Jerome Corsi, who co-authored the 2004 Swift Boat classic "Unfit for Command" that helped scuttle the SS Kerry is back for Barack. The NY Times reviews the effort. Shorter - there are a few mistakes, so ignore the whole thing. How did that strategy work when the Times covered for Kerry?
Yes, surprisingly, the Times did cover for Kerry in 2004 (Hmm, if I quickly cite a couple of laughable Times errors and omissions will that invalidate their coverage the way a few errors invalidated Corsi's book?)
We know that the mainstream media covered for John Edwards in the fall of 2007.
So what are the odds that the Times will run down any of the charges against Obama from the new Corsi book?
Glenn Reynolds has been wondering what other secrets the media is sitting on and what other stories they are not pursuing that might damage Obama. I have a nominee.
Just prior to the Pennsylvania primary Barack Obama was asked at a Democratic debate about his relationship with unrepentant Weatherman Bill Ayers. Obama pretended that he was only casually acquainted with Ayers, describing him as "a guy who lives in my neighborhood, who's a professor of English in Chicago...". Hilary provided a bracing corrective, reminding people that the two men had served on a charitable board together, the Woods Fund of Chicago.
This exchange was newsworthy enough to provoke coverage in the Chicago Sun-Times, and the NY Times; earlier stories had sparked The "Fact Checker" at the Washington post.
And yet! All of these hard-working professionals gave Obama a pass for a very casual relationship with Ayers, citing the charitable board, some joint panel appearances, and a fund-raiser hosted by Ayers. The Barack Obama web site produced a classic of non-disclosure which confirmed these points but added nothing.
None of these sleuths discovered that there was quite a bit more to the story. Barack Obama and Bil Ayers worked together for several years on the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, an educational reform group co-founded in 1995 by Bill Ayers and chaired by Barack Obama. How did Obama forget this? Possibly because the group's effort at public school reform were a failure.
And how did Ayers happen to tap Obama for the chairmanship of this group? Probably because they became acquainted in 1987, before Obama headed off to Harvard, in an earlier go at Chicago school reform.
So Obama has a relationship with Ayers that can be documented from 1995 and almost surely came into being in 1987. Jerome Corsi mentions the Annenberg Challenge in his book - any guesses as to whether Media Matters, the Times, or the WaPo will fact-check that? Obama either lied (by ommisison) or had an absurdly hazy memory at the debate and in the web-site follow-up - any chance the media will wonder what he is hiding and why?
The truth will out - Steve Diamond of Global Labor owns this story and I am riding in his wake - but the Times will be the last to find this news that's fit to print.
I live in Obama's neighborhood and know some of the Obama / Ayers crowd. Ayers and Dohrn have babysat the Obama kids personally. The families are personal friends, not just professional acquaintances.
Posted by: hydeparker | August 13, 2008 at 01:41 PM
I live in Obama's neighborhood and know some of the Obama / Ayers crowd. Ayers and Dohrn have babysat the Obama kids personally. The families are personal friends, not just professional acquaintances.
Posted by: hydeparker | August 13, 2008 at 01:42 PM
Right now the average voter has no idea who William Ayers and Bernadette Dohrn are; they need to figure it out by election day.
Posted by: hrtshpdbox | August 13, 2008 at 01:45 PM
No one has been able to find any statements by Obama regarding South Ossetia or Abkhazia prior to this past week.
Posted by: Neo | August 13, 2008 at 01:51 PM
The average black voter will vote for Obama because he looks black. The average young voter will vote for Obama because they think it is cool. The average rich liberal will vote for Obama because it assuages their guilt at being rich. All of these people will outnumber the voters that actually comprehend the Obama is an empty suit controlled by the Chicago Democrat machine at best, and a socialist Muslim-terrorist-sympathizer at worst.
Posted by: ben | August 13, 2008 at 01:55 PM
I'm still thinking the Republican 527's are going to use Ayers and Dohrn to wipe Obama out in October, when normal voters start paying attention.
Posted by: Buford Gooch | August 13, 2008 at 01:59 PM
Can someone find for me Obama's hidden commie agenda? The only hidden agenda I can seem to find is the rather moderate one he hid from primary voters.
Seriously, why do you think, TM, that will Obama will endanger his own "Oneness" by suddenly turning into Mad Bad Lefty Bomber Liberation Theology Guy after inauguration? I don't buy it -- the only thing this is going to do is increase the crowd under Obama's bus.
Posted by: Appalled | August 13, 2008 at 02:06 PM
For the sake of your readership, you might summarize in a sentence or two what the problem with Ayers is. Not everyone will know.
Posted by: Mister Snitch! | August 13, 2008 at 02:20 PM
"All of these people will outnumber the voters that actually comprehend the Obama is an empty suit"
I doubt it. Captain Zero has:
Blacks - 84% of 11% of the electorate = 9.4%
13%ers - 88% of the 20% (13% plus leaners) = 17.6%
18-34 64% of the 24% = 15.6%
Total = 42.2%
Subtract overlap of 18-34 black of 2.2% and overlap of 18-34 dingbats of 4.2% and his "solid core" is 35.6% if 18-34s vote at historic levels. A more realistic core is about 28%, not much better than Kerry.
