The American Spectator : They're All in This Together

Text Size

They’re All in This Together

By Alfred S. Regnery from the September 2011 issue

Meet Mr. and Mrs. Bill Ayers, and their friend, the president. Our September cover story.

Asked during the 2008 presidential campaign about his relationship with the left-wing radical Bill Ayers, Barack Obama replied that Ayers was just “a guy who lives in my neighborhood.” He implied that to even bring that questionable relationship out of the shadows was a mean-spirited, guilt-by-association political tactic. Ayers, Obama went on, had done something deplorable “forty years ago when I was six or seven years old.”

Otherwise, Obama insisted, Ayers was a paragon of virtue: a respectable fixture in mainstream Chicago, a professor at the University of Illinois at Chicago, on a foundation board focused on education that included “Republicans, bankers, lawyers.” Ayers had even worked for, and was a good friend of, Mayor Richard M. Daley. The Obama campaign at once launched a crusade to distance Obama from Ayers. It went so far as to actually defend the man who had implicated himself in terror bombings in his own 2001 memoir, Fugitive Days.

In fact, Ayers and his wife, Bernardine Dohrn, were radical Marxist revolutionaries in the Vietnam War era. They were founders of the Weather Underground, a violent terrorist arm of Students for a Democratic Society. Both were eventually indicted in federal court, and Dohrn by the State of Illinois. Rather than face a trial they jumped bail and disappeared into the underground in 1970. After they resurfaced 11 years later, both were admitted into the halls of academia. Ayers became a Distinguished Professor of Education and a Senior University Scholar at the University of Illinois-Chicago. Incredibly, Dohrn became a law professor at Northwestern.

The American Spectator has developed information that demonstrates, without any doubt, that Ayers and Dohrn have spent a lifetime advocating and practicing the strategies and tactics of Marxism. That includes the violent overthrow of the United States government. It also involves treasonous cooperation with revolutionary Communist governments in China, North Vietnam, and Cuba during the 1960s and '70s and, until the fall of the Eastern Bloc, governments in Eastern Europe and the Soviet Union. But unlike many of their compatriots from those days of violence and turmoil, Ayers and Dohrn are completely unrepentant about their past activities. To this day, they continue to support destruction of the American free enterprise system and its replacement with a Marxist utopia.

What, then, is the relationship between these two hard-core leftist revolutionaries and the president of the United States, and why is it important?

It is important, first, because Obama, along with Ayers and Dohrn, went to great lengths to mislead voters during the fall of 2008. They “just lived in the same neighborhood” and had little contact, they pretended. On the contrary, The American Spectator’s investigation has concluded that Obama and his campaign staff, with the help of the mainstream media, lied outright about his relationship with Ayers. It has also concluded that Ayers lied about it as well. The Ayers-Obama association is far deeper, longer, and more significant than was ever acknowledged during the campaign.

The relationship is important, second, because Ayers and Dohrn are not reformed former radicals who have abandoned their old habits. Indeed, they are unrepentant, violent radicals who may have adopted new tactics to upend the United States and what it stands for, but whose goals remain just what they were in 1970.

Furthermore, the relationship is important because of the policies and issues that both Ayers and, to a lesser degree, Dohrn worked on with Obama during the 20 years preceding his election to the presidency. These include education reform, juvenile justice, ACORN, and community organizing, among others. Taken together, they demonstrate the extent to which these hard-core left-wingers influenced today’s president of the United States.

Finally, it is important because of Ayers’s relationship, through his powerful businessman father, with Chicago’s Daley family, who happen to be among the most ardent Obama supporters and promoters. As Chicago’s state’s attorney, Richard M. Daley presided over the plea bargain for Dohrn when she surfaced from the underground. He later continued to support Ayers and Dohrn during his long tenure as mayor of Chicago from 1989 to 2011. Daley even launched an unapologetic defense of Ayers when the relationship with Obama was exposed during the 2008 campaign.

BILL AYERS is a limousine revolutionary. He was born into a wealthy Chicago family, raised in the leafy western Chicago suburbs, educated at the best schools, and benefited from connections and privilege wherever he turned. His father, Thomas Ayers, was CEO and president of Commonwealth Edison, Chicago’s electric utility company, and sat on several influential boards, including those of the Chicago Tribune, Northwestern University, and the Chicago Symphony. In 1966, Mayor Richard J. Daley enlisted Thomas Ayers, a close friend, to head negotiations with Dr. Martin Luther King for a city-wide open housing agreement. Tom Ayers was so successful at talking out of both sides of his mouth that King claimed victory while, according to local press accounts, Daley could claim he was able to “preserve the segregationist status quo.”

After a couple of mediocre years in a suburban public high school, Bill Ayers transferred to Lake Forest Academy, an upscale prep school for boys on suburban Chicago’s north shore. (I attended the same school, before Ayers’s arrival). He then went on to the University of Michigan in 1963, where he liked to consider himself a jock because he roomed with the Wolverines’ star running back. He spent a summer working for Leo Burnett, Chicago’s largest ad agency, a job arranged by his father. But he soon joined protests and demonstrations. He was arrested and spent 10 days in jail for trying to disrupt the Ann Arbor draft board. Shortly thereafter he joined Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) and was well on his way to becoming a Marxist and self-styled radical revolutionary.

Bernardine Dohrn seemed made for Ayers; one has to wonder if God doesn’t find the perfect mate even for people who don’t believe in Him. A native of Milwaukee, Dohrn spent her first two years of college at Miami University of Ohio, but transferred to the University of Chicago after she was blackballed at the Delta Delta Delta sorority because she was half-Jewish. She graduated from the University of Chicago law school. But instead of taking the bar exam, she became an organizer for the National Lawyers Guild, a group identified by the FBI as a Communist front. She also became active in SDS.

As she rose to prominence in SDS, Dohrn and Mark Rudd, leader of the SDS at Columbia, split off from SDS in 1969. For them, SDS was too passive in its radicalism and opposition to the Vietnam War. They believed a more militant group, one that would preach violent class hatred and worldwide revolution, was needed. They called themselves the Weathermen after the Bob Dylan line, “You don’t need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows.”

Dohrn was unique in far-left circles: no wire-rims, no stringy hair, and no sackcloth. Peter Collier and David Horowitz, in their 1989 book Destructive Generation, write that when Dohrn arrived in New York City in 1967, “with her tight miniskirt and knee-high Italian leather boots, she created an instant sensation among males in Movement circles.” Even SDS president Greg Calvert was astonished. “I’ll never forget the first time I saw Bernardine,” he said. “She was wearing an orange sweater and a purple skirt, and while everyone else had on Stop the War buttons, hers said Cunnilingus is Cool, Fellatio is Fun. She had a boyfriend…but like others buoyed by the new air of sexual freedom, she had relationships with men who interested her.” J. Edgar Hoover later nicknamed her “La Pasionaria of the Lunatic Left.”

DOHRN WAS ALWAYS one of SDS’s most radical and outspoken leaders. When she ran for SDS “Interorganizational Secretary” in 1968, she was asked whether she was a socialist. When she answered that she was a revolutionary communist, she won by a landslide. In order to assure everybody of her bona fides, she announced that “what we’re about is being crazy motherf—-ers and scaring the s—t out of honky America.”

Page: 1 2 3 > Last ›

About the Author

Alfred S. Regnery is a former publisher of The American Spectator. He is the former president and publisher of Regnery Publishing, Inc., which produced twenty-two New York Times bestsellers during his tenure. Regnery also served in the Justice Department during the Reagan Administration, worked on the U.S. Senate staff, and has been in private law practice. He currently serves on several corporate and non-profit boards, and is the Chairman of the Intercollegiate Studies Institute .

His first book, Upstream: The Ascendance of American Conservatism, was published in 2008. The book has been praised as one of the best authoritative accounts on the history of the American conservative movement.

Letter to the Editor View all comments (624) | Leave a comment Leave a comment

Ken (Old Texican)| 9.2.11 @ 6:32AM

Mr. Regnery,
thanks for the thorough history lesson. I've read bits and pieces over time, but this essay nails it all down.
I shake my head and wonder how America let this guy get a job in the oval office.
Well, we are certainly paying the price now...but for how long, and how bad?

David W| 9.2.11 @ 10:11AM

We know exactly why he was elected. for the Whites, the media did everything they could to hide the truth. For the Minorities, they voted for him because he was half-black, not because he was remotely qualified. And McCain the wimp was afraid to attack Obama's lack of qualification/history/etc.

kate| 9.3.11 @ 2:49AM

He was elected because conservatives decided to sit back and let the children learn their lesson.
You know, like when your kid isn't doing his homework and you are constantly covering for him so that he doesn't fail?
Conservatives got fed up with this country and said "so be it".
So many people were thinking.."let them learn their lesson...let it go to hell for 4 years.."

Me thinks they may have underestimated just how stupid the kids are.

Alan Brooks| 9.3.11 @ 5:22PM

"And McCain the wimp"

That says it all: you ran an old Dole-like NamVet; you deserve what you got.

Alan Brooks| 9.3.11 @ 5:34PM

AS holds feet to the fire, so i'm going to do the ame to Dave W:
Is (or was) McCain a wimp because he was always that way; or because he is too old to not be a wimp? either way, it doesn't reflect well on the ability of the GOP to choose presidential candidates since 1988.
And that is not about the past, it is about today, tomorrow; next year.

Alan Brooks| 9.3.11 @ 8:27PM

Regnery's piece is very well written- he is the publisher so of course he would have to write well- and informative but necessarily one sided; AS is a right of center magazine so why shouldn't it be.
But if you don't go into how many drafted young men died and were injured, tortured (McCain himself) in LBJ's bungled war then it is a bit too one-sided because as soon as the war and the draft ended Ayers and Dohrn lost their charismatic appeal (they were a good looking couple). Radical chic was a short lived fad based on the Draft's convenience in facilitating Communist infiltration. Communist orgs such as SWP and WWP roped in impressionable youths; in fact Ayers and Dohrn were merely shills riding the radical chic bus, with Communists driving the bus.

Obama wasn't even in Junior High when the Vietnam war ended and when the anti-war movement began in '65 he was in Kindergarten. If regnery's article wasn't so informing and well written it would be dismissible-- but if Regnery's intention is to tie Obama to the Commie-dupe Weatherman in any way it is a Fool's errand. It would be comparable to considering Goldwater a fascist merely because some far-far-rightists supported him!

PsychoDad| 9.3.11 @ 9:50PM

Only if Barry Goldwater's campaign had been launched in Commander George Lincoln Rockwell's kitchen.

Sir, I don't know what your game is, but you are in denial.

SOCK PUPPET LAUNCHED HIS POLITICAL CAREER IN AYER'S HOUSE!

Surely that indicates more than "a guy who lived in the neighborhood"?

For that matter, what would your reaction be if a photo were found of Rick Perry launching his gubernatorial campaign from David Duke's front porch?

Personally, I think the rabbit hole much deeper. Some unkind souls have discovered striking stylistic parallels between Fugitive Days and Dreams of My Father. It would be interesting to run a few chapters of each through the software which has made recent news tracking Biblical authorship. Know-wutta-mean?

Alan Brooks| 9.3.11 @ 10:16PM

It would be fair to deem John Lennon a terrorist aider-abetter, but Lennon renounced his radical past eventually. He was a guy who went from one fad to another.
On the other hand, Obama did not donate funds (as Lennon did) to any terrorist group, including the Weathermen.

This is a fishing expedition with no fish biting.

Alan Brooks| 9.3.11 @ 10:35PM

... but if you dig up some real bad dirt on obama then I wont vote for him; but Clinton's enemies cried 'wolf' too many times in the '90s, and it wont hold this time around UNLESS you pull out some very bad laundry from Obama's hamper.
It is unlikely you will; if you couldn't bring Clinton down then your odds of bringing Obama down are virtually nill.
Regnery's article is a well researched, well written, grasping at straws.

Dee Smith| 9.4.11 @ 3:55PM

I don't think Larry Sinclair would agree with you Alan Brooks. Look at Axlerods record with barack Obama, Deval Patrick, Qwame Fitz. He really knows how to pick-em with a card in their back pockets.
You don't think Obama was old enough for this anti-war bullcrap google "breaking the war mentality" by Barack Obama march 10, 1983 that is one thing that we have on record that he did in columbia or around Columbia. The group was S.A.M it worked with A.R.A Arms race Alternatives. they were against nuclear arms. Can we say Stark Tready dum Scott Brown.

victor| 9.4.11 @ 3:00AM

AlanBrooks:
"On the other hand, Obama did not donate funds (as Lennon did) to any terrorist group,"

Maybe not, but he did get plenty of dough from terrorist groups and who knows who else since he has been in office, hmm?

"This is a fishing expedition with no fish biting."

All you need is the right bait, patience and a big net and who knows what sort of fish you will land, eh?

You'd know that, if you've ever gone fishin'. Right?

Alan Brooks| 9.4.11 @ 9:11PM

I've gone fishing many times; but the stories many fishermen told me in the boat were exaggerated stories of fish they either never caught or else a few inches in size were magically added by the raconteur: once in awhile a two foot fish somehow grew into a four foot fish (it might be because, as Tony Curtis says to Marilyn Monroe in 'Some Like It Hot',: "they shrink when they're marinated").
If you're going on a fishing expedition to do a high tech lynching of Obama then you're going to have to use plenty of bait and then when you get him in the boat you wont be patient enough to wait for the lynching, you will have to chop his head off when you get to shore and cook him in your frying pan right away.

Not to forget the bottle of white wine! it will be cause for celebration-- on your part, that is.

Kevin Dunn| 9.5.11 @ 3:01AM

AlanBrooks:
"On the other hand, Obama did not donate funds (as Lennon did) to any terrorist group,"

For that matter, Hitler never killed any Jews himself - he just ordered and encouraged others.

Racer99| 9.14.11 @ 2:56PM

Interestingly one of those present at the coming out party (he is seen in the photo of Barak and Michelle) is non other than financier of far leftist radical organizations, (too numerous to mention here) and former Nazi sympathizer (also unrepentant of his role in identifying jews for incarceration) and present day hero of the demon party, Mr. George Soros -- give him a big hand!!!! Now you can guess who is operating the sock puppet.

Superbowl 14| 9.5.11 @ 9:24AM

Regenery's article may not tie O to Ayers et al tightly but it sure proved O's relationship to them can't pass the smell test.

Alan Brooks| 9.6.11 @ 8:59AM

"Regenery's article may not tie O to Ayers et al tightly"

That is why it is only guilt by association and nothing more.

RCV| 9.6.11 @ 11:07AM

...and a pretty thin association, at that.

Alan Brooks| 9.29.11 @ 10:00PM

As soon as conscription ended in '73, radical chic did also; they are beating a dead horse.

Besides, it was correct to attack military installations that were connected with the Draft,
as long as no casualties resulted.

Timothy L. Pennell| 9.2.11 @ 10:20AM

Lawrence has it exactly right. Like Capone said to Ness, in the last Untouchables movie: "Everyone KNOWS where the Booze is. The question is, are you prepared to cross the bar?"
The Press knew all about this. They knew that his Mother was an Atheist/Communist, and that his Father was a Muslim/Marxist. They KNEW that his Maternal Grandparents, those "Typical White People", were Communists. They KNEW that these Communist Grandparents were the ones who introduced little Barry, to his 1st Mentor: Frank Marshall Davis - Communist. The Media KNEW that Obama sat in the pews of a White Hating/Jew Hating/America Hating, MARXIST: Jeremiah Wright for 20 years. That Obama chose this Bigoted, Racist, Anti-Semite, to officiate his Wedding, Baptize his Children, and be a "Member of my Family". They KNEW, that, to be born to a Muslim Father, makes you a Muslim. They KNEW that he was raised in Indonesia, until he was 11. That he attended Muslim Schools. Muslim Mosques. That he knelt on his Prayer Rug, facing mecca, and prayed for "DEATH TO AMERICA", 5 times a day. They KNEW that he attended Louis Farrakhan rallies, hung out with the Black Panthers, and started his Political Career in the Living Room of two Unrepentant Domestic Terrorists. They KNEW all of this.
And, what did they do with all of this information?
They ignored it, defended it, covered it up, and ATTACKED anyone who dared shine a light, on the Truth of WHO, and WHAT he is. They called those who dared tell the TRUTH: Racist. Bigoted. Anti-American. They claimed that his his ENTIRE LIFE, from BIRTH, surrounded by, and immersed in the Ideology of Marx/Lenin?Stalin/Mao/Pol Pot/ Ho Chi Min and Castro, was nothing more than an "Outrageous Accusation" based on "Guilt by Association".
"You are what you eat."
"Birds of a Feather flock together."
"Men shall know you, bye the Company you keep."
Do you wanna know why we have NO JOBS? Do you wanna know why it "SEEMS" like he just doesn't care how bad things get? Do you want to know why he is willing to Destroy the Middle Class, and Small Businesses, and Private Companies, under the weight of Government Regulations, and Taxes, and Mandates?
That's easy.
Scroll back to the top, and start over.
It's as plain as the sack of potatoes in the back of Michelle's pants.

Oldefarte| 9.2.11 @ 12:46PM

TP, excellent thoughts concerning this also excellent editorial. I would only add that [and I wrote about this also in October of 2008] the THEY that KNEW were only the liberals of the MSM, his campaign staff, etc; but not the PUBLIC AT LARGE. This is true since the former covered up the truth of this editorial from the general/reading public, and instead painted/masqueraded him as an average Joe, African American with a Harvard law degree, and this cute family who was promoting HOPE&CHANGE;. America baught it hook,line and sinker, sadly. We/public are now paying the ultimate price for same, son in that sense we deserve what is now happening to us. W/public did not look beyond the disguised trojun-horsed candidate to the [should have been] obvious signs of who/what this guy really was/is [which is exactly what this author brilliantly describes]. We/public should have known, should have seen, should have realized, but we/public did not do so [and that is our/public's fault rightfully]!!!!!!!

SpiralArchitect| 9.2.11 @ 4:23PM

Paragraphs are fun!

Try it, please.

Oldefarte| 9.3.11 @ 11:07AM

STICK IT WHERE THE SUN DON'T SHINE AND TWIST IT SIDEWAYS [or simply don't read the GD thing], DA!!!!!!!!

Oldefarte| 9.3.11 @ 11:09AM

PS: Maybe you're under an illusion that your writing is a college [possibly Harvard Law School etc] thesis, BUT I'M NOT!!!!

victor| 9.4.11 @ 3:02AM

So is being relevant.

Try it sometime, eh?

victor| 9.4.11 @ 3:03AM

That was meant for SpiralStaircase.

Racer99| 9.14.11 @ 3:03PM

Spiral my friend,
Oldfarte has been posting poignant relative, and well thought out scribbling on this site for a long time. I for one enjoy his summarized intellect and his experience in our society that is so well represented by his ruminations. I like him just the way he is.

Dee Smith| 9.4.11 @ 4:08PM

I have been writing about it since Nov 2007 Miami bookfair c-span. Soro bragging he knew where the dollar would be next year and laughed. (that would mean Oct 2008) manipulate the economy, Do you all remember the Media putting down McCain for leaving his campagin in a flurry.
And look at Obama so level headed and calm. Wouldn't you be calm if you knew what was really happening. Hank Paulson, Timothy Geithner and the rest of them should be in orange Jumpsuits.
Speaking of the tax cheat Timmy his Dad Peter worked with Stanley Ann Dunham for years in and out of indonesia.

Jeamar37| 9.4.11 @ 6:51PM

Olefart: The public had to know. I don't consider myself particularly intelligent, but when Obama claimed he sat in Jerimiah Wright's congregation for 20 yrs. and didn't know he was a racist and bigot, I knew Obama was lying. Why people voted for a confirmed liar is beyond comprehension.

Oldefarte| 9.5.11 @ 11:03AM

J37: You appear to be intelligent to me, since you GOT IT concerning Obama [and others who voted FOR him apparently did not have the intelligence to GET IT]. Now hopefully, enough voters also get it enough to defeat him next year.

Oldefarte| 9.5.11 @ 11:06AM

PS-J37: I also easily GOT IT and voted for McCain!!!!!

LiveFreeOrDie| 9.2.11 @ 1:08PM

The upside is the MSM is becoming more and more irrelevant with each passing day. Pray the trend continues.

WinnieR| 9.2.11 @ 5:38PM

Very well stated. It certainly could not be any more clear.

D Rob| 9.2.11 @ 11:26AM

Agreed. This article also makes me re-think the hypocritical stance the left has taken on his college records. It seems that all Presidents college history has been out in the open, but his record is not. Would his education record and other sealed records prove more connection? Is that the reason we don't get to see them? I'm implying, but I don' t know.

WinnieR| 9.2.11 @ 5:41PM

Could he have enrolled as a foreign student? Who really knows. But he definitely wants to cover up something besides his grades.

smokedaddy| 9.3.11 @ 4:28AM

As it happens, my sister took two courses with Barry at Occidental College back in 1980. The English course was unremarkable, but the American Cultures course still sticks in her craw over the heavy Marxist assumptions behind it. Barry, btw, to her showed no indications of becoming the brilliant man we all know. Her th0ught at the time was that being from an Indonesian family (in part), he was probably at Oxy on a foreign student scholarship. The next year, he transferred to Columbia.

Racer99| 9.14.11 @ 3:15PM

It has been reported (by those that were there) that in every instance of higher education, President Obama was a very "unremarkable student". I believe they are hiding his grades to support the obvious propaganda that he is supposedly "brilliant". Of course grades are not a direct indication of intellect, although you need smarts and effort for high marks. President Bush had mediocre marks but records show his IQ was in the neighborhood of 140. Hardly the idiot the leftist propaganda portrays. They also point to his book as proof of his great writing skills and intellect, but the book was only outlined by Obama, it was most likely written by Ayers himself and Cashill brilliantly show in his book wherein he does a literary forensic analysis to demonstrate this beyond my ability to doubt it's accuracy.

