Obama Praises William Ayers’ Book
Politics — By Dustin R. Steeve on October 20, 2008 at 7:06 pmAccording to Fox News, while he was a state senator in Illinois, Barack Obama endorsed William Ayers’ book A Kind and Just Parent: Children of the Juvenile Court . In the endorsement, state senator Obama praised the book as “searing and timely.” I am not aware of any remarks from the McCain camp about this latest link between Ayers and Obama, but I would not be surprised to see this emerge as a talking point. Meanwhile, Obama’s camp is claiming that the endorsement was not a review of the entire book. This seems like a sensible defense of Senator Obama’s endorsement. It seems perfectly reasonable to assume that Senator Obama simple believed the book’s title (for example) to be “searing and timely.”
I believe that the evidence clearly demonstrates that Senator Obama and William Ayers, a self-admitted perpetrator of domestic attacks against the United States, had a friendly relationship and have many areas of ideological agreement. Ideological agreement between the two can be seen most clearly in the area of education. Given Ayers age and position relative to Obama upon their meeting, it further seems reasonable to conclude that Ayers is something of an ideological mentor to Barack Obama. I hold a high view of the power of mentor / mentee relationships and believe that young people (such as myself) owe much of our early understandings / views of the world and personal networking success to such relationships.
My question to the Obama supporters out there: Does Obama’s mentor / mentee relationship with Ayers matter? If not, why not?
Tweet This
Digg This
Save to delicious
Stumble itLeave a Reply
Trackbacks
Leave a TrackbackAdditional comments powered by BackType
82 Comments
Of course the people who have influenced Obama matter. i am surprised this isn’t more of a taking point myself. When the liberal illuminati are training up their little drones we should be watching out for the next presidential candidates.
The influence a mentor can have is extraordinary and it would only make sense to look into this. I do think this is part of the reason so much was made of Omama relationship with his minister early on. That talking point has kinda died out but it was such a big deal because people like that have substantial influences on our lives, the teacher is going to be reflected in the pupil that’s just the way it is.
Terry
Not even Bill Clinton.
Your complaint about Bush before 9/11 seems to be that he acted for the first 7.5 months of his presidency as Clinton did for the eight years of his presidency.
I’m not even saying it’s a complaint in this case, just an observation. You can’t have your cake and eat it too. Either 9/11 was a Black Swan type of event that ‘changed everything’ or it wasn’t. If it was then talking about what Clintin did is about as relevant as talking about the Opium Wars. If it wasn’t then Bush’s failure to act for 7.5 months or whatever is all the worse.
Use a simple analogy, someone leaves the stove burner on so gas is filling up the house. If the house sitter is in the house for 3 hours and doesn’t notice this that’s a bad thing. If you then come home and sit there for a half hour before lighting your cigar and blowing the house up then you have a pretty good beef with your house sitter, but if no one smelled the gas it can be chalked up to a regrettable accident that everyone should learn from. But if you smelled gas the moment you walked in the door and continued to lounge around for a half hour doing nothing to address it then you’re a fool who should keep his mouth shut.
EW
The influence a mentor can have is extraordinary and it would only make sense to look into this. I
Yea well Bush claimed to have Jesus Christ as a mentor and look what good it did us. More to the point none of you have presented a single piece of evidence that Ayers was a ‘mentor’.
Boonton, your response to Terry is sound but irrelevant. You fail to take into account the fact that Terry is a lying idiot. Clinton fought vigorously against bin Laden, becoming more and more consumed with fighting him as the threat became more and more apparent, and Clinton realized considerable success, saving thousands of lives. Terry’s failure to acknowledge this fact doesn’t make it any less a fact.
You fail to take into account the fact that Terry is a lying idiot.
On the contrary, Terry is not a member of the Trinity of Stupidity. It’s a very exclusive club with exceptionally strict membership standards. With hard work, though, anything is possible!
Clinton fought vigorously against bin Laden, becoming more and more consumed with fighting him as the threat became more and more apparent,
In this case the word ‘vigorously’ may be replaced with the word ‘vainly’ without changing the meaning of the sentence.
And Boonton, your analogy is both tiresome and, well, not a very good analogy.
It’s not that hard. All a person need do is effectively point out the cognitive disonance in one or more of your bloviating comments, and voila! You’ll be calling them stupid in no time.
Terry, maybe in Crazytown what you say is true, but here in Realityland, Clinton stopped the Millenium Bomb plot, plots to bomb the Holland and Lincoln Tunnels, a plot to kill the Pope, a plot to crash an airliner into the CIA headquarters, and numerous other plots.
Let’s do an experiment to see exactly how crazy you are. The Cole bombing occurred in October 2000. Whose fault was the failure to respond to the Cole bombing?
Let’s do another experiment.
