RSS Feed for This PostCurrent Article

Obama/Ayers Update: New York Times Ignores Evidence of Ayers’ Role in Annenberg Board Selection

UPDATED: October 3.

Once again, the New York Times misses the story, parroting the false claims of the Obama Campaign about the relationship between Bill Ayers and Barack Obama. Some months ago the Times reported without comment the Campaign’s lie that the first time Obama met Ayers was in late 1995 at a “meet and greet” held at Ayers’ home for Obama when Obama launched his campaign for the state senate. 

Not so. The Times finally, albeit implicitly, acknowledges they had it wrong: that Ayers and Obama actually met many months earlier at least, when the Chicago Annenberg Challenge (CAC) was first formed. But once again they report, without any logical basis, that Ayers had nothing to do with the elevation of Obama to the CAC board.

In fact, an exchange of letters in late 1994, copies of which I obtained from Brown University, between Vartan Gregorian, then President of Brown and the individual responsible for assessing applications for grants from the national Annenberg Challenge, and Bill Ayers, the founder of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, demonstrates that Ayers played a direct role in “composing” the Challenge’s board of directors.

Another exchange of letters between Gregorian and Adele Simmons, then President of the Chicago-based MacArthur Foundation and an advisor to Ayers, confirms the active personal role of Ayers in selecting board members.

I was interviewed at length by the New York Times for today’s story. In fact, this was the third Times reporter to interview me about the Ayers/Obama relationship – and I provided the Times with the letters I discuss here. They are not mentioned in the story at all. 

Instead of relying on the contemporaneous written record that documents Ayers direct personal involvement in the formation of the CAC board, the New York Times relies on the recollection, fourteen years later, of only one named individual, Deborah Leff, as well as a vague reference to “several” other people allegedly involved, who say Ayers was not involved in Obama’s recruitment to the board. 

The Challenge Board was chaired by Barack Obama and Obama also served as President of the Challenge. (I will explore the role of Obama in those two executive positions in a later post here.) The Obama campaign and Obama himself have attempted to minimize the candidate’s longstanding and close professional and political relationship with Ayers because of Ayers’ authoritarian politics and past record of terrorist activities.

The Obama Campaign’s Story

The Obama campaign recently issued a statement stating that Bill Ayers had “nothing to do with Obama’s recruitment to the Board.” (Emphasis added.) The campaign contends that the only people involved in the appointment of Obama were Deborah Leff, then president of the Chicago-based Joyce Foundation, and Patricia Graham, President of the Chicago-based Spencer Foundation. Graham is a noted education historian and professor at Harvard.

A close review of the contemporaneous written records of the CAC, however, make it clear that this claim lacks credibility. The Campaign’s conclusion appears to be based on a statement issued by Leff a few days ago, fourteen years after the letters discussed here were written, when she stated:

“While working with Adele Simmons and Patricia Graham to identify a highly qualified person to chair the education reform organization the Annenberg Challenge, I recommended Barack Obama to serve as Chair. After meeting with Obama to review his qualifications, Patricia Graham asked Obama to become a candidate for the position.”

Of course, this statement does not contradict the possibility that Ayers was also involved as the letters discussed here demonstrate. I am not aware of any statement from Leff stating clearly that Ayers had “nothing” to do with the Obama appointment.  That appears to be a leap made by the Campaign without any evidence.  

In fact, a 1994 letter from Leff to Vartan Gregorian indicates that she viewed Ayers as in charge of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge. Leff told Gregorian on August 3, 1994:

“The Joyce Foundation strongly supports the proposal for the Annenberg Challenge Grant submitted from Chicago. At its meeting just two weeks ago, our Board of Directors approved a grant of $80,000 to Professor William Ayers at the University of Illinois at Chicago to establish the Chicago School Reform Collaborative [the CSRC - the working group that Ayers organized to develop and submit the CAC grant proposal and that would become an arm of the CAC once established in 1995]….We believe that the….Collaborative represents an effort that is likely to produce the type of sustained, programmatic approach to changing schools that is critical to the principles of the Annenberg Challenge. We give it our fullest support.”

Thus, if the Obama campaign is to be believed it would appear that after the Joyce Foundation gave Ayers and the CSRC its unqualified support and backed it up with money, its President, Deborah Leff, recruited Obama to be the Chairman of the Board of the CAC without involving Ayers.  

