Ghost writers and relevance

posted at 12:15 pm on October 7, 2009 by Ed Morrissey

Allahpundit and Jonah Goldberg both addressed the Bill Ayers-admits-it story regarding the presumed authorship of Dreams of My Father, credited solely to Barack Obama in the early days of his political career, with two different views.  Jonah Goldberg gives the supposed admission room for truth, while Allahpundit — rightly, in my opinion — treats it as Ayers’ ridicule of conservative bloggers for their dogged pursuit of the meme.  If true, Jonah says, it would make a “very big story”:

I am not sure what to make of the story that Ayers has now admitted to writing Obama’s autobiography. If it pans out, that is to my mind a very big story. Stay tuned. But I do think I should revise my earlier pooh-poohing of Jack Cashill’s effort to prove the Ayers-Obama connection.

I disagree.  First, it’s hardly an earth-shaking revelation that politicians use ghost writers for memoirs, political tracts, or anything else they publish.  (Here’s another: they don’t usually write their own blog posts or tweets, either.)  Whether they use their staff, as they do for their daily messaging, or a professional writer for books and other lengthy efforts, they usually employ people whose business it is to know how to write, mainly because writing is too time-consuming for active politicians.  Sarah Palin used a ghost writer for Going Rogue, for instance, and few people bother with it, because it’s a non-issue.  Most ghost writers never get publicly acknowledged, although occasionally politicians will share writing credit.

The effort to determine whether Obama had Ayers as a ghost writer for Dreams made some sense in the presidential campaign, where the media regularly hailed Obama as a literary genius as well as a moderate who didn’t indulge in radical politics.  However, even here, there were better arguments to be made than whether Ayers ghosted Dreams or participated to a lesser extent in the book.  Obama and Ayers worked together repeatedly on political projects, for instance, detailed by David Freddoso in his book The Case Against Barack Obama, and the Jeremiah Wright tapes reinforced that argument much better and much clearer than speculative analyses of writing styles.  As for the literary genius, Obama’s soporific follow-up, The Audacity of Hope, should have made it plain that Dreams was a one-trick pony.

But there’s a larger problem with the argument.  Even if Cashill and the advocates of this position prove their case or get an admission — a real admission — what does that change?  It will show what we already know about Obama and Ayers, a relationship that got plenty of New Media coverage in the campaign, and also show that Obama hired a ghost writer.  Neither of these issues are relevant now that Obama is in office.  Whatever relevance they had in exposing a relative unknown passed last November on Election Day.  Obama will be President until at least January 2013, and his policies and record of governance is really all that’s relevant.  By the 2012 election, we will have plenty to criticize about his performance without worrying about his background.

Cashill’s work might make for a good academic-interest story, but politically, it’s rather meaningless.


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

That’s all well and good until the “something” made of nothing turns out to be the POTUS. Then advancing only as fast as the slowest person in the room is pretty frightening.

Cindy Munford on October 7, 2009 at 12:52 PM

Indeed.

And what’s even more scary is the many who just don’t care. I think many of them do see his nothingness, but it’s still okay because he’s not bumbling Bush. They don’t hear the “uhs” and the “ums” and all that they signify. No, scratch that, they do hear the “uhs” and the “ums” but explain them away as signs of careful thought and intelligence. Ugh!

misslizzi on October 7, 2009 at 12:58 PM

But there’s a larger problem with the argument. Even if Cashill and the advocates of this position prove their case or get an admission — a real admission — what does that change?

Come on, Ed. You’re joking, right? Please tell me this is a joke. If you don’t think that the realization by Precedential supporters that their messiah has lied to them about everything, especially the only accomplishment that they were able to point to, then you just don’t understand much of anything.

It will show what we already know about Obama and Ayers, a relationship that got plenty of New Media coverage in the campaign, and also show that Obama hired a ghost writer.

Er … Ed. The point is not what it would tell US about the moron-in-chief. We know who the fool is (I don’t know if I should really include you in the “we”, but those of us who already know that The Precedent is a moron and a pathological liar). The point is what effect it would have on those who worship the idiot.

Neither of these issues are relevant now that Obama is in office.

You don’t understand that the only power he has is that there are still people who take his words seriously and act as if he has a brain in his head. This issue is even more relevant, now that he is in office, than it was while he was running.

Cashill’s work might make for a good academic-interest story, but politically, it’s rather meaningless.

That’s ridiculous. The “bully pulpit” of the office depends on people taking it seriously. While The Precedent has given everyone more than enough evidence (every friggin’ day) that he is a retard who isn’t competent enough, or smart enough, to run a lemonade stand, there are still many who are trapped in a delusion about the fool. This realization would finally break that bubble for many and that would turn them against him, along with making them realize what has been done to this nation.

If it became common knowledge that a terrorist wrote The Precedent’s “Dreams” and The Precedent spent all this time lying about it, then many more people would start to wonder about the Constitutional eligibility of the America-hater in the White House. They would look at everything he does and start to see where he is coming from, and how he is out to do nothing but destroy our nation.

Ed, if you don’t think that this revelation would have any effect, then you understand very little about political power and the reactions of people to being lied to. Some will always be die-hard supporters of The Precedent. For many, his race is all they need to know to back him. But for anyone else, there will be a moment of realization and that moment will suck any remaining political capital out of him.

I really don’t see what point you’re trying to make, but we have this fool stil trying to pervert our nation with his national socialization of health care and something like the realization that he lied his azz off about all this would go a long way to snapping some out of their stupor and turning them against The moron Precedent.

progressoverpeace on October 7, 2009 at 12:58 PM

The progressives think he’s not twisting arms enough. That is similar to the far-right complaints that McCain is “progressive.”

When I post, you’re both flip-sides of the same coin, I’m not kidding.

AnninCA on October 7, 2009 at 12:45 PM

Obama is the most leftwing president since as least FDR. I would argue more so since FDR was not a social issues leftist, but I can understand the converse argument.

McCain’s lifetime record is middle of the road conservative, but his last 10 years or so put him fully in the centrist category.

So comparing the two really doesn’t work.

18-1 on October 7, 2009 at 12:58 PM

Obama will be President until at least January 2013

Pessimist. I’m still hoping for a resignation of impeachment.

Daggett on October 7, 2009 at 12:19 PM

The left keeps wondering when Glenn Beck will have a mental breakdown on TV.

I wonder when the narcissist in chief, who has never faced a challenge in his life, has his OWN mental breakdown in front of his teleprompter over the fact that he is, in fact being challenged now.

That SNL bit was sort of lame, but it is DEVASTATING to Obama and his camp, as it’s coming from the LEFT, not the right. It’s the first sign that his camp is breaking, that they aren’t going to fall on their swords for Barry.

wildcat84 on October 7, 2009 at 12:58 PM

Even if Cashill and the advocates of this position prove their case or get an admission — a real admission — what does that change? It will show what we already know about Obama and Ayers, a relationship that got plenty of New Media coverage in the campaign, and also show that Obama hired a ghost writer. Neither of these issues are relevant now that Obama is in office.

