Obama And Ayers Worked Together Once? (Johnson and Maguire Are Now?)
Politics makes strange bedfellows, and I do not refer exclusively to the odd pairing of Barack Obama and unrepentant Weatherman Bill Ayers. Larry Johnson, with whom I have had the occasional disagreement in the past, has a fascinating piece on the Chicago Annenberg Challenge which leads us to believe that Obama has been repeatedly misrepresenting and misunderestimating the extent of his relationship with Ayers.
In 1995, the Chicago Annenberg Challenge was created to raise funds to help reform the Chicago public schools. One of the architects of the Challenge was none other than Professor Bill Ayers. Ayers co-wrote the initial grant proposal and proudly lists himself on his own website as the co-founder of the Challenge.
And who was the Chair of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge Fund in its early years and involved with until 2003? That would be Barack Obama. That is a cozier relationship between these two than we have formerly been led to believe [See, for example the Fox News transcript, in the UPDATE.].
Let me toss into the mix some additional research for my new main man Larry.
Here is a 60 page history of the first three years of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge (and an overview here). Bill Ayers is mentioned repeatedly, but Barack Obama is only mentioned in a late supporting note, and it is far from clear what his role was [Jeralyn Merritt says, not much; Hot Air links to other "Not Muchers"].
And here is a bonus link (indirectly) between Barack Obama and Bill Ayers; both Obama and Ayers' father, Thomas Ayers, served on the “Leadership Council” of the Chicago Public Schools Education Fund.
Interesting - Ayers made himself an authority on public education, and has advised Chicago's current mayor, so he and Barack may well have crossed paths many times. Why public education? To advance the revolution, or so I infer from the Ayers website:
This is my fourth visit to Venezuela, each time at the invitation of my comrade and friend Luis Bonilla, a brilliant educator and inspiring fighter for justice. Luis has taught me a great deal about the Bolivarian Revolution and about the profound educational reforms underway here in Venezuela under the leadership of President Chavez. We share the belief that education is the motor-force of revolution, and I’ve come to appreciate Luis as a major asset in both the Venezuelan and the international struggle—I look forward to seeing how he and all of you continue to overcome the failings of capitalist education as you seek to create something truly new and deeply humane.
Dare we ask whether Obama shared these values?
Stray Thought - wasn't Michelle Obama hired to work for Daley in some capacity [Yes, and thanks.]? Did she and Ayers also intersect? One wonders, since Mr. Johnson notes a possible overlap of Michelle Obama and William Ayers' wife, Bernardine Dohrn, at Sidley Austin. In fact, this post about Thomas Ayers and Obama is thought-provoking, especially since Obama seems to be conflating the father and son in his Fox News interview (see UPDATE below).
UPDATE: Here is how Obama described his relationship to Ayers on Fox News:
Now, Mr. Ayres [Ayers] is a 60 plus year old individual who lives in my neighborhood, who did something that I deplore 40 years ago when I was six or seven years old. By the time I met him, he was a professor of education at the University of Illinois.
We served on a board together that had Republicans, bankers, lawyers, focused on education, who worked for Mayor Daley. Mayor Daley, the same Mayor Daley probably who when he was a state attorney prosecuted Mr. Ayres’s wife for those activities, I (INAUDIBLE) the point is that to somehow suggest that in any way I endorse his deplorable acts 40 years ago, because I serve on a board with him.
The board to which he refers is a bit of a mystery. Obama and Ayers both served on the board of the Woods Fund of Chicago, but that was not "focused on education" and working for Mayor Daley. And I don't think it would be fair to say the Annenberg Challenge Fund worked for Daley.
On the other hand, the Leadership Council of the Chicago Public Schools Education Fund, noted above, seems to fit the description, but it was Ayers pere who was on the board.
The plot thickens. My take is that in this answer Obama is alluding to the Chicago Annenberg Challenge Fund, but inaccurately, while overlooking the well-known Woods Fund of Chicago link. However, if there is yet another board connection between Ayers and Obama, bring it on.
