Got Any Follow-Up Qs, Ben Smith? [UPDATED x2]
By SusanUnPC on February 26, 2008 at 4:30 PM in Barack Obama, Media, Politico, William Ayers
UPDATE x2, 02/27 a.m.: It’s okay, people! Ben Smith has cleared it all up in an update to his post yesterday: “UPDATE: 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.” [COMPARE that to what "Ax" told Smith, just below, and tell me if you're now satisfied.]
Original: Today, Ben Smith of Politico.com reports that he didn’t get a chance to ask Barack Obama about his history with William Ayers, the unrepentant terrorist who Larry Johnson has written about extensively here. (Could part of Smith’s problem be that “Obama stiffs, stifles national press“?)
However, intrepid reporter Smith did ask David Axelrod, Obama’s campaign manager, about the relationship:
“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.”
Barack Obama’s two children were born in 1998 and 2001. William Ayers’ and Bernadine Dorhn’s two children? They were born before 1981. (Then there’s another child Ayers/Dohrn raised, Chesa Boudin, who is the biological son of former Weathermen David Gilbert and Kathy Boudin, and who is a Rhodes Scholar.)
Mr. Axelrod, you’re fortunate that Mr. Smith didn’t ask you any follow-up questions, and published your statement as if it were fact.
Now, Mr. Axelrod, if you’re asked again — or if by some chance some reporter gets to talk to your elusive star client candidate — what spin will you give the gullible that time?
UDPATE: This goes entirely beyond the long friendship between Ayers and Obama. This is about the Obama campaign’s LIES and SPIN to defuse, deflect, and obfuscate Obama’s history of questionable associations. It’s about their inability to TELL THE TRUTH.
I’d never say that Ben Smith is gullible. Probably when he hears about the problem with the dates and the children — and that it’s not remotely possible their “kids” go to the same school — he’ll be embarrassed? He’ll scramble to correct the record? I’m sure he’ll act post-haste.
At least, however, Ben Smith is asking questions. And there’s something to be said for that.
::::::::
By the way:
– The conservative bloggers are all over this story.
– While I was researching the facts of this, I ran across an article via Powell Books’s book reviews that I had not seen before, which describes the terrible violence of the Weathermen, as well as their elite arrogance: “Family Circle: The Boudins and the Aristocracy of the Left.”
– I’m in good company. A blogger for The Guardian noticed the problems with Ben Smith’s “interview” of David Axelrod on William Ayers. It turns out this blogger went to summer camp with Ayers’ children, and knows how old they are.
See The Guardian blog Deadline USA’s “Obama and Bill Ayers” post.
on sale for only $16.95.
also comes with a special spatula.)
(List Price: $27.95 - Your Price: $15.47)
“The story of poker is that of risk-loving America ... a crazy ride in unparalleled detail, driven by wit, wisdom, true love, and sizzling style. As analyst, historian, devotee, and no mean player, James McManus is poker’s most eloquent advocate.”
By Sarah Palin (Release date: November 17. 2009)
I can’t understand why Obama comes out with such whoopers? Presumably he knows at some point he’ll be caught, does he really want it to happen after he’s the nominee? If he’d just tell the truth, about himself, and not distort Hillary’s record and stated positions, run on truth and not power poker moves, I’d have the idea that he knows running for prez is a responsibility to party members. This way he seems like worse than a roll of the dice.
I think they (Obama camp) are just “working these stories out”. That is dripping bits here and there (like when recently they said “oops, by the way, there was more contact, money, etc than previously realized…”). The idea is to desensitize the media (and public) to these issues.
So that when anyone else brings them up in the future
everyone will say…”we heard that before, it’s old news, never mind”. They are smart, very smart….
The “slow release” damps the effect because the
“whole picture” becomes blurry, disorganized, scattered. They are smart, very smart….
My impression is that this is also why nothing is sticking ( the irresponsibility and “Obama-addiction” of the media aside ).
consortiumnews.com
Why the War on Obama
By Robert Parry
February 26, 2008
While some cynics still view Barack Obama’s appeal for “change” as empty rhetoric, it’s starting to dawn on Washington insiders that his ability to raise vast sums of money from nearly one million mostly small donors could shake the grip that special-interest money has long held over the U.S. government.
This spreading realization that Obama’s political movement might represent a more revolutionary change than previously understood is sparking a deepening resistance among defenders of the status quo – and prompting harsher attacks on Obama.
