Is John McCain really serious about questioning Barack Obama's association with William Ayers?
The evidence suggests he is not.
To truly drive Ayers into the public conversation, to trick what they consider an irredeemably biased press corps into biting, McCain has three vehicles gassed up and ready to go.
(1) He could put lots of money into an Ayers ad -- video press releases don't cut it.
(2) He could devote a stump speech to Obama's associations and Obama's associations only
(3) He could mention Ayers in a debate.
So far, McCain has done none of those things. On top of doing none of those things, he has declared Obama's association with Rev. Jeremiah Wright as off-limits.
Conservative activists are angry with McCain and crowds are projecting their anger onto Obama. If there is a case for the relevancy of Ayers's association, there is much more of a solid case about Wright's; Wright and Obama were very close; Ayers and Obama were acquaintances. Peremptorily cutting off talk of Rev. Wright displaces the conversation onto Ayers and raises expectations. And time and time, McCain doesn't go there. He mentions Ayers in a speech or interview, or gives the tough talk to Sarah Palin. He neglects to speak about Ayers in a debate. He says that Ayers isn't relevant. Anger mounts. McCain is trapped. Some in campaign blame the media, again, for putting McCain into a box -- when something doesn't work, the media gets the blame. But that hoary old axiom in politics -- timing is everything -- applies. Suddenly dumping on Obama's character and associations in the middle of the worst economic crisis since the great depression smells cheap and desperate. And it creates a spectacle that is becoming easy for the media to dismiss McCain is aware of this -- he's flinched at times and reminded his audiences that he has to be optimistic, but his campaign advisers don't agree on the wisdom of angry crowds becoming the story; some hate the effect this is having on independents and others are trying to pump liquidity into the Republican base.
« Meanwhile, In Canada... Meet Stephane Dion | Main | Obama: McCain's "Worried About His Campaign" » Is McCain Serious About Ayers? Evidence Says No.10 Oct 2008 09:57 am TrackBackListed below are links to weblogs that reference Is McCain Serious About Ayers? Evidence Says No.:
» Is The McCain Campaign Entering Into The Danger Zone? from The Moderate Voice
» Meanwhile, as the Crash Continues, What Are Conservatives Angry About? from Buck Naked Politics Comments (57)
We've got a new dictionary entry for "credulous," my friends. 
If McCain has 1/1,000 of the "honor" that he talks about having, he would stop this right now. If he is not serious about it, if he doesn't believe it, he needs to say it. This is feeling dangerous, I have never heard crowds at political rallys (at least for major party candidates) calling the opposition a "terrorist" yelling "treason" and "off with his head" and "kill him." This is beyond campaigning. It's frightening. And it is not going to sway any independents. If anything violent were to happen, the McCain campaign would have blood on its hands. "All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." And that is truly dishonorable indeed.
Some serious guys from the secret service need to have a word with the McCain campaign about stoking hatred amongst their mob-like crowds. The theme being pushed that deliberately paints Obama as a Muslim terrorist, needs to be ended. All involved in the McCain campaign know it to be untrue. It's a dangerous game to play. Actually Palin is low information enough to maybe believe it...
McCain may not be able to stop this. Remember, we're talking the Republican base here -- the folks who believed Saddam was involved in 9/11 despite all evidence to the contrary. The folks who still love W., despite all evidence of his incompetence. McCain's base, unfortunately, is the right's lowest common denominator. Rove promised them eternal power. And that uppity boy's gone and taken it all away.
The reason he's not serious about Ayres is because there's nothing there. Nobody cares that Obama is acquaintances with a former 60s radical who has been a respcted professor at a relatively conservative and highly prestigous university for 20+ years. I'm really curious what kind of internal polling they've done that shows them Ayres is an issue for independent voters. McCain knows Wright is a non-starter because the Wright stuff played out in the press 6 months ago and Obama emerged scarred, but stronger. Unless they're sitting on something that didn't come out in the spring, the reaction will be a yawn. What bringing back Wright threatens to do is raise questions about Palin's own more serious pastor problems and potentially her AIP connections as well. The last thing McCain wants is to go there.
