But Why Keep Talking to Him? [Victor Davis Hanson and Andy McCarthy on Obama-Ayers alliance]

NRO Corner ^ | October 21, 2008 | Andy McCarthy & Victor Davis Hanson

[Tolik]

But Why Keep Talking to Him?   [Victor Davis Hanson]

I confess I haven't followed the Ayers matter — except for one key and  persistently bothersome detail — the continued communications following 9/11. Relying on the unimpeachable New York Times, I learned two fact: (one), Bill Ayers, in 2001 said that he felt that he had not done enough bombing and could not rule out the possibility that he might have done it all over again; (two) for the next four years (until 2005 when Obama reached the Senate), Obama communicated with Ayers by phone and email (e.g.: "[they] have not spoken by phone or exchanged e-mail messages since Mr. Obama began serving in the United States Senate in January 2005." NY Times)

So why would anyone in a post-9/11 climate continue to communicate with such a loathsome character for four years, when it was common knowledge that Ayers had approved (no, was proud) of his past terrorist tactics of bombing buildings?

Obama may plead the 'I was only 8 years old' line about Ayers' bombing career, or the 'I bumped into him on the street once or twice' story, or the narrative of  'I served with him on a board with some Republicans'. But really, the continued association by phone and email with a proud, creepy Ayers is simply mystifying and has been rarely raised and never explained.

10/21 12:07 PM

 

Re: But Why Keep Talking to Him?   [Andy McCarthy]

Victor, respectfully, the Ayers/Obama continued association by phone and email is mystifying only if one assumes that Ayers's vile 9/11 comments mark the revelation of an Ayers different from the one Obama knew for the many preceding years.  There is not a scintilla of evidence that such a thing could be true.

Ayers has never pretended to be anything other than what he is:  a revolutionary Leftist, who described himself as "a radical, small 'c' communist" in 1995 — the very time when Obama started formally partnering with him on education reform, humping Ayers's radical 1997 book, appearing on panels with Ayers, joining with him to fund the likes of Jeremiah Wright, Rashid Khalidi, and the like.  He did not become proud and creepy after 9/11.  He is what he is and has ever been.

That is to say, the continued association is easily explained for anyone willing to look at the facts.  The post 9/11 Ayers was exactly the same guy as the pre-9/11 Ayers.  That's what drew Obama to him in the first place.  The media and our esteemed commentariat choose not to look at the facts — after all, Obama is such a fine writer and has such intellectual rigor.  So we have the usual dismissal or complex rationalizations of something that is obvious and simple:  Obama shares Ayers's Leftist politics.  Whatever distance Obama has imposed in the last couple of years is strictly a function of his electoral ambitions.

Characteristically, VDH is getting to the heart of the matter.  What is sadly remarkable is how many others are prepared to draw sweeping, negative inferences about Sarah Palin because of her accent, yet, when it comes to Obama, they avert their eyes from the unmistakable evidence staring them right in the face.

10/21 12:45 PM

 

Re: re: But why keep talking to him?   [Mark Steyn]

Victor, Andrew, here's "the Ayers ad the McCain campaign will never make". But it's interesting that there doesn't seem to be any 527 action out there, either.

10/21 01:00 PM

The McCain Ad You'll Never See: the Fort Dix Dance

[Tolik]

Highlights are mine. Sorry, could not resist.

[Tolik]

Nailed It!

This ping list is not author-specific for articles I'd like to share. Some for the perfect moral clarity, some for provocative thoughts; or simply interesting articles I'd hate to miss myself. (I don't have to agree with the author all 100% to feel the need to share an article.) I will try not to abuse the ping list and not to annoy you too much, but on some days there is more of the good stuff that is worthy of attention. You can see the list of articles I pinged to lately  on  my page.
You are welcome in or out, just freepmail me (and note which PING list you are talking about). Besides this one, I keep 2 separate PING lists for my favorite authors Victor Davis Hanson and Orson Scott Card.  

[Tolik]

Nailed It!

This ping list is not author-specific for articles I'd like to share. Some for the perfect moral clarity, some for provocative thoughts; or simply interesting articles I'd hate to miss myself. (I don't have to agree with the author all 100% to feel the need to share an article.) I will try not to abuse the ping list and not to annoy you too much, but on some days there is more of the good stuff that is worthy of attention. You can see the list of articles I pinged to lately  on  my page.
You are welcome in or out, just freepmail me (and note which PING list you are talking about). Besides this one, I keep 2 separate PING lists for my favorite authors Victor Davis Hanson and Orson Scott Card.  

[Tolik]

OOOps, sticky mouse

sorry for the double ping.

[johnny7]

[griswold3]

You don’t need to be a weatherman to know which way the winds blowing....

[Tolik]

Posted here: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2107906/posts

Stanley Kurtz :

This is not about what happened when Obama was eight years old. Ayers and Obama both believe in a redistributionist economic policies. Together Ayers and Obama backed radical community organizers like ACORN, a key player in the mortgage crisis. ACORN’s assault on credit-standards was driven by its redistributionist philosophy. So Obama’s radical associations reveal the truth of his economic policies. It’s all of a piece. But this critical point has not been made.

People still speak as though the "associations" issue and the economic issue are two different things. They’re not. ACORN wants to spread Joe’s wealth around. So does Bill Ayers. That’s why Obama worked with both ACORN and Ayers.

 

[Sneakyuser]

The problem is allowing Obama and the media to use the word “association” as in ‘guilt by’ and so forth.

This is guilt by PARTICIPATION. No one is selected to write a blurb for a book, sit on boards and dole out over 150 million dollars, something most CEOs don’t get the opportunity to do by just being an associate.

And, the goal of the participation was not to improve math and science skills. It was to teach “history” and warp the warp perspective of young minds.

