In the past few days, the William Ayers name has come to my attention several times: first, in a robo call made to our home by the McCain campaign (we had already received a flyer in the mail with "terrorist"slashed across a picture of Ayers and Barack Obama's name placed right alongside the headline), second when I made phone calls for Obama and a thirty-something woman who was undecided told me she was concerned about Obama's values and about that guy Ayers, and today in the gym where my trainer informed me that a rumor was going around about a tape that the Los Angeles Times had not yet released in which Obama was shown toasting William Ayers at some function. (I tried unsuccessfully to find the tape on the internet.) I live in Colorado and these incidents are similar to those reported by the media.
Barack Obama's campaign counters these attacks by repeating that his association with Mr. Ayers is distant, and the news media regularly reports that Mr. Ayers was a one-time radical who is today a professor of education.
To me the defenses of these attacks don't really get to the heart of the matter.
I lived through the time in our history when Mr. Ayers and his fellow "weathermen" were playing the "insurgents" against a horrible divisive war that was responsible for the deaths of over 50,000 men and that accounted for multitudes of anti-war demonstrations and actions. Mr. Ayers and his group went too far and people were killed. We can't take that fact away. He paid his dues, and he'll have to live with himself and his wrongdoings for the rest of his life. I don't know much about his work today and I recall only fragments of his actions then, but I give him credit for reinventing himself and for making a positive contribution to society today. I believe in second chances.
I just read a letter to the editor response in the Los Angeles Times to the Ayers association in which the writer suggests that Obama's association with Ayers is no different than McCain's association with G. Gordon Liddy, the Watergate felon who is now a talk show host. Additionally, George Bush would have never been elected President if people did not forgive him for his past irresponsible behavior. We all have to grow up.
True, some people who have strong beliefs and strong convictions about our country sometimes go overboard. It's a matter of judgment. The Viet Nam war affected all of us in many ways. I know people who took different paths some of which were responsible and some of which weren't, but I daresay that it is wrong to overlook anyone's attempt to right his past wrongs.
I would like to say in response to the guilt by association attacks being made by the McCain campaign the following: (1) we all know people with questionable pasts, but that doesn't mean we can't work alongside them if they have a positive goal in mind, (2) we all grow more wise because of our past mistakes and sometimes with a great deal of work, we can account for the sins of the past and move on, (3) there is no such person or association on earth that can be totally trustworthy; we all are constantly on display for our deeds and possible misdeeds. Mr. Ayers has been tried for his crimes, he has served his time and he has gone on with his life in an admirable way and has made a contribution to society. He has more than redeemed himself. If he and Barack Obama serve together on a board that intends to improve our world, that's a good thing. And, if in the course of their association, if Mr. Ayers wants to help Barack Obama become President, that's fine too. There is absolutely no evidence that Mr. Ayers is going to revitalize his anti-war tactics, and he deserves the benefit of the doubt. Through the years since his crime, he has learned to be constructive and make a difference and he shares a commonality with many of us who seek to make America a better place to live. It doesn't mean that Obama had to learn the same way. He didn't. But if Mr. Ayers is one of millions who can help us become a better America, there is nothing wrong with acknowledging his role. It's very scary that people are blowing this out of proportion.
God wants Barack Obama to be president, I say, when yet another rung is nudged or slammed into the Obama ladder. Many of these rungs have nothing to do with our Guy, like the economy and the financial meltdown, and the deceitful and stupid Iraq war. But some do, of course, and all rungs including Reverend Wright and Dr. Ayers have become such by the way our Guy sees the world.
Through Reverend Wright most Americans first heard the term “prophetic preaching,” made peace with it, and from Obama’s sensitive handling of the issue diffused a Swift Boat opening for the straighttalker who has proven himself to be anything but.
The name Bill Ayers is a name that time forgot, until its Republican use reminds us of a time we don’t want to return to. It was a time when opposition to the Vietnam War almost turned into a revolution, and juggernaut thinkers like Ayers believed they were leaders of this revolution. It wasn't and they weren't - but it was a violent confrontational time.
Then there's Acorn. Doesn’t it really bring the electorate up to speed on where and how the election is likely to be stolen? It sure points up to me the weeknesses and dangers of our registration and voting apparatus, and alerts us that the Republicans have been some busy crooks. Sometimes I ask myself whether the Republican campaign is a subliminal subsidiary of ours.
Then there’s the larger question of whether Obama would have even made the run if the Republican brand weren’t in the gutter. Maybe, but I think that with the abject failures of confrontational politics and of governing from the ideological gut, a peacemaker negotiator – Obama – can naturally move center stage. However to deny the hand of God, the presence of the force or whatever we call it is to deny the meaning of life.
To be human or probably just to live requires us to be on the lookout for patterns. These patterns of course can and often do turn out to be random coincidents, but some are more. In my own life, I felt the force a couple of times - always at points where I was attuned to it. Worry and even suffering made me a receiver, and when I gave in to it, the right way opened up. Magnified from my puny problems, it is the stuff upon which religions are founded, and it’s for this reason that we must be careful.
This hand of God is fickle. It comes and goes. Yes, God wants Obama to be president, but this does not mean that Obama is God. It means that for right now the force is with Obama, and this will be proven enough to put him in the White House. But dark forces combine and move forth to stop the hand. When Joe Biden’s mouth flew open to say that our Guy will be soon tested, this too is the hand. It is preparing us. Let us hope and even pray that the force stays with Obama. The stakes have never been greater.
