The Obama-Ayers connection: Chicago Annenberg Challenge

posted at 8:11 am on September 23, 2008 by Ed Morrissey

Stanley Kurtz tried to force the University of Illinois at Chicago to open its records on a publicly-funded project, and for his journalistic effort got called a “smear merchant” and “character assassin” by Barack Obama and his campaign.  They didn’t want reporters snooping through the records of the Chicago Annenberg Project, Obama’s one claim to executive experience — and the years that belie Obama’s characterization of former domestic terrorist William Ayers as nothing more than a neighbor and an acquaintance.  Kurtz discovers a long working relationship between the two on a project designed to spread radical political thought by essentially feeding it to schoolchildren under the guise of educational reform:

CAC translated Mr. Ayers’s radicalism into practice. Instead of funding schools directly, it required schools to affiliate with “external partners,” which actually got the money. Proposals from groups focused on math/science achievement were turned down. Instead CAC disbursed money through various far-left community organizers, such as the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (or Acorn).

Mr. Obama once conducted “leadership training” seminars with Acorn, and Acorn members also served as volunteers in Mr. Obama’s early campaigns. External partners like the South Shore African Village Collaborative and the Dual Language Exchange focused more on political consciousness, Afrocentricity and bilingualism than traditional education. CAC’s in-house evaluators comprehensively studied the effects of its grants on the test scores of Chicago public-school students. They found no evidence of educational improvement.

CAC also funded programs designed to promote “leadership” among parents. Ostensibly this was to enable parents to advocate on behalf of their children’s education. In practice, it meant funding Mr. Obama’s alma mater, the Developing Communities Project, to recruit parents to its overall political agenda. CAC records show that board member Arnold Weber was concerned that parents “organized” by community groups might be viewed by school principals “as a political threat.” Mr. Obama arranged meetings with the Collaborative to smooth out Mr. Weber’s objections.

The Daley documents show that Mr. Ayers sat as an ex-officio member of the board Mr. Obama chaired through CAC’s first year. He also served on the board’s governance committee with Mr. Obama, and worked with him to craft CAC bylaws. Mr. Ayers made presentations to board meetings chaired by Mr. Obama. Mr. Ayers spoke for the Collaborative before the board. Likewise, Mr. Obama periodically spoke for the board at meetings of the Collaborative.

First off, we should note what this isn’t.  It’s not a smoking gun revealing criminal activity, and not a precursor to an armed overthrow of American government, although Ayers has done both in his lifetime and still talks approvingly of at least the latter.  The program outlined by Kurtz breaks no laws, and Kurtz never claims otherwise.

However, Kurtz’ report provides a very interesting look at the early political life of Barack Obama.  He had already entered politics at the time he joined the CAC, and even at that stage had allied himself with ACORN, which has found itself at the center of more than a dozen voter-fraud investigations.  Obama also allied himself with Ayers and helped the former Weather Underground fugitive push forward with his plans to radicalize an entire generation of schoolchildren in the area through the CAC.  Note well the parallels to community organizing that play out in the activities of the CAC, and recall again how Obama claims that activity as a major qualification for the presidency.

Ayers wanted teachers trained to instruct against “oppression” and to push schoolchildren towards political beliefs Ayers valued — apparently valuing them higher than actual education.  Barack Obama agreed, and for several years worked in close partnership with Ayers to implement that educational policy.  Even had Ayers never tossed a single bomb, this kind of educational philosophy would likely raise eyebrows with most parents, who desire a real education for their children and not some sort of political indoctrination camp.  With the context of Ayers’ violent radicalism, however, it makes the CAC even worse — a breeding ground for future Weathermen, ready to follow Ayers’ lead when the time comes for the revolution that Ayers and his wife (and co-terrorist) Bernardine Dohrn to this day desire.

Barack Obama not only supported this, he helped run this program for several years.  What does that say about Obama’s idea of mainstream, as he has repeatedly described Ayers and Dohrn?  What does that say about his own politics, his own ideas on education, and what kind of philosophy he brings to American politics?

Update: Steve Diamond notes other, more political aspects of the Obama-Ayers relationship, and says the CAC was part of a campaign to fight Mayor Ruchard Daley and the teachers’ unions for control of the schools:

Ironically, while Kurtz wants to tar Obama with the red paint brush of the 60s “radical” Ayers, an understanding of the real purpose of the CAC indicates a much closer political alliance between Obama and Ayers.

