No one right now, ..
jon1979 on April 15, 2008 at 1:30 PM

Well then I hope you will keep us all up to date on this non-existent phenomenon.

In other words, Obama himself dragged his father into this race.

Loved my pop, but some things he believed I will never believe. 1924 Arkansas vs 2008 Texas. Sorry pop, but ya taught me to think for myself.

This ‘track’ into Mr O is about as crooked as it gets.

The Right has been musing about Obama’s late father–a dyed-in-the-wool commie and from a Muslim family–for some time now, with most of it being irrelevant since the junior Obama was abandoned by his father. Now it’s the Left’s turn. At…

Obama apparently has never read the paper.

Right…and he had no clue that Reverand Jeremiah Wright was a racist…he never heard him say any of those things…and Mrs. Obama is just kidding about all that “hate America” stuff…
I’m tired of people saying that none of these people affect Obama in any major way. I’m tired of all the excuses…however, I do agree with:

This paper chase makes the argument against an Obama presidency look like it’s reaching when unnecessary.

He’s the swiss cheese of candidates, but with the media having his back and excusing everything, people appear to be unable to see the holes…

rbj on April 15, 2008 at 1:33 PM

I don’t see Stalin and Pol Pot in your list of those facing “real injustices.”

If only a few tens of millions more could’ve been exterminated – the Communist Utopia would’ve prevailed. Those “well intentioned” souls just needed more time.

Who is doing that?

wise_man on April 15, 2008 at 12:58 PM

No one right now, since this is a Day 1 story in the regular media with the Politico report. It’s just pointless for anyone to continue to push it after that, since the more important things to focus on are what the candidate himself says and does (which is also why using Obama’s middle name in a taunting way is also counter-productive. It provides a low level of style without the substance of all the dumb ideas that could come to fruition if Barak Jr. was actually elected in November).

We should stick with Obama himself and the team that has surrounded him during his political career rather than chase ghosts. This paper chase makes the argument against an Obama presidency look like it’s reaching when unnecessary.

As someone with a living father who is both Kenyan and communist, I keep pointing this out. Maybe I’ll mention it to the Lefties. Maybe not.

Like many who grow up without a parent, Obama spent some time pursuing his ghost for very personal reasons, but this paper didn’t come to his attention.

Ed,

Just curious – what’s the source for that?

So what does this have to do with the 2008 presidential election in the US? Not much.
posted at 12:30 pm on April 15, 2008 by Ed Morrissey

I respectfully disagree.

AlexB on April 15, 2008 at 1:06 PM

Him (AP) didn’t write the post.

Obamha has run a campaign on hollow “hope”& “change” without any substance. He has NO real experience or track record to point to to see what his hope and change actually means.

Under those conditions who he surrounds himself with is VERY relevant.

-He writes a book glorifying his father’s dreams yet we are not supposed to dig into what those dreams were of?
-He gives great credit to his pastor’s influence, yet we are not supposed to dig into what those pastor speeches said?
-He has open socialist/anarchist/communist supporters working at his campaign office (Che gear and all), yet we are not supposed to dig into that?
-He has a school teacher that he admits meeting and befriending others around him claim he started his Presidential run after meeting this teacher, yet we are not supposed to dig into the fact this teacher is a admitted proud liberal terrorist?

“Birds of a feather flock together.”

The Politico’s analysis, though, is risible. Obama’s dad was clearly a socialist at best and a communist more likely. His critique of Kenyatta’s socialism is clearly from the left. I agree that it largely doesn’t matter except as an insight into Barack as a young man.

The paper is an interesting piece of trivia, but it’s not something Obama’s foes should harp on,
jon1979 on April 15, 2008 at 12:54 PM

Who is doing that?

The paper is an interesting piece of trivia, but it’s not something Obama’s foes should harp on, especially since the candidate’s own words have offered up such a rich vein of quotes to challenge him with, as opposed to a 43-year-old tome on East African socialist economic theory.

Dragging a paper from 1965 into this race is perfectly legitimate, ever more so since the Democrat candidate does have a connection to the issues discussed therein.

This paper chase makes the argument against an Obama presidency look like it’s reaching when unnecessary.

Wholeheartedly agree. How are voters going to be persuaded to understand, much less buy, a “political trajectory” from Sr.’s paper to Jr.’s record?

The lack of paper trail in Obama’s own history is much more relevant to this campaign.

Weak, Politico.

“What I would want to do is to have my Justice Department and my Attorney General immediately review the information that’s already there and to find out are there inquiries that need to be pursued. I can’t prejudge that because we don’t have access to all the material right now. I think that you are right, if crimes have been committed, they should be investigated. You’re also right that I would not want my first term consumed by what was perceived on the part of Republicans as a partisan witch hunt because I think we’ve got too many problems we’ve got to solve.