Annenberg, Ayers And Obama In The Weekend News
Barack Obama, unrepentant Weatherman Bill Ayers, and their link through their years of effort together on the Chicago Annenberg Challenge was in the news over the weekend.
First, the beginning of the Long Walkback was noted by Steve Diamond (Dean of the Annenberg story):
Perhaps realizing that there is no hope on the Ayers issue, the Obama campaign began its strategic retreat today. They trotted out a local ally in the Chicago school wars, Linda Lenz, to begin the effort. Her job: admit finally that, in fact, there was some kind of relationship between Ayers and Obama after all but "it ain't no big thang."
And over to Ms. Lenz herself:, who relies on the fact that Bill Ayers has been mainstreamed back into Chicago civic life:
In other words, Obama does, indeed, know Bill Ayers as more than just a guy from the neighborhood. So do a host of civic leaders in Chicago. For example, the Chicago Annenberg Challenge board included Susan Crown of the General Dynamics Corp. family; Patricia Graham, former dean of the Harvard Graduate School of Education, and Arnold Weber, past president of Northwestern University and of the Civic Committee of the Commercial Club of Chicago. Indeed, just about everyone active in Chicago school reform in the early days saw Ayers as a colleague. No one ever accused them of being radical because of their association with Bill Ayers.
Whatever one thinks of Ayers’ actions 40 years ago, there is nothing to condemn, and much to admire, about his leadership and commitment over the past 20 years in making schools better places to teach and learn. And there is nothing to condemn, and much to applaud, in Obama’s close association with those efforts.
Well, fine - we eagerly await the day when Obama steps forward and expresses pride in his long, failed association with Bill Ayers as they worked together on public school reform. Meanwhile we continue to wonder - if Obama is so proud of this, why the cover-up?
Clarice Feldman of The American Thinker notes the commencement of the walkback and awaits Obama's arrival at the reparations trap.
Up in Minnesota the Post-Bulletin highlights the media infatuation with Obama and passes this along to their readers:
Or consider Obama's association with Bill Ayers and his wife, Bernardine Dohrn, members of the notorious Weather Underground. The Ayerses bombed the Pentagon during the turbulent '60s and are unrepentant about this terrorist past.
Obama launched his political career at their home, and served as chairman of the board of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, a foundation Ayers founded. But major media have been almost completely uninterested in the story.
Imagine if John McCain had a similar relationship with a right-wing militia leader who had bombed a federal building.
Down Georgia way the Augusta Chronicle tells us "What Obama Doesn't Want You To Know", with highlights of his liberal voting record and this about Ayers:
Meanwhile, as stories come out about his having learned at the feet of socialists and even a communist, Obama has tried to downplay his connections to admitted domestic terrorist William Ayers ('a guy who lives in my neighborhood,' Obama said in a primary debate). But in papers from Ayers' "Chicago Annenberg Challenge" released just this past week after a long battle, it appears the association between Obama and Ayers was much deeper. Obama served on the organization's board for years, for a time as chairman. And Ayers hosted Obama's first campaign fund-raiser.
"They in fact were partners in various entities and regularly exchanged ideas," writes Investor's Business Daily , "including on how to turn Chicago schools into re-education camps to create a generation of social revolutionaries."
Obama isn't just ignoring or running from his past. He's actively trying to cover over it: His campaign has threatened TV stations with their broadcast licenses for running ads noting Obama's link to Ayers.
In Utah the Daily Herald focuses on Ayers in "The company Obama keeps":
Since [Obama] has done so little, we can't very well judge him by his deeds.
National leaders must convey a sense of who they are and what they believe. Think of Ronald Reagan or Harry Truman, for example. But that's where Obama fails. And that's why his friendships and associations are so important and why his association with William Ayers is so troubling.
...
Obama and Ayers attended the same board meetings, retreats and at least one press conference, and met and talked often from 1995-2001. And the 132 boxes of Annenberg papers may yet yield more information.
It's no wonder that Obama's campaign tried to block release of the papers by the library, and has tried to censor ads about the Ayers-Obama relationship.