Sort of like whether Bush was AWOL, right? That wasn’t an issue in 2004, was it?

/succumbing to mind rays

Pablo on October 7, 2009 at 1:00 PM

Sarah Palin used a ghost writer for Going Rogue…

You know Ed, you’re right, it’s no big deal so why did you have to include the…Sarah Palin did it too sentence?

This isn’t about Sarah Palin, it’s about Obama and Ayers. As you say, it’s not really important. Some of us are just amused that it’s just another facet to Obama’s story that he didn’t know Ayers that well.

However, Ayers blurting out that he was the ghost writer before anyone asked the question reminds me of when my oldest daughter would say she did something before I even knew something had been done. Some would call it a “guilty conscience.”

moonsbreath on October 7, 2009 at 1:02 PM

Cashill’s work might make for a good academic-interest story, but politically, it’s rather meaningless.

Ed. This is where you are completely wrong.

Obama was sold as a genius but he clearly is not.

Your equivocating in the pursuit of “reasonable dialogue” is getting really tiresome. The other side is out to win at any cost. Time you woke up.

gh on October 7, 2009 at 1:04 PM

The one real inside-baseball thing that could come of proving Ayers had anything to do with Obama’s book is Hillary Clinton’s reaction. Obama would be shown to have lied through his teeth in that Philadelphia debate when he said Ayers was just a guy in his neighborhood. There is no way he could have survived if that lie had been exposed while Clinton was still in the race. It would have forced the media to start digging into Obama’s radical background and other associations. It would have led to Rashid Khalidi and possibly the L.A. Times being forced to release that videotape of Obama praising Khalidi.

I don’t see how Hillary could remain in Obama’s Cabinet if it were proven that he lied his way to the nomination against her.

rockmom on October 7, 2009 at 1:07 PM

Ed,

Your own transcript slip is showing. So far as higher education and scholarship are concerned, an author MUST reference all sources and acknowledge those who were most helpful in the composition of any scholarly paper or book, OR LOSE CREDIBILITY. “Obama’s book” failed to acknowledge Ayers efforts; and Ayers’ efforts are readily seen by the critical observer; comparisons have been available since the primary campaign. Perhaps you haven’t read them, as to date you’ve never commented on your study of them. At any rate, Obama’s failure to acknowledge Ayers or credit Ayers at all was poor form at best, so far as those who exist within the higher education, particulary those who exist within the Ivy League elitist circle. To not acknowledge is the ultimate social and academic faux pas, only performed acceptably amongst elitists snubbing their enemies. It’s a slap in the face. Ayers, like Rev. Wright, has his ego to be stroked. And more than anything else in life, Ayers LOVES gumming up the works of “The System”, particularly when he feels neglected or ignored or left out by his protégé.

It wouldn’t surprise me at all if Ayers were poking everyone with the truth of the matter. His point was “PROVE IT.”

As likely as not, Ayers “blurted” the truth, poking fun of Obama while baiting conservatives. Who cares? I don’t. But I’m not forgetting what makes Ayers Ayers, the sheer exhilaration of crossing the system and getting away with it.

Never miss noting that Obama has not proven his own authorship, with his handwritten manuscript or computer record of saved entries.

The real point for concern is that Obama has never been vetted, and never authored anything while Editor of the Harvard Law Review, and his transcripts are non-existent so far as the public is concerned BY HIS CHOOSING. So far as Obama has proven, he has no credentials verified. And Ayers is laughing about that, because Ayers got what he wanted, to screw America.

Sarah Palin used a ghost writer for Going Rogue, for instance, and few people bother with it, because it’s a non-issue. –Ed

Sarah Palin never claimed that her book was anything other than a collaboration. THAT is why her collaboration is a non-issue; she publicly acknowledged her ghost writer in all of her press releases, and never claimed to be writing without collaboration.

maverick muse on October 7, 2009 at 1:07 PM

If you can’t make a case against a communist founder of a radical movement, what good are you?

faraway on October 7, 2009 at 1:07 PM

And yes, I know that Obama and Ayers have always been and continue on best regards. So far as “Obama’s book” matters, it doesn’t to Ayers. He got what he wanted out of the entire affair. And he’ll continue to get whatever he wants, laughing all the way to the bank with his corrupt life.

maverick muse on October 7, 2009 at 1:09 PM

I can’t believe that Ayers hasn’t been added to the Men Who Look Like Old Lesbians blog yet.

saint kansas on October 7, 2009 at 1:12 PM

For a guy that loved showing off the COTUS collage, and speculated on just how empty the Presidential empty suit was, this is a very odd post. Is Allah ghostwriting this stuff?

Mark30339 on October 7, 2009 at 1:14 PM

Imagine if McCain had a ghost writer of his book that he had claimed was all his and that ghost writer had bombed an abortion clinic.

Bet it would be pretty big news.

jukin on October 7, 2009 at 1:16 PM

I think it would be a big deal if Ayers ghost-wrote 0bama’s autobiographies. First of all, it’s Bill-flippin-Ayers. No need to play the Charles Johnson Six-degrees of separation game. This guy’s bad news. Secondly, this may shake loose some more actual examples of 0bama’s “genius” throughout the years. And if we are right (and I know we are) it will show this guy up to be the empty suit he is.

Sekhmet on October 7, 2009 at 1:18 PM

Ayers couldn’t have written it, Obama barely knows Ayers. He said so, and whatever comes out of Obama’s mouth is gospel truth.

/s

realityunwound on October 7, 2009 at 1:20 PM

I think it must rankle Ayers that the Anointed One is getting all the toys based, partly, on a book which Ayers “wrote”.

Dhuka on October 7, 2009 at 12:27 PM

Considering that Obama has made millions of dollars off Dreams and used the book to create the myth of himself as a literary genius, you can’t blame Ayers for feeling a bit perturbed that he can’t take credit for his own work — at least, not in public and not in a serious way. Of course, Ayers can always amuse himself by dropping hints and saying the kind of things he said here. I just wonder what will happen if Ayers feels Obama has betrayed their shared ideals. Will Ayers retaliate by writing another book about Obama . . . a tell-all? Wouldn’t that be fun.

AZCoyote on October 7, 2009 at 1:20 PM

Even if Cashill and the advocates of this position prove their case or get an admission — a real admission — what does that change?

This has been said repeatedly and I’ll say it also: an admission by Ayers as Obama’s ghost writer would mean that OBAMA LIED and Ayers is NOT just “someone in the neighborhood.” This goes to Obama’s credibility and truthfulness. An admission would cast doubt on everything Obama says.

If it became common knowledge that a terrorist wrote The Precedent’s “Dreams” and The Precedent spent all this time lying about it

progressoverpeace on October 7, 2009 at 12:58 PM

Your phrasing sent chills down my spine.