Who is Deborah Leff?

It is not entirely clear how Leff would have a basis to have known Obama well enough to recommend him to Annenberg. He would, of course, join the board of Leff’s Joyce Foundation, too.  But that only happened in late November of 1994. Joyce herself had only moved to Chicago from Washington, D.C., to take up the Presidency of the Joyce Foundation in mid 1992, after Obama had moved there after graduating from Harvard Law School the previous year. 

Leff already had a longstanding and close tie to the MacArthur Foundation’s Simmons – from their days at Princeton together, where Simmons was a dean and Leff was an undergraduate and a member of the first class to include women there. 

Apparently Leff was so impressed by the recent law school graduate during the selection process for her Foundation’s board that she thought it appropriate to recommend him at the very same time to Patricia Graham as Chairman of the Board and President of the $160 million Chicago Annenberg Challenge.

Of course, it is conceivable that it was actually Ayers who recommended to Leff that Obama serve on her board. After all, Ayers and the Joyce Foundation had both been directly involved in supporting the Local School Councils governance structure in Chicago as far back as 1988, as had Obama and his Developing Communities Project. That was long before Leff arrived on the scene.

If Leff had not discussed the Obama appointment with Ayers in advance, it must have come as quite a shock to Ayers when he turned up at the first full board meeting of the CAC on March 15, 1995 and found Obama as its Chairman and President. 

Despite the suggestion by the Obama campaign that Leff and Graham set up a parallel process to recruit Obama to the board that did not include Ayers, the Joyce Foundation continued its strong financial support of Ayers including a grant in 1997 of more than $300,000.00 to support his Small Schools Workshop. 

The role of Warren Chapman 

It would have been very odd for yet another reason for Leff to have circumnavigated around Ayers in order to place Obama on the CAC board. The original working group convened by Ayers to prepare the CAC grant proposal in late 1993 was made up of Anne Hallett, Ayers and Warren Chapman. 

Chapman was, at that time, a program officer of the Joyce Foundation – in other words, he worked for Leff. Chapman was an intimate part of the process that led to the successful CAC grant. Was he, too, kept in the dark about the Obama appointment by his boss? If not, did he, in turn, keep the secret from Bill Ayers?

Chapman now works for the University of Illinois at Chicago (UIC) where the CAC records are housed and where the CAC had its first offices and where Ayers is a faculty member. According to Stanley Kurtz of the National Review, Chapman was recently contacted by Ken Rolling, former CAC executive director, who alerted Chapman to the interest of journalist Sam Dillon of the New York Times in exploring the steps that led to Obama’s appointment to the CAC board, including the role played by Bill Ayers. 

Rolling told Chapman and Hallett in an email, obtained by Kurtz via a FOIA request to UIC, that the Obama campaign had referred Dillon to Rolling but that he had “avoided that question head on” when asked how Obama was “picked” for the Board. He told them he “believed Barack was Debbie Leff’s/Joyce nomination.” 

That suggestion (hint?) of Rolling to Chapman and Hallett, of course, is now the story being circulated by the Obama campaign as indicated in a written statement issued to Kurtz. But the “Ayers had nothing to do with it” story fails, in the tradition of Occam’s Razor, to explain all the known facts.

CAC Board Members Surprised at Obama Appointment

In fact, it was not Ayers who was surprised at the appointment of Obama but the other prominent figures in education on the board. The appointment by Obama struck one of the other board members, Stanley Ikenberry, the former President of the University of Illinois and a noted national education policy scholar, as “unusual” because of Obama’s lack of experience and that it was only over time that Obama earned the “respect” of the other appointees to the board.

Thus, a question has been raised whether Ayers engineered the appointment of Obama to the CAC board so that Ayers had a solid ally on the board to support what would turn out to be the controversial agenda of the CAC.

To remind Global Labor readers, the Chicago Annenberg Challenge was conceived by Bill Ayers, former Weather Underground terrorist, who organized and led the working group (the Chicago School Reform Collaborative, or CSRC) that applied to the national Annenberg Challenge set up in 1993 by Walter Annenberg.  The Challenge set up its national headquarters at Brown University where Gregorian was President at the time.  Adele Simmons of the MacArthur Foundation served as an advisor to Ayers and the CSRC.