Ad Hominen Attacks
I hope that Obama keeps his next debate simple and direct. I thought it was very thoughtful of him to mention education at least twice in the townhall debate; an issue that I do not remember McCain even implying.
The false, negative rumors escalated against Obama gained their strength through being recognized and publicized even though they lacked validity. Regarding the contrived, personal attacks, Obama should merely dismiss any ad hominem statements against him as false. It would be a mistake to address, for example, the Ayer rumor at the level of details because a detailed, convoluted response implies its credibility. In other words, if Obama responds to the Ayer rumor in a detailed manner, he will seem deceiving and mildly self incriminating. On the other hand, if Obama dismisses these attacks as falsely poised and invented by an racist, resentful anti-Semitic, he will gain the upper hand through attacking the rumor and the source of the rumor itself. Additionally, if he criticizes the McCain campaign for even recognizing the rumors of the racist Andy Martin he will gain a greater advantage.
The Sadistic Victim versus the Scapegoat
In terms of psychology and literature, there are two scenarios of irony in which an individual is segregated and attacked. The first is as the scapegoat of a tragedy, but this victim, after being tortured and harassed, is reborn as the god of the next generation (ie. Jesus Christ, Dionysus). The second scenario of segregation is that of the sadistic comedy and its victim whose torture is cathartic and pleasant for the audience. The ad hominem attacks by the McCain campaign against Obama represent the sadistic and cathartic torture of comedy, the laughing angry mob, the second type of irony.
Within this article, a functional definition of tragedy and comedy are used. Tragedy is the protagonist and his separation from society; comedy is the integration of society.
Let me explain the differences between the two scenarios; pretend there is a group of x-children who harass a lonely y-child. In a tragedy, the perspective of the audience would follow the y-child and his separation from the group. The audience would be compelled to sympathize with the y-child to and pity this tortured scapegoat. An example of this is the story of the crucifixion of Christ where the audience sympathizes with the tortured scapegoat.
The alternate perspective occurs within a comedy. Likewise, in this scenario, the x-children inflict torture on the y-child. However, from this comedic perspective, the audience feels a sadistic catharsis through the torture of the y-child. Why?---because from this perspective the audience identifies with the x-children. Many Americans ethnically and nationalistically identify with McCain, the Caucasian Patriot, and the associated leaders of campaign. This is why you can search youtube to find some horrifying videos of republicans at campaign rallies making aggressive personal attacks against Obama. Many of his radical supporters are driven by the sadistic pleasures of a comedy and its victim. They empathisize "Hussein", his middle name, to indicate he is an outsider. An this is the least of it, there are plenty of cases were he is called Osama instead of Obama. This is the emotional state of the present, sadistic perspective that permits such segregating, ad hominem remarks against Obama.
Yes, Barack Obama will have no problem appealing to individuals that focus on policy. Some people are usually not able to distinguish correctly between the proposed policies of the two presidential candidates; nevertheless, Obama connects with these people through the clear manner in which he words his proposals making his policies pertinent to all people willing to listen. When Americans listen, they realize that Obama's policies are better for Americans now and better for the future of humanity. But how will Obama appeal to emotional Americans that can not understand policy or perceive their long term effects?
I am a little worried that Obama will lose to the McCain campaign's comedic, angry emotions of identity and segregation. I would suggest that he change the perspective of the dissenting audience from identifying with the x-children to identifying with him, the y-child. I doubt any extreme republicans will budge, but with this change in perspective, emotionally driven swing voters will feel guilty for leaping on to the angry, segregationist wagon, and will join those who sympathize with the scapegoat, the y-child. If Obama makes dissenters emotionally realize that they actually identify with his values and aspirations, the same, authentic values and aspirations set forth by our founding fathers, then he may convince a few of these dissenters.
Fundamental Values and Aspirations
Listening to Obama's words at last week's townhall debate was reassuring; he had the right experience and the right proposals. However, only until the closing statements was I really pulled in to sympathize with Obama at the emotional level. In these closing statements, he mentioned his background and how the image of a revered America inspired his father. He mentioned, in a thankful manner, the opportunity that America stood for; the opportunity that made it possible for him and his wife to receive an education. He brought us into his perspective and compelled us to relate to him with mutual respect and sympathy. I hope he moves our perspective in the days preceding the election, once again, like he did last week in those closing statements. We must be illuminated; we must associate our values and aspirations with those of Obama; we must identify the inhibiting problem within his opponents; we must realize that through Obama's values and policies our future will be realized.
From the Chicago Sun Times
BY ABDON M. PALLASCH AND CHRIS FUSCO Staff Reporters
John McCain is hammering Barack Obama about his ties to Chicago educator Bill Ayers, co-founder of the Weather Underground, a group that used violence in the 1960s and 1970s to try to end the Vietnam War.
For a week now, the McCain-Palin ticket has been making Ayers an issue. And the attacks continued Friday, with an ad that calls Ayers the "leader of a terrorist group that bombed the U.S. Capitol." The ad also says "Obama's first campaign was launched at a gathering at Mr. Ayers' home."
But is everything the Republicans are saying true? Here's a look at the Obama-Ayers relationship.
Read more:
http://www.suntimes.com/news/politics/obama/1215925,CST-NWS-ayers12.article
(CBS) A recent web advertisement from Republican presidential candidate Senator John McCain makes two false claims about a connection between Bill Ayers and Senator Barack Obama. 1. “Ayers and Obama ran a radical education foundation, together.” The foundation they are referring to is the Chicago Annenberg Challenge (CAC), set up in the early 1990’s with funding from the Annenberg Foundation to reform public schools. Walter Annenberg is a well-known philanthropist and conservative Republican. “This was not the Bill Ayers and Barack Obama show,” says Ken Rolling who was the Executive Director of the CAC and ran the organization, “It was not created by two people, it was created by a hundred people.”