However, Ayers blurting out that he was the ghost writer before anyone asked the question reminds me of when my oldest daughter would say she did something before I even knew something had been done. Some would call it a “guilty conscience.”

moonsbreath on October 7, 2009 at 1:02 PM

Why would Ayers offer this unsolicited information to her? Having read her blog for a while, I take Anne Leary at her word; she has no reason to lie and destroy her credibility. A guilty conscience is a fickle thing.

conservative pilgrim on October 7, 2009 at 1:21 PM

I think it would be a big deal if Ayers ghost-wrote 0bama’s autobiographies. First of all, it’s Bill-flippin-Ayers. No need to play the Charles Johnson Six-degrees of separation game. This guy’s bad news. Secondly, this may shake loose some more actual examples of 0bama’s “genius” throughout the years. And if we are right (and I know we are) it will show this guy up to be the empty suit he is.

Sekhmet on October 7, 2009 at 1:18 PM

Come on now! We all can follow that paper trail, the one that ghost wrote her book used to know a used car salesman that dated the sister of that guy who hung around with that racist guy, so that means Palin endorses racism. I mean it’s as plain as the nose on your face.

Johnnyreb on October 7, 2009 at 1:21 PM

I love biographers. Frankly, I’d like to marry one.

AnninCA on October 7, 2009 at 12:21 PM

Hey, biographers also have their faults.

Biographer Doris Kearns Goodwin won a Pulitzer Prize in 1995 for her bio of the Roosevelts.

7 years later, she admitted that she was a plagiarist who lifted almost a third of her biography of the Fitxgeralds and the Kennedys from 3 other books. In some cases she lifted entire passages from other peoples’ books, and admitted (only after getting caught, of course) that she had paid a cash settlement to one of them.

Many in the academic, literary and entertainments communities gave her a pass, of course. And she was never asked to return her Pulitzer. Of course that fellow Walter Duranty from the NY Times was never asked to return his either.
BTW she’s married to former JFK/LBJ aide Richard Goodwin, who himself wrote a fascinating bio about Galileo.

He also wrote a scathing piece in the Boston Globe in July of 1999, concluding that a year and a half before it ended, Bill Clinton’s Presidency was a total failure. And he voted for the man twice.

excerpt:

Perhaps the most notable characteristic of the Clinton administration has been the belief that to talk about a problem is to deal with it or, at least, to persuade others that you are dealing with it. Thus, we have been treated to passionate discussions of race or education unaccompanied by any substantial measures, almost as if to name a problem were to solve it.

The president’s latest proposal to expand Medicare, although welcome, is a poignant reminder of how much time and opportunity have been wasted

Goodwin then provided a laundry list of all of Clinton’s failures. And didn’t even mention al Qaeda.

The Globe has this article behind a per-per-read firewall, but you can get a free trial and read the article here:

http://www.highbeam.com/doc/1P2-8565396.html

I would highly recommend this article to any Clintonista.

Del Dolemonte on October 7, 2009 at 1:24 PM

You’re wrong.
The narrative that has developed around Barack Obama since the election is that he is not the man he campaigned as. If it comes to light that he didn’t, in fact, write “Dreams,” not only will it cement this narrative, but also expose him as the liar many have always suspected him to be. Whether or not Ayer’s is the “autobiography’s” primary author, clearly he is more than just someone candidate Obama, “knew from around the neighborhood.”

Also, let us not forget Alinksy rule #5 “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.”
It could be argued that Ayers is attempting to make a joke of something here (a preemptive strike) because he recognizes this story to be a loose thread that could potentially expose this damning collusion.

The Obama era will not come to an end due to one catastrophic mis-step. It will be defeated by a thousand (paper) cuts, which serve to unmask “the great Oz” for what he truly is.

MoronThisLater on October 7, 2009 at 1:24 PM

If Ayers wrote Dreams it means nothing, except:

1. Obama is not the genius the media (in the person of Chris Buckley and others) assumed him to be.
2. The Obama narrative is a lie.
3. Obama lied to the nation when he said Ayers was just a guy in his neighborhood.
4. Obama did pal around with an unrepentant domestic terrorist.
5.Obama is susceptible to being blackmailed by Ayers.
6. Obama is a facile liar.
7. There are no longer any standards.

This is easily Ed Morrissey’s worst post.

Basilsbest on October 7, 2009 at 1:26 PM

Is there any subject about which the person called Barack Obama II has told the truth?

baldilocks on October 7, 2009 at 1:26 PM

I have to disagree with you Ed.

1)”Dreams” was used to show Obama’s brilliance in lieu of his academic records. The elitist snobs of journalism soaked up the wonderful words, phrases, and grammatical flair and decided that the book was proof enough, and silenced every call for Obama to release his records because his brilliance was established, end of story- and sold many on that book alone to vote for him. America is going down the tubes on the basis of a book. Imagine that.
(Iran, Honduras, Tibet, UK- I am very sorry. Please keep your flames alive till 2012 and help reignite ours)

2)Ayers was a terrorist. End of story. I don’t care if it was the 60′s. He wanted to hurt Americans, whether they were policemen, judges, or private citizens. If the voting public had been told the truth, that these two are/were joined at the hip not only with the book, but the foundation, and living in close proximity to each other, in a neighborhood known for embracing liberal/radical thought- it would have turned more people off Obama OR more voters who sat this election out would have gotten off their backsides and voted.
3)The Wright-Ayers-Obama connection- truly written about by the MSM and Fox and the right blogs would have sunk Obama and Hillary would have been on the ticket. McCain vs Hillary is a different ballgame.

journeyintothewhirlwind on October 7, 2009 at 1:27 PM

By the 2012 election, we will have plenty to criticize about his performance without worrying about his background. – Ed

Isn’t that what the RNC thought in 2008?

the_souse on October 7, 2009 at 1:30 PM

I agree that this is a case of Ayers pulling chains but the idea that is no big deal becuase “we already know” the relationship between Obama and Ayers doesn’t gain traction with me.

The general electorate accepts the MSM narrative that this connection is a “rightwing” smear that has no substance in fact. If it turns out that Ayers wrote the book for Obama then this narrative is no longer tenable and would demonstrate to non-worshipers who voted for Obama that they were fooled by his campaign into accepting the MSM narrative. That is a very big deal

jerryofva on October 7, 2009 at 1:34 PM

Take Obama out of the equation for a moment (is that possible?) and look at what is left.

Bill Ayers, communist and rebel poseur.
Bill Ayers, founder of loser terror group.
Bill Ayers, as leader, signs off on plans that end in death.
Bill Ayers, murderer.
Bill Ayers, wealthy family buys justice.
Bill Ayers, academic hero.

The lesson is that in America, money is superior to justice. That is not good and yet it is unaddressed. And unaddressed and multiplied, you wind up with what you earn, Obama.

BL@KBIRD on October 7, 2009 at 1:38 PM

Ed is wrong.

1) Bill Ayers has always fought centrist Democrats. Radicals like him and Dohrn are not out to “get” the Right. Ever since the sixties, there aim was corrupt and take over the Democratic Party. Obama’s been a huge disappointment to the radical left on most issues. They are not carrying his water. If anything, they may be expressing their disappointment (Gitmo, Iraq, Afghan, Van Jones, Public Option,…)

2) There are two political fronts. The populist front and the think tank front. Even if this never trickles down to the public, Obama is rapidly losing credibility with moderate and independent think tanks and media outlets who accepted the “genius” meme. This further exposes him as a ligtweight fraud just as it is becoming apparent to more insiders if not the public at large. The trickle down will take time.