Right now, the front line for the Washington Establishment is Hillary Clinton’s struggling presidential campaign, which has been stunned by Obama’s political skills as well as his extraordinary ability to raise money over the Internet. Obama’s grassroots donations have negated Clinton’s prodigious fundraising advantage with big donors.
Powerful lobbies – from AIPAC to representatives of military and other industries – also are recognizing the value of keeping their dominance over campaign cash from getting diluted by Obama’s deep reservoir of small donors. It’s in their direct interest to dent Obama’s momentum and demoralize his rank-and-file supporters as soon as possible.
So, neoconservatives and other ideological movements – heavily dependent on grants from the same special interests – are now joining with the Clinton campaign to tear down Obama by depicting him as unpatriotic, un-vetted, possibly a “closet Muslim.”
On Feb. 25, the New York Times’ new neocon columnist William Kristol attacked Obama’s patriotism by citing the Illinois senator decision to stop wearing an American flag lapel pin because, Obama said, he saw how George W. Bush was exploiting the flag to stampede the nation toward war with Iraq.
“You know, the truth is that right after 9/11, I had a pin,” Obama said when asked about his lack of a flag pin in October 2007. “As we’re talking about the Iraq War, that became a substitute for I think true patriotism, which is speaking out on issues that are of importance to our national security, I decided I won’t wear that pin on my chest.”
In a column entitled “It’s All About Him,” Kristol mocked this explanation as an example of both Obama’s dubious claim to patriotism and his pomposity.
[EDITED BY ADMINISTRATOR: You cannot post entire articles in a comment. It makes the comment too long, and it is a violation of fair use. Further, please provide a link with only a very few paragraphs.]
Clinton surrogates have been spreading rumors about Obama’s association with people with Arab names …
Sir,
The guy who introduced McCain today must read NQ. :O
At least McCain had the good grace and sense to apologize for and denounce him.
Thanks for the Perry article.
How much of this article is just outright lies? Nobody knows where Obama is getting his funds from. Presumably, they are coming from the same donors that Kennedy, Kerry and maybe even Lieberman use. If you think that he got his funds from college students and independents then you are truely drinking the coolaid.
By the way, I think Cee is an achronym for full of shit.
Typo: acronym
Todays Question..
Is it Fair for “ELLEN” to Endorse Hillary..???
Fox News wants to know..
Are you kidding me? That was the sweetest, cutest moment at the Hill fundraiser last night.
I might post it later.
Here is the video (sorry it is from Fox) Scroll down the text and there is the video. Audio is not great though.
http://embeds.blogs.foxnews.com/2008/02/25/clintons-cameo-on-ellens-show/
Was it fair for Oprah to endorse McMondukakerry?
Ben Smith is an Obama apologist. For a while, it seemed like Mr. Smith actually was the moderator of Politico’s blog for the Obama cultists. It is only in the past couple of weeks, since Mr. Obama’s wins in the post-Super Tuesday contests, that Mr. Smith has even feigned a modicum of objectivity about the excessively junior senator from Illinois. SusanUnPC, if you are expecting Ben Smith to act like a journalist, I fear he will disappoint you.
Dang it. But I am filled with hope for journalists!
It’s because we grew up on Walter Cronkite. It’s hard to accept a world of Katie Courics.
Amen to that! The sorry “journalists” of today wouldn’t even be offered a job on a Podunk, ID weekly.
Really difficult to believe in journalist with the like of Judy Millers and Robert Novaks around! Why are journalist like this who have committed such very serious crimes protected? Throw these fuckers in jail. What kind of serious crimes does one have to commit? Why undermining National Security by outing Plame and helping start illegal and immoral wars is not considered high crimes…I just don’t understand? Well I guess I do. Our justice system is not close to being just.
If you write/email “some reasonable journalists” (do they exist?) with this story, do they just choose to ignore it? (yes, I am naive). Why isn’t any of this coming up in the debates…why why why..
I am being serious. Can someone list some reliable journalists?
Paul Krugman seems to get it.
I think here, Larry and Susan seem to get it, though certainly they don’t have the exposure of the MSM.
How about Seymour Hersh, Robert Scherer, Greg Palast, and Robert Parry for starters.
Thanks.
Off the top of my head…
Chris Hedges, Robert Fisk, Nir Rosen, Seymour Hersh, Robert Perry, Eric Margolis, Robin Wright, Laura Rozen, Dhir? Jamal, Jeremy Scahill, Lynn Sweet
How is it that no one notices, even Ben Smith, that their kids can’t possibly go to the same school?! the kids are in their mid to late 20’s for jebus crispies.