Ayers Role: The exchange of letters with Brown University’s Vartan Gregorian

On November 18, 1994, Brown University’s President Vartan Gregorian, now president of the New York City-based Carnegie Corporation, wrote to Bill Ayers and Anne Hallett about the “proposal you have submitted in response to the Annenberg Challenge.”  He called the proposal “ambitious,” “exciting,” “wise” and “appropriate.” He wanted Ayers and Hallett to respond to a few questions and then promised to submit the proposal for final approval to Ambassador Walter Annenberg. His comment on the board of directors was as follows:  ”This probably goes without saying, but I urge you as you compose the governing Board and the Collaborative, to engage people who reflect the racial and ethnic diversity of Chicago.” (Emphasis added.)

On November 18, 1994, President Gregorian wrote to Simmons a letter that was also copied to Bill Ayers.  Gregorian wrote that he had “a couple of questions about the management and accountability structures for the project.”  He told Simmons that because he thought the MacArthur Foundation might be a future contributor of funds to the CAC she would be interested in his concerns.  He wanted to “be sure that we have considered the issue of management carefully.” He concludes by noting that he “plans to transmit the Chicago proposal [from the Ayers and the CSRC] to Ambassador [Walter] Annenberg as soon as these remaining administrative details have been received.”

On November 29, 1994, Simmons replied to Gregorian and copied her letter to Bill Ayers.  She told Gregorian that 

“Bill Ayers, Debby Leff, Pat Graham, Anne Hallett, and I had breakfast on November 22, and reviewed the issues raised in your letter….We are constituting a governing board that will be diverse and bi-partisan and will include civic leaders who have a long-standing interest in the public schools as well as the people who are actually working in the schools. We expect this group to include no more that [sic] eight people, and we should be able to send you a list of several of the names by early next week. It is this group that will be accountable for the implementation of the project, for raising the matching funds, and for overseeing the evaluation.”

On December 1, 1994, Ayers and Anne Hallett (who co-chaired the CSRC with Ayers) wrote back to Gregorian:

“Thank you for your letter of November 18, 1994. We are continuing to build a broad base of consensus and support for the main thrust of the proposal….We have given careful thought to the issues raised in your letter. We are working with Adele Simmons, Deborah Leff, and Pat Graham on issues of management and governance to ensure that Chicago’s Annenberg Challenge initiative is successful. We offer the following responses:….Board of Directors. A five-to-seven person Board of Directors of highly respected Chicagoans is being assembled. Pat Graham, president of the Spencer Foundation, has agreed to serve and is willing to work with the Board. The duties of the Board will be to approve grants, to help raising matching funds, and to hire the executive director….The Board and the Collaborative will reflect the racial and ethnic diversity of Chicago.”

Thus, it is clear from the contemporaneous written record of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, that Bill Ayers, who conceived and led the organization, submission and implementation of the CAC’s grant application, was viewed by Gregorian as responsible for composing the Board of Directors of the CAC and that, in fact, as evidenced by the Simmons letters indeed played a personal, active and direct role in the recruitment and formation of the CAC’s board of directors.

This is consistent with the fact that Ayers was the agent of the CSRC who applied for the grant. Ayers, thus, had formal responsibility for establishing the CAC as a result of receiving the grant from the national Annenberg Challenge via Vartan Gregorian.  There is no written evidence that I have found indicating that Gregorian ever wrote or communicated separately with Leff or Graham where he asked them to take over that responsibility from Ayers.

Copies of all of the letters cited here are linked below.

Letters

1) Gregorian to Ayers, November 18, 1994. Page one. Page two. Page three.

Gregorian to Simmons, November 18, 1994. Page one. Page two. Page three.

2) Simmons to Gregorian, November 29, 1994. Page one. Page two.

3) Ayers/Hallett to Gregorian, December 1, 1994. Page one. Page two. Page three.

4) Leff to Gregorian, August 3, 1994. Page one. Page two.

Trackback URL

RSS Feed for This Post43 Comments »

Comment by Not Your sweetie | 2008-10-04 08:30:20

Wasn’t that a pathetic attempt by the NYT to defend Obama? The more I read, the more connections I found…
Meanwhile, some former Obama supporters angry about Obama’s “rescue”
http://edgeoforever.wordpress.com/2008/10/04/obama-rescues-himself-from-all-campaign-promises/

Comment by bemused | 2008-10-04 09:46:57

Well, duh. This article talks about how now we won’t have all the wonderful things he promised–because he was spinning them out of the same moonshine that Fannie and Freddie and apparently the rest of the world was using. And now the light of day is hitting. Only hope a few more eyes open.