3) Palin’s bio is coming out and this will shut up all the MSM hype that Palin had a co-author and Obama was so smart that he didnt need one.

4) Anything that exposes Obama as a media concocted fraud is good and worth pursuing.

swamp_yankee on October 7, 2009 at 1:44 PM

Dear Ed, perhaps this most reasonable viewpoint will garner another Best Person in the World Award from Olbermann?

NewJerseyGirl on October 7, 2009 at 1:45 PM

I see a big difference between ghost-writers and co-authors. Zero using Billy Ayers for his campaign propaganda book reminds me of JFK (or Joe) hiring Ted Sorensen to create JFK’s “Profiles in Courage” trinket.

Obama the poseur claiming a sub-contracted work as solely his own creation reeks as badly as his doubtful Harvard diploma.

Co-authors, if amply credited, are a completely different matter. Many accomplished persons are conversational not bookish. A co-author can help arrange those spoken phrases onto the written page efficiently and / or chronologically to follow an outline, publisher’s budget, or deadlines. A good example would be the books of Yogi Berra. A very conversational fellow. Well spoken in his unique way. His co-authors have done an admirable job of putting Berra’s spoken perspectives into books that read conversationally. The co-author may have arranged the chapters and polished the punctuation yet those books are Yogi Berra through and through.

viking01 on October 7, 2009 at 1:45 PM

At the time the book was released Obama wasn’t a national-level politician who rated a ghost writer. He was a recent law school graduate and local community agitator. And even ghosted books usually have an acknowledgement, ranging from “By Joe Politician with Joe Ghost” to an acknowledgement to the ghost in the forward of the book.

From a practical standpoint the story, even if true, is going nowhere unless one of the participants or someone very, very close to them talks. Ayers strategy is probably to tell the truth in such an unconvincing manner that he convinces everyone he is lying, so his recent statements don’t count. But in the unlikely event it were proven true, it would be a major hit to Obama’s credibility. He’s rhetorically staked a lot on writing his own books, and a lot of the adulation from the press comes from him being a good writer.

blofeld42 on October 7, 2009 at 1:46 PM

ED MORRISSEY:

“Even if Cashill and the advocates of this position prove their case or get an admission — a real admission — what does that change? ”

IT PROVES OBAMA IS A TOTAL PHONY.

reliapundit on October 7, 2009 at 1:46 PM

At the time the book was released Obama wasn’t a national-level politician who rated a ghost writer. He was a recent law school graduate and local community agitator. And even ghosted books usually have an acknowledgement, ranging from “By Joe Politician with Joe Ghost” to an acknowledgement to the ghost in the forward of the book.

Very true. In fact, he wasn’t a politician at all. Dreams was released in 1995. Obama wasn’t elected to the IL State Senate until 1997. Dreams is not a “politician’s” book. It’s a community organizer’s book.

Pablo on October 7, 2009 at 1:50 PM

Politically and meaningless do not apply to Ayers. Mmm mmm mmm there’s a lot of education policy to come. Underscore the fact Obama doesn’t write (or even draft!) what scrolls on his teleprompter, and it is important to know who Michelle and Jarrett place their trust in crafting the message. How longstanding that trust is, is nothing if not political.

FeFe on October 7, 2009 at 1:56 PM

The question is, WHY was a complete nobody community organizer tapped for an autobiography at all? Who would possibly care about some little guy’s childhood?

The answer is, I suspect, that this empty suit was being brushed up for a national role for a long time. Enough to pay somebody to write a credible backstory for him.

S. Weasel on October 7, 2009 at 1:57 PM

Ed,
Man you really missed the meat of this matter big time. SP has already said that she was “Collaborating” with Lynn Vincent on her book so their is no “Ghost Writer”. Obama said that HE wrote both of his books which we now know is a lie. As was mentioned above BHO will be reduced to a talking blathering teleprompter reading fool by a thousand cuts. As these lies and blunders pile up he will become a leader with no credibility. Again, why the mention of SP when pointing out the lies of BHO.

inspectorudy on October 7, 2009 at 2:06 PM

S. Weasel on October 7, 2009 at 1:57 PM

I agree. My reference to JFK in an earlier posting shares the view that both he and Zero were and are manufactured and maintained by a willing activist media willing to do anything to put their political party in office. JFK had Profiles in Courage and a revisionist history of the PT 109 incident. Zero has his hidden education and voting records. Even Clintoon had the 60 Minutes shill Steven Kroft pimping him as “A Changed Man” for the 1992 campaign.

viking01 on October 7, 2009 at 2:08 PM

This only helps Sarah Palin. Anyone who cant see that either is not very observant or has an agenda.

I still have memories of Chris Matthews and his panel gushing over Obama’s brilliance and his ability to write his own books. Meanwhile, the blogosphere starting lampooning the “dumb” Sarah Palin for having a co-writer.

This cuts off their legs right before her bok comes out. I say pursue this story with a vengeance.

They both had help, but only Sarah was honest. Obama is a media concocted fraud and a liar.

swamp_yankee on October 7, 2009 at 2:12 PM

Ed, I agree with your detractors here.

If Ayers ghostwrote Dreams, the issue is bigger than the Gates affair, and the police-acting-stupidly comment hurt the President a great deal with folks who don’t normally pay much attention to this stuff. Faked scholarship/authorship creates a significant credibility issue (especially if the co-author is Ayers). If conclusively established, the issue would be impossible for the MSM to ignore. Of course, it does not end Mr. Obama’s presidency but his credibility will be tarnished with thinking folks among the 50% of Americans who still approve of President Obama. And once folks are convinced you are insincere, it is very hard to win them back.

clorensen on October 7, 2009 at 2:13 PM

It’s important because it shows a pattern of lies.

javamartini on October 7, 2009 at 2:13 PM

Ed,

I understand you try to be fair and don’t want to come across as some sort of right wing conspiracy theorist, but please don’t go all Bill O’Reilly on us.

If this can be proven it would destroy the faith that some still hold in Obama’s intelligence, credibility, and honesty. That would be devestating.

It’s not about the revelation that he used a ghost-writer. It is about the fact that it would destroy the myth that he is some type of genius, expose him as liar for insisting that he wrote it himself, and would prove to everybody that he was far from being “just a guy in the neighborhood.”

Joe Caps on October 7, 2009 at 2:17 PM

devastating, whatever. figures the one word i add emphasis to is spelled wrong. D’oh.

Joe Caps on October 7, 2009 at 2:19 PM

saint kansas on October 7, 2009 at 1:12 PM

hahah Thats hilarious!

becki51758 on October 7, 2009 at 2:19 PM

Even if Cashill and the advocates of this position prove their case or get an admission — a real admission — what does that change?

Among other things, it means that this page from the Fight the Smears campaign is a pathetic joke, and that he lacks all credibility.