I think what you're seeing is something that David Brooks(!) pointed to in today's NYT. After being in control for the last decade or so, the ideas of the GOP (unrestricted markets, nominally smaller government, use of military, etc.) are growing threadbare and GOP supporters that were motivated by ideas are distancing themselves from the party and campaign. That leaves the GOP the means with which it has used toward those ends. Things like the Southern Strategy and Class Warfare. Things that are more emotion than reason. It seems to me that the McCain/Palin campaign has painted itself into a corner on issues and is now in the position of reaping what the party has sown with the last 25+ years of its tactics: hate.
It is a truly sad spectacle. The McCain campaign may have ignited a fire that will be very hard to put out. I have a feeling that they have realized how much more endangered Obama's life is because of the rhetoric they are spewing on the stump these days. It has whipped the base into a frenzy which is both scary and repulsive.
Well Larry King devoted time to it last night, with Debbie Wasserman Shultz and Paul Begala seemed to put up a weak defense vs. a very aggressive Ari Fleischer. So the story is getting prime time coverage. Only polling will tell if this resonates beyond the base. The media needs to cover the potential violence that could come from the conservative base over this. The McCain campaign is really whipping these people up into a frenzy.
What has many upset is the fact that it has taken this kind of pushing by the McCain camp to even get any visibility in the media. They Ayers story has been out there for a long time, and largely ignored except in right wing blogs. Yes the NYT finally approached it last weekend...and that may be part of the reason it is a story today. But the media have gone after McCain and Palin for much less, and with much more furor. This Ayers story is really a continuing backlash against many in the media.
To the Editor: Re “Politics of Attack” (editorial, Oct. 8) and “Obama and ’60s Bomber: A Look Into Crossed Paths” (front page, Oct. 4): As the lead federal prosecutor of the Weathermen in the 1970s (I was then chief of the criminal division in the Eastern District of Michigan and took over the Weathermen prosecution in 1972), I am amazed and outraged that Senator Barack Obama is being linked to William Ayers’s terrorist activities 40 years ago when Mr. Obama was, as he has noted, just a child. Although I dearly wanted to obtain convictions against all the Weathermen, including Bill Ayers, I am very pleased to learn that he has become a responsible citizen. Because Senator Obama recently served on a board of a charitable organization with Mr. Ayers cannot possibly link the senator to acts perpetrated by Mr. Ayers so many years ago. I do take issue with the statement in your news article that the Weathermen indictment was dismissed because of “prosecutorial misconduct.” It was dismissed because of illegal activities, including wiretaps, break-ins and mail interceptions, initiated by John N. Mitchell, attorney general at that time, and W. Mark Felt, an F.B.I. assistant director. William C. Ibershof Mill Valley, Calif., Oct. 8, 2008
He needs to stop stoking resentment and focus on finishing this campaign with dignity. It really doesn't look like he has a path to winning the Presidency anymore. But the path he's on right now is likely to make him seem culpable for the consequences of all the anger erupting out of the party. If he has any hope of rehabilitating his hard-earned reputation, he needs to demonstrate his Country First motto. He has to be strong enough to talk the crowds down from the precipice and resurrect the Straight-Talking, truth-telling maverick who sometimes says what we don't want to hear because it's what we need to hear. We don't have the stomach for the fight that's boiling over; people are too afraid by everything else that's happening to be pushed even further by his campaign. If, heaven forbid, something terrible happens because of the mob rage and viral emails? That -- and nothing else -- will become McCain's legacy. I'm not saying he shouldn't take his fight to Obama, just that he needs to do it now in the most statesmanlike way he can. Set an example for the rest of us on what we're gonna do if we lose. And maybe we'll get lucky, who knows? I think it's too late in the race for him. But I hope, by setting a strong standard, he can at least help a few candidates downballot. ...And we can feel less disgusted with ourselves when it's all over.