Was it radical? Rolling says that’s in the eyes of the beholder, but he confirms that the CAC funded programs with the following purpose: teacher training, music education, support for new school council candidates, afterschool programs, education research, improvements for literacy and arts programs and initiatives to strengthen parental involvement in public schools. “The idea that the Annenberg Challenge was somehow the extension of the Weather Underground of the 1960’s, that is just one of the most lunatic contentions I can imagine,” says Mike Flannery, political editor at the CBS Chicago affiliate WBBM who has covered Chicago politics for 35 years. Flannery says the other people on involved in the CAC with Obama and Ayers were "business types and Republicans." Obama chaired the board of the CAC but he did not serve on the board with Ayers. Ayers served on a separate advisory board.
http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2008/10/13/eveningnews/realitycheck/main4518056.shtml
So here is my first post for my new blog. Welcome. Hopefully you find some info here that makes you think.
So why "No Talking Points"?
Well, while I believe in the Obama mission, and the Democratic Party's causes - I still think people need to think for themselves and not just follow the leader because they said it was so.
…for finally doing the right thing, by abandoning the hateful, racism-tinged rhetoric his campaign has broadcast at their rallies and in TV ads this week.
at a rally today, mccain finally acknowledged that obama is a “decent person and a person that you do not have to be scared of as president of the United States,” going on to say that “He’s a decent, family man, [a] citizen that I just happen to have disagreements with on fundamental issues and that’s what this campaign is all about.” kudos as well for making these statements even while being booed by his supporters - that takes guts, and i’ll give him that.
while this is a good step, calls should be made to his campaign and to the RNC to cancel their TV ads which echo the same misleading and hateful sentiments, including a new one released for broadcast even today which states that he “worked with a terrorist when it was convenient” which is a blatantly dishonest implication. in addition, the american people should be demanding a public apology and denouncement for john mccain, sarah palin, and the RNC’s previous statements.
i believe an apology is necessary here, because even though mccain seems to be abandoning the rhetoric, his and palin’s comments were clearly “over the line” and if he hopes to be taken seriously as a positive candidate, being able to acknowledge fault would be a big first step.
-h
For the past week, Sarah Palin, has been condemning Barack Obama on the basis of an article she read in the New York Times Obama and 60’s Bomber: A Look into Crossed Paths written by Scott Shane and printed on 10/03/08. From this article she argues that “This is a man who sees America different as you and I do”. I agree with Sarah that how someone sees the world IS very important. There are so many factors to be taken into consideration as we evaluate our candidates, especially in these most difficult and complex times. A glimpse into someone’s American/world view does help us determine the candidate’s leadership qualities.
Since Ms. Palin thought that the New York Times article provided these insights into Obama’s American/World view, I read the article in full and I encourage you to do the same. When I read the article, I became confused, because, for me, the article did not support her conclusions. Although it does state that Ayres and Obama paths’ did cross, after a review of the records of projects and interviews with a dozen people who know both men, it basically states that the two men do not appear to have been close, that Ayres played no role in Obama’s appointment on the Chicago Annenberg project, that little influence has been seen and that Mr. Obama has never expressed sympathy for the radical views and actions of Mr. Ayers.
What Ms. Palin seems to have missed is the full page describing Mr. Obama’s involvement in community service. How when he returned to Chicago as a young lawyer, he joined the board of the Joyce Foundation, a non-profit that “supports efforts to protect the natural environment of the Great Lakes, to reduce poverty and violence in the region, and to ensure that its people have access to good schools, decent jobs, and a diverse and thriving culture.” The article goes on to say that a year later, because of his contribution to the Joyce foundation, he was recommended to be chairman of the board of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, a project sponsored by the Annenberg Foundation to increase the ability of schools to better themselves. I ask you, what kind of a world/American view does someone have to get involved and join programs to improve education, or environment, or to reduce violence, or have access to jobs on their spare time? What kind of judgment does this display in regards to the use of his time and the type of organizations that he wished to serve?
I then began to wonder if Ms. Palin actually read the entire five-page article, or whether she has a reading comprehension problem, or whether she just wanted to distort the article for ruthless political “shenanigans”. After reading the article, I began to question if Sarah Palin, rather than Obama, was someone who sees America different from you and me? Do we aspire to see the world in context, as a whole or do we merely want to pull out pieces of information out of context to distort our world view? Because of the complexity of the world’s problems today, can we afford to have a leader that does not take all of the information available to make judgments? What kind of “shenanigans” could such a leader cause on the world stage?
Write a letter or oped to your own newspaper.
Will the real John McCain Please Stand up (oped submission)
By Patrick Frank
(about 500 words)
I am a grassroots volunteer, teacher-counselor, and freelance writer who has spent hundreds of hours campaigning for Obama, in South Carolina, North Carolina, and phone banking to other parts of the nation.
I admire Obama because he has refused to engage in character assassination. Not so, the McCain-Palin campaign. They have been employing incredibly dirty tactics, adopting the end-justifies-the-means philosophy of running the campaign.
A recent distortion by McCain. He said in a recent speech. “Obama says Ayres is just a guy in the neighborhood.” McCain knows that Obama has been a lot more forthcoming than that, in describing the relationship. These questions were raised during the primary season, and Obama explained his relationship with Bill Ayres satisfactorily.
