Bill Ayers to righty blogger: Of course I wrote “Dreams from My Father”

posted at 9:30 pm on October 6, 2009 by Allahpundit

What’s more amusing? The fact that he’d tease a conservative by baiting her about the right’s Cashill/Andersen-fueled authorship suspicions, or the fact that the Examiner seems to think he was making an earnest, honest-to-goodness confession?

Note that this wasn’t even in response to a question. He simply blurted it out as soon as the interviewer identified herself as conservative.

Anne Leary of Back Yard Conservative was passing through Washington, DC’s Reagan National Airport yesterday, and was surprised to come across Bill Ayers at Starbucks: “scruffy, thinning beard, dippy earring, and the wire rims, heading to order.” She struck up a conversation with him and snapped the accompanying photo…

Ayers was in Washington, he told her, for a conference on education.

“That’s what I do, education,” he said. “You shouldn’t believe everything you hear about me… You know nothing about me.”

To which she responded, “I said, I know plenty–I’m from Chicago, a conservative blogger, and I’ll post this.”…

But he didn’t scowl, and didn’t run off as he has been known to do. Instead, unprompted, he blurted out: “I wrote ‘Dreams From My Father… Michelle asked me to.” Then he added “And if you can prove it we can split the royalties.”

Anne responded, “Stop pulling my leg!”

But he repeated insistently, “I wrote it, the wording was similar [to Ayers’ other writing.]”

Anne responded, “I believe you probably heavily edited it.”

Ayers stated firmly, “I wrote it.”

Anne ended the conversation by saying “why would I believe you? You’re a liar.”

Follow the link for the Examiner’s theory that being denied proper credit for the president’s book — which was published almost 15 years ago — may have finally triggered Ayers’s megalomania such that he could no longer suppress the truth during … a chance encounter with a blogger in an airport. Dude?

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 3 4 5

Now that he’s ratting out Obama it could be all bets are off.

No, I don’t think the bets are off, it is more like the gargantuan egos are getting the better of both Ayers and Mr. Obama. If Ayers helped write it, then why the secrecy?

Oh yeah, that terrorism thing….. messy?!

ted c on October 6, 2009 at 10:44 PM

I do consider myself conservative, but I am, as my moniker indicates, an x-democrat. I’m asking, in your opinion, what distinguishes a neocon from an authentic conservative.

anXdem on October 6, 2009 at 10:30 PM

And, in all due respect, I doubt you are sincerely interested in any response from me as to your statement there.

I once voted as a Democrat, and then I woke up. As a voter, as an individual American citizen, I could never associate or define ANYone as “Conservative” if and as they supported the Democratic Party, based solely on their party platform (for starters but that’s enough).

One isn’t “Conservative” if one’s supporting the Left’s ideas, and I could go on with a list many lines long about that.

But I’m not interested in typing out all the reasons why I define Conservative as Conservative and never as a Democrat.

No political party — NONE — is ever going to fulfill every voters’ tweaks and interests comprehensively. As a voter, I think it’s generally about voting for which one makes the clearer case as to the bigger issues that are most important to me. Then I vote. No option is ever miraculously perfect — and expecting as much is what inspired many gullible people to vote for Obama, who, obviously, is not any of what they’d “hoped” for.

Lourdes on October 6, 2009 at 10:44 PM

Thanks, Badger. So, I take it, Spathi isn’t a fan of protecting America. Sounds like HornetString is right– he’s a waste.

anXdem on October 6, 2009 at 10:42 PM

He likely supports Ron Paul’s policy of isolationism, no matter the war, no matter the cost.

Esthier on October 6, 2009 at 10:44 PM

The last guy I can remember calling to bring back the draft was noted neocon Charlie Rangel.

Jim Treacher on October 6, 2009 at 10:26 PM

Well, you know Rangel’s a neocon too, like Hitler was and Stalin was and Manson is and Ho Chi Minh was and Che Guevara was. Every one of them under the influence of Prescott Bush too, I might add, and Skull and Bones and the Trilateral Commission.

ddrintn on October 6, 2009 at 10:44 PM

topic of thread: Bill Ayers

please stay on that thread.

ted c on October 6, 2009 at 10:45 PM

Obama is, well, a piss-poor communicator, to say the least.
uncivilized on October 6, 2009 at 9:49 PM

I’ sure TOTUS would co-sign that.

Gang-of-One on October 6, 2009 at 10:46 PM

Bill Ayers is not the kind of guy to lie. He admits to be a terrorist and communist sympathizer. He never lied about that. He freely admits it.
So why should he lie about this?
There is too much evidence that Ayers did write this book.
Egos know no boundaries.

cubachi on October 6, 2009 at 10:46 PM

Ugh. Animal cruelty thread…that crap gets my dander up…Why yes, I’d be happy to take a cattle prod to the man that wants to sell films of animal torture…
Just pull his pants down.
Bring us the QOTD thread….Allah/Hardball.

HornetSting on October 6, 2009 at 10:46 PM

topic of thread: Bill Ayers

please stay on that thread.

Bill Ayers ran an anti-conscription movement in the 1960′s.

I was saying how it was excellent that he had the president’s ear on this particular topic. It’s not really off-topic.

