Obama to McCain: Why won’t you say it to my face?

posted at 1:09 pm on October 9, 2008 by Allahpundit

All he wants to do is to talk about the financial crisis, except of course that when he had the chance to do that in front of millions, he had nothing to offer except the stalest, most banal talking points.

In any case, I’m intrigued that he’s calling Maverick gutless, as it pretty much obliges McCain to come after him during Wednesday’s debate. Why he’d want to force an issue into the discussion that could hurt him escapes me, unless (a) their internal polling shows that Ayers is a total non-issue, of which I’m skeptical, or (b) he figures McCain’s going to come after him anyway and he might as well throw a punch now. The new Gallup’s just out, incidentally; I’m guessing the answer’s (a). Click the image to watch.

Update: Yeah, probably (a).

Update: Dave Weigel notes that Ayers has already been an issue in a few swing states and hasn’t paid dividends. Which is true, but there’s a huge difference in amplitude coming from McCain himself than from some 527 ad.


Related Posts:

Breaking on Hot Air

Blowback

Trackbacks/Pings

Trackback URL

Comments

This clown needs to write a book on side stepping questions. He’s going to win Dancing With The Stars, without even being on the show. He WILL NOT say what he knew when. He talks about school issues and Ronald Reagan and everything else but what he knew and what he did when. He’s been on the trail for two years spouting Media Matters and Move On talking points but NEVER facing a real interview. Sure, Bill O’reilly for two minutes before rushing off to his afternoon manicure, but that’s it. I don’t trust anyone hiding and dodging that much.

oakpack on October 9, 2008 at 3:19 PM

You see you can read, you catch these little calendar errors, but you can’t see what is actually written?

Who’s the one who can’t read here? As I said in my past post, I read Kurtz’ investigation (for which he used the Annenberg papers that UIC released on August 26) and all I saw was a bunch of innuendo.

The only “proof” i saw that the program was used as an indoctrination “tool” of Chicago’s youth, was a board member expressing concern that Ayers was making this program too political. This is prior to the challenge taking affect. At this point, Obama stepped in and mediated the situation.

That’s all I saw on the charge of indoctrination. I’ve seen nothing to show that kids were taught or in anyway “indoctrinated” toward a certain political view.

I’ve seen no one complain of this. I’ve seen no students or teachers talking about this. I’ve seen nobody else claim anything like this except for Kurtz, and he provided little to no evidence of it.

All i’m asking is if there is more evidence out there to support this claim. Because I have not seen it.

Tom_Shipley on October 9, 2008 at 3:21 PM

Which is true, but there’s a huge difference in amplitude coming from McCain himself than from some 527 ad.

Let Obama, with no qualifications regarding the economy except that he’s hidden under a desk for the past three weeks, tell voters what he did with $161 million of grant money. After all that taxpayers have committed to in the past six months (and that summertime legislation included a ton of dough to Acorn, so we can thank Congress for the cash infusion to steal the election), I’m sure voters would like to hear how Obama wasted that money and then draw lines to the rest of the spending for social engineering that he has planned.

BuckeyeSam on October 9, 2008 at 3:23 PM

Don’t you guys find it telling that Tom’s biggest “rub” with this issue is if in fact the scumbag terrorist’s reforms were really that radical?

All that bombing and rape shit is no big deal.

ClassicCon on October 9, 2008 at 3:24 PM

What happens if McCain says it to his face? Is that a threat? Obama’s response can only take place if McCain is within 5 feet?

Ronnie on October 9, 2008 at 3:27 PM

Strawman arguments galore!

The issue is that they spent significant time working together on various left-wing causes, during a time Ayers was openly and loudly unrepentant about his previous actions. Whether Obama’s work with Ayers (and with other far-left organizations such as the New Party and ACORN) is evidence of tacit approval of that corrosive radicalism or merely the machinations of an ambitious-at-all-costs politician (and there’s plenty of hard evidence of that, see both his State and US Senate races for the types of political hardball he’s willing to play) in a very liberal district, neither paints him as the type of “post-partisan” politician you seem to believe he is, and neither shows the type of pol many of us want for President. The sad truth is that the regular media has been remarkably not interested in this story, compared to the relative treatment of Sarah Palin the past few weeks. The only one willing to actually investigate and look at the notes was Bill Kurtz – partisan yes, but HE WAS THE ONLY ONE – not a single mainstream outlet was willing to actually investigate until after Kurtz did – and then only to discount his work and whitewash the whole affair (as with the NYT – but CNN actually was more hard hitting). And he got harassed on air by Obama supporters before the notes were released. The most interesting thing about this and the official Obama reaction is how sensitive they seem to be over Ayers. the campaign asked the DOJ to investigate a 527 for running and ad a couple months back, the above Kurtz (and Corsi) “action emails”, and the virtual blanking of that period in his life by the campaign and media. It’s already much more significant that his involvement with Ayers is much more than “a guy from my neighborhood”, even you have to agree. What else is there that is he hiding? What is he afraid will come out, and is he afraid it will sink his candidacy?