Watch the <$50K income and 35+ F demographics - those (as Penn noted) are the ones which will wind up beating him.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | August 13, 2008 at 02:20 PM
Ben - we don't need them all. We just need enough centrist/moderate/conservative Democrats & Independents to add to the McCain Republican base.
That's the target and Ayer's the bomb.
50.1%, baby. 50.1%
Posted by: Greg Toombs | August 13, 2008 at 02:25 PM
It'd be nice if more people cared about this. I don't think too many people are going to be fond of a candidate who's proud of taking part in an event organized by people linked to a foreign government, especially one that's actively meddling in our internal politics. Not to mention the fact that one of the key organizers is an official with a foreign political party.
Posted by: TLB | August 13, 2008 at 02:26 PM
The only hidden agenda I can seem to find is the rather moderate one he hid from primary voters.
And that's hard to find, considering he also hid it from his high school mentor, his college buddies, his church of 20 years, his state legislature constituents, and the rest of the Senate.
Not to mention France, Germany, and MSNBC.
Posted by: bgates | August 13, 2008 at 02:27 PM
"..will Obama will endanger his own "Oneness" by suddenly turning into Mad Bad Lefty Bomber Liberation Theology Guy after inauguration?"
C'mon, no one thinks that, that's not the issue. What does one think, though, of a politician who attempts to drastically downplay the extent of his associations with certain people (Ayers, Wright, Rezco, etc.)? What kind of leader, what caliber of judgement, can we expect from someone who would establish relationships so obviously to his own political detriment?
Posted by: hrtshpdbox | August 13, 2008 at 02:27 PM
the only thing this is going to do is increase the crowd under Obama's bus.
All the better to grease his slide into oblivion.
Posted by: M. Simon | August 13, 2008 at 02:30 PM
TLB - it would be nice if more people cared about that kind of thing. We'd have two entirely different candidates.
Posted by: bgates | August 13, 2008 at 02:30 PM
Is Obama Guilty by Association?
Guilt by Association is false evidence when convicting someone of a crime. A person is not guilty because his father, brother, friend, or employee is guilty. The association may be reason for more investigation, but it alone is not evidence against that person.
Politics for a voter is about understanding, ideas, and truth. What is a politician's understanding and bias about the world? What are his ideas? Is he telling the truth about his thoughts and conclusions, or is he merely saying what we want to hear?
(http://easyopinions.blogspot.com/2008/04/is-obama-guilty-by-association.html>More at EasyOpinions)
Posted by: Andrew Garland | August 13, 2008 at 02:31 PM
"Is he telling the truth about his thoughts and conclusions, or is he merely saying what we want to hear?"
When it comes to describing the nature of his relationships with unsavory characters, he is clearly (and merely) saying what we want to hear.
Posted by: hrtshpdbox | August 13, 2008 at 02:33 PM
Is he telling the truth about his thoughts and conclusions, or is he merely saying what we want to hear?
He sought out a Marxist mentor and looked for Marxist professors. In his own words.
But it is just guilt by word associations.
Posted by: M. Simon | August 13, 2008 at 02:35 PM
Well, appalled, if you are one of those who believes that "there is no enemy on the Left" then I suppose Obama does appear moderate. Moderately Left of most of the Left of American politics.
Personally, I like the part where we're going to have an internal problem-solving mechanism similar to, only bigger and better funded than, the military. I've seen the good these have done in places like Cuba, the USSR, N Korea and China. YMMV.
Posted by: JorgXMcKie | August 13, 2008 at 02:36 PM
Let me just point out that Corsi's a very poor vessel in which to launch our hopes of beating Obama. Corsi spent last year flogging the ridiculous North American Union story, and in January of this year--seven months ago--he was telling fruitcake radio host Alex Jones that he had become a 9-11 Truther.
http://www.youtube.com/v/-yCfI3VmL88
Posted by: Pat Curley | August 13, 2008 at 02:37 PM
Posted by: David Walser | August 13, 2008 at 02:38 PM
No one has been able to find any statements by Obama regarding South Ossetia or Abkhazia prior to this past week
That will require backfilling some stories, but it can be done. Not as easy as having Google wipe the cache of your website, so you can change your Iraq position; but it can be done. Orwell covered how this is done a while back.
Posted by: Leland | August 13, 2008 at 02:40 PM
"No one has been able to find any statements by Obama regarding South Ossetia or Abkhazia prior to this past week."
Neo: How likely did the One know what and where South Ossetia or Abkhazia were? He didn't even know where Arkansas and Kansas were.
Posted by: ic | August 13, 2008 at 02:41 PM
that will Obama will endanger his own "Oneness" by suddenly turning into Mad Bad Lefty Bomber Liberation Theology Guy after inauguration
Past behavior.
Posted by: Sue | August 13, 2008 at 02:43 PM
Neo, yesterday I found (and posted) a statement Obama had made on July 23 about South Ossetia, and his website has supposedly posted one from April (I haven't checked).
Pew Research: Who would better handle an international crisis?
--McCain 51%
--Obama 36%
The last time they posed this question, McCain's margin was 9%.