Sarah Palin said that Obama “pals around” with terrorists. This is a lie. As I understand the facts, Ayres, decades ago, was a founder of the Weather Underground, a left-wing extremist group, and he was involved in several bombings. Today, he is an educational reformer and responsible member of society, a professor at the University of Chicago.
Obama is not a “pal” of Ayres. They are neighbors, and I believe Robert Gibbs said they are on friendly terms, but they see each other infrequently. They served on a couple of boards together. Ayres held a house meeting for Obama back in 1995. He is not involved in the current Obama campaign. Obama has strongly condemned the past violent actions of Ayres and Ayres has apologized for them.
By the way, Obama was about eight years old when those events occurred.
Americans are tired of the old politics of "anything goes" on the campaign trail.
Enraged people at the Sarah Palin rallies shout out, “Kill him,” “Cut off his head,” “liar.” and the words Barack HUSSEIN Obama are repeated in a mocking, menacing tone.
Palin and others have, clearly, been ginning up hatred; let’s hope this does not result in a threat to Obama’s physical safety.
McCain has taken to repeating the question, in a sneering tone, “Who is the real Barack Obama?” I might ask the same question of McCain.” Is this the true maverick who condemned detainee abuse when many others on the right defended the practice? Is this the man who devoted a whole chapter in his book on courage to the work of the Reverend Martin Luther King? Is this the John McCain who reached across the aisle in a spirit of good will on many occasions on capitol hill? Is this the John McCain who visited Vietnam after the war, to heal emotional scars, bury the hatchet, and help “turn the page” on that devastating conflict?
Sadly, it appears that John McCain has capitulated to the extreme right wing of the Republican Party in launching a campaign of hatred and lies, directed at Senator Obama.
I am asking the John McCain I respected before this presidential season to please stand up, and put an end to character assassination by your campaign. Will the real John McCain please stand up.
Patrick Frank
Grassroots Obama volunteer
Box 1283
Kingstree, SC 29556
(843) 372-8851
patrickgfrank@yahoo.com
I have seen so many news quips about the William Ayers connection, but I haven't seen any stinging rebuttals to the questions. Here is a response that will ring as sincere and genuine to most Americans, and strike out against the McCain Camp.
"Why did Obama continue to serve on an Education Board with William Ayers?"
When one lives in a neighborhood with children, responsible parents are involved with local schools and education. In most situations, you will find neighbors and other members of your community involved as well. Ideally all of these volunteers are the best of your community, realistically, some of these volunteers will not be. If Senator Obama had 13 houses across the country like Senator McCain, then his easiest option when he found himself on the Board with William Ayers would be to pick up his family and move to one of the other 13 Estates. For Senator Obama though, who only owns one house, the only real options were; abandon the public education project who's success was far more important than either Senator Obama or William Ayers, or, be cordial with the other members of the board and get the job done. Senator Obama focused on the most important issue and put the public’s needs and best interest ahead of his own. Senator Obama didn’t choose to have William Ayers on the Board, but when exposed to someone with a deplorable past, especially when working on a project that will ultimately be in the public’s best interest, Senator Obama tempered his own opinion by drawing upon the views of his community and peers is order to do the job at hand.
[This is an amazing story by a very courageous woman and what happened when she went to a Palin rally (the one where she started the BS about Obama and Ayers) and shouted in a stadium: "LIAR"! It reveals so much about her shallowness and her veiled racism that when distributed widely in borderline states, I think it could help us win all 13 of them! Please take some time and make sure everyone you know gets a copy of this and prints it out for 5 neighbors! 26 days left! from Stephen Fox]
OpEdNews
Original Content at http://www.opednews.com/articles/What-I-Learned-At-The-Sara-by-Linda-Milazzo-081007-243.html
October 7, 2008
On Saturday I went to Carson, California, to attend a rally for Republican Vice Presidential candidate, Sarah Palin. For those who aren't familiar with the city of Carson, it's approximately 19 miles south of downtown Los Angeles. In the 2004 Presidential election, Carson, which had a population of just under 90,000, donated three times as much money to George W. Bush than to John Kerry. This year, for the 2008 elections, residents of Carson have given slightly more to Republican candidates than to Democrats by a slim margin of $3,000. Thus the gap between Republicans and Democrats in Carson has narrowed. The Palin rally, which you may have seen on youtube and TV, was held at the Home Depot ADT Tennis Stadium. Because of the surprising popularity of Mrs. Palin and easy access to free tickets, all 20,000 stadium seats, plus an overflow area were filled. I got a handful of tickets, recruited my friend Rebecca Tobias, Program Director of the Raoul Wallenberg Institute of Ethics, and trekked on out to Carson. We scored ground level seats in the stadium from which I watched, listened and steadily bristled. When I could no longer stomach Palin's lies and distortions, I jumped up, and at the top of my lungs, repeatedly called Palin a L-I-A-R!