JeffWeimer on October 9, 2008 at 3:30 PM

HOLY SHIT! Mac just named Frank and Dodd! HE DID IT!

Bishop on October 9, 2008 at 2:13 PM

Make ’em famous!

BTW, some silly troll said the Ayers stuff has been covered in the primaries. However, this time the voters are Americans instead of democrats.

In the primaries, associations with traitors and terrorists only endeared him to the leftist base. With undecided voters, it can hurt Obama.

Right_of_Attila on October 9, 2008 at 3:34 PM

Dave Weigel notes that Ayers has already been an issue in a few swing states and hasn’t paid dividends.

How can non-reporting of an issue, be an issue?

That was a hard-hitting interview with Gibson, wasn’t it? I noticed he was seated at the same eye level as the Messiah and he didn’t have the Ben Frnkklin specs at the base of his nose, glaring down at his victim. And the follow-up questions were just awesomely awesome.

Gibson: joke
Obama: ass-clown
ABC: own the tank

fogw on October 9, 2008 at 3:34 PM

right2bright on October 9, 2008 at 2:33 PM

Snark! +1

*eats*

Grue in the Attic on October 9, 2008 at 3:49 PM

The sheeple still have no clue. I wonder if it’s just the majority of city-dwellers that seem to have so little drive in knowing the truth? Perhaps being rural is an eye opener. Although there are definitely some sheeple out here in the country.
Stockin’ up on ammo. Guess the tornado shelter needs some more supplies.

Badger40 on October 9, 2008 at 4:10 PM

That was a hard-hitting interview with Gibson, wasn’t it?

I liked his opening question. It wasn’t, “Why are they lying about you?”, but it was close.

Jim Treacher on October 9, 2008 at 4:13 PM

Wow! Was the the same Charlie Gibson who looked down his nose at Sarah Palin as he deigned to sit in the same room with her to see just what she didn’t know?

Sheerq on October 9, 2008 at 4:24 PM

McCain’s obvious response: “Senator Obama is running ads that say I’m nuts, but he won’t say it to my face.”

civilengineer on October 9, 2008 at 4:31 PM

You know I get the distinct impression that McCain really dislikes Obama on a personal level and is constantly resisting the urge to bitch slap the guy when ever they meet in person. If McCain were to tell Obama what he really thought of him in person face to face Obama would probably crap his pants and run away.

Dreadnought223 on October 9, 2008 at 4:39 PM

Two Points: Charlie Gibson is a two faced a-hole who just showed what a partisan he is by throwing these softballs at Obama. #2: Obama, for once, is right. McCain should have long ago told Barry, to his facejust what a two-faced, arrogant, CORRUPT (morally and otherwise) politician that Barry is. Maverick needs to get as mad as the base is.
At each debate, I catch myself SCREAMING at the TV for McCain to GET MAD, GO FOR THE JUGULAR. FINISH THIS POSEUR OFF!
At this rate, I agree, the headlines on November 5th will read “McCain ran an honorable campaign, says President Elect Obama”

CapitalistPig on October 9, 2008 at 4:58 PM

Tom_Shipley on October 9, 2008 at 3:21 PM

Sorry charlie, you have not read what he wrote…only a liberal blinded partisan fool would come to the conclusion you had after reading Kurtz’s account…so I am giving you the benefit of the doubt, I say you really haven’t read what he wrote, but probably a Media Matters or HuffPo review.

right2bright on October 9, 2008 at 5:31 PM

I love it. Everyone says it’s SO OBVIOUS what the problem with the Annenberg Challenge is. Why it was so RADICAL.

But I ask for one piece of evidence to show it was (and actually provide the ONLY piece of evidence to back this up) and you all come back with nothing.

If it’s so OBVIOUS, you should have no problem finding (or at least remembering) the points in Kurtz’ piece that back up your claims.

And yes, I did read the entire thing.

Tom_Shipley on October 9, 2008 at 5:55 PM

Does that really sound presidential,, or does it sound more like a street thug?
“Say it to my face!”

JellyToast on October 9, 2008 at 6:29 PM

Tom_Shipley on October 9, 2008 at 3:21 PM

The issue is Oslime-a’s character. In the area of being prepared to lead the country, he has the highest negatives of any candidate since Dukakis.