Be afraid, you True Believers. Be very afraid.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | August 13, 2008 at 02:43 PM
I never thought I would be so excited about McCain being in a tie for president.
http://hotair.com/archives/2008/08/13/pew-mccain-pulls-into-a-draw/>Dead Heat
Posted by: Sue | August 13, 2008 at 02:45 PM
RickB, what does the following mean:
"13%ers - 88% of the 20% (13% plus leaners) = 17.6%"
Posted by: Danube of Thought | August 13, 2008 at 02:45 PM
Hmmm. Andrew, it is not guilt BY association so much as guilt OF association.
Obama dissembled about his association with Ayers. Not to put too fine a point on it. Obama did not want us to know the truth.
Obama certainly does not want us to know much about the educational grant frittering that their association accomplished.
And Obama does not want us to look into the kind of people he keeps associating with. Would you associate with Ayers or his wife? Would you associate with anyone who would?
---
And Appalled, when are you going to stop manufacturing straw men and use your keen intellect for the better understanding of the world around us? I know you have the skill, if not the will.
Posted by: sbw | August 13, 2008 at 02:47 PM
A http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0208/8630.html>reminder of how the whole Ayers connection drip drip dripped out:
I've always loved the term 'no evidence' in that story.
Posted by: MayBee | August 13, 2008 at 02:53 PM
" ... My concern is that he won't be constrained by Congress, so some of these more extreme policies might become law. ..."
With Dems controlling both the House and the Senate, he won't be constrained.
Worse, they'll fast-track his appointments to the judiciary.
Thus, Dem control of ALL 3 branches of government. Scary.
Posted by: fdcol63 | August 13, 2008 at 02:58 PM
Posted by: Neo | August 13, 2008 at 03:02 PM
The biggest cover-up is of Obama's Islamofascist connections, in particular his close relationship with Kenyan Prime Minister Raila Odinga, whose other best buddy is Moammar Ghaddafi. Odinga calls himself an Anglican Christian, but signed a Memorandum of Understanding with Muslims leaders where he first declares that he is actually a Muslim (stating that Islam is the only true religion) then promises to impose sharia law if elected. (The agreement became public knowledge when Muslim leaders decided to brag about it in late 2007.)
Given that Obama was raised Muslim (and has lied about it), the fact that his closest political confidant has been exposed as a secret Islamofascist ought to be front page news across the country. Full expose at my link.
Posted by: Alec Rawls | August 13, 2008 at 03:05 PM
This coming a few weeks after ...
Posted by: Neo | August 13, 2008 at 03:05 PM
The connections just go on and on. From the same source you linked to above, when Obama met his wife in 1989 she was working for the same law firm which hired Ayers' wife Bernardine Dohrn, doing so, as its Managing Partner at the time has recently admitted, as a favor to Ayers' father.
This was at a time when Dohrn's convictions for terrorism made it virtually impossible for her to find legal work elsewhere.
Obama's description of Ayers as an English professor who lived in his neighborhood was a breathtaking piece of misdirection and lying to the public, something he never would have dared had he not been both reckless and confident that the press would cover for him.
Posted by: Nomenklatura | August 13, 2008 at 03:09 PM
Obama provides reason enough to believe he is non-principled.
Tell me, Sen. Obama, will you oppose tyranny wherever you find it? How about in Iraq?
Tell me, Sen. Obama, do you believe that everyone should work to the best of their ability? If so, how do you encourage that?
Tell me, Sen. Obama, do you believe that price signals have a place in healthcare policy? Show how your positions support that?
Tell me, Sen. Obama, how you resolve the inherent differences between liberty and equality?
Posted by: sbw | August 13, 2008 at 03:12 PM
For further consideration:
An Obama presidency would almost certainly mean enactment of the "Fairness Doctrine," and regardless of how such legislation would fare in the lower courts this time around, by the time it gets to the Supremes he might have made an appointment or two. Very probably the four conservatives would still be there, but Kennedy is always a wild card in any event. Even after his pathetic performance with McCain-Feingold, I would expect McCain to veto such legislation in a heartbeat.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | August 13, 2008 at 03:13 PM
Seriously, why do you think, TM, that will Obama will endanger his own "Oneness" by suddenly turning into Mad Bad Lefty Bomber Liberation Theology Guy after inauguration? I
I don't think he has mad lefty bomber theology, but I think it is clear that his ideas for foreign policy lean toward the Wright/Ayers view of a less-powerful America. The America that shouldn't act so special.
Posted by: MayBee | August 13, 2008 at 03:13 PM
DoT,
Ben referred to "rich liberals". People calling themselves "liberals" (in a liberal, moderate, conservative matrix) constitute 20% of the population. The 13%ers are the hard left - you can recognize them on any public opinion survey which uses a five step 'Best to worst' scale. The "worst" will always be around 13%.
I left out a couple more overlaps and overstated the 18-34 support for Captain Zero, so that 35.6% core support number really is a maximum. McCain's core support is roughly the same in overall percentage.
There's a dynamic concerning the over 55 group which I haven't seen discussed. When Bubba hooked the women with his lipsucking painfeeling the amount of dough parked in retirement funds was around $2 trillion (versus about $18 trillion today) and a lot of women were caring for parents and/or grandparents whose retirement savings were insufficient. The situation simply doesn't pertain today. Besides the fact that Captain Zero isn't much of a painfeeler.
If you remember the episode with the Slacker Family and their decision to minimally protect their assets rather than fully protect them you can see the difference in "public" (read "women's") reaction. Pathos and bathos just aren't selling as well as they did when Bubba was peddling his quivers.