Whose fault was the failure to take any action on the Presidential Daily Brief, dated August 6, 2001, and entitled “Bin Laden Determined to Strike in U.S.”
The answers to these questions will give us insight into whether you are the mayor of Crazytown, or just a citizen.
Well, Mike, clearly it was the Clinton adminstration’s failure to stress the importance of the terrorists threat that caused the Bush administration to minimize the importance of the August 2001 memo re: Bin Ladin determined to strike in the United States. Anybody with half a brain would know that…..I saw that on the Fox News Channel….
Oh my god, these comments are hilarious! So many experts . . .
Terry, maybe in Crazytown what you say is true, but here in Realityland, Clinton stopped the Millenium Bomb plot
Wrong, Toreno. Clinton (as usual) took the credit for it. It was simply an ordinary airline employee who actually stopped it. Is there any chance that you, like Boonton, think that Clinton was too honest?
Colin Powell doesn’t seem concerned about the Ayers relationship or Obama’s ability to lead.
Sarah Palin thinks she is a better American than you because she comes from a small town, and a superior human being because she isn’t a journalist and has never lived in Washington and likes to watch her kids play hockey. Although Palin praised John McCain in her acceptance speech as a man who puts the good of his country ahead of partisan politics, McCain pretty much proved the opposite with his selection of a running mate whose main asset is her ability to reignite the culture wars. So maybe Governor Palin does represent everything that is good and fine about America, as she herself maintains. But spare us, please, any talk about how she is a tough fiscal conservative.
Palin has continued to repeat the already exposed lie that she said “No, thanks” to the famous “bridge to nowhere” (McCain’s favorite example of wasteful federal spending). In fact, she said “Yes, please” until the project became a symbol and political albatross.
Back to reality. Of the 50 states, Alaska ranks No. 1 in taxes per resident and No. 1 in spending per resident. Its tax burden per resident is 2 1/2 times the national average; its spending, more than double. The trick is that Alaska’s government spends money on its own citizens and taxes the rest of us to pay for it. Although Palin, like McCain, talks about liberating ourselves from dependence on foreign oil, there is no evidence that being dependent on Alaskan oil would be any more pleasant to the pocketbook.
Alaska is, in essence, an adjunct member of OPEC. It has four different taxes on oil, which produce more than 89% of the state’s unrestricted revenue. On average, three-quarters of the value of a barrel of oil is taken by the state government before that oil is permitted to leave the state. Alaska residents each get a yearly check for about $2,000 from oil revenues, plus an additional $1,200 pushed through by Palin last year to take advantage of rising oil prices. Any sympathy the governor of Alaska expresses for folks in the lower 48 who are suffering from high gas prices or can’t afford to heat their homes is strictly crocodile tears.
As if it couldn’t support itself, Alaska also ranks No. 1, year after year, in money it sucks in from Washington. In 2005 (the most recent figures), according to the Tax Foundation, Alaska ranked 18th in federal taxes paid per resident ($5,434) but first in federal spending received per resident ($13,950). Its ratio of federal spending received to federal taxes paid ranks third among the 50 states, and in the absolute amount it receives from Washington over and above the amount it sends to Washington, Alaska ranks No. 1.
Wrong, Toreno. Clinton (as usual) took the credit for it. It was simply an ordinary airline employee who actually stopped it.
Now that someone mentioned it, I remember people complaining during the Clinton years that it was taking too long to get on airplanes because of a lot of silly ’security’ screens.
The only airport screening I ever saw prior to 9/11/2001 was 4 or 5 questions about whether you packed your bags yourself and have they been out of your sight since packing them.
The conversation continues but there is not real rebuttal for the simple fact that the people in our lives influence us. And especially!!! the people in our lives who give us lots of money. The illuminati can spin it anyway they want and maybe he wasn’t a mentor to Obama but do you honestly think he was in some way influential. he endorsing his book, he’s obviously friends with the guy. INFLUENCE!
I think most Obama supporters honestly don’t know why they support him. I mean, I question how any Christian can support a politician who holds so many positions contrary to the Word of God. I pastor a church and I cannot believe how many of my congregation are planning on voting for this guy. He seems to attract the young and the old; the two most self-centered demographic groups, I guess. The young because they are ignorant and are falling all over themselves to appear hip in their support of a young (he’s my age…late 40’s is young now)and literate black man; the old because of fear and desire to be taken care of, plus the over 60’s seem to be a generation that actually trusts government, as opposed to members of my generation that do not.
Mr. Obama is, from my observations, a consummate politician who will say anything and use anybody to his advantage. Which is OK, if he would just own up to what he really is: that is, he is nothing new at all. He is a typical politician whose tired socialist policies have been tried and found wanting in Canada and Europe.