And Axelrod clearly states they know eachother as well as anyone whose kids attend school together, so it isn’t like he can backtrack..it’s clearly a lie. they can’t say they attend the same school that the Ayers kids went to years ago. He said together.
One more instance of how they will say ANYTHING. And they know that the “reporters” won’t mess with “hope,” partly because the reporters want everyone to love them too! (And it’s brutal to write the facts about Mr. Obama’s and Mr. Axelrod’s truthiness issues, and bear the brunt of the backlash from the vitriolic followers.)
Oh I know…I have gotten plenty of backlash myself just in posting on MyDD as a Clinton supporter. I post as americanincanada over there. Not sure what I would do if I didn’t have you Susan, this blog, Taylor Marsh and a few others. I might have clawed out my own eyes by now.
I just don’t understand ignoring the obvious lies. LIES! And then they wonder why I say I am not sure I can vote for Obama. It’s the truth.
Susan, I emailed Ben about this with personal knowledge of that situation. Hopefully he will correct it. Not holding my breath.
Thank you, Sam. We’ll check for any updates, won’t we.
I’m sure Ben will get right on that.
This is typical of the Obama/his campaign. I still remember during the debate, Hillary mentioned is NH co-chair is a lobbyist, Obama just said “That’s not true.” But it is true. Yet nobody followed up on that lie.
Didn’t Jake Tapper? Someone did. I’m sure I wrote it up here.
So many lies, so little time.
BUT (!) people! We must get back to the debate of the day on MSNBC and CNN. What “tone” will Hillary adopt tonight in the debate? Which Hillary will appear tonight? How can we psychoanalyze her for the next four hours until the debate? (So much air time, so little substance.)
She needs to repeat that she has all ready proved that she can be a “change maker”. Listing her successes in the Senate. Her willingness to reach across party lines. Her work for children, her focus on the health care industry for years all the issues that need to be touched on Health care, education. I wish the fuck she would bring up those who lied this nation into Iraq and how she will base any decisions she makes on using our military on solid substantiated evidence from reliable sources.
I also think she should stick her neck out and say that she really wants to help resolve the Israeli Palestinian conflict (she is in Kucinich country and he knows there are plenty of moderate Jews who feel the same way ). That she is solidly in support of Israel, (of course she could never say based on the 67 border) but is also in full support of an independent Palestine.
Pro Israel Pro Palestine Pro Peace
I also hope that she takes on Obama’s strategy on foreign policy (this resonates with millions of Americans)….Obama uses the words”Diplomatic and negotiations” far more often than Hillary.
Define the lines in a strong way making it very clear that by electing her our nation will be on tracks headed in a new direction far far from the Bush administrations disasters.
I question his commitment to Israel, just as I question McCain’s, too.
I can’t believe AIPAC hasn’t thrown it’s muscle behind Clinton.
Hillary should have answered to that: “Not true? Really? Would you swear that under oath? Maybe our
journalists/moderators (morons?) here know better?”
( ha ha ha)…
Susan, I know you and Larry are fans of the Washington Note, but lately I find Clemmons posts to be depressing. Do you think he is right that there is no way she can pull this out?
How have we as a nation been so freakin’ duped yet again. I have to believe that she can pull this off because the alternative is so unacceptable to me….
I like Steve a lot, but his mind works differently from mine. He tries too hard to be “fair” to everyone. And there’s that he hears all the insider D.C. gossip, which must be just nasty these days.
Still check him out though. Never know. However, I corresponded with him about his incorrect portrait of Obama’s infrastructure plan, which most everyone admitted he ripped off from Hillary. He said he’d post something to correct that, but I don’t think he ever did. (He’s very busy, but it was important.)
Sam, ditto. I noticed the same with Clemmons recent columns…Is he right that there is no chance?
Does anyone have any inside info. about their polling in Texas???
Clemons needs to get out on the streets of Ohio more. I’m telling you I really think she is going to take Ohio.
From Family Circle:
Without mentioning whom I grew up and went to high school with one of the notable Weather Underground members who eventually surrendered and went to jail.
For many years I have often wondered how you go from a very bright, athletic and approachable kid to throwing your life away as a so-called revolutionay and criminal.
Regarding Obama I am not surprised. After all he will meet with anyone without pre-conditions.
media’s deided who gets to make up fact.
The Washington Post is so full of crap; there is this story today about a meeting between Clinton people and “journalists (Brider, Dowd, yeah, right…) that is so insulting that I find it hard to believe it.