Naveen, the polling so far is showing that this attack is backfiring. They look stupid and way out of touch. By the way it's great that they are spending time in solid blue states like PA, MN, WI and IA. They should spend more time in Cali and NY.
It's been interesting to see how lexical analysis software indicates that Ayers is the ghost writer for Obama's "Dreams From My Father" book. Cashill has an interesting article on the matter:
Wow, Keith. Sometimes I think the conspiracy theorists couldn't come up with something any more crazy. And then you go and suggest that Ayers is the ghost writer of Dreams from My Father-- and totally redeem yourself! P.S. Wouldn't it almost be a good thing if Ayers wrote the book? I mean its a really inoffensive book, so it would show the softer side of Ayers.
What is about McCain that leads to so many intelligent journalists, including Marc, to write so many he-didn't-really-mean-that columns?
@JB: Ayers was a story in the primary. Due diligence was done by the Chicago papers, and there is no story there, no fire for all the frantic internet efforts to claim Republicans see smoke. If you weren't paying attention then, pity, but the idea that tons of vital new evidence has emerged on this 40 year old case is silly. @Keith: Prize for the most random post and betraying a complete lack of understanding of how lexical analysis software works. The right's desperation on this has gone well beyond amusing and into dangerously delusional. I think fifty four has the only reasonable explanation of why the McCain camp is too "honorable" to touch Wright even though he and Obama actually had a relationship beyond nodding acquaintance. With the endless Ayers shovelling the idea that McCain wouldn't have gone there weeks ago if he thought it would help is laughable. Finally to two bits from Marc: Suddenly dumping on Obama's character and associations in the middle of the worst economic crisis since the great depression smells cheap and desperate.
You People have this all wrong. After the Rovians savaged McCain in 2000 and the Redneck Repugs dashed his chances at winning, McCain went into deep cover mode, intent on destroying the party that robbed him. He's a true Manchurian Candidate, and is succeeding beyond anyone's expectations in destroying the conservative movement. He knows full well that putting the spotlight on the crazy Palin wing of the GOP will leave them permanently discredited. Same goes for the hack journos over at the Corner and similar publications who dare to follow Johnny Mac into the black hole of Ayers accusations in the midst of an unprecedented financial crisis. McCain has seen the beast up close, and knows that it must be destroyed - even if it means going down with the ship and destroying his own reputation in the process. GOD BLESS JOHN SIDNEY MCCAIN! He really is willing to lose an election (and gloriously lose!) in order to save the nation!
This line of attack is deeply appalling, and says much about who McCain really is, finally land forever stripping away the false veneer of honor that he has so studiously cultivated, and which the media has fostered, while eating barbeque. In these times, of all times, to run a campaign which is now reduced openly to fomenting hatred, caring nothing for the consequences to our body politic, is despicable beyond my capacity to say it. Win or lose, what will be left? Win or lose, in the terrible times facing us, he and his uncritical running mate are poisoning the people at a time when we'll be needing to pull together, to find common ground, to see ourselves as in it together. His willingness -- EAGERNESS -- to resort to the tactics of division and polarization is simply horrible. If it works, again, in these times, then we are truly finished as a nation. No kidding. It's that serious, and that unforgivable.
I don't get it. McCain isn't "serious" about Ayers, but his campaign is pushing this story every single day. The bottom line is that McCain is trying to play to two different crowds here: the angry mob that is the base of the GOP and the non-insane rest of the country. When it comes to campaign strategy, I think the word for this is "stupid." Obama figured out a while back that the independents are all that really matter. McCain/Palin rallies are starting to take on the atmosphere of a lynch mob, and the McCain camp is stoking that: McCain agreeing with red-faced ranters who claim that "socialists are taking over the country" and smirking back at the mob as the call for Obama's death. We are entering very dangerous territory here, especially with the economy imploding like it is.
The reports I'm reading suggest that Palin's campaign events are KKK rallies without the sheets. If this hate-mongering weren't raising the specter of physical danger to Obama, I'd be happy to see the GOP's chickens come home to roost.