Captain Zero has to find a different magic and I don't think he can. He's peddling "different" and big eared pencil necked leftist geeks aren't really in that short of supply.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | August 13, 2008 at 03:14 PM
Hydeparker's comment at the top of the thread about the Obamas' personal friendship with Ayers and Dohrn is very interesting. If true, it may not prove anything about Obama's worldview, but at minimum it's an indicator of how easy it is for 60s radicals to be rehabilitated into the "progressive" community.
We can only hope someone else will pull a Stephanopoulos and ask Obama about Ayers again. Due to the changed state of the race since that debate, his answer won't be nearly as easy for the media to ignore as it was the first time.
Posted by: Porchlight | August 13, 2008 at 03:19 PM
I have no idea where the word "hidden" came from, one can read the Communist agenda in every thing the Democrat party does these days.
From sweetness-light.com here's one long
Article
"CPUSA, Obama Platforms Are Identical"
"Vote November 4 as if your life, and your future, depend on it!
Defeating the right wing is the first step in the struggle to end exploitation, poverty, racism and war inherent in capitalism.
The Communist Party USA and Young Communist League participate in today’s movements confident that they set the stage for more fundamental change tomorrow.
Throughout our 88-year history we have defended the interests of the working class, fighting for unity and democratic rights. Today we are guided by our motto, “People and Nature Before Profits.”
Our vision is a socialist USA, that opens the way for equality, world peace, real democracy, a society in which people control their own destinies in a sustainable world.
For our full program visit http://www.cpusa.org
We invite you to join us. Issued as a public service by the Communist Party USA "
My guess is anyone who loves Cuba under Castro is going to be thrilled with what Obama and his supporters will do to destroy America.
From the lead article at the Communist Party of the USA website.
"Barack Obama is not a left candidate. This fact has seemingly surprised a number of progressive people who are bemoaning Obama’s “shift to the center.” (Right-wingers are happy to join them, suggesting Obama is a “flip-flopper.”) It’s sad that some who seek progressive change are missing the forest for the trees. But they will not dampen the wide and deep enthusiasm for blocking a third Bush term represented by John McCain, or for bringing Obama by a landslide into the White House with a large Democratic congressional majority. "
Any American voting for Obama is voting to implement the complete agenda of the Communist Party. There is absolutely nothing hidden about it.
LUN
Posted by: pagar | August 13, 2008 at 03:22 PM
sbw:
I just don't find the Ayers connection, and the implications that keep getting loaded into it, very interesting. I think we've seen enough of Obama to know he is no mad bomber. As a matter of fact, I think it more likely than not that he does not have a whole lot of firmly rooted convictions. (I keep looking for the position that does not get shoved under the bus. Today, we are just as bellicose and stupid on Georgia as McCain)
I do think the failure of the Annenburg project is interesting, and wish more attention would be paid to that. But none will be if all you guys who push this issue can do is put "Ayers -- Terroristic Radical Who Associates With Obama" in bright shiny neon lights.
Posted by: Appalled | August 13, 2008 at 03:25 PM
I'd be interested in knowing what, if any associations Obama has that are not radical
No one has been able to find any statements by Obama regarding South Ossetia or Abkhazia prior to this past week.
I was about to say that I'd bet money that Obama never heard of either place before this week, but than DoT saved me from an ugly obligation.
Posted by: Jane | August 13, 2008 at 03:28 PM
Obama's mama was a lefty. So was his grandfather. He sought out a commie to guide him when he was a teen. He went to Chicago to "organize" the community using a left-wing blueprint. He has a long relationship with left-wing terror bombers, Ayers and Dohrn. He cites 3 extreme left-wing radicals as his spiritual advisors.
I guess it is "guilt by association". He has consistently chosen to associate himself with people who are very far to the left of the average American.
Posted by: stan | August 13, 2008 at 03:30 PM
if you do not like Corsi, try one of the two other books:
Jerome Corsi's The Obama Nation: Leftist Politics and the Cult of Personality,
Fredosso's The Case Against Barack Obama: The Unlikely Rise and Unexamined Agenda of the Media's Favorite Candidate
and Dick Morris' Fleeced: How Barack Obama, Media Mockery of Terrorist Threats, Liberals Who Want to Kill Talk Radio, the Do-Nothing Congress, Companies That Help Iran, and Washington Lobbyists for Foreign Governments Are Scamming Us ... and What to Do About It
Posted by: davod | August 13, 2008 at 03:30 PM
I think we've seen enough of Obama to know he is no mad bomber.
If you mean that Obama will not fashion or detonate explosive devices with the intent to murder American citizens, I think you're right. Did you mean to go further than that? Do you think Obama disagrees with the idea that the United States is an unusually flawed country which must be radically changed in order to win the respect of the world? Do you think Obama disagrees with the idea that white people's greed is ruining the world? Do you think Obama is embarrassed by this country? Do you think Obama disagrees with the idea that the American military is the principal threat to world peace?
Or do you just think Obama will be able to get through 2 terms without sneaking into the Pentagon to hide a bomb? Because I agree with you there.
Posted by: bgates | August 13, 2008 at 03:48 PM
Appalled: I think most of Obama's dancing around Ayers isn't based on the "radical" thing, but rather that Ayers leads to one of the few actual attempts by Obama to do something real and concrete, the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, which was a failure. With such a thin resume, I think Obama really doesn't want to be connected to a failure.