How could a man who wants to be president work so closely with an unrepentant terrorist? We know how a Harry Truman or a Ronald Reagan would react to a former leader of a group who took the side of America's enemies, and who boasts even now of doing so.
Michael Barone tells us that "Three ghosts haunt Barack": Jeremiah Wright, Bill Ayers, and the Born Alive abortion bill.
John Fund of the Wall Street Journal wants Obama to come clean on the Three Horseman of the Obamalypse:
Obama Should Come Clean On Ayers, Rezko And the Iraqi Billionaire
And finally, here is some coverage of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge in the NY Times...
Psych! They still have not mentioned the Chicago Annenberg Challenge by name in a story although they braced their readers for shocks to come with this from Jim Rutenberg on August 27:
The fight may move to another front this week.
The University of Illinois at Chicago is in the process or releasing documents detailing Mr. Obama’s involvement with a non-profit education project started by Mr. Ayers.
All the news that's fit to print! The Times also has provided one bit of blog coverage at the Opinionator.

John *Fund*, Tom.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | September 02, 2008 at 12:32 AM
He wishes he could find...
Posted by: bad | September 02, 2008 at 12:40 AM
Another post by Doug Ross to add to the other posts he's produced today on CAC:
http://directorblue.blogspot.com/2008/09/im-begging-mccain-to-run-this.html
And an astute reader of the Corner emails Robinson:
Sarah Takes After Abe? [Peter Robinson]
Why, yes, actually, in one important respect, she does. A reader makes a remarkably persuasive case:
All the talk of experience in a VP misses the point; the whole concept of checks and balances implies our founding fathers knew we would be flying by the seat of our pants half the time. So?
Rather than experience we should look towards the concept of mastery. Lincoln is a good example. He spent a fair number of years as a suffling lawyer but he mastered the one great civic-political issue of his day (aside form the moral issue of slavery) - the power and develpment of rail transport in American life. He knew everything there was to know about railroads and land and financing and legal ins and outs concerning the power of rail in the 1850s.
Remember that when you hear Ms. Palin going on about energy. She has mastered the land, legal, technical concepts relating to the oil industry; even more she knows the power politics of big oil as it relates to the biggest state in the union and all the other states as well. Just for fun of it some reporter should ask her: "can you describe what the oil companies are doing to protect their rigs from Hurricane Gustav?" Watch jaws drop as she describes to a "T" what you need to do to protect off-shore rigs from harsh weather.
09/01 11:50 PM
Posted by: larwyn | September 02, 2008 at 12:46 AM
Don't forget father Michael Pfleger:
In April 2004, Barack Obama told a reporter from the Chicago Sun-Times that he had three spiritual mentors or counselors: Jeremiah Wright, James Meeks, and Father Michael Pfleger—for a change of pace, a white Catholic preacher who has a close personal feeling for the man he calls (as does Obama) Minister Farrakhan.
He was a prominent early endorser of Obama's successful 2004 Senate campaign, as well as his unsuccessful 2000 challenge to U.S. Rep. Bobby Rush.
He helped set Barack Obama’s “moral compass” for 22 years — which is longer than Obama has known Wright.
In September, the Obama campaign brought Pfleger to Iowa to host one of several interfaith forums for the campaign. Pfleger has given money to Obama's campaigns and Obama as a state legislator directed at least $225,000 towards social programs at St. Sabina's, according to the Chicago Tribune.
Posted by: ROA | September 02, 2008 at 12:48 AM
Hmmmmmmmmmmm. The real TM appears to be back.
Posted by: Uncle BigBad | September 02, 2008 at 12:59 AM
Whatever one thinks of Ayers’ actions 40 years ago is curious phrasing. "Whether one applauds Ayers' attempts to murder GIs and their girlfriends, or, you know, whatever."
Whatever one thinks of the idea of Linda Lenz spontaneously bursting into flame, that is curious phrasing indeed.