I was shouted down in Palinese by her 20,000 admirers, then escorted out by security. I took extra time as I climbed the steps from the ground up to the top just to keep her admirers shouting. The few minute reprieve from Palin's lies was to me a righteous diversion. When I neared the top of the steps I turned back to Mrs. Palin and continued to call her a L-I-A-R, until I was ushered out the door. Thankfully my escorts showed me the utmost respect for they privately shared my feelings. They're working folk. They see through Mrs. Palin. But that's just the start of this story... You see, I'd gone to this event for a reason. Not to see Sarah Palin. I already knew who she was. I went to see the Palinettes - the supporters of this unspectacular woman who had so readily been won over. I wanted to meet them and speak with them and understand their attachment to this lowest common denominator politician - a woman so unqualified for Vice President that her appointer running mate should be imprisoned for treason. As a patriot and voter, I disagree categorically with the choice of Sarah Palin. I seek knowledge, experience, maturity, integrity, charity, clarity, humanity, intellectual curiosity, and wisdom from the leaders I select. Since Palin, in my opinion, exhibits none of these traits, I wanted to assess her supporters' rationale (or rational-ity). What I witnessed was thoroughly alarming!! Among this raptured crowd of 20,000 was a frightening mix of Christian zealots, anti-abortion fanatics, and mostly white suburban women and men reconnecting with their high school mentality. Bright colored pom-poms were everywhere - as if Sarah Palin were head cheerleader, the women were on her squad, and the men were the football heroes. Sarah Palin, the quintessential 4ever-school-girl had revitalized their youth and saved them from adulthood. Check out the red pom-pom "hair" on the man behind Palin. If that isn't high school, what is?? Photo by Linda Milazzo Want further proof of pom-pom Palin? Try this as an experiment. Put on an audio of a Sarah Palin speech. Close your eyes and listen. What you'll hear is the high pitched voice of a teenage girl, speaking in circular reasoning, incomplete sentences, and juvenile idioms. No sophistication. No leadership. No wisdom. Just the sound of a snarky school girl. Sarah Palin is America's greatest nightmare. Sarah Palin is George W. Bush in a dress! Of course there are those who might say that my own outburst toward Sarah Palin was juvenile - to which I'd respond with a resounding NO! It's never juvenile to speak truth to ignorance. To say nothing would be derelict. Certainly, I'd be naive to think that calling Palin a L-I-A-R would make her adorers believe me. But to sit quietly while Palin accused Obama of being:
"someone who sees America, it seems, as being so imperfect, imperfect enough, that he's palling around with terrorists [Bill Ayers] who would target their own country"
"terrorists who would target their own country"
Prior to last night's debates in which Barack Obama was the clear victor, Cindy told reporters earlier that day that Obama has "waged the dirtiest campaign in American history". This coming at the onset of McCain's new strategy to stop talking about the issues, and focus on Swift Boat-style tactics to defame Obama and try to make him seem like some kind of un-American radical. Cindy is giving a response founded on emotion, not logic. She's upset that Obama is pulling away in the polls and on the Electoral map. Obama is widely considered the "nice guy" that wants to be above the bipartisan smear tactics and fear-mongering that Republicans seem to own a patent on. But, he has learned from the Kerry campaign that we should strike back when they strike at us. Calling Obama "dirty" is a stretch, but calling it the "dirtiest" in "American history" is an illogical form of desperation, and just more smearing from the McCains to say the least.
Welcome to The Twilight Zone folks. Where all forms of reality & logic has been suspended in this political parrallel universe, brought to you by the Republican Party.
Obama's "The Subject" ad (in response to John McCain's smear tactics)
Personally, I think the William Ayers story is an important story. Because the situation in our nation in 2008 is not totally unlike the situation in 1968.
While John McCain was a POW in Vietnam, Ayers was protesting violently against the violence in Vietnam and the "domino theory" that drove Cold War foreign policy. Ayers was trying to speak out for soldiers like McCain, for American people frustrated with a war that wasn't working, and for a world community that was being devastated by the Cold War.
The government was failing people at that time. We were sending men to the moon, but we weren't solving people's problems on earth.
The nation was divided. MLK and JFK and RFK had all been assassinated. Malcolm X too. The nation was in turmoil. And the government was unresponsive.
The methods used by the Weathermen were WRONG, no question in my opinion. And I totally disagree with the Communist sympathies of the Weathermen.
But as Jefferson said in 1776: "That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness." That makes it seem to me that Ayers was acting in the highest patriotic traditions of our nation.
Comments? Disagree? Agree?
GREETINGS OBAMITES!Some of you know that I lead an ongoing "charge" against the insidious journalism practiced by FOX NEWS and SHAWN HANNITY. I have taken it personally, as have many of you, when these Neoconservatives apply these dangerous, misleading and offensive practices to our candidate. While the attached letter was sent to over 80 newspapers, Editors and pundits, I took the liberty of forwarding it, separately, to Mr. Keith Olbermann and COUNTDOWN at MSNBC. I did so, because I know NO OTHER PUNDIT who could vocalize the feeling of indignation that so many of you have told me that you have felt. It warranted, I felt, the castigating tone that is one of Mr. Olbermann's "to the point" hallmarks. I was honored in that he conveyed my message "loud and clear." This, my friends, was beyond imperrative, because Mr Hannity's incidiary tone could have reasonably been expected to incite radicals who, in an a "John Wilkes Booth-like" show of mutated patriotic bigotry, could very well attempt to do PHYSICAL harm to Senator Barack Obama or to members of his family. Keith, however, took it ONE STEP FURTHER, and exposed the expressions of SANCTIONED HATE that have come forth from FOX owner, RUPERT MURDOCH and the patrons of his public-opinion boards and blogs. I have posted the TWO relevant links in the "boxed" section immediately following this one, as well as at the points of relevance in the main body of this piece for easy reader correlation. It may interest you to know that, yesterday, it was made clear, that Democratic Governor, and staunch Clinton supporter, Governor Ed Rendell, of Pennsylvania, has endorsed…FOX NEWS! (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/23889508#23889508). The Governor described it as "a fair and balance"news service. Keith immediately bestowed upon him the same "testimonial" earned only by the members of that most "exclusive of exclusive," "members only" order; THE WORST PERSONS IN THE WORLD! Subsequent letter: Shawn Hannity: STOP the anti-OBAMA “FOX-VIRUS” NOW (http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/rickbasora/gGBnpb)
GREETINGS OBAMITES!