And as Jack Cashill pointed out, the media were heralding the “fact” that Obama wrote the book himself, were slobbering all over Barry’s brilliant writing abilities, and used it as an argument to buttress their claims that he is the one we’ve been waiting for.

Buy Danish on October 7, 2009 at 2:19 PM

Wait.. if it is in fact proven that the autobiography that helped elect this President was ghostwritten by a radical leftist and convicted terrorist (who once dedicated a book to Sirhan Sirhan) that’s… not a big story?

Is this an April fools day post?

CreatedOrSaved on October 7, 2009 at 2:20 PM

CreatedOrSaved on October 7, 2009 at 2:20 PM

Great moniker and dittoes on the comment.

It’s not the fact that he had a ghost writer, no one would have faulted him for that. It’s who the ghost writer was, the elaborate charades to conceal it and to distance himself from Ayers (not to mention all the fabulist tales about Barry’s bio that these books contain).

Buy Danish on October 7, 2009 at 2:28 PM

IT PROVES OBAMA IS A TOTAL PHONY.

reliapundit on October 7, 2009 at 1:46 PM

But most people – other than it groupies – already think that.

katiejane on October 7, 2009 at 2:41 PM

However, Ayers blurting out that he was the ghost writer before anyone asked the question reminds me of when my oldest daughter would say she did something before I even knew something had been done. Some would call it a “guilty conscience.”

Ayers is obviously a highly intellegent person with some very questionalbe socail ethics. I don’t think he has a guilty conscience, and I might argue that he does not have a consicence. He does however seem to think highly of himself and his accomplishment from his youthful years to where he is now.

If there is anyone that knows Obama, perhaps better than Michelle, it would be Ayers. Considering Ayers’ intelligence and his background in education, he probably understands, with full clarity, Obama for what he is; a narcissit that uses the accomplishments of others to create a persona that he sees of himself.

He almost certainly read Obama’s first book, and was aware that Obama’s tenue at Columbia was given rather than earned as others, like Ayers, had to do to be tenured professors. It is unlikely that Ayers viewed Obama as a intellectual equal, let alone one that was superior. At the time he wrote the book he most likely saw it as a way to helping Obama become more recognised as he built his politcal career. As pointed out, it is not uncommon for those with less time and ability to use a ghost writer to write their book.

The difference here is that Obama used the book to define his own abilites; abilites that were Ayers’ not his.

Ayers now sees that the book, Dreams of my Father, was his best work, the one that will endure the test of time when everything eles he wrote is long forgotten, and yet a man that he knows could not have written it, who is less intelligent than he is, has his name as the aurthor. To add further insult, Obama even denies knowing Ayers as more than a casual nieghbor.

It maybe that Ayers is own hard left principles are at odds with what Obama is doing or failed to do. Perhaps he had hoped that the investigation into the real aurthorship would have brought out that he, not Obama, had written the book, and in the end they failed to acknowledge it. That he volunteered the fact that he wrote the book, pointing out the evidence that he did and tossing in the lack of his getting any royalites, seems to point to a lot of sour grapes.

This may also be another crack in Obama’s hard left supporters coming out.

Franklyn on October 7, 2009 at 2:41 PM

it = his

katiejane on October 7, 2009 at 2:42 PM

But there’s a larger problem with the argument. Even if Cashill and the advocates of this position prove their case or get an admission — a real admission — what does that change? It will show what we already know about Obama and Ayers

I am not a conservative, I’m a classic (pro-capitalist) liberal from the Netherlands with a political science degree. I write for a living. I grew up in leftist circles, in Europe and New York.

To me it seems pretty obvious and highly relevant that Ayers ghostwrote Dreams of My Father. Relevant because it makes clear that Ayers and his Weather Underground/Chicago circles created the Obama myth.

It is also very likely that Ayers and Obama met in New York in the early eighties and that it was Ayers who brought Obama to Chicago. This relationship and its implications has NOT ‘got plenty of coverage’. It never got beyond the “lack of judgement” narrative.

Please don’t lump this in with the birther nonsense! The problem with the birther theory is that it makes no sense whatsoever in the context of what we know about Obama’s life; there was no reason for Ann Dunham to give birth in Kenya and no reason for Obama Sr. to bring his Hawaiian girlfriend home to his wife and extended family.

If you know a bit about radical marxist academic circles and the history of the Weather Underground and similar groups, you would know that of course Ayers ghostwrote/edited Dreams.

modifiedcontent on October 7, 2009 at 2:48 PM

I disagree. First, it’s hardly an earth-shaking revelation that politicians use ghost writers for memoirs, political tracts, or anything else they publish.

Ed – Barack Obama was not a politician at the time he was commissioned to write this book. He was anacademic. As Harvard Law Review’s President [read: editor in chief] he was the conscience of accuracy and academic integrity at one of the top Law Review publications in the world. He was an instructor at U. Chicago’s Law School which is one of the top 10 or 15 law schools in the country. He was offered a tenure track position. Since an instructor/professor’s worst crime is to publish anything without proper attribution, his ‘con’ job cut to the very heart of his then-profession’s integrity. But that didn’t stop him – apparently – to pull off the ‘con.’
He has accepted a fortune in royalties for the unattributed work of another person – the academic equivalent of high treason.
He was also an attorney while he taught at law school and was ‘authoring’ his book. I – as well – am an attorney. Though the public holds us in contempt – in the course of representing our clients, we rely on the word of opposing counsel to an extent that the public would find surprising. I’ve always been a ‘small-timer’ with a small practice. In that world of lawyers, one’s word with other attorneys – and with the courts – is everything. When one of the local legal beagles is found to have broken his word, many of us consider it not to be gossip but to be a professional obligation to tell our colleagues of this breach so they can protect themselves and their clients.
In both professions in which Obama was engaged at the time that his fraud – or alleged fraud – was perpetrated – such cheating cut to the heart and essence of the integrity of those professions. Had his fellow faculty members known that another college professor had secretly written the seminal work on which their colleague’s reputation was built – he would have been terminated immediately – just as he would have been terminated by his law firm. The fact that the book was biolgraphical and not an academic work would have been of no consequence. Though such a book cut at the very heart of his ethical obligations in the two non-political jobs he then held, he had, apparently no qualms about his actions.
The heart and soul of the office of the presidency is comprised of the moral authority and integrity that comes with the office. Sinc he has shown no regard for the ethical and moral linchpins of his two prior professions, his past treatment of professional ethics should give one pause.
Therefore – I respectfully disagree with you. This is not just the act of a ‘politician’ in a literary endeavor. He was not a politician at the time. But, at that time, he was willing to risk his family’s very livelihood by doing the one type of fraudulent act that would have destroyed his ‘then’ careers.
As a college professor he could screw an alligator on Main Street at noon, and his colleagues would have yawned. As a lawyer, he could have had five mistresses – known to his colleagues – and their only reaction would be to keep their own wive’s and girlfriends hidden from him.
But to publish a work of which he claimed soul authorship? Uh-uh…that would have been a catastrophic revelation in his two professions and he didn’t even blink.