In any case, the circumstances of the Ayers 1995 fund-raiser for Barack become much more intriguing. Since Obama and Ayers worked together in 1995 as founder and Chair of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge Fund, the idea that Ayers was just some guy from the neighborhood who happened to host a 1995 fundraiser for Barack is hard to sustain.
Obama also described his link to Ayers in the recent Philadelphia debate. First, let's note how little Stephanopoulos knew:
An early organizing meeting for your state senate campaign was held at his house, and your campaign has said you are friendly. Can you explain that relationship for the voters, and explain to Democrats why it won't be a problem?
And from Obama:
SEN. OBAMA: George, but this is an example of what I'm talking about [i.e., a distraction].
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.
The Hillary oppo research had done a better job than Stephanopoulos, but still missed the Annenberg education link:
SEN. CLINTON: Well, I think that is a fair general statement, but I also believe that Senator Obama served on a board with Mr. Ayers for a period of time, the Woods Foundation, which was a paid directorship position. And if I'm not mistaken, that relationship with Mr. Ayers on this board continued after 9/11 and after his reported comments, which were deeply hurtful to people in New York, and I would hope to every American, because they were published on 9/11 and he said that he was just sorry they hadn't done more.
Times reporters also missed the Annenberg connection in their post-debate follow up, as did Fox News, and per News.Google I see that only Hot Air has a story on "Annenberg Obama Ayers", and that is 40 minute old.
OK, let's have a cheering thought - McCain has been pushing Ayers but not Wright as his Obama scandal of choice. One bit of speculation I saw (sorry for the no-link right now) is that McCain prefers to thump Obama on the white terrorist rather than the racially charged charged angry black minister. But suppose McCain's people (or the RNC) have done their homework and figure there is more to Ayers than has met the eye?
We already have Obama being very parsimonious with the truth during a nationally televised debate and in a Fox interview. What else may develop?
FISHING AT THE AYERS BLOG: I am just paging through Ayers' posts on education, and this caught my eye:
If an historian speaks about Palestinian rights at Columbia University today, for example, the call goes up for “balance.” If an Israeli diplomat defends Israeli policies at the same place, there is no comparable hue and cry.
Ayers is quite an admirer of Edmund Said (Surprised?) and has an extended discussion of some Palestinian issues.
Military recruiting in the high schools is discussed here (Ayers is opposed.)
Time does not permit, but these are education-related values and positions held by Bill Ayers, a one-time colleague of Barack Obama. Dare one ask, why did Obama choose to work with this guy?

The split in the democrat party is simply breathtaking!
Posted by: Jane | April 27, 2008 at 01:30 PM
Careful, Maguire--if you get too close to Larry you may find yourself becoming dangerously fat and unattractive.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | April 27, 2008 at 01:34 PM
Johnson couldn't find his ass with his own hands--someone fed that tidbit to him. Does it help that he's been backing Hill all along? Oh, naughty me for suggesting that.
Posted by: clarice | April 27, 2008 at 01:42 PM
He and Joe Wilson have been huge Hillary backers throughout the campaign. I honestly believe they thought they might get jobs in a Clinton administration. If the next prez is anyone other than HRC, Larry will go back to being a security-guard wannabe like he's always been.
And I eagerly await Joe's being frog-marched out of court by the D.C. Circuit.
Anyone know the status of that appeal?
Posted by: Danube of Thought | April 27, 2008 at 01:51 PM
Stray Thought - wasn't Michelle Obama hired to work for Daley in some capacity?
"In 1991, the death of her father [a Dem precinct captain] from complications related to MS caused Michelle to re-evaluate her life. She left corporate law to work in the public sector, first as assistant to Chicago mayor Richard M. Daly, later as the assistant commissioner of planning and development." link.
Posted by: DebinNC | April 27, 2008 at 01:52 PM
if you know anything about Chicago, you know the amazing failure of the Chicago public schools. if this is an example of the Ayers/Obama synergy, get ready for a disaster.
Posted by: ed | April 27, 2008 at 01:53 PM
Did Obama ever attend an American public school? Are his daughters still in the private U of C school?
Posted by: DebinNC | April 27, 2008 at 01:58 PM
IMO, Ayers would not consider it a failure as long as he can present his Anti-American agenda to students and get converts.