Spathi on October 6, 2009 at 10:47 PM

Spathi on October 6, 2009 at 10:43 PM

BILL AYERS, Sperm Bank. BILL AYERS.
We all know you hate our heroes in uniform.

HornetSting on October 6, 2009 at 10:47 PM

Side note, since trolls have derailed the thread anyway:

Overall, fewer people died on an average day in Iraq since 2003 than on an average day under Saddam. That’s counting the half a million Iraqis who died during the Iraq-Iran war, but it only seems fair to count those deaths.

BadgerHawk on October 6, 2009 at 10:48 PM

Just support anti-Federalism and anti-interventionism, which is essentially libertarianism.

Anti-federalism? What are you talking about? Are you arguing for a national superstate, which is what anti-federalism is?

We can’t really achieve that until we get turn the war of terror into more of a law enforcement issue as it should be.

Spathi on October 6, 2009 at 10:43 PM

What US law extends beyond our shores, for us to enforce?

You’re a retard.

progressoverpeace on October 6, 2009 at 10:48 PM

SADLY…..no one in the Bootlick Media will report it.

With all the “transforming” of America going on who has time to make an issue of this little item.

Roadblocks………we must have Roadblocks for BHO’s plans.

PappyD61 on October 6, 2009 at 10:49 PM

MeatHeadinCA on October 6, 2009 at 10:36 PM

Stay away!

AsianGirlInTights on October 6, 2009 at 10:49 PM

This whole thing is a gd circle jerk. We have children dying in Afghanistan. And the POTUS is a giant ass. I’m so sick and tired of this b.s. Our country is going in the toilet and nobody, nobody is doing anything about it. Ron Paul is not going to save this. I’m really starting to think we have to take the country back by force. Pretty soon or it is going to be too late. I don’t want to be that fucking old man in 1984 muttering that we should not have trusted them.

nwpammy on October 6, 2009 at 10:49 PM

Bill Ayers to righty blogger: Of course I wrote “Dreams from My Father”

somebody did. cannot image that lazy sob currently occupying the WH being able to write anything

Howard Dean would have been a better candidate

for a town crier

runner on October 6, 2009 at 10:50 PM

MeatHeadinCA on October 6, 2009 at 10:36 PM
Stay away!

AsianGirlInTights on October 6, 2009 at 10:49 PM

Friction.

How long before Bill Ayers pulls a Howard Dean….I didn’t say that…..

HornetSting on October 6, 2009 at 10:50 PM

topic of thread: Bill Ayers

please stay on that thread.

ted c on October 6, 2009 at 10:45 PM

You’re right ted…but the original topic has run it’s course and is kind of boring…lefty troll baiting is much more fun.

AUINSC on October 6, 2009 at 10:51 PM

Stay away!

AsianGirlInTights on October 6, 2009 at 10:49 PM

After some misses lately, I’m ready for a feisty girl! Rar

MeatHeadinCA on October 6, 2009 at 10:51 PM

I thought Aunt Esther wrote “Dreams of My Father”?

PappyD61 on October 6, 2009 at 10:51 PM

OT:

Jim Demint just gave a great talk on Greta about Honduras and how the Honduran government faithfully followed their Constitution. Greta is the only talking head on TV sticking to this Honduras story. Good for her.

progressoverpeace on October 6, 2009 at 10:51 PM

SADLY…..no one in the Bootlick Media will report it.

I thought the NYT was now “on the lookout” for conservative opinion blogs floating stories they could ‘investigate’…

maybe they could pick this one up…

ted c on October 6, 2009 at 10:51 PM

I can’t say who is or isn’t whatever. I can say I can tell B.S. when I read or hear it. And the B.S. methods by the Left that deploy these agitation methods on public commenting on the internet are noticably stinky but well recognizable at this point.

Lourdes on October 6, 2009 at 10:39 PM

Thanks for responding. The reason I asked is because some of the posts on other threads discuss, and often bash, rino’s and other quasi-conservatives. I wasn’t aware that trolls disguise themselves in an effort to confound moderates. I also didn’t realize Spathi was anti-military.

anXdem on October 6, 2009 at 10:51 PM

We can’t really achieve that until we get turn the war of terror into more of a law enforcement issue as it should be.

Spathi on October 6, 2009 at 10:43 PM

Hahaha, there you are, denigrating John Kerry while there you go at the conclusion of that comment in repeating and supporting John Kerry’s ridiculous position: “prosecute the war”.

I agree with earlier comments here, you do not appear to be an American, and/or from, originally, “somewhere else”.

Understand this: John Kerry is a lowdown ugly cad just like Bill Ayers is. The only difference between the two is Kerry’s got a Senate seat.

Lourdes on October 6, 2009 at 10:53 PM

I also didn’t realize Spathi was anti-military.

anXdem on October 6, 2009 at 10:51 PM

Spathi is anti-civilization.

progressoverpeace on October 6, 2009 at 10:53 PM

Bill Ayers ran an anti-conscription movement in the 1960’s.

Spathi on October 6, 2009 at 10:47 PM

He also ran an organization that killed Americans.