Tom R| 9.2.11 @ 11:27PM

DRob: I agree. This should be one of several strategies we should use to attack the organizer in chief. From now thru the election, people from all over the Country, on all of our media, should keep demanding he release his college grades and any law review articles. We can keep demanding, of him or his spokesgeek, "why won't you release grades?"

Their henchmen and the lapdog media won't be able to write the people off as nutty as they did with those demanding O's birth cert. Eventually, the lib media will crack & someone will ask our questions. This is a no lose issue for us and drains O's resourses and time, not to mention, what if his grades were avg.??? Deflation!

Alan Brooks| 9.2.11 @ 1:20PM

Reagan had contacts with white supremacists in the '80s.
So guilt by association is a dead end.

Alan Brooks| 9.2.11 @ 1:32PM

"Reagan opposed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, opposed the Voting Rights Act of 1965 (calling it 'humiliating to the South')...After the Republican convention in 1980, Reagan traveled to the county fair in Neshoba, Mississippi, where, in 1964, three Freedom Riders had been slain by the Ku Klux Klan. Before an all-white crowd of tens of thousands, Reagan declared: 'I believe in states' rights.'
It’s hard to believe now, but in 1965, a higher percentage of congressional Republicans voted for the Voting Rights Act than Democrats. Reagan, then, wasn’t following party tradition; he was making a grab for the white racist vote—and it worked. Southern Democrats abandoned the party en masse for one more welcoming to white supremacy."

tj| 9.2.11 @ 1:54PM

Allen, Allen, Allen, who was the KKK? Demoncrats of course. You are not changing the dialog by lying. We all know the liars when we see them.

carnot| 9.2.11 @ 4:12PM

touche!

SpiralArchitect| 9.2.11 @ 4:28PM

Strange how I have forgot all about the Reagan Agenda of turning this capitalist nation into a communist nation via socialism.

All I can think about is the current POTUS propagating the Marxist / Leninist doctrine to bring this nation down to a communist conclusion.

Alan Brooks| 9.2.11 @ 5:04PM

And who called the tea Partiers Hobbits?
was it Obama?
No, it was McCain. The guy YOU ran three years ago.

Anyway, the GOP of Lincoln's time is not comparable to today's. Neither were the Dems of pre-1970 nonracist as today's Dems are.

carnot| 9.2.11 @ 8:30PM

riiiight. today's Dems aren't racist.....they love it when the "negro dialect" is spoken. and they have designed their own analogue to the plantation.

Charie| 9.3.11 @ 2:14PM

But Robert Byrd, former Kleagle of the Ku Klux Klan, remained a Senate Democrat and revered by them until he died a couple of year ago. He was also an unrepentant "porker" because having been in West Virginia a few years ago, I noticed that about every other building in the state had his name on it. He also claimed to be a "Constitutional scholar". Bet he was fighting against the 14th amendment most of his life, though.

Hmm, Republicans, except for Goldwater, who was never elected president, if you noticed, have never been anti-black. Don't you wish you could say the same about the Dems? Dems elected many anti-black presidents, most prominent was Woodrow Wilson who not only fought against giving blacks the vote, he also did all in his power to prevent women from voting. What a guy! Oh. He was elected president.

Alan Brooks| 9.3.11 @ 3:03PM

Of course Dems were racist in the past, who wasn't? today they bend over backwards to be nonracist. Sure it is smarmy- but so is religion. The govt, says "here's your right to have an abortion, now go away";
a house of worship says "here's your right to eat at a soup kitchen, now go away".
When did anyone ever say smarm is not universal?
I don't doubt this piece is correct that Obama and his administration lied about his relationship with Ayers; however politicians are supposed to lie. Everyone knows Reagan and Bush 41 lied about Iran-Contra, yet it is not only water under the bridge, it was not important to begin with. Neither was Watergate, it WAS a 3rd rate burglary. But Nixon lied too many times for his own good (i.e. the 'smoking gun' conversation of 6/23/'72).
Who knows? maybe Obama will overreach himself and get himself impeached as Clinton did, though such a scenario is more like wishful thinking on your part-- Obama is more cautious than Clinton.
Do what you have to do, publish articles such as this; as long as you know I'm not going to vote for your post-Reagan candidates. I voted GOP in the '80s) the last time was the '86 midterms), however I wont ever vote republican again unless you run Jesus Christ himself as a candidate. With Paul as veep.

Alan Brooks| 9.3.11 @ 3:15PM

will write it again so there is no mistake: I don't care about the minutiae of whether Obama lied about Ayers and Jeremiah Wright the so-called Reverend; nor do I care about Mark Sanford lying to his wife, Reagan and Bush lying about Iran-Contra or Nixon lying 40 years ago.
I only care that the candidate I vote for next year is the best choice. If you run a good candidate next year then I'll vote for him (or her). But it appears unlikely as you haven't fielded a good candidate since 1984.
Ironically, by helping to end the Cold War, Reagan undercut you by removing the unity the Cold War gave you. So now the GOP shall forever tarry, trying to find another Gipper but not realizing his generation is dead or dying.

carnot| 9.3.11 @ 10:37PM

and Obamacare is doing the killing!

Racer99| 9.14.11 @ 4:47PM

Alan you obviously are "engaged" and capable of nuanced thought processes. As a result I would like to suggest that you read Cashill's "Deconstructing Obama". Then read "Liberal Fascism" by Jonah Goldberg. This will give you better understanding of some of the subject matter on this site and will assist you in communicating with conservatives in a cogent and non-insulting manner. Then read Hayek's "The Road to Serfdom" and then the eminent Stanford Professor Dr. Thomas Sowell's "A Conflict of Visions - the Ideological Origins of Political Struggle" in which he makes very clear why the left and right don't agree. God Bless you my friend.

PS - You also need to consider the difference between "religion" and Religious Organizations the later of which nearly invariably distorts the former. Try to view them as separate entities and you'll be less prone to conflate the negative actions of one with the obvious truth of the other. Also, southern racists did not abandon the Democrat party in droves and the Republicans have spearheaded minority rights starting with Lincoln, and continuing on through Eisenhower, Nixon, Reagan etc. In fact Democrats reluctantly jumped in front of the Republican supported civil rights effort only in the 60's after they decided they had to support blacks or their party would become non-existent. Read more history then the apparent leftist pablum you are entertaining and you will be truly enlightened, as I was. I didn't vote for a Republican until I voted for Bush when Clinton ran against him. As with Obama I spotted Bill as being a phony from day one. I am the classical blue dog Democrat and started supporting the Republicans only after the Demon party began to be taken over by far left marxists and the DC Repubs began to be taken over by conservative Constitutionalists such as is more recently exhibited in the Tea Party movement.

Dee Smith| 9.4.11 @ 4:15PM

ALAN DEAR Wall street journal wrote the Hobbit story listen to McCain state he read it in the Wall Street Journal DOPE!!

Stop getting your propaganda on Move-on.org,media matters and the rest of the Obamabots sites. verify before you open your clapp trap.

Alan Brooks| 9.4.11 @ 9:30PM

"and Obamacare is doing the killing!"

Maybe that is what you secretly want; you aren't transhumanists, are you? life extension isn't a big deal for people like you.

@Dee, you think McCain is not capable of dissing the Hobbits, er, I mean... the Tea Partiers? you think he likes them?
It has been documented that McCain called his N. Vietnam captors "gooks"; not even Dole would have called Germans "Krauts".
But that is the past, as Southern_Comment writes: "We're talking about now, please keep up."

Now and next year. If you run someone really good-- at least as good as Reagan and Ike but preferably as good as Geo Washington--.then I'll vote for him or her. But you WONT, because the Right does not embody the consensus you had during the Cold War.
Who was Bush's most famous critic? a Commie?
No, I think it was Pat Buchanan! even WFB began to demur before he died.

You do not possess the requisite unity but you are afraid to tempt fate by admitting it-- and every year that goes by demonstrates such.

Kevin Dunn| 9.5.11 @ 3:06AM

What's wrong with Hobbits anyway? They destroyed the great threat to Middle-Earth. The Tea Party may do the same!

Southern_Comment| 9.3.11 @ 12:36AM

We're talking about now, please keep up.

Oldefarte| 9.3.11 @ 11:30AM

I'm guilty also, Alan, since I was born and raised in the great state of Mississippi. You, sir or madam, can STICK IT & TWIST IT. Kennedy/Johnson's legislation was is now costing this country's taxpayers $trillions and adding to our defecit/debt problems. These welfare programs were wasteful, did not accompolish anything and even added to their targets' problems. Dimwit, in your asinine opinion, are all Southerners ''''''racist'''''' or just the ones from Mississippi? Oh, and Obama is not disliked because he's African American, but simply because he's a socialist, extremist, statist, wealth redistributor, incompetitent government administrator WITH A HARVARD LAW DEGREE! Finely, southerners didn't switch from being Democrats to Republicans, but were forced out of the DP because of its evolving radicalness, extremism, race-baiting tactics, and domination by a minority based and too liberally extreme political platform. Take your ''''racism'''' crap and stick it, since it's old hat and no one is interested and listening to that excrement any longer [try it with the White House crowd, since they may listen to your ratatattat BS]!!!!!!

Alan Brooks| 9.3.11 @ 3:29PM

Oldefarte, if you would try harder to run good candidates you wouldn't be in this predicament. I wont belabor the foolishness of your having wasted 12 years with a certain family from Texas, however since Obama was the candidate opposing McCain in '08 I can mention McCain; you run weak candidates for 27 years and expect me to be enthusiastic? 1984 was your last hurrah and now it has faded away completely. You are the very last to know!

Today you have little to offer save for Reagan's ghost, so Obama lying about Ayers wont help you much at all. Bush's opponents couldn't dig up enough dirt on him so their calling him 'Hitler' and chanting "Bush lied, soldiers died" had no traction. You would have to dig up some real dirt on Obama for it to have any effec; dribs & drabs of Obama's former collusion with Ayers or Jeremiah the Racist Wright (of COURSE there are black racists- who denies it?) wont cut the mustard because there are not enough legs for those stories, however valid, to walk upon.
They are nickle and dime.

Mary Mayes | 9.3.11 @ 5:32PM

Hey Alan - nickel, not nickle. Your blah blah blah is so tedious -- please go away.

Alan Brooks| 9.3.11 @ 5:40PM

I spelled nickel wrong, big deal- look at the typos at AS.
I will go away: after you get decent presidential candidates elected, or at least field them. last time you elected a real winner was 27 years ago; almost a generation.
Can't you do better?

Alan Brooks| 9.3.11 @ 5:42PM

I know what you are, Mary:
a red-state harridan; I meet them all the time.

idalily| 9.4.11 @ 11:21PM

And this comment makes you a sexist jerk. Libs: the tolerant, fair, unbigoted party, my a$$

Racer99| 9.14.11 @ 4:59PM

I for one like Alan posting here. It helps to better understand the depth to which the left is only cognizant of history as presented by other leftists. When he starts reading history as written during the period it was lived, he will begin to see that many of his cherished notions are based on fallacious selective facts as presented in the school books of leftist professors. I, like most of you, was educated initially by public schools that had books written before the far left infiltrated most of the "major" universities.

He apparently does not enjoy that advantage and maybe we can help him to learn from more open minded and less politically motivated sources.

carnot| 9.3.11 @ 10:40PM

11% (manipulated as 9%)

that's all that's needed.

the rest is simply to clear the record. that you don't care or chose to rationalize it (strangely...like most Libs I know..."everyone does it")...strikes me as a personal problem.

Oldefarte| 9.4.11 @ 11:12AM

Alan: As usual you make absolutely no common sense at all. Bush family? Most of us would give our eye teeth to have any member [even those yet born into that family] sitting within the oval office instead of that empty suit domestic terrorist with his worthless Harvard law degree. Weak candidates? That is a completely asinine statement, since any one or all of those candidates have more integrity, professional knowledge, more intellect, more class, less criminality, less family history of insanity and decrepitness, etc that your boy has [or ever will have]. Tell the truth, Alan, that your boy was/is simply a political pupit of the Kennedy family and their money, who, since they could not get elected to political office themselves, instead substituted this little minority with his HOPE&CHANGE; BS message in order to capture the white house and destroy this country from their liberal radicalness. Face it Alan truthfully, your boy is a complete failure. He has never run a business, a government, a committee or a family successfully. This country is in shambles due solely to him and his ilk Democrats historically [who are worthelss scum, white trash and partisanly minority and immorality driven politically; and whose membership as noted by this article are nothing but present and former thugs, criminals, hippies, property destructors and political philosophical socialists or wealth distributors/stealers]. No Alan, your blatenly obvious hatred/condemnation of the Bush family [and no doubt all Texas politicians] is as plain as the continual excrement on you face from your historical postings. Why, I don't know nor care. What did the Bushes fire you for cause when possibly you worked for them? Did one of their females spurn your sexual advances perhaps? Did they obcond a piece of property that you previously owned? What is the reason for your continual hatred for this family? You obviously need serious psychiatric care concerning this issue. Your sad laments paint a deeply disturbed individual and I'd seriously advise you [as one fellow human being to another] seek some medical advice on the subject before it is too late and completely destroys you!!!!!!!

rachelle| 9.5.11 @ 11:57AM

Weak candidates? Without the media in full throated support, the left's choices could not be elected as local dog catchers (for which said dogs are grateful). Kerry, traitor and serial husband to rich women, Gore, the lunatic bore and serial school failure-drop-out and son of his father, with the current One being son of a father no sane person would claim let alone follow. Losers to the core everyone, shielded by a media that loves chaos and hates America. Frances Pivan was on the One's transition team. Questions? I don't have a single one to ask of Mr. Brooks except where did you leave your brain?

victor| 9.4.11 @ 3:16AM

AlanBrooks:
"Reagan declared: 'I believe in states' rights.'"

Since you are a product of our Gov't Run School System, I'll presume that you disagree with States Rights, Right?

Of the following, which do you think should be removed from the Jurisdiction of the States and given to the Federal Gov't?

Exclusive Powers of State Governments

Powers reserved to state governments include:

Establish local governments
Issue licenses (driver, hunting, marriage, etc.)
Regulate intrastate (within the state) commerce
Conduct elections
Ratify amendments to the U.S. Constitution
Provide for public health and safety
Exercise powers neither delegated to the national government or prohibited from the states by the U.S.
Constitution (For example, setting legal drinking and smoking ages.)

Bear in mind we would have to repeal the Ninth and Tenth Amendments, eh?

old white guy| 9.2.11 @ 2:08PM

i would like to do unto ayers as he would have done to me.

Alan Brooks| 9.3.11 @ 3:40PM

"We're talking about now, please keep up."

I AM talking about now! I'm talking about next year's silly election. It will be a joke of an election, a 1840-style log cabin-hard cider election; today politics is celebrity-politics. Why is (or was) Palin so popular? because she is beautiful, a celebrity whether or not she ever seeks the presidency.
As for racism, no one says you have to like blacks at all-- but what you don't get is they don't have to like you, they don't have to vote for your people. This is an oversight on your part, a blind spot.

carnot| 9.3.11 @ 10:44PM

and Obama isn't a "beautiful" celebrity as well?

yes...I get you want to keep racism in play. the reality is that race is irrelevant. just look at how conservative blacks are eviscerated by the Liberal/progressive Left. as always...it's about power.

sell your problematic certainty some place else.

Oldefarte| 9.4.11 @ 11:19AM

Alan, 'THEY' don't like me/others? Okay, then maybe 'they' should legally be forced to repay the $trillions in government welfare that USENS have contributed in gaovernmental taxiation toward feeding, housing, transporting, educating, jailing, prosecuting, executing etc THEMENS, huh? It's called RESPONSIBILITY, Alan. I know that's a foreign word to you, since your intellect can only process RIGHTS, but try and understand the connection between the two words and how they interact philosophically and morally, okay??????????

Alan Brooks| 9.4.11 @ 9:35PM

"just look at how conservative blacks are eviscerated by the Liberal/progressive Left"

You don't have enough black cons to go anywhere, to start with. Thomas Sowell is a drop in the bucket.

idalily| 9.4.11 @ 11:24PM

Well one of them is on the US Supreme Court, a fact I'm sure really chaps your a$$.

Oldefarte| 9.5.11 @ 11:14AM

True, but that's not my/anyone else's fault [it's their fault]. I/we have provided free government/public schools, free textbooks, free computers, free labs, free classrooms, free teachers, etc; so why are there still few black conservatives [that are smart enough to understand the truth of which Sowell etc speak]? The reason is laziness and stupidity. If they would stop bouncing balls and start reading books, there would be more Sowells!!!!!!!

Racer99| 9.14.11 @ 5:13PM

Unfortunately my friend Alan, too often because of the realities of REAL life in politics it comes down to a choice between the lesser of two goofballs. In those cases you either select the best candidate or support the more idiotic of the two. Washington, Adams, Jefferson, Lincoln, Hoover (yes Hoover) , and Reagan don't come along often. These type of leaders are intellectually gifted, and and worked hard to develop those gifts so they could better serve humanity. Whom ever the Repub party runs will be light years ahead of this Marxist speech reader and lying phony fool we have now. Like you I do not consider Obama a terrorist just because he and Ayers go way back. But Barry the sock puppet is a far left Marxist and is most assuredly an anti-american fifth column subversive. Not unlike Billy the Boy Bomber.

sane person| 9.2.11 @ 2:51PM

Lets get real. Obama and his administration are as corrupt as we have ever seen in DC! Just look at the recent stories that have come out: the first is the political appointee by Obama of the niece of one of BO's biggest bundlers in Chicago, Regina Dugan, who is the Director of DARPA and is under investigation for giving her company (that she owns while she is running an agency of the Pentagon) millions of $ while her company gives her promissory notes worth $250K (see: http://articles.latimes.com/20.....s-20110817). The second of course is the recent news story of the BO WH steering $500M to a solar company that has gone bust (see: http://www.washingtontimes.com.....lus-snafu/).

We need to make our politicians investigate and prosecute these crooks quickly before any more taxpayer $ is stolen.

Jack in Wi.| 9.2.11 @ 5:37PM

This is a good history lessson I have been following this couple for decades. We all know it is true. That still doen't mean we can do anything about it, except to publicize it. We used it in the last election an it didn't hurt him much. I think in the coming election we have to forth a positive program that will be something the people can see will help them. A program of endless war and endless bailouts and Obama is a bad guy are not a winning platform. I suppose a tree stump may beat Obama right now. But there is still the fact that if we nominate a walking corpse like Dole, McCain, or Dewey, Obama can pull it out.

Oldefarte| 9.3.11 @ 11:34AM

I'll [and hopefully any semi-intelligent persons also] will vote for the 'tree stump' over the WEALTH REDISTRIBUTOR-IN-CHIEF, since to do otherwise will be to insure the total destruction of this country in 2013!!!!!!

Tiddly| 9.3.11 @ 6:06PM

You are depleting the world's supply of exclamation points.

Margie| 9.4.11 @ 12:14AM

Why.. no he isn't!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

victor| 9.4.11 @ 3:32AM

Tiddly:
"You are depleting the world's supply of exclamation points."

Not to worry, Mr. Wink, we'll be getting a fresh supply, enough to last several millenia, from the Ford Galaxie, which is so much more profitable now:

http://i.huffpost.com/gen/3295.....-POINT.jpg

Imagine if we relied on Government Motors to supply them, we'd all be using semi-colons;;;;;

Just not the same is it, OldeFarte?

"insure the total destruction of this country in 2013;;;;;"

They should be here any day now!!!!!!!:::::......

Oldefarte| 9.4.11 @ 11:21AM

And maybe you are deleting and eleiminating the supply of INTELLIGENCE possibly????????????????

Oldefarte| 9.4.11 @ 11:22AM

Forgot to direct !!!!! the above to TIDDLY WIDDLY, ITSY-BITSY!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Boar Hunter| 9.2.11 @ 10:45PM

I share your view on the impact and thoroughness of the article.

When interviewed at the end of the war, German villagers next to one of the death camps told their interviewers they had no idea what was going on there.

The reason, "this guy" is in the oval office is that liberal's are among other things, liars and lovers of lies and the entire liberal voting block is comprised of those who passionately embrace evil and are willfully ignorant of the truth. For years, liberals have been actively destroying the fabric of society by embracing every deviant, immoral and perverted act, humanity ever dreamed of.

Margret Sanger (One of the founders of the modern Abortion Right movement) said, "[We propose to] hire three or four colored ministers, preferably with social-service backgrounds, and with engaging personalities. The most successful educational approach to the Negro is through a religious appeal. And we do not want word to go out that we want to exterminate the Negro population, and the minister is the man who can straighten out that idea if it ever occurs to any of their more rebellious members."

Their not willfully ignorant? How else do you explain the existence of this Judas breed of "ministers," which continues to operate in the Black community under the guise of social justice?

In a final tribute to Sanger's success, these liberal fanatics who personify evil, have so successfully destroyed a generation of African American's by inculcating them with their racist, entitlement propaganda, the unwashed masses, who's destruction they engineered, now argue for the right to kill their own unborn children and those in opposition are forced to fund it.

People were incredulous when they learned the German villagers surrounding the death camps were so willfully ignorant of what was going on.

To that I ask, why?

Like rats following the pied Piper, hordes of enlightened liberals of all races, creeds and nationalities, continue to follow Obama's fairy tail promises right into the ginger bread house.

