Showing posts with label Tom Hayden. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Tom Hayden. Show all posts

Saturday, October 18, 2008

Obama's NewAge Radicals: Here We Go Again

[Michael Klonsky], whose disgust for mainstream politics led him to launch a new, Maoist Communist Party in the 1970s, today supports Barack Obama so enthusiastically that until recently he was blogging on the Illinois senator’s campaign website. And boycotting this November’s election, Klonsky maintains, would be a “tragic mistake.” He notes that Barack Obama isn’t Hubert Humphrey, 2008 isn’t 1968, and the strong movement he served back then is “relatively weak” now. “My own support for Obama is not a reflection of a radically changed attitude toward the Democratic Party,” Klonsky recently explained to me. “Rather, it’s a recognition that the Obama campaign has become a rallying point for young activists and offers hope for rebuilding the civil rights and antiwar coalitions that have potential to become a real critical force in society.”

Michael Klonsky is hardly the only ’68 radical supporting Obama this year. In 1968, when Mark Rudd organized the student strike that shut down Columbia University, the SDS chapter that he chaired ridiculed Kennedy and McCarthy as “McKennedy,” claimed that “neither peace candidate offers an alternative to the war policies of Lyndon Johnson,” and suggested “sabotage” as an alternative to voting. Rudd succeeded Klonsky as national SDS leader, presiding over the organization’s metamorphosis into Weatherman and performing “a liaison function” for the plot to bomb a Fort Dix soldiers’ dance that instead killed three Weathermen, including two of Rudd’s Columbia SDS colleagues. Today, Rudd renounces bombs, embraces ballots—and supports Obama. “Probably the biggest difference between Columbia SDS people in 1968 and in 2008 is forty years,” Rudd explained in an e-mail. “Most of us have lived with compromise our whole lives. As kids we were raving idealists who thought that ‘The elections don’t mean shit’ was a slogan that meant something to somebody. It didn’t.”

Then there’s Carl Davidson, who was one of SDS’s three elected national officers in 1968, when the organization first urged young people to refrain from voting. His disillusionment with traditional politics became so pronounced that, in the post-sixties hangover that followed, Davidson joined Klonsky in rejecting traditional politics for fringe Marxist movements. More recently, he helped organize the 2002 rally in which Obama first spoke out against the Iraq War and now serves as the webmaster of Progressives for Obama. “The last thing we need is a simple repeat of 1968, which saw Nixon and the new Right as an outcome, as well as the defeat of [Humphrey],” Davidson contends. “One thing I’ve learned. Social change is not made by elections, but it certainly proceeds through them, not by ignoring them or chasing the illusion of end runs around them.”

Former SDS president Tom Hayden is also in the Obama camp. Hayden organized the made-for-TV protest outside the 1968 Chicago convention. But the catharsis of throwing debris at the Chicago police, the purer-than-thou sanctimony that tolerated no distinction between Lyndon Johnson and Eugene McCarthy, and the exhilaration of “voting in the streets” instead of in election booths combined to ensure liberal defeats. Hayden’s orchestrated anarchy proved more damaging to Humphrey’s presidential aspirations than any dirty trick Nixon’s henchmen could have dreamed up. Klonsky remembers Hayden plotting to spread nails on a highway; another SDS leader recalls Hayden encouraging activists to firebomb police cars. If the Democrats couldn’t run a convention, many Americans wondered, how could they run the country? “Did the radicalism of Chicago elect Richard Nixon?” Hayden asked, clearly pained, in his 1988 memoir. “Having struggled with that question for twenty years, I find there is no ‘neat’ answer.”

Now Hayden is one of the organizers of Progressives for Obama.

...Progressives for Obama resembles a Who’s Who of SDS luminaries. In addition to Hayden, Rudd, and Davidson, the group includes Bob Pardun, SDS’s education secretary during the 1966–67 school year; Paul Buhle, a radical professor who has recently attempted to revive SDS; Mickey and Dick Flacks, red-diaper babies who helped craft 1962’s Port Huron Statement, a seminal New Left document; and SDS’s third president, Todd Gitlin. Age and experience have mellowed some of the SDSers in Obama’s camp. Gitlin, for instance, has evolved into a respected Ivy League professor and milquetoast liberal. But others still glory in a past that can only damage Obama’s future. The aging New Left still practices a therapeutic politics that places a higher value on feelings of personal liberation than on restrained pursuit of political aims.
["Feelings of personal liberation"? That would be NewAge - TMR]

Obama has already taken political hits for his connection to Weathermen Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn. In the sixties, Ayers advocated that young people kill their parents, and Dohrn praised the Charles Manson murders. Alongside their Weather Underground cohorts, the pair declared war on the United States and participated in a bombing campaign that hit the Capitol, the Pentagon, and numerous law enforcement agencies. The couple eventually reinvented themselves—first as academics, then as players in Chicago-area Democratic politics. Obama praised Ayers’s book in the Chicago Tribune, sat with him on a foundation’s board, and benefited from a fundraiser held at the couple’s home. Ayers spoke at events organized by Michelle Obama; Barack Obama spoke at events organized by Ayers.

