I Finally Get It
I've been wondering for months why anyone really cared about William Ayers. The way I saw it, worst case was: Obama knew Ayers was a former terrorist who still claimed to hold radical socialist beliefs, but hadn't acted on them in forty years, and to the contrary had sunk so far as to take part in Republican-sponsored projects; and, knowing that, Obama worked with Ayers on school reform, accepted Ayers' political support early in his career, and maybe even liked him. But so what? It's not like Obama subscribes to any of Ayers' radical beliefs or ever collaborated with him on some radical socialist agenda. Obama has said repeatedly that he despises what Ayers did and rejects all of his radical socialist beliefs. So where does it get you -- that he has insufficiently selective taste in friends?
But now I get it. VermontGuy wrote:
[T]he real problem with Ayers is not his bomb-throwing past. It's what he (and Obama) tried to accomplish with the money from the Annenburg foundation. Ayers has not changed, he's simply switched tactics. His goal is to indoctrinate children into his socialist beliefs and create a new generation of leaders more to his liking. And Obama helped him do it.
So the underlying idea of the Ayers guilt-by-association attacks is that Obama is truly a crypto-socialist who worked with Ayers to indoctrinate children into future crypto-socialists, and has since then hidden his radical socialist beliefs to gain political control of our government before revealing them. (Or will he remain a crypto-socialist, working subtly behind the scenes to enact his nefarious, extremist goals?) Well, that surely explains why you'd worry about it.
I am a bit too stunned to trust myself to respond substantively to the idea. So I'll confine myself to wondering out loud why anyone hasn't just said it to me plainly like this before. If I were afraid that McCain's and Palin's past associations with Nazi sympathizers and neo-Confederate secessionist sympathizers were signals that reflected their true beliefs, I'd be shouting it from the rooftops, not couching it as "raising questions about their judgment" and the like.
posted by QueensGuy @ 5:37 AM
12 Comments:
Didn't Timothy McVeigh live in Arizona? Who Is John McCain?
So, a personal association between a presidential candidate and an unrepentant terorist individual is the same to you as having received support from a group that once supported freedom fighters in central america? The nazi thing was not elaborated in the article so I will assume the support for that assertion is low. And for Palin who clearly has worked with Democrats on numerous projects, the fact that she worked with another legitimate party in her state that in the past has had successionist ideas is enough to stain her? These do not seem like equal comparisons. As far as Ayers/Obama goes, it is one of numerous PERSONAL associations (that is: friends) that he has with people who are radical by any traditional definition. If this is true of Palin (as the birth coach assertion would seem to indicate it is still not at the level of Pres candidate to Pres candidate). I recognize this point is not perfectly congruent with VermontGuy's point that what matters most is the radical projects they worked on together. What matters to me about this issue is who Obama chooses as his friends.
I am much more likely to vote on his political actions.
This is the sort of dishonesty that is shot through all kinds of support for Obama. Anything to excuse anything he's done.
Let's be serious. Ayers was a domestic terrorist who wished to overthrow the government of the US. He never paid for his crimes, along with his wife, and has continued to state he was right in his beliefs. Are you truly, honestly claiming, Queensguy, that if McCain decided to launch his political career in the living room of a former leader of the Ku Klux Klan, that you'd say this menas nothing? Or is the reason it's okay here is that Leftie hatefulnesss is socially acceptable while Rightie hatefulness isn't?
It is incredible to me that Republicans are so willing to give Palin's ACTUAL association with and apparent former sympathy for a Secessionist Party a pass -- you do realize this refers to "seceding" from the Union -- not "success" and so many are wont to spell it?
Of course, if Alaska were to actually secede, it would be harder to get all those socialist goodies that the Lower 48 bestows on it.
Isn't secession the essence of a lack of patriotism?
Even if you accept the lies about Palin's ties to the party, I forget the part where they attempted to violently overthrow the US government. They are a non-violent group who wishes to achieve any part of their agenda without violence. Lord knows there are enough civil rights groups who wish to fight againt the country's laws without using violence, and they're usually lionized for their actions.
Good point. Palin shouldn't be Vice President and Obama shouldn't be President.
Obama-attackers on this site are not up on the latest talking points -- don't you know the real problem is Michelle Obama worked at Sidley and Austin -- the same law firm when Ayers' wife Bernadine Dohrn worked?
So maybe it's a top 5 Chicago law firm with hundreds of lawyers -- I'm sure Michelle was building socialist bombs with Bernadine in a conference room.
Yes, we know all that. Former racists are the scum of the earth, and even meeting one should get you in trouble, but former people of the left who were just as evil, and even more unrepentant, get to grow old and wealthy and famous and honored so it's okay to hang out with them.
Sure, because repentant racists never get to spend a full 50 years in the US Senate.
Gee, QG, why didn't you start with this one? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Byrd
GoSWMBCg
Hahahaha! Actually, I screwed up the linking -- it was supposed to be Byrd. Ol' Strom only spent 48 or 49 years. But either one is sufficient to make the point.
"Isn't secession the essence of a lack of patriotism?"
This explains the numerous emails I saw from leftists after the last Bush win, threatening to secede from the Union.
You were saying...?
Post a Comment
<< Home