A pretty strong case could be made that everything political that we read or see via the mainstream media, including the corporatized segment of the blogosphere, is AstroTurf. Though the original term refers to the unethical public relations practice of creating the appearance of grassroots activity on behalf of corporations and politicians where none exists, given that it is ultimately a marketing tool designed to create buzz in order to persuade the gullible against their interests and in favor of the corporate/political entity that paid for it, I’m pretty confident in saying we’re currently being AstroTurfed to death. By everybody.
Most of us are aware of the Obacracy’s use of the Axelrovian AstroTurf Army throughout the corporate media and blogosphere, from the leg-tingling sycophancy of MSNBO and it’s little sister former Big Three networks, to the shameless fluffing of the dying dinosaurs of the American press, to the ridiculous cheerleading of the Rah Rah Rally Boyz and Bots of the BoBama Blogosphere. The influence of General Electric through it’s ownership of NBC and its relationship with MSNBC, Newsweek, The Washington Post, New York Times, Slate Magazine, The Root, and others is pretty well known. What hasn’t been fully sussed out yet is the relationship between General Electric, Exelon, (the big AstroTurfed Obama supporting Illinois energy company and owner of Commonwealth Edison run by William Ayers’ dad, Thomas before his death) and the Obama administration. This site, USCAP, (United States Climate Action Program) shows there most likely is one, though, without further inquiry, it’s difficult to know exactly how strong or tenuous it is. It is also common knowledge that Obama supports cap and trade regulations and has for some time. Green Biz tells us that GE has been promoting it for a long time, too. Read the rest of this entry »
It’s not often that I agree with unrepentant terrorist, and Obabuddy, William Ayers, but when the man is right he’s right. Seems Ayers’ neighbor, the Obapresident-elect, and his partners in government crime, Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel and newly appointed Secretary of Education Arne Duncan, “haf plans” for your children.
Black Agenda Report’s Bruce Dixon interviewed “Chicago educator and activist, George Schmidt,” who calls Obama’s education secretary and basketball buddy Duncan “an underqualified stooge and privatizer” of education, and is highly critical of the job Duncan has done with the Chicago Public School System, and dropped this interesting tidbit of information:
Beginning in the first days of the 21st century, literally Chicago instituted military high schools. And we’re not talking about high schools that have ROTC programs, we’re talking about high schools that are run by and for the military. The first of those was established in the heart of Bronzeville, the south side community at 35th and Giles, in the old armory there. It’s now the Chicago Military Academy. Since then they’ve set up two more army high schools. Carver and Phoenix, a Marine high school and a naval academy which is named the Hyman Rickover Naval Academy inside Senn High School.
Today, Chicago has the most militarized public school system in the nation, with Cadet Corps for students in middle-school, over 10,000 students participating in JROTC programs, over 1,000 students enrolled in one of the five, soon-to-be six autonomous military high schools, and hundreds more attending one of the nine military high schools that are called “schools within a school.” Chicago now has a Marine Military Academy, a Naval Academy, and three army high schools. When an air force high school opens next year, Chicago will be the only city in the nation to have academies representing all of these branches of the military. But Chicago is not the only city moving in this direction: The public school systems of other urban centers with largely Black and brown low income students of color, including Philadelphia, Atlanta and Oakland, are being similarly reshaped.
Congratulations to Oakland mayor Jerry Brown on his plan to open a military academy (see “A Few Good Schools,” Summer 2001). Chicago’s experience with military academies has been overwhelmingly positive. I hope Oakland’s is equally successful.
In 1999 Chicago opened its first public military high school, the Chicago Military Academy at Bronzeville, in a historic African-American neighborhood. Last year the city began converting Carver High School on the Far South Side into its second military school. Both schools are part of the Chicago Public Schools system, not charter schools like Mayor Brown’s academy.
We started these academies because of the success of our Junior Reserve Officers Training Corps (JROTC) program, the nation’s largest. JROTC provides students with the order and discipline that is too often lacking at home. It teaches them time management, responsibility, goal setting, and teamwork, and it builds leadership and self-confidence.
Not surprisingly, the high-school graduation rate for JROTC students in the Chicago Public Schools is 20 percent greater than the citywide average. It’s a little early to measure the success of our academies, but the first class at Bronzeville scored 40 percent better than the citywide average in reading and 30 percent better than the average in math. Perhaps a clearer sign of success is that 1,300 students applied for 110 openings in Bronzeville’s next entering class.
Though a military academy isn’t for everyone, for some it is just what they need in order to make something of their lives.
While proponents claim that the schools do not recruit, and that their ultimate goal is prepare students for college, there’s some evidence that those people are full of hooey. For one thing, these schools call their students “cadets,” require them to wear uniforms, stress discipline, and teach them to shoot guns. From AFP:
Dozens of teens dressed in uniforms provided by the US Marines stand at attention in the gym of a Chicago public high school as a drill sergeant goes through a list of the day’s do’s and don’ts.
Bring your books to class. Come for extra help if you need it. And wear your uniform with pride.
“Young men, you think you can get a haircut and say I’m done for two or three weeks. WRONG,” Sgt. Major Thomas Smith Jr. intones.
“Young ladies. There’s been no problem with your uniforms but there is a problem with your ties. Again, I will go through it again. Wear your ties when you come to my class.”
One in 10 public high school students in Chicago wears a military uniform to school and takes classes — including how to shoot a gun properly — from retired veterans.
Chicago Military Academy (CMAB) is the city’s first comprehensive military academy for high school students. The multicultural school, accepts both male and female students citywide. CMAB has a four-year college prep curriculum in addition to a mandatory Army Junior Reserve Officers Training Corps (JROTC) component. Our last two graduating classes earned over $1.5 million in scholarships and grants. Two of our graduates have been accepted to West Point, and four candidates were accepted to the Citadel. Advanced Placement (AP) classes are offered in four subjects. Honors classes are offered in all core subjects. Virtual courses are also offered.
A student, Natassa Bourkas, had this to say about the advantage of military prep education:
“When people see that we went to a military school, they know we’re obedient, we follow directions, we’re disciplined,” Natassa Bourkas, 16, a student at the Naval academy, told the Tribune.
Needless to say, these schools are not without controversy. The transcript of a PBS Newshour discussion contains this exchange:
ELIZABETH BRACKETT: Minorities make up 92 percent of the cadet population. Only 4 percent are white, compared to 8 percent of the general Chicago public schools population.There are no public school military academies in Chicago’s suburbs. That disturbs Pauline Lipman, a professor at the University of Illinois at Chicago’s College of Education.
PAULINE LIPMAN, University of Illinois at Chicago: When we talk about how these are good schools for these kids, one of the things we want to think about is, why are they not in upper-middle-class white communities? Why are they good schools for low-income African-American and Latino students and not good schools for affluent white kids?
And are we saying that those students need a different kind of discipline, a different kind of regulation, a different kind of option? And I think that’s a form of racial discrimination, and that’s really concerning to me.
It concerns Bill Ayers, too. On his web page, Ayers, Therese Quinn, and Erica Meiners make the case against the militarization of the school system, summarizing his “radical” ideas on the subject this way:
We live in a city awash in the randomly, tragically spilled blood of our children. We live, all of us, in a violent nation that is regularly spilling the blood of other children, elsewhere. It sickens us to think of students marching and growing comfortable with guns.
In an October, 2007 Chicago Tribune article featuring the dedication of a new Marine Academy, Arne Duncan weighed in:
The dedication of the Marine Military Academy on the Near West Side comesa few days after Chicago officials announced plans to open an Air Forceacademy high school in 2009. If that happens, Chicago will become the onlypublic school district in the nation to have academies dedicated to the Army,Navy, Air Force and Marines.
District officials say the military-themed schools give students morechoices and provide an opportunity to enroll in schools that providestructure, discipline and a focus on leadership. They say the schoolsemphasize academics, not recruitment.
“We have to think outside the box, and what existed before simply did notwork for far too many students,” said Chicago Public Schools Chief ArneDuncan. “These schools are popular and have waiting lists, so that tells meparents want more of them.”
Rahm Emanuel thinks the program is a very good idea too. From his Congressional website, Oct. 15, 2007:
Today, the U.S. House of Representatives joined Mayor Daley and CEO of Chicago Public Schools Arne Duncan at the Marine Military Academy, to officially Commission the launch of the new school. Chicago Public School’s Marine Military Academy provides Chicago’s young men and women with a college prep education that focuses on Math and Science. Emanuel secured $300,000 in federal funding for the Military Academy in the Fiscal Year 2007 Department of Defense Appropriations Act.