McCain and Palin are whipping up intensifying fear and hatred of Obama as the clock ticks down and they grow more desperate. Coupled with the escalating fear many are feeling with the financial meltdown, it wouldn't surprise me at all if this led to violence. I heard TV clips today of McCain speaking at a rally while a supporter yelled that Obama was a terrorist, and a Palin rally somebody was shouting "Kill him!" Neither speaker stopped to repudiate those comments or discourage them. Put a gun in the hand of a right-wing nut who just lost his home and let him hear McCain/Palin strongly imply that Obama is a Manchurian candidate who hates the US. Mix well.
The republicans see clearly that they are getting the boot in a big way. They've broken the economy. Foreign affairs are in a bad way and, in the words of the pending NIE report "spiraling downward." Their final legacy is to poison the well, burn the earth, break the dishes and do everything they can to leave an ungovernable mess behind. McCain is fertilizing (manure) the ground for Limbaugh, O'Reilly, Hannity, et al to spend the next 4 years fomenting and raving against anything positive that the new administration tries to do to help solve our problems. Disgusting, but no surprise.
I just had a "Coffee Talk" moment, and am a little verklempt. Talk amongst yourselves. I'll give you a topic -- the author of the "American Thinker" blog is neither a real American nor a Thinker. Discuss.
JB, I'd be interested to know which things you believe the press has hit McCain hard on, especially recently. The troopergate investigation is one I would imagine. However, that's largely a result of how it's been handled by Palin and then the McCain/Palin campaign. Basically, Palin agreeing to the inquiry, then saying she wouldn't cooperate, then changing the story, fighting the inquiry, losing the fight...The story has fresh aspects everyday, so it's going to keep getting media time because there are new pieces to the story. For the Ayers story, there's been no knew information. From strictly a newspaper perspective, what else should they write about? I could only imagine they could rehash the articles that have been written. Without new information, what's there to talk about? Some pretty lengthy investigations have been done by papers and, like the NYT story, they turned up nothing except that they were acquainted through their work on education and anti-poverty boards. What should they be writing?
He says that Ayers isn't relevant. From last night's interview with Charlie Gibson: "[Ayers] wasn't a guy in the neighborhood. [Obama] launched his political career in his living room, in Mr. Ayers' living room. And I don't care about two washed-up old terrorists that are unrepentant about trying to destroy America. But I do care, and Americans should care, about his relationship with him and whether he's being truthful and candid about it," McCain said. What gives? I cannot wrap my head around this 'McCain's honor prevents him from enjoying this moment of character attack, but he has to do it....'. He is on the record making the association, just not via the three methods Marc mentions. He's getting the message on the street, so the standards set forth here are seem like something out of a DC fishwrap...almost a 'didn't inhale' moment. This GBA movement is irrational and as Big Media Matt pointed out in his latest, G. Gordon Liddy isn't Kevin Bacon lengths away from McCain but it isn't harped on ad infinitum.
If I was Obama, at the next debate if McCain doesn't bring this up to his face like he promised he would, I'd say to McCain, "I hear you have something you want to say to me about my associations." This farce needs to be put on the table so the questions being raised can be confronted and answered. Obama has nothing to hide, and McCain needs to be shown as the nut job he is.
McCain is now a very feaful man. To claim that he did not bring up Ayers in the debate because he is not serious about Ayers is much too kind. He didn't bring it up because he knew he would have his a** handed to him. Same thing at the rallies--he cannot challenge those calling for Barack's head because he is afraid of them. McCain does not plan anything in this campaign--he is just along for the ride. Rove's crash test dummy.
John McCain clearly wants to win the election and lose the country. His rallies remind me of the ones in the sixties that Bill Ayers went to. Same sloganisms, same anger. I think he feels he missed out on the sixties because he was in a dank nasty hole. Now he's trying to recreate it...
He has put money behind it. It's going on tv.