So, until you can put all the facts a formula, you’re making suggestions based on less than all the information available.

csdeven on October 9, 2008 at 7:05 PM

McCain’s obvious response: “Senator Obama is running ads that say I’m nuts, but he won’t say it to my face.”

civilengineer on October 9, 2008 at 4:31 PM

He can’t say that because the ad is from a 527 and not Oslime-a.

csdeven on October 9, 2008 at 7:07 PM

Dancing With the Stars Tapdancing With the One.

profitsbeard on October 9, 2008 at 7:10 PM

I’m still waiting for someone… anyone… to clearly state one concrete accomplishment that Senator Obama has achieved that indicates he possess the executive ablility to be President of the United States. Anyone?!?!?

Drunken Angry Clown on October 9, 2008 at 7:14 PM

Has anyone noticed the number of trolls that come out when the Ayers topic comes up and the number of pages we generate on this topic? When topics about the economy or perhaps Dodd and Frank come up, not so many trolls. ON THIS AYERS THING, the trolls are like roaches coming out of the woodwork and the same goes for other sites as well. Just wondering.

Carl Cameron was just on Fox talking about Keating on Dennis Miller’s show discussing the cocaine use and “being on the street”. What was that all about?

freeus on October 9, 2008 at 7:26 PM

I will say it to your face, Obama you unAmerican pos. You were a tool of Ayers at the Annenberg challenge where you routed cash to friendly lefty brainwashers. Like the rest of your so-called career, you were a failure and a fraud.

iconoclast on October 9, 2008 at 7:28 PM

Au contraire, Mutt. If it keeps your filthy, lying, radical, socialist ass out of the White House, these attacks will have served our democracy very well, indeed.

Jaibones on October 9, 2008 at 8:23 PM

He’s smoking weed. Black people’s lips turn purple when they smoke weed.

SouthernGent on October 9, 2008 at 8:24 PM

Tom_Shipley on October 9, 2008 at 5:55 PM

Tom, you silly poseur.

Are you claiming to be unaware that the entire set of files from the CAC/Leftist Orgy of Funding were locked up at UIC until exactly three weeks ago, and remain accessible only under very tight scrutiny to the press, of which 95% are leftist fellow-traverlers quite disinterested in any October surprise of radical findings in Hyde Park?

Are you? No, I don’t believe that you are. Rather, I believe that you are being somewhat disingenuous.

Jaibones on October 9, 2008 at 8:29 PM

McCain has had to confront monsters. A metrosexual like Barry O will be nothing.

Mojave Mark on October 9, 2008 at 8:32 PM

What happens if McCain says it to his face? Is that a threat? Obama’s response can only take place if McCain is within 5 feet?

Ronnie on October 9, 2008 at 3:27 PM

I think there is an option c.

a) OK, maybe. But I’d bet that 75% of the people in the poll didn’t watch the debate. Obama sucked and lied, and we all know that.

b) Eh.

But what about option c)? I think Obama’s scummy campaign thinks they can taunt McCain into a series of direct person attacks on Obama in the next debate, and that they think he’ll look terrible in doing so.

Sounds most likely to me. I think he would need to be very careful in a person to person airing of some of these charges, knowing that the moderator in every event is an activist Democrat, and that the rules and format do not allow for the kind of free-wheeling that would be required to do this right.

I think he should arm himself for a few very clear barrages against Obama, but otherwise keep it close to the vest. In the meanwhile – blast away in every possible forum.

Jaibones on October 9, 2008 at 8:37 PM

I’d pay money to “say it to your face” Obama, you sissy lame excuse of a male! My God, talk about the feminization of the American male. At least GW Bush is manly.

Keemo on October 9, 2008 at 8:51 PM

Maybe Obama can explain why he won’t say “Say it to my face” to McCain’s face.

Edouard on October 9, 2008 at 8:52 PM

Take that childish crap back to the playground Obama.

rplat on October 9, 2008 at 9:19 PM

I’m seeing a cage, a black bear, and may the best man win.

This is what we have been reduced to.

HornetSting on October 9, 2008 at 9:21 PM

I’m seeing a cage, a black bear, and may the best man win.

This is what we have been reduced to.

HornetSting on October 9, 2008 at 9:21 PM

Uh, bear, just a bear. Don’t want to be called RRRAAACCCIIISSSTTT!

HornetSting on October 9, 2008 at 9:24 PM

Which face, Obama?

Ronnie on October 9, 2008 at 9:59 PM

Keating 5.