Posted by: Neo | August 13, 2008 at 03:49 PM
ahmm....don't forget Tony Rezko's chum Aiham Alsammarae and the plundering of Iraq's reconstruction...
Or Rev Wright's book scheduled to come out in Oct.
There are plenty of mines out there.
Posted by: Bill Baar | August 13, 2008 at 03:53 PM
And McCain hung out with Vietnamese Communists for over five years. Patty Hearst thinks that's irrelevant.
Posted by: mkultra | August 13, 2008 at 03:55 PM
The fact that Obama's radical Leftist views have become "mainstream" within the Democratic Party leadership is what should scare the carp out of the rest of us.
Posted by: fdcol63 | August 13, 2008 at 03:56 PM
Neo. That may well be, in which case somebody has done a great job of laying red herrings for the MSM. TM will be delighted to know that he's probably helped.
bgates. In answer to your questions -- I believe the answer is "yes", except the last two in the first paragraph.
Posted by: Appalled | August 13, 2008 at 03:59 PM
William Ayers and his associates have been leading American students to the far, far, left for decades. But it started long before Ayers, much of it came from the prior to WWII era when: "John Kerry’s Red Roots: Richard Kerry’s Left-Wing Legacy" were being established.
"Through agents such as Hiss, the Brandeis-Frankfurter apparatus branched out into all departments of the Roosevelt administration. In 1934 Congressman Frederick Britten observed that a group of 10 to 18 Frankfurter associates met nightly in the home of Benjamin Cohen and Thomas Corcoran to "promote Communistic legislation".6 During World War II, Frankfurter used his former law clerks Joseph Rauh, Edward Prichard, and Philip Graham to coordinate spying on various agencies of the Roosevelt administration through what Rauh and Prichard called “the Goon Squad”: a group of 15 to 20 second-line bureaucrats which included White House aide Laughlin Currie, a Soviet spy.7 Meanwhile Frankfurter and physicist Niels Bohr conspired in trading top-secret information with each other about the Manhattan Project, as part of an effort to try to persuade the Allies to share the secrets of the atomic bomb with the Soviet Union. Some top-secret Manhattan Project papers that passed between Frankfurter and the military supervisor of the Manhattan Project, General Leslie Groves, were later found in the private papers of Manhattan Project consultant Robert Oppenheimer, whose security clearance was later revoked after he was charged with being a security risk.8
I would really be surprised to learn of many white voters for Obama who have not be exposed (And led to believe Communist methods are good) to Communist teachings in the America Schools.
Posted by: pagar | August 13, 2008 at 03:59 PM
be in the next to the last line should read been.
Posted by: pagar | August 13, 2008 at 04:01 PM
Appalled - where do you get the idea that Obama doesn't blame white people for the ills of the world? Was he going to Trinity by accident? Was the title of his autobiography a typo?
In a world where Russia has just crushed a neighboring country, an Islamic theocracy is working on nuclear weapons, and an Islamic nuclear power is working on becoming a theocracy, isn't Obama's conviction that the biggest problem is the US reason enough to not only vote against him but run him out of the country?
Posted by: bgates | August 13, 2008 at 04:12 PM
James Lewis at American Thinker is delightful today:
Nemesis stalks the Democrats
Posted by: Ann | August 13, 2008 at 04:13 PM
Oh such a frenzy you folks are in.
It does not matter,
Mr. Barack will win.
Posted by: Bob | August 13, 2008 at 04:13 PM
bgates: Where do you get the idea that Obama believes the US is the largest problem in the world? Links would be appreciated.
Posted by: Appalled | August 13, 2008 at 04:15 PM
I am white and know the mentality of "Obama Haters" quite well.
They are commonly known as "White Trash"
They have dead end jobs, no career, lousy family life.
Poorly educated, by choice, and unable to compete in the real world they lash out.
They need blame someone for their failures.
-The judge did not give them a break.
-The wife got too much child support.
-The boss does not understand.
White Trash have one common trait. A vile hatred of MINORITIES!
All Minorities. Blacks. Jews, Gays, Asians.
The thought of Barack Obama becoming President drives them to total irrationality. Any negative rumor, no matter how implausible, becomes a fact in the minds of White Trash.
But don't worry.
White Trash never votes.
They don't even know where to vote.
On election day you can find White Trash at your local tavern...or in police lock up...probably on a DUI or domestic assault charge.
Of course it won't be their fault.
Posted by: Robert Blanchard | August 13, 2008 at 04:15 PM
Geez - quoting from a book whose author attacked John Kerry's vietnam record?
How about George Bush or Dick Cheney's Vietnam record? Bush chickened out by joining the air national guard and didn't even show up. Dick Cheney took 5 deferments and never went.
You guys are pathetic!!
Posted by: Pathetic | August 13, 2008 at 04:16 PM
Steve Diamond's Believe me, Barack is no Communist, But.... provides a decent outline of the 'coincidence of interest' involved.
Too much of a focus on Obama's associtaion with the domestic terrorist, Ayers, eclipses his Alinskyite connections. Accelerating rot is the problem - the potential "bombs" are in judicial appointments.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | August 13, 2008 at 04:20 PM
Is that White Trash Rant copyrighted?
