The game mainstream media is playing while covering Barack Obama's campaign is just stunning. Is it that they don't want to do their job? Or they no longer know what their job is? Are they part of the "Obama Cult"? Being a news junkie, those are but a few of the many questions I'm left to wrestle with these days. Take the language "journalist" Ron Claiborne (above) used in this ABC News article on the McCain campaign's decision to go forward with attacking the connections between Barack Obama and Bill Ayers:
"There is scant evidence that the two men were much more than acquaintances who happened to serve together on two not-for-profit boards several years ago."
Really? From what I've heard, their families have a relationship that goes all the way back to 1987 when Michelle Obama and Ayers's wife, the terrorist Bernadine Dorne, worked together in a Chicago law firm. Funny that the "girls" of The View never brought that up. But since it's out there, and documented as fact, do you think it's fair or accurate for Claiborne to report "there is scant evidence that the two men were much more than acquaintances"? 
And why are reporters taking the word of Obama's supporters and ignoring his many critics, when his supporters have, repeatedly, been doing nasty things to keep the story quiet? Their ugly attempts to censor others, alone, should be a huge story considering the supposed intent and image of the campaign Obama claimed to be leading. But, for some reason, the MSM hears and sees no evil.
Barack Obama headed Bill Ayers's multi-million dollar pet project, The Chicago Annenberg Challenge, and it was a complete and utter failure. Hardly the relationship of just "a guy who lives in my neighborhood" that Obama described to George Stephanopoulos. Where are the TV news stories and newspaper articles holding up The Chicago Annenberg Challenge, or The Woods Foundation, or the results of his housing policy, as proof Obama doesn't know how to run anything? Isn't that the media's job? And why can I find all these articles but Ron Claiborne and George Stephanopoulos of ABC News can't? What are they doing with their time this election season? Apparently coming up with clever ways to say nothing so, if there's an Obama presidency, they're insured to have access so they can spew more blow-dried nonsense to the citizens of the country.
Check out the lawyer-speak Obama used when talking about Ayers:"He's not somebody who I exchange ideas from on a regular basis."
So Obama admits he does "exchange ideas" with the commie terrorist; it just doesn't happen "on a regular basis", right? Maybe we've got some kind of "Manchurian Candidate" thing going on here? Maybe not. But wouldn't you think a real "journalist" would want to know what ideas a potential president of the United States is exchanging with an unrepentant terrorist who has said he's determined to bring down America and our capitalist system? Sounds like a front page headline for whoever gets to the bottom of all this stuff but, for some reason - after 19 months on the campaign trail - no journalist has seen fit to find out. Bizarre, isn't it? I mean, it's bad enough that Obama said it during a televised debate and neither George Stephanopoulos, most other journalists, or the general public cared enough to bat an eyelash, but considering that charges of cultism have been leveled at the Obama campaign for some time now, I ask you: what else could be going on here? Or am I to believe, when it comes to the highest office in the land and the most powerful position in the world, all these supposedly smart people just got struck with a bad case of stupid?
Ron Claiborne continues:
"What was known about Obama and Ayers' relationship was that Obama attended a political function at Ayers' home in Chicago in 1995. They served together on a couple of non-profit community service boards. Ayers contributed $200 to Obama's state Senate campaign in 2001."This is just a bunch of easily disproven lies. That "political function at Ayers' home" was actually the coming out party for Obama's Senate campaign. Those "non-profit community service boards" were actually Left-wing organizations with a mandate to indoctrinate our youth with Ayers's ideology. And why would Ayers give any money to a guy he hardly knows, or thinks rejects his ideology? This story - and the reporting that's offered as "coverage" - stinks like a pastor smoking in church. What gives?
Claiborne again:
"The McCain campaign kept suggesting there was more to it. Whenever McCain officials were asked what more they knew, they would say only that they were certain the relationship was closer than Obama described it."