Posted by: pagar | April 27, 2008 at 02:01 PM
Lots of folks have worked with Ayers. The right-leaning Chicago Tribune, which hasn't endorsed a Democrat for president since 1872 and which endorsed McCain in the Republican primary, has published several Ayers pieces over the years.
Posted by: Foo Bar | April 27, 2008 at 02:17 PM
Mr. Johnson notes a possible overlap of Michelle Obama and William Ayers' wife, Bernardine Dohrn, at Sidley Austin.
That is a facinating tidbit, if true, because Dohrn was apparently hired, but then let go by Sidley Austin because she couldn't be admitted to the Bar in Illinois due to her citation for criminal contempt in the case where the two police and one security gaurd were killed. If Michelle Obama was there when that happened, then she presumably knew that Dohrn (and probably Ayers too) had serious issues that would be a political liability for Barack when he entered politics.
It also leads one to think that, rather than the way it has been presented (that Barack and Ayers are friends because they have crossed paths on these public endeavors), in fact, they partnered up on the public endeavors because they were already friends.
Posted by: Ranger | April 27, 2008 at 02:26 PM
This is not the relationship that BrockO described when he was asked about his association with Ayres.
Posted by: MikeS | April 27, 2008 at 02:26 PM
Lots of folks have worked with Ayers.,/i>
Only one running for President. (This from a right leaning republican)
Posted by: Jane | April 27, 2008 at 02:32 PM
oops
Posted by: Jane | April 27, 2008 at 02:32 PM
Lots of folks have worked with Ayers. The right-leaning Chicago Tribune, which hasn't endorsed a Democrat for president since 1872 and which endorsed McCain in the Republican primary, has published several Ayers pieces over the years.
Posted by: Foo Bar | April 27, 2008 at 02:17 PM
Yes, Old Man Ayers' money and power certainly purchased young Billy and his Wife a lot of forgiveness in Chicago. As the chairman of the board of Commonweath Eddison, the main electricity utility in the Chicagoland area and the chairman of the Board of Trusties of Northwestern University, he had a lot of both. As one member of the Northwestern Law faculty noted, the hiring of Dohrn due to her father in laws influence ammounted to the "laundering of evil."
Well, as far as I am concerned, it doesn't matter how many times you launder it, it is still evil, and those who have willingly done the wash for it, will carry its stain as well.
Its also interesting the way so many on the left now jump to defend Ayers and Dohrn. I though the kind of old boy networks and interpersonal relationships that were used to grease their way into positions of power and comfort were exactly what the lift is always fighting against.
Posted by: Ranger | April 27, 2008 at 02:35 PM
Lots of folks have worked with Ayers
It's not the crime, but the cover up that concerns me.
Posted by: MikeS | April 27, 2008 at 02:38 PM
Lots of folks have worked with Ayers.
Looks to me like Ayers wrote several articles about Chicago Public Education (which he is apparently well-informed about), and the Trib published 'em. How that is compelling evidence others worked with him (or redeems his political [terrorist] past) is beyond me. And Larry Johnson was actually informative about something. A first!
Posted by: Cecil Turner | April 27, 2008 at 02:46 PM
Here is a 60 page history of the first three years of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge
PDF created 9/15/1999
modified 9/29/2004
Bill Ayers is mentioned repeatedly, but Barack Obama is only mentioned in a late supporting note, and it is far from clear what his role was.
And who was the Chair of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge Fund from 1995 to 2001? That would be Barack Obama.
does not compute, how can Obama be the inaugural Chairman and not be mentioned in "The First Three Years"?
wayback machine on the websites?
Posted by: windansea | April 27, 2008 at 02:50 PM
(or redeems his political [terrorist] past)
It doesn't redeem Ayers' past, but I do think it's useful perspective when assessing how (un)usual it was for Obama to have some affiliation with him or whether it was a truly grave error in judgment to associate with him.
Do you want to argue that his association with Ayers reflects very poorly on Obama but the Trib's association with Ayers does not reflect poorly at all on the Trib? Is Ayers a guy that's supposed to be shunned by polite society, or isn't he?
