What If Ayers’ ‘Joke’ About Writing Dreams Is On the Press?
After the Anne Leary blog appeared on October 5, there were three interesting developments. The New York Times Kate Phillips wrote a snarky dismissive piece establishing that for the “newspaper of record” Ayers was enjoying yanking chains of gullible reporters by claiming he had ghosted Obama and would share the royalties with anyone who could prove it.
And NRO carried a piece by conservative Jonah Goldberg establishing that that made sense to him, because the National Journal had carried a similar story by their reporter, Will England, on October 3.
And TheDailyBeast.com’s Ben Sarlin called up Ayers who gave him the non-denial denial quote: “You’ve all lost your minds,” he wrote. “Best of luck in the twilight zone.” Sarlin was careful not to call a non-denial a denial, but the sense of his piece was like Kate Phillips-lite — this is wingnut material, you have to be crazy to look into things like this.
I disagree. Here’s why.
The timing of these two “teasing” incidents right after the Andersen statement may be more than a coincidence. Andersen told a tale out of school on Hannity — on September 24, take a look at the tape above — and Ayers/Obama had to walk it back. So far they are doing fine.
The various speculations by “wingnuts” in the blogosphere were no danger to Ayers/Obama. MSM reporter Andersen blowing it in a surprise question by an interviewer who actually had read his book (a rarity in itself) was a nightmare. Andersen is a superb celebrity journalist from Time and People. He has never been sued through more than 30 books and hundreds of articles. He says he has two sources. And his book was a kissy face look at the Obamas meant to sell as a love fest — he had interviewed the first family. He was anything but hostile. And he claims he has two sources in Hyde Park.
There are only two chain-yanking incidents I can find. The first was alluded to by Will England on Oct 3rd in the National Journal. It refers to an “over the weekend” questioning of Bill Ayers at a book festival. “This is my quote. Be sure to write it down: ‘Yes, I wrote Dreams From My Father. I ghostwrote the whole thing. I met with the president three or four times, and then I wrote the entire book.’” He released National Journal’s arm, and beamed in Marxist triumph: “And now I would like the royalties.”
That weekend might most likely have been the same weekend the National Journal piece appeared, October 3 and 4, or the week earlier. England is unlikely to have run a news item that was older than that.
The Hannity mistake by Andersen was more than a week earlier on September 24. Anne Leary’s piece recounted an incident on October 5. When I read it and interviewed Anne Leary, I was struck by how hard Ayers worked to make sure this self-proclaimed conservative blogger (“Thank you, God!” Ayers must have thought) stopped flaming him long enough to get his story across … and turned back and did it again to make sure. It never occurred to Anne it was a setup. She was enjoying telling him what a creep he was. He had to interrupt her twice to make his “confession.”
No one has yet posted any Ayers’ chain-yanking about his ghostmanship prior to the Hannity show. And both these incidents were volunteered by Ayers. Neither England nor Leary had asked Ayers about his possible ghosting. Ayers clearly pushed this story at them.
I have been watching this story evolve for over a year. I did nothing until Christopher Andersen blathered on Hannity. And I saw the stricken look on his face and I have had three very revealing calls with his consultant, who is a pro. Andersen is terrified of talking about this. He won’t speak to me. Ayers hasn’t called back either.
For now the clever “I was joking” story is working fine … except for the timing. Unless someone can show me another “I was joking” incident prior to the Hannity incident, I think the evidence leads to Andersen outing Ayers by mistake, and the chain-yanking being a ploy. Andersen never should have gone on Hannity. His book sales come from nice middle-aged ladies who don’t watch Hannity.
Now they are worried this disclosure will make the book look (horrors!) anti-Obama, which it isn’t. And if so, that will slow his sales. And they are right.
“Authoritative” denials are always worth a little shoe leather, particularly when the denied story, if true, could cause major problems to the denier.
During his campaign for the presidency, John Kerry told everyone he wasn’t present at the 1971 Kansas City meeting of the Vietnam Veterans Against the War which discussed assassinating U.S. senators who favored the Vietnam War. That would have been a problem for Kerry because at the time he had been the national spokesperson for the VVAW. He also denied it to Douglas Brinkley who included it in his campaign biography Tour of Duty. I found witnesses to his presence, and details started coming out of my sources. like an FBI report that made it clear that he was. He had to admit he was there. That kicked off the Swiftboat Veterans for Truth campaign which led to the end of his presidential hopes forever.
As of now, Ayers has not denied being the ghost. Andersen has said he was, and he has sources and a fine reputation in the MSM. It is just lazy reporting to ignore the implications and claim anyone who continues to look into it is some kind of wingnut. The ultimate Ayers joke would be telling the truth and having the media think he was just yanking chains. You can tell the truth and yank chains at least as effectively as you can tell a lie.
The case is still open on Ayers and any responsible news organization should press on.
Four pages crammed with details and information and this epistle still fails to ask the right question.
Barrack Hussein Obama is a liar; does anyone care or give a damn?
Interesting article. Another analysis I would like to see is a comparison of Obama’s (unscripted) spoken words and the language in the books. I suspect there are many differences and few similarities. Obama has had help all his life so he does not think there is anything wrong with these inconsistencies (“someone in my neighborhood”, “our kids went to school together”-unless Ayers has a second family this is difficult to believe). There are many large egos in the Obamasphere (Ayers, Wright, Axelrod) and I don’t think they’ll remain quiet forever.
I have a lot of respect for Jack Cashill, and admire his persistence in exposing the authorship of “Dreams”. I’m glad to see the story is finally gaining some traction.
It’s unfortunate that the United States no longer has a responsible press. If it did the questions of whether Obama wrote Dreams and why hasn’t he released his original qualifying papers (and other papers) would have been addressed.
Obama’s Chief of Staff now says Obama’s government wants to analyze the Afghanistan elction before committing more troops. The people of the United States should analyze their own government before deciding whether to support it. This would involve addressing the following issues:
1. Is someone who arrogantly refuses to submit qualifying papers to the American public fit for office.
2. Where are the usual documents released by a presidential candidate?
3. Is it appropriate for the government of the United States to have Czars?
4. What are the backgrounds of the radical Czars appointed by Obama?
5. What role did Acorn play in Obama’s election? Were they again engaged in getting out the vote of the ineligible?
6. Why does an organization which gets out the vote for only the Democrats receive public funding?
7. Who wrote Dreams From MY Father (who abandoned me)?
More attention has been devoted by the American media to whether Sarah is Trig’s mother than to any of these questions.
Any ideas who writes the stuff that Obama reads off of his teleprompter?
Without the teleprompter the man is lost. Simple sentences quickly descend into little more than incoherent strings of, “Ugh, er, I, ummm, me, ugh, ugh, let me be clear, I, I, mine, me, ungh, ugh and snorfph!”
They were very close. It’s been documented.
Mr Lipscomb – given your experience in publishing, what is your view on the advances given to Obama? Is it usual for an author who blows a deadline to be given a new and even larger advance by a different publisher? This seems weird to me (unless the second publisher had a ghost lined up — but why would it do that for a then-obscure young law graduate?).
I believe that the only person Ayers is ‘jerking around’ is Obama. My reasoning:
From ’69 to ’73 I was in college. I knew, at a quite personal level, some very radical people. One went – like Jane Fonda – to Hanoi during the war, and spoke over the radio to our troops, urging rebellion against American officers. Another is still in prison for bombings, including those of courthouses and police stations. I later wrote a thesis on some of these folks and interviewed them a few years after their time in the ‘movement.’
Let me tell you something I learned about such fellows – and then let me show you some quotes from Bill Ayers web site – posted after Obama’s election – that have been ignored by the mainstream press.
Then, perhaps, we’ll have a clearer view of what Ayers’s recent statements about authoring ‘Dreams’ really mean.
The toughest thing for these guys was to grow up and mature intellectually. They were ideologues and malignant narcissists. Compromise was a word they could not spell. You either were totally with the ‘program,’ or you needed some ‘educating.’ If you couldn’t be educated, you needed to be crushed.
Unfortunately, during these formative years, they got mentally locked into a state of arrested development. Their adult identities and their pride and sense of achievement, were based on these narcissistic acts of their college years. Inconsistency bothered them. They could not look back and say, ‘I was wrong.’
This was especially so because to admit they were wrong about anything, was to admit to their own intellectual and moral limitations and to the narcissistic evil inherent in themselves and their violent and evil actions. They could not bear to entertain thoughts that they, themselves had been evil.
Ayers has written of the terrible ‘knowledge’ that burdened him as have others of his ilk. That ‘knowledge,’ was a narcissistic belief that they were the only ones to view clearly the ‘evils’ in the society around them. They were the ‘enlightened ones.’ This is what made them so dangerous. They – like Marx – believed that a higher knowledge had revealed itself to them.
This ‘higher knowledge’ revealed to them that the system was so corrupt that any concepts of honesty, honor, integrity, etc., espoused by good men were, in fact not truly concepts of honesty and honor at all. Rather, these concepts – which bar normal and good men from acts of duplicity and criminal violence – were actually evil fruits from the poisonous tree of capitalism that were masquerading as good character traits.
Thus, guys like Ayers found it unnecessary to be constricted by such character traits. They could act with what others considered dishonor and duplicity because they were possessed of a higher, purer, big picture knowledge. That knowledge, combined with their narcissism, made them gods who could toy with the lives of the unenlightened.
They decided that the ‘higher knowledge’ revealed to them that any version of ‘goodness’ that came out of a corrupt society was a product of that corrupt society and, therefore, corrupt in itself. That’s why honest debate with these fellows was impossible. It’s also why they adopted the idea of pursuing revolution by ‘any means necessary.’ And they meant it.
They saw and see the American culture as so inherently evil, it could not redeem itself. Therefore, fair play was not and is not on the table. The system must be wrecked.
Understanding these viewpoints as held by the unreformed radicals of that era are essential to understanding what motivates a guy like Ayers in these recent weeks.
I believe that Ayers is now disgusted with Obama. On Ayers’s own website’s homepage, he has not posted any musings since the time between the election and inauguration. Before that, his postings were prolific.
Guys like Ayers do not – as I said – entertain compromise. They are not the type to put lipstick on a comrade’s pig. If the comrade strays – their loyalty to him is gone. To paraphrase Trump: ‘Hey, it’s not personal. It’s just politics.’
But for the Ayers ilk, there is absolutely no difference between the personal and the political.
Friendships come and go, but the ‘movement’ is forever.’
I believe the reason that Ayers has not posted musings since January is because he sat back to see if his puppet/buddy was going to be ‘pure.’ Again, I don’t believe Ayers has it in him to gloss over his former friend’s [Obama’s] political compromises. So, I think he just decided to say nothing and watch.
Now – take a look at Bill Ayers’s last blog site posting entitled: “New Year’s Resolution…2009…miracle and wonder.”
Note his references to how politics will be free of ‘ego’ in the age of Obama Note how he bids good-bye to ‘self-referencing’ politics, etc. And note that he sees the end of war in sight. Then think how that jibes with Obama’s performance for the last nine months. [Talk about disappointment?]
***************************************
“New Year’s Resolution…2009…miracle and wonder”
December 31, 2008
“Goodbye to politics as arid, dry, self-referencing and self-satisfied. Goodbye to star wars and inner wars. Goodbye to deference, didacticism, ego, and complacency in a heartless world. Goodbye to prisons and border guards and walls—whether in Palestine or in Texas—and goodbye to quarantines, deletions, and closures of all kinds. Goodbye to all that.
I resolve to create new spaces overflowing with life, crackling with the surprising and contradictory harmonies of love, stunning in their embodied hope for a better world; to step into the unknown, to jump off the edge, to dance the dialectic; to welcome the new and the now, to learn how to live again and how to love anew; to nurture relentless curiosity, simple acts of kindness, the vast complexity of humanity, the wild unruly convergence, the poetics of resistance, and the wonder of it all.