I don’t know, as an ex-Canadian now living and working in the States, I see in Obama a Canadian-style politician who incites a kind of class warfare and encourages fear by playing on people’s concerns about their health and ability to pay their bills. If you find yourself strapped for cash, a guy that can promise you one less bill to pay sounds pretty good, as long as you don’t think too hard about where the money is coming from.
Christians and Jews are the most gullible voters in America. And I guess we are about to get the president we deserve.
I pastor a church and I cannot believe how many of my congregation are planning on voting for this guy.
I’m not a pastor and I cannot believe your congregation has choosen a man of such contempt for his own people to be their pastor….is this some type of S&M place you’re running?
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C0DE7DF123EF933A25753C1A960958260
Clinton Signs a Wide-Ranging Measure on Airport Security
…
smmtheory
The only airport screening I ever saw prior to 9/11/2001 was 4 or 5 questions about whether you packed your bags yourself and have they been out of your sight since packing them.
http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9C0DE7DF123EF933A25753C1A960958260
Clinton Signs a Wide-Ranging Measure on Airport Security
…
….
…
And
http://dir.salon.com/story/politics/feature/2002/01/15/clinton/index2.html
I flew to Washington DC in July and August of 2001 Boonton, and like I said before – the only airport screening I ever saw prior to 9/11/2001 was 4 or 5 questions about whether you packed your bags yourself and have they been out of your sight since packing them.
Now perhaps he did sign a bill, and implementation was sluggish, but whatever affect it had never slowed down my travels prior to 9/11/2001. And it certainly didn’t stop 9/11/2001 from happening.
Unfortunately we are backward looking when it comes to ‘Black Swans’. After TWA 700 (which has never been 100% explained and probably never will), the effort was to look for bombs hidden in luggage, not box cutters. Now we look for bombs and nail files.
Oh, the Obama-Ayers relationship matters, all right. It is the education ideological sameness that is most disturbing, frankly. Ayers’ writings and endorsements of other radical books on the subject prove what his agenda is: to re-educate our children and make them little lemmigs of the secular, illuminati left.
smmtheory, Are you saying that you didn’t have to put your carry-on bags through an x-ray screener and didn’t walk through a metal detector? That would be very odd since that has been done since 1973. If you’ll check the FAA website, you can find a detailed history of security measures, including those implemented in the Clinton presidency. It’s easy to say in retrospect what should have been done or could have been done, but the fact is that 9-11 did not occur on Clinton’s watch. Prior to 9-11, did Bush or his FAA people or anyone connected with him advocate or try to implement tougher security measures?
Prior to 9/11/2001, anybody could walk through to the gates, without questioning, without having to show ticket or boarding pass. The metal detectors were set so low it took about a pound of metal or more to set them off. You call that screening? And if you didn’t have any carry-on luggage? Guess what, no x-ray! In 1976 I was able to buy a one-way ticket 20 minutes prior to departure, no luggage, nothing but the clothes I was wearing and was on the plane with 5 minutes to spare at Denver (try that nowadays). Does that sound like screening? If it was, there was nobody complaining about long delays from it.
But since you brought it up, with metal detectors being required though not in wide use in 1973, are you going to claim that was Clinton signing that bill to implement screening? In case you hadn’t noticed, he was not the President in 1973.
I stand by my claim that I never saw screening that delayed travel the way Boonton was talking about prior to 9/11/2001.
Are you trying to say it wasn’t even planned before Bush came into office? The terrorists flying those jets got trained to fly during Clinton’s watch. You can’t lay the entire blame on President Bush. It just don’t stick. The commission said it was a failure in all areas even as far back as during the Clinton term. For too many years the U.S. government – even back as far as Reagan and the Marines bombed in Beirut – failed to respond appropriately to the threat.
No, but you can’t know that if 9/11/2001 had never happened whether or not he or they would have sooner or later done so. He had only been in office 9 months at that point. Clinton had 8 years in office, and the one time something was done, it wasn’t enough to prevent 9/11/2001. If Gore had been in office, it still would have happened, so who would you have blamed then?
who would you have blamed then?
I didn’t blame anyone in particular for 9/11. If you go back to comment 41 or so you’ll see that this whole tangent started when ucfengr tried to blame 9/11 on Clinton.
We’ve gone around the world twice since then but the fact remains if Clinton should have done something during 8 years then Bush really should have done something upon taking office. By should I mean action that one should take *given* the available information. If you walk into a house and smell gas you should take immediate action. If you can’t smell gas then you may be excused from responsibility but you’d probably wish you could.
That’s funny, when I go read comment 40 and so forth, I don’t see Ucfengr trying to blame Clinton for 9/11. All I see Ucfengr’s questioning somebody’s judgement that President Clinton was a good President. I see Ucfengr criticising President Clinton for not treating the problem seriously and the ineffective actions whenever he did authorize a response. For that matter, 3 of the 4 Presidents that preceded him could be criticised for the same thing.