“Our Nation’s success depends on the quality of our children’s education. Chicago Public School’s Marine Military Academy is a pioneer of educational excellence and will become a model for public education across the country.”
Not all of Arne’s plans for privetizing the school system include the military, of course:
Chicago teacher Jesse Sharkey writes, “In the past couple years, Arne Duncan [Obama's pick for Secretary of Education who hails from Chicago] has been turning public schools over to private operators–mainly in the form of charter and contract schools — at a rate of about 20 per year. Duncan has also resuscitated some of the worst ’school reform’ ideas of the 1990s, like firing all the teachers in low-performing schools (called ‘turnarounds’). At the same time, he’s eliminated many Local School Councils and made crucial decisions without public input.”
On this website, the effectiveness of Duncan’s efforts is debated, here, the JROTC makes its own case, and here, in a 2003 National Catholic Reporter article, the genesis of the military push is traced to Colin Powell:
The four-year course, offered as an elective in lieu of physical education at a traditional high school or as a requirement at a military academy, comes with its own curricula and instructors, who are retired military officers certified by the branch of the armed services they represent. Army JROTC instructors receive their certification at Fort Knox, Ky., which is also headquarters for Army recruiting.
According to the military, impetus for JROTC’s growth in the last decade came from Gen. Colin Powell, now secretary of state, after the Los Angeles race riots in 1992. Powell, then chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, surveyed the ruins of southern Los Angeles and decided that what the nation’s youth needed was the discipline and structure of the military. Critics say JROTC expanded substantially in the early ’90s because the military needed more skilled recruits and youth interest in enlistment had declined. As a recruiting tool, JROTC is undeniably effective. According to defense department estimates 40 percent of all JROTC graduates enlist after high school.
While I haven’t yet had the time to process all the information, I have to admit to being outraged. Considering that both Obama and Emanuel are advocates of mandatory volunteer service, and “civilian defense” my initial reaction to the notion that children are being militarily indoctrinated at the high school level is WTF!?!
The election of Barack Obama as president just might be the funniest tragedy-in-the-making in world history. As I watch the mainstream media cheerleaders who worked so diligently to elect him, (some pseudo/quasi “journalists” even seeing it as their job to help him) now watching him be exactly as he’s always been, and asking themselves, “my God, what have we done?” I can’t help but laugh. Whaddaya mean, “what have you done?” You’ve encouraged the majority of the voting public, as well as (let you tell it) the entire freaking world to elect a guy you studiously avoided finding anything out about. And, not only that, you didn’t let anybody else find anything out about him, either. He certainly wasn’t telling, and you guys in the MSM weren’t even curious about that.
There was a time when the surest way to get the media and press to investigate a guy was for that guy to act like he was hiding something. The only thing more certain to get their attention was for a guy to issue a “catch me if you can, na nanna na na,” challenge. Obama did both repeatedly, simply saying, “I’m not telling you anything,” whenever he was asked a question he didn’t like. Of course, he never said it directly, he usually just whined, “can’t I eat my waffle?” or “c’mon guys, I a’reddy answered like, what, eight questions?” and left. And our previously, notoriously nosy press corps said, “okay, everybody, he said, no,” and left, too. That was usually it. Oh, until the official Obama Denial Team issued an official Obama denial. Then that was really it.
“He says he’s not a Muslim, he just doesn’t listen in churches he’s not really interested in, unless going to them can advance his career.” “He said he doesn’t have any records from the Illinois senate.” “He said his dad was a British subject, but he’s a natural born citizen.” “He told us he went to Columbia, he got into Harvard, he must be smart. We don’t need to see his transcripts.” On and on it went, every question answered in the press with “The Obama Camp Issues A Denial, That’s Good Enough For Us!” headlines. “Of course he doesn’t ‘pal around with‘ terrorists who just happen to live down the block and used to work with him a lot. He’s only eight years old, and they’re not terrorists anymore, and anyway, he’s got a lot of friends, so what?” “What’s it to you if he wrote letters for a guy who’s going to jail and let people freeze in houses our guy helped him buy? Yeah, they had a deal on his own house but, gee whiz, it’s no big deal.” “He answered eight questions and now lookit, his waffle’s cold! See what you did?” I’ve heard of “Big Brother” but this kind of over-protective, surrogate parent role for the media is a little much, even for Orwell.
Now, this stellar press/media industry is amazed that people don’t trust them anymore. Go figure. Even people who allowed themselves to be brainwashed by the bullshit they spewed resent them. And now, these brilliant wordsmiths, pundits, analysts, commentators and investigators seem bewitched, bothered and befuddled by their own bullshit.
Funny as hell.
Here’s a newsflash fuh ya. You shamelessly promoted a hologram of a Pet Rock/Mr. Potato Head. He’s admitted to being a “Rorschach test” and a “blank screen,” and you guys projected constantly shifting images of everybody from Ghandi to Elvis to Martin Luther King to JFK/Lincoln/Roosevelt/God to Kermit the Frog and Norman Rockwell’s granny on him and pretended there was a “there there.” Well, there, there, honey, there ain’t no “there.” And those of you who are my age and older, the boomers, are the worst. You guys should really know better. What you thought was a toy when you were five and later realized was just a potato, what you marveled at as a brilliant marketing ploy when you were a teenager, knowing all along when you weren’t stoned that this new “toy” selling like hotcakes was just a rock in a box, was re-packaged and reissued in Barack Obama, and you fell for it again.
He’s not even a real rock or a potato, he just “evokes the wondrous spirit of an innocent child playing with one.” Or some other such heart-tugging, hackneyed, platitudinous nonsense. And you bought it. Hook, line and sinker. I “can’t believe you ate the whole thing!” Shoulda called Mikey, he not only hates everything, at least he wasn’t stupid. Now, you and all the other duped and deluded denizens of their own imaginary mental dungeons are trying mighty hard not to look as silly as you feel. Progressives, bullybloggerboyz, op-ed columnists and, funniest yet, the conservatives who fell so hard for the snow job that they abandoned their own selves to vote for “hopey, happy, joy, joy,” are all suddenly consumed with “who is this guy” questions they feel compelled to share with us all, assuming we all now feel their self-induced pain.
As we all know, Barack and Michelle Obama live in the neighborhood surrounding the University of Chicago, Hyde Park. So does Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn, Louis Farrakhan (who thinks Obama is the Messiah,) Tony Rezko (when he’s not in jail,) Jesse Jackson, and on Obama’s block, James and Barbara Bowman, Valerie Jarrett’s parents, in the home in which they raised their family after returning to this country from London. Ms. Jarrett herself now lives just a few blocks away.
Why is this important? Well, there’s an old saying, “tell me who you are by the company you keep.” And while our new president-elect and King of All Media certainly “keeps company” with lots of people who don’t live in and around Hyde Park, and conversely, is not likely to spend time with most of the denizens of the area, given that it’s an oasis of wealthy academia surrounded by, shall we say, less well funded, much less intellectually curious people, some of those Hyde Park dwellers who are in Obama’s inner circle have often proven problematic in the past, and likely, will continue to do so.
Take for example, “unrepentant terrorist,” (say it with me) William Ayers. Obama has continuously tried to distance himself from the radical professor with the now famous “just a guy in my neighborhood” line, even though, from all indications, the two are quite close. During the campaign, Ayers obediently kept his mouth shut and did not contradict Obama’s characterization of their relationship. After the election, however, Ayers has crawled out of hiding, and yet, in his attempts to corroborate his “neighbor’s” assertions, has let a little too much truth slip out. Or, so says the Chicago Tribune. In a new afterword to the re-issue of his book, “Fugitive Days, which he will promote on “Good Morning America” Friday, Ayers writes:
“[W]e had served together on the board of a foundation, knew one another as neighbors and family friends, held an initial fund-raiser at my house, where I’d made a small donation to his earliest political campaign.”
Uh-oh. “Family friends?” Ooops? Or is Ayers just an egomaniac incapable of keeping quiet about anything?