Posted by: bgates | September 02, 2008 at 01:39 AM
larwyn | September 02, 2008 at 12:46 AM
That is the key and the MSM and most of the Ds are going to get blindsided.
Posted by: M. Simon | September 02, 2008 at 01:54 AM
Steve Diamond described how Local School Councils were tried in New York City before Chicago and that they created incredible conflict with the teachers union. I wonder whether another reason that Obama does not want his work on the CAC to become widely known is that it might not be viewed favorably by teachers around the country once they understood what he was trying to do, both before the CAC and during it.
Posted by: daleyrocks | September 02, 2008 at 01:59 AM
the non reportage by the major news outlets is at this point a disgrace. That it will almost inevitably be spun with the Lenz angle is criminally irresponsible.
Noticing the slanted headlines at the NY Times on Palin in comparison: "Disclosures on Palin raise questions on vetting process" and Yahoo "Heat is on Palin, McCain" is nothing short of coded sexism/partisanship.
It does not matter the lengths to which they will go. The Left will do anything and say anything they have to in order to win. The hypocrisy is stunning.
Posted by: matt | September 02, 2008 at 03:09 AM
This is certainly Obama's "Swift Boat" problem.
Let's just hope this takes the same course as last time!
Posted by: Bob | September 02, 2008 at 05:20 AM
Byron York makes a great point his morning:
"As for now, at least, evangelicals seem to be completely on Palin’s side. And McCain’s. This is a group that has been skeptical of McCain in the past. Now, it’s probably fair to say that he has never been more popular among evangelicals than he is at this moment. Whether that will last, or whether Palin will cost McCain support among other voters, is not yet clear. But within the confines of the Republican Convention, McCain’s surprising choice of Palin — and the equally surprising news about her family — is paying off."
Why the Palin Baby Story Matters
I think he's right... McCain may have made more then one great choice with Palin!
Posted by: Bob | September 02, 2008 at 06:10 AM
oops wrong thread sorry!
Posted by: Bob | September 02, 2008 at 06:11 AM
McCain/Palin spokesmen, when they go on these talk shows and are asked about Palin's 17 year old daughter's relationship....they should laugh and start talking about the relationships between Obama and Ayers and ask the media why they are prying into the sexual life of a 17 year old and ignoring the Obama/Ayers relationship.
Posted by: tina | September 02, 2008 at 06:37 AM
What is interesting, and perhaps overlooked, is that serving as the head of the Annenberg Challenge is an executive position. Why doesn't the campaign highlight that? Failure in a position such as that is no reason not to bring it forward as America has thousands of business and private organization leaders who were unsuccessful their first time out. We do overly lionize those that succeed wildly their first try, but failure is no indicator of future success. Very strange not to highlight it... any experience in that realm is better than *none*.
And I do wish to hear much more about Rezko, Auchi, Ayers, Alsammarae,Pfleger, Wright, Davis, Daley, ACORN, all those lovely PACs that contributed to Obama in his State runs... really, can I hope that he will change his ways and come clean on these folks and what they have done for him? Such ingratitude not to acknowledge those that helped you on your way up.
And perhaps a bit more on the Annenberg Challenge as it seems chock-a-block with unaccountable people and money, Cuban training for the Weathermen, why Sen. Obama's name ends up on FARC laptops and a bit of investigation as to how a convicted felon in Iraq is now getting shielding from the current Administration and is a heavy Obama supporter. And how he never took on the corrupt Chitown machine, but benefitted from it.
Just a bit of hopenchangification on those topics from the candidate. Simple for a man who calls for so much... just has to show a smidgen of it for himself. Because before he seeks to change the lives of millions, I would want to see him change the life of one man for the public good: himself.
It is what he is running on.
Posted by: ajacksonian | September 02, 2008 at 06:53 AM
"Imagine if John McCain had a similar relationship with a right-wing militia leader who had bombed a federal building. "
Ive imagined just such a thing and the words JOHN, MCCAIN, DISGRACED, FORMER REPUBLICAN SENATOR, WHO IS SHUNNED BY HIS FORMER PARTY keep popping up.