Every profession has its ethical strictures which seem of little relevance to folks in other professions but which, in the relevant profession, is akin to eating kittens for lunch after molesting a goat kept locked in a doghouse.
This allegation, if true, should not be regarded as an act of an ‘everyone-does-it’ politician. It should be viewed for what it is: an outright betrayal of the core values of the only other professional jobs he’s ever had.

To me, that’s still relevant — especially considering the job he currently holds. Though – per Obama – this current job in D.C. appears only to be a part-time sideline – I understand that his current employer does require some sort of oath that other people – some even outside his current field – take seriously. Some folks even consider the oath he recently took to be as serious as the Cub Scout Oath – or the third grader’s most sacred words: “Cross my heart an’ hope t’ die an’ if I’m lying you can have my frisbee.”
I got a feeling that the US Air Force is gonna be pretty shocked if ‘Frisbee One’ is lost over another one of this charlatan’s broken oaths.
Jim Anderson
anderson.james@att.net

Jim Anderson on October 7, 2009 at 2:50 PM

First, it’s hardly an earth-shaking revelation that politicians use ghost writers for memoirs, political tracts, or anything else they publish.

You’re kidding, right? It’s not about using a ghost writer, it’s about who the ghost writer is. Most “authors” don’t use ghost writers who are/were Communists that plotted attacks against Americans, and who despise the American way of life. If it turns out that Ayers did write Obama’s book, he’s certainly more than just some guy from the neighborhood. It would be just one more lie added to the ever-growing pile of Obama lies.

In 2012, everything will matter.

xblade on October 7, 2009 at 2:52 PM

Sorry, but the President’s veracity is never a dead issue.

You suggest the Obama/Ayers relationship was fully disclosed and widely known before the election. Anything but. Since when did “a guy from the neighborhood” become a close confidant capable of having written Obama’s autobiography? Not in Obama’s version of events. He has NEVER openly discussed or disclosed his close relationship with Ayers. Simply not factual to suggest otherwise.

Further, to suggest that Sarah Palin’s use of a ghost writer on Going Rogue, which is openly known and disclosed by all involved, is the same as Obama’s use of a ghost writer to write his autobiography, a “fact” which, if in fact a fact, has never been disclosed or even hinted at by the Obama camp, makes no sense and simply does not hold up.

The only fact in that regard that we can confirm is that the Obama camp poo-poohed every attempt to suggest that Ayers wrote Dreams or that he even knew Ayers beyond a casual acquaintance.

To suggest that none of this is arguably relevant because, even if Obama lied about it, we all know people do it, is simply nuts.

And this is particularly true for this fellow, who carries this patina of sophistication and the label, by some, as “the smartest President in the history of mankind” for some reason. To find out the his second book is more like it and that someone else wrote the first, would, in my opinion, be a devastating blow to his image. And, finally, since he’s all image and no substance, that could prove fatal politically.

IndieDogg on October 7, 2009 at 2:57 PM

Ed, I disagree with you wholeheartedly on several of the points others have already raised. Here’s a roundup plus a few more:

1. Obama is not so brilliant that he wrote his own books. He, in fact, did have a ghost writer. One who he will not acknowledge. Does “you lie!” ring a bell?

2. Obama says he barely knew Ayers, who was “just a guy in my neighborhood.” Does “you lie!” ring a bell?

3. You write: “Sarah Palin used a ghost writer for Going Rogue, for instance, and few people bother with it, because it’s a non-issue.” Palin’s COLLABORATOR is Lynn Vincent, a flesh and blood named writer, not a ghost.

4. See #3′s quote. Time magazine and yahoo are both running stories that are making a Big Darn Deal about how fast “Palin’s ghostwriter” wrote her book.

5. See #3′s quote. Politico has already written a hit job smear piece on Lynn Vincent.

So yes, Ed, several people are “bothering with” Palin’s collaborator.

hrh40 on October 7, 2009 at 3:00 PM

If Van Jones had to resign because of revelations that he was a communist revolutionary, why would this (if it were possible to prove)have no affect on Barry’s career??

Buy Danish on October 7, 2009 at 3:01 PM

I disagree. First, it’s hardly an earth-shaking revelation that politicians use ghost writers for memoirs, political tracts, or anything else they publish.

How many American presidents have used a communist terrorist to ghost-write a so-called autobiography? Hopefully none.

What this story does, if proven to anywhere near certainty, is show that Obama is the first actual Potemkin President and was a ‘Manchurian Candidate’.

JonPrichard on October 7, 2009 at 3:01 PM

Ed,

Palin did not use a “ghost writer” she used a co-author. They are not the same thing. One implies an attempt to hide the truth the other aknowledges that there was help in the writing of the book.

unseen on October 7, 2009 at 3:05 PM

hrh40 on October 7, 2009 at 3:00 PM

Well said and spot on.

Bruno Strozek on October 7, 2009 at 3:06 PM

Faked scholarship/authorship creates a significant credibility issue (especially if the co-author is Ayers). If conclusively established, the issue would be impossible for the MSM to ignore.

It’s almost impossible to conclusively establish authorship. There wouldn’t be a credibility scandal anyway. This type of book by first-time public figure writers is often heavily edited or ghostwritten by professional writers.

To me it’s just one part of the bigger puzzle that people have to become aware of, including conservatives, who generally still don’t really understand who Obama is – thinking he’s a lightweight or just a corrupt Chicago politician etc.

That’s why lumping this in with the birther nonsense is disastrous to any opposition against Obama.

Obama is a myth carefully created by marxists, from his birth – marxist student Ann Dunham hooking up with a socialist third worlder, raising Barry to identify with and model himself on civil rights leaders – to uncle Frank, to Bill Ayers, ACORN, New Party and the Chicago machine.

Yes, lots of elements of that story did come out during the election, but the Obamacrats with help from clueless conservatives like Bill O’Reilly succeeded in separating and defusing those elements – “lack of judgement” etc. It still has not been put together enough.

Authorship of Dreams is one important key. It’s the starting point for the creation of the public myth that led to the presidency.

modifiedcontent on October 7, 2009 at 3:06 PM

What do we know, or think we know, about the Big O? We have a rough history, but very little that is concrete. We know of a leftist slant since childhood, but have little documentary evidence of competence. Much of the evidence we would normally have has been purposely hidden, at great expense and effort.

The book is part of the evidence, and for it to have been ghost-written by a generic writer would still be a piece of dishonesty; it is no shame to acknowledge a ghost-writer, so if there was one, why hide it? Most people who use ghost-writers admit it freely, and nobody thinks twice about it.

Serious readers or writers know that the style or personality of the writer is pervasive. One can imitate the style of someone else for short pieces, but the longer the piece, the more likely the imitation is to fall on its face. Cashill’s evidence is not trivial. It compares to a musicologist knowing that I composed a piece and claimed it was Mozart – the longer the piece, the more sure an expert would be that it was not authentic.

That the 2 books are different in quality, and that the Big O shows no evidence now of special competence with words, implies that one of the few pieces of evidence we had prior to the election was not authentic. If that is the case, along with all the hidden history, it speaks to the purposeful creation of an electable image for an individual whose real policies would not make him electable. To fooling the American public intentionally.