Kafir on October 9, 2008 at 1:28 PM

And McCain should preempt his question of Ayers at the debate by adding that Obama will probably bring this up and quickly explain this and what he did that was wrong and what he learned from it. Then hit Obama with Ayers and say if this was the only bad judgement he made maybe it could be explained away ,BUT, Rev Wright, Rezco, Acorn…bring it full circle and the judgement question. Doesn’t know what was in Obama’s mind but if you put them all together, it paints a really shaky picture of judgement.

yakwill83 on October 9, 2008 at 11:55 PM

Has anyone noticed the number of trolls that come out when the Ayers topic comes up and the number of pages we generate on this topic? When topics about the economy or perhaps Dodd and Frank come up, not so many trolls. ON THIS AYERS THING, the trolls are like roaches coming out of the woodwork and the same goes for other sites as well. Just wondering.

They have to express how little they care because it doesn’t matter because they don’t care.

Jim Treacher on October 10, 2008 at 12:34 AM

Mccain in the next debate: I’ll say it to your face, you community organizing rabble-rouser!

promachus on October 10, 2008 at 9:07 AM

The Ayers apologists care plenty. They prove it by popping up like the unwashed pigs they are whenever the topic arises.

They KNOW that, in the eyes of the American voter, an association with an attempted mass-murderer and his wife trumps an association with four swindlers in terms of pure evil.

Again, now and forever, better the Keating Five than the Chicago Seven. Go, Palin/McCain!

Spanglemaker on October 10, 2008 at 9:08 AM

oops, forgot socialist community organizing rabble rouser!

promachus on October 10, 2008 at 9:10 AM

Doesn’t know what was in Obama’s mind but if you put them all together, it paints a really shaky picture of judgement.

yakwill83 on October 9, 2008 at 11:55 PM

I know what exactly was in Obama’s mind and it isn’t bad judgement unless you expect to be President, which he probably didn’t. If you’re a carpetbagger from Harvard and try to make it as a inner city politician, you make inroads with the leftist power brokers like his successor, Ayers, and other “community overseers organizers”. Then you get in with the over the top, popular pastor. Once you start gaining ground, being the talented “community overseer organizer” you are, you start getting friendly with slumlords and seek to consolidate enough money and power to maintain a safe congressional/council/etc. seat. When he made these connections there was no way he knew that he would rise so high so fast, nobody could have seen that coming. I have never seen such a speech that payed such high dividends as his 2004 speech.

LevStrauss on October 10, 2008 at 9:44 AM

careful. John might take a bite out of your ear if he gets too close. Back off B .O.

johnnyU on October 10, 2008 at 10:20 AM

Obombem talks to the hand not the people. That is where it stashes those talking points to make sure he does not trip up and tell us the truth or contradict his version of his relationship.

MSGTAS on October 10, 2008 at 11:04 AM

My suggestion for McCain’s answer (in an alternate universe:)

“‘Say it to my face?’ He must think he’s running for King of the World Wrestling Federation. If that’s his idea of how we should decide who’s going to be President, I’m 74 years old and I’m still pretty sure I could send his pansy ass crying back to his mommy. However, that’s not how we elect Presidents in America, and when he’s actually ready to run for President instead of Chief Bully, he can start by telling us why he LIED about his relationship with Ayers, why he LIED about his relationship with Rev Wright, why he LIED about his relationship with Rashid Khalidi, why he tried to hide an $800,000 payment to an organization that’s being indicted all over the nation for voter fraud, and why he’s so afraid of reporters discussing his roots among Chicago radicals.”

I think it would work, but then, I’m just a keyboard quarterback.

philwynk on October 10, 2008 at 12:46 PM

philwynk, nicely said. Obama for King of the WWF. I’d be willing to bet McCain could send Obama crying back to his mommy.

Mulligan on October 10, 2008 at 3:55 PM

Say it to your face?? What an immature statement. Sounds
like playground speak!! And he wants to be President of the United States??

gary on October 10, 2008 at 4:28 PM

John, Say it to his face. Tell him he is weak, he is a liberal, and he cant be trusted with the Presidency. Tell him judgement matters, for the last 10 years his friends and associations show that he has show that he is not ready

OriginalPechangas_son on October 10, 2008 at 7:49 PM

Do ya know the difference between Bill Ayers and Timothy McVeigh ?

Ayers beat the rap, became a teacher and has an alliance running for President.

Scary Halloween huh ! ! Boo ! !

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GA77kpXm3HE

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ONfJ7YSXE5w

Texyank on October 10, 2008 at 9:56 PM

Which face, Obama?

Ronnie on October 9, 2008 at 9:59 PM

this has the makings of a campaign ad.

GitMoe on October 11, 2008 at 1:57 AM