While the Obama's enjoy the most opulent life styles imaginable, these liberals wait for his scraps among the bones of their compatriots and stare in awe at their savior while dreaming of a glorious someday that will never be.

They will realize their error only when it is their turn for the oven and they discover the only one who ever eats ginger bread is the evil witch who ensnared them.

Lawrence Boccardi| 9.2.11 @ 6:36AM

So what? We knew all of this 4 years ago. The American electorate showed the depth of their stupidity!

Brian Mc| 9.2.11 @ 6:54AM

I would take it a step further, Lawrence. It was fostered by ignorance; folks didn't want to know and the leftist media was quite happy to oblige. Now, the same media is beating the racist drum incessantly. So, we are not patriots concerned with the survival of the Republic, but hate mongers who want nothing but to lynch our poor, black commander in chief. When he is overthrown, there will be blood on the hands of this same media for what they have wrought. Or, if he wins, there will be blood on their hands for what they have wrought.

There is no stopping this crazy train. It's heading downhill under a full head of steam and there's a huge, sharp bend up ahead called the elections of 2012: can you say, "State of Emergency"?

WRTolkas| 9.2.11 @ 8:10AM

Dear Brian Mc,

Before the Marxist and Chief declares a "State of Emergency," he better revoke the 2nd Amendment first.

Everyone have a safe and happy holiday weekend.

Southern_Comment| 9.3.11 @ 12:39AM

Good Luck to him with that. I doubt the South, or really anyone else who owns firearms, would oblige him.

Oldefarte| 9.2.11 @ 12:50PM

Agree, but only in the sense that that STPIDITY came from our/public not making the required effort to look behind the curtain of liberalism [from the MSM] and see/discover the truth. It was out there [Hannity/Fox etc], but everyone was too busy being brainwashed by the NYT, CBS,NBC, WaPo, etc to seek the truth!!

Stan| 9.2.11 @ 12:55PM

If you heard the comments of Steve Wynn (the casino magnate) about Obama, it sickened me. 15 minutes of Google time would have told him everything he needed to know.

SpiralArchitect| 9.2.11 @ 4:30PM

You so readily discount the votes from those on the Gov dole & the dead.

They are a super majority.

Oldefarte| 9.3.11 @ 11:45AM

In respectful disagreement, it was instead the supposedly semi-intelligents of everday America that allowed themselves to be led astray by the like of the MSM's daily BS. They simply didn't THINK RATIONALLY. Also those of the 'gov dole' [ie SS/Medicare seniors] did not majoritively vote for Obama/Democrats and put him/them into office; but instead it was the Hollywood crowd, the radical liberals of academia, the government welfare recipients, the Hispanic relatives of illegal immigrants, the DA young unemployed dope sniffers, etc that pull the lever for them in 2008!!!!!!

Alan Brooks| 9.3.11 @ 5:48PM

Go ahead, write "Clint Brooks" (an insult to Clint as he undoubtedly much younger and prettier than me) or any other handle, but it wont change the fact you are lost without Reagan and will keep running 2nd rate presidential candidates. Win or lose the election, you will still lose.
You ran Bob Dole in '96 and you expected us to respect you? YOU are the biggest chumps.

victor| 9.4.11 @ 3:45AM

Alan Brooks:
"Clint Brooks" (an insult to Clint as he undoubtedly much younger and prettier than me"

Since Clint has claimed his father was at the Crimea during the Charge of the Light Brigade, I imagine he looks like this:

http://freepages.religions.roo.....uselah.jpg

You have nothing to worry about Alan.

Clint| 9.4.11 @ 5:06PM

Victor, The Russkie Cripple:

http://www.grimmemennesker.dk/.....ap-man.jpg

victor| 9.5.11 @ 2:14AM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dIsHsq27rhU

victor| 9.5.11 @ 3:35AM

Clint/Timmie*

Obviously your eyes are getting even worse.
You can't even read the link for the pic:

http://freepages.religions.roo.....uselah.jpg

The key word is Methuselah.

I was being polite. I could have said that you were older than dirt, eh?

You also have a messiah complex if you thought that was the pope, eh?

Clint| 9.5.11 @ 11:36AM

The Cripple Russkie Victor's Old Lady,Apocalyptic Crank Lady, Margie

http://www.grimmemennesker.dk/data/media/2/2_2.jpg

victor| 9.5.11 @ 1:55PM

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dIsHsq27rhU

Margie| 9.5.11 @ 4:02PM

Consider the behavior of Clint/Tim* here.
Incapable of discussing anything, and only capable of personal, demeaning insults to one's character.

Like Satan himself, and the lying Leftists here: proving exactly what he is and on whose side he resides.

Ya gotta serve somebody!

Oldefarte| 9.4.11 @ 11:33AM

Alan: I don't know/care who/what 'Clint Brooks' or Clint' is/was/never will be. As Reagan said. THERE YOU GO AGAIN! I would gladly and honorably once again vote for Bob Dole or even Jerry Ford over their socialist, American destroying alternative candidates/Democrats. Let's see who you are so ignorantly proud to be associated with: Johnson,Clinton,Carter, Kerry, that idiot from with an Army helmet on his head sitting within a tank,Obama, Pilosi, Reid, Schumer, Clyburn,Conyers, McKinney, Grayson, Wasserman-Shultz, Weiner, etc. did I miss anyone, Alan? You must be so proud, huh? Wow, the Bushes are so boring since they never fornicated on a restaurant floor with a waitress, never directed a nephew to rape a female at their compound, never manslaughtered a campaign worker while drunkenly driving a car off of a bridge, never raped a babysitter, never falsely claimed to heroically cammanded a Navy vessel, never questioned the meaning of 'IS' under oath, never verbally told white tea partiers to GTH, etc. Did I miss anything possibly Alan????????

Kevin Dunn| 9.5.11 @ 3:08AM

if the Republicans are lost without Reagan, the Democrats have been lost since they lost Truman.

Clint Brooks| 9.2.11 @ 6:48AM

I have to agree with my brother Alan, Ayers seems likea nice guy who I could sit down and smoke dopet with.

Doctor Brooks Right| 9.2.11 @ 7:07AM

I have to agree with my brother, The Reverend Jeremiah Right , Ayers seems like a nice guy who I could sit down on.

Perry Tomlinson Brooks| 9.2.11 @ 7:45AM

What's dopet ?

I thought we smoked crack.

wukong| 9.2.11 @ 10:06AM

Don't you you smoke crackt?

Alan Brooks| 9.3.11 @ 5:52PM

Doesn't matter if I sniff glue, you are still the biggest suckers around; do you really think we are going to go for your rancidified Reaganism? you can't do better?

IMO you feel guilt because you fumbled the ball for so long.

Oldefarte| 9.4.11 @ 11:39AM

No Alan, we didn't fumble the ball; but were simply outnumbered by your preferred sleezy, scumball Democrats historically. Yes, political mistakes were/are made in COMPROMISING with this group of gutter trash aka Democrats, but mostly Republicans have gotten the message and learned their lesson politically thanks to the tea party-patriotic Americans who are valiantly leading the charge of conservatism today. Alan, the political landscape is now forever changing, so I'd advise you to either lead, follow or GET OUT OF THE GD WAY!!!!!!!!!!!

idalily| 9.4.11 @ 11:30PM

I can hear Dylan: Oh, the times they are a changin'. November 2012 can't come soon enough!

Kevin Dunn| 9.2.11 @ 7:03AM

So real investigative journalism is not dead! This should be compulsory reading!

loulou| 9.2.11 @ 10:20AM

A brilliant article.

Bob K.| 9.2.11 @ 11:29AM

I don't know how much investigation this took. The Regnery's are from the Chicago area and no doubt watched it all unfold before their eyes.

But like all people who want to be around where the "action" is the Publishing business moved to Washington D. C.

The heartland has been abandoned by most Conservatives for the DC, NYC, Boston, liberally greased axis. Neo-conservatives love it there!

That is why we look for leaders from Texas and like places.

WinnieR| 9.2.11 @ 5:56PM

Read: "Roots of Obama's Rage", Dinesh D'Souza; , "Subversion, Inc..." , Matthew Vadum; "The Case Against Barack Obama", David Freddoso; "Gangster Government", David Freddoso; "The Shadow Party", David Horowitz - all great reads and insight into the politics and mind of our leader and the democrats. They are all available on Kindle as well.
Another interesting read into the ideology of the Democrats is "Supreme Power: Franklin Roosevelt vs the Supreme Court", Jeff Shesol.

Red at Heart| 9.2.11 @ 7:04AM

This article takes us further down the road than anything Hannity has put forth about Ayers/Dorn. Ayers' connections into the Chicago Machine by virtue of his dad being CEO of Com Ed, a patron of the arts, etc., obviously opened doors for him that could never have occurred otherwise; specifically, being able to land a professorship at the U of I. Dorn grabbed his coat tails and used the power and influence of the Daley's to walk away from numerous charges regarding her criminal past.
Readers, recommend this story to your email address book.

Stoddard| 9.2.11 @ 3:25PM

I'm a pretty middle-of-the-road guy, but when I recently finished the chapter on the Weathermen in "Destructive Generation" I felt so disgusted I had to shower.

Drudge Ette Obama| 9.2.11 @ 7:06AM

Does this charming couple still wear the rings made of fallen US airplanes from the Vietnam War?

Knew much of this and what I didn't, I am not surprised. But Daley - who roams the White House as we speak, what a further disappointment in the people of Chicago who have elevated union thugs and slumlandlords .

Michael Tomlinson| 9.2.11 @ 7:37AM

At least they're not those "dangerous" Christians or Tea Party "extremists" like all those nasty Republicans who respect others, do good deeds, feed the homeless, clean up after their rallies, donate to charity, support the Boy Scouts, respect the Constitution and love America.

PAUL| 9.2.11 @ 8:18AM

Michael - spot on as always. When Biden compared Tea Party members to terrorists, Republican leaders should have been screaming at the top of their lungs that the real terrorists are friends of the President, but not a peep about it.

rongordo | 9.2.11 @ 9:56AM

On the contrary; Palin put it right on FOX News primetime, remember? "The Tea Party is not a bunch of terrorists, or Obama would be hanging out with us."

Anthony| 9.2.11 @ 11:07AM

A wonderful retrospective on two of the most vile and deluded POS that have made up the radical American left.
You almost succeeded in destroying America, almost. Now it's our turn to turn the tables on you!!!
Mr. Regnery fails to give credit to the terrorist-bomber cum ghost writer for the creative skills he employed on behalf of the Incompetent-in-Chief, Obozo. You have to give this scum his due, he is a good writer.
Oh well, when the revolution comes, like I said, we'll be looking for Mr.& Mrs. Ayers to give thanks for all they have done for America.
I hope Billy boy still has that ring made from the wreckage of that America plane. Perhaps for his last act of defiance, Mr. Ayers can choke on it.
Can't wait.

Oldefarte| 9.2.11 @ 12:55PM

Amen, MT...well stated! Oh, and I'm sure you've heard the one about HOW YOU CAN STARVE A DEMOCRAT TO DEATH? Answer: HIDE HIS FOOD STAMPS UNDER HIS WORK BOOTS!!!!!

Carol| 9.2.11 @ 7:43AM

Too little too late for the article - good read though.

The damage has been done.

The trio have done so much damage that it will be hard to undo.

If only we had Republicans that weren't afraid of Obama's skin color and afraid of what those lunatics on the left thought - impeachment would already be in the works. I know - the Senate wouldn't vote to impeach but the GOP could have exposed all the crap Obama has done to us.

And there are too many on the pubic dole to vote out their welfare pimp.

Goodbye America - it was nice knowing you.

WRTolkas| 9.2.11 @ 8:15AM

Dear Miss Carol,

We've been through worse before. Through is the important word. And being through we have emerged stronger and wiser. If it wasn't for the Marxist in Chief would there be a Tea Party?

It is our mission to get this story out. Everyone should have a copy of this editorial on their computer. If anyone challenges the Tea Party as "Right-Wing Christians," email, print, or just read this editorial to them. If MSM doesn't, WE WILL.

rongordo | 9.2.11 @ 10:00AM

The Senate initiates impeachments, unless I'm mistaken, so of course, Harry Reid is not going to do that. I know it's easy to point fingers a spineless Republicans, but imagine waking up in the morning, and finding a hostile protest on your sidewalk, and reading smears in the news about your kids. death threats are not uncommon from the left.

Anthony| 9.2.11 @ 1:04PM

Oh Carol, "it ain't over till it's over". Besides, Mr. and Mrs. Ayers haven't sung yet (but they will).
Hey Bill and Bernardine, I hope you've enjoyed reading this article and our comments; you know that you have.
Join the conversation, why don't ya?
Tick tock..... tick tock.....tick tock.......

WinnieR| 9.2.11 @ 6:11PM

That is what got him elected. Had the liberal left media really vetted this man, they themselves would have been accused of being racist, not to mention hypocritical.
The "I" word may come about if he gets re-elected; certainly not before.

martin j smith| 9.2.11 @ 7:45AM

This is all very old. In spite of Obama's well known associations there was

martin j smith| 9.2.11 @ 7:52AM

Computer got messed up. Cont
no vetting of this guy. And GWB will as I understand it stand with Obama at the 9/11 memorial which I would avoid. Though I would not say there is exact correspondence between Obama and GWB there are significant issues where they overlap for example Illegal immigration. For example development of PC on the War on Terrorism For example a distinct coldness towards Israel and an avoidance of dealing with North Korea and Iran--that is putting the dirt under the rug or worse--playing Ostrich. Not to mention excessive spending but Obama wins on area my miles. But importantly to me to question why the Mainstream Republicans who had to know who Obama was let it ? Does it not occur to you to ask GWB and all the Bushes and Roves, and the Noonans and Krauthammers and for that matter John McCain himself ? Where were thye?

Stan| 9.2.11 @ 1:01PM

While I don't agree with GWB's immigration stance, it cannot be equated with Obama's. GWB was and is a friend of Israel. And finally John McCain is distinctly not in the group of Republicans you have listed. They did speak up, McCain, the most important voice at the time, did not.

Oldefarte| 9.2.11 @ 1:05PM

Martin, as you accurately indicate, my main disappointment with McCain was his PC in not attacking politically Obama with the truth of what/who he was/is, which was out there. Hillary backed off and went PC also. This was due to his being the first African-American presidential candidate, and the fear of being seen as overtly critisizing him [and thus being a 'racist']. This is currently seen by liberals throwing the R-card whenever the political heat gets too high on him politically. The R-card defense is their trump card mechanism to difuse the truth regarding his background. It could/should have been brought out pre 11/4/08 but was not for PC purposes; and if the Republicans fail to now come out will all political guns ablazing for next year's election, his re-election could be assured. As with this excellent editorial, the truth simply has to be told as to who/what this man was/is/forever will be!!!!!!!!!!!!

Susan Mays| 9.3.11 @ 12:37AM

Will you please stop with the slashes!

Oldefarte| 9.3.11 @ 11:47AM

Will you MIND YOUR OWN GD BUSINESS??????/!!!!!!!!!!

WinnieR| 9.2.11 @ 6:14PM

Maybe the Bilderbergers worked on it! /joke

Lullabys, Legends and Lies| 9.2.11 @ 8:01AM

As some of you here well know, I’m in the Army, and one night when I was on Charge of Quarters (CQ), I played the movie “the Weather Underground: The Explosive Story of America’s Most Notorious Revolutionaries (2002)” to the 20 year old Soldier who was on the 24 hour shift with me. When it was finally over, I asked him, “would you be surprise to hear that President Obama kicked off his political career in the Chicago living room of that man, Bill Ayers?”. He looked at me like I was joking, then said, “you’re kidding me right?”. I said “no,… no I’m not”. Right there and then, I knew that I turned this Soldier into a Communist hating Republican for the rest of his life!!

Everybody involved with that group should still be in jail to this very day, not out free writing books for up and coming Illinois State Senators, or “teaching” Little-C Communism at some Illinois College, or being paid to give speeches about the fun times he had blowing sh*t up in the 60’s, they should all be in jail still, just waiting to die. It defies logic, that the President of the United States would even know this man, much less be friends with him (and despite what the President may say, they were friends until very recently). It’s a disgrace!!

Mike D.| 9.2.11 @ 8:14AM

Mass ignorance is a powerful weapon, and the leftists and their media wing use it effectively.

SpiralArchitect| 9.2.11 @ 4:39PM

Compare powerful politcal speakers of the past to contemporary ones.

Obummer & Hitler are not intelligent but both know propaganda is the best tool as an means to an (their) end.

Fear & ignorance used by the skilled orator provides a very dangerous opportunity.

WinnieR| 9.2.11 @ 6:19PM

You brought up the two names together, so here is a link to copy into your web browser:

homelandsecurityus.com/archives/4979

Pecos Pete| 9.2.11 @ 8:36AM

LLL: You say, "they were friends until very recently" and I say they REMAIN friends to this very day. Otherwise, your comment is spot on.

Oldefarte| 9.2.11 @ 1:15PM

LLL: Let me take this opportunity to THANK YOU FOR YOUR MILITARY SERVICE to me, my family and to the general public. YOU and others who have historically served are the sole reason why this nation is the greatest on earth. As a senior, old codga who witnessed the 1960's of which the arthor describes, I can tell you for a fact that some of today's congressional/political leaders were also the extreme radicals of that foregone era, who [like me] are in their twilight years and now use their liberalism philosophy to legislate the laws that currently strangle this nation to death. The Kennedys, the Durbins, the Schumers, the Pilosis, the Reids etc are all former hippies of the '60's era. It's not just the Ayers and Doehns that are the problem, but some elder congressmen as well. In a word, its the DEMOCRATS!!!!!

Margie| 9.2.11 @ 1:49PM

Yep, the former hippies are the current scourge and pestilence on America. They were so when they were younger perhaps out of ignorance, but then they never repented.

As the old saying goes quite well:

"If you're not a liberal at twenty you have no heart, if you're not a conservative at forty you have no brain.”
~ Winston Churchill.

LLL's: Right on~ you know how to convert them. Just one soul saved from the dregs of Liberalism is cause for the Angels to rejoice!!

RCV| 9.5.11 @ 12:53PM

Margie - were you a liberal at 20?

Margie| 9.5.11 @ 1:50PM

I was, but didn't ever hear the word Liberal. I was raised by Democrats who didn't teach me a thing about politics. In our house the hatred for Republicans was visceral. Three months before my 20th birthday, I became a Christian, by the Grace of God. I was involved in Bible studying and helping support orphanages in Haiti for a couple of decades and paid absolutely no attention to t.v. or to the happenings in this World, except the local news station's radio reporting. Since I couldn't understand what the politicians were really saying I didn't vote, because I couldn't honestly cast a vote for that which I couldn't understand. All I knew at the time is that when a politician was speaking, he was really saying something else. And both sides always seemed to confute what the other was saying.

I was like a blank slate and whatever choices I was going to make in so far as voting, was going to be as informed.

In 1992 I stumbled upon Rush Limbaugh on the A.M. dial. When I was a rebellious teenager previously, I had only listened to F.M. After I became a Christian, I virtually gave up Rock n' Roll. Now, I had started to work in a Mom & Pop small business and worked from home. One day I put on the radio and was scrolling through the stations and heard this super confident man speaking. His confidence struck me. Then his humor. Then I began listening to what he was actually talking about and found that he was a serious man talking about serious issues but that he was brilliant!!

For the first time in my young little life I began to understand what the politicians were REALLY saying. He peeled away the layers and it became clear to me what the Democrats stood for, and what the Republicans stood for.

That's when I became what I call, "politically aware." I had become spiritually aware when I gave my life to Christ as in Jn. 3:3, and by the Grace of God, my eyes were opened to the reality of my own sin, and how it was destroying me and taking me to Hell, and thus my need for Jesus.

But now, and wonderfully so, I was fully aware and attuned to the fact that not only had God rescued me from being in spiritual darkness, but that He had provided a way through listening to Rush, for me to realize that I was a conservative politically as well as personally.

I had registered as an Independent when I was 18, but had never voted. I registered Republican in '92 and cast my very first vote for George H. Bush, and happily so.

Since that day I have always voted Republican, and I don't care how "Liberal" some of them may be, NONE of them are as wrong headed or for Socialism as any Democrat. Sure there are degrees, et al. But what the Republican party stands for and what the Dem party stands for are like night and day.

There will be no turning back for me.
I thank God for my changed life and way of thinking. I thank God that He gave us the Bible, to learn of His ways and how to come to know spiritually, His Son who died for us in our place, for our sins.
And I thank God for guys like Rush Limbaugh who God uses every day to help bring other little lambs (and some older sheep too) into the conservative flock. Rush says what we're already thinking.. he just knows how to put it out there on the airwaves for us, and that is, the truth.
Rush IS Truth in Advertising. LOL.

So, there's my little testimony. I was indeed a liberal at 20, but by the Grace of God have been a conservative for almost 40 decades after that.

What's your excuse? :^).

Margie| 9.5.11 @ 3:00PM

oops. Meant 4 decades. 40 decades would indeed make me older than Methuselah.

RCV| 9.5.11 @ 5:30PM

Thanks for the testimony - I enjoyed reading it. And thanks for the correction on your age! :)

Lullabys, Legends and Lies| 9.2.11 @ 2:36PM

Thanks Oldefarte!! It's my pleasure to serve, plus, it's the best damn thing I ever did in my entire life. And as the old Army commercial used to say, "It's not just a job, it's an adventure", and no truer words were ever spoken!! Another good thing about being in the Army, there's aren't too many Liberals here either!! Those Tree hugging, Terrorist loving, wannabe Commies don't like the Military too much anyway, which is fine by me, they smell like old dying Hippies anyway. We don't need them here, and they wouldn't cut it here either!!