Esthier on October 6, 2009 at 10:54 PM

Thanks for responding. The reason I asked is because some of the posts on other threads discuss, and often bash, rino’s and other quasi-conservatives. I wasn’t aware that trolls disguise themselves in an effort to confound moderates. I also didn’t realize Spathi was anti-military.

anXdem on October 6, 2009 at 10:51 PM

Just so you know, Spathi is also an anarchist who advocates for the dissolution of the Federal gov’t and the military.

ICBM on October 6, 2009 at 10:54 PM

AUINSC on October 6, 2009 at 10:51 PM

I think this topic is awfully interesting. Have you read any of Cashill’s columns over at americanthinker? They’re compelling and the level of analysis he gets into are extraordinary. There are so many direct comparisons in these two books that it is stunning. Moreover, to have another book support the conclusions that Cashill had already made, and NOW, Ayers admits it is very compelling.

I may be gullible, but I think the smoke needs to be followed on this one.

ted c on October 6, 2009 at 10:55 PM

After some misses lately, I’m ready for a feisty girl! Rar

MeatHeadinCA on October 6, 2009 at 10:51 PM

Just stay away from me, ok? Pervert.

AsianGirlInTights on October 6, 2009 at 10:56 PM

Thanks for responding. The reason I asked is because some of the posts on other threads discuss, and often bash, rino’s and other quasi-conservatives. I wasn’t aware that trolls disguise themselves in an effort to confound moderates. I also didn’t realize Spathi was anti-military.

anXdem on October 6, 2009 at 10:51 PM

O.K., fine, and thanks for the polite followup.

The whole “RINO” disdain is justified for much of what you also now make note of and as I was previously describing: the Left likes to wedge their players into the politics of our nation under guise of belonging to the Right, while then operating quite the opposite.

Some RINOs are, in effect, “Trolls in Congress”. They run as Republicans, use the GOP to gain office, then go about legislating for the Left. Thus, called “Republican In Name Only” or RINO. They deserve to be ridiculed.

Lourdes on October 6, 2009 at 10:56 PM

Ugh. Animal cruelty thread…that crap gets my dander up…

HornetSting on October 6, 2009 at 10:46 PM

Yeah, that’s one thread I won’t be reading.

ddrintn on October 6, 2009 at 10:56 PM

We can’t really achieve that until we get turn the war of terror into more of a law enforcement issue as it should be.

Spathi on October 6, 2009 at 10:43 PM

Yeah, cause that worked so well in stopping Bin Laden before 9/11.

Esthier on October 6, 2009 at 10:57 PM

A draftee army made up of today’s 20 year-olds forced to serve? No thanks, much better off having the person to your left and right being professionals, or at the very least volunteers with extensive training. Modern warfare is not the same as 40 years ago.

ray on October 6, 2009 at 10:58 PM

I smell a rat.

Mike D. on October 6, 2009 at 10:59 PM

Just stay away from me, ok? Pervert.

AsianGirlInTights on October 6, 2009 at 10:56 PM

Man, you got his number.

Esthier on October 6, 2009 at 10:59 PM

Just stay away from me, ok? Pervert.

AsianGirlInTights on October 6, 2009 at 10:56 PM

OK, I apologize if I’ve offended you… You just sounded like a good sport.

So what’s with the moniker?

MeatHeadinCA on October 6, 2009 at 10:59 PM

it is amusing, he was mused at his Conservative muse and couldn’t wait to amuse himself with the muse and muse over use musing over his amusing little conversation.

I read this article because I thought it was substantial by the headline – now I feel suckered and in need of a Shower. The guy should be in jail or deported, and he laughs in the face of America.

seesalrun on October 6, 2009 at 10:59 PM

Man, you got his number.

Esthier on October 6, 2009 at 10:59 PM

Oh, come on… help me out here ;)

MeatHeadinCA on October 6, 2009 at 11:00 PM

Bill Ayers ran an anti-conscription movement in the 1960’s.

I was saying how it was excellent that he had the president’s ear on this particular topic. It’s not really off-topic.

Spathi on October 6, 2009 at 10:47 PM

And yet, ~oddly~ , you get to promote Ayers and Ayers’ voodoowoodoohoodoo positions while ~conveniently~ reintroducing anti-war, anti-U.S. Defense “beliefs” — and how it is you can actually type that Rangel is “a neocon” is genuinely weird.

Lourdes on October 6, 2009 at 11:00 PM

whoa, that troll just got crushed.

ted c on October 6, 2009 at 11:02 PM

Oh, come on… help me out here ;)

MeatHeadinCA on October 6, 2009 at 11:00 PM

No means no, Meat. I saw how you went after Ann. And now you’re winking at me? Tsk. Tsk.

Esthier on October 6, 2009 at 11:03 PM

NOW, Ayers admits it is very compelling.

I may be gullible, but I think the smoke needs to be followed on this one.

ted c on October 6, 2009 at 10:55 PM

I’m not buying it Ted…sounds to me like a typical lefty ‘I’ll feed you what you most want to hear game, then make fun of you for buying into it’ game and this poor reporter fell for it. It’s just a little bit too good to be true. Ayers is a terrorist, who has Obama’s ear, but he isn’t a sub-room temperature IQ kinda guy…if he were, he would have been convicted of the actual terrorist crimes he did commit, instead of enjoying a relationship with the POTUS.

