« Barack Obama: Invisible Man
GOP Scare Tactics »



Why Ayers Matters (Guest Voice)

October 10th, 2008
By CAGLE CARTOONS

Print Print

Republican presidential candidate Sen John McCain is getting a lot of criticism from many pundits in many news organizations and on many sites (such as this one) for raising the “Ayers” issue. In this Guest Voice column, Michael Reagan, the popular talk show host and son of former President of Ronald Reagan, argues that the issue does matter. Guest Voice posts do not necessarily reflect the opinion of TMV or its writers.

Why Ayers Matters

by Michael Reagan

To listen to the Obama spin-masters you’d think that the McCain campaign’s questioning of their candidate’s association with unrepentant terrorist bomber Bill Ayers is a smear tactic falsely elevating a casual relationship between the two men into one where they worked together in promoting Ayers’ far-left goals.

Their reaction to the continuing revelations that disprove that claim is one of sheer panic — and they have a good reason to be scared witless that any in-depth probe of what went on between the two comrades will reveal Obama’s true colors — all of them dark red!

If the truth becomes better known — and it will if the Ayers issue is doggedly pursued — it will be clear that Obama was not only deeply immersed the fetid swamp of Chicago’s far-left political scene, but was from the very beginning of his career carefully groomed by the city’s socialist left to follow the path he’s on now in his quest for the presidency of the United States.

Giving credence to the charge that Obama was “groomed by an older generation of radical leftists for insertion into the American political process, trading on good looks, brains, educational pedigree, and the desire of the vast majority of the voting public to right the historical racial wrongs of the [past]” as the American Thinkers’ Thomas Lifson has written:

• Obama belonged to the socialist New Party, described by Lifson as “a radical left organization, established in 1992, to amalgamate far-left groups and push the United States into socialism by forcing the Democratic Party to the left.” A March 22, 1998 article by John Nichols in These Times revealed, “After six years, the party has built what is arguably the most sophisticated left-leaning political operation the country has seen since the decline of the Farmer-Labor, Progressive and Non-Partisan League groupings of the early part of the century.”

• Obama has been allied with ACORN and their Project Vote, the radical leftist group now charged with massive vote fraud aimed at electing Barack Obama president of the United States. Obama has long been directly involved with ACORN. An article by Toni Foulkes of ACORN, “Case Study: Chicago-The Barack Obama Campaign,” which appeared in Social Policy magazine in 2004, Foulkes revealed ACORN noticed Obama when he was organizing on the far south side of the city with the Developing Communities Project. Wrote Foulks: “He was a very good organizer. When he returned from law school, we asked him to help us with a lawsuit to challenge the state of Illinois’ refusal to abide by the National Voting Rights Act … Obama took the case, known as ACORN vs. Edgar … and we won. Obama then went on to run a voter registration project with Project VOTE in 1992 that made it possible for Carol Moseley Braun to win the Senate that year. Project VOTE delivered 50,000 newly registered voters in that campaign (ACORN delivered about 5000 of them). Since then, we have invited Obama to our leadership training sessions to run the session on power every year, and, as a result, many of our newly developing leaders got to know him before he ever ran for office.”

• Obama and Bill Ayers were close associates for years, going back as far as 1995 if not earlier. According to CNN: “A review of board minutes and records by CNN show Obama crossed paths repeatedly with Ayers at board meetings of the Annenberg Challenge Project. The Annenberg Foundation gave the project a $50 million grant to match local private funds to improve schools… Obama was asked to serve as the board chairman in 1995… For seven years, Ayers and Obama — among many others — worked on funding for education projects, including some projects advocated by Ayers … The board, for example, gave hundreds of thousands of dollars to Bill Ayers’ small schools project… The funding, according to records… CNN reviewed, came directly from the Annenberg foundation which Obama chaired. While working on the Annenberg project, Obama and Ayers also served together on a second charitable foundation, the Woods Fund.”

No wonder the Obama campaign wants the Ayers connection to be off-limits.

©2008 Mike Reagan. Mike’s column is distributed exclusively by: Cagle Cartoons, Inc.



This entry was posted on Friday, October 10th, 2008 at 9:18 am and is filed under Newsweek Blogitics, Negative Campaigning, Debates, Guest Contributor, 2008 Elections, Barack Obama, Politics. Responses are currently closed, but you can trackback from your own site.

Viewing 86 Comments

    • ^
    • v
    I think the real question here is whether (no pun intended) or not the employing of sensational adjectives injects any more (badly needed) substance into Reagans piece.

    The following link contains an internal memo from ACORN's directors talking about what the organization really is, as opposed to the narrative being advanced by those who are intent on demonizing them:

    http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/20...
    • ^
    • v
    The market is down (READ: IT'S THE ECONOMY) 509.35 in the first half hour today and McCain and his apologists want it to be about a long debunked character attack...
    • ^
    • v
    Uh, if they served on the board together-- obviously their paths would cross repeatedly. What is today's relevance?

    And can Michael explain the fact that McCain has had repeated contact with an ex-felon and confessed Watergate conspirator who once plotted Jack Anderson's murder??? See how you can make McCain's appearance on Liddy's radio show sound ominous??? Liddy was in his own way a domestic terrorist as he operated outside of the law and was willing to use violence. Don't Americans deserve to know the real story of McCain and his pal, Gordon Liddy???
    • ^
    • v
    Off topic does not equal off limits. Also, exasperation does not equal panic.