Then, there’s Valerie Jarrett, Obama’s extremely close adviser and very close personal friend to the Obama family. Jarrett, who has been rumored to be a potential replacement for Obama in the Senate, though she says she’s not interested, has more plausibly been said to be in line for a cabinet appointment, possibly in the Department of Housing and Urban Development, or Department of Transportation. With her background, with the Chicago Transit Authority, and as CEO of Habitat Company, which develops “mixed income housing,” such specualtion is not surprising. But it’s the Habitat association that could do her in. Habitat’s goal of eliminating public housing projects by developing privately owned housing projects for government assisted and other low-income families, hasn’t proven to be an overwhelming success. With the involvement of folks like Allison Davis and Tony Rezco and questions surrounding Obama’s assistace in acquiring subsidies for the developers, Jarrett’s background just might not be much of an asset. And now, Judicial Watch is sniffing around. From Standard Newswire:
Judicial Watch, the public interest group that investigates and prosecutes government corruption, announced today that it has obtained documents linking Valerie Jarrett, an advisor to Barack Obama and the co-chairman of the President-Elect’s transition team, to a series of real estate scandals, including several housing projects operated by convicted felon and Obama fundraiser/friend Antoin “Tony” Rezko.
According to the documents obtained by Judicial Watch from the Illinois Secretary of State, Valerie Jarrett served as a board member for several organizations that provided funding and support for Chicago housing projects operated by real estate developers and Obama financial backers Rezko and Allison Davis. (Davis is also Obama’s former boss.) Jarrett was a member of the Board of Directors for the Woodlawn Preservation and Investment Corporation along with several Davis and Rezko associates, as well as the Fund for Community Redevelopment and Revitalization, an organization that worked with Rezko and Davis.
(According to press reports, housing projects operated by Davis and Rezko have been substandard and beset with code violations. The Chicago Sun Times reported that one Rezko-managed housing project was “riddled with problems — including squalid living conditions…lack of heat, squatters and drug dealers.”)
As Chief Executive Officer of the Habitat Company Jarrett also managed a controversial housing project located in Obama’s former state senate district called Grove Parc Plaza. According to the Boston Globe the housing complex was considered “uninhabitable by unfixed problems, such as collapsed roofs and fire damage…In 2006, federal inspectors graded the condition of the complex an 11 on a 100-point scale – a score so bad the buildings now face demolition.” Ms. Jarrett refused to comment to the Globe on the conditions of the complex.
“Like Barack Obama, Valerie Jarrett is a product of the corrupt Chicago political machine. And it is no stretch to say that she was a slumlord,” said Judicial Watch President Tom Fitton. “We have real concerns about Jarrett’s ethics. Washington already has plenty of corruption. We don’t need to import more of it from Chicago.”
Characterized as “the other side of Barack Obama’s brain” by CBS News, Jarrett first met the Obamas seventeen years ago when she offered Michelle Obama a job. While speculation has arisen that Jarrett could take Obama’s place in the U.S. Senate, the New York Times reported that it is more likely she will become a senior White House adviser, thus continuing her long record of being an important influence and mentor to Barack and Michelle Obama.
So, while Mr. Obama awaits his coronation inauguration, which is supposedly going to be witnessed by a million people live, (yeah, right, they said the same thing about the election night Grant Park celebration, turned out to be about 100,000) it might well be safe to bet that getting out of his old neighborhood can’t come fast enough.
Many of Barack Obama’s “former” friends who had been shoved under the proverbial bus for appearances sake, obviously now feel comfortable enough to crawl out from under, now that he has been elected. Seeming none the worse for wear, Louis Farrakhan, William Ayers and Jeremiah Wright, loquacious all, are delightedly spewing forth long pent-up words of praise and frustration. The Chicago Sun-Times is reporting that Minister Farrakhan spoke glowingly about the new president-elect, who he once called “the Messiah,” and explained his recent reticence:
“For nine months, I kept quiet because I saw that the good words that I spoke about this beautiful young man at our Saviours’ Day convention and the way they were misused,” Farrakhan said of Obama. “I decided it would be better for me to just be quiet rather than be drawn into the controversy that was swirling around his pastor, Father Pfleger, and others.”
Farrakhan then added with a smile, “I feel freer today to say the things that are in my heart.
William Ayers, the “unrepentant terrorist” (say it with me) obviously feels pretty free now, too, according to the Washington Post. The day after the election, Ayers complained to WaPo that Obama’s opponents were trying to turn him into a “cartoon character,” even though he and Obama are “not that close.” And they most certainly do not “pal around.”
“Pal around together? What does that mean? Share a milkshake with two straws?” Ayers said in his first interview since the controversy began. “I think my relationship with Obama was probably like thousands of others in Chicago. And, like millions and millions of others, I wish I knew him better.”
Poor Bill. How well can you get to know a guy you share office space with, huh? And it must be hard to sit idly by while your good name is being besmirched by both the “liberal media” and the Republicans. Especially if you’re innocent:
“I didn’t do anything. It’s all guilt by association. They made me into a cartoon character; they threw me up on stage just to pummel me,” Ayers said. “I felt from the beginning that the Obama campaign had to run the campaign and I had to run my life.”
Seems old Bill is making up for lost time, when it comes to the spotlight, though. On Friday, he attended a Northwestern University appearance of Rev. Jeremiah Wright, who was speaking at the university’s first “State of the Black Union” in Cahn Auditorium. It was a make-up date for Wright, who had been dis-invited last spring when the school rescinded it’s offer to issue Wright an honorary degree. Much like Obama dis-invited Wright to his coming-out speech. Anyway, Ayers, obviously scarred by Tom and Jerry during a troubled childhood, repeated his “cartoon” characterization comments to reporters at the event:
“Both Rev. Wright and I were brought up as cartoon characters in this campaign because disinformation and dishonest news,” Ayers said. “I did not suffer as much as he did, but we both got out of it with a certain amount of dignity.”
The Chicago Sun-Times says Wright’s speech was uncontroversial, yet their headline screams, “Wright Rips Media in NU Talk.” The article claims Wright lead off his remarks by “criticizing” the media, then immediately quotes Fox News:
In a recent interview with Fox News, he said he’d been asked if he thought the media had treated him unfairly. His response, he said, was, “Ray Charles could see that.”
Other people under the bus, like Jesse Jackson and Father Michael Pfleger, are probably still going to have to stay there, and though Ayers, particularly, seems blind to the reality, there’s no guarantee that he, Farrakhan, and Wright are going to be allowed to stay out. Maybe that’s what Rev. Jesse was crying about. Maybe he’s the only one who knows the truth.
Barack Obama is, by his own admission, the most clueless man the American public has been acquainted with since Hogan’s Heroes’ Sgt. Schultz never saw contraband being smuggled in and out of Nazi Germany through a tunnel under a POW camp on that old TV show. Obama “didn’t know” William Ayers was a terrorist, he “didn’t know” Tony Rezko was indictable, he “didn’t know” Rev. Jeremiah Wright preached sermons not exactly embraceable by most American Christians. He “knew nuttink!” Now, according to his campaign surrogates, he “didn’t know” his aunt was living illegally in the United States, but as far as he’s concerned, she can just crawl right under the bus with the rest of ‘em. From Politico:
Barack Obama did not know a relative was living in the United States illegally for the past nearly four years prior to today’s Associated Press report, “but obviously believes that any and all appropriate laws be followed,” the campaign said Saturday in a statement.
The Democratic nominee last heard from Zeituni Onyango, who attended his swearing-in ceremony to the U.S. Senate in 2005 and is a half-sister of Obama’s late father, two years ago, when she called to say she was in Boston, the campaign said. Campaign officials said they did not assist her in getting a tourist visa and had not known that she was living in America.
Obama, who also has a tendency to point fingers like a little boy caught arm-deep in the cookie jar insisting upon blaming his imaginary friend, also says “the Republicans did it!” Since Obama never says anything Axelrod didn’t say first, we can treat any statements from either as interchangeable:
“The American people are pretty sensible,” said Obama chief strategist David Axelrod, “and I think they are pretty suspicious of things that are dumped in the marketplace 72 hours before a campaign, so I am not concerned about that.”
Asked whether he was suggesting there were political motives from a Republican administration, Axelrod said: “I am not saying anything at this point.”
Seems like a strange reaction from a group who “benefited” from leaks about “Joe the Plumber” traced back to Obama supporter, Helen Jones-Kelley, who according to the Las Vegas Examiner, now seems to be lying and pointing fingers herself:
The Ohio employee who ran a child support check on Joe the Plumber says a supervisor told her the man contacted the social services agency about his case.
Niekamp told The Columbus Dispatch she is unfamiliar with any policy in which the records of the newly famous are checked.
That sounds like Camp O, alright. First, deny, then blame somebody, anybody, else. If that doesn’t work, just stop talking about it, like Obama surrogate Robert Gibbs is now trying to do about “Auntie-gate:”
Senior strategist Robert Gibbs shut down any line of questioning Thursday when news broke about Obama’s relative, telling reporters, “I’m not going to get into it.”
