During a weekend of Republican attacks on Senator Barack Obama’s personal associations, Fox News Channel ran a program Sunday that made provocative assertions about similar connections, called “Obama & Friends: The History of Radicalism.”
Sean Hannity, the conservative radio and television host, was the host of the hourlong program, which raised, among other things, unsubstantiated accusations that Mr. Obama’s work as a community organizer in Chicago was “training for a radical overthrow of the government.”
The statement came from Andy Martin, a conservative writer and frequent political candidate who is credited as being among the first — if not the first — to assert in a chain e-mail message that Mr. Obama was secretly a Muslim.
Mr. Obama is a Christian; his campaign says he “is not, was not and has never been” a Muslim.
Peppering his statements with phrases like “in my opinion” and “my view is,” Mr. Martin said Mr. Obama’s political career had been engineered by Bill Ayers, a founder and former member of the radical Weather Underground and now an education professor in Chicago.
Various reports, including ones in The New York Times, have found no evidence that Mr. Obama and Mr. Ayers were particularly close, although they have had various points of contact. Mr. Ayers was host of an event for Mr. Obama early in his political career, they served together on a charitable board, and both worked on an educational project financed by the billionaire philanthropist Walter H. Annenberg.
The program was the latest step in the evolution of opinion journalism on cable news. It comes as one of Fox News’s rivals, MSNBC, becomes increasingly liberal, with hosts like Rachel Maddow and Keith Olbermann advocating against Senator John McCain. But Mr. Hannity’s program on Sunday was notable in presenting partisan accusations against Mr. Obama in a journalistic, documentary format in prime time.
Saying he believed that ties between Mr. Obama and Mr. Ayers were deeper, and reporting that Mr. Ayers had been an admirer of the Venezuelan president Hugo Chávez, who, in turn, is an acolyte of Fidel Castro, Mr. Martin said, “If you love the Cuban revolution and Castro, and if you love what’s happening in Venezuela with Hugo Chávez, you’ll love Barry Obama — Barack Obama, as he calls himself — in the White House.”
For good measure, Mr. Martin, who made a failed bid to run on the Republican line in the 2004 race for a Senate seat from Illinois that Mr. Obama won, added, “We are basically going in the throes of a social revolution which attempts to essentially freeze out anybody who is not part of this radical ideology.”
The special was shown on “Hannity’s America,” the Sunday night program in which Mr. Hannity does not have to share the screen with his weeknight liberal co-host on Fox News, Alan Colmes.
Mr. Hannity said that Mr. Obama did not respond to a request for comment. Still, the program presented no opposing viewpoint to the program’s thesis: that, in Mr. Hannity’s words, “Obama’s list of friends reads like a history of radicalism.”
Mr. Hannity’s executive producer, John Finley, said that the program was clearly opinion and that the audience — on average 1.5 million to 2 million — knew to take it as such. “ ‘Hannity’s America’ is an opinion show — it’s a show from Sean’s perspective, which is obviously conservative,” Mr. Finley said.
Speaking of Mr. Martin, he added, “It’s one man’s opinion, one of many that was expressed on the show.”
Mr. Martin said he was careful not to present his theories about Mr. Obama as proven fact.
“That is my opinion — expert opinion — if you will,” Mr. Martin said of his commentary on Mr. Hannity’s program. “I don’t pretend to be an exclusively fact-based reporter, though I try as hard as I can to get the facts.”
Mr. Martin came under strong attack from liberals on Monday. Many noted that the Republican Party of Florida decided against backing his bid for the State Senate in 1996 after receiving documents from his Congressional race 10 years earlier in Connecticut listing the purpose of one of his political committees as “to exterminate Jew power in America and to impeach the judges of the U.S. Court of Appeals in New York City.”
Mr. Martin had previously said the documents were forged, and again denied their authenticity on Monday. He also denied harboring anti-Semitic sentiment, saying “it’s peripheral, it draws you away from the issue.”
And when confronted that this guy that Sean Hannity gave an hour long forum to was a Andy Martin, virulent anti-semite, well, Hannity went ballistic.