The grant application itself and much of what the CAC was up to emerged in the heated “Chicago School Wars” underway in that city from the late 1980s until the late 1990s. This war was for the control of Chicago’s public schools.

One side in this war was controlled by Mayor Richard M. Daley, Jr., son of the legendary Mayor Daley.

And the other side was led by Ayers and a small group of reformers that had emerged several years earlier in 1988 during a battle to create a new power center in the Chicago schools, the so-called Local School Councils, or LSCs. The LSCs were an effort to rein in the power of unionized teachers, school principals and school administrators, in the wake of an unpopular teachers’ strike in 1987.

This milieu around Ayers also included, as far back as the late 80s, Barack Obama and the Developing Communities Project (DCP) that had hired Obama as its Executive Director in 1985. The DCP was a leading participant in the campaign to establish the LSCs.

Thus, in fact, the “radical” Bill Ayers and his ally Barack Obama, a Democratic political activist and lawyer on the rise in Chicago, were engaged in an anti-union effort to influence the direction and nature of the entire Chicago public school system. It would lead them into a battle with Mayor Daley himself.

Read the whole post. I have a little skepticism about this, though, since Obama allied himself politically with both the educational unions and Daley during this same period of time. If Obama was at war with Daley and the unions, neither side acted much like it — and Daley has publicly defended William Ayers on more than one occasion.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

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

Comment pages: 1 2

Let’s skip to the really important part of the issue. Was the gathering at Ayers’s house in 1995 a fundraiser?

(channeling Ben Smith)

MayBee on September 23, 2008 at 10:53 AM

Nope…. the key is to go on an education agenda attack.

Point out the PROGRAMS the AB challenge put forward… multiculturalism, and point out Obama’s College money for service scheme…

Then juxtapose it with a PTA Mom… like… oh.. Sarah Palin?

One, 150 million dollars wasted, with no positive change… one works inside the system…

Just who is the community organizer?

Romeo13 on September 23, 2008 at 10:54 AM

saint kansas on September 23, 2008 at 9:16 AM

If you or anyone else has the time and expertise to turn that into a video be my guest, cos I don’t! It’s open source anti-Obama material, free to all.

You can also leave a comment on an old post at the blog if you want to cooperate on a project – it’ll turn up in my email.

MrLynn on September 23, 2008 at 10:10 AM

I’ve emailed stuff to the campaign before, but don’t know if it gets seen. If anyone knows a sure-fire email address for getting through to them (as opposed to the ‘Contact us’ addresses at the McCain and RNC websites) let me know!

EnglishMike on September 23, 2008 at 10:55 AM

What would be really interesting would be to graph the English and math scores of the children subjected to the “Annenberg Challenge”. We could say that Obama’s credentials as an Agent of Change (TM) are on the line here.

unclesmrgol on September 23, 2008 at 11:03 AM

Old Texan Charles Goodnight, perhaps the best known rancher in Texas once said “some men just need killing!” William Ayers need to be a the top of that list.

try again later on September 23, 2008 at 11:10 AM

No. No killing talk.

MayBee on September 23, 2008 at 11:21 AM

This just isn’t worth getting stressed over. It, like all the other, “should be career ending” facts about Obama will be forgotten by this afternoon. Very sad, indeed.

They are counting on use to give up.

Now more than ever: donate time and money to stop Obama. Contact your local McCain office. Live in a blue state? You can still help make phone calls.

Time to stand up.

Let’s roll.

ex-Democrat on September 23, 2008 at 11:50 AM

I have a little skepticism about this, though, since Obama allied himself politically with both the educational unions and Daley during this same period of time

Good that you posted it anyway just to get everyone riled up. Anyway, let’s hope that Obama didn’t actually do anything to undermine unions. Wouldn’t that be terrible?

bayam on September 23, 2008 at 12:30 PM

The main issues with Obama and Ayers are the relationship with ACORN and the radicalization of the education system. Compound that with the fact the CAC admits it wasted the money makes Obama not only look like a radical but incompetent. These are the reasons he never mentioned the CAC in his executive experience credentials.

And I’m still furious with O’Reilly. He finally gets around to having Kurtz on to discuss the CAC and Ayers. What does he do? He dismisses it all as “helping poor folks.” So much for not being in the tank for Obama.