The blood's on his hands, literally (god forbid) or metaphorically. The markets are tanking, we're pouring money into a war that no general will talk about winning, and Mccain's campaign has decided to fan the flames of racism and xenophobia byfeaturing the most idsidious and scurrilous of attacks. I ran a Lexis-nexis search of Ayers last night for the years 1996-2000. Two Chicago Sun-Times mentions, one in a review of a documentary on the 60s where he's called "largely forgotten" one reporting on his exceppent education work. One mention in the NY Times as a "former radical" doing important work. One note in the Chicago Law Daily that he was soing a book-signing of his book on the juvinile justice system. The gap between that Bill Ayers and the razor's edge of mob violence on which the Republicans are precariously balanced could not be more stark.
Yes, but Wright is a militant black CHRISTIAN. This undercuts the message of his "Do we know the REAL Barack Obama?" spiel. In other words, how can he be a secret Muslim if he spends all his time hanging around with the good Reverend?
Why has nobody questioned whether Walter Annenberg was a terrorist sympathizer? It was his charity, the Annenberg Challenge, whose board Obama and Ayres sat on. Of course, Annenberg was a major Republican figure, founder of Reader's Digest, but hey! "Humor in Uniform" must have been his way of secretly undermining the troops, no? Perhaps the American Thinker could set us straight.
McCain needs to go down in history as the candidate that attempted to singlehandedly turn US civil rights and race relations back 50 years, just to win an election. He should be held morally and personally accountable for what is going on at these rallies, because he is signing off on ALL OF IT, and the press/media needs to stop ignoring the very wrongness of what is happening right in front of our eyes. This is no longer about "mud slinging"--this is yelling "fire" in a crowded theater, and it has no place in modern American politics. The American media needs to step up to the plate and stop acting like this is some playground fight and begin reporting on the serious nature of what McCain's campaign is doing. Apparently, many Americans have either poor memories or a limited understanding of the progressive nature of underlying events that precipitate violent acts against political figures. They need to be educated, and now. This whooping up of the intense anger in these folks is not going to end after the rally--look at the YouTube videos of seemingly ordinary people waiting in line at McCain Palin rallies. They seethe in disgust, anger and repulsion while talking about Obama, and are full of disinformation and outright factual inaccuracies fed to them by the Hannitization of American talk radio, and advanced by the McCain-Palin campaign. Where does John McCain think all that is going to go once the rallies are over? Or even worse, once the election is over and Barack Obama wins? If, God forbid, one of those clinic-bomber types listens to this garbage and believes it and attempts some violent event in response, I wonder if John Sydney McCain will bat an eyelash. If this turn of events doesn't cause people to question his leadership abilities and his character, than nothing will. As far as I am concerned, John McCain lacks the character, lacks the values, and lacks the intelligence to ever hold office again. Let's hope Cyndy has a use in her life for this aging nutjob blowhard, cause he's gonna need someone to pay his bills.
Does anyone have the deja vu chills as they compare today's campaign environment with the early 1960's -- the mob vitriol, the irrational anger, the code phrases being used to incite low-information voter paranoia?
Former republican governor of Michigan Milliken backs away from McCain GRAND RAPIDS -- He endorsed John McCain in the presidential primary, but now former Republican Gov. William Milliken is expressing doubts about his party's nominee. "He is not the McCain I endorsed," said Milliken, reached at his Traverse City home Thursday. "He keeps saying, 'Who is Barack Obama?' I would ask the question, 'Who is John McCain?' because his campaign has become rather disappointing to me. "I'm disappointed in the tenor and the personal attacks on the part of the McCain campaign, when he ought to be talking about the issues." Milliken, a lifelong Republican, is among some past leaders from the party's moderate wing voicing reservations and, in some cases, opposition to McCain's candidacy. "I know John McCain is 72. In my book, that's quite young," said Milliken, 86, Michigan's longest-serving governor. But he added, "What if she were to become president of the United States? The idea, to me, is quite disturbing, if not appalling. "Increasingly, the party is moving toward rigidity, and I don't like that. I think Gerald Ford would hold generally the same view I'm holding on the direction of the Republican Party."