Posted by: MarkO | August 13, 2008 at 04:25 PM
Obams will win in November.Destiny is on his side.George Bush won twice in spite of all the skeptics. Destiny was on his side.
Posted by: George | August 13, 2008 at 04:27 PM
Appalled - maybe I pulled a fast one, maybe you read too fast. The question, does "Obama disagree with the idea that the American military is the principal threat to world peace" was one where you answered "no". You want to say that is substantially different from America being the biggest problem in the world, or do you want to refine your answer?
You guys are pathetic!!
Posted by: Pathetic
That's funny, right there, I don't care who you are.
Poorly educated, by choice
I thought you guys were pro-choice.
Posted by: bgates | August 13, 2008 at 04:28 PM
Woot...woot! We found the Obama cyberwhatevertheywerecalledbots!
Posted by: Sue | August 13, 2008 at 04:29 PM
That's funny, right there, I don't care who you are.
Get r' dun...
Posted by: Sue | August 13, 2008 at 04:29 PM
Do you see a pattern developing with libtards?
Kerry is a fraud.
Gore is a fraud.
Edwards is a fraud.
Obama is a fraud.
Libs are too stupid to see these frauds for what they are. They want to believe these "users".
Obama had no record. Zero. He is a nobody.
But he says the crap that libtards want to hear. He is a one trick pony. He is about being black and libs having guilt.
He hangs around with terrorists.
McVeigh is dead. So should Ayers and Dohrn.
Posted by: gus | August 13, 2008 at 04:34 PM
bgates:
It's possible I put a no in a yes spot. Idea is that I do not believe Obama thinks we are the biggest problem in the world, and all those other things you listed off.
Posted by: Appalled | August 13, 2008 at 04:34 PM
As a white male raised in the south during the 50s and 60s I knew many avowed racists. They were my friends, relatives, neighbors, team mates, class mates, church goers etc. Does that mean that every white from the South in that era is a racist, obviously not. I resent guilt by association. Where did all my racist friends go? They became republicans.
Posted by: fblaze | August 13, 2008 at 04:37 PM
I do not believe Obama thinks we are the biggest problem in the world
Links would be appreciated ;)
(Oh, forgot - the biggest problem is cynicism, isn't it?)
Posted by: bgates | August 13, 2008 at 04:39 PM
" ... Idea is that I do not believe Obama thinks we are the biggest problem in the world ..."
The fact that Obama rejects the concept of "American exceptionalism", as do most of today's American liberals, is enough for me to dislike him.
Because if you don't believe that America has unique and special characteristics and values that are worth defending and promoting to the rest of the world, you have absolutely no business as its Chief Executive or Commander-in-Chief.
Posted by: fdcol63 | August 13, 2008 at 04:41 PM
I resent guilt by association. Where did all my racist friends go? They became republicans.
This isn't just self-parody, it's pre-parodized. He puts the punch line before the setup.
I can't do anything with this - better trolls!
Posted by: bgates | August 13, 2008 at 04:41 PM
"the biggest problem is cynicism, isn't it?"
I thought it was saddling his unicorn. BTW - naming it 'Whitey' wasn't the best move he might have made. Sure, all unicorns are white but still...
Just saying.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | August 13, 2008 at 04:44 PM
"I just don't find the Ayers connection, and the implications that keep getting loaded into it, very interesting. I think we've seen enough of Obama to know he is no mad bomber."
I don't think he's a mad bomber either. To me, by far the most important implication of the Ayers connection is that Obama has consistently been, and continues to be, willfully deceitful about it.
Back in mid-March I said McCain would win the two-party vote, 53-47. That still seems about right. This young man just doesn't know enough to be president and commander-in-chief, and that will become increasingly evident in September and October. Plus which, some of us hate-filled white trash have made arrangements to have polling stations established next door to our taverns.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | August 13, 2008 at 04:45 PM
As a white male raised in the west during the 50s and 60s I knew many avowed racists. druggies, nutjobs and trsitors They were my friends, relatives, neighbors, team mates, class mates, church goers etc. Does that mean that every white from the west in that era is a racist, druggy, nutjob, traitor, obviously not. I resent guilt by association. Where did all my racist, druggy, nutjob, traitor friends go? They became smarmy little creeps like fblaze.
Posted by: Barney Frank | August 13, 2008 at 04:48 PM
Oh, you have got to see what Joe Klein has to say about Corsi's book (LUN)
"But we're not seeing those sorts of claims being made about McCain this year...because Democrats tend not to do that sort of thing. They are the sorts of claims that Republicans--Bush Republicans--make."
Delusional.
Posted by: MayBee | August 13, 2008 at 04:51 PM
I'm wondering about the Larry Sinclair story now. Didn't that story break in the National Enquirer too?
Posted by: Shyannie | August 13, 2008 at 04:51 PM
DoT:
When you lived in Georgia as long as I have, you know that no poor white trash is going to be seen in any tavern. It's gonna be a bar, or maybe a roadhouse. Taverns are for yankees.
Posted by: Appalled | August 13, 2008 at 04:51 PM
Note that the book will open at Number One on the list of bestsellers. There are already half a million printed. 'Unfit for Command' sold 800,000 copies and changed the election. Some of the buyers were white male landowners.
