Posted on 08/08/2008 8:34:02 AM PDT by jazusamo
Sen. Barack Obama has a long history of close associations with radicals, extremists, socialists, communists, and terrorists. When his long trail of these associates is encountered in bits and pieces, it is more easily dismissed. But when the whole pattern is viewed, it becomes more shocking and more devastating.
That's why the three recent books on Mr. Obama are so important. They put all the pieces of the Obama puzzle together. And that's why those three books are must reading for any voter: Dick Morris and Eileen McGann, Fleeced; Jerome R. Corsi, Obama Nation: Leftist Politics and the Cult of Personality; and David Freddoso, The Case Against Barack Obama: The Unlikely Rise and Unexamined Agenda of the Media's Favorite Candidate.
One way to get a better fix on Mr. Obama's associates is to take a more detailed look at just one of them. That's what Mr. Freddoso does in an important chapter seven entitled "The Radical Influences." As it is said, the devil is in the details, and the devil is more obvious when more details are considered rather than bits and pieces.
Here are more details on the Bill Ayers/Obama relationship. Like Mr. Obama, Mr. Ayers won't admit he makes mistakes and tries to lie out of the most outrageous situations. Mr. Ayers claims he wasn't a terrorist even to this day although he was bombing the Pentagon, the U.S. Capitol, police stations and other facilities, and was taking lives in the process. In a 2001 interview, he said, "The reason we weren't terrorists is because we did not commit random acts of terrorism against people." In a 2008 statement he continued the same denial, "I've never advocated terrorism, never participated in it, never defended it. The U.S. government, by contrast, does it routinely and defends the use of it in its own cause consistently." Note, like Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Mr. Ayers is another of the many America-hating friends of Mr. Obama's.
Mr. Ayers would be classified as a terrorist based on his own admissions described above. In an 11-year reign of bombing and terrorism, Mr. Ayers participated in 30 bombings. But he was also lying when he said he did not want to commit random acts of terrorism against people. In fact, before a congressional committee, someone who had infiltrated Mr. Ayers' group testified that he (Mr. Ayers) told the people who were to place a bomb in a Detroit police station that the bombing should coincide "with the time when there would be the most people in those buildings."
Another friend of Mr. Obama is Mr. Ayers' wife, the notorious terrorist Bernadine Dohrn. Her thinking is best demonstrated by her reaction to the Charles Manson murders. At a Weathermen War Council meeting, she said, "Dig it! First they killed those pigs, then they ate dinner in the same room with them. They even shoved a fork into the victim's stomach! Wild!" As recently as 2007, Ms. Dohrn said the U.S. government is "the greatest purveyor of violence in the world." But Mr. Ayers can easily match the rhetoric of his wife with this now famous statement: "Kill all the rich people. Break up their cars and apartments. Bring the revolution home. Kill your parents."
Mr. Obama tries to dance away from the Ayers/Dohrn association by saying, "The notion that somehow as a consequence of me knowing somebody who engaged in detestable acts 40 years ago, when I was 8 years old, somehow reflect on me and my values doesn't make much sense to me."
But as usual, Mr. Obama misses the point. No one blames him for what happened when he was 8 years old. But they do blame him for friendship and association with an unrepentant terrorist in the here and now.
Mr. Freddoso summarizes, "But it remains both relevant and interesting that Obama is 'friendly' with an unrepentant terrorist who was involved in a movement that killed innocent people, and that he even accepted donations from him to his campaign. How many unrepentant communist terrorists do you have as friends? How many politicians have such a donor, even if the contribution was only $200?"
Remember, Mr. Ayers is just one example among a long parade of radicals, socialists, communists, and terrorists that form the fabric of his life experience. There was a communist mentor, Frank Marshall Davis, who influenced him even before he went to college, there were the Marxist professors he sought out in college, there was the enthusiast for the U.S.S.R. that selected Mr. Obama as her successor in the Illinois Senate, where he picked up all kinds of radical associations which he continued, there was the endorsement of the Marxist "New Party" which he sought out and won during one of his runs for the Illinois Senate, there was Rev. Jeremiah "Damn America" Wright, and Father "Hate Whitey" Pfleger. And there are all the radical and socialist advisers which still inhabit his campaign and will probably find a place in his administration should he be elected. They include, for example, professor Cornel West who bills himself as a "progressive socialist" and who teaches that Marxist thought is "an indispensable tradition for freedom fighters." He sees the land of dictator Hugo Chavez as one where there is a "democratic awakening taking place." There is Robert Malley who was forced out of the campaign after it was found that he was meeting with the terrorist organization Hamas. Another one of his campaign advisers is Professor Charles Ogletree of Harvard, who favors reparations to the descendants of slaves and advises Mr. Obama on matters of criminal justice and on constitutional issues. One of his major fundraisers is Jodie Evans, a founder of the anti-war group Code Pink, another admirer of dictator Hugo Chavez, and one who doesn't know why being a communist is considered anti-American.
Mr. Freddoso summarizes as follows: "These radical connections do not disqualify Obama from the presidency. But they do raise questions about his judgment. By what criteria does a man chose his friends and end up with the likes of Tony Rezko [the convicted felon and associate of Obama], Jeremiah Wright, and Bill Ayers? How does he choose his advisers and end up with people who chat with terrorists, advocate reparations for slavery, and praise Hugo Chavez as a champion of democracy?
