funky chicken on February 22, 2008 at 11:52 AM

One doesn’t have to be an angry leftist to start pardoning these murderers if one is the POTUS. Frankly, the prospect of all these terrorists (and technically most acts of terrorism occurred in the 70s and 80s)getting out of prison scares me. They are unrepentant and they have a strong social network to put them in positions of relative power. Nobody who can top the left for rewarding people for being sociopaths.

Blake on February 22, 2008 at 10:55 AM

They’re already out of prison. Ayers and Dohrn were acquitted of the charges against them due to prosecutorial screw-ups in 1981. And you can see from the link that the Obamas have long been part of their circle of associates. (I’ve been alluding to this for a bit.)

That said, nothing will come of it. The fix is in and the American public thinks that Marxism died with the Soviet Union.

baldilocks on February 22, 2008 at 11:54 AM

I just found out that they are childless, which may be something they can’t help, but it adds to my gut feeling that they haven’t passed a very important test for a leader: to put someone else ahead of yourself…No insult intended to those who have grown up without having children. I just know that it took me years to grow up and become a conservative parent.

Christine on February 22, 2008 at 11:41 AM

You may be confusing them with someone else. They have two daughters.

baldilocks on February 22, 2008 at 11:56 AM

Vote Sauron 08 on February 22, 2008 at 11:32 AM

Well-said.

For insight into Obama’s formative years, read this Chicago Trib story about his mother (Stanley Ann Dunham) who got quite the Liberal education at Mercer Island High School.

Buy Danish on February 22, 2008 at 12:07 PM

Was that the March rally? - Hiney Von Pewps

Yes.

Over at Wikipedia, the idiots continue to edit the page to cover up the details that the event was organized by International ANSWER. I gave up editing this detail and then some superuser swept in and deleted whole portions of the Talk section where the discussion was going on about the ANSWER note.
http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/Barack_Obama%27s_Iraq_Speech

gabriel sutherland on February 22, 2008 at 12:18 PM

Buy Danish. Her parents named her Stanley? No wonder she was such a mess.

funky chicken on February 22, 2008 at 12:21 PM

The Weathermen were worse than terrorists, they were and are idiots.

RobCon on February 22, 2008 at 12:24 PM

I caught Obama stealing lines from Jimmy Carter last night. The great orator said in the debate that “I want a government that is worthy of its people”. That is stealing from Carter’s line: “I want a government as good as its people” and it is a line Carter used during the 1976 primaries and in the first debate with Gerald Ford. It was meaningless pap but it always made Carter seem like a good man. Carter’s support for Hamas came later. I wonder if Jim Ruttenberg at the NY Times will be interested in writing about Obama stealing lines from Carter. Somehow I doubt it.

Larraby on February 22, 2008 at 12:27 PM

They’re already out of prison. Ayers and Dohrn were acquitted of the charges against them due to prosecutorial screw-ups in 1981.

I was referring to a large network of self labeled political criminals, most associated with Ayers and Dohrn, that Obama will be lobbied hard to release. None of them are repentant. And all should remain in prison. It is really offensive that Obama would associate with Ayers and Dorhn.

Also, I’ve been reading about these people for several decades and was present for the Days of Rage. Their portrayal, and others, on the internet is being seriously whitewashed.

Blake on February 22, 2008 at 12:27 PM

Only on a few conservative outlets (and not wiki) do you find any reference to Bernadette Dohrn yucking it up about how the Manson family murdered poor Mr. LoBianco, carving war on his chest and leaving a fork sticking out of his belly. What a bitch Dohrn was and is.

Blake on February 22, 2008 at 12:36 PM

Could Obama not have known who Bernadette Dohrn was? She who publicly yucked it up about how the Manson family murdered poor Mr. LoBianco, carving war on his chest and leaving a fork sticking out of his belly? Yeah, he knew. [hopefully this will pass the draconian HA censors]

Blake on February 22, 2008 at 12:40 PM

Buy Danish. Her parents named her Stanley?

funky chicken on February 22, 2008 at 12:21 PM

Her father (Stanley) wanted a boy. Hey, who can blame him. He had the audacity of hope.

Buy Danish on February 22, 2008 at 12:41 PM

funky chicken on February 22, 2008 at 11:52 AM

Heh. Probably. Folks who say McCain’s the same as Obama might say almost anything.

petefrt on February 22, 2008 at 12:45 PM

Could Obama not have known who Bernadette Dohrn was?

Blake on February 22, 2008 at 12:40 PM

Exactly. It’s like not knowing who Abbie Hoffman was. Obama is not a Johnny-come-lately lib. He has been a lib his entire life, he worships liberalism, and surely he knew who one of the most famous iconographic radicals of the Sixties was.

Buy Danish on February 22, 2008 at 12:46 PM

I was referring to a large network of self labeled political criminals [SNIP]

Also, I’ve been reading about these people for several decades and was present for the Days of Rage. Their portrayal, and others, on the internet is being seriously whitewashed.