“I do know him because I taught at the University of Chicago,” Obama said. “And he is Palestinian. And I do know him and I have had conversations. He is not one of my advisors; he’s not one of my foreign policy people. His kids went to the Lab school where my kids go as well. He is a respected scholar, although he vehemently disagrees with a lot of Israel’s policy.
“To pluck out one person who I know and who I’ve had a conversation with who has very different views than 900 of my friends and then to suggest that somehow that shows that maybe I’m not sufficiently pro-Israel, I think, is a very problematic stand to take,” Obama said. “So, we gotta be careful about guilt by association.”
If you said William Ayers, you blew it. He’s a terrorist, not a Palestinian. According to ABC News’ Jake Tapper, Obama was explaining his relationship with Rashid Khalidi at a May 22 appearance before a group of Jewish voters in Florida. This is what Obama said about Ayers in the ABC Philadelphia debate as reported by Media Matters:
George, but this is an example of what I’m talking about. This is a guy who lives in my neighborhood, who’s a professor of English in Chicago who I know and who I have not received some official endorsement from. He’s not somebody who I exchange ideas from on a regular basis.
And the notion that somehow as a consequence of me knowing somebody who engaged in detestable acts 40 years ago, when I was 8 years old, somehow reflects on me and my values doesn’t make much sense, George.
Ben Smith of Politico reported in February that it was David Axelrod who said this about Obama/Ayers:
“Bill Ayers lives in his neighborhood. Their kids attend the same school,” he said. “They’re certainly friendly, they know each other, as anyone whose kids go to school together.”
Seems Ben had raised the Ayers question in an article a few days before. Good excuses are hard to come by, might as well recycle ‘em.
Note: the Tapper piece explores a McCain/Khalidi connection which Camp Johnny Mac doesn’t seem to deny, they just claim it’s beside the point.
Asked to respond to this seeming contradiction, McCain-Palin spokesman Michael Goldfarb writes, “It’s long been clear that Obama and Khalidi have a close relationship — that they were frequent dinner companions. It is another in a series of questionable associations, but it is not the focus of our request that the LA Times release this tape. It’s clear from the Times story that the evening featured speeches that were anti-Semitic in tone and anti-Israel in nature. As our initial statement said, ‘This campaign wants to know how Barack Obama responded to that hate-speech, whether he was mingling with Ayers, who he once described as ‘just a guy in my neighborhood,’ and anything else that might be of interest to voters now deciding who to support in this election.’”
African Press International says they have tapes of Michelle Obama having a hissy fit about them and their coverage of her husband’s campaign, where she lets it slip that he was adopted by his stepfather, and so what? Supposedly, she said lots of other things Camp O would rather not have people hear, and according to API, they’ve gone to great lengths to see that these tapes never see the light of day. Also according to API, they are just as determined to see that the tapes are released, and have entered into an agreement with FOX News, the terms of which apparently include a clause that FOX will not confirm the deal until 15 minutes before airtime. Now, API says, due to phenomenal pressure, they’re revealing the names of the FOX reporters involved: Sean Hannity and Greta Van Susteren. You now know what I know and here’s how I know it, straight from the horse’s mouth, so to speak:
Many have been wondering about what will happen to the Michelle Obama tape, now that API has received death threats for planning to have the tape aired. Death threats mounted after API refused an offer of 3 million US dollars by Senator Obama’s Campaign manager.
There has been speculations that Fox News may deny that there is an agreement already reached that gives the them permission to air the tape. The public who are aware of the existence of a tape should be aware that some elements in our society would not like the message in the tape to come out.
The agreement stipulates that any information on the day and hour the tape will be aired will only be announce 15 minutes to the airing time. This was agreed upon to avoid any pressure being directed to Fox News Network by individuals who would want to get the details about the tape in question.
The airing of the tape can take place any time from this day and due to its sensitivity, people who will inquire from Fox News and API for details will either get a no comment answer or that there is no agreement on the table.
We are aware of the fact that some people made inquiries today by emailing or telephoning Fox News and may have been disappointed with the answers they got. API is not here to mislead anyone and takes the responsibility to inform�its loyal readers�that the tape will be aired unless pressure wins over�any of the parties involved, of which case that will amount to a�breach of contract. �Such a thing�is unacceptable because API is committed to let the American people get the information in the tape and judge for themselves what value it may have in their political lives.
Although the parties had agreed that the particular shows going to air the tapes should not be made public before�15 minutes to airing of the tapes, public pressure has forced us to make this revelation earlier than we should.� Both parties, API and Fox are in agreement that no further details will be released on the subject.
�While we struggle to have the Michelle Obama tape, the McCain camp is struggling to have another tape that has information relevant to the campaign. The taped conversation has Mr obama when he was dining with friends considered radicals and supporters of terrorism.
The second tape in question is of a dinner for Rashid Khalidi, attended by the Obamas and possibly by William Ayers and Bernadine/Bernadette Dohrn, among others. The Los Angeles Times reported on the dinner in April, and have confirmed possession of a videotape of the evening’s event, which they refuse to release to the public.
Now that the Ashley Todd story has been disproved, Obama supporters seem to be celebrating anew, curiously rationalizing not only that, since this story about a mythical Obama supporter is false, all stories about Obama must be similarly false, and that if any blame is to be assigned, it’s to John McCain. On some planet, in some universe far, far away, that might make sense, but where I sit, it’s pretty ridiculous, so I’ll leave that alone.
Instead, I’ll ask the question that has intrigued me for a long time, but doesn’t seem to bother people who follow Barack Obama at all. What if all, or any, of the allegations that have been made against the Senator turn out to be true? It’s possible, none of them have actually been factually proven to be wrong, rather, the available facts have been spun to Obama’s advantage. This, in itself, is curious.
It seems that nowadays “rumor” and “conspiracy theory” are negative characterizations about anything potentially affecting Barack Obama. Yet, the truth is, all conspiracy theories are based on rumor until they’re proven. Watergate was a rumor, Monica Lewinski was a rumor, John Edwards’ affair was a rumor. Once the facts were revealed, a conspiracy to cover-up the truth became obvious. That’s where the word “cover-up” came from.
But, all rumors about Barack Obama are “evil lies” designed to derail the noble aspirations of a near-saintly, yet, simultaneously, traditionally oppressed, black man. What the fuck? We know for a fact that he is a liar. Every step of the Rev. Wright way, Obama lied. He never told any more truth than he needed to to get away with his lie, in fact, he even gave a forty-five minute national speech designed to make every American citizen complicit in his lies; but those devoted to him still see no problem. And that wasn’t the end of his lying. It wasn’t until Rev. Wright told one unforgivably inconvenient truth about him that Obama stopped lying and admitted that Rev. Wright didn’t mean that much to him, after all. Because you see, the biggest lie, and the one Rev. Wright objected to, was that Jeremiah Wright was ever really important to Obama.
“He’s a politician.”
That was Jeremiah Wright’s sin; telling the world that Obama was not “more than a politician” to him. Did Wright ever refer to Obama as a “devout Christian” or a “cherished member” of his “flock”? Why did he make such a big deal about classifying him by his job description and not by his status in Wright’s church? On March 27, 2008, Huffington Post did post a March 11, 2007, letter from Wright to the New York Times claiming that he had indeed said those things about Obama in an interview, but the NYT writer chose not to use those quotes. You would think that by that time, Wright’s support of Obama would be so well established, HuffPo wouldn’t need to post a year-old letter to illustrate it.
“Ya better watch him.”
Every black person who has spent any time in a black church has heard a black preacher utter those words as a warning against everything from Mr. High Cholesterol Foods, to Mr. Street-Slick Hustler, to the Devil himself. “He’s gon’ getcha, if ya don’t wach out. Watch ‘im.” That’s what Rev. Wright’s comments to the National Press Club sounded like to me:
Politicians say what they say and do what they do based on electability, based on sound bites, based on polls, Huffington, whoever’s doing the polls. Preachers say what they say because they’re pastors. They have a different person to whom they’re accountable.
As I said, whether he gets elected or not, I’m still going to have to be answerable to God November 5th and January 21st. That’s what I mean. I do what pastors do. He does what politicians do.
“Watch ‘im.”