Posted by: Terry Gain | September 02, 2008 at 07:11 AM
Good Morning to All!
Nice posting, AJacksonian, a lot of us would like to hear those things.
Posted by: Pagar | September 02, 2008 at 07:12 AM
" What is interesting, and perhaps overlooked, is that serving as the head of the Annenberg Challenge is an executive position."
Ive made this very point in a dozen comments, none of which have provoked follow up discusssion.
Posted by: Terry Gain | September 02, 2008 at 07:19 AM
Will an Obama Presidency will be very much like his executive performance at CAC? Tons of money spent and nothing accomplished.
Posted by: Terry Gain | September 02, 2008 at 07:29 AM
"They in fact were partners in various entities and regularly exchanged ideas," writes Investor's Business Daily , "including on how to turn Chicago schools into re-education camps to create a generation of social revolutionaries."
Well, at least the Augusta Chronicle is calling a spade a spade here.
Posted by: Pofarmer | September 02, 2008 at 07:34 AM
Public education is a mess, and Ayers and Obama ought to be the poster boys for it.
========================
Posted by: kim | September 02, 2008 at 07:50 AM
Personally, I'm really interested to know if there is a way to verify the comment a couple of weeks ago on this site by .. I believe .. hydeparker or such, that claimed Ayers and Dohrn had actually babysat the the Obama kids.
It's one thing to serve on a board with your domestic terrorist neighbor, but quite another to entrust your children to them.
Posted by: Neo | September 02, 2008 at 07:54 AM
Ms. Lenz bears further study. as does the Community Renewal Society of which she's a part. They appear to be fellow travelers with Jeremiah Wright and TUCC.
Posted by: DebinNC | September 02, 2008 at 08:16 AM
matt-
the non reportage by the major news outlets is at this point a disgrace. That it will almost inevitably be spun with the Lenz angle is criminally irresponsible.
Couldn't say it better myself. One of those articles included a 22 year old DUI arrest and a fishing permit ticket.
Since the media can do an "investigation" stretching back more than 20 years maybe they can peek into the possibilty that terrorist bomb-maker Ayers and Obama teamed up on education reform in the late 1980's through the DCP and ABC's coalition. However, since Obama would have been new to Chicago then and the ink still wet on Ayers EdD from Columbia maybe they could also undertake an investigation to see if maybe the Obama-Ayers partnership goes back to Morningside Heights and NYC from about 1982-1986 (when Weather Underground trrorists were still active and getting arrested for murder, robberies, gun and bomb-making charges, and obstruction of justice).
You know, a bit of investigative journalism...
Posted by: RichatUF | September 02, 2008 at 08:24 AM
Rich, I've been waiting for the first mention of the possibility that blaming Palin for her husband's driving record, her daughter's pregnancy, or her future son-in-law's fishing violations might be that worst of sins, guilt by association.
Posted by: bgates | September 02, 2008 at 08:38 AM
Yeah and perhaps if Michelle had been a better wife Obama would not have been forced to cavort with terrorists.
The left is funny.
Posted by: Jane | September 02, 2008 at 09:16 AM
bgates-
I've been waiting for the first mention of the possibility that blaming Palin...
I know. I mean those thing say a lot about her as a mother and them as a family. Geez, the Palin's are running around Alaska like they are the Clanton's, or Ivan the Boneless.
Posted by: RichatUF | September 02, 2008 at 09:18 AM
Ive made this very point in a dozen comments, none of which have provoked follow up discusssion
You should be glad, Terry. A failed $160 million dollar boondoggle doesn't speak well of Obama's executive ability.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | September 02, 2008 at 09:26 AM
Except, as near as I can figure, Palin's husband got the DUI before they were married. Poor judgment on her part, marrying a man with a record. /sarc
Posted by: Sue | September 02, 2008 at 09:36 AM
The key things to hammer home when people try to maintream Ayers are:
1) He tried to kill American soldiers on American soil. His only regret about it is he didn't succeed.