 
 

Comment by WasLNbutNoBamaBotsKeepStealingMyName | 2008-10-04 08:30:58

What has happened to our nation, to the press, to our country, that the media has come to this…totally ignoring the truth and glossing over the facts so that Hussein Obama can be POTUS?

Comment by Jeremiah God Damn Barack Amerikkka Wright | 2008-10-04 09:16:11

Its called making sure the fix is in.

If its gonna hurt Barry they either bury it or get out infront of it and claim there is nothing to see.

The only reason NYT is breaking this Campaign talking point story is because someone else is working on an indepth piece and they want to get out in front of it and prevent the pickup as old news.

Comment by snosandy | 2008-10-04 11:31:55

We can only hope.

 

Comment by On the mark | 2008-10-04 13:04:30

Perhaps they are aware that while Obama was completing his degree at Columbia in 1982-83, Bill Ayers was attending Bank Street College from which he graduated with a Masters in Early Childhood Education in 1984? Ayers then attended Columbia until until 1987.
Bank Street College is less than a quarter of a mile from Columbia, and they collaborate on courses.
We know, from his own writings, that Obama “was drawn to foreign students, Marxist professors, and punk poets”. One such professor was Edward Said, who was also an associate of Bill Ayers.
It is inconceivable, given their concentric politics, and Ayers’ penchant for recruiting black radicals, that they did not meet in the two years they were studying within a quarter mile of each other.
Is this why Obama won’t release his transcript from Columbia? Does it reveal a tie to Ayers? Were they classmates? Did they perhaps even live together or close to each other?
If this theory is correct then an awful lot of other dots fall into place.
Where did Obama go on graduation? Not home to Hawaii – he went to ……..Chicago!
Where did he meet his wife? At a job with a law firm where Bernadine Dorhn worked and Bill Ayers’ father had influence.
How did he insert himself into the Chicago political structure so easily? As Kurtz asks “who sent him”?

 
 
 

Comment by Touchet | 2008-10-04 08:31:11

What is going on is the press is using the obama campaign as an authority figure. This is bad bad journalism because it goes against basic philosophical logic. If people were actually an kinda of educated on logic in high school they would know this is called a call to authority.

Even in law cases, and expert in a field has to cite studies and facts in why they come to a conclusion. They can’t just state a conclusion and the court go….eeeww aaaha okay THROW HIM IN JAIL.

This is what is happening in the news. They are using Talking heads as authority figures to spread propaganda.

The news is not a source of information any longer. It is a tool for dumbasses who can’t investigate claims and believe anything out of the mouth of an authority figure.

Comment by jvsp | 2008-10-04 08:38:44

LOL! So right you are, so right you are! The arguments de jour: ex cathedra and ad hominem. Critical thinking is at an all time low in America. As evidence I submit the current state of mathematics.

 

Comment by bemused | 2008-10-04 10:01:21

This is a very important point in attitude adjustment (i.e. brainwashing), establish authority. Those who think The One is a facinorious aspirator, noted for his rodomontade and nescience, are unable to persuade those who believe him to be the superexcrescence of aeaeae (yes, these are real words) because the two groups follow different authorities. One follows the BoBo camp and one is against.
So the issue in successful argument is to make it clear who is the better authority. Having persuaded someone of your authority, you can go on to persuade them of issues, but not before.

 
 

Comment by Paul F. Villarreal | 2008-10-04 08:31:20

Steve, you are the man. Thank you for all of your hard work on this subject, and the heck with the Times trying to fluff over the Ayers/Obama relationship.

The Times interviewed me earlier in this election cycle. I soon found out the only reason they did so was in an attempt to discredit my video work that was apparently a little too effective for the Times’ and Obama’s liking.

Speaking of videos, I am going to repost something from the last thread because it relates to a new must-see video on Obama and his repetitive support of infanticide –

.

New ad from the recently formed The Committee for Truth in Politics correctly hitting Barack Obama hard on the subject of Obama’s repeated, disgraceful support of infanticide:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3Q4OPAdYiZ8

Please pass this along, favorite it, comment on the video, etc. This is a critical issue that the American electorate MUST know about. It is up to all of us here to make sure that the word is spread.