Deanna on September 23, 2008 at 12:30 PM

I think this is going to be a front page story in the NYT this week…but first, is Sarah Palin feeding her kids right during the campaign, could they suffer from malnutrition? Studies have shown that women under stress have a higher rate of birth defects then average women. How much is Sarah Palin spending on hair cuts now? And is Todd Palin on the campaign trail because she can’t trust him?

right2bright on September 23, 2008 at 12:30 PM

And I’m still furious with O’Reilly. He finally gets around to having Kurtz on to discuss the CAC and Ayers. What does he do? He dismisses it all as “helping poor folks.” So much for not being in the tank for Obama.

Deanna on September 23, 2008 at 12:30 PM

I agree, O’R had a chance to nail him with ACORN and the CAC but let him off the hook…payoff.

right2bright on September 23, 2008 at 12:31 PM

Public education = liberal voter training (including reading and writing well enough to fill out forms.)

RBMN on September 23, 2008 at 12:39 PM

GOOGLE: SAUL ALINSKY BARRACK OBAMA LUCIFER

Alinsky says the first true community organizer was Lucifer and dedicates his book, Rules for Radicals to him. Ayer’s father put the Daleys in charge of Chicago politics. Obama is a handpicked puppet who eagerly went into the political machine in Chicago. This corruption is so obvious it is unbelievabvle they are getting away with it.

volsense on September 23, 2008 at 12:39 PM

Both William Ayers and Barrack Obama did their undergraduate work at Columbia University. Coincidence? Yeah, right!!!

volsense on September 23, 2008 at 12:42 PM

May I make a small quibble about your first sentence? The records Stanley Kurtz wanted to see are housed at the University of Illinois at Chicago, but they’re not “its records” in the sense that they’re records of activities of the University of Illinois at Chicago. You might want to correct that to read “force the library of the University of Illinois at Chicago to provide access to records on deposit there” or something. Just in the interest of being fair to the library…

lbphilly on September 23, 2008 at 12:47 PM

IF Mr. Obama is proud of his achievement (as top executive of the CAC project), you’d think his campaign would eagerly trumpet the fact. Instead, we saw this two-step maneuvers all to hide ‘not even a smoking gun’ (I think the Obama camp knew it wouldn’t had been a smoking gun). So you ask yourself, WHY?

If the information came out before, what it revealed would contradict the “Hope and Change” message (his only salient point) in the primaries. After he had secured his party nomination, the camp decided to use a different tactic to discourage too much interests paid to the CAC.

If he had come out and admitted he was wrong (being enthusiastic and naïve) in what he did early in his career, it is another nail on his ‘Judgment to Lead’ message.

Sir Napsalot on September 23, 2008 at 1:16 PM

And I’m still furious with O’Reilly. He finally gets around to having Kurtz on to discuss the CAC and Ayers. What does he do? He dismisses it all as “helping poor folks.” So much for not being in the tank for Obama.

Deanna on September 23, 2008 at 12:30 PM

That was maddening. Next up, I’m waiting for McCain to praise Ayers for his community service work with ‘the poor’ just as he praised the Obamarxist.

That being said, I don’t think BOR is in the tank for Obama. He just twists himself into ridiculous knots trying to sound like an independent. He did it this morning on Fox & Friends when he blamed Barney Frank, Chris Dodd and… George Bush, who unlike the corrupt Dems tried to put control in place, for the mortgage fiasco.

Buy Danish on September 23, 2008 at 1:35 PM

Neither Stanley Kurtz, nor Steve Diamond, mention any specific grants funded for more than about $200,000. To dispose of $150,000,000, as the CAC did over about five years, must have required a big staff to review and select the sufficiently-radical proposals – or perhaps there were some really substantial grants which we aren’t informed of.

Where’d all that money go? I’d hope that such information would be available.

And if Walter Annenberg felt that the $47,000,000 which his foundation devoted to Chicago was to improve education, the diversion of it plus another $100,000,000 in matching funds to supercharge radical politics would appear to him to be the biggest fraud in the history of benevolent giving.

Insufficiently Sensitive on September 23, 2008 at 1:44 PM

Who knew that there were any African villages on the south side of Chicago…

Maybe that’s where they made up rediscovered Kwaanza…

I denounce myself…

RocketmanBob on September 23, 2008 at 1:55 PM

What’s the problem???

They were improving Education, my brother…

Y’know, helpin’ out underprivileged yoofs and stuff….