AUINSC on October 6, 2009 at 11:04 PM

Spathi on October 6, 2009 at 10:47 PM

Name one person in a position of power who actually supports a draft. Rangel, or anyone else who brings the matter up for political reasons, doesn’t count.

I work all day with people in the military. I have never known one single military member who supported a draft. Because none of us would ever trust our lives to someone like you.

A draft would actually be your best friend, because it would utterly destroy the military’s morale.

BadgerHawk on October 6, 2009 at 11:04 PM

No means no, Meat. I saw how you went after Ann. And now you’re winking at me? Tsk. Tsk.

Esthier on October 6, 2009 at 11:03 PM

I thought you were open minded just like Ann… I’ve never aggressively chased Ann. I don’t agree with her, but she seems like a foxy gal.

MeatHeadinCA on October 6, 2009 at 11:05 PM

Some RINOs are, in effect, “Trolls in Congress”. They run as Republicans, use the GOP to gain office, then go about legislating for the Left. Thus, called “Republican In Name Only” or RINO. They deserve to be ridiculed.

Lourdes on October 6, 2009 at 10:56 PM

Agreed. There are legions of pols that will run on whatever ticket and/or party necessary to win elections and advance their personal agenda- Olympia Snow comes to mind.

And, so ted c doesn’t have a fit for posting off topic, I also believe Barry not only didn’t write Dreams, but any other substantive material.

anXdem on October 6, 2009 at 11:07 PM

I’m not buying it Ted…sounds to me like a typical lefty ‘I’ll feed you what you most want to hear game, then make fun of you for buying into it’ game and this poor reporter fell for it. It’s just a little bit too good to be true. Ayers is a terrorist, who has Obama’s ear, but he isn’t a sub-room temperature IQ kinda guy…if he were, he would have been convicted of the actual terrorist crimes he did commit, instead of enjoying a relationship with the POTUS.

AUINSC on October 6, 2009 at 11:04 PM

You would be right and I would agree with you if Ayers’ made this assertion out of left field, and we had no prior evidence linking him to Obama’s book. However, there exist a compelling evidence of the following: a)Obama’s historically proven poor writing skills, b)writer’s block and failure to meet a deadline c)geographic co-location in Hyde Park d)Anderson’s assertions that “two” sources indicated that Obama took notes/tapes over to Mr. Ayers e) Cashills very compelling literary analysis into both Ayers and Obama’s book and finally, f) Ayers own assertion and presence of mega-ego.

ted c on October 6, 2009 at 11:08 PM

BadgerHawk on October 6, 2009 at 11:04 PM

Spathi doesn’t answer questions, dude…he just asks them…if you know what I mean.

AUINSC on October 6, 2009 at 11:09 PM

I thought you were open minded just like Ann… I’ve never aggressively chased Ann. I don’t agree with her, but she seems like a foxy gal.

MeatHeadinCA on October 6, 2009 at 11:05 PM

Open-minded only means easy to the Left.

I don’t know about Ann though. She was a little graphic in her self description. I have to think she was taking a few liberties.

Esthier on October 6, 2009 at 11:10 PM

Ayers is a terrorist, who has Obama’s ear, but he isn’t a sub-room temperature IQ kinda guy…if he were, he would have been convicted of the actual terrorist crimes he did commit, instead of enjoying a relationship with the POTUS.

AUINSC on October 6, 2009 at 11:04 PM

Well, I disagree. First off, Ayers IS a terrorist, you’re right about that, BUT HE IS ALSO “a sub-room temperature IQ kinda guy”. Genuinely, he is that.

That he has the ear of Barack Obama (and wife among others in that group) speaks as badly about them as it does about Ayers == the conclusion, then, is that they are, indeed, “sub-room temperature” in nature. I think it’s an amoral, corrupted group of people who’ve found one another along their amoral, corrupted paths toward greater amorality, destruction and negation of the U.S.A. (certainly Ayers’ goal).

That he was never convicted of his obvious, legally identified crimes is surely due to that same amoral, corrupted crowd. Ayers father, for keen example, as also the same amoral group that has spawned these same “associates” from the same bad pool.

Lourdes on October 6, 2009 at 11:10 PM

Taking the report at face value, the line about “splitting the royalties” is most interesting.

What is Ayer’s income? Is he rich like the Obamas et al, or is he a typically “underpaid” academe.

I’m betting on 2.

Giant egos are usual in this game, but it all comes down to $$ doesn’t it.

How much would Bill’s end of the book be?

CrazyGene on October 6, 2009 at 11:11 PM

I have to think she was taking a few liberties.

Esthier on October 6, 2009 at 11:10 PM

No comment. Thanks for not yelling at me ^_^

MeatHeadinCA on October 6, 2009 at 11:11 PM

I thought you were open minded just like Ann… I’ve never aggressively chased Ann. I don’t agree with her, but she seems like a foxy gal.

MeatHeadinCA on October 6, 2009 at 11:05 PM

MeatHeadinCA,

The best policy when dealing with these internet people is to consider all of them to be 300 lb. hairy guys sitting naked behind the computer smoking cigars and drinking beer. The most handy rule of all is that a woman’s(if it’s a woman) hotness is inversely proportionate to the sexiness of her handle. A he/she with a screen name of sexyfoxysexylegs is a mack truck.