This would not be unknown to others, editors, publisher staff, other friends and social contacts would know. It would be interesting to see what the publishers and editors have to say. Like Ayers, they might not respond clearly. But it would be interesting.

jodetoad on October 7, 2009 at 3:09 PM

Ed,
It would appear you’ve stepped in somethin’. Shit or shinola?

Blacksmith8 on October 7, 2009 at 3:15 PM

this entire post is wrong on so many levels. first off Obama was sold to the American public has a “smart” man because of the “FACT” he “wrote” the book. If it turns out he didn’t write the book the american public will have one more data point on how they were duped.

Second you have no idea or proof that Palin’s tweets or face book pages are not her own. All exec’s use a assinant to draft letters. the “take a memo” has been a aprt of higer office in politics and business in America for a long time. Howeve tweets are more likely from the person doing the tweets.

third, Your question of “what does it change” misses the entire argument. It changes the entire storyline. And instead of a “smart” highly educated president it opens up America to the possibility that Obama is stupid. It calls up reasons for why the Obama team is not also releasing his transcripts from college. It makes the American people take a second look.

Finally it takes away a talking point of the dems inregards to Palin or any other GOP official that has a book written by a co-author

unseen on October 7, 2009 at 3:17 PM

Whether they use their staff, as they do for their daily messaging, or a professional writer for books and other lengthy efforts, they usually employ people whose business it is to know how to write, mainly because writing is too time-consuming for active politicians. Sarah Palin used a ghost writer for Going Rogue, for instance, and few people bother with it, because it’s a non-issue. Most ghost writers never get publicly acknowledged, although occasionally politicians will share writing credit.

I’m glad this was brought up. It’s important to consider the misplaced credit and misplaced blame.

First, if Sarah Palin turns out a great book and it sells well, then many of her detractors will credit–a co-author or ghost author, however you call it. They’d use that to discredit her as an intellectual, a writer, or someone worthy of national office.

Second, if Mr. Obama turns out a great book and it sells well, then he automatically earns the credit and the assertions of any ghost writer is denounced loudly; it simply doesn’t fit the template. Moreover, any evidence of poor writing skills are ignored.

The net effect of both treatments? I reference Sarah Palin’s WaPo column on energy independence and healthcare. They were well written and referenced with citations added. Hence, they can stand on their own merits because evidence is provided. This makes for stronger writing, more compelling arguments and a strengthening of Sarah Palin as one who can advance an argument. On the other hand, Mr. Obama’s work must be defended outright by his guardians, for it is work that cannot stand upon its own. There is no clarity in sources, no clarity in authorship, and Mr. Obama is weakened in his ability to advance an argument–a fact which is shown in the polls daily.

In summary, weak writing has to be covered up and generates more questions than it answers whereas strong writing can stand upon its own merits and helps advance strong arguments through proper citation and clarity. It answers more questions than it creates.

ted c on October 7, 2009 at 3:22 PM

Sarah Palin wsa never billed as an intellectual superpower. Everyone expects her to have a ghost writer and does not begrudge her. Obama is much different. He has been billed and hailed as the black genius editor of the Harvard Law Review. The young black genius who is Senator from Illinois. Of course such a genius writes his own books and Obama has always always always implied that he was sole author of “Dreams from my Father”

Obama was such an awesome genius that he was a professor at Chicago University Law School. Such a political genius that he helmed his Senatorial and Presidential efforts. I once saw 0bama himself bragging that he was a genius at political campaigns

Of course he writes his own books and of course he is eligible to be President! You are a racist for doubting this young black genius that comes along once every hundred years and we are lucky to have him!

dennisw on October 7, 2009 at 3:34 PM

Morrissey’s point covinces me. Had Pres. Obama turned out to be a fiscal conservative, cut taxes, balanced the budget, etc., his ties to Ayers wouldn’t matter. That he hasn’t done those things doesn’t make his ties to Ayers matter. We know what he’s like as president now because he’s been president; we don’t have to guess based on his pre-president ties and performance.

Jens on October 7, 2009 at 3:35 PM

We know what he’s like as president now because he’s been president; we don’t have to guess based on his pre-president ties and performance.

Jens on October 7, 2009 at 3:35 PM

We’re not guessing. We’ve bought Obama now and what was advertised on the box, ain’t what the thing in the box can do. It’s like buying a blender that says it makes smoothies, you get it out of the box and it makes stuff, just not smoothies. It’s false advertising to say that Mr. Obama was an accomplished author, when he can’t do that. Should he get a pass on this? I certainly don’t think so.

ted c on October 7, 2009 at 3:45 PM

Have to disagree with Ed. If this was found to be true, leading up to the election, Obama would have likely lost. It would’ve been over the top prima facie proof he was a liar.

AYNBLAND on October 7, 2009 at 4:14 PM

“Politically, it’s rather meaningless”.

Oh, ok. Unrepentant terrorist actually wrote a book supposedly written by President Barack Hussein Obama. Turkmenbama has been known to openly brag that he ACTUALLY wrote his own book.

Maybe Osama bin Laden can ghostwrite his next one. It’ll be meaningless.

(Some peeps don’t want to wake up and see that everything about Turkmenbama is a bloody lie and that he is the enemy)

Gob on October 7, 2009 at 4:26 PM

Ed has a strange take on this. Ayers is not just any ghost writer – he’s also a communist and terrorist. Obama is not just any politician. His supposed erudition is his stock in trade. Obama would be exposed as a liar and an intellectual fraud.

Ted Torgerson on October 7, 2009 at 4:29 PM

Wow, what the hell happened to Ed Morrissey?

Sometimes I seriously question this blog’s direction.

dip it in cider on October 7, 2009 at 4:31 PM

What is it with these fem lefties?

Jaibones on October 7, 2009 at 4:46 PM

Haven’t had a chance to scan the thread, so apologies if this is a repeat.

The problem is not just that Obama used an unacknowledged, radical, ghost writer, it’s that Obama passed off pieces of Ayer’s biography as his own. For a President who was elected on virtually nothing but his bio, this is huge.

JM Hanes on October 7, 2009 at 4:53 PM

But he lied about writing his book Ed.

That’s the difference.

Sarah Palin and others didn’t LIE about having a collaborator working with them on their books.

Sapwolf on October 7, 2009 at 4:55 PM

Ed,

Palin did not use a “ghost writer” she used a co-author. They are not the same thing. One implies an attempt to hide the truth the other aknowledges that there was help in the writing of the book.

unseen on October 7, 2009 at 3:05 PM

Correct.

A ghost-writer writes it all with some input up front.

Obama’s book WAS ghost-written.

Palin’s book is NOT ghost-written. Ms. Vincent is a co-auther. She didn’t write the book for Palin like what Ayers did for Obama and then lie about it.

Ed,

You MISSED this one really bad.

In fact, just pull it and do some damage control.

Sapwolf on October 7, 2009 at 4:59 PM

I can only assume that Ed didn’t follow the original story about Ayers ghostwriting Obama’s book, so is trying to posture here, which is embarrassing.