I mean, there’s no doubt that this helped Michelle’s children

Anyone who has problems with this is a…a…a…
RAAAAAAAAAAAACIST !

RocketmanBob on September 23, 2008 at 2:02 PM

If Obama’past, including his transcripts and other records from Harvard and the like, is not going to be vetted by the media, why should we not assume he has something to hide?

Is he a Muslim? Was he a radical? Did he advocate violence?

Hey, if we can’t vet the guys past then we can assume he has something to hide.

Sarah get a gyn exam, yet Obama gets a pass?

mylegsareswollen on September 23, 2008 at 2:20 PM

What I wrote to Mr. Kurtz in an email last Sunday:

Dear Mr. Kurtz:

I noticed over at Hot Air that ABC has discovered a document that they represent as putting the lie to Sarah Palin’s version of “Troopergate” (http://www.abcnews.go.com/print?id=5844710 ).

Perhaps the courageous truth seekers of the fourth estate currently residing at ABC might be willing to help you pry loose the documents you’ve been seeking from the University of Illinois at Chicago regarding Barack Obama’s relationship with Bill Ayers and their work on the Annenberg Challenge?

Should that be the case, I’ll be diligent in watching for low flying sows and boars.

Best regards,

Amendment X on September 23, 2008 at 2:21 PM

give Ayers a microphone and an audience of like-minded Democrat-voting leftists…and broadcast it on YouTube.

And gop.com

Let them illustrate exactly what they stand for.

These things tend to work out in the wash.

Black Adam on September 23, 2008 at 2:55 PM

No need, Black Adam. There are lots of records of Bill Ayers speaking, on camera, writing on his blog, making public appearances.

The RNC ad:

Opens with pictures of Ayers’s best work, bombed Pentagon room, dead cop, blown up Philly townhouse with three dead (yea!) Weatherman types splattered everywhere, etc. Over that run scripts of his most idiotic bragging, his most radical statements. Then more photos from Chicago circa 1968 and the DNC convention.

Big ending: then show the towers burning and collapsing, and overlay the NY Times magazine article published the next day, highlighting and freezing on his nutty – “I think we didn’t do enough…”

Jaibones on September 23, 2008 at 3:16 PM

If you’ve read the earlier posts at Global Labor, you might realize that Obama wasn’t just picked out of the blue for this project or even because he was part of the DCP.

He’s been groomed the whole way.

By whom? You might ask. I’ll tell you that it is not fringe political elements that are your worry. It is not Chicago politics, though that certainly trained Obama well.

In 2004, it was Big Oil that was the bogeyman in the election. This election, it’s Big Energy. Specifically, companies like ComEd or, more directly, Exelon, who have a lot invested in nuclear plants, hydro-electric and, interestingly, windfarms.

ComEd, owned by Exelon, happens to be one of Obama’s largest donors. Exelon PAC has donated equally to Republicans and Democrats, but Exelon People’s PAC is a different story. Further, Frank Clark, President/CEO of ComEd is a registered lobbyist and a registered bundler for Obama. He also happens to sit on the board of trustees at the hospital where Michelle Obama works.

That is just the tip of the iceberg. Who do you think are the top ten investor institutional holders for these big energy companies? Think current financial crisis. Who is failing and what private institutions are buying them up? Mutuals and other investment vehicles suddenly speculating oil up to $145/bbl? These same financial institutions are Obama’s top donors. yes, they are involved in the current subprime mess, but that is just one of many problems.

The same investment institutions are the top ten holders for Edison International and Consolidated Edison. California and NY respectively. Those are just a few.

How did you like that spectacle of the Big Oil execs getting grilled by congress? The threats to nationalize or develop a windfall profits tax? Orchestrated by the Democrats. I bet that the Big Energy guys and these investment firms were laughing up their sleeves watching their opponents get tarred and feathered in public for something big Energy and its investors were pulling the strings on the whole way.

You don’t think the Democrats were really blocking oil drilling for some altruistic, save the planet and feel good, tree hugger reason, do you?

As we all know, windfarms and other “alternate” energy aren’t really very profitable or inexpensive means of generating electricity right now. They only become profitable when all other energy becomes too expensive. Like oil. Or, when they are able to get sufficient tax releif and government funding to offset or reduce their own investments in building plants or upgrading infrastructure.