The Dems, with the media helping them, MUST ensure that the public makes uninformed, or warped opinions.

[CaliforniaCon]

This story makes it sound like there has been no communication between Ayers and Obama since 2005. Actually all it says is the two have not exchanged e-mails or phone calls. BIG difference.

My bet is that these two are often in contact with each other — after all, they have so much in common..........

[purplelobster]

It seems pretty clear by now that, although Obama has no intention of blowing up any building, he’s a staunch, naive disciple of the Radical Chic that I thought was dead a long time ago. Obama still refuses to explain his past relationship with longtime Employer/Mentor Bill Ayers other than to say that Bill won’t be a part of his Administration. I’d say that this is cold comfort for the average voter. People keep talking about how Obama appeals to young voters, but I’m not buying it. Obama’s main appeal seems to be more to the older Baby Boomers who are re-living their teenage years, still pretending to be fighting “the man.”

Obviously Obama is still enthralled with Ayers and even makes light of his Mentorship with Bill. While he still won’t explain why he had deep ties to Ayers, he felt free to make jokes about it at the Alfred Smith dinner. Obama seems to underestimate the signficance of the issue to the general public, because he is surrounded by a coterie of media admirers who don’t think it’s a big deal.

[Tolik]

You are in a good company with Thomas Sowell.

Thomas Sowell (posted here: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2099179/posts)

Critics of Senator Barack Obama make a strategic mistake when they talk about his "past associations." That just gives his many defenders in the media an opportunity to counter-attack against "guilt by association."

We all have associations, whether at the office, in our neighborhood or in various recreational activities. Most of us neither know nor care what our associates believe or say about politics.

Associations are very different from alliances. Allies are not just people who happen to be where you are or who happen to be doing the same things you do. You choose allies deliberately for a reason. The kind of allies you choose says something about you ... continue

Thanks to jazusamo for collecting Thomas Sowell articles

Believers in Obama
Negative Advertising
The Real Obama: Part IV
The Real Obama: Part III
The Real Obama: Part II
The Real Obama
Do Facts Matter?
Idols of Crowds
Changes in Politics
Whose “Special Interests”?
The Galbraith Effect
…As Well As Several Other Issues
Are Facts Obsolete?
Conservatives for Obama?
Cocky Ignorance
Obama and McCain
Irrelevant Apologies
Success Built on Work Ethic
An Old Newness
A Living Lie
Obama’s Speech
Race and Politics
Non-Judgmental Nonsense   

[T. Buzzard Trueblood]

Obama shares Ayers's Leftist politics. Whatever distance Obama has imposed in the last couple of years is strictly a function of his electoral ambitions.

So true.

[Tolik]

It was and still is much easier for people to hate Timothy McVeigh as unsociable, conspiracy loving, former military redneck (have I mentioned all in his rap sheet?) than pleasant, engaging, smart, well connected Ayers. If you don’t know who he is and you end up in the same company, its easy to fall for his charms. But what is the difference between their deeds? Only that McVeigh was more successful in implementing his plans than Ayers.

The only positive quality I find in Ayers is that he is honest enough about his radical views. As in so many other situations, its a willful blindness that stops people from seeing the truth.

[purplelobster]

Yes, I hadn’t thought about it, but there does seem to be a parallel between Bill Ayers and Timothy McVeigh. It’s hard to say because I don’t what McVeigh was claiming as his incentive, because no one on the right hails him as a distinguished member of the community as the left does with Ayers and I don’t have any desire to examine McVeigh’s BS reasoning. No doubt that McVeigh had some insane, twisted rationale for his brand of terrorism that couched itself as a political opinion.

My opinion of the Weathermen’s political beliefs is that they appear to have been spoiled trustfund kids who ate too much of the brown acid. I don’t see any depth to Ayers arguments and opinions, just psychotic nonsense. It’s disturbing that Obama sees Ayers as a Mentor.

[Seaplaner]

As you relay in your post, SK writes...This is not about what happened when Obama was eight years old.

Of course it's not.

This is called "arguing off the point". It's also known as the The Red Herring fallacy, "...in which an irrelevant topic is presented in order to divert attention from the original issue."

Lawyers do it do derail questions that might lead to something significant, and to conceal truth.

Marxist Obama uses this fallacy (constantly but clumsily) as a shield to evade (in a most cowardly fashion) sincere inquiry about Marxist Obama's past associations with terrorists.

.

[Tolik]

“It’s disturbing that Obama sees Ayers as a Mentor”

Indeed. My previous post had an assumption (hopefully shared by all people) that regardless of motivations, Timothy McVeigh was evil. Ayers is educated, polished, charming version of evil as far as I am concerned. That he is accepted by so many people, and not just Obama, as a normal member of society is disturbing.

I understand that young people can get infatuated with stupid ideas and do something really stupid. Then, after they recognize the stupidity (and hopefully it did not lead to too much damage), repent and atone, they can return to the society, IMHO. Ayers was never sorry. And he is a respectable educator and a professor. Boils the blood.

[hershey]

Ayres is now a ‘distinguished professor of education’ who has written several textbooks widely used all over the country. The books indoctrinate young kids with the notion that socialism is great and America is evil. Lesson plans included, and a test on Wed.

The far left (Ayres and pals), decided two things long ago. One, to follow Marx and brainwash young children in school as soon as possible. And two, to create a candidate for the US presidency who would carry out their aims. Obama is that creation, the Manchurian Candidate come to life. If this doesn’t scare the pants off you, how about the distinct possibility of Ayres a member of Obama’s cabinet, say, the Secretary of Education? Along with John Kerry as Sec. of State. Are you freaking yet?

[GOPJ]

Thanks for the ping.

[Arthur Wildfire! March]

Right on! Nailed it!