But this isn’t about Jeremiah Wright, or about the persistent “Muslim” rumors, this is about Barack Obama being a liar. Who cares if he is a Muslim, but why would he lie about it? There’s no record of his being baptized, since leaving his church in return for Hillary Clinton’s Michigan votes he hasn’t joined another, there’s enough evidence of his being enrolled in Indonesian schools as “Muslim,” he’s the one who said the Muslim call to prayer was “one of the prettiest sounds on Earth,” and his Freudian, “my Muslim faith” slip is enough to give one pause. Given that he is a liar, why is the media so reluctant to investigate any of this fully? On Oct. 20, Newsmax reported that their investigation indicates the “smears” Camp O is so dedicated to fighting, are largely based on fact. Of course, the Obots will dismiss such an article out of hand since it’s Newsmax, and unflattering. However, if you’re convinced there’s nothing to the “smears” why object to having them fully, instead of superficially, investigated, and thus, exposed as the lies you believe them to be?
What accounts for the media’s reluctance to investigate Obama fairly? Journalist Michael S. Malone admits to being “ashamed” to even call himself a journalist anymore due to the one-sided, biased coverage of this year’s election:
The traditional media is playing a very, very dangerous game. With its readers, with the Constitution, and with its own fate.
The sheer bias in the print and television coverage of this election campaign is not just bewildering, but appalling. And over the last few months I’ve found myself slowly moving from shaking my head at the obvious one-sided reporting, to actually shouting at the screen of my television and my laptop computer.
But worst of all, for the last couple weeks, I’ve begun — for the first time in my adult life — to be embarrassed to admit what I do for a living. A few days ago, when asked by a new acquaintance what I did for a living, I replied that I was “a writer”, because I couldn’t bring myself to admit to a stranger that I’m a journalist.
Many people will attribute everything to race. Some will chalk it up to the partisanship of the “liberal media.” I think the Obama campaign’s successful “Messiah-zation” of the candidate is the more likely reason.
A Light Will Shine Down
A website called Obamamessiah chronicles the many times early in the primaries that Obama used a variation of the “light will shine down” “joke” in his stump speech. Every time he made the statement, it was reported, sometimes mockingly, sometimes admiringly, but always reinforcing the “Messiah” narrative. On January 9, 2008, The Washington Post ran this quote:
“I am going to try to be so persuasive, so that those of you who are still wavering…will suddenly come to the conclusion — a light beam will shine through — will light you up — and you will experience an epiphany — I have to vote for Barack!”
“A light will shine”…”epiphany?” Can anyone argue that this was not deliberately messianic? “If you believe,” “this is the moment,” “yes we can,” “hope,” deliberately oft-repeated in sermons disguised as speeches, these phrases plant specific seeds in the minds of those receptive to serving as vessels. They’re even more scary if the candidate really believes them, himself. At a fundraiser in May, 2007, MensVogue reported this quote:
When Morgan Freeman comes over to greet Obama, the senator begins bowing down both hands in worship. “This guy was president before I was,” says Obama, referring to Freeman’s turn in Deep Impact and, clearly, getting a little ahead of his own bio. Next, a nod to Bruce Almighty: “This guy was God before I was.” (Okay, more than a little ahead.)
Once the “messiah” seed takes root, criticism becomes unacceptable. “Don’t Swiftboat me,” becomes “Don’t Swiftboat Jesus.” While some dismiss such observations as over-reactions to what they consider to be obvious jokes, the reality is a little more complex.
“Many a true word spoken in a joke.”
My mother liked to speak in homespun, old school idioms like that. Though she was very young when I was born, she embraced the traditions passed down from generation-to-generation of African American women known as “mother wit,” kind of a cross between common sense and women’s intuition. Another favorite saying of hers was, “Child, don’t be no fool.” When acolytes are commonly described as “KoolAid drinkers,” the messianic, cult-like status of the one being served is no longer in question. Believers were so convinced of Jim Jones’ godliness, they followed him to a foreign country to their deaths. No amount of pleading admonitions by fearful loved ones deterred these true believers, true faith trumps common sense.
In the case of Barack Obama, his god-like, rock star (same thing) status has insulated him from scrutiny. That is the purpose. Dubious associations, legitimate criticisms, in-your-face flaws and weaknesses are not only forgiven, but defended, due to the flat out refusal of the faithful worshippers to entertain such heresy against their god. “There are none so blind as those who will not see,” is a particularly apt description of Obama followers; it’s not really Biblical, either.
Therefore, when it comes to Tony Rezko and Obama’s proven lies about their “boneheaded” realtionship, and William Ayers, and Obama’s obvious lies about their relationship, Obots don’t see. Videos like this one, might as well not exist:
When it comes to the fact that Obama refuses to show his true birth certificate, even to a judge, preferring to offer the less official Certification of Live Birth, which contains much less information and may be forged, devout Obamabots question the legitimacy of those making the request. Why? Why not show the original document, easily obtainable from the State of Hawaii Bureau of Vital Statistics, and be done with it? If he is indeed the son of Frank Marshall Davis, why not say so. What difference does it make if Andy Martin is a kook? And how does attacking a website like African Press International’s claims of a phone call from Michelle Obama alluding to her husband’s adoptive status mitigate against the truth? Even if it’s a hoax, that doesn’t answer the basic citizenship questions at the heart of all the allegations.
The bottom line is, if Barack Obama is elected November 4, he will not get a record contract, he will become President of the United States. Any of the allegations against, and questions surrounding, Senator Obama would be enough to get him kicked off American Idol; should our standards for the highest office in the land be less? This is not a reality show, this is reality. If any or all of the “smears” turn out to be facts, how will those who blindly vote for him justify their devotion? Maybe before we cast our votes in “solidarity” to “the brother,” or in “hope” for a “better future,” maybe we should honestly assess who Barack Obama is today, and was yesterday. Because if any of the “smears” are true, what happens after he is elected will be on your heads.
Barack Obama likes to tout his community organizing and associations except when it becomes inconvenient to do so. When they can be used to bolster his weak resume, or counter-mock those who ridicule him, he proudly trots out his “experience.” Yet when anyone questions him about Ayers or ACORN, as John McCain did in last night’s debate, Obama runs as far way as he can semi-credibly get, as fast as his Mac Daddy long legs can take him. How can the fact that Obama “was only eight years old,” when William Ayers committed the crimes he still has not repented, excuse his subsequent association with him as a grown man? Repeating the same mantra whenever questioned about the issue not only underscores the ridiculousness of the denial, it soon becomes tedious. The same is true for the ACORN affiliation. Any self-professed “community organizer” who would try to distance himself from the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now, either thinks his detractors are stupid, or is stupid, himself.
Now, unlike people such as Michelle Malkin, I don’t have a giant bowling ball sized ACORN stuck up my butt in my craw. I’m just not sure this organization is the spawn from hell some folks make it out to be. It’s also doubtful that they’re overly effective at any rate, since if they were, Democrats might actually win presidential elections once in a while. And as far as being significantly responsible for the housing crisis is concerned, I’ve already gone on record here, here, and here with my feelings about the unlikelyhood of that.
Yet, Obama is definitely tied to ACORN and he simply cannot credibly claim pride in his community organizing roots without embracing the group. It is common knowledge that Obama was directly involved with Project Vote in Chicago. Chicago Mag.com, January, 1993:
The most effective minority voter registration drive in memory was the result of careful handiwork by Project Vote!, the local chapter of a not-for-profit national organization. “It was the most efficient campaign I have seen in my 20 years in politics,” says Sam Burrell, alderman of the West Side’s 29th Ward and a veteran of many registration drives.At the head of this effort was a little-known 31-year-old African-American lawyer, community organizer, and writer: Barack Obama.
edit
Within a few months, Obama, a tall, affable workaholic, had recruited staff and volunteers from black churches, community groups, and politicians. He helped train 700 deputy registrars, out of a total of 11,000 citywide.
On ACORN’s front page at their website their affiliation with Project Vote is touted right under their denunciation of McCain’s “attacks.”
The goal of ACORN and Project Vote’s voter registration drives is to empower low-income and minority communities by giving them a voice in the political process. ACORN hopes that expanding the electorate will result in more candidates who appeal to historically underrepresented voting populations.
On Project Vote’s homepage, the ACORN story is the fourth one down. In another article, this one from The Chicago Reader, 1995, we have mention of the Woods Fund being involved with the Developing Communities Project, as well as an Obama connection with ACORN:
Woods was the first foundation to underwrite Obama’s work with DCP. Now that he’s on the Woods board, Rudd says, “He is among the most hard-nosed board members in wanting to see results. He wants to see our grants make change happen–not just pay salaries.”
edit
Another strong supporter of Obama’s work–as an organizer, as a lawyer, and now as a candidate–is Madeline Talbott, lead organizer of the feisty ACORN community organization, a group that’s a thorn in the side of most elected officials. “I can’t repeat what most ACORN members think and say about politicians. But Barack has proven himself among our members. He is committed to organizing, to building a democracy. Above all else, he is a good listener, and we accept and respect him as a kindred spirit, a fellow organizer.”