DFCtomm on October 6, 2009 at 11:12 PM

Spathi doesn’t answer questions, dude…he just asks them…if you know what I mean.

AUINSC on October 6, 2009 at 11:09 PM

Yes, agreed: the old, tiresome, trolling tactic, ask “questions”…

Lourdes on October 6, 2009 at 11:12 PM

No comment. Thanks for not yelling at me ^_^

MeatHeadinCA on October 6, 2009 at 11:11 PM

Of course not. You’re cute. ;)

Esthier on October 6, 2009 at 11:13 PM

Spathi on October 6, 2009 at 10:08 PM

A draft in this day and age would result in one thing for sure…Canada would have a massive influx of spineless, hand wringing, cowardly twats…just like you.

You can hook up with DryWall, and rap about stuff, and tug each other.

BigWyo on October 6, 2009 at 11:14 PM

Taking the report at face value, the line about “splitting the royalties” is most interesting.

What is Ayer’s income? Is he rich like the Obamas et al, or is he a typically “underpaid” academe.

I’m betting on 2.

Giant egos are usual in this game, but it all comes down to $$ doesn’t it.

How much would Bill’s end of the book be?

CrazyGene on October 6, 2009 at 11:11 PM

I think Ayers daddy was/is a megabucks guy that he welched off of until he could sink his teeth into the government or Soros teat.

Big egos (think COL Nathan Jessup) want to tell the truth and don’t want to have their authority or knowledge questioned by mere peasants.

I think Ayers wants to tell the story and has to be pressed to do so. He’s a smart guy, he’s talented, he’s an awfully good writer–I don’t agree with the content, but in a purely literary sense, he’s apparently pretty good. I’ll take Cashill’s word for it.

ted c on October 6, 2009 at 11:14 PM

ted c on October 6, 2009 at 11:08 PM

Maybe…but it doesn’t much matter. What if it proves to be true? Obama is already so entangled with Ayers that it doesn’t make a difference…so why would Ayers bait the reporter this way? The only reason I can think of is to discredit the right on technical grounds…and this is a very standard lefty trick. That would be the only gain his side could get from it…and it would be a very clever maneuver.

So, even if true, it really doesn’t buy us anything..but if Ayers really is pulling this stunt, the left has a little bit more ammo to show us as being paranoid delusionals…he wins either way if we ‘run with it’.

AUINSC on October 6, 2009 at 11:14 PM

MeatHeadinCA,

The best policy when dealing with these internet people is to consider all of them to be 300 lb. hairy guys sitting naked behind the computer smoking cigars and drinking beer. The most handy rule of all is that a woman’s(if it’s a woman) hotness is inversely proportionate to the sexiness of her handle. A he/she with a screen name of sexyfoxysexylegs is a mack truck.

DFCtomm on October 6, 2009 at 11:12 PM

Hahaha +10000

Thanks. I have heard rumors that some of the posters here aren’t the gender they claim… Thanks for the heads up.

MeatHeadinCA on October 6, 2009 at 11:14 PM

Of course not. You’re cute. ;)

Esthier on October 6, 2009 at 11:13 PM

Well, thank you… that’s man-cute, right?

MeatHeadinCA on October 6, 2009 at 11:16 PM

and how it is you can actually type that Rangel is “a neocon” is genuinely weird.

Lourdes on October 6, 2009 at 11:00 PM

Muslim Replicants get a little off tone too regularly.

BL@KBIRD on October 6, 2009 at 11:16 PM

Did anybody else follow the Cody Kessler links? Holy crap. Egomania on steroids and meth combined with typically witless left-wing wallpaper chewing. Pretty on the outside but, good God, what a turd.

Django on October 6, 2009 at 11:19 PM

Maybe…but it doesn’t much matter. What if it proves to be true? Obama is already so entangled with Ayers that it doesn’t make a difference…so why would Ayers bait the reporter this way? The only reason I can think of is to discredit the right on technical grounds…and this is a very standard lefty trick. That would be the only gain his side could get from it…and it would be a very clever maneuver.

So, even if true, it really doesn’t buy us anything..but if Ayers really is pulling this stunt, the left has a little bit more ammo to show us as being paranoid delusionals…he wins either way if we ‘run with it’.

AUINSC on October 6, 2009 at 11:14 PM

au contraire.

The political capital of a president floats on a bedrock of trust. If a president claimed first authorship for a book that he, not only didn’t write, but milli vanillied a fantasy for you that got you to the White House, then that is enormous. Do you remember what happened to the author who’s book was found to be fraudulent after Oprah had given it props? He is now a laughing-stock and unpublishable because she was made to look a fool. If a scientist publishes a scientific paper and is later found to manipulate data or results, he could be excommunicated from the scientific community and become unpublishable. What ramifications could this have for a president? I would think they’d be far more significant. Don’t get me wrong, if the president wrote the book, prove it. If Ayers didn’t write the book, prove it.

ted c on October 6, 2009 at 11:19 PM

au contraire.