Wouldn't anybody think reporters would try to see if they're right? Get a little "Watergate" action going? What are they waiting for? Like Steven Colbert is going to get to work? Ayers is a terrorist, y'know? Why wait for the McCain campaign to sort it out? Is it just me or isn't running for office what political campaigns are supposed to do and investigations of terrorists what reporters are supposed to do? Could I be confused about that? All Ron Claiborne seems to want to know is what he ends his article with:"Obama was at Ayers's house once 13 years ago. They served together on two boards. Their children went to the same school."
Sorry, bub, but, amongst those of us who still have working brains, that simplistic assessment of this particularly complex relationship just won't do:
This ain't no game.
The guilt-by-association game - hey, everybody's playing it!
ReplyDelete*******
I wish I could say I was surprised by this, but let face it: there were signs. There was John McCain's long opposition to a national holiday for Martin Luther King, Jr., his use of racial epithets, his love of racist jokes, and the increasingly racist tone of his campaign.
It seems that John McCain was a member and sat on the board of the US Council for World Freedom ("USCWF"), an organization noted for its extreme ideology, racism, and anti-semitism. This organization has been described as "largely a collection of Nazis, fascists, anti-Semites, sellers of forgeries, vicious racialists, and corrupt self seekers." Why on earth would John McCain associate himself with such a group? Why would he take a leadership position with it?
McCain's connection to the group became news when Paul Begala mentioned it on Meet the Press:
This guilt by association path is going to be trouble ultimately for the McCain campaign. You know, you can go back—I’ve written a book about McCain. I had a dozen researchers go through him. I didn’t even put this in the book. But John McCain sat on the board of a very right-wing organization. It was the U.S. Council for World Freedom. It was chaired by a guy named John Singlaub, who wound up involved in the Iran-Contra scandal. It was an ultraconservative right-wing group. The Anti-Defamation League, in 1981, when McCain was on the board, said this about this organization. It was affiliated with the World Anti-Communist League, the parent organization, which ADL said, "has increasingly become a gathering place, a forum, a point of contact for extremists, racists and Anti-Semites."
No, I think it's actually called the God-damn-America-guilt-by-20-year-assocuiation game.
ReplyDeleteAnd Oliver Willis is a chump who sees racism everywhere and wouldn't know the truth to save his mother's life. He always knows where the fridge is, though.
Thanks for the "Meet The Press" transcript. That part where Paul Begala says John McCain was raising money for the US Council for World Freedom, and teaching them how to skirt the law, is gripping. How did he put it? Oh yea:
"That's not John McCain".
Anything in that group's goals about destroying America and bringing down the capitalist system? Is John McCain's godfather a communist? Is there anytime where John McCain repeatedly worked for terrorists who founded anti-American orgs and blew through millions of dollars, calling it the most important "executive experience" of his life?
Shall I go on?
might as well. nobody with any sense of reality is listening!
ReplyDeleteInterestring that you hold Obama responsible for things a casual acquaintance did when he himself was 8 years old, but completely let Mccain off the hook for sitting on the board of a group condemned by the ADL as "largely a collection of Nazis, fascists, anti-Semites, sellers of forgeries, vicious racialists, and corrupt self seekers" when McCain was 52!!!
ReplyDeleteIs that reallye argument you want to make - that even as an 8 year old boy, Obama showed the same level of maturity and wisdom as a middle-aged man? Or is that McCain as a middle-aged man should be held to the same standards as an 8-year old boy?
tooo funny...
Two things:
ReplyDelete1) You seem to have me confused with those blacks who whine about race all the time. Sorry, asshole, but that shit don't work with me. Go peddle your identity politics to Al Sharpton or someone else who wants to demonize white people. That's not me.
2) Barack Obama wasn't 8 years old when Bill Ayers said he didn't do enough bombing - at that time Barack was working with Bill Ayers in The Woods Foundation. And he and Michelle have been down with Ayers and Bernadine Dorne since '87 and there's no hiding it now.
It's over.