This is not an abortion issue. It is an issue of a man whose extremism both went against the entire US Senate and which led him to be the ONLY ONE of his Illinois State Senator colleagues to speak out against the bill.

Please help to ensure that voters throughout the United States learn more about the dangerous, conscienceless radical that is Barack Obama.

Thanks.

.

Steve, you’re a patriot. The Times is a joke and is heading to its own, deserved Ragnarök. Keep up the great work, and, again, thanks for your efforts. America needs more like you.

Comment by csuzeq | 2008-10-04 08:53:19

I’ve sent articles and videos to certain Obama supporters about this and you’d be surprised how many people think it is ok. They say, good he stands up for abortion rights. I’m ok with that. I am forever changed from election 2008 and many of the people I have lived I do not view them the same as I did one year ago.

God save us!

Comment by csuzeq | 2008-10-04 08:54:16

sorry, people I have loved.

Comment by Paul F. Villarreal | 2008-10-04 09:27:46

The issue will not work with the majority of Americans. There’s a reason why it was unanimously supported in the US Senate and only Obama spoke out against the BAIPA bill in the IL Senate. It’s insane, and so long as it is framed correctly, there is no way around that.

If a small cadre of people think it’s ok to leave live infants to die in linen rooms, they represent a very small minority of opinion. They’re freaks, and so is Obama. The American people won’t support this madness.

 

Comment by snosandy | 2008-10-04 11:40:29

Never has one candidate been so polarizing that he tears long standing relationships, even families apart.

 
 
 

Comment by voteamerican | 2008-10-04 09:25:27

I hate to even think of these people being the leader of the so called free world. “Obama’s repeated, disgraceful support of infanticide” always reminds me of the cruelties of the socialists/communists people who govern in Africa. Such as Winnie Mandela (wife of Nelson Mandela)who was credited with the invention of hanging burning tires around her victims necks.

 

Comment by pasmalltowngirl | 2008-10-04 09:55:38

Thanks Paul, Here is another video that will bring you to tears, especially if you have lost a child at birth.
Mad World By Barack Obama
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KxQiIzS49D8&NR=1

 
 

Comment by typewriterstreaming | 2008-10-04 08:38:52

The NY Times article was unbelievably disappointing. I feel like we are screaming into an empty hole and running out of time.

Comment by Paul F. Villarreal | 2008-10-04 08:50:29

The Times piece is a deliberate attempt to help Obama by seeking to diffuse the Ayers issue that they know is about to explode in 527 ads. Don’t be disappointed; the Times has no intention of doing any actual reporting, they only want to help Obama. Once you understand that, there won’t be any more disappointment. This is what a tanked-out media looks like, and we have to hit back hard and fast in order to have any chance to beat the Chicago Fraud.

If you want to do something and you have a few dollars, donate to some of the 527’s that are putting out the truth, like American Issues Project, Our Country Deserves Better PAC, Born Alive Truth and others.

Don’t be dejected. That’s what the Obama Media wants. Keep fighting, like Steve is and the rest of us need to.

The media isn’t controlling sh*t. But if we do nothing, they — and their stunt candidate — win.

Keep your head up, and keep moving. After Palin’s start turn the other night, we have every chance to take down the DNC’s coupist clown.

Comment by csuzeq | 2008-10-04 08:56:06

I do keep reminding myself that there is nothing that would change the mind of someone who has already long ago decided not to vote for Obama.

 

Comment by typewriterstreaming | 2008-10-04 11:32:59

You’re right Paul F. Thank you for that. It’s a mind screw and that’s why the media is beginning to announce the election is over.

 
 
 

Comment by Pat Hickey | 2008-10-04 09:15:20

Keep hammering at the louses, Steve.

You have the will and the know-how.

http://hickeysite.blogspot.com/2008/10/past-is-prologue-except-when-it-makes.html

 

Comment by AnyoneButNobama | 2008-10-04 09:16:49

It is mind-boggling how the press and nobama have colluded to deceive the American people. Anyone accepting Nobama’s blatant lie about his connection to Ayer’s is a fool.
God have mercy on America.
Get to the McCain/Palin phone bank.