Obama continues his organizing work largely through classes for future leaders identified by ACORN and the Centers for New Horizons on the south side.
The Washington Post has been debunking the Obama/Ayers connection on his behalf since February of this year, but given the early endorsement by the Woods Fund Obama enjoyed, makes you wonder whether he may have been responsible for Ayers’ later involvement, not the other way around. This website, Discover The Networks, claims Project Vote is the voter mobilization arm of ACORN, and claims both groups were instrumental in the implementation of the Motor Voter law Obama referred to in last night’s debate.
Obama has tried the same “with ‘em while agin’ ‘em” tactics regarding his blackness. Yes, he wants credit for being black enough for black voters to empathize with him and reward him with our votes, yet he also wants to keep us at enough distance to re-assure nervous white voters that he is not an agent of black empowerment. He will even go so far as to denounce the relevance of our continued struggle, chastise us for our lack of responsibility, and exploit our legacy, all for his own political gain.
There are not only just too many coincidences to explain away, the connections are so obvious they seem to speak for themselves. They speak for Obama, too, but when he deigns to speak of them, all too often, he’s lying. And it’s beginning to seem that his lies just might catch up to him.
UPDATE: This website suggests that Obama and Ayers might have crossed paths many times when they both had offices in the same building.
Bill Ayers and Barack Obama shared an office. Ayers’ Small Schools Workshop, the one Obama directed all that money too is located at 115 S. Sangamon Street, Chicago, Illinois 60607 [Note the link is to a year 2000 version of their website].
edit
In 1998, the address for the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, where Obama presumably worked, was 115 S. Sangamon Street, Chicago, Illinios 60607. Here’s a copy of their 1998 tax return with that address.
Even John Grisham would have a hard time selling the events of the 2008 Democratic election as a novel, but if anybody could, it would probably be him. Lord knows, he’d have a lot to work with. Think about it, a political thriller about an African American candidate coming up out of nowhere, with the mega-buck backing of unknown benefactors hidden by the illusion of unprecedented internet support, to secure the nomination even though he was resoundingly rejected by more than half of his party. Wow! Add the element of a shady Chicago cabal of disparate entities hellbent on remaking the American government and moving the seat of power from Washington D.C. to their home city, through the restructuring of the banking industry, bringing down the global economy in the process. Exploiting a rift in the party, a coup of sorts could be executed, resulting in the overthrow of the party’s ruling family with help from the candidate vanquished early in the last election. Throw in a little organized crime, a few ‘60’s radicals, some local machine politics and the greed and corruption of a major political party, and you’ve got a best-seller on your hands. Wrap the whole thing around a civil court case, and let Mr. Grisham loose. The fictional consequences would present no real-life repercussions and it would be a whole lot more entertaining than what we’re experiencing now.
Who might the cast of characters in this fictional drama be?
Barack Obama – Charismatic, up-and-coming, Harvard educated, junior senator from Illinois; this character would overwhelmingly appeal to the under-represented black community, who could then easily be manipulated into supporting “one of their own.” Hiding a radical socialist agenda under a glib persona, he would be slickly packaged and sold as a messianic redeemer of the underclasses. Coupled with the support of the far-left academic intellectual community, the appearance of a “base” could be built, allowing the candidate to be skillfully marketed, through the use of the internet. Preaching a “non-partisan” platform, unlimited corporate funding could then be funneled to the candidate’s campaign under the guise of massive small donor, across-the-board, grassroots support.
Michelle Obama – First Lady wannabe wife of the candidate, more radical than even her husband, this politically ambitious mother of two, often mistaken as the power-behind-the-throne, relishes the opportunity to further her extremist ideas that her husband’s candidacy presents, though less successful at masking them than he. Fashioning herself a modern-day Jacqueline Kennedy, she would become as well known for her more than occasional public lapses into radicalism as for her sense of style.
David Axelrod – Well-known political kingmaker, the reigning “king of Astroturfing” as he is known, this PR man extraordinaire would spectacularly succeed in his effort to “make a president” out of whole cloth. Known for shaping public opinion by creating the illusion of grassroot support (astroturfing) for his public- and private-sector clients through his two separate firms, Axelrod would plot the course of the candidate’s campaign, writing his TelePrompTer-read speeches, designing campaign strategy exploiting loopholes in existing party rules, and creating a Beatlemania-like atmosphere through the use of artfully stage-managed public appearances. Staying primarily in the background, Axelrod would only appear publicly to explain what Obama really meant (WORM) in order to extinguish one of numerous fires inevitably resulting from trying to pull off the daunting prospect of deluding the country and the world.
William Ayers – unrepentant ’60’s radical bomber turned respected university professor, the combination terrorist/academic/fat cat provides a bridge to the candidates multiple bases of support. Hiding his unreleased radicalism in plain sight, this son of privilege and original architect of the grand scheme to overthrow the government provides entree into the right circles for his hand-picked Manchurian candidate. He also ghost-writes the candidate’s bestselling first memoir which later serves as the basis for the candidate’s legitimacy.
Bernadine/Bernadette Dorhn – even more radical wife of subversive Ayers, this frustrated still mad bomber serves as marriage broker for the candidate by introducing him to her law firm protege before re-entering academia.
Jamie Dimon – CEO JP Morgan Chase, member of candidate’s finance committee, said to be on the short list for Treasury Secretary in candidate’s administration, Dimon turns public humiliation for being unceremoniously dumped by his mentor at Citigroup into a triumph of revenge by heading up Chicago’s BankOne through a merger with JPM after a sixteen month layoff to plot and sulk. The resulting pissing contest between the two firms leads to Dimon’s apparent victory in the market restructuring game.
This motley crew of characters, plotting to move the government’s base of operations to Chicago, could consolidate their political and financial power once Wall Street and the global market has been destroyed, and their candidate has been elected. Though I’m not at all knowledgeable about economics, maybe a Dow Jones/Chicago Mercantile Exchange power shift might be an interesting plot twist.
For over a year, Hannity’s concerns were met with ridicule as mere racist right-wing rantings. After Wright’s sermons ignited a firestorm in March 08, Barack Obama denounced him. From HuffPo’s transcript, dated the 14th:
The statements that Rev. Wright made that are the cause of this controversy were not statements I personally heard him preach while I sat in the pews of Trinity or heard him utter in private conversation. When these statements first came to my attention, it was at the beginning of my presidential campaign. I made it clear at the time that I strongly condemned his comments. But because Rev. Wright was on the verge of retirement, and because of my strong links to the Trinity faith community, where I married my wife and where my daughters were baptized, I did not think it appropriate to leave the church.
Notice Obama doesn’t mention being baptized himself. On the 15th, Jake Tapper questioned Obama’s version of events:
But according to a New York Times story from a year ago, the Obama campaign dis-invited Wright from delivering a public invocation at Obama’s candidacy announcement.
“Fifteen minutes before Shabbos I get a call from Barack,” Wright told the Times. “One of his members had talked him into uninviting me.”
In a phone call with Wright, Obama cited a Rolling Stone story, “The Radical Roots of Barack Obama,” (the name of which has curiously been changed on the RS website) and told him, according to Wright, “You can get kind of rough in the sermons, so what we’ve decided is that it’s best for you not to be out there in public.”
Three days later, Obama threw Wright under the bus:
After claiming Wright was not his spiritual adviser, and even if he was, Obama never heard him say any of those bad things, and even if he did, he didn’t agree with him, and even if he did, he couldn’t disown him, and even if he could, he couldn’t leave his church, the bottom line is he was, he did, and he could.
Now, the same thing is playing out in the Ayers case. Obama doesn’t know him, at least, not well. Months ago, the issue was raised in the infamous Philadelphia debate Obama fared so poorly in against Hillary Clinton. As McCain is being characterized as employing a desperate “Hail Mary” unfair tactic against St. Obama, Clinton was similarly lampooned in the media. That was the first time we heard the “just a guy in my neighborhood” excuse. Now, the right-wing guys are challenging Obama’s Ayers excuses as they did his Wright ones. Predictably, Obama has leaned on the “neighborhood guy” thing as far as it would take him, which was to the “I didn’t know about him” stage, then to the “we’re not that close,” phase of “Obama Denial, 101.”
If history is any sort of teacher, we won’t have to wait long for the “Greatest Really Important Ayers Speech Ever.”
According to Politico, Republican vice-presidential nominee, Sarah Palin, says Barack Obama is lying about his associations with William Ayers. Doggonit.
