Wednesday, October 15, 2008
"Those liberals who get their panties in a twist ..."
Thomas Frank is the token liberal in the Wall Street Journal's editorial/opinion pages. Frank's "Tilting Yard" columns are high comedy because practically everything he writes seems to be clipped from Democratic National Committee press releases. Put his musings side by side with the well reasoned and chock-full-of-facts-and-figures editorials for which the WSJ is famous, and you're not only guaranteed to chuckle for a bit, you almost want to send the man a check so he sign up for courses in basic economics and elementary logic.
In his column today, Frank offers his opinions 'bout B. Hussein Obama and William Ayers. Frank is friendly with Ayers, so he takes personal exception to Republican criticism of Obama and his radical friends. Frank writes:
"[T]he Republican presidential campaign has put nearly all its ... political capital on emphasizing Mr. Obama's time on various foundation boards with Bill Ayers, a former member of the Weathermen, which planted bombs and issued preposterous statements in the Vietnam era. Some on the right seem to believe Mr. Ayers is Mr. Obama's puppet-master, while others are content merely to insist that the association proves Mr. Obama to be soft on terrorism. Maybe he's soft on anarchy and repudiation, too."
No one has suggested that Ayers is Obama's puppet-master. Furthermore, Obama has said enough dumb things over the years to suggest that, as a matter of policy, he'd be soft on terrorism; Ayers name doesn't need to be - and hasn't been - dragged into that debate. See what I mean about Thomas Frank?
Those liberals who get their panties in a twist every time someone mentions Obama and Ayers in the same sentence need to realize this: It's not just Ayers. Ayers gets the most-mentioned treatment because he (a) engaged in terroristic activities, (b) escaped prison on a technicality, and (c) refuses to apologize for his actions. (Ayers: "I don't regret setting bombs. I feel we didn't do enough.") You can damn sure bet that if John McCain was chummy with, and attended a fundraiser at the home of, someone who bombed abortion clinics and refused to apologize for it, NOW and NARAL and the DNC and every other left-wing outfit you can think of would be raising holy hell.
But it's not just Ayers. Obama has a history of associating with radical left-wingers and corrupt pols, and these associations explain how he got to where he is today. Dan McLaughlin offers some insight:
"You will often hear Obama's defenders argue that his ties to this or that extremist or corrupt figure is an isolated aberration, an example of "guilt by association"; that the various favors he dispensed with public money and private charitable foundation funds are nothing unusual in politics. But when you look at Obama's record and biography taken together, what you see is that the favors, the extremists and the machine ties are all inextricably intertwined, and that far from being isolated incidents, Obama's modus operandi of mutual back-scratching with radicals and crooks extends to nearly every aspect of his life and career - his family, his faith, his home, his jobs and education, his significant election victories and legislative 'accomplishments,' his closest advisors and most important mentors, the money and organization that made up his campaigns."
If you haven't done so already, I encourage you read David Freddoso's The Case Against Barack Obama: The Unlikely Rise and Unexamined Agenda of the Media's Favorite Candidate. Until then, these links'll keep you busy:
Obama's Rootless Ambition looks at the influences that shaped Obama before he ran for office.
Obama and the Extremists looks at his relationships with left-wing radicals and how they were an integral part of his rise in politics.
Obama and ACORN looks at his intimate relationship with a network of community organizers with a pervasive record of voter fraud and deep involvement in the subprime housing crisis.
Obama and the Machine looks at Obama's long, deep and multifacted partnership with machine politicians in Chicago and Springfield.
Obama and the Favor Factory looks at Obama's routine practice of trading favors with his political benefactors.
Obama, "New Politics" and Principles looks at the illusory nature of Obama's "new politics," his absence of a record of fighting tough battles on principle, and wraps up and concludes the series.
In his column today, Frank offers his opinions 'bout B. Hussein Obama and William Ayers. Frank is friendly with Ayers, so he takes personal exception to Republican criticism of Obama and his radical friends. Frank writes:
"[T]he Republican presidential campaign has put nearly all its ... political capital on emphasizing Mr. Obama's time on various foundation boards with Bill Ayers, a former member of the Weathermen, which planted bombs and issued preposterous statements in the Vietnam era. Some on the right seem to believe Mr. Ayers is Mr. Obama's puppet-master, while others are content merely to insist that the association proves Mr. Obama to be soft on terrorism. Maybe he's soft on anarchy and repudiation, too."
No one has suggested that Ayers is Obama's puppet-master. Furthermore, Obama has said enough dumb things over the years to suggest that, as a matter of policy, he'd be soft on terrorism; Ayers name doesn't need to be - and hasn't been - dragged into that debate. See what I mean about Thomas Frank?
Those liberals who get their panties in a twist every time someone mentions Obama and Ayers in the same sentence need to realize this: It's not just Ayers. Ayers gets the most-mentioned treatment because he (a) engaged in terroristic activities, (b) escaped prison on a technicality, and (c) refuses to apologize for his actions. (Ayers: "I don't regret setting bombs. I feel we didn't do enough.") You can damn sure bet that if John McCain was chummy with, and attended a fundraiser at the home of, someone who bombed abortion clinics and refused to apologize for it, NOW and NARAL and the DNC and every other left-wing outfit you can think of would be raising holy hell.
But it's not just Ayers. Obama has a history of associating with radical left-wingers and corrupt pols, and these associations explain how he got to where he is today. Dan McLaughlin offers some insight:
"You will often hear Obama's defenders argue that his ties to this or that extremist or corrupt figure is an isolated aberration, an example of "guilt by association"; that the various favors he dispensed with public money and private charitable foundation funds are nothing unusual in politics. But when you look at Obama's record and biography taken together, what you see is that the favors, the extremists and the machine ties are all inextricably intertwined, and that far from being isolated incidents, Obama's modus operandi of mutual back-scratching with radicals and crooks extends to nearly every aspect of his life and career - his family, his faith, his home, his jobs and education, his significant election victories and legislative 'accomplishments,' his closest advisors and most important mentors, the money and organization that made up his campaigns."
If you haven't done so already, I encourage you read David Freddoso's The Case Against Barack Obama: The Unlikely Rise and Unexamined Agenda of the Media's Favorite Candidate. Until then, these links'll keep you busy:
Obama's Rootless Ambition looks at the influences that shaped Obama before he ran for office.
Obama and the Extremists looks at his relationships with left-wing radicals and how they were an integral part of his rise in politics.
Obama and ACORN looks at his intimate relationship with a network of community organizers with a pervasive record of voter fraud and deep involvement in the subprime housing crisis.
Obama and the Machine looks at Obama's long, deep and multifacted partnership with machine politicians in Chicago and Springfield.
Obama and the Favor Factory looks at Obama's routine practice of trading favors with his political benefactors.
Obama, "New Politics" and Principles looks at the illusory nature of Obama's "new politics," his absence of a record of fighting tough battles on principle, and wraps up and concludes the series.
# posted by Joltin' Django @ Wednesday, October 15, 2008 