2) Ayers' acceptance in "mainstream" Chicago political society is an example of just how corrupt Chicago politics are. If it hadn't been for Daddy Ayers' money and political position, Bill would have been driving a cab like his less violent lefty friends. Obama's friendship with Ayers points out how tollorant Obama is of corruption because Ayers' good standing in Chicago is a direct product of that corruption.
Posted by: Ranger | September 02, 2008 at 10:06 AM
Why the MSM displayed so little interest when an actual Democratic Presidential candidate has an affair with a woman , hires her as his videographer to provide an excuse to travel/hang out together, fathers an illegitimate child with her, denies everything, cheats on his cancer stricken wife , and the MSM says "Move along, no story here".
But a VP candidate has a daughter who is pregnant at 17, will marry the father, and is having the child, well now, there's a real story. Is it any wonder Obama is portrayed as our saviour???
Posted by: bl | September 02, 2008 at 10:08 AM
uhh, Linda Lenz? She is the founder and publisher of Catalyst Chicago. This is the primary print newspaper cheerleader for local school councils in Chicago. Catalyst is where you went if you're Bill Ayers and you can't get any CAC coverage from the Chicago Tribune or Chicago Sun-Times.
Ms. Lenz would safely be classified as a CAC insider.
Posted by: Gabriel Sutherland | September 02, 2008 at 10:19 AM
527s people. 527s.
It is just a matter of time now that there is hoe and change in the air.
Posted by: M. Simon | September 02, 2008 at 10:42 AM
Ive made this very point in a dozen comments, none of which have provoked follow up discusssion
That I've agreed with this all along, and first thought of independent of your comments, is why I never discussed further.
Posted by: Captain Hate | September 02, 2008 at 11:36 AM
It is just a matter of time now that there is hoe and change in the air.
I agree that Michelle is a bit of a pill, but this seems a little rude.
Posted by: Barney Frank | September 02, 2008 at 11:41 AM
Posted by: cathyf | September 02, 2008 at 12:13 PM
By this measure, Harold Stassen, the 4-year perennial "up and comer" who delivered the RNC keynote address in 1940, would have been the best qualified in the last half-century, but this would also make comedian Pat Paulsen more qualified that Obama.
Posted by: Neo | September 02, 2008 at 12:22 PM
What is interesting ... is that serving as the head of the Annenberg Challenge is an executive position.
Maybe, maybe not. Obama was board chair, and in most organizations that is not an executive position. Now this one may have been, as non-profits are a bit different than for-profit organizations, but one would have to look more closely at their structure and the responsibilities of the involved parties. To me it sounds more like Ayers was the executive.
If you want to dig, look here.
Posted by: DrJ | September 02, 2008 at 12:29 PM
My understanding is that Ken Rolling was executive director of the CAC.
Posted by: Porchlight | September 02, 2008 at 01:24 PM
Could well be. In any event, that person was not Obama.
Posted by: DrJ | September 02, 2008 at 01:26 PM
I've got Rollings as the document signer for tax returns and reports. He had the executive director position without doubt. The interesting bit involves an examination of why Obama was even there. His "expertise" involved community organizing, not education. A closer look at his law firm is in order - there's an "open secret" there involving Rezko and progressive rape of the public purse.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | September 02, 2008 at 01:34 PM
It's not as if Barack Obama were appointed as a non-voting, nor an attending board member. He was chosen for the board and chosen to be its chairman.
If chairman of the board isn't executive level experience, what exactly IS executive level experience?
Posted by: Gabriel Sutherland | September 02, 2008 at 02:11 PM
Regarding NYT .. my goodness, is this the same paper running three font-pagers on Alaskan teen pregnancy today?
I'm wondering when the Pinch 'n' Bill Show are going to finally run the tank dry on that newspaper-of-record steamroller over on Times Square.
Posted by: Bob Kunz | September 02, 2008 at 02:27 PM
Gabriel is correct.
I have served as board member, Chairman of the board, president and vice president of a secular non profit and our church.