Your gas analogy fails because 1) very few people do NOT recognize the problem with the smell of natural gas and would definitely act accordingly, and 2) nobody foresaw flying planes suicidally into buildings as a result of hijacking. Get it? Nobody had that information but the terrorists! Your unspoken assumption that President Clinton had that kind of information to pass along to President Bush is a non-starter.
Forget about Ayers, what about Khalidi?
Excerpts from a recent editorial:
The Los Angeles Times is apparently sitting on a videotape showing Obama’s remarks at a farewell dinner that year for Rashid Khalidi, the one-time PLO spokesman who now heads the Middle East Studies Department at Columbia. (Columbia University’s shame is a subject for another column.) Khalidi is not distancing himself from his past. Consistent with what you’d expect from someone who justified PLO attacks on civilians in Israel and Lebanon from 1976 to 1982, Khalidi routinely refers to Israel as a “racist” and “apartheid” state, and professes to believe in a “one-state” solution to the conflict. Guess which country would have to disappear for that “one” state to come into existence?
The Khalidis and Obamas were good friends. In his capacity as a director of the Woods Fund, Obama in 2001 and 2002 steered $75,000 to the Arab American Action Network, the brainchild of Rashid and Mona Khalidi. According to an L.A. Times account of the dinner, Obama mentioned that he and Michelle had been frequent dinner guests at the Khalidi home (just another guy in the neighborhood?) and that the Khalidis had even baby-sat for the Obama girls. Like William Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn, the Khalidis held a fundraiser for Obama in their living room when he unsuccessfully sought a House seat. At the farewell dinner, according to the L.A. Times, Obama apparently related fondly his “many talks” with the Khalidis. Perhaps that’s where he learned, as he told the Des Moines Register that “Nobody is suffering more than the Palestinian people.” Obama told the crowd that those talks with the Khalidis had been “consistent reminders to me of my own blind spots . . . It’s for that reason that I’m hoping that, for many years to come, we continue that conversation — a conversation that is necessary not just around Mona and Rashid’s dinner table” but around “this entire world.”
Even less attention has been paid to the man Obama appointed as his emissary to the Muslim community in the U.S., Mazen Asbahi. Asbahi, it turned out, had ties to the Islamic Society of North America, which in turn was an unindicted co-conspirator in the Holy Land Foundation case. The Holy Land Foundation was accused of being a front group for Hamas. When news of these associations became public, Asbahi resigned from the campaign to “avoid distracting from Barack Obama’s message of change.” And don’t forget hope!
Many American Jews preparing to pull the lever for Obama have never heard of Asbahi. But they surely know about Jeremiah Wright. They know that he gave a “lifetime achievement” award to Louis Farrakhan; that he supported efforts to get U.S. businesses to divest from Israel; that he gave space in the Trinity Church bulletin to Hamas; and that he has accused Israel of “genocide” against the Palestinians. They are preparing to vote for a man who tamely tolerated all of that (and more) for 20 years.
Your gas analogy fails because 1) very few people do NOT recognize the problem with the smell of natural gas and would definitely act accordingly, and 2) nobody foresaw flying planes suicidally into buildings as a result of hijacking.
I agree with #1, unlike smelling natural gas it was hardly clear that Islamic based terrorism was leading up to 9/11 if you were an intelligent person looking at the available information before 9/11. Sure in retrospect it is easy to ‘connect the dots’ but in retrospect we can filter out the noise that was buzzing around (such as the cult based terrorism of the Japanese subway bombing, Tim McVeigh, the uncertainity over what caused the TWA flight to blow up off of Long Island, China, and all that).
In regards to #2, the specific tactic wasn’t foreseen but the strategy of using the air system was. Hence the desire to screen passengers against ‘watch lists’ and so on were examples of policies that were designed to address known threats (hijacking, bombings) that could have helped against the novel 9/11 attack.
I think we have common ground here when it comes to hindsight bias. We react to the past and judge the future as if it was inhibited by the past. Before 9/11 hijackings tended to be somewhat nonviolent affairs that often did not result in a lot of life lost, except maybe when the gov’t jumped the gun and stormed the plane (note how other incidents like Waco and Ruby Ridge come into play here). Bombings were the most deadly form of air based terrorism and as long as it was clear you weren’t sneaking a full force bomb onboad the plane you were considered perfectly safe.
This is not “evangelical,” this is political hackery. Please change the title of your blog.
You got to check this video out I found on Youtube. Its badass.
Let me know what you guys think.
youtube video
I caught bits and…
Balls in the Air- …
woah, wait till he moves out, and then make it exclusive. That way if he makes a mistake by coming home sexually to her, you won’ t look bad. Don’ t set yourself up. Wait till the right moment.