Interesting little facts. ComEd put the “green” message board up at Invesco field for Obama’s speech and probably was the onous for all that “think green” convention garbage (which wasn’t really as green as people think).

There is more where that came from. Suffice it to say that Obama is probably the closest to “the Manchurian Candidate” we have ever seen. He’s been selected, groomed and supported the whole way by these organizations.

The Bill Ayers fringe politics is just a side show.

Kat_Mo on September 23, 2008 at 3:32 PM

Sorry that was so long. i was just ticked off.

Kat_Mo on September 23, 2008 at 3:58 PM

So, let’s get serious here.

Obama was part of this program… I don’t know too much about it, but on the surface it seems like an attempt to get parents and the community more involved in the education of their children.

It doesn’t seem to have been a success, but not really an outright failure either. Now, this editorial seems to make a leap in a few cases that I don’t think is reflected in reality:

CAC also funded programs designed to promote “leadership” among parents. Ostensibly this was to enable parents to advocate on behalf of their children’s education. In practice, it meant funding Mr. Obama’s alma mater, the Developing Communities Project, to recruit parents to its overall political agenda.

I don’t see any evidence that Ayers or Obama tried to push political beliefs or agenda.

There was concern from one board member that Ayers actions may be political or perceived as political and Obama stepped into to moderate a meeting to ease those fears… and it seems to have worked.

That’s the only “evidence” shown that Obama and Ayers were pushing their political views on people. Pretty weak. It seems to me that rather than trying to push political views, the program was set up to empower parents and communities to become more involved in their childrens’ education.

This program went on for years. If this was some sort of political indoctrination process, I would suspect there would have been more complaints or notice of it. But I couldn’t find any.

Also:

Instead of funding schools directly, it required schools to affiliate with “external partners,” which actually got the money. Proposals from groups focused on math/science achievement were turned down. Instead CAC disbursed money through various far-left community organizers, such as the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (or Acorn).

As I understand it, there were 45 “external partners” in the program ACORN and the other two mentions in his article are just three of them. He call all of them “various far-left organizations.” I’m very doubtful of that claim. It seems like a gross over-generalization to me.

Kurtz brings up some of Ayers more radical views, then kind of infers that they were reflected in this program and that Obama agreed with them. But I don’t really see evidence of that.

There seems to be a lot of loose facts, associations and implications in this piece. Ed says this:

Ayers wanted teachers trained to instruct against “oppression” and to push schoolchildren towards political beliefs Ayers valued — apparently valuing them higher than actual education. Barack Obama agreed, and for several years worked in close partnership with Ayers to implement that educational policy.

Again, something like this is implied in the piece, but I don’t think it’s really shown. Just looking at the bare facts Kurtz laid out without make inferences, I don’t think Ed’s statement is a accurate statement. It’s all very mushy and doesn’t, to me, seem to reflect the reality of the situation.

Tom_Shipley on September 23, 2008 at 4:06 PM

Someone please drop a piano on that S.O.B.

Akzed on September 23, 2008 at 4:07 PM

Perhaps the courageous truth seekers of the fourth estate currently residing at ABC might be willing to help you pry loose the documents you’ve been seeking from the University of Illinois at Chicago regarding Barack Obama’s relationship with Bill Ayers and their work on the Annenberg Challenge?

These documents were released on August 26.

Tom_Shipley on September 23, 2008 at 4:13 PM

All of that CAC stuff was just a way to get their feet wet in the community in order to get support for a run to public office for Obama. It’s “success” or “failure” meant nothing.

Kat_Mo on September 23, 2008 at 4:19 PM

With all the reports we see about wrongdoing by ACORN, remind me again why ACORN isn’t subject to RICO prosecution, why it’s still in existence?

Is it just a case where authorities just aren’t feeling up to it? Taking a little time off, a little me time?

If these bastards really do the things they are reputed to do, they ought to be shut down. Or did we just as a nation sort of decide to start cutting anarchists more slack these days?

jeff_from_mpls on September 23, 2008 at 9:19 AM

Jeff, are you aware that our tax dollars underwrite ACORN and that the community reinvestment acts that led to providing mortgages for fiscally risky clients has provisions to further support ACORN?

onlineanalyst on September 23, 2008 at 4:27 PM

Tom_Shipley on September 23, 2008 at 4:06 PM

Ayers was not just trying to help parents educate their children! He was trying to indoctrinate them, using subjects like science and math to teach “Social Justice”. Lots of articles are out there that pre-date Obama’s presidential run about Ayers education ideas, and they are radical, far left ideas, which is what one would expect from an unrepentent terrorist.