I resolve to embrace a new world in the making, planetary peace and inner peace, and I resolve, each day in every way, to vote for love—all kinds of love for all kinds of people in all kinds of circumstances and situations.”
*********************************************
Now that I’ve quoted from the December 31st post, take a look at what I’ve excerpted from the Ayers analysis, posted four days before December 31st. It contains his musings about who ‘should’ become Secretary of Education. Note how he refers to Arne Duncan, the fellow who ultimately got the job. And though he doesn’t reference directly Bush’s No Child Left Behind Act, he attacks virtually everything for which it stands. After you read that, consider that just around two weeks ago the NEA went ballistic when they learned that Obama was not only planning on continuing with projects based on the ‘No Child Left Behind’ approach and philosophies, but was actually going to seek to implement more testing and ‘merit pay’ and other items the NEA despises.
********************************************
Excerpt from Ayers’s Post re: the appointment of the Secretary of Education, December 27 2008:
“Of course I would have loved to have seen Linda Darling-Hammond become Secretary of Education in an Obama administration. She’s smart, honest, compassionate and courageous, and perhaps most striking, she actually knows schools and classrooms, curriculum and teaching, kids and child development. These have never counted for much as qualifications for the post, of course, and yet they offer a neat contrast with the four failed urban school superintendents–Michelle Rhee, Joel Klein, Paul Valas, and Arne Duncan–who were for weeks rumored to be her chief competition.
These four, like George W. Bush’s Secretary of Education, Rod Paige of the fraudulent Texas-miracle, have little to show in terms of school improvement beyond a deeply dishonest public relations narrative. Teacher accountability, relentless standardized testing, school closings, and privatization—this is what the dogmatists and true-believers of the right call “reform.”
December 27, 2008
***************************************
When Ayers states “Teacher accountability, relentless standardized testing, school closings, and privatization—this is what the dogmatists and true-believers of the right call “reform,” he unknowingly was describing the exact reforms that Obama has recently announced!
He also says that Arne Duncan, who eventually got the Secretary of Education job, accomplished little as Superintendent in Chicago beyond “a deeply dishonest public relations narrative.”
Are you starting to get the picture?
Ayers was willing to knock Arne Duncan and in pretty tough terms. Then he posted the New Year’s resolution stuff about the end of war, and – poof – Bill Ayers fell silent.
I think – as I said – he’s been the ‘watcher,’ keeping his own counsel.
Ayers has had time to observe that Obama is a socialist, but, unforgivably, an unprincipled one who deals with lobbyists, etc. Not only that, Obama has big-time Wall Street buddies.
Worst of all, however, from Ayers’ perspective: Obama announced his education plans –[ right before Ayers made his statements about his authorship of ‘Dreams’ to National Journal and to the conservative blogger, Anne Leary] – to institute Bush style education reforms including increased goal-oriented student testing and promotion of educators based on merit as determined from that student testing– all of which Ayers has extensively opposed. And you better watch out for what happens when an unreconstructed radical ‘opposes’ something.
When he refers to the ‘fraudulent’ Texas miracle, he is referring to the educational reforms Bush made as governor which resulted in, ironically, greatly improved literacy, especially among the Hispanic community.
So, within days of the Obama administration’s announcement to pursue very conservative programs to improve education that expand on the Bush reforms – what happens?
He fires a huge shot within an inch of Obama’s bow. Out he comes with the statement “I wrote Dreams From My Father.”
Guys like Ayers have no sense of personal loyalty whatsoever when their political goals are threatened. They would rather destroy a politically imperfect friend while totally supporting a political ‘comrade’’ who just happens to have sex with kittens and later eats them – but who never varies from the ‘party’ line. As long as the political ‘goal’ is pursued with single-mindedness, all is forgiven. But nothing is forgivable if you stray from the political goal.
I think Ayers is very bright – and certainly bright enough to know that his message would be interpreted in all sorts of confusing ways. The conservatives would think he was duping them or punking them. The Left would be sure he was screwing with the conservatives. The pundits would think it was a demonstration of post-middle aged ‘yippie’ theatre to attract attention and have a joke.
But I think they all have it wrong.
The statements in which he said he wrote the book were – I believe – his way of delivering a ‘message-shot’ across the bow to only one person: Barack Obama. Ayers doesn’t give a damn about the royalties. He doesn’t give a damn about the credit.
He does give a damn that his communist lackey isn’t a complete commie lackey. And for that he cannot forgive him.
Ayers doesn’t have to say another thing. He can just keep giving these same ‘book quotes’ and sound Delphic.
He doesn’t have to organize petitions against Obama’s education program. He doesn’t have to persuade the public that Obama is wrong. And anyway, those are tactics idealized by our Republic’s founding principles.
Nope – he doesn’t have to do any of that ‘democratic’ stuff. Why?
Because Ayers once again possesses a ‘Bomb.’ He has, in his basement, the makings of a literary Bomb that will throw the system and the ability of the president to govern into chaos.
The man to whom he was sending a message – Obama – knows what Ayers statements of authorship mean. It means that Obama has strayed from orthodoxy. He has strayed on Guantanamo, on renditions, and on ending war. He has, within the last four weeks, particularly strayed from the orthodoxy of modern education preached, taught and professed by Ayers and the teachers’ unions. The warning is there. If he doesn’t see Afghanistan and Iraq end., along with the many other Bush programs Obama has adopted, including the expansion of Bush’s ‘abhorred’ educational reforms – then the next book by Ayers – with supporting documentation – will be “How I Tried to Destroy America In My Twenties in the Sixties – And How – In My Sixties, I finally Brought Down an American President.”
Remember – guys like Ayers do not compromise. They’d rather destroy their ‘own guy’ and see the reins turned over to a conservative republican than support what they consider to be a ‘hypocrite.’
It’s a bizarre and parallel universe in which Billy and Bernie, et al, live. I’m sure it’s hard to believe that I’m right. But I tell you – I met some very scary people in those radical days. Some are still pretty scary but too old to do any damage. But – if you cross them – whatever damage they can do, they will do.
Sincerely,
Jim Anderson
anderson.james@att.net
Re JV DeLong’s question.
Obama would be seen by any publisher as “rising star”. The “affirmative action” post at the Harvard Law Review and its accompanying publicity established that.
So the second publisher was NOT wrong or doing anything unusual. Just trying to make a buck on a new opportunity, and boy did they ever.
His agent did a good job. This is pretty routine
When Shaquille O’Neal was queried about some details in his autobiography, he answered: “I don’t really remember, I never read my autobiography.”
With Shaquille’s quip as a large Erata on the cover, both “Dreams” and “Audacity” can be again placed on the market.
Wow, Obama’s using a teleprompter and ghost writers?
He’s truly history’s greatest monster!
Seriously, I don’t mind people criticizing Obama.
In fact, I welcome it, but this is just stupidity.
Birth certificates, teleprompters, ghost writers.
Really?
Mr. Anderson’s comments are very interesting. I would be interested to hear him speculate about what it would take for Ayers to explode his bomb if he has one.
Ayers and Obama are very close. Common knowledge in Hyde Park.
8:Jim Anderson
I think you are on to something. It puts O’s recent waffling into context.
Thanks for the perspective
RE #11/Dave K: [...] Wow, Obama’s using a teleprompter and ghost writers? [...] Birth certificates, teleprompters, ghost writers. Really? [...]
Really – welcome to Believe It Or Not, National Hypnosis & Paralysis section -
Jim Anderson: I was in college around the same time as you were. Your description of the campus radicals is similar to mine, though I didn’t know any who are now in jail. I recall an SDS honcho at my school who said that college students should all study Lenin.The reverent tone in her voice as she said “Lenin” was apparent. That was not intended as “know your enemy,” but as study Lenin the way you would study Plato or Shakespeare. This SDS honcho apparently did not swallow the Weatherman Kool-Aid, as the honcho has been an elected official for the last two decades, and appears to be a garden-variety liberal these days.
I agree with you that Billy and Bernie have made only tactical retreats from their Prairie Fire days. Someone who writes that when the Vietnam War was about wound down is not in the “I was wrong” game. Billy’s trip to Thugoslavia, a.k.a. Venezuela, and Bernie’s talking about being in the belly of the beast also show that they are not about to admit they were wrong.
I also came to the conclusion that Ayers’s statements in recent weeks about authorship were primarily intended as a message to Obama. I initially thought that the message was not about Obama’s overall conduct of policy, but as a way to send a message to make sure that the Justice Department did not further investigate any potentially indictable Ayers acts. Given Holder’s actions towards the Panthers etc., this may be a case of Ayers getting nervous over something he needn’t worry about- guilty conscience.
Or, Ayers may have already calculated that it is exceedingly unlikely that Holder will further investigate, and he is sending a meta-message to Obama about his policy decisions, which is how you see it. Which also fits in with the grandiosity of someone who would co-author Prairie Fire.
Why is it ok for Palin to use a teleprompter and not Obama?
I have no problem with Anderson’s analysis.
It dovetails nicely with my own.
Ayers is sending at least one message and it is not to England and Leary.
Like Dr. Frankenstein Ayers is finding out that his programmed creation has an agenda of his own.
It was sort of cool ghostwriting the presidential memoir and having the entire country on but not if he has to live under a bus with absolutely no credit AND a bad reputation. Where’s the fairness there? “I’m IMPORTANT,” shouts out Billy!
Now and Then, you twit, because your guy’s a super duper genius and Palin can’t even read. You guys wrote the script, now live with it.
OK, I’ve been getting in some hot water commenting on another article on this site, arguing that until I see definite proof I think Obama wrote, or largely wrote, Dreams. I’ve personally seen instances where someone edits something, and it winds up sounding like they wrote it, but that’s neither here nor there. I’m fascinated by the idea that Ayers would be involved. Why would he bother? As I’ve said elsewhere, he’s the most self-centered narcissist anyone has seen in a good long while. He actually thought he was going to be dictator of the United States when the Weather Underground won their war with the pigs. I don’t see that kind of personality helping in someone else’s autobiography that much. If he did, I’m having trouble figuring out why his name wouldn’t be on the cover. Obama was no one in politics at the time; he and Ayers would have had to be incredibly prescient to know where Obama’s political career was going to go, and how quickly it would get there.
Two of the other commenters on that article took me to task, though, rather harshly and repeatedly for rejecting the idea that the *publisher* could have hired a professional ghostwriter, and had him remain anonymous. The one guy insisted that a ghostwriter would have been paid $20,000 for several months work, and that it would have been a good gig. I gather you’re saying that you’d have known about it, Mr. Lipscomb, if any such deal had been concluded and it involved the publisher?
Regardless, an interesting article…
I have the ‘audiobook’ of DFMF and Barack reads it in the same way he reads from his teleprompter. My ears feel like they are bleeding after a while and I have to shut it off. I still haven’t gotten through the whole audiobook because it’s seriously lacking in personality.
Hmm.
YOU WROTE/ASKED:
What will Random House do as this kind of clear evidence accumulates that the sitting president of the United States lied to them and the American people about having written his memoir by himself?
SIMPLE:
GET TO JANE DYSTEL AND “ASK HER TO/INDEMNIFY HER/PAY HER TO” BREAK HER CONFIDENTIALITY DEAL WITH HER FORMER CLIENT OBAMA.
JANE SOLD THE BOOK.
AFTER THE 2004 KERRY SPEECH OBAMA BROKE HIS CONTRACT WITH HER; SHE SUED, AND THEY $$$$$$$SETTLED.
WHAT’S GOOD FOR THE GOOSE IS GOOD FOR THE GANDER.
IF OBAMA CAN BREAK HIS CONTRACT, THEN SHE CAN TOO.