=====================================
Posted by: kim | August 13, 2008 at 04:51 PM
Fox saying Colin Powell will endorse Obama at his convention.
And I want to say I told you so, because when Andrea Mitchell turned so strongly toward Obama, I said it was because she'd found out her friend Powell would endorse him.
Posted by: MayBee | August 13, 2008 at 04:52 PM
It is amazing that so many liberals have no historical understanding or even remember the evil days of the Soviets or Chi-Coms. There are many, many links on Google for anti-American statements by BO, his wife and his own supporters including the Dem leadership in Congress: Reid, Durbin, Nan, et al. Please try to keep up by actually reading instead of emoting. BO and many of his supporters, especially on blogs, seem to be pacifist socialists without even understanding the background where they picked up such radical ideas. So many of the posters seem to be in their '30's or '40's with as little experience in 'historical America' as the faux Messiah. Voting their hatred of W, the Gop, Christians and conservs in the Repub. Party seems to be OK as long as W and other Pubs are called Nazis, Fascists, and those bloggers don't even remember those days. It is a pathetic lack of not only experience but of American historical culture. Liberals seem to live on emotive reactions but facts are things that often get in their way yet they just ignore them. Sad and our university profs in many of our schools keep brainwashing these type of journalists, students, and blinded minorities who vote zombie like Dem in every election without ever questioning whether any, any Dem Platform agendas have actually aided them over the last 60 years! Sad.
Posted by: Pastor Glenn Koons | August 13, 2008 at 04:52 PM
Kristol, just now on FNC, saying that Colin Powell is going to endorse Obama and speak at the Dem convention on Wednesday night. He is saying its not a "done deal" but he is pretty confident in making these statements.
Posted by: tina | August 13, 2008 at 04:53 PM
MayBee, Joe Klein seems to have forgotten that a lot of people were calling for Kerry to make a more effective response to the Swifties, and also seems not to have made the leap of logic that many made about the poor response, that Kerry couldn't respond. And look at the ignorant way he tries to tag McCain with Corsi.
==========================================
Posted by: kim | August 13, 2008 at 04:59 PM
Ayers was apprehended while planning to bomb an NCO club dance in FT Dix NJ.
The bomb he was going to use was designed to hurt people (nails on the explosive etc). It wasn't just a "political statement"
My father was a sergeant in the Army just back from Vietnam and we were stationed in NJ. We weren't very rich, and what money my parents did make went towards us kids. One of the few things my dad always did with my mom is go to NCO club dances. I was 14.
Ayers got off on a BS technicality and laughs about it - "Guilty as hell - free as a bird". He has frequently said he 's only sorry he couldn't have done more damage.
Obama is known by his associates. "Mentor" is not a casual association, Yet people shrug off the reverand Wright relationship. You don't hang around with someone like Ayers unless you are at least to some extent sympathetic with him.
It's a long time ago - what's the big deal, people ask?
There are limits to behavior and to what is acceptable no matter where you fall in the political spectrum. No decent person would keep the company of someone like Ayers.
Obama has a 20 year relationship with a guy who was doing his best to kill my mom and dad. And who laughs about it (While getting his picture taken standing on the American flag) Ayers spits on us all and Obama doesn't have a problem with it, or him.
Enuf said
Posted by: Manchu | August 13, 2008 at 05:00 PM
Andrew, declaring guilt-by-association to be an invalid metric by which to judge Obama is a straw man argument. No one claims that associating with criminals and lunatics makes Obama guilty of their crimes or madness, but given that he has always been free to choose his associates he chose some rather unsavory ones. Life has many paths one can trod. If several people choose to follow the same path, it is because they have the same destination and have chosen the same direction to get there. Do you believe that Obama attended Rev. Wright's church for any reason other than he accepted Rev. Wright's teaching. The members of Rev. Wright's congregation chose to come together because they shared the bond of common belief. To declare that there is no guilt of believing Rev. Wright's rants merely because Obama associated with him in a setting that existed solely for the sharing of common beliefs defies common sense.
Posted by: willis | August 13, 2008 at 05:01 PM
Powell is not the icon he once was and still thinks he is. Both Democrats and Republicans distrust him because he was Bush's Secretary of State. He is an old hasbeen. And as far as I'm concerned he's a traitor for the way he dragged out the war by not supporting Bush. There is little question that he enjoyed Joe Wilson's war against Bush, and if he weren't such a sneaky little so and so, he'd have been a defendant along with Armitage in the Flame's suit.
==================================
Posted by: kim | August 13, 2008 at 05:03 PM
his bogus birth certificate, perhaps?
Why won't anyone either validate or refute this claim, made by a forensics expert?
Posted by: who knows? | August 13, 2008 at 05:07 PM
Appalled: I think we've seen enough of Obama to know he is no mad bomber.
I think we've seen enough of Obama to know we don't know much of anything about Obama.
He speaks to people's hopes all right, with nothing that adequately explains how to fulfill those hopes. It all seems calculated to Get Him Power At Any Price, including the price of the trashing of the economy that has raised the quality of life of even the poorest Americans higher than most of the poor elsewhere in the world.
Appalled, you are listening to the Sirens call you onto the rocks when you are smart enough to know better.
Posted by: sbw | August 13, 2008 at 05:07 PM
You crowd are the same brainiacs that voted for Bush. Twice! Nice work. Basically you've been wrong about everything for 8 years. Have fun Swiftboatin'. If Colin Powell endorses Obama it is game over.