With the public revelation of this unseemly relationship—between unrepentant terrorists and the man who now seeks to oversee America’s war on terror—and the impact it’s already had on voter attitudes, one would think that other sixties extremists might be more reserved in proclaiming their support for Obama, knowing the damage such associations can do to his candidacy. As for Obama, he’ll need to do some distancing of his own. He protested that he was only eight when Ayers, Dohrn, Rudd, and company embarked on their bombing campaign, and that’s reasonable enough. But he’ll need to go further.


— Daniel J. Flynn, on why the connection between Barack Obama and Bill Ayers is important, if only to TMR and New York's City Journal

Saturday, October 4, 2008

Barack Obama: Terrorist "Educators" Are O.K.

“I don’t think there’s a statute of limitations on terrorist bombings,...If John McCain had a long association with a guy who’d bombed abortion clinics, I don’t think people would say, ‘That’s ancient history.’"

-- Steve Chapman, a columnist for The Chicago Tribune, on Barack Obama's association with Bill Ayers, in Scott Shane's pre-emptive strike against further end-game criticism (which was oh so helpfully released on a Saturday) in the New York Times.

In the same article, Tom Hayden (Crazy NewAge Jane Fonda's former husband and also a radical leftist) adds:

“If Barack Obama says he’s willing to talk to foreign leaders without preconditions, I can imagine he’d be willing to talk to Bill Ayers about schools."

Isn't that sweet? Like an unrepentant terrorist being put in charge of the education of children is just fine. What's next? An arsonist running the fire department? This article is such bullshit. A total attempt at a whitewash.

Barack Obama once said he met Bill Ayers when he and Ayers were picking up their kids from school. Are we to believe that Barack Obama, who has two daughters in elementary school, and a guy who was blowing up the Pentagon when Barack was 8 years old have kids the same age? Barack's obviously lying (or spinning) and, of course, Ayers won't talk - but we're supposed to believe Ayers would let a young inexperienced Barack (who the NYT claims Ayers hardly knows) run Ayers's multi-million dollar foundations, would roll out Barack's political campaigns at his house, and also make financial contributions to assist him in same? Would YOU do all that for somebody YOU hardly know? And why does Barack's story keep changing? Why won't Ayers talk? Why is everybody closely involved with Obama a crazy radical? What are they all hiding? (Check out that last link)

How stupid do these people think we are?



This shit just don't wash. Not for the presidency. The office is too important for the issue of an unrepentant terrorist and socialist, determined to spread his radical ideology through our schools, not to be cleared up, 100%. Barack Obama has nothing but radicals, socialists, and communists in his background - that much is clear - and he has to answer questions about them, completely, before he can be seriously considered dog catcher. That's how it's always been and there's no reason to change the rules because some people have got a bug up their asses for a black president. Show me another presidential candidate who made it through with the same type of questions and associations hanging over their head.

Like that bullshit NYT hit piece about John McCain's "affair", this report is so soft-headed I can't believe they even bothered running it.

It's like they think they still have credibility or something.

Sunday, April 6, 2008

NewAge (Rhymes With Sewage)

"Much of what we associate with the Aquarian sixties was in fact old hat,...but if the pattern was visible to those with a sense of history, it wasn’t to the New Left, which,...'imagined itself radical pioneers, discovering a new world of ideas that had eluded all who had lived until the present.' Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) founder Tom Hayden, like many of the members of MoveOn.org today, exulted in his dismissal of all that had come before. 'In formulating our vision and ideas,' explained Hayden, 'it was most important to draw lessons from that same experience instead of relying on the textbooks of others.' There was no past, just a glorious future. In short order, the New Left had created its own version of the Nazi-Stalin pact by embracing both the leather-clad fascist thuggery of the Black Panthers and the Maoist version of Stalinism.

The sixties ended with SDS’s morphing into the violent Weathermen, leftists with wealthy backgrounds who tried to 'smash monogamy' through group sex and 'smash capitalism' with pipe bombs. It was all very nineteenth-century,..."


-- From Fred Siegel's review of A Conservative History of the American Left, by Daniel J. Flynn, in City Journal.