One more life long Republican, Frank Schaeffer, is extremely upset at mob-mentaility of McCain. Via Baltimore Sun: John McCain: If your campaign does not stop equating Sen. Barack Obama with terrorism, questioning his patriotism and portraying Mr. Obama as "not one of us," I accuse you of deliberately feeding the most unhinged elements of our society the red meat of hate, and therefore of potentially instigating violence. At a Sarah Palin rally, someone called out, "Kill him!" At one of your rallies, someone called out, "Terrorist!" Neither was answered or denounced by you or your running mate, as the crowd laughed and cheered. At your campaign event Wednesday in Bethlehem, Pa., the crowd was seething with hatred for the Democratic nominee - an attitude encouraged in speeches there by you, your running mate, your wife and the local Republican chairman. Shame! John McCain: In 2000, as a lifelong Republican, I worked to get you elected instead of George W. Bush. In return, you wrote an endorsement of one of my books about military service. You seemed to be a man who put principle ahead of mere political gain. You have changed. You have a choice: Go down in history as a decent senator and an honorable military man with many successes, or go down in history as the latest abettor of right-wing extremist hate.
Isn't criticizing Wright problematic too? Wright is a Marine Corps veteran with 3 presidential commendations. He served in 'Nam, though he was not a POW. Also, the stuff he is infamous for saying was in the context of sermons - a rhetorical form with a well-deserved reputation for bombast and hyperbole. Given Wright's decorated military background, isn't there a real risk of Obama turning it back on MCain? "Jeremiah Wright served in our military and has been highly decorated for his service, just like my honorable friend John McCain. But now John McCain is saying that an American who fought for his country is a traitor. Rev. Wright has earned his right to criticize America, even though I do not agree with that criticism."
Ambinder, you're a piece of shit.
The reason the Ayers story is now getting traction and the McCain/Palin supporters have adopted this violent mob mentality comes down to basic word choice. Correct me if I am wrong but I never heard Clinton call Ayers a domestic "terrorist," I believe she referred to him as a radical. But Palin's speech writers decided to repeat the "terrorist" label over and over and that is what has made all the difference. They know that word makes white america think of muslim extremist which ignites their anger and reveals their fears. And with no clear enemy, their supporters mistakenly feel justified in threatening Mr. Obama and other minorities. That is what is so disgusting about the McCain campaign and the two people on top of the ticket. If anything should happen to Mr. Obama, and I pray to God everyday that nothing ever does, McCain and Palin will have his blood on their hands and they will have started what could eventually become the most violent racial/cultural war this country has ever seen. McCain and Palin must stop their dangerous rhetoric immediately. The way their supporters have acted this past week reaffirms my decision to NEVER be associated with the Republican party. Never! I will never be associated with a party that thrives on racism and intellectual laziness. I don't care if Dems tax 90% of my income, there is something to be said for maintaining one's dignity and integrity. Because when the money is gone all you have left is your character and that is worth much more to me.
I'm sorry, I don't really understand why this matters. So he's not serious about Ayers - so what? Somehow that makes McCain a more noble candidate or something? What is the argument here? Is it: "Well, you see, he could have gone with the more serious Wright stuff, but he steers clear of that, and is only partly serious about Ayers, so that means McCain really is an honorable candidate, and all this talk in the media about McCain going negative is just elitist liberal media talk". Is that it? I have never understood this narrative of McCain as essentially an honorable man forced to do less than honorable things because of forces beyond his control. When he is the President, it doesn't matter what his intentions are, what matters is what he actually does. It doesn't matter if he is tormented or tortured about going down this horrible route to win the election, what matters is he did. Good intentions are not enough. That's what Republicans have been trying to tell Democrats all these years, right? Maybe McCain needs a refresher course on that.