Country First

 

Comment by Sara | 2008-10-04 09:17:51

To Steve Diamond:
Why don’t you go on Fox News with your story and/or have your side of story published in another newspaper?

 

Comment by tzada | 2008-10-04 09:25:34

Has anyone else noticed this…….

Fact Check is the Annenberg Political Fact Check?
http://www.factcheck.org/

Is this the same Annenberg as the Obama/Ayers
connection?

Are not Factcheck and Moveon both creatures of George Soros? Is the Annenberg challenge connected to him as well? Did it start out as his or end up as his or?

Do not all the liberal blogs and MSM not use fact check as their sources for “truth”?

Is Barack Obama a George Soros creation?

Has Soros roiled the economic waters as well?

It appears that Harry Reid did. Either he is dumber than dirt or his loose mouth regarding a large insurance company about to go bankrupt was a deliberate effort to destabilize the economy further.

Then you have Nancy Polosi and her “we have to play the hand we were dealt” Deceitful bitch. Did anyone notice this in the new bailout?

Bailout bill loops in green tech, IRS snooping

That includes, as the New York Post pointed out, millions in tax breaks and related pork for kids’ wooden arrows, Puerto Rican rum producers, auto race tracks, and corporations operating in American Samoa. (The likely explanation for the latter: StarKist has a large tuna-canning operation in American Samoa. And StarKist’s parent company happens to be located in the district of House Speaker Nancy Pelosi.)

http://news.cnet.com/8301-13578_3-10057618-38.html?tag=nl.e433

 

Comment by EyesOpen | 2008-10-04 09:35:39

My parents are Dems and I’ve been chipping away at the Obama mystic for months now. I’ve been forwarding Steve Diamond’s research to read; but not until this morning’s NYT article are they really listening. So, while the NYT article is watered down I now have my opening. Keep up the great work on this issue.
McCain / Palin 2008!!!!

 

Comment by Neo | 2008-10-04 09:42:21

Comment by Medusa | 2008-10-04 10:17:22

I am furious about the NYT sell out to Bozo. Are they on the dole? They must be getting money from his campaign.

Steve’s post is on RCP. Vote on it so more can read it.

http://readerarticles.realclearpolitics.com/?period=all

 
 

Comment by standard | 2008-10-04 10:40:21

The NYT has passed off some really slimy tabloid as “political reporting” this season.
If they had gone after Bush the way they went after Hillary Clinton, Gore would be finishing up his last golden weeks as president.

 

Comment by Amazonia | 2008-10-04 10:50:35

Enlightening post, Steve Diamond.

Paul F. Villareal, I appreciate your informative comments and excellent video clips. Agree with you that we should not give up the fight to inform the public in any way possible. I am glad to see people knowledgeable in media (writing, video, radio, blogging, etc.), such as yourself and others, being involved to help preserve Democracy and Freedom in our country.

Amazonia

 

Comment by interested party | 2008-10-04 11:16:08

All evidence indicates Ayers was involved in the selection of Obama to the chair. Note that early correspondence on the composition of the board is “c.c.” to Bill Ayers. That Ayers did not recommend Obama, or at least ok him when Ayers was instrumental in the formation of the CAC, is about a believable as as Ayers being “just another guy in the neighborhood”. One deception mimics another.

The problem (for Obama) remains, he would have had to work with Ayers once head of the board on the implementation of Challenge objectives. What of that involvement? This is after all a shortsighted project whose mission failed, collapsed, was assumed by more competent members of the Daley persuasion (sic). What was Obama role in this failure?

 

Comment by Linda | 2008-10-04 11:26:35

NYT is trying to use you and others as cover for them painting a false story.

This is an effort to help Obama (of course) by painting a false story of Ayers, in an effort to soften what is going to be coming out.

The media has officially become propagandist, provacateurs and entertainment rags. Welcome to the world of the “Running Man”.

