Bill Ayers is was a member of the Weather Underground, a group responsible for many bombings forty years ago , including one at the pentagon. Before the Weather Undergroung, he was the leader of a non-militant group called the Students for a Democratic Society.
The WU were a confused bunch of left-wing activist that evolved from the SDS. The WU had noble ideas that they tried to accomplish using foolish tactics. Protesting the Vietnam war by bombing government buildings is no way to accomplish anything. Bill Ayers was part of this group and is not exempt from these attacks.
After these attacks, Bill Ayers became an elementary education activist. His recent work is for a noble cause, a cause that he recruited Obama to help him with.
The sound bite, "We didn't do enough" is a statement grossly taken out of context. This statement was a response to a question about his involvement in protesting the Vietnam war. The soundbite we all have heard many times is a complete distortion of Bill Ayers' position. In fact, he wrote a letter to a city lawyer (Richard Elrod) injured in an attack made by the weatherman to express his condolences. The lawyer is quoted as saying that Bill Ayers was "Remorseful".
We know Obama and Ayers knew each other more than Obama expressed to at first. If Obama is going to be attacked, attack him here for not being completely honest. Don't attack him for knowing this man, in fact, Obama said his actions in the WU were dispicable. They were on a board together to improve the community, not to blow things up.
Election Integrity Seminar, January 17, 2023
1 year ago
While I don't think that it is nearly close to the most important in this campaign, I disagree that the William Ayers connection is insignificant.
ReplyDeleteFormer Clintonista Dick Morris wrote a very interesting column on why we should care about the association between Barack Obama and Bill Ayers. Here are two key points, that I find most interesting:
Even apart from the details of the Obama/Ayers connection, two key points emerge:
a) Obama lied and misled the American people in his description of his relationship with Ayers as casual and arm’s-length; and
b) Obama was consciously guided by Ayers’s radical philosophy, rooted in the teachings of leftist Saul Alinksy, in his distribution of CAC grant funds.
Since Obama is asking us to let him direct education spending by the federal government and wants us to trust his veracity, these are difficulties he will have to explain in order to get the votes to win.
Your first point is legitimate. Not sure what you mean with your second. I know very little about those grants so if you could shed some light that would be great.
ReplyDeleteDick Morris also has a lot of hatred for Obama. Watch Fox news, he is on that program often smearing Obama left and right. Him and Newt Ginrich are probably the worst two Fox News Contributors in my opinion.
Other than the fact I believe he is by definition a socialist, my main concern with an Obama presidency is that this guy is basically an unknown entity. He won't answer questions about his associations, he doesn't have a strong voting record, and of his "experience" in the US Senate, the majority of it has been spent on a Presidential Campaign. I don't feel comfortable trusting my family's future to a guy that says one thing and what record he does have, indicates something else. That's why the associations are important...there's not much else to judge the man's character.
ReplyDeleteWhile I find him entertaining, I agree that Dick Morris is a poisonous little man. His point is however, legitimate. The grant was to be used for education. From what I understand, instead of using the grant to promote math and science education, he used to promote teaching radical philosophy. That doesn't show great judgement.
As a post-script, there are a lot of intellectually dishonest folks on Fox, I agree. Sean Hannity makes me want to punch the TV, for example. CBS/ABC/NBC are in the tank for Obama. Where does an average Joe, get unbiased news?
Why this blog of course! If I had to advise anyone, I'd say watch CNN because I think they do the best job at attempting to stay bi-partisan. However, I will admit that they lean left a little with their core people, but they are still the best on television in this respect.
ReplyDeleteI left Hannity out of my other post because I thought it was implied. That show is the essence of why Fox is a terrible show. They bring Colmes to "balance out" the show, but Hannity completely dominates the conversation. Colmes is a good little liberal in my book, but he doesn't stand a chance against Hannity's loud tactics.
O'reilly is a different story for me. While he claims to be independent, this claim is obviously not true. But, I do believe he tries his best to be honest, unlike Hannity.
Who is worse? Obama/Ayers or McCain/Keating?
ReplyDeletehttp://opinionsacrossamerica.blogspot.com
Of course it matters! Should it make us label him as something he isn't, though?
ReplyDeleteIf comments like these are going to have more effect than they should have, or less effect, maybe we should just be like Britain and make a set time television time for our candidates and limit campaigning to a short period of time before the election.
I'm very much in favor of shortening our campaign periods and leveling out the playing field fiscally. Votes shouldn't be bought, both sides should have an even chance at getting their message across.
ReplyDeleteWhen asked about people that bomb abortion clinics, Sarah Palin responds:
ReplyDelete"Others who would want to engage in harming in innocent Americans or facilities, that uh, it would be unacceptable to...I don't know if you're going to use the word 'terrorist' there."
Can I get a consensus that that is sickening? I hope she was caught off guard and I hope she has the opportunity to set this right.