Talking over your guests is a common FOX tactic but he made a good point. 1 that Walter Annanberg, a Reagan ambassador and a friend to Reagan also sat on this board. And ironically his widow now supports McCain. And as Alan Colmes states in the piece, the board included both Democrats and Republicans as well as William Ayers. But McCain Palin would have all of us believe that this board was some hotbed of anti-American radicalism.
So Obama, sititing on a panel with democrats and Republicans which included William Ayers, a political figure in Chicago education and politics can be tarred with associations but Sean Hannity who invited a guy on a show specifically designed to promote this smear that he agrees with isn't an anti-semite?
But I thought if you sit with someone, you have to agree with everything they're ever said and done in their life!
But wow! So FOX hosts an hour long smear piece with absolutely little to no facts, just b.s. from some anti-semite who has made all sorts of racist and just outright kooky allegations in the past.
This is the Republican Party in the 21st century. It's sad really. What do you say when right wing radicals and racists call you radical and racist?
It's scary that, in less than thirty days, there's even a possibility that guy who pals around with terrorists and corrupt foreign leaders might be elected President and the center-left press is less concerned about investigating that than it is attacking and questioning anyone who tries to have a discussion about the issue.
It's scary that, in less than thirty days, there's even a possibility that guy who pals around with terrorists and corrupt foreign leaders might be elected President and the center-left press is less concerned about investigating that than it is attacking and questioning anyone who tries to have a discussion about the issue.
Have you proven it.
Was Walter Annenberg also a terrorist then?
Is Sarah Palin an anti-Semite since she sat in the church pew and then joined 2 pastors in her church who made anti-semetic remarks again, in her presence?
it's funny how the far right wants to hold Obama to standards they don't hold for themselves.
it's not about proving it.... although more and more comes out every day.....it's about having good judgement and for many people Obama doesn't have it based on who he thinks it's ok to hang around with.
it's not about proving it.... although more and more comes out every day.....it's about having good judgement and for many people Obama doesn't have it based on who he thinks it's ok to hang around with.
sitting on a board with a bipartisan forum of Chicago politicians and leaders to work on educational reform is not "hanging around".
With that sort of standard it's amazing that you guys haven't pilloried Bush or fOX news for hiring ex Iran contra and watergate felons.
Last edited by whomod; 2008-10-097:12 PM. Reason: more felons
It's scary that, in less than thirty days, there's even a possibility that guy who pals around with terrorists and corrupt foreign leaders might be elected President and the center-left press is less concerned about investigating that than it is attacking and questioning anyone who tries to have a discussion about the issue.
Originally Posted By: whomod
Have you proven it.
As noted above, every time someone tries to even discuss the issue, the center-left press shuts it down like some sort of Soviet purge.
It should be noted however, the following facts cannot be reasonably disputed:
William Ayers and his wife were terrorists.
Ayers group, the Weathermen, bombed and killed people. They even attacked a nine year old kid's family.
William Ayers has indicated his continued support for his past actions.
Ayers and Obama have a long history of, not just knowing each other, but working closely together.
Obama began his political career in Ayers' home.
Ayers' wife and Michelle Obama also worked together.
Obama's denials/minimalizations of his associations with Ayers have been found to be less than candid.
You can try and draw parallels but, so far, none of your efforts at "guilt by association" directed at the McCain come close to the ties between the Obama family and the Ayers family.
Prometheus happy Moderator Hack in Business 15000+ posts 10/09/08 04:29 PM Making a new reply Forum: Politics and Current Events Thread: Re: Obama's Terrorist Pals
whomod content User some RKMB'ers are Obsessed with Black People Hmmm? 5000+ posts 10/09/08 04:26 PM Making a new reply Forum: Politics and Current Events Thread: Re: Obama's Terrorist Pals
It's scary that, in less than thirty days, there's even a possibility that guy who pals around with terrorists and corrupt foreign leaders might be elected President and the center-left press is less concerned about investigating that than it is attacking and questioning anyone who tries to have a discussion about the issue.
Originally Posted By: whomod
Have you proven it.
As noted above, every time someone tries to even discuss the issue, the center-left press shuts it down like some sort of Soviet purge.
It should be noted however, the following facts cannot be reasonably disputed:
William Ayers and his wife were terrorists.