Posted by: Foo Bar | April 27, 2008 at 03:02 PM
"The right-leaning Chicago Tribune...has published several Ayers pieces over the years."
This is supposed to prove something? The New York Times regulary publishes David Brooks and William Kristol. The Wall Street Journal has published George McGovern and Alan Dershowitz. National Review has published Garry Wills. The Boston Globe and the Washington Post have published William F. Buckley, Jr.
Please, Foo Bar, tell us what it all means.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | April 27, 2008 at 03:02 PM
does not compute, how can Obama be the inaugural Chairman and not be mentioned in "The First Three Years"?
Well, it could have been a purely cerimonial position being "President of the Board of Directors." If so, then it was given to him as a plumb to pad his resume for future political endeavors. In fact, that is exactly what I imagine it was, because administering a 50 mil grant is a big deal and might actually show some executive experiance. The fact that he doesn't mention it means that there probably was minimal actual work involved in the position.
Posted by: Ranger | April 27, 2008 at 03:03 PM
"Is Ayers a guy that's supposed to be shunned by polite society, or isn't he?"
Of course he's not, Foo Bar--he's as mainstream as apple pie. Keep hope alive.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | April 27, 2008 at 03:04 PM
does not compute, how can Obama be the inaugural Chairman and not be mentioned in "The First Three Years"?
Cover-up?
To me, it seems that Obama has not been forthcoming about his relationship with Ayers.
Posted by: MikeS | April 27, 2008 at 03:05 PM
Do you want to argue that his association with Ayers reflects very poorly on Obama but the Trib's association with Ayers does not reflect poorly at all on the Trib?
What association does the Trib have with Ayers? He apparently founded one of the education funds, and advises the Mayor on education. Should they not publish his pieces on a topic in which he is obviously expert? Isn't that a perfectly ad hominem argument?
Posted by: Cecil Turner | April 27, 2008 at 03:10 PM
Do you want to argue that his association with Ayers reflects very poorly on Obama but the Trib's association with Ayers does not reflect poorly at all on the Trib? Is Ayers a guy that's supposed to be shunned by polite society, or isn't he?
Posted by: Foo Bar | April 27, 2008 at 03:02 PM
I think it reflects very badly on the Chicago Tribune (which, by the way, is far from "right leaning" and paved the way for Obama's Senate seat by going to court to unseal Jack Ryan's divorce papers).
The fact that Daddy Ayers' wealth and power was able to "fix" things for Bill and his wife is a shame on the entire Chicago political and social system (one of many I may note).
Posted by: Ranger | April 27, 2008 at 03:12 PM
Please, Foo Bar, tell us what it all means.
Your analogy doesn't work. If Ayers were merely a guy with far-left views with no history of violence, this wouldn't be much of a story. Brooks, Kristol, etc., are not ex-terrorists.
Posted by: Foo Bar | April 27, 2008 at 03:14 PM
For some reason Foo Bar wants us to know that the Trib has published Mr. Ayers, but makes no mention of the fact that the New York Times has done so as well. (It also published the Unabomber.)
Could that have anything to do with the fact that in his NY Times piece the mainstream Mr. Ayers regretted not having set off more bombs?
Posted by: Danube of Thought | April 27, 2008 at 03:15 PM
Should they not publish his pieces on a topic in which he is obviously expert?
Right, Ayers is an education expert. Should Obama have not worked with Ayers via this Chicago Annenberg Challenge Fund, which was about reforming public schools?
Posted by: Foo Bar | April 27, 2008 at 03:19 PM
scrub a dub dub
I've got terrorists in my tub
Posted by: windansea | April 27, 2008 at 03:21 PM
It appears that FooBar, The Chicago Tribune, and Barack Obama have all forgiven Ayers.
I do think that is an example of bad judgment.
Posted by: MikeS | April 27, 2008 at 03:21 PM
Lots of folks have worked with Ayers.
Lots of folks have run for President, too, but the two circles seem to overlap with just one person. And that one person seems to be pretty hazy about what his relationship with Ayers has been (see the Fox transcript or the recent debate). Where there's smoke and a guy with a fire extinguisher, there may have been a fire.