 

Comment by Steven | 2008-10-04 11:54:48

People of the USA need to come out swinging,force investigations into the people murdered at Obamas Trinity church,voter fraud,caucus fraud,illegal overseas donations,violation of Logan act,forging presidential seals,illegal candidate run TV stations and attempts to silence free speech.These are all crimes.
Long live USA

 

Comment by Judy in Arizona | 2008-10-04 13:04:03

What about McCain’s connection to organized crime? McCain didn’t seem to find a problem with using the finances and political connections of his father-in-law, Jim Hensley, a man who had close ties with organized crime. In 1948 Hensley was convicted of Federal charges, and in 1977, Hensley had close ties with who many believed was responsible for the murder of Don Bolles, the Arizona Republic reporter. Hensley was also in the thick of it with the Keating 5, of which McCain was one of the “5”. I don’t think Obama serving on a non-profit organization with Ayers (whose illegal activities took place when Obama was a child, and who was now a college professor) comes close to McCain’s affiation with organized crime. In 1995 McCain was also invited to the birthday party of crime boss Joe Banano.

Comment by bemused | 2008-10-04 20:02:28

Judy, the population of AZ in the late ’70s was very small. Phoenix was correctly described as “the world’s biggest small town.” Everyone knew everyone, including crooks. The persons who were identified in Don Bolles murder may or may not have been connected with Kemper Marley (get the names, girl), a mover and a shaker and often suspected of not being the nicest person–but! innocent until proven guilty. It would have been impossible to be either well-connected, rich, or politically inclined in those days and not have known people like Marley or Keating, they were everywhere. And being invited to a birthday party is not exactly like being invited to be on a board of directors, hmm? You are really stretching for dirt on Mac.

 
 

Comment by bss | 2008-10-04 13:06:58

No one has answered my question:

Can the argument be made effectively to voters that “exchanging ideas” with Ayres disqualifies one for public office? If so, how do you rectify that with the fact that Ayres is a government employee whose salary is paid in part by Illinois taxpayers and whose job is with a public institution? And that Ayres is employed by the U of I, and has been for years, expressly to “exchange ideas” as a public university professor?

And more importantly: Why has Ayres’/Obama link not resonated with voters so far, and can McCain really make it more important to voters than current-day issues like the economy and the health-care crisis?

 

Comment by ReginaldL | 2008-10-04 19:01:50

Axelrod-inspired astroturfing at no quarter? You bet’cha!

 

Comment by Madison | 2008-10-04 20:12:21

All In the Family The democrats and ceo Fannie mae Freddie Mac and more-Down load this on Disk and send to all…I have it on VCR – DISK -CD- ALL IN THE FAMILY

And download as you see this-

All In the Family
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rodIc9E1g7E

 

Comment by mrkwong | 2008-10-04 20:45:09

bss – the issue is not that Obama ‘exchanged views’ with Ayers. The issue is that anyone whose worldview is close enough to that of Ayers that the Weatherman would find him a useful protege probably ought not be running the country.

We know enough to conclude that Obama and his campaign have lied, repeatedly, about his involvement with Ayers, that while the press strains at the gnat of Sarah Palin being able to see Russia from the state she governs they’re willing to swallow the horse wherein Ayers is just a guy Obama sees in the neighborhood.

So, if it’s such a tiny thing, if their relationship was arm’s-length, why do they feel a need to lie about it? Why will reporters spend days fraudulently editing Sarah Palin videos in an attempt to prove she was a member of AIP but fail to read even the available documents to evaluate the closeness of Ayers’ relationship with Obama? If they think he’s clean, what have they got to lose?

The fact that Ayers is a university employee is not germane; one could argue that the problem is the mindset within the university administration that would permit his hiring in the first place, but I’ll leave that one alone for now.

 

Comment by mrkwong | 2008-10-04 20:57:17

oh and bss – one further point. I do not know why the McCain campaign has not been putting out ‘WANTED’ posters with Barney Frank’s picture on them. Were I in the Senator’s position I’d have been naming names three weeks ago, and I’d be demanding a special prosecutor to look into FNMA’s lobbying and contributions and the recipients thereof. Jesucristo, does McCain think he has to worry about chasing away black voters?

As for healthcare, there is only one candidate in this race who has any personal experience with the healthcare world that the average worker or small businessperson faces. There’s only one candidate in this race who does not at this point have free health insurance for life. There’s only one candidate who has to consider in her future plans that her family would be absolutely uninsurable outside of a big-employer (or government) group plan. And that’s Sarah Palin. For everyone else it’s academic, for her it’s very personal.

 

Comment by Chuck Norton | 2008-10-04 22:46:35

 

RSS Feed for This PostPost a Comment

Name (required)
E-mail (required - never shown publicly)
URI
Your Comment (smaller size | larger size)