Hi Margie!! I hope you survived Hurrican Irene? I was up in New York that weekend, and it was a real mess. It took me 7-1/2 hours to make it the first 70 miles, every single road I tried was closed, blocked, flooded, or completely washed away. But I finally found a crack in the blockade, and I got the hell out of there!! As you well know, if you breath too much of that New York air, you start turning back into a Liberal!! And that's completely true too, because I saw it on Mythbusters, I think!! Then after I got to the passable Interstate-84, I still had another 11 hours to go, to get back to FT Bragg. Whew!! What a trip!!

Margie| 9.2.11 @ 3:33PM

Mythbusters~ LOL. I like that~ is it really a show?
Glad you got out of there in time. We've moved so were nowhere near it. We're in western PA soon to move to Ohio~ currently john Kasich country. If you're ever out that way, e mail us.

And LLL's~ don't ever believe that old superstition that you could turn back into a Liberal ever again. As long as you keep that healthy fear of it~ it can't happen!! Even when you get to be old and gray!!
Just look at Oldefarte. :^)~.

Lullabys, Legends and Lies| 9.2.11 @ 7:50PM

Ah great Margie, now you tell me!! Do you know how hard it was to hold my breath for an entire day? Not easy!!

Yeah Mythbusters is a real show, it's on the Discovery Channel. It "used" to be one of my favorite shows, but then this year, guess who they had on the show as a special guest? Yep, HIM, my Boss, the Communist in Chief himself!! I haven't watched the show since!!

Kasich Country huh? You mean the Home of the future President of the United States? That Kasich? Nice!! I don't think the Liberals, or the Unions like him very much out there, which is exactly why I think he's great!!

Here's an interesting little tidbit for you!! We were just told this week at our last safety briefing, being that we're on Active Duty, that we should watch what were posting on Facebook, especially when it comes to the President of the United States. Now I'm only guessing here, but apparently, "a lot" of Service Members are posting "not so nice" things about our Commander In Chief on their Facebook. Hmmm? I wonder why they'd do that?

I'm just glad I don't use Facebook, because otherwise, otherwise I would've thought they were talking directly to, and about me. And this was a Direct Order too!! As in, Hey Soldier, you don't have the same Rights as everybody else when it comes to the 1st Amendment, and when it comes to talking about "this" President. That kind of SUCKS!!

I sure hope they don't find out about my screen name here, because I could be in big trouble then. I "may" have said something, maybe once or twice in the past, about the current occupant sitting in the Oval Office, who's watching the Golf Channel tonight to get hints on how to get rid of his slice (he's playing this weekend, you see!!). I wouldn't want them taking away my 1st Amendment Rights, for saying a few bad things!! That would SUCK!!

Alright, so maybe I've said three bad things about him in the past!! Or was it four?

Margie| 9.2.11 @ 8:27PM

Nope, you never said a blessed thing, and I can attest to it!!

Yes, Kasich country. I listened a few weeks back to him addressing an audience concerning this Union issue, and he was so great he even quieted down the Union backers that were yelling at him. He was pretty awesome, LLL's. He was so darn sincere in explaining how and why things needed to change because the private sector can't just keep paying the public sector like they have been, and that everybody needs to face that reality. And about how we need a budget with plenty of cuts government wise.

I wish there were mini clones of him all over the state! Things would get changed at a much faster rate than they have been, that's for sure, and in a good way.

Now they're going door to door out here to try and convince people to vote against his bill. I had the idea of following them, and as soon as they leave somebody's house going and knocking on their door and telling them not to, but I don't know if I could keep up with them. But it's a good idea. Maybe I can gather up some people to help me out!

And don't buy into any more superstitions please, like about black cats and mirrors and ladders and stepping on cracks, ok?
You can stop holding your breath, too, because I hear Obama is gonna lose big time this time around!

Oldefarte| 9.3.11 @ 11:59AM

LLL: No thank you's needed as I was simply telling the truth. I worked for many, many former/retired military members before my retirement, and all had that military dedication, focus and determination to solve the particular problem etc. You/they etc are the reason for this country's greatness, and you all deserve to be given a pat on the back occasionally for same!!!!

Charie| 9.3.11 @ 2:33PM

One of the teachers unions in Wisconsin invited Ayres to speak before their group. Not sure how that turned out but there was sure a lot of protest raised about it. I'm sure I'll hear all about it on Tuesday. Hard to get up-to-date conservative news on the weekends.

Jocon307 | 9.4.11 @ 3:59AM

" I knew that I turned this Soldier into a Communist hating Republican for the rest of his life!!"

Good Job!

You've said everything I wanted to say much better than I said it in my original post to this thread.

Ayers and Dohrn really make my blood boil.

PAUL| 9.2.11 @ 8:12AM

The CIA should have disappeared both of these sub humans when they travelled abroad.

Chalkdust| 9.2.11 @ 8:19AM

Don't forget Bill Clinton who made the commie rounds.

USSAlabama| 9.2.11 @ 10:14AM

Look at Hillary as well. 'Shadow Party'?

SpiralArchitect| 9.2.11 @ 4:41PM

Clinton and his murderous ways...

View 'the Clinton Chronicles' - if you dare.

Vince Foster surely was murdered.

Texas Mark| 9.2.11 @ 11:42PM

I doesn't hurt to maintain some hope....for lack of a better term.

Chalkdust| 9.2.11 @ 8:17AM

Enough of the full measure of Obama and his band of Illinois commies/socialists/demoncrats/fellow travelers was there for all to see.... who choose to look. To their shame, Conservatives/Republicans/libertarians stayed home because the RINOs in charge of the Republican Party, choose John McCain as it's standard bearer. Now, it could be argued (convincingly I might add) that mealy-mouthed John McCain's election would have destroyed the Republican Party much like Obama has destroyed the Demoncrats
Mitt Romney, who's nomination might have turned 2% of the voters around to the Republican side, was asked by the RINOs to be a good little trooper and wait his "turn" in four, maybe eight years.
Now we come too the point were the rubber hits the road and Republicans fight each other; Will the TEA party be able to push the RINOs to the back of the room, will the Republican factions coalesce around the party nominee?

Oldefarte| 9.2.11 @ 1:24PM

I wholeheartedly agree with your thoughts, but I'd add respectfully that McCain's presidential election whould not have destroyed the Republican Party [and same would have instead resulted in at least a normalization of this nation's governmental policies, even if not to our conservative, tea party liking]. Same would h=not have resulted in $800 billion in unionized employment maintenance within government, WELFARECARE whose costs are/will strangle businesses and consumers, excessive governmental regulations that are scaring the crap out of small businesses, Justice Dept lawsuits against states over immigration, ICE's igoring their enforcement of immigration laws, Interiors non-issuance of oil drilling permits to oil companies, etc. The one/only/primary problem is Obama and Democrats, whose radical domestic terrorists political policies are destroying this country [and if given another four years, will completely do so]!!!!!!!!

martin j smith| 9.2.11 @ 8:18AM

I would like to add one point regarding the Mainstream Republican Brand and that is this: Their timidity towards the Obama administration continues( Boehner's refusing Obama's speech date is a remarkable exception ) . While this regime continues to use policy by decree methodology much like any dictator, Mainstream Republicans have been too quiet for me. And Fox News, Fair and Balances seem to be more Fear and Bend. This is why we have what we have in part.

Oldefarte| 9.2.11 @ 1:31PM

I agree, but its not just Republicans, its the public at large. Why do African Americans continue to quietly support this president and Democrats who are solely responsible for their 20-25% unemployment, do labor union members continue to pay dues to their unions that politically support Democrats to their members' detriment, do young voters continue to support them when the job opportunities for them after gradualtion are slim and none, do the general public support them when their political demands will result in increased taxiation for every taxpayer, etc? Why?

SpiralArchitect| 9.2.11 @ 4:48PM

When all expenses are covered one only needs a couple bucks a month to live the life one has always lived.

Change is bad, the known & customary way life has always been is just fine for those people.

Oldefarte| 9.4.11 @ 11:47AM

Change? Constructive change, but certainly not which we've experienced. 10-30% unemployment while spending $800billion on providing governmental welfare to unionized state/local government employees is not desireable or beneficial. $trillions on welfare oriented health care to indigents who haven't/don't/won't contribute to society is not beneficial change. Government of the people, by the people etc has now become government of the government, by the government, for the government so NOT help me God!!!!!!!

Trebuchet| 9.2.11 @ 8:28AM

I don't know if any one remembers this but Ayers and Dohrn were big fans of Charles Manson, so much so that Dorhn traveled to LA during his trial to show their support.

The Bishop| 9.2.11 @ 8:59AM

You are correct, Trebuchet. The charming Bernadine even went so far as to laughingly comment about a fork being embedded in the abdomen of one of Manson's victims. A charming part of the Chicago cultural elite, these two.

USSAlabama| 9.2.11 @ 10:18AM

Yes, and clips of what she said exist if not scrubbed. More info on her and all of this disgusting network of demons can be researched here in great detail:

http://www.discoverthenetworks.....indid=2190

idalily| 9.4.11 @ 11:39PM

I remember, Trebuchet. And I was only 8. I will never forget the SDS. Murdering terrorist thugs. Obama, I'm sure, thought they were cool.

Louis Jenkins| 9.2.11 @ 8:53AM

Thank you Mr. Regnery for putting the nuts and bolts together. I knew many of these facts, however you but them in a cronological order. True, the past is in the past, but these Communists just keep rising up out of their holes. Let's hope the next election keeps them down.

The Bishop| 9.2.11 @ 9:00AM

The past is also prologue to the future and this makes me weep for the future.

Oldefarte| 9.2.11 @ 1:34PM

LJ, these facts were discoverable pre 11/4/08 and sadly no one cared enough to discover same and to keep the current president from becoming elected. If the general public continues on this ignorant path and re-elects him next year, there will be no more US!!!!!!!!

Susan Mays| 9.3.11 @ 1:00AM

Anyone with any sense should have known in their gut how bad obama was before the 2008 election. All democrats are bad period.

Oldefarte| 9.4.11 @ 11:49AM

Correct, Susan, and your operative wording is '''''SHOULD''''. The truth was out there, but people read/hear the MSM's propaganda instead of seeking out the truth in news from the alternative news media sources!!!!!!

The Bishop| 9.2.11 @ 9:08AM

Of course, there's no way to confirm this but it has been posited that Ayers ghost-wrote Obama's famous screed, Dreams of My Father. And while that may be speculative, Ayers is, at least, literate. Take Obozo off the teleprompter and you get a view of how literate he is. It adds to the suspicions.

I admit to having read that tome during the 2008 campaign (in an effort to understand the alternative to Loser McCain). I couldn't help but wonder how a 34-year-old could fill 480 pages (paperback version) with no discernible accomplishment(s) to chronicle. That's 480 pages of my life that I'll never get back.

Great article, Mr. Regnery.

USSAlabama| 9.2.11 @ 10:33AM

Initiate an internet search using the keywords: "stylometric analyses Dreams From My Father"

Pretty convincing evidence; the matter will remain forever impossible to *confirm* and they both know that.

Oldefarte| 9.2.11 @ 1:42PM

This is almost the directly similar political scenerio of the 1960ish election of JFK. His book [like Obama's] was a propelling force toward his election, and intentially so. Both books were intended to protray their subjects in a politically favorable light, and correspondingly to disguise the truth. Books, like TV, movies etc are used by their producers as masquerading propaganda vehicles to trojun-horse their subjects along a favorable agenda path. They are subliminal messaging of sorts. The point is that no one should always believe what they read, hear, are told etc as same may in fact be BS!!!!

Bob Grant| 9.2.11 @ 9:37AM

Excellent article. One of the most disturbing aspects of the story is their involvement in developing school curriculum to poison future generations, albeit slowly and incrementally.

Folks, everything is now on the line. Education, the economy, the financial system, and our entire political system.

Oldefarte| 9.2.11 @ 1:46PM

BG, I hate to be the one possibly telling you this, but many many things today are as you describe. The news you read in your MSM newspapers is camafloged propaganda intended to influence your political opinion. The TV shows you watch every night are subliminal messaging of liberalism propaganda. The movies that your family attends/views are disguised libal agenda vehicles. The public school that your children/grand children attend use manipulating textbooks to propagandize their liberal agenda. You and everyone are sadly surrounded by it daily!!!!!!!!

Margie| 9.2.11 @ 2:00PM

As to the public school system, it all started way back when they started teaching "Evolution", and threw Bibles out of the schoolroom.

Fast forward to now and we're seeing children being taught the homosexuality is acceptable, how to put condoms on, that the Founding Fathers were a bunch of White Racists... etc. etc.

It's up to the parents to teach their children well as the old song goes~ but NOT in the ways of the godless Left.

But never fear, because this life is so short and Eternity is forever. When Christ returns, He's going to set up His own "form of government". And it will be upon His Shoulders." Is. 9:6 & 7.

Oldefarte| 9.4.11 @ 11:53AM

Marg, as always you are so correct, and unfortionately there are no PARENTS any longer. The illegitimacy birth rate is soarding, with drive-by non-parents being encouraged by Hollywood's BS with their BABY-BUMP MESSAGING. S & G is close at hand, sadly!!!!!

Oldefarte| 9.4.11 @ 12:27PM

PS, Marg: Not that it's related to this subject, but can you believe this TV show 'Dancing With the Stars' that is attempting to place this transvestite Chaz Bono on its show next season? I'm as tolerant as can be in this environment, but this to me is going way over the line of decency/immorality!!!!

Margie| 9.4.11 @ 4:13PM

Oldefarte,

I don't watch the stuff. We threw out t.v. in the trash years ago. We pick & choose what to watch, if anything, online~ no cable t.v. necessary.

And Netflix is great for old movies.

I feel sorry for the woman who goes by the name of Chaz. Especially because I understand that homosexuality and Lesbianism is a case of mistaken identity~ (it's all in the thinking, and the Devil working through the flesh), and therefore completely unnecessary. I pray God rescues her from it. And it IS possible with God.

We're all ruined by Sin. Some manifest it in this way, and some in others.. but until we're rescued by His Grace and mercy, we're all on our way to Hell. Strong words I know, but it's the truth.

The Bible tells us that the World would become like Sodom & Gomorrah in the end times, and as always, He never lies. It is happening right before our very eyes. This type of Sin is just another type of rebellion toward God~ though those who practice it may not look at it that way. But it is, along with sex before Marriage and any other sin.

The problem with those who practice Homosexuality is that those who are especially callous and their consciences are already seared, are usually the ones who are militant and the trouble makers who want to violently shove it in our faces. (Just like they did in the biblical account of Sodom & Gomorrah).
But it isn't really us they're rebelling against, or "society"~ it's God.

I don't think there's a line left to cross anymore. "Gay" Marriage is being foisted upon us now, and unless there's a Constitutional amendment to stop it by some courageous politicians and the will of the people, then what Jesus said would happen will happen.
After that, there's no turning back.
That's why the Bible (God's own Words), says that Jesus is returning ONLY for those who are eagerly waiting for Him.. not all will be saved.
Sin is Sin and it separates us from God. That's why we "mean" and "hateful" and "nasty" Christians go around warning everybody all the time about Hell.

Sin=death=Hell.
Repentance=forgiveness=eternal Life and Heaven.

Oldefarte| 9.5.11 @ 11:41AM

Marg: I'm going to slightly disagree with your kindness on homosexuality etc in that IMO it's a conscious CHOICE issue, and not a BIRTH one. All humans are born [granted by our Creator] with FREE WILL, and we choose our lifestyles [they are not imposed upon us, as homosexuals would have everyone believe falsely]. They choose to be immoral/sinful, and accordingly they will face possible punishment for same [like we all will from our respective freely chosen acts of immporality, criminality etc] at our deaths [as you rightfully say]. I therefore do no feel sorry for them, since no one forces their homosexuality upon them. MAN'S LAW is suppose to reflect its origin within the NATURAL LAW, but in cases of homosexual marriage etc clearly does not do so sadly. I think you're wise indeed to discard TV [due to the frivolity/stupidity of most TV programming], but the sad part to me is that parents/relatives of small children [who are most susceptable to it brainwashing] are lured captives of same to their detriment. I wish that I could be as displined as you and stay from the TV, but I do make a half-hearted attempt sometimes at reading etc instead!!!!!!

Margie| 9.5.11 @ 3:12PM

Yikes, Oldefarte. I didn't say it wasn't a choice. I know it's a choice.
My pity on the individuals who choose the sin is just that, pity. I pity them for choosing a lifestyle of sin that is against what God intended them to be.

My pity towards them doesn't excuse it, and God says He won't excuse it either. No one who chooses as lifestyle of any type of sin can enter into Heaven, He has made that perfectly clear in the Bible.

With the temptation, He provides the way of escape, through Himself, so no one has an excuse. If Jesus didn't die for us, there would be no hope of being able to stop sinning. But He did, and so now that there is the hope of being released from the power of Sin, none of us has an excuse any longer.

Sorry that you misunderstood.

The World isn't going to change for the better, and homosexuality isn't going to go away until Christ returns to save those who are eagerly waiting for Him.

Til then, Christians are here to preach His Gospel, the true Gospel, which says that our Sin separates us from God, and that we all need to repent and believe in Him in order to be saved from Hell.

John 3:3.

Oldefarte| 9.6.11 @ 2:02PM

Marg: Your 'pity' is your charitable nature, and I wish that I [and many] could be more like you. I'm probably INTOLERANT of such immorality, but same has kept me mostly on the moral straight & narrow hopefully to my benefit. I wish that I could more charitable in thought, but it's just not within my nature. When others stray, I reflect on the concept of all of our granted FREE WILL, and simply reason that they CHOSE to go asunder. I do think that change from immorality is possible in one's earthly existence through contrition [certainly the good thief of Calvary proved that with his pardon from Christ Who stated that he/thief would be with Him/Christ on that very day in heaven]. I also do think that the current decrepit immorality that exists can possibly be reversed [but only with civilization's re-education,re-dedication, and re-application to/of Christian religious principles and theory]. It's possible, though not very probable with today's increasing liberalism!!!!!!!

Margie| 9.6.11 @ 11:28PM

Oldefarte,

Pitying a lost soul doesn't equal tolerance, to be sure. When someone chooses to take themselves away from God by sinning, they suffer the consequences. I know this from experience~ who doesn't?
But those who persist and then die that way~ it is a pity because all along, there really was hope.
Jesus doesn't tolerate sin, and neither should we.

He does show mercy, when we simply choose to turn from our sins, and the moment we are sorry, He is willing to forgive, like He did with the thief on the cross.
That's how He is!

"But thou, O Lord, art a God merciful and gracious, slow to anger and abounding in steadfast love and faithfulness." Ps. 86:15.

Oldefarte, not tolerating sin in both yourself and others is EXACTLY how God wants you to be!

God bless you, sir.

RCV| 9.4.11 @ 4:15PM

OF, you are many things, but "tolerant" is not a word I would associate with you! And Chaz Bono, by the way, is a transsexual, not a transvestite.

Margie| 9.4.11 @ 5:58PM

God doesn't want us to be tolerant of sin.
If you think He does, your preaching and believing another gospel.

RCV| 9.4.11 @ 6:04PM

Well, Margie, if "Dancing With the Stars" eliminated all sinners from the show, there would be nobody left to dance -- certainly not Bristol Palin or Tom Delay.

Margie| 9.4.11 @ 6:12PM

I am talking about sin, not Dancing with the Stars!

Oldefarte| 9.5.11 @ 11:48AM

RCV: All sinners [ie Delay] are not committing sin while performing on that TV show, but Chaz would be so visably doing so by the act of one [so called by the LGBT crowd] female dancing with another female. If not sinning, then at the very least it is disgusting visually to the rest of us normals [and therefore against COMMUNITY STANDARDS]. Take your liberalism and stick it!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Margie| 9.5.11 @ 3:19PM

RCV always and in such perfected lawyerly form, lumps everything together.
But you, Oldefarte are as usual, correct.
You hate the blatant parading of Sin in front of your righteous eyes, just as Lot in the Bible was vexed everyday as he had to behold the blatant parade of Sodomites in front of his eyes.

And God saved Lot out of Sodom and Gomorrah, because he was righteous, and cared for the truth, and He destroyed Sodom and Gomorrah to serve as an example to future generations.

But despite God's warning of what He does to people who choose this sin, they do it anyway, don't they?
It is a pity, but they too will perish just as those at Sodom did~ that is what God says, not me.

Anyone who says or teaches other than this is preaching a different gospel, and not the one of Jesus Christ!

God bless Oldefarte!

Margie| 9.5.11 @ 3:22PM

I should have added, that they too will perish, UNLESS they repent.

There IS a Way. It is called Jesus Christ. The ONLY way:

"Jesus said to him, "I am the Way, and the Truth, and the Life; no one comes to the Father, but by Me." Jn. 14:6.

Oldefarte| 9.5.11 @ 11:44AM

He/she/it is BOTH according to Webster's!!!!

Bill| 9.2.11 @ 9:37AM

In Bill Ayer's book Fugitive Days, he refers to himself and Bernardine Dohrn as "guilty as sin, free as a bird?"

Can we elect a president in 2012 who can do something about eliminating the second clause of that sentence? Has the statute of limitations expired or something? I mean Ayers and Dohrn absented themselves for years and years; doesn't that toll the statute of limitations?

esJay| 9.2.11 @ 10:47AM

There is no statute of limitations for murder.

daddio| 9.2.11 @ 1:07PM

Yeah-what about their jumping bail and running? Did they ever get caught and serve time? If not, why not? Is it a statue of limitations thing?