A SMART PUBLISHER OUGHT TO “MAKE HER WHOLE” AFTER RETURNING THE OBAMA HUSH MONEY – AND THEN PAY HER ADDITIONAL SUM$ TO WRITE A BOOK ABOUT THE WRITING/SELLING OF “OBAMA’S” DREAMS.
REPEAT: THE TRUTH LIES WITH DYSTEL.
OK, so now I’ve read your earlier comments…you’re saying you know your publishing house didn’t do this, but the second one might have, and you’d have no way of knowing…I’m still asking the question, though: why would the ghostwriter not have their name on the cover? I can understand about someone with an established public persona (actor or politician or someone) but Obama was no one at the time…as you said, Frey did *write* A Thousand Little Pieces, he just didn’t *live* most of it. Do publishers typically hire ghostwriters for individuals like this, when they have no status other than “rising star”? It seems a pretty big risk for relatively little possible reward, other than the faint possibility of the individual with the funny name getting elected President.
A second point, which has been largely ignored: if Ayers had ghostwritten Dreams, why wouldn’t Obama have *wanted* Ayers’ name on the cover? Remember, in Obama’s world, Ayers is a hero. Among academics, having someone like Ayers for a friend and colleague, helping you write a book, would be a plus. It’s only among the larger populace that he’s considered a terrorist, because of the tiny insignificant technicality that he tried to kill innocent people more than once. Note Obama’s (and his campaign’s) surprise when this first came up; they didn’t think anyone remembered the Weather Underground, at least unfavorably. To them, Ayers’ name on the front of a book like this would be a positive thing. People like those in Obama’s circle live in a bubble; they’re surrounded by those who agree with them, and they believe the opposition to be tiny, deranged, and evil. That makes Ayers’ being left off of the cover of the book rather odd, to me anyway…
Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha [oh lord...]
You people never get sick of looking like idiots.
Delia:
My ears feel like they are bleeding after a while and I have to shut it off.
THat’s a classic symptom of cerebral hemorrhage. You’ve literally made your brain explode from indulging in so much asinine fantasy, lol.
After listening to Obama without a teleprompter a few times coupled with his own shallow nature & fake persona, I believe President Obama is not capable of writing anything worth publishing; therefore, it makes sense his Weatherman founder/terrorist friend is the true source for Dreams of My Father. However, Ayers himself is not enough for the proof since he is a known liar. Ayers’ own ego must be manipulated & more proof given he is the source for the news to stick.
I also believe Ayers is only loyal to his own radical politics–not Obama; when he sees Obama waver or vote “present” even when he is not radical enough for Ayers, the resentment will grow. Ayers will want to be known as the writer for Dreams of My Father as vindication for his political beliefs.
19. Thomas_L…..:
“Now and Then, you twit, because your guy’s a super duper genius and Palin can’t even read. You guys wrote the script, now live with it.”
Gee, TL, I wasn’t asking you what I thought. I was asking you what you thought. Don’t fear your own thoughts, TL, at least not in the daytime. Go ahead, let your freak flag fly! Sing out for justice and freedom of speech. Go ahead, have a thought. It’s bold, I know, and unfamiliar too. But give it a try, just once.
I think it’s going to be awfully tough for the Liberal Establishment to acknowledge a wealthy white guy wrote a book about growing up African American. That kind of acknowledgement isn’t going to happen.
What cracks me up when liberals attack No Child Left behind, is the failure to acknowledge or even recognize that much of it was written by……. Teddy Kennedy!
Yep! Ted boy did a whole host of writing on this bit of legalese & he was instrumental in its passage through congress.
The fact is, w/o Teddy’s help, NCLB would never have passed. The only way it got through was Teddy’s influence & much of the babble he included in it.
I am no fan of NCLB. However, I am also no fan of continuing to throw huge sums of money at an education system that is abysmally failing this nations children. W/ drop-out rates escalating & with remedial education now required for any kid entering a college, it is apparent NCLB has failed… but so too has the old system that was even worse!
Seems the plans of the left have unraveled & I suspect many of their current plans will unravel as the public realizes the lefts cronies are as despicable as any on the right they have vilified, & perhaps worse since all they do is talk about how altruistic they are!
24. Moho,
That’s all you have for me today, Homes?
I’ll brew you a fresh cup of java to get those teensy, tiny, itty bitty brain cells revived.
Obviously, you’ve NEVER heard the Audiobook.
How transparent.
RICK ROLLLLLLLLLLL
Contacting Jane Dystel is a good idea, although unlikely to be fruitful. I’ll do it.
As for those of you speculating about why Obama or Ayers did this or that, I haven’t a clue. I am trying here to retrace what is on the record. And how I read the state of play. As yet I can’t conclude anything, just show what appears to me a productive line of inquiry that bears further examination.
DavidN, don’t impute meanings I haven’t put in the story. I don’t know if a ghostwriter was hired, paid, or there was a secrecy agreement and neither does anyone else so far. All or none or any combination are possible.
But for the record I am not the troll Thomas L. Now and then refers to.
#16: It’s O.K. for Obama to use a teleprompter. It’s O.K. for him to use speechwriters.
It’s just odd that he is so widely celebrated for his oratorical brilliance when his ability to speak in public falls apart without his teleprompter. And when he says that he “actually wrote” his two autobiographies, the level of skill in those pieces of work are related to the contrast between Obama on and off the teleprompter.
If his writing and his public are the main reasons many people admire him, his writing and speaking become topics of interest.
I really do not remember Ayers as a mover and shaker in the anti-war, anti-establishment movement of the late 1960′s. However, I have seen about 10/15 articles about him on this site so I have been doing some checking on him.
I never understood the reasons for that kind of violent radicalism from either the left (ayers types) or the right (mcveigh types) wings of the political spectrum. But was was always interesting to me over the years is how much the fringe right and left have in common when it comes to their “hatred” of the “system.”
Very interesting, indeed. Thanks for the article !
It’s odd DFMF is still not given more scrutiny considering it’s more fiction than non-fiction.
Jerome Corsi’s, ‘The Cult of Personality..’ touches on many of these fallacies.
I believe Obama’s teleprompter etiquette is lacking/ disingenuous and at most times silly due to his 20 something year old speechwriter.
Obama, a man quickly approaching 50, past middle age and STILL speaking as if he’s still running for the Harvard Law Review slot or high school class treasurer.
When Obama goes into detail, such as his Middle East speech the errors were rampant and often. To be expected from a young man. Though unacceptable for leader of the free world.
It’s reminiscent of ‘The Office’ Creed Bratton character who colors his graying hair to portray his ‘hipness’ and not lose his job due to possible ageism.
Well now Mr. Lipscomb, for the record, you’ll have to explain that accusation of being what which Every Single Time, in reality, lives to be. The day I bother to go to Huffpo or Kos to stir up the morons, I’ll slice my own wrists, thank you. Or do you expect an apology for sharing initials?
By the way, EST, since we know who does your “thinking”, we already know what you “think”. Be gone, self befouler, your panties stink.
Strange troll reaction to this one. They are like worms roasting on a hot sidewalk over this issue… I like it. But I have to say, we’ll need to get Ayers to spill the beans on this. If this story has any legs someone is going to need to pay the man to produce the evidence. That kind of dirt would be worth millions, so it would have to be someone with very deep pockets.
Dear Mr. Thomas Lipscomb,
Now and Then is a troll here and he/she trolls under many different names on a regular basis here ad infinitum. Thomas_L., on the other hand is NOT a troll and has not displayed ‘troll’ behavior (that I’ve seen in almost a year of being here regularly).
Just trying to clear things up.
And thank you for the article. It was an interesting read.
Now and Then…I’ve seen Sarah Palin give a speach without a teleprompter and she was articulate and factual. She engaged the audiance. Go to YouTube and watch Obama without a teleprompter..It’s some of the most freakin hilarious footage out there!!!
To DavidN: I can understand that it seems odd to you that Ayers and Obama would leave Ayers name off the cover of the book. Consider this, however: Yes – it may have been a shock to Obama, as you mention, that Ayers name would raise hackles today. But, I promise you, it was no surprise to Ayers. He was well aware that my generation knew his and Bernardine’s name as well as we knew the names of our parents. And we saw their photographs on the Wanted Posters for years in every post office in this country.
Again – Ayers was and is a ‘movement’ guy. The political ends are his obsession. He would very well know that if Obama’s name was married to the Ayers name, that Obama’s future usefulness to him would be crippled when older folks learned of the association. And he knew very well how his name would be viewed outside the Chicago Hyde Park Bubble.
Better for Ayers to have a high placed friend whose actions aren’t subject to ‘question’ because of his association with a former terrorist who happens to be Ayers, himself.
In fact, as far as pursuing fame: With Ayers’s notoriety, he could have sought real fame in society. But that wasn’t his goal. Note: Until this latest brou-ha-ha virtually no one in the general public knew what Ayers was doing. And what was he doing? He was climbing higher and higher into more influential positions on national education committees. He was having tremendous [but quiet] influence. You never saw him on t.v. preaching ‘revolution’ in education. You didn’t see him – like a publicity hungry Jesse Jackson – leading pickets outside of schools to object to their policies.
Nope.
It wasn’t about him achieving personal fame. It was about revolutionizing education and changing this country through indoctrinating youth. If he had become a famous national figure in education, he would have been watched and attacked by those who knew of his activities. Check out his curriculum vitae and you may be surprised at just how quietly well-known and influential he has become across the country in acceptable educational circles.
Never forget when dealing with these guys: their political identities are their personal identities. If a political goal of Ayers has been achieved, it is no less satisfying to him than if he achieved personal fame. His political issues are his children. If they succeed, he can sit back and beam at what he produced while not being in the limelight. Probably the only thing that Ayers would share with Ronald Reagan would be the motto, “It’s amazing what can be accomplished if you don’t care who gets the credit.”
And note what I quoted from Ayers’s post after the election: “Goodbye to politics as arid, dry, self-referencing and self-satisfied…..Goodbye…….to ego.”
In two sentences, back to back, he is extolling the idea of Obama’s election as introducing a new era of political selfless altruism where the political ends are the goal rather than desires of self-promotion or to have an ego trip.
If you want a point of reference for understanding an ego like Ayers’s – think of a dedicated Catholic Priest or Monk toiling in the Third World. Just as it is difficult for virtually all people to understand the single-minded devotion of one who quietly dedicates his life to God, so is it equally difficult to understand the single-minded devotion of an Ayers to a political cause. If his ego was to get in the way of the ’cause,’ he’d practically want to whip himself for his sins.
These fellows do not think in the same way as average folks do. They are not after the customary fame and accolades that ‘woo’ most people. They view those as sinful capitalistic traits. They look at such self-promotion as tacky capitalist behaviors in which an individual elevates himself above the purity of the cause. And anything that interferes with that cause – especially one’s personal negative notoriety – is to be avoided.
Ayers and Co., didn’t just make ‘noises’ about revolution to attract attention to themselves. In fact, they conducted their activities in secret. What they wanted was revolution – the real thing. He may have wanted, as one poster, above, remarked, ultimately to be leader of some sort of dictatorship. But to achieve it he was prepared to stay out of sight and work behind the scenes. He was no Abbie Hoffman attracting attention to himself, prancing onstage and promoting his own personality. He did not need to feed off applause. He had his superior ‘knowledge’ and that was enough.
The actions that Obama would consider to be friendly help by Ayers, would – by Ayers – be considered a political investment in a stock of unknown worth that had potential to grow.
Would Ayers sit there for hour upon hour writing a book for no credit and no royalties? Sure. Such altruism could prove worthwhile to the cause someday.
For Obama, however, it has become a Sword of Damocles.
As for Ayers being a known ‘liar?’ About what? – I ask. He will give his interpretation of his actions as a ‘revolutionary’ that are characterizations quite different from those of most people. He writes of his past but admits that he’s using fake names and altered time lines. But does he deny setting bombs? Nope.