But check it out for the comments that they cite Clinton’s spokesperson Phil Singer said:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/02/25/AR2008022502501.html
And never mind the blogorrhea that follows.
I meant “Broder”
Susan, the blogger at The guardian mentions Ayers taught at Columbia a few years back. You said Obama was at Columbia and doesn’t want to talk about those years.
Do you know whether these two overlap in their stay at Columbia? What year(s) was this?
Hey Susan,
How about you ask Pres. Clinton about his pardons…including a weatherman himself?
You can’t see the forest through the trees can you?
As President, pardoning former members of the Weather Underground to close out a sad chapter in US history differs oh so slightly from having the unrepentant terrorists as part of your inner circle as President.
Subtle, I know.
Pardoned terrorists who’d served time AND expressed remorse.
Vs. fraternized and accepted campaign contributions from a terrorist who in 2001 said he wish he’d gone further.
Nice try.
Oh and that little thing that it was her husband, NOT HER, that did it.
duh.
Can’t see the s. through the flies.
“How about you ask Pres. Clinton about his pardons”
And where is William Jefferson Clinton’s name on this ticket, oh myopic one?
Meilssa McEwan (Shakesville) has a great post about Obam denying the Liberal tag. What’s wrong with being a liberal? Hang Ten, Dude
“
Read it all. Very good.
I also think Hillary should go ahead and say it. That women have waited for this moment for a very long time (many women I am talking to are saying this). And that She has worked for this opportunity for a very long time and that not only does she have years of experience that she Loves this country and the American people deeply. (be tough but share her emotions too)
Where is Hillary’s media strategy? A media strategy needs a positive offense (introduce a positive narrative of who the candidate is, and what her strenghts are, and address doubts about her) and a defense (a way to chip away at opponent’s strengths.)
Today we learn that Rep. John Lewis may cave into the thugs pressuring him to switch his vote to Obama, who ran a 30-year-old primary challenger against Lewis for being, in the 30-year-old’s words, “unhip”. What about Massachusettes superdelegates Kennedy and Kerry - are they going to vote the way their state did?
So the candidate is young, and hip, but he’s also a narcissist. And this guy who will not be in the same room as Gavin Newsom, who supported gay marriage in San Francisco, thinks nothing of fraternizing with this former terrorist who was unrepentant as recently as 2001?
AF, the media strategy doesn’t matter because the media does not give her the time of day. It does not matter what she does, it does not matter how hard her media team tries, they don’t give two shits about what her media strategy is. I mean it is LUDICROUS that they started airing the Obama camps accsations based on Drudge yesterday without waiting for a comment from the Clinton campaign. That is NUTS. Just like how they didn’t bother to give her foreign policy speech air time. That was also crazy. Yes, Hillary has made mistakes in this campaign, but the biased media is way out of control and there is nothing her campaign can do about it. They tried to open up access after Iowa, hoping that would help, it hasn’t. Even as BO gets more and more removed from the press, they still love him. It does not matter what she does, the media hates her, they hate her story, and they aren’t going to lift a pretty finger to help her.
The Drudge thing was such an opportunity - that this guy on a day when Turkey is invading Iraq, Kosovars are Independent, a human chain forms in Gaza, that this guy is talking to Drudge, taking Drudge at his word. This guy is hiding out in his bunker only to appear before adoring audiences.
Except for Diane Sawyer, this morning, on Good Morning, America, who is impressing me more and more.
What did Diane Sawyer do? Maybe she could do a sit down with Diane if she is being fair, because I was VERY unimpressed with Ms. Katie Couric and her frigidair questions.
I seem to remember Diane Sawyer doing a real hit piece on Howard Dean and especially on his wife Judith. I also seem to remember her hit piece on the Dixie Chicks.
Are these just a couple more Senior Moments where my rememberer doesn’t remember so good?
What did she say?
AF, I used to think along the same lines as you a while ago. But Sam is dead right.
Check the article the “press corps” put out in the WashPost today (I posted the link above)
CNN (Caffrey) called this piece of crap “excellent” and “piled on” about how down and removed from reality the Clinton camp is….
Absolutely everything she does is either totally ignored (when inconvenient) or immediately followed by an attack/insult/whatever. It’s impossible to get anything accross. They are totally
“Obama-addicted”
CNN is reporting a Richardson endorsement in
“the next couple of days”. My gut feeling is that it’ll be for Obama now that Dodd jumped in…
and will campaign for him in Texas. This wouldn’t be good.