Posted by: Tom Maguire | April 27, 2008 at 03:22 PM
If Ayers were merely a guy with far-left views with no history of violence, this wouldn't be much of a story. Brooks, Kristol, etc., are not ex-terrorists.
Posted by: Foo Bar | April 27, 2008 at 03:14 PM
Ironically, you hit the nail directly on the head.
"If Ayers were mearly a guy with far-left view with no history of violence, this wouldn't be much of a story"
This is a man who attempted to commit mass murder at Ft. Dix the same way the Tim McViegh and Terry Nicholes did in OKC. The fact that his cohorts blew themselves up with the nail bombs before they could plant them does not erase the fact that the intent was there, and that, to this day, Ayers has not admitted any regret at all except that they didn't succeed at killing all those NCO and their wives and girlfriends that night.
So, yes, the calculus is different, and this is a story because of his violent past and his refusal to repent for it. Do you think that if Terry Nicholes prosecution had been preveted by government action, and he went and got a PhD in education and wanted to publish something on school reform, anyone would touch it regardless of how well thought out or written it was?
Posted by: Ranger | April 27, 2008 at 03:25 PM
How about working with him to give a hefty donation to a racist pastor's church?
Ayers's "expertise" is manifested in his November, 2007 remarks describing the US as a place of "great stress, and oppression, and authoritarianism," and bemoaning "a kind of rising incipient American form of fascism."
Foo Bar is exquisitely correct in noting that the persons I identified, unlike Ayers, are not ex-terrorists. They are simply people who get published in organs that disagree with them editorially, an event that happens every day.
If you think Ayers's views of today's America are mainstream, go ahead and say so. And say so as often as possible from now until November, and we'll leave it up to the electorate to decide.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | April 27, 2008 at 03:26 PM
(It also published the Unabomber.)
Kaczynski's terrorism was ongoing at the point, he hadn't been caught yet, and the Justice Deparment recommended that the NYT and WaPo publish the manifesto out of concern for public safety and with the hope that someone would recognize his writing style and help catch him.
That's completely different from the Ayers situation. He was a prof at UIC and hadn't been considered dangerous for decades. The suggestion, though, is that decent people should not have associated with him.
Posted by: Foo Bar | April 27, 2008 at 03:37 PM
Larry's blog does provide some entertaining
Reading
"The truly scary part is that Obama stands for, essentially, nothing."
"Obama stands for Obama."
"His entire campaign has been premised on creating a cult-like adoration of him as a transformational figure."
"The issues be damned."
"That worked incredibly well for a rather long time. As po’ Barry himself has complained, this campaign has gone on so long that babies have started walking and talking since he began running for president."
Posted by: pagar | April 27, 2008 at 03:39 PM
Right, Ayers is an education expert.
With no association with the Trib.
The suggestion, though, is that decent people should not have associated with him.
Yep.
Posted by: Cecil Turner | April 27, 2008 at 03:41 PM
I'm thinking that either another shoe will drop on the Ayres connection, or somebody will come up with a racial angle and say we can't discuss it.
Posted by: MikeS | April 27, 2008 at 03:48 PM
I came across a tit bit on a Dem site today (I'd have to look it up) that through various foundations and boards Bomber Ayers was Words Obama's boss for 8 years.
Might have been a different thread on the Larry Johnson site.
Posted by: M. Simon | April 27, 2008 at 03:51 PM
Lots of folks have run for President
Now that I have your attention, I wonder if you would be willing to fix your McCain/maverick post to reflect that fact that McCain-Feingold got eleven Republican votes in the Senate, not one, as you incorrectly recalled. I don't know if you maybe meant "got one Republican vote" as some sort of humorous exaggeration, but I'm sure it was read literally as your recollection of the facts by the majority of readers.
Posted by: Foo Bar | April 27, 2008 at 03:51 PM
With no association with the Trib.
Decent people shouldn't "associate" with him, but it's fine to publish him in the leading paper of one of America's largest cities, thereby increasing his prestige and influence. OK, then.
Posted by: Foo Bar | April 27, 2008 at 03:54 PM
Did Obama ever attend an American public school? Are his daughters still in the private U of C school?
