Sol Stern takes up the substance of "reforms" proposed by the likes of William Ayers. The Annenberg Challenge and Barack Obama’s association with it sound innocuous enough on the face of it. If the only objection were that Obama had been "paling around" with a bad guy (Ayers), held a fundraiser in his home and happened to serve on a board with him--it would be one thing. It is certainly enough to show that Obama lied when he characterized Ayers as just "some guy in my neighborhood." But the real question must be to what extent does Barack Obama agree with the thinking of William Ayers? Obama has denounced the terrorism for which Ayers remains unrepentant. But will he denounce the praise Ayers lavished on Hugo Chavez? Will he denounce the agenda Ayers promotes of getting schools to teach that America is an inherently racist and militaristic country with a capitalist system that is inherently unfair and oppressive? Does Barack Obama support that narrative? It is a fair question given that it now appears that the foundation for which Obama and Ayers worked did support such a view of America.
So the real question for Obama is not so much "Who are your friends?" but, rather, "What do you believe about America?" Is it really unfair to suggest that his associates provide us some clues on that score?
Thank you for nailing the REAL issue. If your accuracy and eloquence don't come through McCain's voice tonight, we are in trouble. Our economic woes will pale in comparison to what's coming if this ideology takes over in January!
For reasons not directly related to the election, I for one am glad this issue is being raised. Why? Because as someone deeply involved in high school history curriculum development, I can tell you that Ayres' view that teachers should convince kids America is racist, sexist, imperialist and oppressive is embraced by a very much more substantial number of educators than most of the public realizes.
If the election is allowed to be a referendum on the Bush tenure, ---------------- the GOP will lose.
If the race becomes a visceral reaction to the associations and activities of Barrack Hussein Obama, ------------- then this race can still become a Republican rout of the Democrats.
Some have foolishly deluded themselves that the race should devolve into a test of competing economic plans. This is nothing but a projection of the desires of the faculty lounge on to the American electorate. Races don't play out like boring discussions on CSPAN. The American voter isn't a policy wonk.
Moreover, how can we compare economic "plans" when Obama is selling nothing but "hope" and "change." THROUGHOUT the ENTIRE campaign, Obama has been a blank slate, which the voter has been allowed to chalk any of his desires upon. Thus the idea of a robust collision of viewpoints simply isn't going to happen, for it's completely contrary to Axelrod's gameplan. Which is a study in calculated ambiguity.
Certain ideas, like the "global poverty initiative" should be focused on, NOT because it's economically unsound, which it is, but because it reveals Obama's elitism, internationalism, radical hankerings, radical blaming of America for the poverty of others.
It's a LEFTY policy proposal.
Obama's associations should not be relegated to a minor matter of a "bad judgement," which presumably he'll grow beyond once installed in The White House.
He HAS been "paling around with terrorists." And has done so for most of his ADULT existence. As late as his early 40s, he's been running around with RADICAL, HARD-CORE anti-American types. That's no longer a matter of judgement, that's a STATEMENT of who he is
As Governor Palin remarked, he HAS been "paling around" with those that hate America!
He's "paled around" with them because he concurred with them, he agreed with them, they shared similar attitudes, they shared a similar worldview, they ALL affected a post-national, post-American attitude. There was no substantive difference between Dohrn, Ayers, Wright, et al. They're ALL a pack of whackos. And the Democrat standard bearer PREFERRED their company to normal, ordinary, peaceful, non-subversisve Americans.
Mark Levin made this point the other day on The Corner, over at NRO. And it's a bullseye.
In fact, it's SO painfully accurate that some prefer not even to mull it over. For what it says about the state of the Democrat party is simply unthinkable.
"My government is my worst enemy. I'm going to fight them with any means at hand."
Joe Vogler, founder of AIP.
"Keep up the good work," Palin told AIP members. "And God bless you."
"She's Alaskan to the bone ... she sounds just like Joe Vogler."
AIP Chairwoman, Lynette Clark.
"When the [federal] bureaucrats come after me, I suggest they wear red coats. They make better targets. In the federal government are the biggest liars in the United States, and I hate them with a passion."
Palin is going to be exposed for the lying hypocrite she is. The 527's are going to go after this right wing extremist with a vengeance.
I am a big fan of Sol Stern - ex SDS Berzekley Member and Radical 1960's hippy who thankfully has made a 180-degree turnaround. Luckily my teenager isn't exposed to the radical public school teacher's agenda, like Ayers, that makes American everything bad and people like Fidel Castro good. I will file this post under the 968,738th reason my teenager is homeschooled. He gets the real American History lesson.