Ayers group, the Weathermen, bombed and killed people. They even attacked a nine year old kid's family.
William Ayers has indicated his continued support for his past actions.
Ayers and Obama have a long history of, not just knowing each other, but working closely together.
Obama began his political career in Ayers' home.
Ayers' wife and Michelle Obama also worked together.
Obama's denials/minimalizations of his associations with Ayers have been found to be less than candid.
You can try and draw parallels but, so far, none of your efforts at "guilt by association" directed at the McCain come close to the ties between the Obama family and the Ayers family.
But see, that's your biased opinion talking. i realize you guys are DESPERATE to stop McCain's slide but as I said, this issue was raised by Hillary Clinton and looked into by the media. In fact the NY Times article repeated that fact. They found specious evidence of this being anything but an acquaintance.
Yeah, you can rail against the media's "liberalism" all you want and more power to you. To believe that then you'd have to believe that the media has been in Obama's pocket all along even when he was an underdog and Hillary was the supposed favorite.
Is it possible to cling to one conspiracy too many? You see deep connections because you want to see deep connections. and raising the issue over and over again isn't going to change the fact that the media saw no there, there when they first looked into it and when they look into it again every time McCain tries to elevate the subject.
Now based on the fact that the DOW pretty much crashed and burned yet again and everyone including you and I are losing their shirts as far as retirement savings go (thanks to tying retirement to the stock market BTW thanks guys!), do you really think most people (besides rabid partisans like you and Sean Hannity that is) really give a fuck about the 1960's and the old stale culture wars you guys still want to fight?
I concede, they've worked as a distraction for you guys many times but this time, it's different. Theres some real serious shit that is affecting EVERYONE right now and William Ayers or the Weather Underground has NOTHING to do with it.
As noted above, every time someone tries to even discuss the issue, the center-left press shuts it down like some sort of Soviet purge.
It should be noted however, the following facts cannot be reasonably disputed:
William Ayers and his wife were terrorists.
William Charles "Bill" Ayers (born 26 December 1944)[1] is an American elementary education theorist and former leading 1960s anti-war activist. He is known for the radical nature of his activism in the 1960s and 1970s as well as his current work in education reform, curriculum, and instruction. In 1969 he cofounded the radical left organization the Weather Underground, which conducted a campaign of bombing public buildings during the 1960s and 1970s. He is now a professor in the College of Education at the University of Illinois at Chicago, holding the title of Distinguished Professor.
Quote:
Ayers group, the Weathermen, bombed and killed people. They even attacked a nine year old kid's family.
One of the first acts of the Weathermen after splitting from SDS was to announce they would hold the "Days of Rage" that autumn. This was advertised to "Bring the war home!" Hoping to cause sufficient chaos to "wake" the American public out of what they saw as complacency toward the role of the US in the Vietnam War, the Weathermen meant it to be the largest protest of the decade. They had been told by their regional cadre to expect thousands to attend; however, when they arrived they found only a few hundred people. According to Bill Ayers, "The Days of Rage was an attempt to break from the norms of kind of acceptable theatre of 'here are the anti-war people: containable, marginal, predictable, and here's the little path they're going to march down, and here's where they can make their little statement.' We wanted to say, "No, what we're going to do is whatever we had to do to stop the violence in Vietnam.'"[2]
Shortly before the demonstrations, they blew up a statue in Chicago built to commemorate police casualties incurred in the 1886 Haymarket Riot.[8] The blast broke nearly 100 windows and scattered pieces of the statue onto the Kennedy Expressway below.[9] The statue was rebuilt and unveiled on May 4, 1970, only to be blown up by the Weathermen a second time on October 6, 1970.[10][9] The statue was rebuilt once again and Mayor Richard J. Daley posted a 24-hour police guard to protect it.[9]
Though the October 8, 1969 rally in Chicago had failed to draw as many as the Weathermen had anticipated, the two or three hundred who did attend shocked police by rioting through the affluent Gold Coast neighborhood. They smashed the windows of a bank and those of many cars. The crowd ran four blocks before encountering police barricades. They charged the police but broke into small groups; more than 1,000 police counter-attacked. Many protesters were wearing motorcycle or football helmets, but the police were well trained and armed. Large amounts of tear gas were used, and at least twice police ran squad cars into the mob. The rioting lasted approximately half an hour, during which 28 policemen were injured (none seriously). Six Weathermen were shot by the police and an unknown number injured; 68 rioters were arrested.