What exactly has he lied about? He may dissemble and use words to cleverly disguise his goals – but, in general, he’s proud of what he’s done. What’s to lie about?
People assume that, because he engaged in criminal activity – he is also a liar. Uh – check his books and his record. He talks about bombing. He talks about rioting. He talks about violence. He reveals utterly horrific details of his political obsessiveness. I’m not sure what people are referring to when they accuse him of lying. I’m not defending his character. I’m just saying, look at the record. He may interpret it differently, but he doesn’t deny it.
And if you fail to find he is actually a liar, consider this: His words to the National Journal and Anne Leary are the very first words he’s uttered about Dreams From My Father. He has not contradicted himself on the issue of authorship on the two occasions he has ever spoken about it.
Saying to later interviewer that people have lost their minds and are in the twilight zone for asking follow-up questions about ‘Dreams’ is NOT a denial. It is a statement that means absolutely nothing. Zero. Zip. Nada. But he knows that people will hear what they want to hear. He already made his point. Obama got the message. He doesn’t need to keep talking about it at this point. He can just sit for a while longer and continue to watch.
Jim Anderson
anderson.james@att.net
Delia: Repeating rickroll at the end of everyone of your silly posts is only emphasizing the fact that you’ve never actually rickrolled anyone.
Anderson. Ayers and Co., didn’t just make ‘noises’ about revolution to attract attention to themselves. In fact, they conducted their activities in secret. What they wanted was revolution – the real thing. He may have wanted, as one poster, above, remarked, ultimately to be leader of some sort of dictatorship.
Two Things:
1. Although most people have forgotten it today, in Ayers time revolution seemed like a good idea. People were being drafted into service to murder people and they didn’t have the power of the vote. Our government was responsible for the deaths of thousands, perhaps millions, over a war that can not be justified. Indeed, our government was secretly bombing other nations without the consent of the governed. Whether or not you approve of Ayers activities is for your own conscience. But it can’t be avoided that the US had hit nadir of unaccountable autocracy and murderous foreign policy.
2. The silly conspiracy theory that refuses to die: Look, I realize that in your world, impoverished as it is by your fear of the media, books and cognitive activity, the world boils down to three people. In this world, George Soros, Barack Obama, Bill Clinton [and now, absurdly, Ayers] are responsible for any phenomena you disagree with. Just keep in mind that while this may be an enjoyable world to live in, its not the world the other 80% of the nation exist in. You live in a fantasy land. What I can’t figure out is why its such an impoverished fantasy land. At least get some hot chicks in there in bikinis as Ayers henchmen, maybe a raygun or two…
Thank you Delia. I’ve enjoyed your conservative presence, as well. When trolls attack, just as when the WH attacks Fox News, it merely shows that something’s getting to them. Not through to them, sadly, but what can you expect from people who live to come here and pull their poopy pants down?
28. Rubicon: “What cracks me up when liberals attack No Child Left behind, is the failure to acknowledge or even recognize that much of it was written by……. Teddy Kennedy!”
Well, y’see Rube, unlike the right with its RINOs, etc., liberals can disagree without banishing and badmouthing each other.
37. Ms. Attitude: “I’ve seen Sarah Palin give a speach without a teleprompter and she was articulate and factual.”
Yeah, and as Katie C found out, Sarah can really think on her feet, too.
36. Delia: “Now and Then is a troll here and he/she trolls under many different names on a regular basis….”
Good work, Delia! Always glad to see the A-holes keeping track of the Trolls.
Ah Biblio! Shall we define you? Let’s see. No mirrors at your house? Check. Sh*t doesn’t stink? Check. Full of his own sense of superiority? Check. Repeatedly and without appartent effect, posts on sites where everyone but the other Huffposters think he’s a total moron? Check.
I mean, at what point do we all, blown away by your bon mots, fall down and praise the great Biblio? How about smug, self satisfied, holier than thou twit? Yes, I believe that will do fine.
Thomas Lipscomb and James Anderson, thank you for sharing your perspective.
The idea of Ayers ambushing his former fellow traveller is a valid hypothesis, which cannot be shelved until proven incorrect: Entering the white house, even before declaring the closure of Gitmo, BHO made a big fuss of being able to use his blackberry, against the professional advice of the security service, who knows how dangerous that would be.
Why would any president establish an adversarial relation with his security service from day one? This is paranoid behavior, and paranoia is the predictable long-term outcome of narcissitic disorders, given enough years. Was he hoping that the blackberry would be the ultimate defensive tool of the fast talker against various potentials for blackmail after having received so much “help” from so many “benefactors”? Keep in mind that this is the first candidate ever to raise more than a half-Billion for his presidential campaign. Will we ever get a complete list of those whom is his beholden to?
What if the man disappoints enough hopeful “benefactors” to trigger a storm of retributions, from many a shady actor, each of them waiting for some other to “throw the first stone”? Ayers would be the right guy for this, would he not?
So it would be quite comforting to find a solid proof that Ayers did NOT write the book, so the story could be put to rest! If Blackmail did not exist before, Al Capone might have invented it. Watch from what’s blowing from the windy city!
40. Moho:
While that was true for most of the Vietnam War era, by 1972 eighteen year olds had the right to vote. The Draft ended in June 1973, and the number of draftees the last two years was considerably below what it had been at the peak of the Vietnam War.
So, by Moho’s reasoning, with the end of US involvement in Vietnam and the end of the draft, that would not justify revolution. Guess what? Billy Ayers, Bernadine Dohrn and others did not agree. In 1974 they were among the four co-authors of Prairie Fire. The book was dedicated to Sirhan Sirhan, among others, and advocated dictatorship of the proletariat for the US. We all know how dictatorship of the proletariat ended up for China, Russia, Eastern Europe, and Cuba. Billy and Bernie wanted us to walk down that road, even after we were out of Vietnam.
Thomas L.
I mean, at what point do we all, blown away by your bon mots, fall down
In my experience, it usually happens after the drugs wear off. That is, I’m assuming, from the themes you write about, that you’re a fan of hallucinogens.
To Question: If Obama told a lie a day until he left office, and including a 2nd term, he wouldn’t come remotely close to the pile of BS that got dumped on the US public during his predecessor’s time. But Obama isn’t telling a lie a day, nor even anything close to it, but that’s not so much the case with all these worse than useless Republicans trying to block him from getting anything done. Why don’t you and the other numbnuts clean your own house at least before tossing rocks.
Gringo,
I’m trying to do this as gently as possible, keeping in mind that you’ve agreed with me that Ayers interest in revolution was legitimate given the nature of US autocracy and warfare in the sixties and seventies:
The Vietnam War or the Second Indochina War was a Cold War military conflict that occurred in Vietnam, Laos, and Cambodia from 1959[1] to 30 April 1975….
Gerald Ford took over as U.S. president on 9 August 1974 after President Nixon resigned due to the Watergate scandal. At this time, Congress cut financial aid to South Vietnam from $1 billion a year to $700 million. The U.S. midterm elections in 1974 brought in a new Congress dominated by Democrats who were even more determined to confront the president on the war. Congress immediately voted in restrictions on funding and military activities to be phased in through 1975 and to culminate in a total cutoff of funding in 1976.
Its quite clear that the US continued funding South Vietnam and was even trying to reserve the right to conduct aerial bombardment, which was only stopped by legislative action. One would think that legislative action was a result of public pressure. It seems that you’re only protest has been removed and you can now wholeheartedly embrace the efforts of Ayers in the sixties and seventies to bring about revolution. You’re welcome.
Dear MOHO, I’ll answer your points in the order you made them.
you said: “1. Although most people have forgotten it today, in Ayers time revolution seemed like a good idea.”
1A: You are partially right. In fact, many truly thought the country would actually come apart at the seams resulting in a revolution and some at the college level especially, thought Revolution was a good idea. But, of course, just because an idea seems good to some at a particular time, doesn’t mean their opinions and thoughts on the matter were either wise or good.
2. “People were being drafted into service to murder people and they didn’t have the power of the vote.”
2A. The characterization of ‘murder’ is interperative. But they were drafted to kill the enemy defined by LBJ, et al.
3. Our government was responsible for the deaths of thousands, perhaps millions, over a war that can not be justified. Indeed, our government was secretly bombing other nations without the consent of the governed.
3A. Much of what you say is true. Some of the actions can be justified, but many cannot. In fact, the Gulf of Tonkin resolution was not even a declaration of war. The debate on that resolution lasted less than a day. It was overwhelmingly passed and gave an open ended ticket to use force without defining a goal. The failure to have an actual Constitutional required debate – led to a debate in the streets. Such debates are, by their nature, not governed by Roberts Rules of Order. The procedures the Founders provided for going to war were designed to prevent exactly the adventurism of LBJ, and to prevent the failure to convince the public of the war’s need and rally support or fail in the attempt. The officials did not provide for the people to voice their opinions.
4. “Whether or not you approve of Ayers activities is for your own conscience.”
4A. Yes, any personal approval of him is my personal choice. Duh. But I do not approve of what he did. And it was Ayers’s choice to act on his personal conscience in violation of all standard notions of treason.
5.”But it can’t be avoided that the US had hit nadir of unaccountable autocracy and murderous foreign policy.
5A. Yes, the US was pursuing a terrible policy and questioning the patriotism of those objected. My problem is this: Ayers, et al, didn’t want accountability and a policy change. They wanted a complete overthrow of the existing order and an end to American Constitutional Government. But it was not the Constitution nor the ideals of the founders that were flawed. The Constitution was fine. It was the people at the top who were flawed. The people who circumvented the Founder’s Constitutional Plan in Vietnam were flawed to the point of criminality. But Ayers and Co., wanted to utterly destroy the entire system. They wanted true communism. The greatest nation on earth would have lost its structure and discarded the founding principles if Ayers had succeeded.
6. “The silly conspiracy theory that refuses to die: Look, I realize that in your world, impoverished as it is by your fear of the media, books and cognitive activity, the world boils down to three people.”
6A. I wasn’t aware we lived in different worlds. I am not afraid of anything you list. Nothing I said in either of my posts indicates a fear of t.v., books, or thinking. My world boils down to three people? This is ignorance and bigotry talking.
7. In this world, George Soros, Barack Obama, Bill Clinton [and now, absurdly, Ayers] are responsible for any phenomena you disagree with.
7A. As you can tell – my responses to the first half of your letter show that we agree on much about Vietnam. I’ve never posted a comment on Soros. When I first heard Obama speak during the primary season, I thought he could unify the country. Then I saw a horrible race-baiting advertisement Obama had broadcast in Spanish. When I saw the translation, I realized he lacked character and principle. I was extremely disappointed.
Bill Clinton? Your reference means nothing to me. I don’t know what it means to you. What phenomena is it of what you speak? Wait, don’t bother to answer that. I don’t want to talk about Roswell.
But, since I agree with several of your points on Vietnam, I presume you think that I must share your fears of Soros, Obama and Clinton.
You are, perhaps, projecting – and frankly – you are incoherent when you reach that point.
8.”Just keep in mind that while this may be an enjoyable world to live in, its not the world the other 80% of the nation exist in. You live in a fantasy land. What I can’t figure out is why its such an impoverished fantasy land. At least get some hot chicks in there in bikinis as Ayers henchmen, maybe a raygun or two…”
8A: Hey – I’m not the guy who said that Bill Ayers wrote Dreams From My Father. Bill Ayers said that. Twice. He is the one – perhaps – who is living in the fantasy to which you refer.
This entire set of postings are based on an assertion he made. It’s not based on anything but his words. Since he appears not to be a liar, I just figured I’d help explain the mindset and motivations of people like him whom I’ve met. His assertions have confused so many people, but most people have never dealt with anyone like Ayers. I have.
Best of luck on your planet.
Jim Anderson
anderson.james@att.net
42. Bib…if Katie was as much in love with Sarah as she was Barry she would’ve allowed the questions to be reviewed prior to the interview like she let Barry.