Being on a board of directors is a de facto if not de jure executive position. It is in essence a super executive position meant to oversee and direct and if necessary overrule the day to day executive positions.
IMO Barry does have a good deal of executive experience and was a miserable failure at it, along with the rest of dopes who squandered all that money. I'd probably be facing charges or at least a civil action, if the non profit I was on had run through $160,000,000 with nothing to show for it.
Posted by: Barney Frank | September 02, 2008 at 02:32 PM
Gabriel,
I finally found the reference which described Obama as "president". In a note concernning his resignation from the "Presidency" of the Board of Directors he is referred to as "the Founding President of the Challenge", a position which he held for four and one-half years.
No job description is furnished for the job of "President of the Board of Directors" but some degree of executive responsibility would seem to be implicit.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | September 02, 2008 at 02:40 PM
I served on a Board of a charitable institution for about 15 years, too, and if I'd behaved in such a fiscally irresponsible way I KNOW we'd all have been sued.
Posted by: clarice | September 02, 2008 at 02:42 PM
The Obama strategy of trying to paint Ayers as mainstream in liberal Democratic circles in Chicago is a gold mine for the GOP. The fact is that Ayers and Dohrn ARE accepted by millions of liberals as part of their mainstream. And that is what Reagan Democrats need to be reminded of.
There are millions of Democrats who were comfortable with ANSWER providing the leadership for the anti-war movement. There are millions of Democrats who love Michael Moore. And millions who agree with Ayers and Dohrn in their denunciations of the USA. A lot of the Dems in those groups served in the Clinton administration and a lot more will serve if Obama wins.
Posted by: stan | September 02, 2008 at 02:46 PM
Who is listed as the "executive director" for the Annenberg Challenge. The ED is usually the one running the show. They meet on a regular basis with the Board Chairman and/or the full Board as a reporting agent. However, the Board makes the rules the ED is charged with administering. The ED is the CEO/CFO. So who was the ED for the CAC?
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | September 02, 2008 at 02:54 PM
Fiduciary responsibility is a different thing: the board has that in spades.
Regarding "executive," in the for-profit world one can have company executives on the board; that is pretty common. There usually are many more non-executive board members. The "founding president" angle to me is interesting, as that would connote executive responsibilities.
I grant that the non-profit world might be a bit different in their organizational structure and responsibilities.
Posted by: DrJ | September 02, 2008 at 03:03 PM
The only board I've been on is a small PTA board in a very small school district, but my Mom was an Executive Director for one of THE largest non-profits in this country, first on a regional basis, each with its own boards, and then at the national headquarters level with ultimate responsibility over all regions nationwide.
Our house was always filled with poster board as she worked on her visual aids for board meetings pre-Powerpoint.
Originally, she started in a small regional area as a board member, then President of the Board, and then when my Dad got sick and she needed to return to full time employment, she resigned from the board and took over in the paid position of ED. Her expertise and what she made her national reputation on was budget, personnel and fund-raising. She traveled, as part of her job, all over the country working with regional EDs on these areas and giving hundreds of seminars. One of her biggest projects was in Obama's Cook County where she helped them raise the millions needed for property and the construction of a year round camping facility and retreat. I remember her complaining that not only did she have to get people to open their pocketbooks but that she had to act as construction manager as well, a job she did not relish. But, it was something everyone else said couldn't be done and that was enough incentive for her to make it happen and happen in a big way.
As she worked her way up to national ED thru various regional ED positions, she had Board presidents she mocked as idiots and she had a few she really admired who became close friends. I remember when she was working in Buffalo, NY, the Board President was the wife of one of the richest men in America at that time and yet when they would go to lunch, the woman counted out her tip to the penny, pointing out that that was the way they got to be so rich, by not wasting money. She was generous but within the 10% or 15% tip that good manners required.
Posted by: Sara (Pal2Pal) | September 02, 2008 at 03:23 PM
So who was the ED for the CAC?
Upthread porchlight said Ken Rolling.
Posted by: DrJ | September 02, 2008 at 03:25 PM