Quote:
William Ayers has indicated his continued support for his past actions.
And?
Quote:
Ayers and Obama have a long history of, not just knowing each other, but working closely together.
He served on two nonprofit boards with Barack Obama. Both Ayers and his wife, Bernardine Dohrn, hosted a meet-and-greet for Obama at their home in 1995,[2] where Alice Palmer introduced Obama as her chosen successor in the Illinois State Senate.[3] However, investigations by journalists concluded that Obama does not have a close relationship with Ayers.
Quote:
Obama began his political career in Ayers' home.
Both Ayers and his wife, Bernardine Dohrn, hosted a meet-and-greet for Obama at their home in 1995,[2] where Alice Palmer introduced Obama as her chosen successor in the Illinois State Senate.
Quote:
Ayers' wife and Michelle Obama also worked together.
And? Your point?
Quote:
Obama's denials/minimalizations of his associations with Ayers have been found to be less than candid.
Opinion or fact?
Quote:
You can try and draw parallels but, so far, none of your efforts at "guilt by association" directed at the McCain come close to the ties between the Obama family and the Ayers family.
Is this really all the Right has now? Biased-opinions and fantasy-evils? Are you so desperate to be "correct" that you have to pull random insinuation and hypocritical standards out of the thin air? Really?
Is it possible to cling to one conspiracy too many? You see deep connections because you want to see deep connections. and raising the issue over and over again isn't going to change the fact that the media saw no there, there when they first looked into it and when they look into it again every time McCain tries to elevate the subject.
Now based on the fact that the DOW pretty much crashed and burned yet again and everyone including you and I are losing their shirts as far as retirement savings go (thanks to tying retirement to the stock market BTW thanks guys!), do you really think most people (besides rabid partisans like you and Sean Hannity that is) really give a fuck about the 1960's and the old stale culture wars you guys still want to fight?
I concede, they've worked as a distraction for you guys many times but this time, it's different. Theres some real serious shit that is affecting EVERYONE right now and William Ayers or the Weather Underground has NOTHING to do with it.
You're a bit of a douche, and far too extreme. But, when you're right, you're right...
to be fair Pro the Right has been asking these questions for a year. Hillary Clinton was asking them too. The media chose to try and bury this story. Now we have media outlets other than Fox like Time digging around so I feel better knowing journalists are at least asking questions.
It's fair to ask about his associations, and his decision making process. Yes the economy is fucked, and yes the world is dangerous. That doesn't mean that just because a guy isn't in the same party as the current President he is better. Campaigns are all about promises. It is more than fair to see what this guy was about before he was running for President. Hanging out with guys like Bill Ayers and Rev. Wright doesn't make him a racist and terrorist, but you have to question why were these guys okay to hang with before he was running for President. It seems maybe he is okay with their way of thinking. No that he must choose friends based on political currency, he dissociates them. So who is the real Barack, the guy running for President, or the guy hanging out with extremists?
Yeah, not to seriously compare Obama to Hitler or Mussolini, but the defense for both those guys at the time was that they were good for their respective nations' economies.
You can't blindly ignore serious questions about a candidate's positions, judgement or beliefs and focus only on the economy, or any other single issue. That's exactly how countries end up with crooks, liars or worse.
All of the biggest dictators and murderers were brought in under populist campaigns and no one checked out their backgrounds. Pol Pot, Hitler, Castro. People have short attention spans, they need to check their history better. To think the US is invincible to this kind of thing isn't being a realist. I go back to the powers Bush grabbed in his last term, he wasn't popular. Wait until someone with a gift for causing people to faint, and telling everyone what they want to hear makes a power grab. By the time anyone realizes it it may be too late. PJP has pointed out the enabling act, these things can, have and do happen. Who you associate with tells a lot about who you really are.
to be fair Pro the Right has been asking these questions for a year. Hillary Clinton was asking them too. The media chose to try and bury this story. Now we have media outlets other than Fox like Time digging around so I feel better knowing journalists are at least asking questions.