To believe, as Ed says he does, that Ayer’s probably didn’t write the book, and I said that correctly — (Ayers WROTE that book, as the person who did the original inquiries pointed out with the allusions used (nautical references) were Ayer’s and NOT Obama’s)

Second, even now, if it were made known to the general public that Ayers helped write Obama’s book, it would be no less than HUGE!!! Democrats and the media have said over and over that Ayers and Obama hardly knew one another, and this would be a indisputable revelation to those who believed the media. And there’s presently a massive move from in print media to the internet, due to obvious coverups of ACORN recently, and people don’t like being kept in the dark. So a story that Ayers really did write Obama’s book would get out to virtually everyone; it is different now than before the election…

Anyhow… I disagree with both Ed and Allahpundit on this one. Even to the point of this even being a story… like somehow Ayers is going to admit to doing it. I mean, come on Ed and Allahpundit… get real.

Danzo on October 7, 2009 at 5:39 PM

Thanks Danzo. Nicely said.

Pity this thread is way down. It seems like at the beginning peeps where blindly following what Ed and Allapundit (BOTH ARE WRONG!)said.

I think this issue is HUGE and not crazy.

Gob on October 7, 2009 at 5:50 PM

I think if the phrase “Chicks up front” appears anywhere in the autobiographical novel, then Ayers ghost wrote it.

If the phrase does not appear, then Ayers still may have written it.

ExpressoBold on October 7, 2009 at 7:07 PM

Au contraire, Ed!

Every angle that can help undermine Obama’s power to push through disastrous policies and waffle on serious issues should be pursued by whatever dogged reporter/journalist/blogger has the impetus to track each angle down.

Who would have thought utter nobodies like Giles and O’Keefe could hurt him with a silly little pimp-ho pose and a cheap camera by exposing the corruptions of his allies at ACORN, formerly one of Obama’s best community organizing tools?

Hammer at every chink in his tinfoil armor until he is rendered less able to damage the nation with his feckless follies.

profitsbeard on October 7, 2009 at 7:54 PM

Even if Cashill and the advocates of this position prove their case or get an admission — a real admission — what does that change? It will show what we already know about Obama and Ayers, a relationship that got plenty of New Media coverage in the campaign, and also show that Obama hired a ghost writer. Neither of these issues are relevant now that Obama is in office.

Yes, Ed, “we” & “the New Media” already knew during the campaign. But what about those whose reading/watching preferences were “OLD MEDIA” (MSNBC, CNN, etc)? Not to mention the willfully ignorant who need something shoved in their faces before they recognize it (case in point: ACORN) This would be a revelation of epic proportions- a blatant lie, and another definitive & more intimate link between Obama & his terrorist-buddy, Ayers.

Obama will be President until at least January 2013, and his policies and record of governance is really all that’s relevant.

A bit overly optimistic, IMHO.

NightmareOnKStreet on October 7, 2009 at 7:57 PM

Au contraire, Ed!…
profitsbeard on October 7, 2009 at 7:54 PM

Exactly. Sometimes, I have to doublecheck to make sure I’m still reading HotAir and haven’t accidently clicked a link to HuffingSomePaint/dKos- or haven’t otherwise gone over to the dark side site.

HotAir, Alice, Through the Looking Glass, much?

NightmareOnKStreet on October 7, 2009 at 8:08 PM

Yeah, but isn’t the idea of a ghost writer having someone who is a good writer so that the work has the proper grammar, flow, interest, etc.?

Not a crony who shares a common ideological position and probably isn’t a very good writer.

The excerpts I’ve heard from Dreams sounds rather like Kerouac’s On The Road, that is, not original and steeped in more ancient Leftist writings. I have no problem with Kerouac, but I wouldn’t want him to be President nor advising the White House anymore than I would have wanted the late, great Sam Kinison advising Reagan.

I pre-ordered Palin’s book just to support her…I don’t expect anything great in the work itself nor care if she penned it herself.

Dr. ZhivBlago on October 7, 2009 at 8:47 PM

Neither of these issues are relevant now that Obama is in office. Whatever relevance they had in exposing a relative unknown passed last November on Election Day.

I disagree, each thing that comes out on Obama turns some believers into a non-believers. That may matter come 2012. I work in academia, and every day the light bulb goes off for someone who voted for him. They didn’t do their homework on Obama before the election…but now little things like this make them realize the mistake they made in voting for him. The media really pushed against the “guilt by association” thing, and some believed it when Obama said that Ayers was just a guy in his neighborhood…this proves that he was much more and there will be eyes that it opens.

Plus, you can draw conclusions from it….like maybe he isn’t the scholar they thought he was….similar to the way the teleprompter showed that he really couldn’t give a speech. It can’t change 08, but it can change 2012.

njpat on October 7, 2009 at 9:08 PM

Who would have thought utter nobodies like Giles and O’Keefe could hurt him with a silly little pimp-ho pose and a cheap camera by exposing the corruptions of his allies at ACORN, formerly one of Obama’s best community organizing tools?

I think you mean unknowns, rather than nobodies. I doubt very much that either Hannah Giles or James O’Keefe could write the kind of pathetically putrid piece Morrissey offered up today.

I’m sure both of them understand the difference between a ghost writer and a co-author and I have no doubt, given the extent to which they went to expose the corruption of Acorn, that both of them would think it hugely important if the President is proved to be a consummate fraud and facile liar.

I doubt very much that you’d ever see from Giles and O’Keefe the kind of work product put on display here by Ed Morrissey.

Basilsbest on October 7, 2009 at 9:16 PM

Ed – You are wrong. This is a big deal because Obama’s qualifications were predicated on his unusual brillance as demonstrated by the fact that he was the editor of the Havard Review and that he authored a best-selling memoir shortly after graduating from Columbia. While most people viewed his second book the way they do most political books, the Dreams of My Father book was viewed very differently because it was authored without the view toward the White House. It was, as many argued, truly authentic and powerfully written. If it turns out to be a lie, that is a very big deal indeed.

RedSoxNation on October 7, 2009 at 10:23 PM

Cashill’s work might make for a good academic-interest story, but politically, it’s rather meaningless.

Ridiculous. The lesson from Bush’s historic popularity plummeting to historic loathes is that the political facade needs to be chopped at with a relentless axe. This revelation will not fell the tree alone but it takes a chunk out of the Obamamessiah’s phony persona.

miles on October 7, 2009 at 10:34 PM

Well, Ed, looks like most people here think you are wrong about the significance of this.

It’s not the ghost writing that is the issue, rather who the ghost is. If it’s Ayers then it means that the bio itself is suspect and that Obama was doing things totally divorced from that narrative. It also means that Obama was always a terrorist sympathizer and that he lied about it to get elected.

None of this matters?

virgo on October 8, 2009 at 2:27 AM

Sarah Palin used a ghost writer for Going Rogue, for instance, and few people bother with it, because it’s a non-issue.

And she was upfront and open about it and her ghostwriter never bombed anyone.

You are one confused, twisted guy, ed.

peacenprosperity on October 8, 2009 at 7:50 AM

Comment pages: 1 2