Oldefarte| 9.2.11 @ 1:52PM

Hades, half of the people my age who went through the university system of the 1960's are aging hippies who acted uncivily within street protests etc concerning the Vietnam War, police, the establishment, etc. Remember Kent State protests? Watts, L.A. etc race riots? There are many many Ayers and Doehns out there in this world sadly!!!!!!!

idalily| 9.4.11 @ 11:44PM

Not all of those aging hippies bombed buildings and murdered people. Protest is one thing, murder something else. Those two did far worse than protest the war. They murdered people and ended up on the FBI's 10 Most Wanted List. They should be tried for murder and treason.

Oldefarte| 9.5.11 @ 11:52AM

I agree wholeheartedly and beyond. As a college educated boomer, I also disagree with the idea of street protesting [which should be but sadly ins not illegal], since in most cases is disrupting and costly to the taxpaying public at large [and should not be tolerated]. The proper way of protesting politically is through VOTING and/or SUPPORTING POLITICAL PARTIES, not by acting like savages on a street corner!!!!!

RCV| 9.5.11 @ 10:07PM

It can't be made illegal because the First Amendment, thank God, guarantees the right of the People peacefully to assemble. Unpeaceful assembly is already illegal. Democracy is messy sometimes, OF, but we'll try not to disturb your naps too often!

Oldefarte| 9.6.11 @ 1:43PM

RCV: As a retired senior after 35 years of working continuously 24-7, paying taxes, supporting a family, etc; I simply request that you change your lifestyle and do LIKEWISE [instead of wasting your and everyone else's time by protesting in the streets]. Human-animals and savages do such, when they are either too stupid or lazy to get a job, produce income, contribute to society, pay taxes etc. If you wish to protest, do so humanely and courteously by what's known as ....VOTING [and leave the streeti protesting to the criminal thugs, unless of course you're one of them]!!!!!

RCV| 9.6.11 @ 4:28PM

As a 64-year old myself, OF, it's been a long time since I did anything political in the streets, other than canvassing for candidates.

Bill| 9.6.11 @ 3:27PM

Bill Ayers was building bombs with his girlfriend and a couple of his cohorts in a Greenwich Village townhouse when Ayers, just by chance, went outside to buy a pack of cigarettes or something in a local store. Ayers was lucky he went outside because a few minutes later, the bomb they were all working on blew up, levelling the townhouse and killing Ayers' girlfriend (yes, he had a girlfriend before Bernardine Dohrn) and the other two people. Ayers wasn't just some street protestor; he was a killer, or at least a would-be killer. Just for the record, the bomb they were working on was intended for a dance for soldiers at Fort Dix and would have caused mass death and destruction if it had been planted according to plan. NCOs and privates, not officers; so much for being "of the people."

Mac | 9.2.11 @ 9:41AM

Regarding President Obama and his long and multiple connections to and with William Ayers as well as Bernadine Dohrn, the following is taken from an unpublished article written in June 2008.

2. Senator Obama’s friend, neighbor, and fellow board member is an unrepentant terrorist bomber.
According to Senator Obama’s own chief strategist, David Axelrod, William C. Ayers, a former leader of the America-birthed, radical Left, terrorist group, the Weather Underground (a/k/a the “Weathermen” – which were on the “violent fringe of the 1960s anti-war movement”) lives in the Obama’s neighborhood and “they’re certainly friendly.” Mr. Ayers “has written about his involvement with the group's bombings of the New York City Police headquarters in 1970, the Capitol in 1971 and the Pentagon in 1972.”
Senator Obama and Mr. Ayers are sufficiently friendly to have known each other well since at least 1995 when Barack Obama was introduced to a group of liberal elites as a Chicago state senator’s hand-picked successor at the home of Mr. Ayers and his wife, Bernadine Dohrn. Ms. Dohrn was also a terrorist with the Weathermen and was once jailed “for refusing to testify before a grand jury investigating other Weather Underground members’ robbery of a Brinks truck, in which a guard and two New York State Troopers were killed.”
In essence, two terrorists were instrumental in launching Senator Obama’s political career.
Both Mr. Ayers and Ms. Dohrn are unrepentant about their actions. “I don't regret setting bombs; I feel we didn't do enough,” Ayers told the New York Times in a story released on September 11, 2001. The Weather Underground was “an organization which claimed responsibility for 25 bombings in the United States.” [emphasis added] Both Ayers and Dohrn, who planted bombs in the hopes of killing as many Americans as possible in terrorist attacks, never suffered any consequences for these acts. The two:
disappeared in 1970, after a bomb – designed to kill army officers in New Jersey – accidentally destroyed a Greenwich Village townhouse, and turned themselves into authorities in 1980. They were never prosecuted for their involvement with the 25 bombings the Weather Underground claimed; charges were dropped because of improper FBI surveillance.
Both have written and spoken at length about their pasts, and today he is an advocate for progressive education and a professor at the University of Illinois at Chicago; she’s an associate professor of law at Northwestern University.
….
Others [than Senator Obama] are less inclined to even consider forgiveness.
Ayers was a terrorist. Bernadine Dohrn was a terrorist. Ayers has never offered one word of apology — he glories in it, thinks it’s terrific. And that to me is not what I would call acceptable or mainstream behavior,” said Dan Polsby, a former law professor at Northwestern who is now dean of George Mason University Law School. “If Obama takes a different view on that — well, OK, that’s data about Obama.
Obama’s two children have attended the University of Chicago Lab Schools, where Mr. Ayers children (who are older) attended years ago, but where Ms. Dohrn “is still active,” according to an Obama aid. Aaron Klein has reminded that Ms. Dohrn “also served on panels with [Senator] Obama.” As Steve Chapman noted in an article about the pair,
Dohrn has likewise rationalized the [bombing] explosions, claiming that ‘our acts of resistance were tiny and symbolic.’ She even went to prison for refusing to testify about an armored car robbery involving her confederates. [But] that crime was not tiny or symbolic to the two police officers or the security guard who were shot to death in the process.
All this is public record, and Barack Obama would have to be in a coma not to know it. Yet he showed no qualms about consorting with Ayers and Dohrn.
It's hard to imagine he would be so indulgent if we learned that John McCain had a long association with a former Klansman who used to terrorize African-Americans. Obama's conduct exposes a moral blind spot about these onetime terrorists, who get a pass because they a) fall on the left end of the spectrum and b) haven't planted any bombs lately.
You can tell a lot about someone from his choice of friends.
….
[Obama’s] exercise in moral equivalence is unconvincing, if not dishonest. Would Obama be friendly with someone who actually bombed abortion clinics and defends that conduct? Not likely. But he is friendly with William Ayers, a leader of the radical Weather Underground, which in the 1970s carried out numerous bombings, including one inside the U.S. Capitol. (Though the last person who should object is Hillary Clinton, whose husband pardoned two Weather Underground members.) [emphases added]
In the August 2001 issue of Chicago Magazine, Mr. Ayers, who, that article noted, is also famous for urging 60’s youth to “Kill your parents,” is pictured, hands in pockets, still with the militant look, posturing in a close, dark alley now becoming overgrown with weeds, while he stands atop a rumpled American flag. Mr. Ayers was 55 years old at the time, and had been a friend of Senator Obama’s for at least five years.
The Chicago Magazine article, an otherwise over-sympathetic paean to the unrepentant home-grown terrorist still reveling in his failed attempts to murder, reported, “…violence, death, and white-hot rhetoric—is his past and Ayers insists he has no regrets. ‘I acted appropriately in the context of those times….’” Mr. Ayers once said he was, “Guilty as hell, free as a bird -- America is a great country.”

3. Senator Obama’s unrepentant terrorist bomber, extreme Leftist friend is now an influential educator, children’s education author, and was recently elected Vice President for Curriculum of the 25,000 member American Educational Research Association (AERA).
News editor Ed Lasky noted that “ Obama [has been] able to dismiss Ayers as a ‘Professor of English.’ On his website, Barack Obama has this to say about Ayers:
Ayers is a tenured professor at the University of Illinois at Chicago and a ‘respected advisor’ to Mayor Daley on School Reform.
Mr. Lasky further noted, “Barack Obama has been attempting to burnish Ayers' reputation by characterizing him as a university professor – still one of the more honored and respected professions in America. He peddled the notion that Ayers is an educator now and this should absolve him of the burden of his bomber background.” In laying out details for several of Professor Ayers courses (which heavily rely on books such as Brazilian Marxist Paolo Freire's [a leading theoretician of Liberation Theology also advocating schools be used to promote revolutionary fervor and action as does Obama’s Pastor’s mentor, James Cone, with Black Liberation Theology] Pedagogy of the Oppressed), Mr. Lasky observed that Ayers adopted an ideology of radicalism over education when he attended Columbia University’s Teacher’s College:
Ayers has subsequently written a best seller used in ed-school courses which focuses on the moral imperative of teaching social justice to students in K-12 classrooms. He has been active in ‘teaching teachers’ that capitalism is a curse and imperialism is an American obsession.
….
Instead of educating teachers to prepare their students for the real world, and to acculturate immigrant children into the civic culture of America, Ayers is helping to create a cadre of teachers who will promote a view that is radically at odds with the mores of most Americans and that is divorced from the traditions of education in America.
Sol Stern of City Journal has written extensively about the nexus of Senator Obama and William Ayers regarding education in America, and argues that the more critical aspect of the senator’s affiliation with an unrepentant and unpunished terrorist is his refusal to acknowledge Mr. Ayers all-consuming political agenda:
The more pressing issue is not the damage done by the Weather Underground 40 years ago, but the far greater harm inflicted on the nation’s schoolchildren by the political and educational movement in which Ayers plays a leading role today.
….
Ayers’s politics have hardly changed since his Weatherman days. He still boasts about working full-time to bring down American capitalism and imperialism. This time, however, he does it from his tenured perch as Distinguished Professor of Education at the University of Illinois, Chicago. Instead of planting bombs in public buildings, Ayers now works to indoctrinate America’s future teachers in the revolutionary cause, urging them to pass on the lessons to their public school students.
Indeed, the education department at the University of Illinois is a hotbed for the radical education professoriate. As Ayers puts it in one of his course descriptions, prospective K–12 teachers need to “be aware of the social and moral universe we inhabit and . . . be a teacher capable of hope and struggle, outrage and action, a teacher teaching for social justice and liberation.” Ayers’s texts on the imperative of social-justice teaching are among the most popular works in the syllabi of the nation’s ed schools and teacher-training institutes. One of Ayers’s major themes is that the American public school system is nothing but a reflection of capitalist hegemony. Thus, the mission of all progressive teachers is to take back the classrooms and turn them into laboratories of revolutionary change.
Unfortunately, neither Obama nor his critics in the media seem to have a clue about Ayers’s current work and his widespread influence in the education schools
….
…[T]hrough his indoctrination of future K–12 teachers, Ayers has been able to influence what happens in hundreds, perhaps thousands, of classrooms.
Ayers’s influence on what is taught in the nation’s public schools is likely to grow in the future. Last month, he was elected vice president for curriculum of the 25,000-member American Educational Research Association (AERA), the nation’s largest organization of education-school professors and researchers. Ayers won the election handily, and there is no doubt that his fellow education professors knew whom they were voting for. In the short biographical statement distributed to prospective voters beforehand, Ayers listed among his scholarly books Fugitive Days, an unapologetic memoir about his ten years in the Weather Underground. The book includes dramatic accounts of how he bombed the Pentagon and other public buildings. [emphases added]
With friends like William Ayers and Bernadette Dohrn, former terrorists who still brag extensively in print about their involvement with attempting to destroy the United States from within – first with bombs, now with socialist educational ideology – Americans should legitimately, and very loudly, ask just what kind of “change” Senator Obama envisions, intends, and/or cause.

4. Senator Obama and his unrepentant terrorist bomber friend were fellow board members of the Woods Fund which provided $75,000 in grants to the anti-Israel Arab American Action Network which has ties to the terrorist Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO).

Senator Obama served as a paid director ($6,000/year for several years) to a Chicago-area non-profit organization, the Woods Fund, from 1999 until almost 2003. William C. Ayers served with the Senator and continues to be a board member. Mr. Ayers also hosted a fund raiser for Senator Obama when he first ran for elected office in Illinois.
Additionally, in 2001 the Woods Fund gave a $40,000 financial aid grant to a group with ties to the PLO (Palestine Liberation Organization) – the Arab American Action Network – which was co-founded by radical Columbia University professor Rashid Khalidi and whose “president” is conveniently Mr. Khalidi’s wife, Mona. In 2002, the Woods Fund gave the Arab American Action Network a second gift of $35,000. Mr. Khalidi and his wife have been successful fundraisers for Senator Obama since his failed bid for the U.S. House of Representative.
The Arab American Action Network opposes the existence of Israel as a state, calling its founding a “catastrophe.”
Mr. Khalidi, the Arab American Action Network’s co-founder, “was reportedly also a director of the official PLO press agency WAFA in Beirut from 1976 to 1982, while the PLO committed scores of anti-Western attacks and was labeled by the U.S. as a terror group. Khalidi's wife, AAAN President Mona Khalidi, was reportedly WAFA's English translator during that period.” Both deny this but Palestinian diplomatic sources have confirmed it.
__________
ALSO:

In “Obama Dollars” at American Thinker, September 23, 2008, an article dealing with President Obama and other people’s money [http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/09/obama_dollars.html], you will find this regarding President Obama’s connections with William Ayers:

9. $100,000,000. Other People’s Money (and again, yes, you read that right, $100 million).
The Chicago Annenberg Challenge (CAC) was established in 1995 after a $49.2 million grant proposal by Obama friend and unrepentant-terrorist-bomber-now-educator William Ayers [see #6 above] was awarded. Both Senator Obama and Mr. Ayers were deeply involved – Senator Obama as founding Chairman – in the failed, five-year CAC educational “reform” fiasco, which wasted over $100 million of other people’s money on Mr. Ayers pet authoritarian educational theories.1
The C.A.C.’s own final technical report issued in 2003 repeatedly noted that it was an utter failure.
In order to receive the grant money, an equivalent amount of matching funds had to be raised. $110 million quickly was, $1,000,000 of which was awarded by the Wood’s Fund – the “progressive” non-profit organization of which both Senator Obama and William Ayers were board members.
Not coincidentally, not only was William Ayers one of the first CAC grantees despite being the co-chairman of one of its two operational arms, but his decades-long friend and political ally, communist Michael Klonsky who founded the American-birthed Maoist Communist Party2 was as well. Mr. Klonsky initially received a $175,000 grant for his Small Schools Workshop, and was later given another $482,622.3
Until recently, Mr. Klonsky operated a blog at the official Obama Campaign website. All of its content has now been removed. Additionally, Senator Obama’s official campaign web site contains an endorsement page entitled, “Marxist / Socialist / Communists for Obama.”4
Education is a crucial policy issue in America. Its form and substance should never be left to either the Barack Obama’s of the world, nor to William Ayers who, as news editor Ed Lasky noted, “Barack Obama has been attempting to burnish Ayers' reputation by characterizing him as a university professor – still one of the more honored and respected professions in America. He peddled the notion that Ayers is an educator now and this should absolve him of the burden of his bomber background.” Mr. Lasky observed that Ayers adopted an ideology of radicalism over education when he attended Columbia University’s Teacher’s College:
Ayers has subsequently written a best seller used in ed-school courses which focuses on the moral imperative of teaching “social justice” to students in K-12
classrooms. He has been active in ‘teaching teachers’ that capitalism is a curse and imperialism is an American obsession.
….
Instead of educating teachers to prepare their students for the real world, and to acculturate immigrant children into the civic culture of America, Ayers is helping to create a cadre of teachers who will promote a view that is radically at odds with the mores of most Americans and that is divorced from the traditions of education in America.5
Likewise, Sol Stern of City Journal has written extensively about the nexus of Senator Obama and William Ayers regarding education in America, and argues that the more critical aspect of the senator’s affiliation with an unrepentant and unpunished terrorist is his refusal to acknowledge Mr. Ayers all-consuming political agenda:
The more pressing issue is not the damage done by the Weather Underground 40 years ago, but the far greater harm inflicted on the nation’s schoolchildren by the political and educational movement in which Ayers plays a leading role today.
….
Ayers’s politics have hardly changed since his Weatherman days. He still boasts about working full-time to bring down American capitalism and imperialism. This time, however, he does it from his tenured perch as Distinguished Professor of Education at the University of Illinois, Chicago.
….
Ayers’s influence on what is taught in the nation’s public schools is likely to grow in the future. Last month, he was elected vice president for curriculum of the 25,000-member American Educational Research Association (AERA), the nation’s largest organization of education-school professors and researchers.6
Senator Obama, with the help of such people, attempted to radically change the entire Chicago, Illinois education system. Fortunately, he failed. If elected President, he might not.
__________

AND in:

“Ship of Fools,” American Thinker, October 11, 2009
[http://www.americanthinker.com/2009/10/ship_of_fools_obamas_intimates.html] see this:

16. William Ayers -- Obama friend, neighbor, fellow board member, "respected" national educator, virulently anti-American, and dramatically unrepentant radical terrorist bomber. Mr. Ayers famously stated:
"I am a radical, Leftist, small ‘c' Communist...Maybe I'm the last Communist who is willing to admit it.... The ethics of Communism still appeal to me."
Perhaps Mr. Ayers most notable statement was made to the New York Times in a story released on September 11, 2001:
"I don't regret setting bombs; I feel we didn't do enough,"
It has gradually come to light that Mr. Ayers, far from the casual acquaintance President Obama made him out to be during the 2008 election, is quite likely the real author of Mr. Obama's "autobiography," Dreams of My Father. 1
Mr. Ayers approach to education is as authoritarian as is his approach to society as a whole - otherwise he would not have planted terrorist bombs in an effort to compel his personal beliefs upon the rest of society. As Sol Stern of City Journal wrote:
Ayers's influence on what is taught in the nation's public schools is likely to grow in the future. Last month, he was elected vice president for curriculum of the 25,000-member American Educational Research Association (AERA), the nation's largest organization of education-school professors and researchers. Ayers won the election handily, and there is no doubt that his fellow education professors knew whom they were voting for. In the short biographical statement distributed to prospective voters beforehand, Ayers listed among his scholarly books Fugitive Days, an unapologetic memoir about his ten years in the Weather Underground. The book includes dramatic accounts of how he bombed the Pentagon and other public buildings.
....
Ayers's politics have hardly changed since his Weatherman days. He still boasts about working full-time to bring down American capitalism and imperialism. This time, however, he does it from his tenured perch as Distinguished Professor of Education at the University of Illinois, Chicago. Instead of planting bombs in public buildings, Ayers now works to indoctrinate America's future teachers in the revolutionary cause, urging them to pass on the lessons to their public school students. 2
The Ayers-Obama Socialist-conversion mission carried out with the Chicago Annenberg Challenge's $100,000,000 was a total failure, producing zero results in student learning, but succeeded in massive transfers of wealth to Leftist, Socialist, and even the Communist causes of long-time Ayers ally, Mike Klonsky, a former S.D. S. leader, college professor and Director of the Small Schools Workshop. However, neither Mr. Ayers nor President Obama have given up on their radical Leftist agenda. 3
Ayers is married to unrepentant Weather Underground terrorist Bernadine Dohrn who was once jailed for refusing to testify before a grand jury investigating other Weather Underground members' robbery of a Brinks truck, in which a guard and two New York State Troopers were killed. Like her husband, she remains involved and influential in school programs.
For Mr. Ayers, Mr. Freeman, Mr. Jennings, and President Obama's Secretary of Education, yet another Chicagoan, Arne Duncan - and far too many others in the Obama Administration - education is solely about pursuing then mandating the radicalization of children through indoctrination in Leftist policies, "social justice" curricula, and Socialism itself in public schools.

SOURCES and NOTES

USSAlabama| 9.2.11 @ 10:37AM

Obama's memoir was published in June 1995. Earlier that year, Ayers helped Obama, then a junior lawyer at a minor law firm, get appointed chairman of the multi-million dollar Chicago Annenberg Challenge grant. In the fall of that same year, 1995, Ayers and his wife, Weatherwoman Bernardine Dohrn, helped blaze Obama's path to political power with a fundraiser in their Chicago home.

In short, Ayers had the means, the motive, the time, the place and the literary ability to jumpstart Obama's career. - - - - - - - Jack Cashill

Chalkdust| 9.2.11 @ 11:47AM

Mac:
Love your work, outstanding rant.

Oldefarte| 9.2.11 @ 2:07PM

Mac's excellent information was generally and sadly out in existence pre 11/4/08, and the public either ignored or discounted same. Additionally, it's not just this limited/selected situation of Ayers/Doehn/Obama etc that should be of concern to all of you. It's much more broadly the fact that each/every university/college is producing yearly its idological/brainwashed graduates into the world to go forth and further indoctrinate the public=you. Our public school system is scandalously being manipulated to indoctrinate its children by these university/college graduated school administrators and/or teachers. Hollywood's producers of movies and TV programming is likewise brainwashing you daily/hourly with ultra-liberalized programming. Wake up, America!!!!!!!

Matthew Quigley| 9.2.11 @ 10:01AM

If you have evidence of Ayers and Dohrn's criminal activities, present it to a prosecutor and do what you can to have charges filed and these two slugs tried. Otherwise, this essay is four years too little and too late.

Bill| 9.2.11 @ 10:38AM

A non-Obamaoid prosecutor could start with their admissions...