Blake on February 22, 2008 at 12:27 PM

Got it. Thanks.

baldilocks on February 22, 2008 at 12:52 PM

More on Obama, Ayers and Dohrn, well after Ayers disgusting 2001 remarks:

In April 2002, Ayers, Dohrn, and Obama, then an Illinois state senator, participated together at a conference entitled “Intellectuals: Who Needs Them?” sponsored by The Center for Public Intellectuals and the University of Illinois-Chicago. Ayers and Obama were two of the six members of the “Intellectuals in Times of Crisis” panel.

Buy Danish on February 22, 2008 at 1:02 PM

…the American public thinks that Marxism died with the Soviet Union.

baldilocks on February 22, 2008 at 11:54 AM

That’s a big part of the problem, isn’t it.

I’ll be checking in often on David Horowitz for some of the best analysis of Obama’s radical roots, such as they may be.

petefrt on February 22, 2008 at 1:07 PM

Wait a second … wasn’t Adolph Hitler swept to power on a platform of Change and Hope?

crosspatch on February 22, 2008 at 1:52 PM

Or even Adolf!

crosspatch on February 22, 2008 at 1:53 PM

Buy Danish–that’s good stuff you’re finding. Have you emailed it to the Politico? Or to Allah so he can add an update and bump the story?

funky chicken on February 22, 2008 at 2:09 PM

Good catches, Buy Danish, but with panel and boards, he probably didn’t know who was on them until after he’d accepted, and it sounds like he might’ve risked his political career if he’d shunned them. Besides, you cross paths with a lot of people in politics, and he probably didn’t even recall Ayers’ history.

Even if he did, Ted Kennedy’s hands aren’t exactly free of blood, but you don’t see politicians in 2008 shunning him over Chappaquiddick, do you? It’s understandable, even if it might be upsetting to a non-politician.

calbear on February 22, 2008 at 4:11 PM

…but with panel and boards, he probably didn’t know who was on them until after he’d accepted…Besides, you cross paths with a lot of people in politics, and he probably didn’t even recall Ayers’ history.

calbear on February 22, 2008 at 4:11 PM

They were both on the board for the Woods fund. This is not a long list of people, so it’s fair to say they rubbed elbows.

They were on the panel I cited (because it was after 2001), and they were on this panel together:

In November 1997, Ayers and Obama participated in a panel at the University of Chicago entitled Should a child ever be called a “super predator?” to debate “the merits of the juvenile justice system”.

They were also neighbors, and Ayers mentions that in his idioitic book.

No way Obama didn’t know who Ayers was. It doesn’t mean they were friends necessarily, but they worked together and Obama did not distance himself from him after his appalling 2001 remarks.

Update: Click here to see what Democrat radio host, Taylor Marsh, has to say about Obama’s relationship with Ayers which goes into some detail on her website:

Obama’s Ayers and Dorhn relationship is something more than a few people have been trying to nail down for weeks. You can bet the Republicans and their 527s will do just that. I don’t blame them either. This goes well beyond the Rezko connection. In the bad judgment file, any association whatsoever with a domestic terrorist who actively tried to thwart an air war during the Vietnam war, calls our Marines “terrorists,” while also being unrepentant about it, shows a lack of seriousness I will never accept. John McCain’s personal disgust at this connection between Obama and Ayers will bring out a righteous fury that will likely pit the War Hero against the Terrorist’s Friend, which is just one angle Obama’s opponents will use.

Buy Danish on February 22, 2008 at 4:40 PM

gabriel sutherland on February 22, 2008 at 12:18 PM

I once spent a couple of days trying to get a mention of Ramsey Clark’s work for Saddam Hussein into ANSWER’s article. They camp and presume ownership of the articles.

To be technical, There wasn’t a

Hiney Von Pewps on February 22, 2008 at 5:50 PM

…[oops] there wasn’t a chapter of “ANSWER”, until 2004. Or rather, the same people organized themselves as the Chicago Coalition Against War and Racism. You see, this is a PLP/RCP town. The Not In Our Name people were there first and the International Socialist Organization is a much bigger deal here.

That said, I probably have some sort of documentation laying around, but unless i can get such impartial sources as slate or Olberman to publish it, it will be suppressed as “WP:OR”.

Hiney Von Pewps on February 22, 2008 at 5:57 PM

here’s a for instance:

http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:w4UZcGBxu8oJ:www.windycitymediagroup.com/gay/lesbian/news/ARTICLE.php%3FAID%3D1226+ccawr%40aol.com+answer+2002&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=9&gl=us

and…

http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:Iz-zT5gwwTEJ:leb.net/~al-awda/chicagoaction/+ccawr%40aol.com+answer+2002&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=10&gl=us

and of course, no: ccawr is not “a coalition of religious leaders” or whatever they were trying to front on the wikipedia page.

Hiney Von Pewps on February 22, 2008 at 6:14 PM