Some of you know that I lead an ongoing "charge" against the insidious journalism practiced by FOX NEWS and SHAWN HANNITY. I have taken it personally, as have many of you, when these Neoconservatives apply these dangerous, misleading and offensive practices to our candidate. While the attached letter was sent to over 80 newspapers, Editors and pundits, I took the liberty of forwarding it, separately, to Mr. Keith Olbermann and COUNTDOWN at MSNBC. I did so, because I know NO OTHER PUNDIT who could vocalize the feeling of indignation that so many of you have told me that you have felt. It warranted, I felt, the castigating tone that is one of Mr. Olbermann's "to the point" hallmarks. I was honored in that he conveyed my message "loud and clear." This, my friends, was beyond imperrative, because Mr Hannity's incidiary tone could have reasonably been expected to incite radicals who, in an a "John Wilkes Booth-like" show of mutated patriotic bigotry, could very well attempt to do PHYSICAL harm to Senator Barack Obama or to members of his family. Keith, however, took it ONE STEP FURTHER, and exposed the expressions of SANCTIONED HATE that have come forth from FOX owner, RUPERT MURDOCH and the patrons of his public-opinion boards and blogs. I have posted the TWO relevant links in the "boxed" section immediately following this one, as well as at the points of relevance in the main body of this piece for easy reader correlation. It may interest you to know that, yesterday, it was made clear, that Democratic Governor, and staunch Clinton supporter, Governor Ed Rendell, of Pennsylvania, has endorsed…FOX NEWS! (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/23889508#23889508). The Governor described it as "a fair and balance"news service. Keith immediately bestowed upon him the same "testimonial" earned only by the members of that most "exclusive of exclusive," "members only" order; THE WORST PERSONS IN THE WORLD!
Subsequent letter: Shawn Hannity: STOP the anti-OBAMA “FOX-VIRUS” NOW (http://my.barackobama.com/page/community/post/rickbasora/gGBnpb)
KEITH OLBERMANN presents: THE WORST PERSON IN THE WORLD
March 19, 2008 - Hannity's Site Features Outrageous Obama Posts http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/23716643#23716643 March 21, 2008 - FoxNews.com HATE SPEECH http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/23716643#23750779
March 19, 2008 - Hannity's Site Features Outrageous Obama Posts
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/23716643#23716643
March 21, 2008 - FoxNews.com HATE SPEECH
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/23716643#23750779
From: Rick Basora [the_dragonwolf@comcast.net]
Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2008 11:23 AM
To: KEITH OLBERMANN & COUNTDOWN [countdown@msnbc.com]
Subject: FW: SHAWN HANNITY - THE PINNACLE OF IRRESPONSIBLE JOURNALISM AT ITS WORST
The very “worstest” person in the world
Keith, You are my absolute “bestest PUNDITARIAN hero.” I’ve circulated this “modestly” but my deepest hope is that it gets to you. Kindly note the “Olbermannisms.”
SIC’EM!
Nothing can excuse the extremes of irresponsible journalism exhibited by Shawn Hannity and FOX on the 3/9/08 edition of Hannity's America. There, he deliberately attempted to vilify a Presidential candidate with tabloid-worthy disinformation. This is how tyranny is raised; by feeding it. I wrote this letter and sent it to the journalistic world in order to expose this un-American "jester". I am forwarding it to the respectable and credible Keith Olbermann, in hopes that he may use it as a "belt" with which to "spank" this buffoon for discrediting your legitimate profession of "informers of the world." If this “Roman Circus” of an election campaign succeeds in its apparent objective of robbing America of its “popular” will, let all Americans know, that Shawn Hannity stands charged and convicted of complicity.
From: Rick Basora Sent: Monday, March 10, 2008 11:26 PM
To: Hannity@foxnews.com; Feedback@foxnews.com; yourcomments@foxnews.com
Cc: 'americasnewsroom@foxnews.com'; 'Myword@foxnews.com'; 'Friends@foxnews.com'; 'Jamie@foxnews.com'; 'Newswatch@foxnews.com'; 'Foxreport@foxnews.com'; 'Atlarge@foxnews.com'; 'JER@foxnews.com'; 'Lineup@foxnews.com'; 'Martha@foxnews.com'; 'Ontherecord@foxnews.com'; 'Special@foxnews.com'; 'Cavuto@foxnews.com'; 'editor@ajr.org'; 'mailto:editor@ajr.org'; 'rrieder@ajr.org'; 'rsmolkin@ajr.org'; 'tkunkel@ajr.org'; 'executive-editor@nytimes.com'; 'managing-editor@nytimes.com'; 'washington@nytimes.com'; 'national@nytimes.com'; 'metro@nytimes.com'; 'news-tips@nytimes.com'; 'public@nytimes.com'; 'president@nytimes.com'; 'CEO-CarolineLittle@wpni.com'; 'executive.editor@washingtonpost.com'; 'wsj.ltrs@wsj.com'; 'a.murray@wsj.com'; 'a.latour@wsj.com'; 'd.pettit@wsj.com'; 't.cullen@wsj.com'; 'j.fry@wsj.com'; 'darren.mcdermott@wsj.com'; 'ombudsman@washpost.com'; 'metro@washpost.com'; 'national@washpost.com'; 'tips@tribune.com'; 'ctc-tribletter@tribune.com'; 'publiceditor@tribune.com'; 'EAchenbaum@tribune.com'; 'ctc-editor@tribune.com'; 'bdold@tribune.com'; 'TMcNulty@tribune.com'; 'gdelama@tribune.com'; 'JCWarren@tribune.com'; 'aaguilar@tribune.com'; 'aahmed@tribune.com'; 'KAlleynemorris@tribune.com'; 'LBAnderson@tribune.com'; 'rranderson@tribune.com'; 'kataiyero@tribune.com'; 'NBendavid@tribune.com'; 'lbowean@tribune.com'; 'SChapman@tribune.com'; 'LCohen@tribune.com'; 'JChase@tribune.com'; 'JCrewdson@tribune.com'; 'HDardick@tribune.com'; 'MDorning@tribune.com'; 'askamy@tribune.com'; 'national@latimes.com'; 'tvtimes@latimes.com'; 'op-ed@latimes.com'; 'letters@latimes.com'; 'info@ap.org'; 'mediainquiries@msnbc.com'