The political capital of a president floats on a bedrock of trust. If a president claimed first authorship for a book that he, not only didn’t write, but milli vanillied a fantasy for you that got you to the White House, then that is enormous. Do you remember what happened to the author who’s book was found to be fraudulent after Oprah had given it props? He is now a laughing-stock and unpublishable because she was made to look a fool. If a scientist publishes a scientific paper and is later found to manipulate data or results, he could be excommunicated from the scientific community and become unpublishable. What ramifications could this have for a president? I would think they’d be far more significant. Don’t get me wrong, if the president wrote the book, prove it. If Ayers didn’t write the book, prove it.

ted c on October 6, 2009 at 11:19 PM

Well, we agree to disagree…if politics = science, then Obama would never have been elected in the first place. Actually, politics = emotion is closer to the truth and does a much better job of explaining our current plight.

AUINSC on October 6, 2009 at 11:21 PM

So, even if true, it really doesn’t buy us anything..but if Ayers really is pulling this stunt, the left has a little bit more ammo to show us as being paranoid delusionals…he wins either way if we ‘run with it’.

AUINSC on October 6, 2009 at 11:14 PM

I disagree. Refraining from airing dubious and problemtic amoralities (for example, a President who has published books under his own name while not having written those books, just for starters) (and worse, the books were written by an crazed, terroristic-bombing lunatic who today leads a good life in Chicago — with awards from people who minimize his awful behaviors — while avoiding culpability to our nation for his wretched acts as also political positions), anyway, refraining from exploring and exposing such travesties of public deceit as that just because it’s assumed the Left will “make fun of us” is just wrong.

If that was an operative standard, nothing would ever be exposed and we’d be wearing red stars and hailing Stalin, if not much worse.

Lourdes on October 6, 2009 at 11:22 PM

A he/she with a screen name of sexyfoxysexylegs is a mack truck.

DFCtomm on October 6, 2009 at 11:12 PM

That’s often true.

Asian is probably this dude.

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/226/474196820_ac2010ce48.jpg

But that’s OK, because Meathead is probably this chick.

http://media.photobucket.com/image/fat%20girl%20at%20computer/Scottishchik90/fat_girl.jpg

Oh, content alert, btw.

Esthier on October 6, 2009 at 11:22 PM

The best policy when dealing with these internet people is to consider all of them to be 300 lb. hairy guys sitting naked behind the computer smoking cigars and drinking beer. The most handy rule of all is that a woman’s(if it’s a woman) hotness is inversely proportionate to the sexiness of her handle. A he/she with a screen name of sexyfoxysexylegs is a mack truck.

DFCtomm on October 6, 2009 at 11:12 PM

Nice visuals, DFCtomm.
Loxadonta (veteran HA commenter) sent me a pic of him/herself once. s/he is way beyond the 300 lb mark, though. More like six tons and a lovely shade of gray.

anXdem on October 6, 2009 at 11:24 PM

(previously, to Spathi):…and how it is you can actually type that Rangel is “a neocon” is genuinely weird.

Lourdes on October 6, 2009 at 11:00 PM

Muslim Replicants get a little off tone too regularly.

BL@KBIRD on October 6, 2009 at 11:16 PM

Yes, it goes along with their use of imagery of Burt from Sesame Street depicted as an “evil American”.

Lourdes on October 6, 2009 at 11:24 PM

AUINSC on October 6, 2009 at 11:21 PM

deal. At some point the politics converges with the science and the emotion and we may be nearing that wave crest with this very issue. Someway, somehow, it’ll all get reconciled.

ted c on October 6, 2009 at 11:24 PM

Seems like Ayers is either throwing out a red herring or he is telling the truth (ha ha) that he wrote the book and he wants $$ for it.

With the popularity of Obama’s book, the latter isn’t all that unlikely given the state of the economy and Bombing-Bill’s Starbuck’s lifestyle, however, the former seems equally plausible given that he is no friend to the right.

Don’t mind me I’m just thinking (and typing) out loud.

VibrioCocci on October 6, 2009 at 11:25 PM

Well, thank you… that’s man-cute, right?

MeatHeadinCA on October 6, 2009 at 11:16 PM

I hope so.

Esthier on October 6, 2009 at 11:26 PM

When people like Spathi use the term they either mean anyone who is even remotely hawkish on foreign policy, or joos…

BadgerHawk on October 6, 2009 at 10:35 PM

…or who havn’t chugged the kool-aid.

Gang-of-One on October 6, 2009 at 11:31 PM

I disagree. Refraining from airing dubious and problemtic amoralities (for example, a President who has published books under his own name while not having written those books, just for starters)

Lourdes on October 6, 2009 at 11:22 PM

Well, even taking into account such amoralities as “a President who has published books under his own name while not having written those books, just for starters (…the very definition of a ghost writer, BTW) as, at best, a minor sin, compared to what he is actually doing…the tactic I described has been used before to great effect…in fact, we’ve used it against the left to great effect recently…with ACORN!

Yes, they are loony and corrupt and we proved it…but we used this same technique…but there is a fine line between looking loony and being loony.

It seems that we are falling into the first trap…even if it’s true (Ayers wrote Obams’s book)…nobody will care. What Obama is actually doing has much more resonance that that and cannot be refuted in any way. That’s where we win the battle…hit the high-value targets.