Oldefarte| 9.2.11 @ 2:11PM

Yeah, present this evidence to the current [or former] mayor/administrators [Rahm Emmanuel] etc of Chicago [who are all former collegues of the president and former Daley collegues] and see how far you get. No doubt, you'll be the ones that end up in jail, not them!!!!

Ken (Old Texican)| 9.2.11 @ 10:24AM

Folks,
I have a deep suspicion that Governor Perry is cleaning and loading both six-guns for the debate next week. I'm guessing at least a couple of his "bullets" will come from Sarah's speech this weekend.
Mr. Perry has made "campaign promises" he cannot back away from. I think that has been on purpose. I think he plans to do everything in his power to keep those promises.

I think he will fire all the Czars.
I think he will strangle the bureaucracies
I think he will use the "bully pulpit" very well, (unlike a decent man named Dubyah).

People call the "Governorship" in Texas "weak". There is a very specific reason for that; when Texas re-entered the Union after the Civil war, we were "blessed" with the prospect of carpetbagger Yankees filling that chair...indefinitely.
So.
In Texas, a Governor must lead with only persuasion.
Perry has done that very well... and gotten a lot of Republican legislators in place ... and on the same page.
If nothing else, If he can win, I believe he can embarras a lot of Republicans in DC to do the needed things.

Margie| 9.2.11 @ 2:05PM

"I think he will fire all the Czars.
I think he will strangle the bureaucracies
I think he will use the "bully pulpit" very well, (unlike a decent man named Dubyah)."

I hope so!!
Rush just said that John Fund wrote a column saying Sarah's gonna endorse him... ready for takeoff.. yeah!!

Oldefarte| 9.2.11 @ 2:23PM

You and me both! There are several unplesentries I'm disturbed with concerning Perry, but which can hopefully be explained away. I do like the little I know about him, who is is, and has been. I like his sarcastic/pointed KICK IN THE GONADS style of politics. I like Texas' tort reform and their being a major oil producer. I admire his military service and and grateful to him [and all ] who has honorably served this country. If he ends up becoming the Republican nominee, I only want him to look this president in they eyes and to tell him basically that we KNOW WHAT HE IS, WHO HE IS, WHAT HIS LIBERALISTIC POLICIES ARE AND DON'T WANT THEM, AND THAT WE WANT HIM TO LEAVE DC AND TAKE HIS DEMOCRATIC FRIENDS/ASSOCIATES BACK TO CHICAGO OR WHEREEVER. I'd like for him as our next president to eliminate WELFARECARE and DODD-FRANK, all or most governmental regulations, to allow oil companies to drop movable oil rigs every 500 feet in all therr of our oceans and to resrict it production/supply to our domestic needs primarily, to kindly solve the immigration problem and its resultant governmental expense upon the taxpayers of this nation, to shove Hollywood and it obnoxious/abhorant radical immorality back into its closet and to begin producing talented vehicles worthy of those over the age of 15 years for viewing, etc. That's all, not much!!!!

Margie| 9.2.11 @ 3:39PM

Nah. I'd say that's the bare minimum!!

The Bishop| 9.2.11 @ 3:44PM

Perry had a great interview on Mark Levin's show last night. I, formerly a skeptic, was very encouraged. I hope he is the real deal.

SpiralArchitect| 9.2.11 @ 5:01PM

At least is* proud to be an American.

*Becomming POTUS not required

Southern_Comment| 9.3.11 @ 1:39AM

Not to be rude or anything, but that firing the Czars. They were Obama's picks and will leave with him.

Bill Diebold| 9.2.11 @ 10:50AM

...and the line between democrats and terrorists grows thinner...

Lullabys, Legends and Lies| 9.2.11 @ 2:13PM

There's a line left? It must be microscopic!!

Oldefarte| 9.4.11 @ 12:36PM

Nope, if anyone had the courage/ability to dig deep enough into his Princton/Harvard years as to what he wrote paper-wise, who his college associations were, etc, there would NO LINE [no doubt there would be some protests of the military/police, calling them PIGS etc; since the military's presence on Harvard's campus has been a thron in liberalism's side at least going back to the days of his nominated SCOTUS's days]!!!!!!

Von Mises Jr.| 9.2.11 @ 11:02AM

The revolution continues. Revolution is defined as "overthrow and replacement of the government or political system."
Flouting bankruptcy law with the Chrysler bond holders, syndicalism at GM, Bill of Attainder with Gerald Walpin, Contempt citing for ignoring Judge Feldman's oil drilling moritorium ruling, dismissing the Black Panther case, refusal by Holder to enforce DOMA and illegal immigration are all forms of revolution by this Marxist POTUS.

Our Constitution and "Rule of Law" have been shredded by this regime. This must not just be stopped, but reversed. Otherwise you children will be subjects to an depotic regime of arbitrary, capricious and vindictive "Rule of Men."

Oldefarte| 9.2.11 @ 2:26PM

VN Jr...well said!!!!!!!!

Oldefarte| 9.2.11 @ 11:04AM

[From the book HOW TO ARGUE WITH LIBERALS] '....Affect puzzlement at the curious fact that the 2002 Beltway sniper murders were initially blamed by investigators on an "angry white man." Then wonder why, after the perpetrators were discovered to be inconveniently black and Muslim, the liberal media persistently referred to killer John Muhammad by his pre-conversion name John Williams; and why authorities chose to play down the possibility that the cold blooded assassination of ten Americans by two Islamic converts rambling about jihad had anything to do with terrorism or the "Religion of Peace." ....'

martin j smith| 9.2.11 @ 11:24AM

In regards terrorism and the Radical Left ( which is now more Mainstream Democrat Party ) in regards to connecting the dots and their intent about the future lets us examine these elements: Class warfare of Obama and his friends. Racial warfare
aka the famous"race card" and of course the spread of fear of the... Tea Party.. who will lynch
anyone not White , Add to that actual violence by SEIU members and add to that the advent of Flash Mobs and just for the fun of it, add to that the riots in Britain. In addition, lets also look at the behavior of our MSM and the way they present the news--poor Obama mistreated, disrespected, all of course racially motivated.
Friends it all adds up. What will happen between now and the election and ---what if there is a sever landslide against the Socialists and Obama.
I think we do need to think ahead.

Dave Williams| 9.2.11 @ 12:24PM

Disgusting....this whole crew of turds needs to be FLUSHED 14 months from now. Get out there, folks, raise money for the candidate of your choice, and try to open some independents' eyes...don't waste time on the hard-core brainless libs, though. We survived Carter, we survived Clinton, and we'll survive King Zero and his anti-American cronies.

WRTolkas| 9.2.11 @ 12:32PM

All this information should be on everyone's hard drive.

Jerry S. Dickinson| 9.2.11 @ 12:44PM

As is the case with many of the "Revolutionary" youth the impetus was fear of serving in the military. Having to exchange the silver spoon for the general purpose flatware of boot camp. It is astonishing how far some will go to eliminate responsibility in their lives.

Stan| 9.2.11 @ 12:53PM

"is the ultimate expression of the left's descent into degeneracy" I think it's even simpler than that, first of all it's not a descent as the left has been this degenerate for 60 years. Second, they look on the likes of Ayers and say to themselves "I wish I had the guts and conviction to be like him".

If liberalism is an emotional disorder, they respond emotionally. In the same way that a Christian might be inspired to be like Mother Theresa or Billy Graham.

Jerry S. Dickinson| 9.2.11 @ 12:54PM

In response to some of the comments above, This information and much more is available to anyone that wants it. Sufficient information was available before the election. I do not understand the ease with which people are deceived by O'Drama. Look at the man, look at his product. We may define ones motivation by examining the "fruits of his labor". How can anyone not see this man for what he is? There are many books about the subject. One, "Obama Nation" by Jerome Corsi is sufficient to sway any logical thinking adult away from O'Drama. Can you realistically imagine that 3.8 of every ten people you see believe O'Drama is doing a good job?

Simon Templar| 9.2.11 @ 12:56PM

Mr. Regnery,

Thank you for being bold, brave, and having the courage to tell the truth.

Your article underscores the absolute need for an atlternative media be built to bring truth to the public. We do not have a free press. We do not have a free press that is not in the business of propaganda and hidden agenda.

Oldefarte| 9.2.11 @ 2:28PM

Amen, agreed, ST!!!!!!

O Tamandua| 9.2.11 @ 1:00PM

1. Why did you have to talk about Ayers' "100 friends in the Dupont loft" escapade? I just ate lunch. ">(

2. I still am amazed by how used I feel - I remember the (early 90s?) movie "Running on empty" which seems to be based loosely on the Ayers family. (The movie family was nicer...the bombing they planned only permanently blinded a custodian; no loss of life.) But of course, the family was shown as something noble.

It's tragic, but not coincidental, how simultaneously rotten so much of our political and cultural systems are in America, precisely what the Ayers family wanted. Nonetheless, there will be a day of reckoning for them, and I dearly hope they (somehow) collectively and genuinely repent of their worldview and actions.

I seriously do.

Nomad| 9.2.11 @ 1:13PM

This article and its resulting posts prove that flights of fancy remain a mainstay of Republican politics. A number of crimes alleged to have been committed (or conspired for) by Bill Ayers and Bernadette Dohrn warranted federal investigation and involved alleged homicides for which there is no statute of limitations. Yet, when Ayers and Dohrn emerged from underground, where was the DOJ? Could it be that, despite the legend and the lore, there just wasn't enough concrete evidence for a conviction?

Guilt by association is a fool's game. No one - and I mean no one - ascends to high levels of power without getting their hands a little dirty along the way. It's called political expediency and it's practiced on both sides of the political spectrum. During their careers notable conservatives ranging from Ronald Reagan to Grover Norquist to George W. Bush maintained relationships with Jack Abramoff. Do we assume these men are crooks because of that relationship? Should Rick Perry be condemned as a kool-aid-drinking-rapture-waitin' Christian nutjob because of his association with Mike Bickel and the International House of Prayer? Do we question every decision made by Clarence Thomas because of his wife's ties to a neo-conservative group? Of course we don't. But when it comes to Obama, there's no Marxist conspiracy theory too fanciful to escape critical questioning.

Work yourselves into a lather over the Obama-Ayers connection if you wish. But it's old news, has virtually no bearing on how this country ends up solving the very real problems we have and means nothing.

Simon Templar| 9.2.11 @ 1:35PM

Your comment prove that flights of fancy denial, illogical arguments, and false premises remain a mainstay of Left wing politics and useful idiots.
Guilt by association..laughable! He was guilty by his own admissions, his actions, his participation, and his life long commitments to marxism and the overthrow of the United States.

As far as that poser you put in the whitehouse, he is also guilty by his own books and his own admissions of these associations and how he sought them out because he identified with their world view.

Get lost troll. Your propaganda stinks and your argument is flaccid. The truth will eventually come out about your socialist thug from Chicago.

Paul| 9.2.11 @ 2:19PM

Simon, apart from things Obama has SAID, is there anything he's actually DONE that you can point to as an example of his Marxism?

Oldefarte| 9.2.11 @ 2:40PM

Proposition: Use your influence to obtain access to the loked up/secured from public sight written paperwork that he produced while at Princton and Harvard, let the public read, desemminate same and thereafter we'll PROVE TO YOU HIS MARXISM, okay????????

Paul| 9.2.11 @ 2:54PM

I asked specifically if there was anything he had DONE as an example of Marxism, not what he has SAID. (I'm combining writing and speaking into a single thing, which is the communication of an idea. It's not the same as acting on an idea.)

Based on the non-responses to this question, I'm assuming the answer is No, there are no examples of Obama's actions that are Marxist.

Keep this in mind while you're railing against "Obama's Marxism": you're talking about something no more real than a unicorn. And in doing so, you're ignoring the deeper issues for which Obama (and most other American politicians today) need to be criticized.

Fact is, the US has one single party: the Corporatist Party. Its agenda is to hand over rights, power and money from the middle class to corporate elites at an ever increasing rate. Democrat vs Republican is a meaningless distinction when looking at this overall picture. That's why we've got a jobless recovery. That's why a corporation is now granted all the same rights as a human being. But by all means, keep prattling on about "Obama the Marxist" and miss the point entirely.

Progressive Bob| 9.2.11 @ 7:28PM

You need to join me and vote for Ralph Nader.

victor| 9.4.11 @ 3:52AM

ProgBob:
"You need to join me"
Why, are you coming apart at the seams?
Maybe some Crazy Glue would help?

Or maybe we could glue you to Ralph Nadir?

Nick| 9.4.11 @ 7:00PM

Ha-ha!
Good one, Victor.
God Bless!

BackToBasics| 9.4.11 @ 3:40AM

I've talked with those who beleive as you do. They recognize the dangers we face but I think they simplify the truth too much by lumping the 2 parties into one.

As to your question about what Marxist steps Obam has done, what did you expect, an instant jump into a totally Marxist government in 2009? It's too soon for that and I think you know it. Marxism / Leninism or some form thereof is being implemented in incremental steps by the Dems.

And if Obam were only a "corporatist" then why did he say during the 2008 campaign and after that he wanted to transform America which was still a mostly capitalist nation in 2008?

Republican elites / RINO's are more the corporatist types.

But, both the RINO's and Dem elites have this in common; they want to weaken the middle class and small businesses in America. But they do it for different reasons. RINO elites are more corporatist and want to continue to funnel the money to the top few. Small businesses represent a threat to the large corporations because in America, the owners are free and may not tow the elitist line even if their small business later becomes large. And of course they would then siphon money away from the RINO elites. Dems want a small and weakened middle class and few small businesses so they can more easily control the poor masses in a manner similar to today's Cuba or North Korea.

In this same sense, corporatists also will eventually be opposed when the Dems try to implement their full control. Dems will not want a powerful and wealthy cadre of elite corporatists who could possibly oppose and compete with them. Dems are all about government. Enough money will filter to the top to keep them living in splendor. They will not worry about whether there are many healthy corporations and corporatistsd as long as they've "got their own riches, control and power."

In that way the Dems are worse than the RINO elites. But I'll take a TRUE Tea Party-style goverment way above either of the other two any day of the week.

BackToBasics| 9.4.11 @ 3:54AM

I cite Cuba and N Korea as examples because I think the Marxists here want to take the heavy-handed route. I do not think they see China as there model. As I've read and heard before, there is more freedom, business-wise, in China today than there is in America, although China was very heavy-handed in the past. Most totalitarian states start off with the iron-glove, whip, imprisonment and sword. I think America can still stave it off with the right leaders but if we do not, I think we or at least part of the country is heading in that direction.

Oldefarte| 9.4.11 @ 12:53PM

Paul: You're entirely wrong/incorrect, and the reasons why are that 'corporations' did not legislate/institute the CRA of 1977 that forced banks/financials to loan to financial indigents for welfaric purposes which 30 years later finally snowballed into this present financial/real estate/credit/government defecit-debt crisis. You want an 'act' of Marxism', fine I'll give you several: his $800 non-stimulus to labor unionized government workers political payoff so that they would maintain their welfaric employment status instead of losing their jobs as were thousands in the private employment segment of society; his WELFARECARE that is stealing [wealth-redistributing] health-medicare from seniors who PAID FOR same and giving instead to the snot-nosed youths who don't work, don't pay taxes, consume drgus daily and are basically worthless to society; his legally suing Arizona and Alabama over immigration; his witholding oil drilling permits to oil companies in order to pacisfy his wacko environmental constituents [while starving consemuner of much needed energy sources off our coasts]; his racial political non-emforcement of voting protection laws of this country in favoritism of his favor racial minority; his legally suing major banks for extortion purposes over the failed housing policies of the Democratic Party from 1977; his burdensome government regulations which create fear among 'corporation' and prevent them from hiring employees; etc. Want more, or are you smart enough to understand his Marxist-Communistic-socialistic tendencies and philosophy now?????????

Simon Templar| 9.2.11 @ 2:52PM

Obamacare.

Paul| 9.2.11 @ 2:56PM

Obamacare was essentially a bailout of the pharmaceutical industry. It bestowed on that industry millions of new consumers, and passed a law requiring them to buy their products. You need to read something about Marxism, because this isn't it.

A Marxist would have passed a single payer health plan, no doubt about it. That's what Marxists (as well as moderate liberals) have done every single other place in the world.

Try again: I ask are there any examples of Obama's actions that can be considered Marxist (and I'm particularly asking people who know what Marxism really means).

Simon Templar| 9.3.11 @ 3:04PM

Paul, there are times where being nice and polite just do not cut it. This is one. Obamacare is America's version of socialized and nationalized healthcare...a predominant element of socialism that has been a key step in the formation of a socialistic state, as outlined by Marx himself. This has been a dream of American socialist for nearly a century and half. Please do not lecture me about socialism when clearly you do not have a clue about what is it. I have an advanced degree in Sociology and studied it at length. Your ignorance is astounding. You do not even seem to understand what Obamacare is and it is certainly more than a so-called bailout of the drug industry which it is not in fact. I could give a half doozen more examples but I am not as it would be a waste of time and energy spent on a useful idiot.
Do you know where the term, "useful idiot", came form?

Simon Templar| 9.3.11 @ 3:05PM

That is from not form...typo.

Paul| 9.4.11 @ 2:00PM

==========================
Paul, there are times where being nice and polite just do not cut it. This is one.
==========================

Let's be clear: republicanism is incompatible with "being nice and polite" in nearly every instance. I'm not surprised you find this one is no different.

==========================
Obamacare is America's version of socialized and nationalized healthcare..
==========================

This is true. Obamacare is America's version of the kind of healthcare program that every other developed country in the world has. So, it deserves comparison. And under such a comparison, you'll see that Obamacare is by far the least socialist, most capitalist and corporate-friendly, healthcare plan in the world.

Or do you believe that capitalist titan South Korean (whose national healthcare plan is one of the most comprehensive and effectively run one in the world) is a socialist country?

Do you believe Mitt Romney (the guy on whose plan Obamacare was entirely based, and who you'll be voting for next year) is a socialist?

Do you ever think about any of this stuff?

==========================
Please do not lecture me about socialism when clearly you do not have a clue about what is it. I have an advanced degree in Sociology and studied it at length.
==========================

Bwwwahahahaha!!! You can't lie so easily here, Simon. You have already demonstrated a profound ignorance on even the most pedestrian understanding of Marxism and socialism. Pretending that you actually studied this subject does not change that. If that were true, it would mean yours is not simple ignorance, but a willful stupidity.

==========================
I could give a half doozen more examples but I am not as it would be a waste of time and energy spent on a useful idiot.
==========================

I...see. You've got plenty of times to write vacuous comments and unsupported assertions. But when it comes time to actually provide concrete examples that could actually refute my points....damn, you're all out of time!

Priceless!

Oldefarte| 9.4.11 @ 12:58PM

A single payer system? Wake up dummie, that is exactly what Hillary, Bill, El Chosen One, Teddy and the rest of this socialist Democrats have been attempting to do for decades, and if not for the obsructionism of Republicans would have instituted same. Grow a brain!

Oldefarte| 9.4.11 @ 1:10PM

'Read something about Marxism'? Okay, then you read this [which completely describes this administration's political philosophy]: '....Marxism is an economic and socio-political worldview and method of socioeconomic inquiry that centers upon a materialist interpretation of history, a dialectical view of social change, and an analysis and critique of the development of capitalism. Marxism was pioneered in the early to mid 19th century by two German philosophers, Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels. Marxism encompasses Marxian economic theory, a sociological theory and a revolutionary view of social change that has influenced socialist political movements worldwide.The Marxian analysis begins with an analysis of material conditions, taking at its starting point the necessary economic activities required by human society to provide for its material needs. The form of economic organization, or mode of production, is understood to be the basis from which the majority of other social phenomena — including social relations, political and legal systems, morality and ideology — arise (or at the least by which they are greatly influenced). These social relations form the superstructure, of which the economic system forms the base. As the forces of production, most notably technology, improve, existing forms of social organization become inefficient and stifle further progress.
These inefficiencies manifest themselves as social contradictions in society in the form of class struggle. Under the capitalist mode of production, this struggle materializes between the minority who own the means of production; the bourgeoisie, and the vast majority of the population who produce goods and services; the proletariat. Taking the idea that social change occurs because of the struggle between different classes within society who are under contradiction against each other, the Marxist analysis leads to the conclusion that capitalism oppresses the proletariat, the inevitable result being a proletarian revolution.Marxism views the socialist system as a being prepared by the historical development of capitalism. According to Marxism, Socialism is a historical necessity (but not however, an inevitability [1]). In a socialist society private property in the means of production would be superseded by co-operative ownership. The socialist system would succeed capitalism as humanity's mode of production through worker's revolution. Capitalism according to Marxist theory can no longer sustain the living standards of the population due to its need to compensate for falling rates of profit by driving down wages, cutting social benefits and pursuing military aggression. A socialist economy would not base production on the accumulation of capital, but would instead base production and economic activity on the criteria of satisfying human needs - that is, production would be carried out directly for use.Eventually, socialism would give way to a communist stage of history: a classless, stateless system based on common ownership and free-access, superabundance and maximum freedom for individuals to develop their own capacities and talents. As a political movement, Marxism advocates for the creation of such a society...' If that don't describe those FAT CAT BANKERS AND INSURANCE COMPANIES...' I don't know what in hades does so!!!!!!

Paul| 9.4.11 @ 2:02PM

Wow, somebody just discovered Wikipedia and the copy-and-paste commend!

My son just learned to ride a 2-wheeler last weekend. I love watching someone make a major advance.

Next, you might one day be able to understand what you copied, and even, you know, talk about it and stuff.

Margie| 9.4.11 @ 5:24PM

Personally attack the messenger (no matter who it is) but never, NEVER deal with the contents, hmm?