“your fear of the media”
Posted on a website, and directed at other users of said website.
It seems like every time the internet acts as a spotlight to illuminate the depths of human stupidity, people(and I use that word very loosely) like Moho feel compelled to pick up a shovel and start digging.
One quick note for the folks who say “even if he did write it, who cares? Politicians use ghostwriters all the time.”
Obama wasn’t a politician in 1995. He was a young attorney and University of Chicago lecturer whose only claim to real fame was being the first black president of the Harvard Law Review. Dreams isn’t a Presidential memoir or even a politician’s memoir, as was his later work Audacity of Hope (which is completely pedestrian in comparison).
His entire political career was built on the success of Dreams.
Do young aspiring authors on the tenure track at the University of Chicago and with distinguished law backgrounds use ghostwriters?
I would also like to thank Thomas Lipscomb and James Anderson for their carefully thought out and detailed discussions and responses. It’s a refreshing perspective from people who do not usually post on PJM.
Unfortunately the trolls are doing what they do best (the only thing they know how to do): denigrate thoughtful discussion of issues.
Need some forensic analysis done to the book, don’t we?
Thomas:
Great piece. Thank you for putting your weight behind it and opening the door to “responsible news organizations.”
Now, if we could find some of those….. Bueller, Bueller…?
I could not get from this article exactly what Andersen’s “sources” are for the story. There’s a lot of convincing circumstantial evidence, but Lipscomb says: “Thanks to Christopher Andersen’s hard work there is now credible sourced evidence that Obama did lie about his dealing with Ayers.” Examples? I presume this is referring to the book, not to other things that are well known like the cocktail party launching Obama’s campaign.
The other point I would make is that the reason Obama would have concealed Ayers’s name at the time is likely simply that as a nobody he had not earned the right to have a ghostwriter. It was preposterous enough for this 20-something of zero accomplishment to be writing a memoir, but to have it ghostwritten would have been too much for even his publisher, or at least one would hope.
BC, I’m sure the Republicans will ‘clean house’ when the Democratically led Congress, Senate won’t steal $2.6 billion dollars of defense money for pork projects.
Tom, excellent piece. I’ve been looking through quite a bit of your writing and it’s intelligent and insightful. Especially appreciate how you refuse to stay on one side of the political fence, opting for truth and logic, rather than sticking/w parties. That has also been my preference.
It’s about time this came out and it’s my feeling we will be seeing more of this in the near future. quite enjoyable.
Annie Hamilton
annie.hamilton@gmail.com
You guys need to quit trying to rationalize Obama’s statements, writings etc……just face it..
Da Boss Don’t Like Whitey!!
Of course that means he has a psychological problem of hating himself…
The thing that jumped off the page at me was that Obama couldn’t meet his deadline at all. All this material, and he couldn’t successfully put pen to paper. After all, that would be actually accomplishing something. “Gosh, this writing stuff is much harder than I thought!”
“It is easy to campaign. It is much harder to govern.”
OR: “It is easy to campaign. It is much harder to write.”
Jim Anderson – Don’t respond to one of our resident poo-flingers, Moho. Waste of time.
I’d like to compliment you on your posts. It was a great distillation of the workings of the narcissistic, revolutionary mind. While I knew such in general, it really helped to crystalize it for me. Thanks. Good writing, by the way. Perhaps you should write… or ghostwrite.
The other point I would make is that the reason Obama would have concealed Ayers’s name at the time is likely simply that as a nobody he had not earned the right to have a ghostwriter.
Obama’s not the genius liberals claim he is but, – unlike some here – he would have understood that if his true relationship with the unrepentant domestic terrorist became known he could kiss his presidential ambitions goodbye.
It’s ridiculous that this needs to be explained.
FIRST OF ALL..TO THE PRETENDER…USE YOUR OWN NAME, YOU COWARD”!!!!!!!!! NOT TOM’S!
SECOND, IT’S A SHAME… PEOPLE DON’T KNOW TRUTH, WHEN THEY READ, SEE, OR HEAR IT!!!
THANKS, ”REAL TOM” FOR AN INSIGHTFUL, ACCURATE ARTICLE!!!!
”SHEEP ARE STUPID..THAT’S WHY, A DOG,,CAN HERD THEM!!!!”
37. Ms. Attitude:
“…I’ve seen Sarah Palin give a speach without a teleprompter and she was articulate and factual.”
Really? What speech was that? To whom? When?
Re #8/ Jim Anderson, # 15/ Gringo, #20/ DavidN,#25/ Sebastian Shaw, #32 Poor Citizen, #40/ Moho, etc…
Maybe it’s old news, yet… Eppur si muove…
Bellow is a link to a September, LA Weekly piece reviewing much of what’s known about Bill Ayres & the Weathermen, and about the fact that this case is not yet closed for the SF PD and FBI…
—————-*—————–
“Weathermen’s Ticking Time Bomb/The investigation into a cop killing in the ’70s leads to a Chicago law professor involved in the early stages of Barack Obama’s political career/By PETER JAMISON
http://www.laweekly.com/2009-09-17/news/weathermen-s-ticking-time-bomb
RE #15/Gringo: [...] I also came to the conclusion that Ayers’s statements in recent weeks about authorship were primarily intended as a message to Obama. I initially thought that the message was not about Obama’s overall conduct of policy, but as a way to send a message to make sure that the Justice Department did not further investigate any potentially indictable Ayers acts. Given Holder’s actions towards the Panthers etc., this may be a case of Ayers getting nervous over something he needn’t worry about- guilty conscience. [...]
Quite possible – actually your take on this reminded me about the LA Weekly article about the Weathermen case still being open.
Best -
The whole authorship question can be reduced to one statement:is there any common statement or item in “Dreams…” and Ayers’ book that is too small to be noticed yet cannot be explained by chance? This is the key to identifing forgeries or plagerism. The key here is Frantz Fanon, a figure in anticolonial circles. He is mentioned in “Dreams…” and Ayers’ book in similar terms,which on the surface might be odd-he is not a prominent figure in American politics.However, both Obama and Ayers spell his name exactly the same-WRONG.I have not seen any scholarly piece on Fanon make the same mistake;I frankly can’t explain how both books that express admiration for this figure would make such an elementary mistake unless they had a common author or a common editor.Why hasn’t anybody noticed this?
Jim Anderson, Very insightful. All we can do is wait and see if and when Ayers places Obama under the bus. Ayers is and will continue to be a very dangerous person. He is a domestic terrorist just the same a Tim McVey, the only difference, he was not convicted.
66. Goldengoph,
I just looked up the passage in DFMF and you’re right, it’s spelled ‘Franz Fanon’ (without the ‘t’). I don’t have Ayer’s book to compare with though but Fanon is only mentioned once and is [indeed] misspelled:
“At night, in the dorms, we discussed neocolonialism, Franz Fanon, Eurocentrism, and patriarchy.”
Good detective work!
66. Goldengoph:
Well, all they would have to do is read the same source which misspells Fanon’s name.
The entire Internet shows how easy it is for a mistake to travel.
Yours,
Tom DeGisi
JVDelong: “This seems weird to me (unless the second publisher had a ghost lined up — but why would it do that for a then-obscure young law graduate?).”
__
Exactly! This has always bothered me. Publishers are usually careful about pursing projects that are almost certain to have a payback via sales. It is not obvious to me that there could have been any such promising payback for a bio of the “obscure law graduate.” I believe that someone set this up with the publisher — someone who had an interest in pushing Obama as a public figure. I suspect George Soros — but who knows. Lots of folks had a vested interest in Obama becoming President.
I THINK THAT OBAMA IS A FOOL WHEN IT COMES TO STUFF LIKE THIS AND SHOULD RESIGN SO HE CAN SAVE HIS FACE.
Well I think that Ayers does care about personal fame and fortune. If Ayers wrote Dreams then I think he would feel resentment reading the reviews that praise Obama as a literary giant. Writing is very important to Ayers and he has never received the acclaim for any of his works that Obama has for Dreams – he would find that very galling. Ayers has been left behind, his role in Obama’s rise to presidency denied. Ayers is now saying he wrote Dreams because he wants his authorship revealed so that he can receive the acclaim and wealth he thinks he deserves.
Ayers blog spot has an archived entry for April 2006 called Weather Underground Redux where he tries to justify his life as a domestic terrorist. It’s a long article and gives a good feel for his writing style as well as his thinking.
If Ayers wrote Dreams I bet he is just dying to tell the world about it but is holding back because of the obvious problems it would cause. It must really stick in his craw that Obama is getting all the credit for his work but has not turned to be out quite as radical as Ayers no doubt would like. As I mentioned on AT the right questioner could probably get it out of him in a serious confession just like Tom Cruise did with Jack Nicholson in the movie “A Few Good Men”.
His assertion is disinformation, designed to stir up the Right and inspire the right to make a fool of themselves.
I would caution against believing anything Ayers says about anything.
the reason Obama didn’t disclose he had Ayers as a ghost writer is that if he did-Hillary would have had him beat and he would be running for Senate. McCain would also be our president today if a very close connection between Obama and Ayers were proven before the election.
They are very close. It would not surprise me if Ayers wrote the books. He babysits the kids.
So, if The One has betrayed the Revolution, is Ayers to be his Trotsky? And if he has not, will Axelrod become his Molotov, and Emanuel his Beria?
I wasn’t aware we lived in different worlds.
And, of course, that’s the worst part of it. You don’t seem to be aware that everyone else in the world gets that Ayers simply got sick of being thrown under the bus by Obama and being constantly accused by people like you, who think that there’s a difference that’s worth discussing between the words “murder” and “kill”. And who also think that its treason to rise up against a criminal government [which you also acknowledged, at the time, was criminal]. Ayers has nothing to lose by now, and no one else gives a sh^t about your silly accusations. Its quite understandable that he’s enjoying himself watching your collective heads explode over his joke.
@ #64,65 misanthropicus: My link@ #15 to an American Thinker article covered some of the same ground. The more the merrier regarding links, always a new twist.
I wonder how history would have turned out if Billy’s Ayers’s girlfriend Diana Oughton and others hadn’t blown themselves up in the Greenwich Village townhouse and had gone on to set the bomb at Fort Dix.
moho
Challenge: Next year during Rolling Thunder, go to the wall, beat your chest and call the attending Veterans out on being murderers. Show us your physical courage after having harangued Delia.
it can’t be avoided that the US had hit nadir of unaccountable autocracy and murderous foreign policy.
Your narrative intentionally omits the millions murdered in Laos and Cambodia. Finishing elementary school was “enough” to warrant execution.
Coward!
Jim Anderson,
Fascinating. Do you think Ayers has a breaking point? E.g., if November 2010 rolls around with no legislation in place to institute socialized medicine, could Ayers decide to pull the plug on his guy? I’ve been (snarkily) logging growing Democrat disillusionment with Obama at my blog. It’s getting intense in some affinity groups.
Regarding this:
If you want a point of reference for understanding an ego like Ayers’s – think of a dedicated Catholic Priest or Monk toiling in the Third World. Just as it is difficult for virtually all people to understand the single-minded devotion of one who quietly dedicates his life to God, so is it equally difficult to understand the single-minded devotion of an Ayers to a political cause. If his ego was to get in the way of the ’cause,’ he’d practically want to whip himself for his sins.
I have another idea: Think of a serial rapist or killer who hasn’t been caught yet, savoring television coverage of his crimes as he fondles “souvenirs.”
66. Goldengoph:
Why hasn’t anybody noticed this?
They have now. Thank you.
But I think you’re right. The phony authorship won’t be proved to the diehards by literary forensics; it will only happen by Ayers pulling the plug.