Originally Posted By: britneyspearsatemyshorts
It's fair to ask about his associations, and his decision making process. Yes the economy is fucked, and yes the world is dangerous. That doesn't mean that just because a guy isn't in the same party as the current President he is better. Campaigns are all about promises. It is more than fair to see what this guy was about before he was running for President. Hanging out with guys like Bill Ayers and Rev. Wright doesn't make him a racist and terrorist, but you have to question why were these guys okay to hang with before he was running for President. It seems maybe he is okay with their way of thinking. No that he must choose friends based on political currency, he dissociates them. So who is the real Barack, the guy running for President, or the guy hanging out with extremists?
Originally Posted By: the G-man
Yeah, not to seriously compare Obama to Hitler or Mussolini, but the defense for both those guys at the time was that they were good for their respective nations' economies.
You can't blindly ignore serious questions about a candidate's positions, judgement or beliefs and focus only on the economy, or any other single issue. That's exactly how countries end up with crooks, liars or worse.
Originally Posted By: britneyspearsatemyshorts
All of the biggest dictators and murderers were brought in under populist campaigns and no one checked out their backgrounds. Pol Pot, Hitler, Castro. People have short attention spans, they need to check their history better. To think the US is invincible to this kind of thing isn't being a realist. I go back to the powers Bush grabbed in his last term, he wasn't popular. Wait until someone with a gift for causing people to faint, and telling everyone what they want to hear makes a power grab. By the time anyone realizes it it may be too late. PJP has pointed out the enabling act, these things can, have and do happen. Who you associate with tells a lot about who you really are.
THANK you! That's exactly what I've been striving to hear. These are all very rational points that actually express what you really mean when you just shorthand it with the anti-Obama slurs and mudslinging. Well stated. Thank you for taking the time to write it.
In response, I will only say that I think any sincere link between Ayers and Obama is greatly exaggerated. However, on the flipside, Michelle Obama didn't exactly nail down how close they are tied together when Stewart asked her to quantify it on the Daily Show episode I just watched. She had a perfect chance to come clean or clarify, and she sort of side-stepped the issue. Doesn't convince me of anything, just annoyed me she is either unwilling, or was told not to, shed some real light on the subject...
However, on the flipside, Michelle Obama didn't exactly nail down how close they are tied together when Stewart asked her to quantify it on the Daily Show episode I just watched. She had a perfect chance to come clean or clarify, and she sort of side-stepped the issue. Doesn't convince me of anything, just annoyed me she is either unwilling, or was told not to, shed some real light on the subject...
For the first time in my adult life, I'm proud of Prometheus.
Jailed political fundraiser Antoin "Tony" Rezko, the Chicago real estate developer who helped launch Barack Obama on his political career, is whispering secrets to federal prosecutors about corruption in Illinois and the political fallout could be explosive.
Democratic Gov. Rod Blagojevich, whose administration faces multiple federal investigations over how it handed out jobs and money with advice from Rezko, is considered the most vulnerable.
Rezko also was friendly with Obama — offering him a job when he finished law school, funding his earliest political campaigns and purchasing a lot next to his house. But based on the known facts, charges so far and testimony at Rezko's trial, there's no indication there'll be a so-called "October surprise" that could hurt the Democratic presidential nominee — even though Rezko says prosecutors are pressing him for dirt about Obama.
"I think this strikes fear into the Blagojevich administration and the Statehouse Democrats but not into the Obama campaign," says state Sen. Kirk Dillard, R-Westmont, a John McCain delegate to the GOP convention but an old friend of Obama.
Rezko, 53, a real estate developer, was convicted in June of scheming to use his clout with the Blagojevich administration to squeeze $7 million in kickbacks out of a contractor and seven money management firms seeking to do business with the state.
Within two months, Rezko was seen in U.S. Attorney Patrick J. Fitzgerald's office, along with his attorneys.
There has been no official confirmation that Rezko is talking but his sentencing has been postponed indefinitely and both sides say they are going to "engage in discussions that could affect their sentencing postures."
"They never would have delayed the sentencing if he weren't talking — it's proof positive," said Jay Stewart, executive director of the Better Government Association of Chicago.