Oldefarte| 9.5.11 @ 11:59AM

'understand and talk about it', okay then why don't you get off of your son's two[not '2'] wheeler and READ AND REPLY TO THE FACTS OF THE ABOVE DEFINITION OF MARXISM [or are you too stupid to do so intelligently?]!!!!

Margie| 9.4.11 @ 5:38PM

Hey Oldefarte, what you have to do with the likes of "Paul" is pin him with one question and make him answer it.
(oh, and by the way, the definition you posted above hit right on target, that's why he had to personally attack YOU or your source rather than actually honestly discuus what you wrote).

For example, wouldn't we like to know if Paul agrees that, "Capitalism oppresses the proletariat?"
LOL.

Make him answer. All he wants to do is get everyone here to keep posting reasonable answers to his questions when he has no intention of discussing them. He's all about going round n' round.

Drunken Sailor| 9.2.11 @ 4:20PM

Attend a black liberation church for 20 years. Black Liberation has its roots in Marxism.

Paul| 9.2.11 @ 4:28PM

Yes, but what did he DO? At some point, all these influences and utterances should result in some actual Marxist ACTIONS (assuming he actually is Marxist). I'm not talking about attending some church. He's the POTUS. If he were actually a Marxist, you would be able to point to some actual policy initiatives that he has backed.

Drunken Sailor| 9.2.11 @ 4:52PM

We can list them all day but your won't listen or will argue semantics.

1.Stripping Capitalists Of Their Assets (GM)
2. Controlling Higher Education

Obama has already launched legislation to remove private lenders from student loans which would now all be provided by the federal government directly (not yet passed)
3.•Declared a "War On Business" as shown by his legislation that pharmaceutical corporations pay high rebate fees to Medicaid and promoting the importation of foreign drugs which could include low potency or outright counterfeit drugs into the nation. The financial outlook for US pharmaceutical companies has been decimated.
4.mortgage bailout legislation is little more than a full blown entitlement program
All of these policies represent time-honored Communist policies specifically designed to devastate the free market economy as well as impoverish and punish the upper and middle classes leading to their elimination so that the Communist "Dictatorship Of The Proletariat" can be introduced.

Ok, now want to argue semantics, fine. Call him a Leninist

Troll

Paul| 9.2.11 @ 5:24PM

Thanks, Drunken Sailor. You're the first person to even attempt to honestly answer the question. And you're the first person to understand the difference between SPEECH and ACTIONS. Now let's look at your points.

====================
1.Stripping Capitalists Of Their Assets (GM)
====================

What does this mean? Are you saying he nationalized GM? Because that's what a Marxist would do. However, that's not what Obama did.

====================
2. Controlling Higher Education
====================

This one sounds nasty and very Pol Pot-ish. How did he control higher education? Did he dictate curriculum? Did he fire teachers that were not toeing the party line? That's what a Marxist would do.

Oh. He's suggested removing private lenders from providing student loans, as his response to the huge problem of crippling student loans charged at inflated rates, which plagues most college graduates. That's it? In your mind, this constitutes "controlling higher education?" Are you serious?

====================
3.•Declared a "War On Business" as shown by his legislation that pharmaceutical corporations pay high rebate fees to Medicaid and promoting the importation of foreign drugs which could include low potency or outright counterfeit drugs into the nation. The financial outlook for US pharmaceutical companies has been decimated.
====================

To keep Medicaid functional, the program needs to pay for itself. (Most republicans can understand this.) Medicare and Medicaid reimbursements are far lower than insurance company reimbursements, and it's causing a financial short fall. Requiring pharmaceutical companies to make up the difference is reasonable, but I can see how some would disagree.

However, Obama did not promote the import of foreign drugs. You lied about that (or perhaps you're just ignorant). No, during the health care debate, he actually guaranteed to the Big Pharma that no such importing would be allowed, and that the government would not try and get reduced prices through bulk purchases. That is, he has guaranteed profit to a particular sector. (And no, the financial outlook for US phara companies is in no way decimated. You lied about that too.) This is not something a Marxist would do.

====================
4.mortgage bailout legislation is little more than a full blown entitlement program
====================

In what way?

====================
Ok, now want to argue semantics, fine. Call him a Leninist
====================

I see where you're going with this. You want to name him after communists of the past because it's a neat little tagline. However, when you do that you demonstrate a profoundly shallow grasp of current events, and complete ignorance about either Marx or Lenin. Your fellow travelers all share this ignorance, as we've seen on this thread. But if you ever want to convince anyone outside this little echo chamber, you're going to need to bolster them a bit more and eliminate the meaningless namecalling.

Unless (as has been my suspicion all along), there is really nothing to the American authoritarian movement beyond this kind of meaningless namecalling. In which case, as you were.

Drunken Sailor| 9.2.11 @ 5:49PM

"We can list them all day but your won't listen or will argue semantics."
Like I said.

You simply want to defend Obama and like Michael Moore bash the capitalist system, which if you have ever worked a honest day in your life and gotten a paycheck for, you are a benificiary of.

Would you last name happen to be Krugman?

Paul| 9.2.11 @ 6:13PM

Right. As I thought. You actually cannot defend your point of view under scrutiny.

So you know, I will not be voting for Obama. I run a web development company with 10 employees, so suggesting that I'm anti-capitalist and do not work is absurd in the extreme. However, I understand that if your points are weak, that's what you need to say.

Thanks for playing.

Progressive Bob| 9.2.11 @ 7:30PM

Stop your whining and support Ralph Nader. He won't let us down.

USSAlabama| 9.2.11 @ 7:58PM

Shut UP -- you dumbass! Nobody is going to waste their vote on x'ing Ralph Nader.

Progressive Bob| 9.3.11 @ 6:32PM

Hey! I want progressives to vote for Nader. It is time to send a message.

Drunken Sailor| 9.2.11 @ 7:44PM

Oh I can play, just was short on time.

What does this mean? Are you saying he nationalized GM? Because that's what a Marxist would do. However, that's not what Obama did.

Yes, it is. The goverment owned a share of GM and told them how they were going to do business, including what options the share holders had. Goverment run corporations is a principle of Marxism. Not to mention there is nothing in the Constitution that gives him that power.

In your mind, this constitutes "controlling higher education?" Are you serious?

Yes, When the goverment takes my tax money to provide someone a free college education that is Marxism.
Since when is a college education garunteed? Or a low interest rate loan? If you want the education, work for it. If that means a part time job and a slower education so be it. No one else should have to pay for it.

I'm not even going to get into the Pharaceuticals because I work in a Pharmaceutical wholesale distributor and see how he has affected business.

Mortgage bailout should never have happend. If you take a risky loan then that is your fault. Perhaps living in your means should have been a priority. The goverment created the problem in the first place with CRA.

Now, I have a question for you. If you do not believe Obama is or would practice Marxism if he had more free reign then what would you call his governing style? And why does it irk you so much that people call him a Marxist if your not going to vote for him.

Never suggested you didn't work. I said if you had worked you were a product and benificiary of capitalism that you would appear to be bashing.

By the way, you really do come of as condescending but we can live with that. You do realize this is a conservative website, don't you?

Margie| 9.2.11 @ 8:10PM

Thanks, DS.. take it away, guys!

Paul| 9.2.11 @ 8:42PM

==============================
The goverment owned a share of GM and told them how they were going to do business, including what options the share holders had. Goverment run corporations is a principle of Marxism.
==============================

You really don't know what you're talking about, do you? The US government gave GM a loan, and then dictated certain things about the shareholders the same way as any lender would. Once GM has paid the loan back, these terms go away. Meanwhile, there are countries with actually nationalized industries. In those cases, the government runs the companies directly, and does not give them back to the private sector. There's a bit of a difference, don't you think?

==============================
When the goverment takes my tax money to provide someone a free college education that is Marxism.
==============================

However, that's not what's happening. The education isn't free. Students have to pay for it. They get a loan for the amount, with the idea that once they graduate, they'll get a higher paying job and will make that loan worth it. This is one of the most essential aspects of capitalism, the notion of borrowing money now where you can make a better return than you pay in interest. It's pretty hilarious that you're deciding to criticize it. Without this concept, the whole economy would come to a grinding halt.

As for it being unfair for taxpayers to give low-interest loans, here's the capitalist argument for that (which most other countries understand). If you educate your population, it improves the standard of living for the country at large. Then the country is more competitive on the labor market. Providing low-interest loans is simply an investment in our future, something every sustainable business does.

==============================
I'm not even going to get into the Pharaceuticals because I work in a Pharmaceutical wholesale distributor and see how he has affected business.
==============================

If that were true, and if my point about the pharmaceutical industry were wrong, you would have loads of material with which to refute my point. As is, however, your comment speaks for itself.

==============================
Mortgage bailout should never have happend. If you take a risky loan then that is your fault.
==============================

Sure. But just to keep things in perspective, the $75 billion that Obama spent on the mortgage bailout is a drop in the bucket compared to the $800 billion that Bush spent on TARP. Both programs are designed to deaden the short-term impact of financial failure, the impact of which hits the country as a whole. Lots of home foreclosures depress the real estate market, which depresses many other markets, which ultimately leads to a depression which affects everybody. It's not about rewarding people who took out bad loans. It's about trying to keep the economy on an even keel. Most republicans do not understand basic economics, much less macroeconomics. So I'm not surprised having to explain this to you.

==============================
Now, I have a question for you. If you do not believe Obama is or would practice Marxism if he had more free reign then what would you call his governing style? And why does it irk you so much that people call him a Marxist if your not going to vote for him.
==============================

Obama's governing style is "namby-pamby compromise in favor of the complete takeover of the country by a corporate-government consortium." In other words, he's the same as every other mainstream politician (give or take the "namby-pamby" part, which is a matter of style), apart from Ron Paul.

It irks me when the national dialogue is being conducted by people who don't understand the terms. You don't know what marxism means, as you've demonstrated, and neither does anyone else here. However, you use it to describe reality. Your description is wrong, and by conflating these issues, you're actually sidetracking the national discussion down an avenue of bullshit. This is entirely dysfunctional. The country has some serious problems, and our politicians are not up to the task to fix them. And half the population is mired in radical stupidity. We need you guys to wise up a bit, otherwise we're doomed.

==============================
Never suggested you didn't work. I said if you had worked you were a product and benificiary of capitalism that you would appear to be bashing.
==============================

And you were wrong on all counts, weren't you?

==============================
You do realize this is a conservative website, don't you?
==============================

You must be joking. There's nothing conservative about this web site. Conservatism is about facing reality and dealing with it. Conservatism is about preserving our ecosystem for future generations. Conservatism is about understanding financial issues and spending money wisely. This site has none of that. This site is a bunch of monkeys flinging poo at Obama because he has a D after his name and black skin. "Oooga booga, he ain't one of us!!" William F. Buckley must be rolling in his grave to see his movement degraded to this.

There is no such thing as American conservatism as a movement. What's left is simply authoritariansim. You all want a strong leader so you can say "Heil" to their "Zeig." See the Bush years for an example. Just about everything you complain about Obama, Bush did as well (and often much worse) and yet you never complained, and voted for him as you were told.

Southern_Comment| 9.3.11 @ 2:12AM

I'm not going to go point by point as I've read enough of your post to know to when to stop.
In one sense you are correct, he did not nationalize GM. Nope what he did was far worse, he used the federal government and our own money to slight capitalism and play favorites. This is also one of the ways in which he declared war on business. How could business play in a game when the government with all that money and power can switch the rules to whatever they feel like?
Another method he used to declare war on business, Obamacare just the bogging down of the business with paperwork was ridiculous - take that all the way up to his moratorium on drilling. If you feel that was beneficial to employment and the needs of American's, well I'd sure like to hear those reasons.
I also appreciate how you are ignoring the lawsuit, filed by the government against Boeing for opening a plant in a right to work state. Yeah, that's not attacking business at all!

Paul| 9.3.11 @ 1:27PM

=============================
I'm not going to go point by point as I've read enough of your post to know to when to stop.
=============================

In other words, you can't refute a word of what I wrote, so you're not going to even bother to try. In that way, you're actually smarter than any of the commenters who have actually tried their hand. Congratulations.

=============================
In one sense you are correct, he did not nationalize GM. Nope what he did was far worse, he used the federal government and our own money to slight capitalism and play favorites.
=============================

Yes, that's what he did, and I don't think that was right either. However, let's be clear. Cheney did the same thing with several republican-dominated companies, most notably Haliburton which was heading to Chapter 11 bankruptcy before the Bush years (as a result of asbestos lawsuits), but then recovered beautifully once its CEO was vice president and able to send them several multi-billion dollar no-bid contracts. It didn't even matter that they got caught actually stealing taxpayer dollars (Haliburton) or murdering civilians (Blackwater). They kept getting those contracts, their less-well-connected competitors suffered, and by your standards, they "declared war on business."

But that's not how you see it, is it? You can't criticize a person with an R after his name, even if their behavior is objectively worse than Obama's. This makes you a hypocrite. The fact that flaunt your hypocrisy so transparently makes you an imbecile.

=============================
Obamacare just the bogging down of the business with paperwork
=============================

I actually run a business, and we provide heathcare for our employees. The paperwork involved in this is huge. The cost is tremendous. You have no idea about any of that, because your manager at Jack In The Box doesn't tell you. But the current system is awful and needs to be fixed.

=============================
take that all the way up to his moratorium on drilling. If you feel that was beneficial to employment and the needs of American's, well I'd sure like to hear those reasons.
=============================

When drilling destroys the environment, as it did in the gulf last year, the impact on the economy and working Americans is massive. Destroying the ecosystem long-term to employ some people short-term is not a winning strategy. See if you can find an adult to explain this to you.

=============================
I also appreciate how you are ignoring the lawsuit, filed by the government against Boeing
=============================

How can I be ignoring this if no one has mentioned it yet? Seriously, are you really this stupid?

The Boeing suit is part of the battle to eliminate unions in this country. This would be a disastrous move for all but the richest 5% of Americans. The middle class in this country was created when unions began. As union membership declines to its lowest percentage since the 20s, so too has the middle class declined. Assuming you're middle class, this should concern you. However, billionaires have convinced you to agitate directly against your own interests, relying on your abiding hatred for "teh libruls" and your unlimited stupidity.

Progressive Bob| 9.3.11 @ 6:34PM

Paul, please support Nader. It is change we can truly believe in. Nader will bring back the middle class with high taxes and great eastern European like benefits.

victor| 9.4.11 @ 4:15AM

Paul Krugman:

====================
1.Stripping Capitalists Of Their Assets (GM)
====================

What does this mean? Are you saying he nationalized GM? Because that's what a Marxist would do. However, that's not what Obama did."

On the contrary, Obama and his cronies took well-established bankruptcy laws in the United States, which provide a clearly stated preference of secured creditors over unsecured creditors.
He took the bondholders share and exchanged them for GM stock that amounted to 5 cents on the dollar.

He did the same to Chrysler Bondholders and reduced their 79% share down to 29%. and awarded 55% to the UAW.

Chrysler’s secured bondholders thought that existing bankruptcy law would protect them.
Obama and his UAW cronies managed to cut them off at the knees and shake them down for as much as they could carry away.

Obama manages to turn existing law on its head and takes from the secured creditor and gives it to the unsecured creditor.

Pretty ingenious, eh?
A lot to be admired for, eh?

Oldefarte| 9.4.11 @ 1:20PM

Actions? WELFARECARE'S DESTRUCTION OF MEDICARE, NON-STIMULUS GOVERNMENT BENEFITS TO LABOR UNIONS, LEGALLY SUING BANKS/STATES OVER IMMIGRATION, etc. Need any more examples or are you TO BLIND TO SEE?????????

Simon Templar| 9.3.11 @ 3:23PM

By the way, the discussion thread and article was about his unsavory and inappropriate associations with Marxist, radicals, and those with criminal records and involvements with the overthrow of the United States NOT whether he has put in place Marxist laws, legislations, and programs. These associations and identifications with these world views is damaging enough.

I do not have to prove anything. You do. You have to convince us that his actions and policies are not socialistic in nature and in keeping with American tradition and precedent. Good luck..you will need it.

Clever little shit you think you are..take your straw men and skip on back to the Huff and Puff.

Paul| 9.4.11 @ 2:14PM

========================
These associations and identifications with these world views is damaging enough.
========================

It depends what you're trying to do with this argument.

If your intention is to convince a bunch of knuckledraggers that Obama is Not One Of Us and is A Really Bad Guy, then just about any collection of words will do. That's how an echo chamber like this one works.

However, if you're trying to convince someone outside your echo chamber that there is something wrong with these nebulous associations you mention, they you'll need to show the actions generated from these associations, and the harm that those actions created. You all have failed at that in every way. And keep in mind, I am not an Obama supporter, and I am actually fully receptive to hearing Obama criticized. Nonetheless, your arguments here are so weak that one absolutely has to be stupid to believe any of them (as you all have demonstrated).

========================
You have to convince us that his actions and policies are not socialistic in nature and in keeping with American tradition and precedent.
========================

Who do I look like, Anne Sullivan? My strength is not in getting handicapped people to see. You're going to see exactly what you want to see, facts be damned. For example, you believed (and probably still do) that Saddam was behind 9/11. Getting your views to conform with reality is outside the scope of what any individual or web site can do. It's going to take a much larger disruption of your echo chamber to achieve that change. History shows that it normally takes violent conflict. As is abundantly clear from the comments here, you lot hate "libruls" for their cultural differences, just as American GIs were taught to have "the gooks," and are probably not far from being able to kill them indiscriminately.

========================
Clever little shit you think you are.
========================

Actually, I know my intelligence is not exceptional in the world at large. While I may have all the answers and can run circles around all the commenters on this site, that doesn't make me a genius. It just means you lot are extraordinarily stupid, something I've demonstrated already in countless ways.

Margie| 9.4.11 @ 4:19PM

Stupid is following a Marxist to Hell.
The Devil is running circles around your pea brain, but you're too stupid to be a man.

Margie| 9.2.11 @ 2:13PM

"Should Rick Perry be condemned as a kool-aid-drinking-rapture-waitin' Christian nutjob.."

That says it all about the above poster. When you mock God and Bible believing people, that says it all.

After all, Bible believing Christians are considered heretics to some false Religions, are hated by the World like Christ was hated, and are therefore hated by those who reject God and try and replace Him with a Religion of their own~ Liberalism, which is Communism-lite.

Yet Bible believing Christians and their friends founded this country, and are the driving force in trying to keep it free.

It's spiritual warfare~ and God's will is going to be done no matter what the screaming Leftists say or do.
And His will is always GOOD.

RCV| 9.3.11 @ 5:26PM

Did God will Obama to be President in 2008?

Reprobate Charlatan Vomitus| 9.3.11 @ 7:41PM

I don't bother with silly being so stupid, and such an idiot, that I fail to realize, despite 64 years of lifelong study of Christianity, and of the Constitution, that since Wilson, liberalism has progressively been damaging the fundamental Christian, and Constitutional, fabric of this exceptional nation, at a pace that has been detrimental, which would have continued under a female Clinton - no, I am not so stupid, and such an idiot, that even I would offer to verify the gender - in inexorable manner, until it was too late, but instead, God Almighty, in His infinite wisdom, has truly blessed this nation exceptionally yet again, through a dithering idiot liar in chief downgrader, who is so stupid, and such an idiot, of such epic magnitude the stupidity and idiocy of whom dwarfs even my own, allowing the nation to finally acknowledge the obvious destruction, on stupidly, and idiotically, posting over, and over, and over, stupidly, and idiotically, matters.

RCV| 9.3.11 @ 9:06PM

Man up, Skip. Zzzzzzzzzzz .......

Reprobate Charlatan Vomitus| 9.3.11 @ 10:14PM

I don't bother with silly how stupid I am and what an idiot I am, to anonymously post under anonymous initials, anonymously, to have the gall to call out another poster, who, ironically, through the use of words and phrases is transparently obvious to any reader with a modicum of intellectual honesty, while calling out almost as often as posting 'z's, on the irony of the posted 'z's being the most intellectually honest comments I make, while being universally acknowledged for being morally unprincipled, for fraudulently deceiving, and for ejecting vomitus, over, and over, and over, yet again matters.

RCV| 9.3.11 @ 10:29PM

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzz.......

Margie| 9.4.11 @ 12:10AM

RCV,

If you knew your Bible you wouldn't be asking me this.
You DO know who the Ruler of this World is, don't you?

And as to God's will:
Ephesians 1:9 & 10.

RCV| 9.4.11 @ 2:36PM

Of course I know who the ruler of the world is. The question, however, is more theologically complex. Most Muslims believe, for example, as to Calvinists, that God is directly responsible for every action and decision that happens. He has predetermined all, and in that scenario, He decided that Obama would win and will decide if he is reelected.

Other theologians believe that God has given man free will; that human action matters because God is looking to us to make the right choices, but leaves the decision to us. In other words, all of us have the potential to choose God and to be saved.

I was just honestly wondering which alternative you believed in, or if you had a different perspective.

RCV| 9.4.11 @ 2:37PM

That should read "as do Calvinists".

Margie| 9.4.11 @ 5:05PM

I'm not into theology. I'm into the Bible (God's own Words).
I don't care what Calvin said, or anybody else for that matter~ only if what they say agrees with what is already written.
Bible believing Christians actually study the Bible, and don't worry about what men may say.
Everything one needs to know is already there, that's how God saw fit to make His will known. That, and by His Spirit which is the same Spirit that He gave to dwell inside the hearts of those who wrote the Bible. This amazing Gift is available for the asking to anyone who honestly and humbly asks:

"If you then, who are evil, know how to give good gifts to your children, how much more will the Heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to those who ask Him!" Lk. 11:13.