“Barack Obama hasn’t told the American people the total truth about that, about his association with Ayers,” Palin said on conservative radio host Laura Ingraham’s show. “Doggonit, he fails to tell the American people with candor and with truthfulness what his associations are and we have to know.”
In the same article, Obama retaliated predictably:
“I’ll repeat again what I’ve said many times. This is a guy who engaged in some despicable acts 40 years ago when I was eight years old. By the time I met him, 10 or 15 years ago, he was a college professor of education at the University of Illinois,” Obama said.
I call bullshit, Barack. I believe Sarah. Here’s the thing; since neither Obama or Ayers is forthcoming with relevant information, one must dig. And that’s a problem right there. Why is it that trying find out the truth about simple things takes so much work? Like, when, exactly, did Barack Obama graduate from Columbia? This story in The Nation, says 1985:
In 1985, freshly graduated from Columbia University and working for a New York business consultant, Barack Obama decided to become a community organizer. Though he liked the idea, he didn’t understand what the job involved, and his inquiries turned up few opportunities.
Obama says he was two years out of college, though when he became a community organizer:
I was just two years out of college when I first moved to the South Side of Chicago to become a community organizer.
Okay, so as many sources attest, he graduated Columbia in 1983. What did he do for two years? The Nation says he didn’t know what a community organizer was, CBS News quotes his autobiography, Dreams From My Father:
Even Obama didn’t know when he first gave it a try back in 1985. “When classmates in college asked me just what it was that a community organizer did, I couldn’t answer them directly,” Obama wrote in his memoir, Dreams from My Father. “Instead, I’d pronounce on the need for change. Change in the White House, where Reagan and his minions were carrying on their dirty deeds. Change in the Congress, compliant and corrupt. Change in the mood of the country, manic and self-absorbed. Change won’t come from the top, I would say. Change will come from a mobilized grass roots.”
So, two years out of college, he doesn’t know what a community organizer is, but he knows he wants to be one? Right. How does he know “change” comes from “grassroots?” Maybe the year he spent community organizing in Harlem might have something to do with it. From the New York Times:
Mr. Obama graduated in 1983. In his memoir, he says he had decided to become a community organizer but could not persuade anyone to hire him. So he found “more conventional work for a year” to pay off his student loans.
edit
After about a year, he was hired by the New York Public Interest Research Group, a nonprofit organization that promotes consumer, environmental and government reform. He became a full-time organizer at City College in Harlem, paid slightly less than $10,000 a year to mobilize student volunteers.
Mr. Obama says he spent three months “trying to convince minority students at City College about the importance of recycling” — a description that surprised some former colleagues. They said that more “bread-and-butter issues” like mass transit, higher education, tuition and financial aid were more likely the emphasis at City College.
So, he spent a few months doing a job he wanted, but didn’t know anything about, doing something no one can remember him doing the way he says he did it. This article chronicles Obama’s journey this way:
A year after graduating from Columbia, Obama spotted an intriguing help-wanted ad in The New York Times. The Calumet Community Religious Conference (ccrc), a group that aimed to convert the black churches of Chicago’s South Side into agents of social change, was looking for a community organizer to run the group’s inner-city arm, the Developing Communities Project (DCP). Obama soon arranged to meet in New York with the organizer heading up the job search.
Obama had spent the previous year on a fruitless quest. He worked briefly for a Ralph Nader outfit in Harlem teaching college kids about recycling and then on a losing assemblyman’s race in Brooklyn.
Now, the meeting was in New York, after he worked on somebody’s political campaign. Obama’s webpage bio doesn’t mention anything between Columbia and Chicago:
Barack’s father eventually returned to Kenya, and Barack grew up with his mother in Hawaii, and for a few years in Indonesia. Later, he moved to New York, where he graduated from Columbia University in 1983.
The College Years
Remembering the values of empathy and service that his mother taught him, Barack put law school and corporate life on hold after college and moved to Chicago in 1985, where he became a community organizer with a church-based group seeking to improve living conditions in poor neighborhoods plagued with crime and high unemployment.
Why are the two years between 1983 and 1985 so glossed over that even national magazines make the leap from college to community organizing in Chicago as though they were contemporaneous? A UAW.org profile mentions Harlem, but says community organizing came in Chicago:
After graduating from Columbia University, Obama worked for a Harlem environmental and consumer advocacy organization in New York City. In 1985 he was hired in Chicago as a community organizer for $10,000 and a used car.
Obama’s links to local school councils began more than 20 years ago, when they were first being created. His South Side community organizing group, the Developing Communities Project, supported the 1988 reform act that created the councils.
DCP was part of the Alliance for Better Schools, or ABC Coalition in 1988, which, at some point was chaired by, if not founded by William Ayers. From Wikipedia:
Ayers is also listed by name in the last column of the graphic above. While there are no straight lines here, to anything, there’s enough missing to raise questions, which to this point, are unanswered. So when Sarah Palin says Obama is not telling the truth about his association with Ayers, she’s right.
Where’s the outrage about the William Ayers/Barack Obama association? Not from concerned voters, from William Ayers? Shouldn’t a guy who’s having his name dragged through the mud scream in protest? You’d expect a truly reformed, former radical to tell anybody who would listen, “Hey, can it with the terrorist stuff!” I’m a respected academic; a professor of education, for Chrissakes, with a wife and grown kids! Leamme alone, willya? So, I know the guy, so what?”
But that’s not the kind of response we get from Ayers or Obama. Ayers refuses to discuss it at all, and Obama avoids the issue as much as possible. When Obama’s forced to respond, he says something stupid, like “He’s an English professor who lives in my neighborhood.” Just the fact that they both work at the same university puts them in a little more proximity than that. And neither of them are English professors, by the way.
Obama’s surrogates are even stupider. In response to questions about Obama and Ayers’ supposed “first meeting” at a political coming out party in Ayers and his wife, Bernadette Dohrn’s home in 1995, David Axelrod actually tried to pass this bit of whimsy off as truth:
“When he went he certainly didn’t know the history,” chief Obama strategist David Axelrod told CNN – arguing for the first time since the story surfaced early this year that Obama was unaware of Ayers’ past.
Hello?
Exactly when was that first meeting anyway, Dave? I guess when you’ve “astroturfed” half the country into believing a guy whose profession is running for a different office every few years is ready to be president, you start to believe people will buy your bullshit as milk chocolate if you say so. This is not the first time Axelrod has said something in Martian to explain Obama/Ayers. In February, he told Politico’s Ben Smith:
“Bill Ayers lives in his neighborhood. Their kids attend the same school,” he said. “They’re certainly friendly, they know each other, as anyone whose kids go to school together.”
When it was pointed out that Ayers kids are damned near Obama’s age, their campaign tried to sell Ben this:
There’s been a bit of confusion about Axelrod’s line on the kids, who — as the Guardian’s Daniel Nasaw noted — aren’t the same age. Obama’s kids went go the the University of Chicago Lab Schools, where Ayers kids, who are much older, had gone. However, Bernardine Dohrn is still active at the school, and an Obama aide said that was the connection.
So, in cleaning up the “kids in school” cow pie, Camp O admits to a previously unreported Obama family/ Ayers family connection.
Then he got a call from Jerry Kellman, an organizer working on Chicago’s far South Side for a community group based in the churches of the region, an expanse of white, black and Latino blue-collar neighborhoods that were reeling from the steel-mill closings. Kellman was looking for an organizer for the new Developing Communities Project (DCP), which would focus on black city neighborhoods.
William Ayers, associate professor of education at the University of Illinois at Chicago; co-director of the Small Schools Workshop; co-director of the Chicago Forum for School Change—an affiliate of the Coalition of Essential Schools;[20] chairman of the Alliance for Better Chicago Schools (ABCs) coalition;[21][22] former Chicago assistant deputy mayor for education (1989–1990);[22] brother of John Ayers, executive director (1994–2004) of Leadership for Quality Education (an affiliate of the Civic Committee of the Commercial Club of Chicago) and former associate director (1987–1994) of the Civic Committee of the Commercial Club of Chicago; son of Thomas Ayers, former president (1964–1980), chairman and CEO (1973–1980) of Commonwealth Edison and former vice president (1980) of the Chicago School Board (my emphasis)
So, while it’s obvious these two guys go way back, if it’s innocent, why not just ‘fess up and be done with it? But, hey, the same could be said about Obama’s official birth certificate, or baptismal records, or college transcripts, or medical reports; we haven’t seen any of those things, either. Makes you wonder, what’s the big deal? Why do people have to go to court to get access to documents you’d think the “transcendent candidate for hope and change and transparent governing” would be only too happy to lay his cards on the table about? Only, Obama doesn’t just keep his cards close to the vest, he’s stuck half the deck up his sleeve to the elbow.