Here’s a very thorough expose’, by Sol Stern. Here’s a more recent update.

There is no way that Barry was unacquainted with Ayer’s ideas, and highly unlikely he didn’t actually support most of them considering the fact that they were in charge of doling out dollars.

Buy Danish on September 23, 2008 at 6:08 PM

In February, Smith asked Obama’s chief strategist (and reigning expert on Chicago’s political tribes), David Axelrod, about the Obama-Ayers relationship and got this answer:

“Bill Ayers lives in his neighborhood. Their kids attend the same school,” he said. “They’re certainly friendly, they know each other, as anyone whose kids go to school together.”

As it turned out, their kids did not go to school together, but Obama was the chairman of a $150 million effort spearheaded by Ayers on the important issue of public education, which funded “awful” projects and “had little impact on student outcomes.”

You would think Axelrod would have some ’splainin’ to do. But you would be wrong.

As the CAC story emerged, Ben Smith’s blase reaction clearly communicated that he did not care that he was misled by Camp Obama about the Ayers relationship, let alone that Obama’s biggest claim to executive experience (and a reform credential to boot) was judged to be a failure, even by the CAC. Indeed, Smith took the story as evidence of how mainstream Ayers is — as opposed to how dysfunctional the political culture of Chicago is.

In contrast, Smith felt compelled to nitpick statements by John McCain’s campaign strategist, Steve Schmidt, about the Ayers relationship. Smith added in a separate blog post that Schmidt’s comments were “‘Hey, look over here’ politics” — the campaign’s urgent attempt to change the subject from the economy. That was the daily talking point at the Huffington Post, too — even though McCain was making headlines talking about the economy the same day.

Perhaps those who read Ben Smith will stop thinking that he is “in the tank” for Obama when he stops doing the breaststroke through Obama’s Kool-Aid. And the same could be said for any number of Smith’s pals in the media.

http://patterico.com/2008/09/23/barack-obama-bill-ayers-and-ben-smith/

Answer: Yes.

Mr. Joe on September 23, 2008 at 7:34 PM

Lots of articles are out there that pre-date Obama’s presidential run about Ayers education ideas, and they are radical, far left ideas, which is what one would expect from an unrepentent terrorist.

As I pointed out in my last post, there’s no evidence to show that some of Ayer’s more radical ideas expressed prior to his work on the project made it into the project.

Again, Ed writes this:

Ayers wanted teachers trained to instruct against “oppression” and to push schoolchildren towards political beliefs Ayers valued — apparently valuing them higher than actual education. Barack Obama agreed, and for several years worked in close partnership with Ayers to implement that educational policy.

But I have seen no evidence that this program trained teachers to “instruct against oppression” or attempted to impart any political views onto children.

There’s no evidence to show this occurred in Kurtz’ op-ed or the other article I read that he wrote about the program. It seems Ed and Kurtz just assume this must have happened.

If I missed evidence to show this occurred, please point it out to me.

Tom_Shipley on September 23, 2008 at 7:40 PM

It seems Ed and Kurtz just assume this must have happened.

Tom_Shipley on September 23, 2008 at 7:40 PM

I am not certain what Ed is specifically referring to, but obviously he’s right, and everything else we know about Ayers supports his suggestion.

Your suggestion, on the other hand, that in the absence of video of Ayers directing a group of teachers to follow an anti-oppression curriculum we must all assume that he was emphasizing classic literature, mathematics and proper English is just stupid, as is your wont.

Jaibones on September 23, 2008 at 9:53 PM

OK, I wasted a few more minutes reading Kurtz’s piece. Tom Shitley, let me simply say once again what everyone here already knows: you’re an idiot.

Go read it, dickeater.

Jaibones on September 23, 2008 at 9:57 PM

Every time I see the front page picture of Ayers standing on the flag, all I can think of is: Smug asshat!

91Veteran on September 24, 2008 at 1:35 AM

Jaibones,

Again, if there’s evidence that I missed that shows that the program instructs teachers to “instruct against against oppression” or attempt to indoctrinate school children with any political philosophy, please point it out.

Tom_Shipley on September 24, 2008 at 8:02 AM

Comment pages: 1 2