I remember these people from the 1960s also. Their defining characteristic was their absolute unshakable conviction of their intellectual and moral superiority to those they denigrated from LBJ and Nixon to their fellow students who did not follow their enlightened ideology. ‘The Movement’ were politicians and elitists, often from moneyed families. They envisioned the concept of a revolutionary new order in which love, brotherhood, and justice would prevail with themselves, by divine right, in control of everything.
In retrospect most of them grew up. Some went into politics, usually ‘progressive.’ Others made money, drove Volvos and took their kid to soccer. A few simply clipped coupons and remain today as they were in the 60s essentially dilettantes.
Ayers and Dohrn were something else, true monsters, who could be proud to commit murder against their fellow man whom they claimed to be trying to elevate. It says a great deal about Obama’s lack of character and morality that he would be in anyway associated with people like these. I can understand Ayers and Dohrn’s attraction to those callow students of the 60s who later grew up; but Obama?, with the perspective of time, to have so much as even talked about some book with Ayres? Whether Ayres wrote the book or not, we have a problem.
To: 8. Jim Anderson:
you are 100% right. The logic of Ayers `madness` is exactly what you described:
these kind of people rule Soviet Union: they planned and successfully executed a nu,ber of genocidal operations including organized famines, mass murder done through many methods, etc.
They can come down here , to USA and ayers will help them to exterminate millions of Americans: it is all true.
I met these people back in USSR and i know that ayers exist her in numbers
We just have to be vigilant. Every one of us
Thank you, Mr. Lipscomb and Jim Anderson, for a fascinating discussion.
The “shot across the bow” tactic makes perfect sense for Ayers, who’s quite enamored of his own cleverness. Here’s hoping his election-night euphoria dissolves into outraged and vocal disappointment.
Kabud (83): These people exist in every country and every society. Exhibit “A” right in this forum is someone calling itself “moho.” Read his rants and feel the hate, then realize that the Communists needed people like this to commit the actual atrocities.
Mr. Obama and Random House/Times books entered into a legally binding contract that defined who wrote that book. Where is that contract?
What other books by Random House aren’t written by the person shown on the cover? This is the key and fundamental question that will drive this issue.
If there is clear and compelling evidence that Mr. Ayers wrote this book, then Lipscomb is correct, Mr. Ayers may be owed a book tour or authorship credit. He’s obviously a talented writer who helped build a president. Any man would want some credit for that kind of work.
I believe that Bill Ayers is the linchpin preventing Mr. Obama’s decision on GEN McChrystal’s request. Consider the history of Mr. Ayers. He cut his teeth as an anti-war protestor. He detested it so much that it led him to violence and murder.
Today, there is an interesting juxtaposition. Here we have the antiwar protestor, and the president he created. The president is perched upon a decision to increase troops similar to those decisions made back in the 1960′s. The anti-war protestor sits upon a secret that he can use to blackmail the president in order to control him from making that decision. Of course the decision is stalled, the president is utterly hungup with this dilemma. Commit troops and risk the wrath of Ayers and the left–especially the risk of his secret getting broken wide open. Don’t commit the troops and risk losing the war. A helluva choice that I’m sure the White House is really, really sweating and I think ought to be brought into this analysis, particularly concerning the personalities involved. It goes beyond the book and brings current events into greater clarity.
RE #77/Moho:
1) [...] I wasn’t aware we lived in different worlds. [...}
Mojo, you aware of nothing, anyway -
2) [...] You don’t seem to be aware that everyone else in the world gets that Ayers simply got sick of being thrown under the bus by Obama [...]
So Obama DOES throw his acolytes under the bus – hey, a spike on Mojo’s encephalograme baseline -
3) [...] by people like you, who think that there’s a difference that’s worth discussing between the words “murder” and “kill”.
Heh-heh-heh – for someone who sees the “It depends on what do you mean by IS” as proof of spendid intellectualism, your prior statements looks weird -
4)[...] And who also think that its treason to rise up against a criminal government [...]
Oath Keepers? Tea-party goers? Fox network? Rush Limbaugh? Hm, the spike on Mojo’s encephalograme baseline is dwindling –
Mojo has returned to his previous state of complete mental calm -
RE #77/ Mojo: [...] he’s enjoying himself watching your collective heads explode over his joke. [...]
An tiny, ignored spike on Moho’s encephalograme baseline…
If you call enjoyment watching on the screen how Kathleen Soliah is returned to jail, then Ayres sure has some fun -
However, I strongly doubt that an actual fugitive who might see the FBI at his door anytime (see #15/Gringo, #64/ misanthropicus), lives that serenely -
But, it’s you Mojo -
69. Tom Degisi: “all they would have to do is to read the same source which’s misspells Fanon’s name…” I did a Google search-there aren’t any sources that misspell the name.The only Franz Falon noted is a contemporary writer, not the figure that died in 1961. What are the odds that two people who live in the same neighborhood would make the same mistake(a unique mistake) by chance?Such a source would be similar to using a reference on Georg Washington, that well-known German patriot.Fanon is the “updagelsfard” of “Dreams…”: in Minnesota at the end of the 19th century a runestone was discovered recording the history of a Viking expedition of 1362.It was noted to be a hoax after the word “updagelsfard” was noted in the inscription. The problem was that the word was not in general use until centuries later.It was a simple fact that could not be dismissed.The Fanon misspelling in both books is a similar simple fact that cannot be explained away.The simplest explanation is that both books had the same author.
Yes Moho. I’m a fan of hallucinogens and a conservative. The fact that I think the war on drugs is a hopeless and witless exercise because drugs seem to have won doesn’t mean I’ll be sharing your koolaid, however.
“54. ic: Need some forensic analysis done to the book, don’t we?”
A preliminary professional analysis has been done, and the investigator concluded there was little basis for an in-depth follow-up. See here and here.
Given the prospect that the present administration will be even worse than the failed Bush Presidency, it is difficult for me to remain civil when I see Obama’s opposition obsessing about frivolous issues like this one.
Yeah, I posted here before that ghostwriting was ok… but saying you wrote a book “yourself” when it was ghostwritten is just uncool.
Shades of Francis Bacon
Re #91/gs: [...] Given the prospect that the present administration will be even worse than the failed Bush Presidency, it is difficult for me to remain civil when I see Obama’s opposition obsessing about frivolous issues like this one. [...]
You guys at Trolls Central, this is your latest hymn page?
It’s quite important to find what’s behind this fraud – who knows what interesting biographical details might Ayres might leak about Obama. Having access at all those notes, tapes etc. he sure had the opportunity to connect dots of larger configurations -
89. Goldengoph:
What are the odds that two people who live in the same neighborhood would make the same mistake(a unique mistake) by chance?
Pretty low. Of course we could have the causality arrow reversed, if, for example Barack read Ayer’s book and copied the spelling from it. That wouldn’t be by chance but it also wouldn’t indicate Ayers wrote Dreams. In addition that sort of error could easily be explained as a result of Ayer’s helping to edit or assemble Dreams as Andersen’s information suggests rather than Ayer’s actually ghosting it.
91. gs:
Well, that analysis doesn’t address the notion that Ayer’s gave Obama significant help as an editor or assembler at all – which would still be damning as it would put the lie to Obama’s contention that he and Ayers barely knew each other.
Yours,
Tom DeGisi
95. Tom DeGisi, thanks for reading the links I posted.
You wrote, “Well, that analysis doesn’t address the notion that Ayer’s gave Obama significant help as an editor or assembler at all – which would still be damning as it would put the lie to Obama’s contention that he and Ayers barely knew each other.”
If that notion were true, I don’t see why it would be “damning”. It would do nothing to demonstrate that the Right has committed itself to govern responsibly.
This center-right nation threw out the Republican Congress decisively. This center-right nation decisively elected the most liberal President since FDR.
This whole situation is too similar to the “Profiles in Courage” fraud. The book was written essentially by Ted Sorensen and Jackie’s Georgetown summer school history professor. The truth never got out until years after JFK’s death; Sorensen has admitted to being the author of large portions of the book while claiming that JFK was the driving force behind it,what ever that means.Could Ayers have edited it? Of course, that is assuming that Obama had a manuscript, which seems unlikely based on Andersen’s decription of near-panic in the Obama household over concerns of a possible demand from the publisher to return the 75 grand advance,which they had spent.Occam’s Razor- the simplest answer is almost always the correct answer,ie. Ayers wrote both books. I don’t think that any of this concerned Obama, because I think that he was genuinely ignorant of Ayers’ and Dohrn’s terrorist past. During the campaign he desperately downplayed his relationship to them; had he actually been aware of their terrorist past he could have come up with a more realistic strategy without lying. It was only because of a press that left its curiosity at the door and an inept Clinton campaign that this relationship never got out to the American public.Probably more frightening is the possibility that Obama could be that ignorant.
Guys when discussing the Troll Moho please remember he is a self confessed Jew Hating ARAB and Obama worshiper. So his posts are the product of that perverted mindset and once you know this all will fall in to place.
http://www.breitbart.tv/the-b-cast-writer-makes-case-that-bill-ayers-is-secret-author-of-obamas-book/ In the fall of last year The B Cast had Jack Cashill on their Show. “link above” For me the story describing a tidal river convinced me that Jack was really on to something. I don’t think anyone has pointed out the name of Obama Poem was “Underground” …As in Weather Underground… Obama idolized Ayres so much he named one of the two Poems after the Weather Underground? Then about three weeks ago late at night I was watching Hannity on Fox News when he was interviewing Jack Anderson during the interview “here is link” http://www.breitbart.tv/the-b-cast-new-claims-confirmation-that-ayers-helped-write-obamas-book/ Anderson said Obama actually wrote Dreams. After interviewing over a hundred people in Chicago there were two Eye witnesses. I did not think that Hanity realized exactly what it was he just stumbled on their because he quickly moved on. I got up turned on my Computer and looked up the B Cast show e mail address and sent off to Scott Baker and Liz Stephens a note saying what I had found. But just to make sure I also posted the story in the chat area! The B Cast was no longer just a Show with a few live viewers any longer like it was before the election filming their show in front of a corrugated galvanized backdrop. In the last few months the B Cast crew with Scott and Liz with the help of viewers like me and many others like Pam Key of Naked emperors News acting like investigators digging in obscure places and search engines around the Web found the audio and Video that uncovered the story’s that were the cause of people like Van Jones having to step down. The NEA scandal. I tell you very few people know it but the B Cast and unpaid viewers who helped to contribute the information on Acorn’s miss deeds, Audio and video that eventually ended up all over the web and eventually on Glen Becks show. It is Scott Baker who has appeared on Glen beck’s Show several times in just the last few weeks! Scott is the one Schooling Beck on the multitude of Radical Socialist Obama brought from Chicago. The next time the B CAST show talked about this was because of a tip from me. Hannity on Fox had Jack Anderson on promoting his new Book and during the course of the interview Anderson mentioned something that shocked me. What he said could be the subject of a Whole new Book! I felt the ramifications could completely turn the political world up side down. Anderson I think had no idea what he stumbled on nor did Shawn Hannity. This was the Proof that Hillary and Sarah Palin were right all along! It was the proof that all the Media pundits who pointed to Obama’s Book as proof he was some kind of genius and make Americas troubles go away while living in peace and harmony with prosperity and happiness were a load of Crap! I thought the benefit of this story getting out would be the next time a “Unknown” ran for the office of the Leader of the free world. The Media would have the good since to do some Vetting. It looks to me like if the FBI was required to give everyone in the White House a Background check to pass a Secrete clearance before being able to work there. The only one who would be in the White House at this time would be Obama’s two Girls and their Dog. The thing that will change with this story getting out is in the future American Presidents running for Office will have their backgrounds checked for someone like Ayres, Doren, Wright, Jones, and so many others to numerous to mention. As it is now the Police department in San Francisco has been told to “SHUT UP” and stand down from their intention to reopen the Ayres investigation on a Bombing from years ago. The reason was a federal investigation was in progress…like we really believe that “Yea that’s the ticket” I am convinced Ayres and Obama go back to NYC. But that’s another story..here is how I like to explain the Book connection to the average regular Joe six pack. And tell it so simply Joe could re tell the story even after a 6 pack. Average Joe can understand this kind of math! If you remember The TV Show called NUMBERS where they use Math to solve Crimes this is where I get some of my ideas from. Now average Joe and Suzy understand the Lottery and how hard it to hit the “Jack Pot” and the biggest lottery is still the Irish Sweepstakes Lottery. So after you calculate in the number of books you have at the library of Congress and out of those how many include the obscure reference to a Tidal River “That are not science related”. My guess is the odds of having a guy living in the Neighborhood “A Stones throw away” and both of them haven written about a River going Both ways, would be about as unlikely as winning the Irish Sweepstakes! Then you add other math algorithms. Not only do you live within a Stone’s throw from this guy in the neighborhood who both just happened to Wright about a Tidal River going both ways, then add the unlikely coincidence that while living in N.Y.C. both Obama and Ayres and Doren all lived within a Stone’s throw from each other as well!” WOW! What a coincidence that is! Folks it turns out the chances of that occurring twice for the same three people would be the equivalent of winning a SECOND Irish Sweepstakes! WOW ! Then you add another unbelievable coincidence that in both Books that when the discussions is raised about the Tidal River witch moves both directions the story relates to a older Male that is educating a younger Male. WOW WOW! Now you add the fact that in both Ayres and Obamas Book they were standing at the exact same spot on the exact same River “The Hudson”. Now in Lottery terms that would be like winning the 70 Million Irish Sweepstakes three times in a row. WOW WOW WOW! This is starting to get uncanny! The coincidence just keeps multiplying. Then you add another algorithm in, it just so happens that William “Terrorist weather underground” Ayres and Obama both were at the same Accidental I meal Occidental Collage at the very same time. That’s just nuts. Both admit belonging to groups that advocated ending Anti Apartide in S. Africa. It turns out that the odds against that equal to about a 20 Million Dollar State lottery no where the extremely tuff odds of the Irish Sweepstakes “But 20 million is still 20 Million nothing to snicker at. birdmanbob4@gmail.com
