« Concert Review: Martha Argerich, Charles Dutoit & Three Russian Classical Masters
Dear Sarah: The Bill Ayers Well Is Still Dry »



McCain, Ayers and the Hail William and Mary Pass

October 5th, 2008
By JAZZ SHAW, Assistant Editor

Print Print

ayers.jpgI’ve been loathe to tackle this subject in the past because it’s a rather daunting proposition to wrap your arms around, but the genie is now out of the bottle. (Or perhaps it would be better said that the pit bull is out of the doghouse?) Since Sarah Palin dared infer the specter of Bill Ayers and his connections to Barack Obama on the campaign trail, it seems that everyone will need to make their peace with this in one direction or the other. Reactions were swift and diverse, with our own Editor-in-Chief describing it as “a new low” for the McCain campaign. Conversely, a number of conservative voices, including my friend Ed Morrissey, have been belittling the MSM for playing down the connections between Obama and the admitted bomb thrower and early member of the Weather Underground. We are also told by anonymous McCain campaign sources that we will be treated to references regarding Tony Rezko as well. Apparently Reverend Wright will be off the table for stump speeches, with Big Mac leaving that to 527 groups and Right-wing bloggers with a wink and a nod.

For the benefit of those of us who may be a bit confused about these issues, I would ask Obama’s detractors to address a few basic questions. First let us start with the assumption that Barack Obama certainly knows William Ayers to one degree or another, having met on several occasions and worked simultaneously on the boards of two institutes. Is Barack Obama being accused of participating in illegal terrorist activities in concert with Ayers, or plotting to do so? If this is not the accusation, what precisely is the charge we are intended to consider? Is this essentially a question of judgment and character and the choices a candidate makes in their personal relationships? If so… fair enough. It’s a legitimate question for voters to consider when making their choice.

A similar set of questions could be offered up regarding Antoin “Tony” Rezko. He stands accused of a raft of illegal activities and corrupt business practices. Are we to understand that Obama is also being charged with committing some of these crimes? Or is this primarily another of those judgment questions?

If the former, then I think Obama’s accusers should be able to clearly spell out for us the charges against the candidate, including details of the crimes, times, dates and places. If the latter, then the situation is easier to grasp, but one wonders if this is a path that Team McCain actually wants to travel. Should the Obama campaign begin taking up our time in debates and campaign appearances talking about Rick Renzi? He stands accused of a host of federal corruption charges including money laundering and fraud and currently awaits trial. Establishing a “connection” between Renzi and McCain wouldn’t be difficult, as he served as Big Mac’s campaign co-chair in Arizona as recently as this year. The usual defense against this by McCain supporters is that Renzi hasn’t technically been convicted of anything yet. True enough. But if you are a pundit who has ever devoted any virtual ink to Dollar Bill Jefferson (as I have myself) then you’ve pretty much let the air out of that argument, since Jefferson and his freezer full of cold cash are still technically innocent until proven guilty.

If we are to assume, as these proponents of the Ayers As Campaign Issue meme seem to intend, that such associations are disqualifiers for the Oval Office, then may we assume that they will be calling for McCain’s resignation should he win the White House and Renzi be later found guilty? Surely having a convicted felon serve as your campaign co-chair is at least as solid of a “connection” as serving together on the board of the Annenberg Challenge or buying a house next door to some shady Chicago political fixer. None of this is to say that such questions should be forbidden or are somehow “off limits” in the political arena, particularly if it is solely a question of judgment. But a few more answers to the above questions would be helpful if you want voters who aren’t already clearly in the McCain camp to take these issues to heart.



This entry was posted on Sunday, October 5th, 2008 at 10:47 am and is filed under Newsweek Blogitics, Negative Campaigning, John McCain, Barack Obama, 2008 Elections, Polls, Politics. Both comments and pings are currently closed.

Viewing 4 Comments

    • ^
    • v
    Read it yourself and decide if Obama is misrepresenting his relationship with Ayers:http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/individualProfile.asp?indid=2169
    • ^
    • v
    the Ayers mention is legitimate fodder for a debate on character. but i'm certain many on the Left would also love to have any justification for digging up the bones of the Keating 5 as they apply to The Maverick's campaign.

    but politics these days -- especially on the Right -- doesn't require facts. mud wins votes just as well, or better, even. to his credit, i think, at least post-primaries, Obama stuck largely to issues before the mud-slinging began. but with the Palin pick McCain more or less admitted his inability to win on substance, and now it's looking like a sh*tstorm on the horizon.
    • ^
    • v
    Palin has a very close relationship with a very anti-American:

    Todd Palin, Longtime Former AIP Member - Alaskan Independence Party

    "Palin's husband Todd was a member of the AIP from October 1995 through July 2002, except for a few months in 2000. He is currently undeclared"

    third-party ("Alaska First -- Alaska Always") that wants Alaskans to get a vote on whether or not the state can secede from the U.S. But her husband was a long-time member, and at least two AIP officials recall her attending the 1994 convention, though she says she did not attend.

    http://tinyurl.com/3s3un2

    Todd Palin broke the law by not showing up to answer questions about the trooper investigation.

    McCain's relationship with G. Gordon Liddy a radio host and convicted Watergate burglar?

    Liddy has acknowledged preparing to kill someone during the Ellsberg break-in "if necessary"; plotting to murder journalist Jack Anderson; plotting with a "gangland figure" to murder Howard Hunt to stop him from cooperating with investigators; plotting to firebomb the Brookings Institution; and plotting to kidnap "leftist guerillas" at the 1972 Republican National Convention -- a plan he outlined to the Nixon administration using terminology borrowed from the Nazis. (The murder, firebombing, and kidnapping plots were never carried out; the break-ins were.) During the 1990s, Liddy reportedly instructed his radio audience on multiple occasions on how to shoot Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms agents and also reportedly said he had named his shooting targets after Bill and Hillary Clinton.