Two Words Reverend Hagee
Is there any length you won't go to to help McCain out of the morass he has waded into? McCain has decided to a fear-based slimy campaign built largely around Ayers, and it's NOT because the conservative base is angry at him, it's because that's how he thinks he will win. The base loves McCain now, he's stoking all their deeply-held beliefs that the lefties and gays and dark folks are conspiring to steal the election and put them down. What will it take for you to recognize the depths that McCain has sunk to? Of course that would take an act of courage because it implicates you as well.
If "Country First" McCain really believed that Obama was associated with a terrorist and since this was first brought up in the Primaries, wouldn't the honorable Senator have announced his concern at the time of the nomination that a "terrorist sympathizer" would be running for President? For the good of the country, wouldn't that be something he would be compelled to address immediately - in order to save the country? Or wouldn't he have instigated a Senate investigation to have Obama removed from the Senate?
When Obama began his career 25 years ago, I'm sure he suffered some racial discrimination (Michelle too). He was sincere, I think, in wanting to make conditions in South Chicago better. He probably accepted help whereever he could get it.
Dear Mrs Palin, I rite to you directly because of your great experience foreign trade relations. Also I like mamma big familia. I have great number brown shirts for sale. Historical but littel used following failed fascist experimenta in my country. Cheap but no credit carta accepted. Prego contact Benito.
What is about McCain that leads to so many intelligent journalists, including Marc, to write so many he-didn't-really-mean-that columns? Because McCain serves up some tasty barbecue. Oh, and he's a "maverick."
I've been watching very closely the dust up between Obama and McCain. As an African living in the U.S. I can't hide my admiration for American politics. You can campaign anywhere without fearing stone-throwing mobs. But lately, I've come to reevaluate my thoughts. This has been more so after hearing mobs attending McCain campaigns call Obama a "terrorist" and yelling "Kill him." I could not believe it guys. This is not America. In America, you don't bay for your opponent's blood, not especially so when he/she is an African American presidential candidate. You know why some people are so exercised! They thought Obama's candidacy was a milieu. It's becoming a reality. These folks, most of whom I consider to be white supremacists, are yet to come to terms with the fact that an African American can govern the leader of the free world.
foo So, you somehow think that the notional "Ayers connection" is a winning hand in this election? At a time when the economy is heading into a rerun of the Great Depression and America is simultaneously losing two wars, while permitting the perpetrator of the 9/11 atrocity to go free? Oh, and watching while a nuclear-armed Pakistan disintegrates before our eyes? Seek. Help.
Has McCain forgotten that even though he only needs the votes of roughly half the population to win the presidency, he needs to be president of all the people? And a significant proportion of the people will not forget the tactics he used in the (increasingly unlikely) event that he wins. Because the tactics are vile. Whipping up the mob by appealing to basic hatred and fear, inspiring the extreme elements to shout "terrorist," and "kill him," is not an acceptable election strategy. Or at least it shouldn't be. I think McCain realized the enormity of what has been happening and is now trying to tamp down the more extreme elements. I want to believe this is because he is, at heart, an honorable and not because he has discovered that the two minute hate doesn't poll well.
Utter baloney, Marc. The media this week have had wall-to-wall Ayers, close to 2,000 articles and video pieces nationally, probably more Ayers saturation than at any point in the campaign for a story that is utter BS, repeat, utter BS. If you're going to smear Obama, you're also going to have to smear all the Republicans who served on the same Annenberg Challenge board, and might I add that Ayers was not on the Board for the duration while Obama was. And have you ever mentioned McCain's far closer ties with G. Gordon Liddy, who has a much more serious rap sheet than Ayers? I haven't seen a Liddy reference. Not one. Not here anyway.