What a bunch of ….
Anyone?
Stampede of opportunists.
“THESE are the times that try men’s souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country; but he that stands by it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman.”
Time to suck it up, Winter Soldiers.
Cafferty? I didn’t think he liked anyone or anybody. But then I stay away from cable as much as possible these days. But I seem to remember a couple of times when his Clinton abhorrence was showing. But no problem there because that’s always allowed.
Sorry, I replied in the wrong place.
But I do love your quote. It’s just that it’s getting awfully cold out here. I felt the same way when aquaintances seemed so willing to be bamboozled by GWB.
I fast-forward through Cafferty. He’s predictable. His cranky routine is OLD.
Again, Andy, it may win Obama a brief news cycle, but I really don’t think Richardson matters all that much. Maybe I am just biased because I think he said some really foolish things throughout the campaign, but I just don’t think he really matters. I also think he would look silly endorsing Obama because 1) he previously stated he would endorse the way his state did, 2) his entire campaign was about experience. Is he now saying experience doesn’t matter? Jeez, someone send him the video of Obama saying he doesn’t have enough experience to RUN A COUNTRY.
Richardson has always struck me as someone who cares more about hiw own well being than anyone else’s. Maybe that isn’t fair, but I see him as an opportunist of the worst kind.
His endorsement won’t matter. It is too late. It might have mattered just before 2/5, but not now. Just as Dodd’s doesn’t matter.
Sam, I understand your point and actually agree
your perception of Richardson. Problem is it piles on the view “Obama is the winner” and people in Texas (specially) will be influenced by the media about this. I heard on NPR several interviews in TX of Latino men; saying “well he is wining so I’ll vote for him”….
Yeah, the narrative of who is winning is a huge problem. I agree with that. I just wish Edwards would endorse her. I REALLY thought he would after the first Harry and Louise advertisement, but I guess not…
The narrative of who’s winning is ALL that matters.
Edwards, if he is truly a man of conscience, needs to speak out on Obama’s poor health plan.
These coy dances are getting old. He’s playing the “who’s winning” game too.
(I’ve had plenty of positive things to say about Edwards here, but he is not a “profile in courage” at this moment in history.)
The interview with Richardson was interesting. He was very clear in saying that he did not think the primary race was over, by a long shot. He said he feels it will be very close and that he is loyal to the Clinton’s. He may not endorse at all, he also said.
I don’t even want to make any assumptions as to what he is thinking because he said he is also open to being VP.
He said the campaign is the classic change vs. experience, and that he tried to run on experience and lost.
I think he’s vying for a veep spot to Obama - his experience will balance out Obama.
Yep, it’s the only way Obama will get any of Clinton’s support base (Latino vote in California especially) if he gets in the GE.
Wow, it’s like a fire dance, here.
I was thikning latino votes would go to Mccain, not Obama.
The only ones buying the Obama shit are the empty headed democratic narcissists, and the republican trolls who feed them.
Honestly, I don’t think Obama will swing most of the Latino vote in the general election, or most of the Asian vote. I think Latinos and Asians are alike in that these groups tend to be less ideologically aligned. These groups like McCain, just fine, and they don’t feel the need to vote for a Democrat just because…
I am not sure he will endorse Obama, though it may be the popular wisdom. I mean the Obama camp itself has been claiming Edwards, Richardson and Gore for months and they so far have ended up with Dodd, Kerry and Kennedy; the later two being very quiet these days lest someone ask them to change their superdelegate votes to match their state’s voters choices.
How cool would it be for Richardson to endorse Hillary before the Texas primary?
We Asians are leaning to GOP generally. I get this impression from online BBS discussions. This time most of my friends voted for Hillary in the primary and would vote for her in GE just because we like her. Some might find this unbelievable, but believe it or not, there are people out there who genuinely like Hillary.
So if Hill doesn’t get the nomination, we will go back to McCain anyway.
Some might say we are racist. But I beg to differ. Latinos and Asians (Mostly Chinese/Indians) both embrace immigrant mentality, unlike some, who only have entitlement mentality. I think that’s the biggest difference among us, though sometimes we are grouped together as minorities.
[...] Ben Smith: It’s he who quoted the always authoritative David Axelrod the other day saying that of course Bill Ayers and Obama know each other because their kids go to [...]
[...] Got Any Follow-Up Qs, Ben Smith?, NoQuarterUSA, February 26, 2008. SusanUnPC notes Axlerod’s lie on behalf of Obama: “Bill Ayers [...]