    Liddy has donated $5,000 to McCain's campaigns     since 1998, including $1,000 in February 2008.

    McCain has appeared on Liddy's radio show during the presidential campaign, including as recently as May.

    Listen to McCain on Liddy's show on 11/10/07 http://tinyurl.com/4k8f28

    Check out Liddy's many radio programs that strongly support McCain

    http://www.radioamerica.org/POD_ggl.htm

    in November McCain praised Liddy for his adherence “to the principles and philosophies that keep our nation great,” Chapman reports.

    http://tinyurl.com/3nyx6o
    • ^
    • v
    I'm kind of amazed.

    I understand that political professionals have inside information. But I can't believe this will work. I can't believe it's not self-defeating. I can't believe it won't boomerang.

    The hypocrisy and desperation of this are just too obvious. Will moderate undecideds really want to associate themselves with this? Won't even many McCain supporters find themselves embarrassed by this?

    Like the previous commenters, I'm well aware of the McCain's membership in the Keating Five and Palin's marriage to an Alaskan secessionist.

    The infamous commercial comparing Obama to Paris Hilton now seems like it's a million years old. And even though this strategy just went into effect today, it already seems like an artifact of a much distant time and place.

    Can such a thing actually work to the benefit of anyone?

    I accept that I know nothing of the way actual professionals operate politics.

    But I'm still amazed.
 
close Reblog this comment
Powered by Disqus · Learn more
blog comments powered by Disqus

« Concert Review: Martha Argerich, Charles Dutoit & Three Russian Classical Masters
Dear Sarah: The Bill Ayers Well Is Still Dry »


By posting comments on The Moderate Voice you are acknowledging and agreeing to the following general comments policy:

(1) The Moderate Voice's comments are hosted by Disqus (http://disqus.com). If your comment doesn't appear immediately, please be patient since it is an off-site system.

(2) All e-mail received from readers by The Moderate Voice is considered intended for publication unless otherwise indicated in the initial message from the writer. Please do not send us attachments unless you contact us and we agree to it.

(3)The Moderate Voice reserves the right to edit all e-mail and posted comments for content, clarity, and length.

(4) Our comment space is reserved for comments that relate to a post's topic. You should not reprint lengthy text from your own works or those of others, including news articles. You MAY link to them.

(5) Comments that are abusive, offensive, contain profane or racist material or violate the terms of service for this blog's host provider will be removed and the author(s) banned from future comments. Such comments also violate the very SPIRIT of this site -- which was created to encourage thoughtful and vigorous discussion among readers who may share differing viewpoints.

(6) All points of view are welcome on The Moderate Voice, with the following exceptions:

(a) Comments posted several times a day with the intent of dominating, re-directing or hijacking the thread by turning a discussion into the equivalent of a bitter shouting match.

(b) Comments posted several times a day that insult or call other commenters or blog writers names or repeatedly make the same point with the effect of or clear intent to annoy other commenters or blog writers.

(7) Name-calling, personal attacks, racist comments or use of profanity by any commenter, whether they are by persons who agree or disagree with the views expressed by The Moderate Voice will NOT be tolerated and will result in the deletion of the comment and the banning of the commenter's ISP address, without notice. In some cases a comment may be deleted and the writer will be given another chance. Commenters who virtually ASK The Moderate Voice to ban them by ignoring any warnings or daring TMV to ban them will quickly get their wish.

(8) Anonymous commenters should identify themselves with the same moniker, so readers know their comments are coming from a single individual. If they don't, they are subject to a banning.

(9)If we have problems with inappropriate or inflammatory comments from a commenter who it turns out gave a fake email address that person is subject to immediate banning.

(10) Quotes from material appearing on The Moderate Voice with attribution are allowed. Reprints are allowed only by permission from The Moderate Voice. You may request permission by e-mail.

(11) The Moderate Voice is a personal site. It is not the Government. It is NOT aligned with any political party. It is NOT promoting any specific candidate for office. It is not a public institution or a media organization. It is not a neutral site. It is intended to express and disseminate the authors' varying points of views. Writers on this weblog WILL take positions. It reserves the right to limit comments to those that, in its view, comport with its stated comment policy. Comments that do not comply are subject to deletion and banning of the author's ISP.

Disclaimer:

--Reading and posting comments at The Moderate Voice constitutes acknowledgment of and agreement to the terms outlined in this comment policy. This comment policy may be revised in part or in full at any time.

--All comments must comport with applicable state and federal laws. The Moderate Voice has no obigation to monitor, edit, censor, or take responsibility for comments. It may or may not act upon a violation of its comment policy once a suspected violation has been brought to its attention. Therefore, commenters are solely responsible for the content of their comments and should ensure that that their comments are lawful and fall within the stated guidelines of both The Moderate Voice and its hosting company.

--The Moderate Voice is not be responsible for injury or liability to any reader or commenter resulting from its own communications or those of commenters, that may be offensive, misleading, inaccurate, illegal, or otherwise unsuitable in the view of the reader. Readers and commenters further agree to indemnify and hold harmless The Moderate Voice from claims resulting from the use of any material appearing on The Moderate Voice which damages the reader, commenter or any other party.

--The Moderate Voice is not responsible for and might disagree with material posted in the comments section. While we strive for accuracy in our posts and DO correct errors, material posted by The Moderate Voice in its posts -- or those left by others in the comments section -- may or may not be accurate.

Read and Post at your own risk.