As a 60 year old black American female who grew up in the segregated state of Tennessee during the 1950's and 1960's, I have two observations to make: 1. Sen. McCain is acting this way for a simple reason: He has no character. This is obvious in the way he treated his first wife. I appreciated his service to America, but there are some things that go beyond being a POW. What about being true to the person you pledged before God(providing he was married by a clergyman)to love and honor for better or worse and in sickness or health? Those vows didn't seem to matter then when he saw somemething "better". Given his past actions, why are we so mystified at what he is doing now? 2. I knew the dismantling of the tragic house of "white privilege" would be ugly, but to me it is also in certain ways humorous. If you wonder why I say humorous, visit the blog, "American Thinker" and you will see what I am talking about. Excuse me, I must go buy some more popcorn. Have a blessed day everyone.
foo Is it called the Palin campaign? Or the Karl Rove campaign? Or the Steve Schmidt campaign? Or the ghost of Lee Atwater campaign? NO! It's called the McCain campaign he controls who is saying what and when. Whether he is being surprised by the things his surrogates are saying, he is outright condoning it with his staff or he just chooses to allow to happen and say nothing absolutely none of those reasons is excusable from a man who wants to be POTUS. And at this point is he really the man in charge of his campaign or have pathetic Palin and the angry mob taken over?!?
Actually this springs to mind: If McCain isn't serious about promoting the Ayers attacks because he won't fully fund it, yet he allowed his surrogates to do it until it blew up in his face (1) He could put lots of money into an Ayers ad -- video press releases don't cut it. His budget is limited and was hoping fools in the press would spend time on his campaign's lies and vitrol for him or hoping it really went viral. (2) He could devote a stump speech to Obama's associations and Obama's associations only. The amount of b.s. that speech would provide for Obama pushback commercials, Obama fund raising and the real press debunking it would not make it a winner...the hateful distortion is best left to his stooge Palin. (3) He could mention Ayers in a debate. John McCain has become a joke, a shell of his former self, unrecognizable....he's totally pathetic.
McCain has his own Ayers: Nazi sympathizer Gordon Liddy
Sure, it is true that Barack Obama was just a popsicle licker when Ayers was bombing government institutions but while adult "Pals", Ayers and Obama were in allegiance to distribute tens of millions of dollars together in a collaborative effort in the Annenburg Challenge Project. It is an absurd denial of reality to think that kind of money passes hands without considerable personal interaction in any organization(and especially a grant-funded organization) . Furthermore, the results of the Annenburg Challenge distributed funds were a complete failure towards the goal of education... In fact that money was spent toward the goal of political and social radicalization of the student body. A really great investment huh?... But what does that tell you about the intent and philosophy of Barack Obama? Now heard on the street that Ayers may have ghost-written one of Obama's books... If this is true, as autobiographical as these books are, going further in human collaboration almost surely requires the swapping of spit.... Not just a guy in the neighborhood... Then there is the Rev. Wright absurdity... I personally know the political leanings and peculiarities of priests and reverends after a couple of sermons... BARACK OBAMA CAN ONLY BE COMPLETELY STUPID ABOUT HUMAN CHARACTER OR LYING LIKE A CLINTONIAN WHEN HE SAYS, AFTER 20 YEARS, HE NEITHER SAT THROUGH OR KNEW OF REVEREND WRIGHT's HATE MONGERING. In either case, stupidity or lying through his teeth, the case of Rev. Wright should completely disqualify him from being considered as much more than a shoe salesman. Metaphorically speaking.... Like a "tip of the iceberg" the Rev. Writght incidents reveal a subculture of black hatred which unlike an iceburg, is more like the tell-tale smoke-stack of a distillery of hatred.. brewing a bitter cauldron a so-called black reformist, evangelicalism.... Twenty years isn't a mistake of judgment in a setting like that, it's an embrace of a lexicon ... Nobody can explain it to me without being in constant denial of their own common sense or otherwise showing Obama to be a complete stooge.
|
Subscribe to this blog by Email Twitter || On Facebook || QIK Live Channel  Recent Posts
Monthly Archives
|
| 
Copyright © 2008 by The Atlantic Monthly Group. All rights reserved.
Great. He's just allowing hatred to fan into flame and then stoking the fire with insidious remarks because he has nothing else to do. Not serious about it, though.
Posted by Martin | October 10, 2008 10:01 AM