Now you’ve got this Barackaphile Robert Gibbs guy, mocking what the Obama boyz call “guilt-by-association smears,” ranting at Sean Hannity about Obama basher, Andy Martin, making the claim that since Hannity has interviewed Martin, who has been accused of anti-Semtism, that makes Hannity an anti-Semite, too. The fact that unlike Obama and Ayers, Hannity probably doesn’t even know where Martin lives, let alone visit the man, escapes these geniuses.
Wow! 3 out of 4 of the ladies of The View (Joy Behar was not there, Sheri Shepherd was) think the Ayers-Obama connection is A-Okay. I mean, he’s not a terrorist now, for Goodness’ sakes, sheeesh! But, in this article I found from January 27, of this year, a website called Working Life, published by the Labor Research Association, takes psychic exception to Whoopi, Inc. There’s lots of good stuff there, most of which we already know, but it lays things out before Rezko was convicted, and months before this current Ayers stuff has fit the fan.
But behind the story, the federal case against Rezko is based on a detailed picture of the web of influence Rezko and his cohorts exerted over state agencies managing Illinois’ financial assets. Barack Obama’s political career was spun out in tandem with this Rezko apparatus, particularly through Rezko’s partner and Obama’s former boss, Allison S. Davis.
Start with U.S. Attorney Patrick Fitzgerald’s December 21, 2007 proffer in the Rezko case, with its charges of extortion and kickbacks taken in 2004 from the Illinois Teachers’ Retirement System: $10,000 from this crime was channeled to a “political candidate” not named by the prosecutor. The fact that Rezko was on the finance committee of Obama’s campaign for U.S. Senate, and the other facts in the case, make it clear that Barack Obama was the candidate in question.
Though Ayers is not mentioned by name, the “Hyde Park Mafia” is:
The “Hyde Park Mafia” purportedly backing Obama’s rise was centered in the University’s campaign for school reform, along the lines of the Ford Foundation and British efforts to corral American slum residents into blind, self-defeating local politics.
This pdf report on The University of Chicago website, (U of C is in Hyde Park) concerning the first three years of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, entitled “Improving Chicago Schools,” does acknowledge “Bill Ayers” as a founding member. The connections between Ayers, Rezko and Obama have been explored in many places, notably Evelyn Pringle’s Board Games, which have been summarized here and here, among lots of others.
Talk about a “silly season.” Barack Obama’s favorite line for characterizing political attacks against him by his opponents appears to apply especially well to him. Angered by Republican VP nominee Sarah Palin’s “palling around with terrorists” comments, the Obama campaign is threatening once again, to take off the gloves and attack back. This time, they’re focusing their now famous laser-like offensive intensity on John Mccain’s decades old involvement with the “Keating 5,” a group of politicians accused of influence peddling. Camp O will be making the case in a 13 minute internet video scheduled to air at noon, that McCain’s behavior in that instance is not only indicative of his inability to handle the current economic crisis, it laid the groundwork for it.
“I was judged eventually, after three years, of using, quote, poor judgment, and I agree with that assessment.”
Meanwhile, AP-Yahoo News, in it’s “rapidly-becoming-famous” ridiculously illogical defense of Obama’s associations with radical William Ayers, quotes an Obama surrogate calling Palin a “fluffy bunny.” Way to get tough, guys:
“It’s a giant changing of the subject,” said Jenny Backus, a Democratic strategist. “The problem is the messenger. If you want to start throwing fire bombs, you don’t send out the fluffy bunny to do it. I think people don’t take Sarah Palin seriously.”
“Fluffy bunny?” Okaaaay. Maybe you shouldn’t send a “fluffy bunny” to throw firebombs, but you certainly shouldn’t use the phrase “fire bomb” in a defense of a guy who’s proud of setting them. And, you might not want to bring up a case implicating your own party in economic shenanigans as an indictment against your opponent. Ya think?
But AP’s Douglass K. Daniel goes one (or 20) step further by accusing Palin of what the New York Times calls “racism without racists,” or subliminal racism, in bringing to mind post 9/11 images of “dark skinned radical Muslims”. According to Daniel, any mention of terrorism is an attempt to smear Obama with racially based xenophobia. But, the terrorist in Palin’s comments was Ayers, not Obama, and that terrorism association is more likely to bring to mind Timothy McVeigh than Mohammed Atta. Unless Dougie knows something the rest of us don’t about Obama’s religion and extra-curricular activities, the racism charge is more than a stretch, it’s a trip down the rabbit hole.
And that “fluffy bunny” thing is just weird.
But then, the whole Obamanon (Obama phenomenon) is getting weird. In Virginia, a state Obama won handily in the primaries, his supporters are pulling out all the stops to head off potential racist voting by “getting it out in the open:”
When Cecil E. Roberts, president of the coal miners union that shapes politics in much of this mountain region, talks to voters, he tells them that their choice is to have “a black friend in the White House or a white enemy.” When Charlie Cox, an Obama supporter, hears friends fretting about Obama’s race, he reminds them that they pull for the nearby University of Tennessee football team, “and they’re black.”
Union organizer Jerry Stallard asks fellow coal workers what’s more important: improving their work conditions or holding onto their skepticism of Obama’s race, culture or religion. “We’re all black in the mines,” he tells them.
That oughta put those racists’ minds at ease. And, Lord knows, that “subliminal racism” is not always so “subliminal,” so you gotta fight it wherever you see it. Because if you get enough of it, and you let it go by, it might offset the 90+ percent of black people voting for Obama.
Maybe it’s just the fact that according to The Washington Post, the Republican National Committee is planning to call for an investigation into Obi-WanNaBePresident’s fundraising is what’s gotten Team O so discombobulated. Or maybe the Rasmussen Report that almost 60% of Americans polled are fed up with Congress, with almost half convinced that people picked randomly from the phone book could do a better job, that’s just got all politicians spooked.
Personally, I think we all walked through the looking glass and fell down the rabbit hole on our way to The Twilight Zone. Hope there are no “fluffy bunnies” down there; if there are, somebody might make a porno movie about them. And I imagine that could ruin Peeps for me forever.
Everybody in the world wants Barack Obama to be president, except me. At least that’s what a BBC poll seems to say.
U.S. Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama may be struggling to nudge ahead of his Republican rival in polls at home, but people across the world want him in the White House, a BBC poll said on Wednesday.
All 22 countries covered in the poll would prefer to see Obama elected U.S. president ahead of Republican John McCain. And in 17 of the 22 nations, people expect relations between the U.S. and the rest of the world to improve if Obama wins.
Y’all can have him if you pick him up by tomorrow, as far as I’m concerned. Bill O, on the other hand says Obie needs to pick better friends.
A pretty strong case could be made that everything political that we read or see via the mainstream media, including the corporatized segment of the blogosphere, is AstroTurf. Though the original term refers to the unethical public relations practice of creating the appearance of grassroots activity on behalf of corporations and politicians where none exists, given that it is ultimately a marketing tool designed to create buzz in order to persuade the gullible against their interests and in favor of the corporate/political entity that paid for it, I’m pretty confident in saying we’re currently being AstroTurfed to death. By everybody.
throughout the corporate media and blogosphere, from the leg-tingling sycophancy of MSNBO and it’s little sister former Big Three networks, to the shameless fluffing of the dying dinosaurs of the American press, to the ridiculous cheerleading of the Rah Rah Rally Boyz and Bots of the BoBama Blogosphere. The influence of General Electric through it’s ownership of NBC and its relationship with MSNBC, Newsweek, The Washington Post, New York Times, Slate Magazine, The Root, and others is pretty well known. What hasn’t been fully sussed out yet is the relationship between General Electric, Exelon, (the big AstroTurfed Obama supporting Illinois energy company and owner of Commonwealth Edison run by William Ayers’ dad, Thomas before his death) and the Obama administration. This site, USCAP, (United States Climate Action Program) shows there most likely is one, though, without further inquiry, it’s difficult to know exactly how strong or tenuous it is. It is also common knowledge that Obama supports cap and trade regulations and has for some time. Green Biz tells us that GE has been promoting it for a long time, too. Read the rest of this entry »
It’s not often that I agree with unrepentant terrorist, and Obabuddy, William Ayers, but when the man is right he’s right. Seems Ayers’ neighbor, the Obapresident-elect, and his partners in government crime, Chief of Staff 