    It's not as if reporters haven't asked the question in recent Obama interviews. It's not as if Obama hasn't given an answer, but I'll guess this will keep on until it can be made to sound sinister. Trust me, the majority of the American public is aware that Barack Obama and William Ayers knew each other. We really, really know. It's going to take more than associations, the current polls reflect an American public that knows about the connection. There's going to need to be some sort of proof of influence. Otherwise the line of reasoning sounds like that old South Park episode, "Collect underpants ... ... Profit."

    For pity's sake, the house is burning down and these guys want to argue about who was the last one to clean out the fridge!
    • ^
    • v
    JSpencer...

    ACORN is a radically dysfunctional organization...which enjoys partisan backing from those on the Left. It is, in fact, an embarrassment to the Democratic party...in much the same way as the voter-suppression groups are an embarrassment to the GOP.

    When its founder's brother Dale Ratke embezelled a million dollars from the organization, it was promptly covered up by ACORN and the embezellment disguised as a loan, while the embezeller remained on ACORN's payroll.

    Just Google indictments/election/fraud and you will get pages of links. If this were a GOP group, folks here would be howling in outrage. ACORN has a long long history of links to voter fraud.

    True, Voter Registration fraud is not Voter Fraud. It is doubtful whether a voter with an ACORN Registration Card with Bugs Bunny would be allowed to vote. But I doubt whether Bruce Wayne or Perry White or Jame T. Kirk would raise an eyebrow...especially when IDs are not required. How many illegal voters have voted care of ACORN? ACORN's own filters are notoriously lax (cf. Bugs Bunny).

    Kritt...there are obvious differences between Ayres and Liddy: Liddy served time for his crimes. Ayres walked. Liddy did not plant bombs in public places that could have killed innocents. Ayres did. Liddy is largely confined to the fringe of the Conservative right. Ayres is deep in the heart of Chicago's left-wing intellectual establishment.

    The only similarity...and that is a big one...is that neither have really expressed remorse for their actions.
    • ^
    • v
    Janine...what you say is very true.

    It is good that these questions are raised...and Obama, as opposed to his spokespeople...is now having to answer questions on the record.

    The evidence suggests there was no real relationship between Obama and Ayres (I am referring to Kurtz study of the Annenberg Challenge).

    Thus, I fail to see why defending or excusing Ayres is necessary (or defending or excusing ACORN). Obama is of the Left. He encounters others on the Left in his time. Obama may even be a socialist. So what? I suppose I approach American politics from a different perspective. It seems very narrow to me. Socialism has some good points (not many, but some :)

    I think Shaun Mullen actually called it right here. Ayres was/is a nasty, unrepentent domestic radical. But Obama's connection with him was largely tenuous.

    Perhaps there are more secrets in the closet. But you are right, Janine...when the economy is tanking, who cares whether Obama was at one or five cocktail parties with Ayres and other people?
    • ^
    • v
    Kim, the statements about the number of times that Obama and Ayers were in the same room at board meetings goes to rebut the Obama campaigns assertions that they rarely crossed paths. They both served on the board of the Woods Foundation, and Obama's staff have downplayed that by saying that that board only met a few times a year so there wasn't a close working relationship. That doesn't appear to be inaccurate, but that's beside the point.

    Where the two of them appear to have worked much more closely though is on the Chicago Annenberg Challenge project. That program was Ayers' baby- he cowrote the grant application for the startup funds, and then when they won the grant he structured the program with several parts- one was the planning arm that he himself headed up, and the other was the CAC itself for which Obama was chosen as board chair. What Stanley Kurtz and others are questioning is how it could possibly be credible that Ayers didn't have anything to do with Obama's selection (which is what Obama's campaign and some of the CAC principles claim. There's documentary evidence showing that Ayers clearly was calling all of the shots, so it strains credibility to think that he had nothing to do with selecting a relatively unknown Harvard Law guy to head this up.)

    Notice that this WaPo article quoted on Obama's fightthesmears website doesn't even mention CAC. Why would that be?

    There just appears to be a massive panic over this information being exposed to daylight, and although I don't see any real fire there certainly appears to be smoke in the form of coverup and deflection from even discussing this.

    And yes, I do think there are more important campaign issues right now- but unfortunately neither McCain nor Obama are saying how they'll turn the economic problems around anyway.
    • ^
    • v
    "Perhaps there are more secrets in the closet."

    I'm beginning to think there must not be. McCain would have pulled out new allegation already instead of going through Hillary's waste bin. You'd think he could have taken all the money he saved on Vice Presidential vetting and hired some top notch PIs.
    • ^
    • v
    Obama may even be a socialist. So what? I suppose I approach American politics from a different perspective. It seems very narrow to me. Socialism has some good points (not many, but some :)
    Marlowe, with all due respect, I think your attitude from across the pond is affecting your viewpoint here. ;-)

    True that socialist does not equal 'evil', but there's no doubt in most people's minds- even liberal democrats- that an avowed socialist could not win an election in the US. So, if Obama's political leanings are that far left, the voters ought to be told before the election and not after, no?

    I'd feel the same way if a conservative candidate seemed to be using moderate rhetoric and claiming to run on a center-right platform but had a history of only working on ultraconservative programs and legislation- and then tried to downplay or dodge questions about working relationships with controversial figures from the fringe right.