Subject: SHAWN HANNITY - THE PINNACLE OF IRRESPONSIBLE JOURNALISM AT ITS WORST
To Shawn Hannity and to the Management of Fox Broadcasting;
Last night, as I watched Shawn Hannity, on Hannity’s America, corrupt the minds of “the corruptible” with a program that tendered accusations of “terrorist” affiliations between Barack Obama and William Ayers of the former Weathermen, I was reminded of the collective “brainwashing” that, as a child, I was taught to believe was a characteristic only of “evil” nations like the former Soviet Union and of former Nazi Germany. As a child, I recall being assured by my 6th grade teacher that such a robbery of the human “will” would never be tolerated in America. FREEDOM, she said, could only be achieved by a people who were empowered with TRUTH as the element that, along with a sense of identity, made valid their RIGHT to CHOOSE it. Last night, your Shawn Hannity usurped that right from those Americans susceptible to the inflammatory; from those vulnerable to the politics of FEAR and from those ignorant BY CHOICE to the REALITIES of the Presidential candidates at large.
Mr, Hannity, I am compelled to remind you that, despite your reluctance, we still reside in a country where the rule of law prescribes that a person is innocent, and not by association, until proven guilty. I feel further obligated to engage your cynical racial and religious bigotry by reminding you that, if African Americans find refuge in institutions and churches whose very names herald a predictable WELCOME, it is because the sins of our fathers have forced them, however subconsciously, to find refuge in an identity. (Keith Olbermann's observations - http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/23716643#23750779) No, Mr. Hannity, a church with a name that speaks to a black congregation is not a racist statement; it is a statement of fraternity that you and our forefathers insisted on disallowing white America from fully participating in…and yet…they welcome us. Further, you “mouth” the word “Muslim” as if it were the very “sound” of social and religious leprosy. You might recall that legitimate Muslims are a peaceful people in non-complicity with the fanatics that did us and still wish us harm. Your message, sir, is one that has a history of inciting lynch mobs and, just in case Jenna, LA taught you nothing, ALL OF AMERICA will put that mob DOWN. While I am certain that Senator Obama would strongly sensor my statement, I will ask you that, if you must hate the mutations of religious principal, then, Sir, hate the religion of The Crusades, of the THOUSAND YEARS of European Inquisition, of Waco, Texas and of The Salem Witch Trials. Hate whatever fed the narcissism of Reverends Jim Baker and Jim Jones and you can start by hating the perversion of 10,000 pedophile priests, the Institutions that fed them our children. Hate those who sanctioned their rape and that, in doing so, stripped many of us of the comfort that one should find in the words “In God We Trust.”
As it has become commonplace with radical Conservatives, last night Mr Hannity invoked the late President Reagan and his anecdote of a father who, back in the days of the “cold war”, declared that he would prefer to see his two little daughters dead…rather than to see them live under a faithless and godless Communist regime. With that story, Mr. Hannity attempted to rouse his audience to a “pitch” of nationalistic outrage. It appeared to me that he was IMPLICIT LY charging Senator Obama of practicing a communist-like godlessness. Allow me to remind FOX and Mr. Hannity that it was Mrs. Hillary Clinton’s Wellsley College thesis honoring her ANTI-ESTABLISHMENT mentor, Saul Alinsky and his MARXIST teachings, that earned her the appellative “Alinsky’s daughter.” The document necessitated its being SEALED to the public by a 1993 special Presidential order issued by her husband who considered it a political liability because of its “radical” content. This document was “unsealed” in 2001 after the Republicans took office and is currently available for your scrutiny and review. What happens to human convictions after 40 years have passed is known only to those minds that contain them and to God Himself who made them; not to Shawn Hannity.
He went on to showcase President Reagan in a clip from his “Star Wars” speech, where he indicated that America was “a country that did not start wars.” Gentlemen, if this was Shawn Hannity’s way of weaving “illusions of war-mongering” with which to surround a Presidential candidate who stands on a platform of DIALOGUE as his preferred weapon of pre-emption of war, you may want to advise him about the fact that we ARE, in fact, in a war unjustly started; a war that he endorsed and that he is a member of the political party that started it. Senator Obama was the legislator who attempted unsuccessfully to galvanize an effective movement to avoid it. History has proven him to have been STRATEGICALLY CORRECT and no degree of Mr. Hannity’s resenting him for it will grant him access to that elite minority reserved solely for the JUDGEMENTALLY SOUND.