AUINSC on October 6, 2009 at 11:31 PM

Big deal!

Tell us something we don’t know.

Sapwolf on October 6, 2009 at 11:32 PM

We can’t really achieve that until we get turn the war of terror into more of a law enforcement issue as it should be.

Spathi on October 6, 2009 at 10:43 PM

Do you mean, like the police action in Korea and Viet Nam?

Johan Klaus on October 6, 2009 at 11:33 PM

I can think of no better way to hide the truth than to tell it. Ayers may be evil but he is no idiot. I am suprised he is allowed to live in peace after all he has done.

Zelsdorf Ragshaft on October 6, 2009 at 11:35 PM

It seems that we are falling into the first trap…even if it’s true (Ayers wrote Obams’s book)…nobody will care. What Obama is actually doing has much more resonance that that and cannot be refuted in any way. That’s where we win the battle…hit the high-value targets.

AUINSC on October 6, 2009 at 11:31 PM

If we only focus on HVTs while we are being carpet bombed, then our ability to hunt HVTs is going to be decimated. We need to pursue every ACORN, book, Czar, corruption etc… and, I’m sure Michelle Malkin would agree, that this knotted tangled web of corruption will eventually unravel. The ACORN scandal is proof positive that once we gain traction on one thing, then whole lots of other things open up. You never know what we’ll find if we pursue this angle. Nor O’Keefe and Giles know what they’d find when they sauntered into ACORN.

ted c on October 6, 2009 at 11:35 PM

That’s often true.

Asian is probably this dude.

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/226/474196820_ac2010ce48.jpg

But that’s OK, because Meathead is probably this chick.

http://media.photobucket.com/image/fat%20girl%20at%20computer/Scottishchik90/fat_girl.jpg

Oh, content alert, btw.

Esthier on October 6, 2009 at 11:22 PM

That’s about right.

DFCtomm on October 6, 2009 at 11:36 PM

The only thing that Ayres deserves is a a firing squad. Well, maybe life in prison with a big old hairy cell mate.

Johan Klaus on October 6, 2009 at 11:38 PM

ted c on October 6, 2009 at 11:35 PM

Well, you and I share the respect for MM then…one question…if this is so good, then why isn’t MM all over it?

AUINSC on October 6, 2009 at 11:38 PM

Let’s waterboard Ayers and see what he says.

BottomLine5 on October 6, 2009 at 9:45 PM

That’s what I was thinking somebody might try.

Sapwolf on October 6, 2009 at 11:40 PM

At least Ayers didn’t meet the blogger in the men’s room.

You can tell EVERYTHING about a text from analyzing it. If Ayers really did write it there’s really no way to hide it.

Mojave Mark on October 6, 2009 at 11:42 PM

We need major change before we can ever realign. Hopefully Ron Paul will run again.

I’m just glad that McCrazy is NOT IN charge of the armed forces.

Spathi on October 6, 2009 at 10:12 PM

Who in their right mind would want to be aligned with you? No one.

Gang-of-One on October 6, 2009 at 11:44 PM

Well, you and I share the respect for MM then…one question…if this is so good, then why isn’t MM all over it?

AUINSC on October 6, 2009 at 11:38 PM

I dunno. We all have our stories we sink our teeth into. I just happened to see several of Cashill’s articles over the last several months and thought they were extraordinary, all by themselves. Now that these other revelations have come out, they are even more extraordinary. At first, I took Cashills work with a grain of salt and even asked him to analyze some other writer in Hyde Park’s book using the same analysis he used between Ayers’ and obama’s books just to see if they’d come up with other, possibly spurious, similarities. If you haven’t read these articles and have any interest in what appears to be literary forensics, then check out Cashills’ work. I’m no English expert, but I can appreciate some strong literary work and this guy has done some.

FWIW

ted c on October 6, 2009 at 11:45 PM

What US law extends beyond our shores, for us to enforce?

You’re a retard.

progressoverpeace on October 6, 2009 at 10:48 PM

Liberal: That’s what the World Court and the UN is for!

Non-Liberal: But the UN is composed of dicatators and the World Court is run by thugs.

Liberal: RAAAAACIST!

CPL 310 on October 6, 2009 at 11:45 PM

Southerm Avenger talks about the desire to attack Iran.

Anyone willing to trust the same folks who wanted to attack Iraw? This is why we’re much better off with Obama in charge of the military than a McCain.

Spathi on October 6, 2009 at 11:47 PM

Let’s waterboard Ayers and see what he says.

BottomLine5 on October 6, 2009 at 9:45 PM

I volunteer.

Johan Klaus on October 6, 2009 at 11:47 PM

I dunno. We all have our stories we sink our teeth into.

….

ted c on October 6, 2009 at 11:45 PM

I’ll stick with MM and Brietbart…they are the people who really know what’s real and what isn’t. They have a track record…Cashill…not so much.

AUINSC on October 6, 2009 at 11:48 PM

first, let me quote this, to convey that I wholeheartedly agree

The president shouldn’t get a standing army.
That’s the only way to avoid another Bush. The States need to be put in charge of the national defense.
Spathi on October 6, 2009 at 10:05 PM

Second, this quote is astonishing

“I wrote ‘Dreams From My Father… Michelle asked me to.”