It is called the Lab School. They still attend.
BTW the Trib hasn't been right leaning for years.
They traded places with the Sun Times. (which is nominally the South Side [black] paper)
The Trib now leans liberal and the Sun Times leans conservative.
Posted by: M. Simon | April 27, 2008 at 03:57 PM
Most vets will tell you that tail-chasing is nothing to be alarmed
about in a very young dog...
But when older dogs chase their tails, this may be a sign of
anxiety, boredom, frustration, canine compulsive disorder, or physical
problems such as fleas and irritated anal glands. The tendency toward
tail-chasing behavior is sometimes genetic in certain breeds
(including bull terriers, fox terriers, and Jack Russell terriers).
Posted by: MikeS | April 27, 2008 at 03:57 PM
"The suggestion, though, is that decent people should not have associated with him."
Not if they want to be president of the United States. Not close. Obama will suffer for this association, and he should. Just as McCain should suffer if he'd had a long association with David Duke or Pat Robertson. G.W. Bush was pilloried for a single appearance at Bob Jones University. The idea that Obama's associations with these nutballs ought not be discussed is simply ludicrous.
And if it were merely an effort to associate with those holding a wide range of disparate views, we'd have a list of his associations with conservatives over the years. We don't; there are none. Pressed to come up with one recently, the best he could do was to call Senator Coburn--whom he met in 2005--a "friend."
He's an oily fellow with a bad habit of hanging out with fringe loonies. Go ahead and tell me that's off limits in a presidential campaign.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | April 27, 2008 at 03:57 PM
Poor Foo Bar is still hung up on Maguire's innocent typo.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | April 27, 2008 at 03:59 PM
. . . but it's fine to publish him in the leading paper . . .
He was advising the (Democrat) mayor on education. Pretending that there's something wrong with publishing his views on the subject--or that that constitutes a right-wing endorsement--is silly. (The mayor working with him in the first place displays some questionable judgment, however.)
Posted by: Cecil Turner | April 27, 2008 at 04:02 PM
Poor Foo Bar is still hung up on Maguire's innocent typo.
sometimes genetic in certain breeds
Posted by: MikeS | April 27, 2008 at 04:02 PM
"To me, it seems that Obama has not been forthcoming about his relationship with Ayers."
BHO's not exactly "all in" wrt his candidacy, is he? Gotta keep the Chicago wheels greased if he doesn't want to repeat Carol Moseley Braun fantastic single term performance. That is, unless he's already awaiting indictment for some Rezko (or other) indiscretions.
One might think that he already knows what's written on the last page of this farce pretending to be drama. He should.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | April 27, 2008 at 04:06 PM
BTW the Trib hasn't been right leaning for years.
Their endorsements for other offices aren't entirely predictable, but they endorsed GWB in '04, and they haven't endorsed a Dem for president since 1872. In any case, the relevant time period is the period over which Ayers' pieces were published. That goes back at least as far as 1988.
Posted by: Foo Bar | April 27, 2008 at 04:15 PM
BHO's not exactly "all in" wrt his candidacy, is he?
Yup, and it's not just passive omissions. Obama seems to have been actively obfuscating on the Ayres connection.
Posted by: MikeS | April 27, 2008 at 04:16 PM
He was a prof at UIC and hadn't been considered dangerous for decades.
By whom?
Posted by: Jane | April 27, 2008 at 04:32 PM
I want all those who are in an uproar about Ayers to state their position on Oliver North -- whose prosecution was similarly stymied for technical reasons.
North, while no terrorist, was certainly willing to sell arms to a terrorist nation. And, last time I checked, he is being hailed as a hero in certain right wing precincts (not here, to my knowledge). North is now worth millions and giving speeches with the sponsorship and the support of the US marines.
So, how do you feel about that, folks?
Oh -- as for Ayers -- you can take the measure of a leftist's sincerity and intelligence by whether or not he openly supports Hugo Chavez. If he is a Chavez supporter, he is either not capable of thought, or too anti-american to bother with it. As for Obama's association -- it still feels far more tangental than hsi association with Wright, and far more explicable.
Posted by: Appalled | April 27, 2008 at 04:41 PM