As the pariah of last nights “Hannity’s America” unfolded, it was clear that Mr. Hannity extended warm and humane concern for the life and wellbeing of one Britney Spears. In stark contrast, was his misguided and malicious presentation of the character, principals, religion and persona of one Barack Obama; a legitimate Senator of the United States, respected by what most polls reflect as the majority of our country’s electorate. In doing so, this contemporary carpetbagger has insulted the MILLIONS whose voices are the mandate that drives his candidacy. Hannity has slapped the essential face of Democracy; of the decent journalists and pundits of FOX and of our media. He attempted a coupe on the people’s right for TRUTH to be allowed to guide the American Electoral process. Most of all, Mr. Hannity has provided the most educated minds in America, described by Frank Newport of the Gallup Organization as being the core of Senator Obama’s support, with irrefutable evidence that any legitimate opposition to Senator Obama’s Presidential bid can only find momentum in feeble minds inspired by synthesized realities delivered by “tabloid” journalists beholden to tyrants who, regardless of their party affiliation, are certainly worthy of the descriptive, “MONSTERS.” It is no wonder, gentlemen that we are referred to in Europe as “hypocritical contradictions of ourselves.”
Perhaps, Mr. Hannity, you may want to discuss issues that are current and of legitimate concern to America. I might suggest that you begin with programming devoted to the more than TEN MILLION DOLLARS in Saudi, Middle Eastern and Taiwan contributions received by the Clintons and disclosed by The Washington Post, The NY Times, Jihad Watch and more. Some good questions to begin with would be; how will this impact “President” Hillary Clinton’s foreign policy decisions regarding the war on terror if she and her husbands personal interests are funded by the world’s largest supporters of it? How will this Saudi endorsement affect her right to speak to women’s rights? How will Taiwan’s “offering” temper her engagement of China as the possible new “owner” of America? There are REAL issues, I assure you, that scream for addressing; issues of far greater nobility than your need for tabloid ratings. If, however, that is all that we can expect from you, you might consider a piece on the story that just broke on New York’s Governor Spitzer admitting to involvement in a prostitution ring. It is, as you know, yet another scandal from a State plagued by the seemingly polar opposites of unspeakable hardship and of chronic corruption by its politicians. That should be sordid enough to satisfy your personal and/or political libations, Sir.
Take heed of these, my closing words. The irresponsibility of Shawn Hannity’s “rabble rousing journalism” could very well inspire right wing radical extremists to commit acts in PATENT SUPPORT of his bastardized rant. Because you, Mr. Hannity, are in contempt of the most basic of professional standards and of the ethics of personal decency, we, the majority of America’s electorate hold you and The Fox Network personally responsible for any such actions and further hold you accountable for promoting them and for inspiring them. (KEITH OLBERMANN'S observations - http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/23716643#23716643)
If we are to learn the lessons willed to us by the American “giant” that was Robert F. Kennedy, it behooves us to recognize that YOU, Mr Hannity, are THE EXTREMIST.
“What is objectionable, what is dangerous, about extremists is not that they are extreme, but that they are intolerant. The evil is not what they say about their cause, but what they say about their opponents.” Robert Francis Kennedy
Rick Basora
Fort Lauderdale, FL
Sent: Monday, March 10, 2008 11:26 PM
To: 'Hannity@foxnews.com'; 'Feedback@foxnews.com'; 'yourcomments@foxnews.com'
Mr, Hannity, I am compelled to remind you that, despite your reluctance, we still reside in a country where the rule of law prescribes that a person is innocent, and not by association, until proven guilty. I feel further obligated to engage your cynical racial and religious bigotry by reminding you that if African Americans find refuge in institutions and churches whose very names herald a predictable WELCOME, it is because the sins of our fathers have forced them, however subconsciously, to find comfort in an identity. No, Mr. Hannity, a church with a name that speaks to a black congregation is not a racist statement; it is a statement of fraternity that you and our forefathers insisted on disallowing white America from fully participating in…and yet…they welcome us. Further, you “mouth” the word “Muslim” as if it were the very “sound” of social and religious leprosy. You might recall that legitimate Muslims are a peaceful people in non-complicity with the fanatics that did us and still wish us harm. Your message, sir, is one that has a history of inciting lynch mobs and, just in case Jenna, LA taught you nothing, ALL OF AMERICA will put that mob DOWN. While I am certain that Senator Obama would strongly sensor my statement, I will ask you that, if you must hate the mutations of religious principal, then, Sir, hate the religion of The Crusades, of the THOUSAND YEARS of European Inquisition, of Waco, Texas and of The Salem Witch Trials. Hate whatever fed the narcissism of Reverends Jim Baker and Jim Jones and you can start by hating the perversion of 10,000 pedophile priests, the Institutions that fed them our children. Hate those who sanctioned their rape and that, in doing so, stripped many of us of the comfort that one should find in the words “In God We Trust.”
Take heed of these, my closing words. The irresponsibility of Shawn Hannity’s “rabble rousing journalism” could very well inspire right wing radical extremists to commit acts in PATENT SUPPORT of his bastardized rant. Because you, Mr. Hannity, are in contempt of the most basic of professional standards and of the ethics of personal decency, we, the majority of America’s electorate hold you and The Fox Network personally responsible for any such actions and further hold you accountable for promoting them and for inspiring them. If we are to learn the lessons willed to us by the American “giant” that was Robert F. Kennedy, it behooves us to recognize that YOU, Mr Hannity, are THE EXTREMIST.
“What is objectionable, what is dangerous, about extremists is not that they are extreme, but that they are intolerant. The evil is not what they say about their cause, but what they say about their opponents." Robert F. Kennedy