99. Bob Nordberg: Your posting would be more readable if you broke it up into paragraphs.
Online postings are more readable if they are broken up into three to five lines.
DavidN – FYI
I’m a linguistics professor – the modern version of Professor Higgins and I can assure you that Obama did not write the books referred to. First of all Obama and a huge number of left leaning politicians and media types have eschewed standard English and use what I have designated Sloblish. I won’t go into the eye-glazing details of Sloblish but rest assured that if it weren’t for mass literacy which is predomonantly responsible for maintaining standard English, Sloblish would morph into another language just as Dutch changed from the original German dialect it is based on or the Romance languages evolved from Latin. Trust me – Sloblish speakers are incapable of eloquence but they are able to read flowery stuff from a teleprompter.
Gringo I do not write well. But I do pay attention well. I hope you play the links I provided. I would like to take this space to thank Jack Anderson at this time for his honesty. It is obvious that Mr. Anderson is someone who leans to the left politically but the truth is more important to him than his affiliations. If it is true that Ayres knows secrete information about that Obama that no one else knows, The fact is that he Ayres is pulling the Strings. And that is very scary indeed. Eric Holder with the Justace Dept. just told the San Francisco Police to stand down from it’s speeking about William Ayres and the investagation being opened up because of new information! Google it…before it’s scrubed. Obama has changed his position on Troop increases this week lesving out Commanders in the field scratching their Head. If Ayres threat to expose Obama is the reason we do need to be afraid very afraid. We can agree that Ayres vision of Amerikkka is one none of us want. birdmanbob4@yahoo.com
Are you sure that your not a professor of bullsh^t?
Yes Moho. I’m a fan of hallucinogens and a conservative.
The former was established when you wrote this document. The latter remains to be seen.
Justice Department to San Francisco Police: Shut Up! Link provided at bottom of post. I would not want you to just think I am making this stuff up. And please let’s not start calling each other names. If you have no argument to refute my allegations then just keep a open mind and do your own research. I do believe this subject is much to serious to not look in to. If the Justice Dept. does open an investigation in to what we know is someone with extremely close ties to Obama that would be very good news. And I will admit to being wrong. But on the other hand if the Justice Dept. is putting a gag order on San Francisco Police because Ayres has “the goods” on Obama that is very scary indeed. I think it would be a good idea for President Obama to release his school records and show the world he has nothing to hide. I think it is time for the MSM to call for Obama to remove from the Administration “All” the people with links to radical or communist connections like Van Jones, in other words remove all the people who think like Bill Ayres does. The American people would love to believe Obama, the way to do that is to provide the openness he promised us release his School records and distance himself from Communist and Marxist and people who truly believe in Mao’s revolutionary ideas. Bob Nordberg
By James Simpson
Allegations that presidential pal Bill Ayers was involved in the murder of a San Francisco policeman appear to be running into something of a gag order from at the Department of Justice.
According to the San Francisco Chronicle, the Justice Department and the San Francisco Police Department have contacted the San Francisco Police Officers Association and told them not to talk about the Ayers case.
Boy, that was fast!
Cliff Kincaid’s March 12 National Press Club press conference apparently hit a nerve.
As mentioned in the AT article of Wednesday, March 18, the Police Association had sent out a letter of support to Kincaid and his Campaign for Justice for Victims of Weather Underground Terrorism, observing:
There are irrefutable and compelling reasons to believe that Bill Ayers and his wife Bernardine Dohrn, members of the terrorist group ‘Weather Underground’, are largely responsible for the bombing of Park Police Station and other police stations throughout the United States during their ‘tour of terror’ in the late 1960s and early 1970s.
And asking that:
…every possible effort be made to bring all evidence concerning this crime and all other crimes of urban terrorism perpetrated by the ‘Weather Underground’ against the police officers of our great country to the forefront in a court of law.
According to the Chronicle:
Police Officers Association President Gary Delagnes confirmed that his union got a call from federal investigators telling them they had an “active investigation and should not be commenting on the case.”
Delagnes said the letter was meant only to show support for the family of the slain officer, Sgt. Brian McDonnell, and to help them “bring closure to the case.”
Right. And what is the matter with that?
So why on earth would the Justice Department want them to keep their mouths shut? Exactly what did they say that would damage an “active investigation?” Are they claiming that no one knows the book is still open on that case? Are the statements above likely to compromise an “active investigation” if indeed it is truly active?
Mr. Holder, as Shakespeare said: “me thinks thou dost protest too much.” So out with it! What, or who are you really trying to protect?
Why didn’t the Justice Department contact Kincaid’s group? After all, they have said this same exact thing. The Justice Department probably doesn’t want them to get any more attention than they already have. Besides, the Obama Administration certainly doesn’t try to muzzle free speech, do they?
So instead they attack the Police Officers Association, who bring solid, non-partisan credibility to this effort. And all the Association wants is to see this case solved.
Friends of the President or not, Mr. Holder, Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn are two career criminal psychopaths, who have cheerfully left a lifetime path of destruction in their wake.
You need to step up to the plate, Mr. Holder. All these Weather Underground cases, and the park station bombing especially, need to be solved. If the heat is too much, either get out of the fire or help solve the case.
62 Comments on “Justice Department to San Francisco Police: Shut Up!” http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/03/justice_department_to_san_fran.html
Gringo here is the story from the San Francisco Cronicle Home of the
San Francisco Chronicle
Home Delivery | Subscriber Services
Sign In | Register
SFGate Web Search by YAHOO! | Advanced Search
HomeNewsSportsBusinessEntertainmentFoodLivingTravelColumnsBuy & SellJobsHomesCarsClose [X]Quick links to the best of SFGate | Still can’t find it? see Site Index.News »TodayBreaking NewsLive ViewsTrafficWeatherSectionsBay Area & StateBusinessChronicle MagazineCrimeEducationGreenHealth & MedicineNationObituariesOpinionPoliticsScienceStyleTechnologyWeird NewsWorldSports »49ersRaidersGiantsAthleticsWarriorsSharksMoreBayListBlogsChronicle WatchCity BrightsColumnistsComicsData CenterEarthquakesLotteryMapsPollsReader ViewsSmall BusinessVolunteeringFeaturesFood »Bargain BitesRecipesRestaurantsRestaurant ReviewsTop 100 RestaurantsWineTravel »HawaiiMexicoSF GuideWeekend GetawaysWine CountryReno & TahoeLiving »Gay & LesbianGreenHome & GardenMomsOutdoorsPetsSFiSSki & SnowEntertainment »ArtBooksHoroscopeLocal BandsLive MusicLocal EventsMovie ShowtimesMoviesTheater ReviewsThings To DoTV & RadioClassifieds »Advertise With UsCarsReal EstateBuy & SellJobsMerchandisePersonalsPetsPublic NoticesRentals
Bay Area & StateNationWorldPoliticsCrimeTechObituariesEducationGreenScienceHealthWeirdOpinion Matier & Ross Archive | E-mail | Police officers told to zip lips on bombing
Phillip Matier,Andrew Ross
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
——————————————————————————–
Print E-mail del.icio.us
Digg
Technorati
Reddit
Facebook Slashdot
Fark
Newsvine
Google Bookmarks
Share Comments (81) Georgia (default) Verdana Times New Roman Arial
Font | Size:
——————————————————————————–
The San Francisco Police Officers Association’s leadership has been told to muzzle it after signing a letter accusing onetime Weather Underground radical Bill Ayers and his wife, Bernardine Dohrn, of being behind the nearly 40-year-old bombing at a San Francisco police station that killed a sergeant.
——————————————————————————–
Images
View Larger Image
——————————————————————————–
Matier & Ross
UC Berkeley to admit more out-of-state students 10.21.09
S.F. chief sets eyes on spies for safety’s sake 10.19.09
Obama not a party animal like Clinton 10.18.09
Obama to avoid the rabble on S.F. visit 10.14.09
More Matier & Ross » .
——————————————————————————–
We hear that both U.S. Justice Department reps and Police Chief Heather Fong put in calls to the union to find out just what they were doing talking out of school about an active investigation that may be ready to make a move soon in the 1970 bombing at Park Station.
The word was, button your lips.
Police Officers Association President Gary Delagnes confirmed that his union got a call from federal investigators telling them they had an “active investigation and should not be commenting on the case.”
Delagnes said the letter was meant only to show support for the family of the slain officer, Sgt. Brian McDonnell, and to help them “bring closure to the case.”
No one has ever been charged in the bombing, and Ayers said last week he had nothing to do with it.
Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2009/03/18/BA3J16ID29.DTL#ixzz0UcMoQULf
Gosh you’re* an eloquent chap Moho but somewhat grammatically challenged.
*you’re – a contracted form of you are not to be confused with the possessive pronoun form your unless you’re a devotee of Sloblish
People,don’t go off on tangents.Just look into the Frantz Fanon issue; you don’t need to do analysis of individual passages or similar sentences (although the tidal river stuff is interesting). The secret of detecting frauds,be it Der Speigel’s Hitler diaries or the “Vinland Map of 1440″ or the Kensington Runestone is the presence of a simple error that cannot be explained.The presence of Franz Fanon in both Obama’s and Ayers’ books is unique- do a Lexus or Google search on any other sources that misspell the name in a similar manor.Amazingly,NO ONE ELSE DOES. How can it be explained simply? I have posted this question on other blogs and I have yet to see a convincing explanation other than the books have a common author. No Obamaphile has given an answer other than “it isn’t important” or “you’re a birther” or some other pap; the general response has been to refuse to address the fact that this problem exists.
Wow.. A Ton of replies here… I honestly don’t understand why this is still an issue. IMHO.. it’s been resolved now for a month. I think there are more Important issues at hand.. Serious issues… Such as our Troops IN Afgh. So, I shall move on.