In addition, attorneys say federal investigators have been questioning Blagojevich contributions around the state using information that only Rezko could have supplied. Finally, courthouse personnel requesting anonymity because grand jury probes are secret said Rezko has been repeatedly brought from his cell to the U.S. attorney's office to talk to prosecutors.
Rezko could have a lot to tell. He has raised millions of dollars in campaign money for many Illinois politicians and according to federal prosecutors used his clout to control appointments to state boards.
But questions concerning Obama's relationship with Rezko linger, particularly over Rezko's role in the purchase of the Obamas' home.
The two have known each other for years, starting when Rezko offered Obama a job after he graduated from Harvard Law School in 1991. Obama didn't take it, but a friendship developed.
The men talked politics frequently and occasionally dined together with their wives.
In 2005, the Obamas paid $1.65 million for their home near the University of Chicago. The sellers wanted a parcel they owned next door to sell on the same day, and Rezko's wife, Rita, was the buyer. At the request of the Obamas, Mrs. Rezko later sold them a 10-foot strip of land to enlarge their lot. They paid $104,500.
The deal took place while Rezko was under investigation and when details of the cozy relationship surfaced, Obama said it was a "bonehead" error to have asked for the additional land because it looked like he was getting a favor.
"I regret it," Obama said at the time. "I'm going to make sure that from this point on I don't even come close to the line."
McCain and vice running mate Sarah Palin have mentioned Rezko little if at all. But Republicans have aired a television ad focusing on Rezko. And McCain aides have repeatedly tweaked their opponent over the real estate deal in e-mails to reporters.
"We're delighted to have a debate on judgment with Barack Obama, who bought his million-dollar mansion in a shady deal with a convicted felon," McCain spokesman Brian Rogers said in August.
Blagojevich, meanwhile, got a black eye from the trial.
One witness testified that Blagojevich talked about hiring him for a major state job while his $25,000 donation to the governor's campaign fund was lying on the table.
Two attorneys testified that Blagojevich hinted that they could get lucrative state contracts if they raised money — possibly for a future White House campaign.
Yes the economy is fucked, and yes the world is dangerous. That doesn't mean that just because a guy isn't in the same party as the current President he is better...Hanging out with guys like Bill Ayers and Rev. Wright doesn't make him a racist and terrorist, but you have to question why were these guys okay to hang with before he was running for President. It seems maybe he is okay with their way of thinking. ...
Originally Posted By: the G-man
Yeah, not to seriously compare Obama to Hitler or Mussolini, but the defense for both those guys at the time was that they were good for their respective nations' economies.
You can't blindly ignore serious questions about a candidate's positions, judgement or beliefs and focus only on the economy, or any other single issue. That's exactly how countries end up with crooks, liars or worse.
If you compare responses to the Depression in the 1930s, you can see how a rather frightening rhetoric took hold. In his inauguration address in 1933, Roosevelt declared that "the moneychangers have fled from the high seats in the temples of our civilisation". This was not so different in tone from Nazi talk about Jewish bankers.
Hitler and FDR came to power in the same year, and not with very different economic policies. They talked about youth and the harnessing of the will. They used government programmes of public works to restore employment.
The difference lay not only in the characters of Hitler and FDR, but in the systems in which they operated. In a proper democracy, strong leadership can coexist with constraints. By the end of the 1930s, there were no important robust democracies in the Western world, except for Britain and America. Reaction to the slump had favoured dictators. What the Nazis had called their "war for work" had turned out, because it included rearmament, to be work for war.
We cannot yet see the future dictators, but we can certainly see the weakness that gives them their chance.
Some Futurists hold that sometime prior to the expected return of Jesus, there will be a period of "great tribulation"[40] during which the Antichrist (Barack Hussein Obama), indwelt and controlled by Satan, will attempt to win supporters with false peace, supernatural signs. He will silence all that defy him by refusing to "receive his mark" on their right hands or forehead. This "mark" will be required to legally partake in the end-time economic system.[41] Some Futurists believe that the Antichrist will be assassinated half way through the Tribulation, being revived and indwelt by Satan. The Antichrist will continue on for three and a half years following this "deadly wound".[42]
And?