"What sort of nominations does such a man make as president? What kind of diplomacy does he pursue, given that so much of diplomacy consists in reading, understanding, and judging others' intentions and character?
"That is why these ties deserve scrutiny. If Barack Obama becomes president, his good judgment, or lack thereof, will affect the entire country."
That's also why every voter should read the three books mentioned before.
The radical connections deserve special scrutiny for another reason. Mr. Obama tried to hide them. For example, Investors' Business Daily (August 6, 2008), in a piece entitled "Young Obama's Red Mentor," reports, "If the relationship with Davis [Frank Marshall Davis, Mr. Obama's communist mentor] was as blasé as the Associated Press makes it sound, why is Obama mum about it? And why did he try to hide Mr. Davis' identify in his first memoir, published in 1995?
"'With the exception of my family and a handful of public figures' he wrote in the preface, 'the names of most characters have been changed for the sake of privacy.' But there was no need to protect Davis' privacy. He had long been dead.
"More likely, the cryptic references to his communist mentor were - and still are - designed to protect Mr. Obama's background from the scrutiny it deserves."
And now back to the three books for one final observation: The dust jackets are worth the price of the books. For example, the dust jacket of Mr. Freddoso's book contains this classic question and Obama answer from a Nov. 8, 2004 press conference:
Reporter: Why have you ruled that out, running nationally?
Barack Obama: You know, I am a believer in knowing what you're doing when you apply for a job. And I think that if I were to seriously consider running on a national ticket, I would essentially have to start now, before having served a day in the Senate. Now, there are some people who might be comfortable doing that, but I'm not one of those people."
So this is not only another Obama flip-flop, but also an admission that he no longer believes that someone - himself included - should know what you're doing when you run for the presidency. I give him credit for his honesty in admitting he's running, but also admitting he doesn't know what he's doing.
Herb Denenberg is a former Pennsylvania Insurance Commissioner, Pennsylvania Public Utility Commissioner, and professor at the Wharton School. He is a longtime Philadelphia journalist and consumer advocate. He is also a member of the Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of the Sciences. His column appears daily in The Bulletin. You can reach him at advocate@thebulletin.us
It is to bad that the people inclined to vote for Bammy are probably to dumb to read.
Freddoso was on our local conservative talk show this morning. His book lays out the facts.
Soon, Obama will be heard to murmer, “that’s not the Tony Rezko I knew”.
So true.
Any Repub with the baggage of BO would have been tubed months ago but I think his day is coming.
I'd like to see Ras do a poll on this.
So would I. I disagree with Freddoso on that though he’s probably technically right.
Unintended consequences of reverend King’s dram; Barack Obama is being judged by the content of the characters he associates with.
And that is exactly the problem. Obama appeals to the lazy. His speeches are not full of information, but they are Elmer Gantry type. Therefore they arrouse those who don’t bother to read or investigate anything to any depth and who just want a little excitement in their dull lives. He appeals to those who don’t want to work, and want to be taken care of by the government. He appeals to those who think that if things “change” that means they will be better, but have no idea how things really are in this contry. He appeals to the self-centered, selfish, jealous people who are only concerned with their immediate needs, not the needs of the nation. He appeals to the types who spout talk about sacrafices others have to make, but aren’t willing to make them themselves (Hollywood eletists et al). And he appeals to the white, guilt-ridden liberals who simply are afraid that anyone might consider them racist if they don’t support the BHO frienzy. Unfortunately, a lot of those types are in the media and make up a large protion of the U.S. Lazy, uninformed, guilt-ridden, glory seekers. That is his base.
Which book is the best one to buy ...Obama Nation?
That’s for sure!
Here is a working one:
http://www.freerepublic.com/~etl
ETL, best wishes and thanks for all the effort in putting together a remarkable Freeper homepage and expose of Obama and his communist connections!
” And that is exactly the problem. Obama appeals to the lazy. His speeches are not full of information, but they are Elmer Gantry type. Therefore they arrouse those who don’t bother to read or investigate anything to any depth and who just want a little excitement in their dull lives. He appeals to those who don’t want to work, and want to be taken care of by the government. He appeals to those who think that if things “change” that means they will be better, but have no idea how things really are in this contry. He appeals to the self-centered, selfish, jealous people who are only concerned with their immediate needs, not the needs of the nation. He appeals to the types who spout talk about sacrafices others have to make, but aren’t willing to make them themselves (Hollywood eletists et al). And he appeals to the white, guilt-ridden liberals who simply are afraid that anyone might consider them racist if they don’t support the BHO frienzy. Unfortunately, a lot of those types are in the media and make up a large protion of the U.S. Lazy, uninformed, guilt-ridden, glory seekers. That is his base.”
A version of this should be the next ad run by John Mc from now until election day . It should also be the lead story on the news media.
Your summation tells it like it is................
Impeccably articulated my friend.
Best synopsis I’ve seen yet.
Somebody, somewhere, is going to say that sign is racist because of the fried chicken reference.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.