Posted by: common sense | August 13, 2008 at 05:08 PM
My goodness. Is this what they refer to as a "bimbo eruption"?
Posted by: Jane | August 13, 2008 at 05:09 PM
Powell knows he's betrayed the Republicans. His only hope for future influence is with the Democrats. Ditto Armitage. What a pair of scumbags.
====================================
Posted by: kim | August 13, 2008 at 05:10 PM
You know, common sense, if Powell weren't ashamed of the most powerful piece of truth he ever spoke, that Saddam desired nuclear weapons, he might still have an ounce of credibility. He is ashamed, and he doesn't have an ounce of credibility. He's a lose/lose proposition and it takes a lose/lose candidate like Obama to be attracted to him. He's made himself a cipher; mark my words.
=================================
Posted by: kim | August 13, 2008 at 05:13 PM
i had no idea there were so many retards in this country...
oh, wait! yes i did! they gave us our LAST president, the biggest dunce on the planet. bush!
Posted by: itsmeeeeee | August 13, 2008 at 05:13 PM
Wow. It's true, you guys REALLY don't get it, do you?
You know as well as we do that the Media is sitting on McCain "stuff" that makes this penny-ante Obama "stuff" pale in comparison. The WORST thing you can say about Obama is that he's young and inexperienced. The better news is, he's not a pathological liar, with near psychopathic emotional outburst issues, who's linked to some of the seediest big money corruption scandals and some downright slimy personal scandals in recent history... John Edwards has NOTHING on McCain, that's for sure!
Oh, c'mon, we're all adults here: admit it - YOU don't want McCain any more than WE do... He's an also-ran, and you KNOW it; he always has been. He didn't have what it took in 2000, and he doesn't have what it takes now. Do you REALLY think he's going to make it all the way to November without blowing it in public? He's come close several times already; it's gonna happen, we all know that, it's only a matter of time, and the cameras will be rolling...
You stoop to this kind of content-free bashing of Obama because you have NOTHING to be proud of on your side. So you hope to create this kind of "controversy" in hopes of bringing him down. (By the way, how's that whole "Whitey!" tape thing working out for you guys? 'Bout as well as the "Kenyan Birth Certificate" thing, right? You kids have fun now...)
Posted by: OneMonkeysUncle | August 13, 2008 at 05:14 PM
Furthermore, If someone other than Powell had been in charge in the first Gulf conflict, we might have finished off Saddam then. History will not be kind to Powell, and it already isn't.
======================================
Posted by: kim | August 13, 2008 at 05:15 PM
OneMonkeysUncle. Wow, you don't keep up. The Kenyan birth certificate business may well have been disinformation from the Obama camp. The real problem is in Indonesia. TexasDarlin' if you want to stay abreast.
===============================
Posted by: kim | August 13, 2008 at 05:17 PM
Ans in the other corner weighing in at former V/P candidate for the Democrat Party and all around nice guy Joe Lieberman will be speaking at the Republican Convention. So what is the fuss? Colin Powell is black as as the media constantly tells us all blacks are voting for Obama. So how is this news? Now on the other hand how many former national ticket nominee are there supporting the other Party's nominee? Right, only one.
Posted by: GMax | August 13, 2008 at 05:18 PM
I'm guessing, OMU, that if McCain erupts on camera, the muddle will think 'It's about time'. You've got an ineffective meme there. Obama has a much thinner skin than McCain, and when Obama erupts he's going to look like the spoilt child that he is.
==============================
Posted by: kim | August 13, 2008 at 05:19 PM
You are right on one point, though, and it will get McCain points over Obama. McCain is passionate; Obama is not. McCain's passion will get out the vote; Obama's lack of it will transfer to his supporters. You want passion? See the PUMAs.
============================
Posted by: kim | August 13, 2008 at 05:23 PM
You crowd are the same brainiacs that voted for Bush.
Yep. Know what else? We're the only ones. The 60 most frequent commenters on this site each cast one million votes, and you guys never caught us.
We're gonna do it again in November, too.
(Note to nobody: Firefox gives me the Red Pen of Misspelling on 'brainiacs', 'commenters', and 'Obama', but it's ok with 'gonna'. Hm.)
Posted by: bgates | August 13, 2008 at 05:23 PM
Milt Rosenberg of WGN-Chicago Radio hosted an amazing program last May on Ayers-Obama-Annenberg and more. It is available in the audio archives at the link below. I cannot recommend listening highly enough. At the time I heard it, not too many people seemed interested. Hopefully more voters will pay attention now. See second item - May 5, 2008 - here:
http://tinyurl.com/5m3zmw
One of the guests on above mentioned show is Sol Stern. Here is an April 08 article by Stern that will tell you lots more about Billy Ayers' abominable influence on American education:
Obama’s Real Bill Ayers Problem
The ex-Weatherman is now a radical educator with influence.
http://www.city-journal.org/2008/eon0423ss.html
Posted by: SallyVee | August 13, 2008 at 05:24 PM
The anger within his party against McCain is from the far right, the anger against Obama is from the muddle. That is a very key difference and there is no way on God's green political stage around that.
==========================
Posted by: kim | August 13, 2008 at 05:26 PM