I currently work in the construction field, awaiting my call from the US Army to serve in Special Forces. But during my youth I spent the time and money to take a professional grade aptitude test that determined the ideal profession/ career/ natural position for me was as a psychologist.

According to their professipnal opinion, I had a natural gift to read people, their statements, their body language, their actions, and their brains.

This statement, “michelle made me do it.”, is a double indictment. This is the impulsive rantings of someone so guilt ridden, but yet so distorted through indoctrination, and so permanently damaged by jealousy…

let me take my mask off. I’m at the bar, drunk, posting from my phone. forgive me that my vocabulary is falling short and my grammar lacking.

Now I can give a real analysis without the preconditions of sounding professional.

As spmeone else noted earlier, this is a man (ayers) who sees the fruits of his labor, paying off exponentially, to someone else. And what does bill ayers get except a ride next to the driveshaft underneath the obama bus.

I read a few months ago about ayers re-assessing obama, post presedentially. He sounded like someone betrayed, disappointed, and in disarray.

The revelations from Cashill, and then the devastating claims from the michelle-barack love book, have all but cemented the fraudulent authorship of this book in the annals of history.

from a psychological perspective, I revert to my original michelle obama evidince, that she urged barack to seek the help of bill ayers, and ayers explicitly adknowleding this fact first and foremost.

these aren’t the actions (ayers’s) of a liar, to instantly provide substantiating evidence, evidence that could be substantiated by a recent and popular “fawning” book.

if he was lying, why throw michelle into the fray? if there is one thing about liars, it is that they know how to tell ambiguiagte stories. you would never list a second or “third person”, someone that could be independently verified and possibly contradict your story.

This revelation is devastating, and in order to discount it, you would have to assume the original blogger in question is a total and complete liar, and would rather fabricate stories than write even her opinion to take up space, and then that she dishonestly would recount a very realistic and professionally accurate description of deep seeded guilt in bill ayers over writing barack obamas books.

remember, this man (bill ayers) has been thrown under the Obama Special-Ed Bus LONG AGO. what is there to lose? Obama has already betrayed ayers in his teachings, insulted him, denied him, and most of all, not rewarded him.

What does ayers have to lose from a candid airport moment from an unknown blogger??

most of all, the admission is freedom. the admission is true. and the admission is victory. no matter the scale.

dip it in cider on October 6, 2009 at 11:48 PM

Anyone willing to trust the same folks who wanted to attack Iraw?

Spathi on October 6, 2009 at 11:47 PM
Is that near Rio?

Johan Klaus on October 6, 2009 at 11:48 PM

“The most efffective way to tell a lie is to tell the truth in such a way that no one will believe it.” (R. A. Heinlein)

NeighborhoodCatLady on October 6, 2009 at 11:49 PM

Anyone willing to trust the same folks who wanted to attack Iraw?

Spathi on October 6, 2009 at 11:47 PM

We’ve proven that you are a liar and an idiot…no need to answer any of your questions.

BTW, where exactly is Iraw?

AUINSC on October 6, 2009 at 11:50 PM

What does ayers have to lose from a candid airport moment from an unknown blogger??

most of all, the admission is freedom. the admission is true. and the admission is victory. no matter the scale.

dip it in cider on October 6, 2009 at 11:48 PM

damn, If I could buy you a drink, I’d do it. Great points and don’t drive home.

ted c on October 6, 2009 at 11:52 PM

What does ayers have to lose from a candid airport moment from an unknown blogger??

moreover, what more does he have to hide? If he had to hide the fact that he wrote the book in order to get Mr. Obama elected, then, now that that’s done, why keep it a secret any longer?

ted c on October 6, 2009 at 11:54 PM

AP: I think you owe Anne Leary a drink.

ted c on October 6, 2009 at 11:59 PM

Obama has already betrayed ayers in his teachings, insulted him, denied him, and most of all, not rewarded him.

dip it in cider PICKLED IN CIDER on October 6, 2009 at 11:48 PM

Re: the “not rewarded him” part

We don’t know how much he was compensated to help write the book (if he did help), so saying that he was “not rewarded” wouldn’t be accurate, right?

VibrioCocci on October 7, 2009 at 12:01 AM

I also didn’t realize Spathi was anti-military.

anXdem on October 6, 2009 at 10:51 PM

anXdem, you’re joking right?

Gang-of-One on October 7, 2009 at 12:06 AM

Anne Leary needs to get an iPhone, jailbreak it, and load Cycorder on to it. Next time she runs into some guy like Ayers, run Cycorder to take his picture. Leave it running to tape the conversation with film. All she’s got here is He Said-She Said. Since Ayers will deny, Leary’s basically got nothing much. Film showing him saying this…. Well, now!

SilentWatcher on October 7, 2009 at 12:12 AM

That’s a hilarious story. Nice work.

jonezee on October 7, 2009 at 12:14 AM

Oh, content alert, btw.

Esthier on October 6, 2009 at 11:22 PM

This has to be the funniest post ever!

Gang-of-One on October 7, 2009 at 12:20 AM

Comment pages: 1 2 3 4 5