Mike D.
Carlsbad, Calif.
As we can all see here Ayres did write for Obama that is clear and if Jim Anderson is correct, and I think he is about William Ayres. I wish Ayres was just trying to extort some Money from Royalties. The truth is that he could use this Book authorship leverage along with who knows what other Blockbuster knowledge of things he could possibly use against Obama. I heard the Obama Administration say yesterday to the other media outlets not to run with any of the story’s Fox reports on. Now that is a statement from an administration with something to hide. If you ask yourself what would you do if you were in the White House and knew a huge story was about to break. My thinking here is they are doing everything in their power to limit the damage from news they know is about to hit “Damage Control” Ayres is holding the cards, Ayres is Steering the Obama administration Ship, William Ayres has the Wind at his back. Ayres is calling the shots. Depending on what other Ballast Ayres can drop on Obama one thing is certain we are in for Stormy Weather ahead! My biggest concern is Ayres could force Obama to turn tail and cut and run from those in Afghanistan who would return to power and again have a base to work from to use to attack America again. As I sit here and contemplate each side next move I can’t help thinking how much this sounds like a Spy Novel. I really wish it was a dream I awake from. If Ayres is Blackmailing Obama, I hope Obama is brave enough to step to the plate and admit to whatever Ayres has on him this will take whatever ballast and Wind at the back Ayres completely away. The last thing we want to see is to have anything from Obama’s Past to affect any decision Our President has to make. Especially decisions that could cost lives of our servicemen and women.
110. Bob Nordberg: I repeat my previous observation. Your postings would be more readable if you would break them up into paragraphs. I took your previous posting, copied and pasted it into a Word Doc, and put in line breaks/paragraphs so that I could read it. Contrary to your assertion of #102, your write pretty well, with the exception of making your writings more reader-friendly by breaking them up into paragraphs.
Reading online is not the same as reading hard copy. It is difficult to deal with any more than three to five lines at a time without a line break.
There are many people who will not even attempt to read something online that is not broken into paragraphs. Many people react a similar way to seeing a posting entirely in capitals. If you break your writing into paragraphs, more people will read them.
(One topic, one paragraph.)
Example:
As we can all see here Ayres did write for Obama that is clear and if Jim Anderson is correct, and I think he is about William Ayres. I wish Ayres was just trying to extort some Money from Royalties. The truth is that he could use this Book authorship leverage along with who knows what other Blockbuster knowledge of things he could possibly use against Obama.
I heard the Obama Administration say yesterday to the other media outlets not to run with any of the story’s Fox reports on. Now that is a statement from an administration with something to hide. If you ask yourself what would you do if you were in the White House and knew a huge story was about to break.
My thinking here is they are doing everything in their power to limit the damage from news they know is about to hit “Damage Control” Ayres is holding the cards, Ayres is Steering the Obama administration Ship, William Ayres has the Wind at his back. Ayres is calling the shots. Depending on what other Ballast Ayres can drop on Obama one thing is certain we are in for Stormy Weather ahead!
My biggest concern is Ayres could force Obama to turn tail and cut and run from those in Afghanistan who would return to power and again have a base to work from to use to attack America again. As I sit here and contemplate each side next move I can’t help thinking how much this sounds like a Spy Novel.
I really wish it was a dream I awake from. If Ayres is Blackmailing Obama, I hope Obama is brave enough to step to the plate and admit to whatever Ayres has on him this will take whatever ballast and Wind at the back Ayres completely away. The last thing we want to see is to have anything from Obama’s Past to affect any decision Our President has to make. Especially decisions that could cost lives of our servicemen and women.
Thank you Gringo I will sincerely try. Gringo I did share your criticism about my lack of line breaks to a girlfriend and her reply was. “Let me get this straight, you are talking back and forth with Jim Anderson and others about the Leader of the Free World being controlled by a domestic Terrorist who set off Bombs in the Pentagon and the Capitol Buildings. And the only thing some guy named Gringo could say repeatedly was use more line breaks?” I said yes that’s all he said! She thought for a while looking out her window of the Car as I drove and started giggling she turned back to me and said laughing as hard as have seen in a while. “He is right you should thank him for being honest and pointing it out you do need more line breaks!” And Goldengoph I did e mail Scott Baker on the B Cast Show about it and his response to me was : The B-Cast to me
show details 11:38 PM (12 hours ago)
Bob – it is a really good point — Cashill has written about it before so it is out there
but I haven’t emphasized it enough
http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/08/obama_ayers_and_the_knowledge.html I would not be surprised if he brings it up on today’s show the live link for the show 3:00 today is http://www.livestream.com/thebcast All told the b cast has talked about this issue a total of 5 full Hour Shows going back to before the election. I invite all those here to come join in!
birdmanbob4@gmail.com
Thomas Lipscomb has written a fascinating, well-informed article. I hope responsible news agencies do take his advice to heart and run with this Ayers story.
Tom Lipscomb had the courage and literary judgment to publish a book of mine, Selected Poems of Catullus (Mason & Lipscomb, New York, 1974), a translation of erotic and satirical poems by that most outspoken of ancient Roman poets. My versions might otherwise never have seen the light of day. Soon after the book appeared, however, the publishing house was no more! Post hoc ergo propter hoc? I surely hope not. In any case, nobody else would publish the book, and my translations of Catullus have been out of print ever since, alas.
They’re still alive and kicking, though, after all these years!
A canvass of the National Book Critics Circle membership this year asked the question: “Which work in translation has had the most effect on your reading and writing?”
http://www.bookcritics.org/blog/archive/nbcc_reads_spring_2009/
Scroll past book critics’ remarks on Mann’s Dr. Faustus, Proust’s Remembrance of Things Past, and Murakami’s Wind-Up Bird Chronicle, and there’s my Selected Poems of Catullus. The critic here, George Scialabba, received the first annual National Book Critics Circle’s Nona Balakian Award for Excellence in Reviewing in 1991. Mr. Scialabba’s comments are just as eloquent testimony to Thomas Lipscomb’s singular acumen as a publisher.
Thank you, Tom, after so long, for having brought my work to light.
Carl
Mike D: You are right! But that is exactly the point Anderson made if you look above and the point I have been making as well. If Ayres really was just a guy in the Neighborhood like our President said repeatedly. And if the President wrote his own Book none of this would matter. The fact is Obama made the mistake of allowing Ayres to write his Book and the truth is a huge Leverage or ballast Ayres can use to bribe while holding our president hostage or affect things like Obama’s decisions in Afghanistan on Troop increases. Ayres may or may not have other information on Obama. Ayres wants the US out of Afghanistan NOW. He could care less if American blood has been spilled in vain. Ayres could care less if this land falls back in to control of those who caused 9-11…So to your question as to why we aren’t conversing about the war in Afghanistan we are! birdmanbob4@gmail.com
96. gs:
Well your comments about Republicans and the Right have absolutely nothing to do with this subject, which basically comes down to Obama’s contention that he and Ayers don’t know each other well and the increasing evidence that they do.
It is possible to have both deceptive, incompetent and unpopular Republicans / Rightwingers and a popular but deceptive Democratic president.
It’s happened more than once, if memory serves.
Yours,
Tom
Yours,
Tom DeGisi
Ayers has his man in the White house, he won’t give anything away, ever.
He is a mole working ever so slowly through the education system, while Obama
appoints the radicals. Just take a look at where Van Jones is today, net neutrality,and the signing away of American Sovereignty coming up in Copenhagen in November, the cancer that is Acorn,to name a few .The Left are making huge strides.
Ayers is perfectly content. He has 3 more years to watch the communist takeover of America, he sits back every night with a big bowl of popcorn enjoying every minute, his man has done wonders in just nine short months.
http://biggovernment.com/2009/10/22/major-acorn-victory-in-new-york-thanks-in-part-to-van-jones/
Here is how Obama and Ayres would communicate …Obama’s $3000 cell phone… ‘Barack-Berry’
Posted January 26, 2009 by JJSaidIt Staff
Barack Obama’s fight to keep his cell phone leads to a revolutionary invention.
The Presidential cell phone has officially arrived and is appropriately nicknamed the “Barack-Berry,” but, in fact, President Obama’s new smartphone is a $3,350 device that has all the bells and whistles of a CIA secure computer server.
The president has fought the National Security Agency to keep his BlackBerry phone, saying they would have to “pry it out of my hands.” He protested that a mobile device would help him stay in touch with the real world.
However, e-mail has long been treated with suspicion by the Secret Service because of fears it could be hacked into by foreign espionage agencies, or that sensitive information could reach the public.
To prevent hacking, the NSA has created a spy-proof BlackBerry alternative called Sectera Edge. The cell phone is reportedly capable of encrypting top secret voice conversations and handling classified documents.
Check out the prototype below.
http://johnjohnsaidit.com/obamas-3000-cell-phone-barack-berry/ birdmanbob4@gmail.com
http://johnjohnsaidit.com/obamas-3000-cell-phone-barack-berry/ I think Ayres has Obama’s NUMBER…..Obama’s $3000 cell phone… ‘Barack-Berry’
Posted January 26, 2009 by JJSaidIt Staff
Barack Obama’s fight to keep his cell phone leads to a revolutionary invention.
The Presidential cell phone has officially arrived and is appropriately nicknamed the “Barack-Berry,” but, in fact, President Obama’s new smartphone is a $3,350 device that has all the bells and whistles of a CIA secure computer server.
The president has fought the National Security Agency to keep his BlackBerry phone, saying they would have to “pry it out of my hands.” He protested that a mobile device would help him stay in touch with the real world.
However, e-mail has long been treated with suspicion by the Secret Service because of fears it could be hacked into by foreign espionage agencies, or that sensitive information could reach the public.
To prevent hacking, the NSA has created a spy-proof BlackBerry alternative called Sectera Edge. The cell phone is reportedly capable of encrypting top secret voice conversations and handling classified documents.
The sooner the fact that Obama had Bill write his book dreams is covered by the MSM the sooner a Man like Ayres will not be able to use it to bribe an American President….for me the safety of our troops are the most important thing on the list. After the MSM covers the fact a Pasty White old Terrorist wrote the Book for Obama on what it’s like to be a Black man in a White Man’s World searching for his Black Father. Forget for a moment that Ayres is a Terrorist who went to Cuba to get lessons from Castro on Bomb building tec. It in embarrassing enough alone B. H. Obama went to the House of a White Man to write a Book on what it’s like to grow up being a Black Man. That info alone is enough to bribe our President.
http://foia.fbi.gov/weather/weath1a.pdf The above link is FBI files on Ayres Doren and others trips to Cuba to learn how to make Bombs among other things birdmanbob4@gmail.com
The evidence of Ayers and Obama’s freindship has been there from the very beginning, but no one in the msm wanted the truth to come out. Obama gave a review of one of Ayer’s books, they sat on boards together, Obama launched his career in Ayers home. Michelle worked for the same law firm as Dorhn. Dorhn introduced Obama to his future wife.
Add to this mix, one Cora Weiss who funded Obama Sr trip to go to school here. she also supported Vietnam awols in Hawaii, was great freinds with Frank Marshall Davis. She had an anit nuclear action office 2 blocks from Columbia at the same time Obama went there and wrote his school paper rticle on your guessed it, The Anti Nuclear movement. It just so happened that she also supported SDS in which Ayers was a member. To tidy it all up, Ayers was also at a school a few blocks away from Columbia.
I’d heard about this before. One theory is that Ayers was working on getting Obama up to speed to run for Mayor of Chicago with a published book. If that happened, Ayers would be “Mr. Chicago” to Obama. But, they overshot the mark and BHO ended up being elected president. Ayers’ track record won’t let him be part of the inner circle in the White House. So, now he’s stuck where he was, and probably bitter to a degree.