John the Baptist baptized with water, Jesus came to baptize with the Holy Spirit:

"I myself did not know Him; but He who sent me to baptize with water said to me, 'He on whom you see the Spirit descend and remain, this is He who baptizes with the Holy Spirit.'" Jn. 1:33.

But as usual, I digress!

In the book of Job, God arranged it for us to see that nothing is done without His permission. The Devil had to get God's permission to do what He did to Job.. but God told him not to take his life. Job trusted in the God of the Bible and came through his fiery ordeal blessed and mightily restored by God.

You didn't want to say it, but you know from your studying that the Devil is the Ruler of this World. Jn. 12:31, 14:30, 16:11, 1 Jn. 5:19.

And that when Christ returns, he is going to be destroyed, along with Death and Sin. 1 Cor. 15:25 & 26, Rom. 16:20.

The Bible says God gave Mankind the Earth to have dominion over it. Gen. 1:26. Then Mankind sinned. Gen. 6:5.

Fast forward to the fulfillment of the Law and the Prophets in Christ Jesus and no longer is there the requirement of Religion to save us but Salvation is through Christ Jesus, by Grace through faith since He has now become the Sacrificial Lamb of God.

John chapter three explains how we come into an actual relationship with God through Christ by receiving the Holy Spirit, being "born from above" or as the original Greek language says, "regenerated" from above.

God tells us in the Bible that not a single sparrow falls to the Earth with Him knowing it, as well as the fact that the hairs on our heads are numbered. Mt. 10:29 & 30.

Each man does either the will of God or the will of Satan. Those who are in Christ d His will. The rest are under the Ruler of this World.

God is Omnipotent and nothing is done without His knowledge, as it is written.
In Ephesians He tells us His plan:

"For he Has made known to us in all wisdom and insight the mystery of His will, according to His purpose which He set forth in Christ as a plan for the fulness of time, to unite all things in Him, things in Heaven and things on Earth." Eph. 1: 9 & 10.

There's the Omnipotent Glorious Truth!
He wins, though the purposes and intents of the hearts of men are evil all the day long.

Those who are in Him have no need to fear because He tells us so:

"Fear not, little flock, for it is your Father's good pleasure to give you the Kingdom." Lk. 12:32.

It's what I call the Big Picture vs. the little trash.

Margie| 9.4.11 @ 5:08PM

bad typo above. "He did to Job" s/b "he did to Job." (small 'h').

Oldefarte| 9.4.11 @ 1:21PM

Damn, I certainly hope NOT! If so, I'll abondon Christianity!!!!!

Paul| 9.4.11 @ 2:25PM

You already have abandoned Christianity.

Ask yourself: who would Jesus torture? Who would Jesus wiretap? Who would Jesus bomb back to the stoneage in an aggressive war based on lies? Would Jesus stage protests against the government because it was helping poor people? Would Jesus try and ban groups because they were registering poor people to vote?

Face it, Fart, you've long since switched teams.

Margie| 9.4.11 @ 5:10PM

And you actually think you're smart?

Paul| 9.5.11 @ 12:03PM

Margie, I'm actually starting to feel a little bad for you. You obviously want to refute what I've said, but your responses are so consistently brain-challenged and impotent, ultimately saying exactly nothing except "I read the bible but someone explains the big words to me."

Let your grandkids know what you're getting up to. There's no reason on earth they should let you prattle away on the internet making a fool of yourself.

Margie| 9.5.11 @ 1:12PM

Aww, a snake that feels bad?
LOL.
I don't think so!

Margie| 9.5.11 @ 1:16PM

p.s. I let the Word of God refute you.

"Why do you not know My speech? It
is because you are not able to hear My
Word. are of the Devil as father, and the
lusts of your father you desire to do. That
one was a murderer from the beginning,
and he has not stood in the truth, because
there is no truth in him. When he speaks a
lie, he speaks from his own things, because
he is a liar, and the father of it.
And because I speak the truth, you do
not believe Me." Jn. 8:43-45.

Margie| 9.5.11 @ 1:18PM

Correction: add the word you to the above verse: You are of the Devil.

Oldefarte| 9.5.11 @ 12:09PM

No, the Catholic Church abondoned me by permitting pedifilia within it ranks. Jesus would not torture---He established the Natural Law to be followed, gave man FREE WILL to choose and will JUDGE at death [life is the freedome to choose salvation and the necessity to accept judgement at death]. Jesus didn't bomb anyone [there were no bombs in his time], but he did drive money changers out of the temple and did judge the GOOD THIEF at Calvary. Jesus would protest a government that corruptfully used taxpayers money to enslave people for partisan political purposes. Jesus would ban people illegally registering people to vote illegally [ie Acorn] multiple times for politically partisan purposes!!!!!!!!!

Oldefarte| 9.5.11 @ 12:31PM

Paul: Obviously you're too young etc to have heard the old proverbs of [1]God helps those who help THEMSELVES and [2] Charity begins at HOME. If you want to help the poor, whip out YOUR wallet, don't STEAL from mine!!!!

BackToBasics| 9.5.11 @ 4:34PM

from your post - "Who would Jesus bomb back to the stoneage in an aggressive war based on lies?"

Jesus recognized that even His peaceful, loving and sacraficial ministry would bring division in the world. - "Think not that I am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword." Matthew 10:34

He also was angry enough to throw the moneychangers out of the temple twice and throw their money all around as well. (John 2:15 - early ministry, Matthew 21:12- prior to the cross) No doubt they lost considerable amounts on those 2 occasions.

But Jesus has several stages in His dealings with the world. In the future, after the world has mostly rejected Him he will come to purge the world and set up His kingdom. Revelations 19:11-16 speaks of Him coming in terrible wrath. For brevity I'll just include verse 15, "And out of his mouth goeth a sharp sword, that with it he should smite the nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron: and he treadeth the winepress of the fierceness and wrath of Almighty God. Revelations 19:15

These sayings that liberals love to post such as "Who would Jesus bomb" and new stimulus programs will now be called "targeted measures" by the Dems, etc., etc. These are contrived statements that are thrown up by libeals as shrapnel to try to justify themselves, misdirect the tens of millions of poorly informed voters and to throw off the conservative and / or Christian opposition.

Such a question is not based on a more full understanding of His ministry which is still ongoing and will show a judgmental period in the future.

BackToBasics| 9.5.11 @ 4:35PM

sp sacrificial, judgemental

BackToBasics| 9.5.11 @ 4:41PM

should say - These sayings that liberals love to post such as "Who would Jesus bomb" and the changed phrases e.g. the new stimulus programs will now be called "targeted measures" by the Dems, etc., etc. are contrived statements. Such phrases and clever definitions and rephrasings are thrown up by liberals as shrapnel to try to throw off the conservative and / or Christian opposition and to justify themselves as well as misdirect tens of millions of poorly informed voters.

Oldefarte| 9.2.11 @ 2:34PM

BS! Do you think there is an equal comparison between associations with corrupt businessmen, and with violent murderers and property destructers? Do you equate the followers of Pat Robertson with those of UBL? Did the former's followers fly airplanes filled with jet fuel into the twin towers on 9/11/01? Ayers, Doehn etc are/were violent domestic terrorists who were no different than the Muslim nutjobs that killed 3000+ on 9/11/01. Take your silly/stupid MSM liberalized comparisons and STICK IT WHERE THE SUN DON'T SHINE!!!!!!!!

shipley130| 9.2.11 @ 4:46PM

No, it's not old news. It comes up regularly on other blogs. We understand that Obama is closely aligned with Ayers, now.

Jeff Perren | 9.3.11 @ 11:55AM

There are circumstances in which "guilt by association" is quite valid. There are laws against criminal conspiracy. However, no one is suggesting that Obama actually took part in any of the criminal acts that Ayers and Dohrn admitted perpetrating.

(By the way, many criminal investigations are dropped for reasons other than lack of evidence, especially when they are years old, even when the perps are known to be guilty. Political connections in Chicago being one main cause.)

The fact is that Obama consorted with, and benefited from his connection with, known domestic terrorists. That's not "guilt by association" except in the most literal sense; it is an indicator of the kind of man he is.

Exposing his character is, indeed, one aspect of "solving our problems." Neutralizing a fascist who has no compunction about working closely with criminals like Ayers can be an important component of that.

Charie| 9.3.11 @ 3:03PM

All the questions you asked about Republicans have been loudly answered "Yes," and at length by the liberal Democrat party. You never heard all the screeching about Abramoff during the campaigns? You must have run into Rip Van Winkle somewhere.

You're forgetting the part in the article that says Ayers and Dohrn turned themselves in to police and confessed what they had done. Are you claiming that Republicans were running Chicago at that time? During the Daley tenure?

You might also want to remember that those who ignore their history are doomed to repeat it.

Kenneth Olsen | 9.2.11 @ 1:13PM

Nice history lesson. But the author's (and American Spectator's) deliberate avoidance of Jack Cashill's evidence and arguments that Ayers wrote Obama's first book is bizarre and frustrating. See "Deconstructing Obama" and decide for yourself. Ignoring it undermines American Spectator's credibility.

In Art:
http://lysanderspoonerlawschoo.....Itemid=100

Annabelle| 9.4.11 @ 12:06PM

I agree and had the same thought while reading this excellent article. Why no mention of the Cashill book? His literary analysis comes as close as literary analysis can to proving that Ayers wrote the Obama book.

Stan| 9.2.11 @ 1:16PM

What's even a larger criticism of the MSM is that we don't even have to look at Ayers past for problems. Focus on the Family would regularly bring his name up for all of the hare brained liberal schemes he was planning or implementing in Chicago's schools.

That alone should have destroyed his candidacy, but the Liberal media protection zone knows no boundaries.

Wayne | 9.2.11 @ 1:20PM

Notice the King Pin in all these activities has been Mayor Daley (1 and 2). They are the Don's of the Irish Athletic Club of Bridgeport, a gang that took over operations of Chicago and have now moved nationwide. Obama's job is to institute Chicago style corruption and power nationwide and worldwide.
Even the Communist are nothing more than tools for the gangs. And don't forget a Daley (William) is sitting in the White House directing every move of Obama. You never go more than 2 degrees from a Daley (who appointed Rahm as their successor in Chicago).

Paul| 9.2.11 @ 1:44PM

This is a silly article. Yes, Ayers and Dhorn were radicals who did some awful things. And yes, the fact that they escaped justice is a travesty. That all makes sense.

The article is silly because it's a rewarmed 2008 campaign talking point, to try and associate Obama with the Weather Underground, to suggest that like the WU, Obama is also a Marxist. This contention relies deeply on the audience not knowing what Marxism means.

Criticize Obama all you like (and there is A LOT to criticize), but claiming he's a Marxist is absurd. Obama has been just as corporatist in his policies as any republican. Time and again, he has prioritized the interests of multinational corporations over the average working American. What kind of Marxist does that? The answer is "no kind."

I know that this article wasn't meant to elicit this kind of critical thought, but was mainly preaching to the choir and telling them something that makes them feel good. And hey, it's nice to feel good. But if you go around believing these ideas are true, eventually someone is going to ridicule you for believing something so absurd. And that's not going to feel good anymore.

Oldefarte| 9.2.11 @ 2:47PM

You're a flamin' liberal retard, obviously. Re-Read the GD editorial, stupid. It does not claim that Obama is a Marxist, but that he's an ultra liberal extremist who has associated himself with same by choice. Wright, Ayers, Doehn etc are NOT MAINSTREAM AMERICAN CITIZENS, but are radical extremists bent upon socialization of this country. The Weather Underground existed in the 1960's before Obama got out of short pants, stupid. Ayers/Doehn were of that era, not Obama, DA. What's implied in this editorial rightfully is that he freely associated with these individuals and was not forced into same. Why? Simple, because he and they are of like mind philosophically, that's why!!!!!!

Paul| 9.2.11 @ 2:58PM

I understand that if you don't have a valid point, you can try and make it up with ad hominem attacks. You actually make my point.

So according to you, Obama isn't a Marxist but an "ultra liberal extremist." First question: can you explain the difference between these two? Second question: can you point to anything Obama has DONE that can be considered "ultra liberal extremist?"

If you don't have any answer to this, feel free to call me a retard again and I'll know what you mean.

Charie| 9.3.11 @ 3:13PM

I don't care if he's socialist, communist, Marxist, Leninist, Trotskyite or Stalinist. He does not believe in a free market economy or American mores. His cozying up to Wall Street is to get money for his billion dollar election campaign.

He pretty well had his way with them during his first campaign. He was their biggest donation recipient. Now Fannie and Freddie have rolled over for good. I have no idea of how much money they're good for this time, but I'll bet it ain't wooden nickels.

Oldefarte| 9.4.11 @ 1:24PM

I'll make your point again since you obviously have trouble reading English: '...Marxism is an economic and socio-political worldview and method of socioeconomic inquiry that centers upon a materialist interpretation of history, a dialectical view of social change, and an analysis and critique of the development of capitalism. Marxism was pioneered in the early to mid 19th century by two German philosophers, Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels. Marxism encompasses Marxian economic theory, a sociological theory and a revolutionary view of social change that has influenced socialist political movements worldwide.

The Marxian analysis begins with an analysis of material conditions, taking at its starting point the necessary economic activities required by human society to provide for its material needs. The form of economic organization, or mode of production, is understood to be the basis from which the majority of other social phenomena — including social relations, political and legal systems, morality and ideology — arise (or at the least by which they are greatly influenced). These social relations form the superstructure, of which the economic system forms the base. As the forces of production, most notably technology, improve, existing forms of social organization become inefficient and stifle further progress.

These inefficiencies manifest themselves as social contradictions in society in the form of class struggle. Under the capitalist mode of production, this struggle materializes between the minority who own the means of production; the bourgeoisie, and the vast majority of the population who produce goods and services; the proletariat. Taking the idea that social change occurs because of the struggle between different classes within society who are under contradiction against each other, the Marxist analysis leads to the conclusion that capitalism oppresses the proletariat, the inevitable result being a proletarian revolution.

Marxism views the socialist system as a being prepared by the historical development of capitalism. According to Marxism, Socialism is a historical necessity (but not however, an inevitability [1]). In a socialist society private property in the means of production would be superseded by co-operative ownership. The socialist system would succeed capitalism as humanity's mode of production through worker's revolution. Capitalism according to Marxist theory can no longer sustain the living standards of the population due to its need to compensate for falling rates of profit by driving down wages, cutting social benefits and pursuing military aggression. A socialist economy would not base production on the accumulation of capital, but would instead base production and economic activity on the criteria of satisfying human needs - that is, production would be carried out directly for use.

Eventually, socialism would give way to a communist stage of history: a classless, stateless system based on common ownership and free-access, superabundance and maximum freedom for individuals to develop their own capacities and talents. As a political movement, Marxism advocates for the creation of such a society....'!!!!!

Margie| 9.2.11 @ 3:37PM

Oldefarte,

They always keep asking for examples and yet when they're given ignore them and act like none were given.

Like water off a duck's back!!

Paul| 9.2.11 @ 4:13PM

Margie, there have been no examples of one single ACTION of Obama's that can be considered Marxist. You either already know that and are pretending the opposite (which I guess is easier than trying to make the point yourself), or you don't know that because you're unable to read.

Which is it?

If you still want to insist that examples have been provided, I invite you to point them out specifically.

Ken (Old Texican)| 9.2.11 @ 5:01PM

Paul,
I can give you one example of Obama being a communist, (pardon the shorthand).

ie: "He presided over the deaths of a hundred thousand innocent American babies with a smile on his face."
You, Paul, are a communist as well, practicing "disinformation" by the bucket full.

It's too late, a-hole. We are on to your lies.
Kiss my butt.

Paul| 9.2.11 @ 5:08PM

Ken, I realize you have the same problem as other commenters, in that you don't have a strong point, and need to make up for this weakness by calling me names. I suppose that comes with your territory.

Can you show me a picture of Obama smiling at the deaths of those innocent babies? I don't just mean a picture of him smiling, but smiling in a way that you describe. The babies should be in the picture too.

No? So what you're saying is that he's president, and while he's been president, abortions have occurred. You can say the same thing about George W. Bush and every other republican president since Nixon. Were they all Marxists?

Dan Hirsch| 9.2.11 @ 5:46PM

What is the little President's position on Roe v. Wade? I bet he'd smile at it.

There, there's your picture of Obama smiling at dead babies.

Here's the question for you, Paul:

Are you just stupid or are you just a useful idiot?

Please pick, stupid, because that would be excusable...

Don't tread on me...

Paul| 9.2.11 @ 6:16PM

=======================
What is the little President's position on Roe v. Wade? I bet he'd smile at it.

There, there's your picture of Obama smiling at dead babies.
=======================

So, what you're saying is, if you can imagine something that never happened, that means it's true. That succinctly explained delusion actually explains this article and most of the comments. Thanks for the clarification.

Southern_Comment| 9.3.11 @ 2:14AM

Really? Show me a picture of Obama smiling over dead babies? That's just silly. What a worthless and silly command.
Well of course we couldn't show you that picture. We could show you a picture of Obama saluting military caskets at an solemn even where the families of these fallen soldiers had requested no cameras.
No, that does not necessarily prove he's a marxist, but it does prove what a POS he is.

Southern_Comment| 9.3.11 @ 2:15AM

typo - an = a

Paul| 9.3.11 @ 1:10PM

Your fellow imbecile above imagined Obama smiling about aborted babies, and then used that product of his imagination in an attempt to prove something factual. By asking him to provide some sort of proof for his imaginary story, I was hoping to show him that he simply made his proof up, and that it was entirely meaningless.

I know it must be hard to grasp a concept like that when you're as dumb as a rock. So I'm happy to provide a more thorough explanation for folks like you.

===============================
We could show you a picture of Obama saluting military caskets at an solemn even where the families of these fallen soldiers had requested no cameras.
===============================

No cameras wasn't the families' request; it was the Bush Administration's, who wanted to hide every trace of the fact that the country is at war, so his campaign contributors can continue to profit from it with taxpayer dollars while you blissfully watch Dancing With The Stars.

Charie| 9.3.11 @ 3:18PM

Paul, are you genuinely naive or just being disingenuous? While still a rep. in Illinois he voted not only for partial birth abortion but that babies who survived being aborted must be allowed to die. That is a matter of public record if you care to check it out.

The babies are not available for pictures. They're all dead.

PS GWB would die himself before voting for such a law! You can take that to the bank.

Margie| 9.2.11 @ 7:02PM

Obama has almost single-handidly put some private sector businesses out of business, took over some of the auto industry making it Government Motors (and has now appointed yet another Czar~ a Car Czar), to continue this fraud, oops and what about the "bail-outs" and yet he keeps spending. The stinking Marxists want to utterly trash the economy so that we'll all have to suck off the government teat, and yet you say, "Where is it? I don't see it!"

Supercilious hack!
Duh. This Leftist hack (Paul) must be blind. Oh, wait, that's part of the mental disease called Liberalism.

Paul| 9.2.11 @ 7:10PM

Margie, you're one of the few who is able to stammer out a response. Let me try and address it.

What private sector businesses did he "almost single handidly (sic)" put out of business. What did he do to make that happen?

Calling GM "Government Motors" implies that the government has some hand in running the country. It doesn't. The government has loaned GM some money to keep it in business so it wouldn't lay off tens of thousands of employees and further damage the country in the short term. You may not think that was a good idea (I don't), but to suggest that GM has been taken over the government simply means that you do not understand this issue very well.

Railing about "the czars" is silly. It's just a title in the administration, and has nothing to do with the czars of Russia. If you felt that strongly about it, why didn't you complain when Reagan first introduced the term, or when Bush Jr expanded the number of czars in his administration? Your selective criticism exposes you as a partisan hack rather than some sort of principled person.

The "stinking Marxists want to utterly trash the economy so that we'll all have to suck off the government teat" just presided over the single largest drop in government spending on public programs in the last 60 years. Either you're ignorant of this fact, or you don't know what a Marxist is.

Paul| 9.2.11 @ 7:12PM

Sorry, I meant this:
Calling GM "Government Motors" implies that the government has some hand in running the COMPANY.

Margie| 9.2.11 @ 7:48PM

You guys crack me up. we keep telling it like it is and you keep glossing over the truth.

It's all just so.. silly, isn't it? Why~ we must be dreaming! Yeah, that's the ticket!! We're all hallucinating here!
Sorry but the country is waking up. I don't know if you're getting paid to do what you do here, but it just doesn't work!

And you have no idea whether I complained about other politicians or not~ another trait you Marxists have of making yourselves God.

Spare me.

Paul| 9.2.11 @ 8:07PM

======================
You guys crack me up. we keep telling it like it is and you keep glossing over the truth.
======================

If what you were saying were true, then you could have put me in my place far more effectively by countering every single thing I say with this "truth." However, you can't do that, as you know.

======================
And you have no idea whether I complained about other politicians or not
======================

Of course I know. How do I know? Because 1) you have not exhibited the kind of integrity required to criticize one of your own, and 2) because if you had ever voiced such criticism, you would show that now and refute my claim. For example, you could say "Yeah, it's all Reagan's fault for starting the czar thing in the first place!!" But you could never, ever utter such words.

Sorry, Margie. But if you want to stop feeling so stupid, you'd better find something else to occupy yourself.

Margie| 9.2.11 @ 8:33PM

I don't feel stupid~ only for having anything to do with you!

Answer not a fool according to his folly.

Betina| 9.2.11 @ 8:04PM

Yeah, we do. You're it.

Betina| 9.2.11 @ 8:04PM

Yeah, we do. You're it.

Paul| 9.2.11 @ 8:15PM

What a stunning rebuttal! I'm sure that really wowed the retards.

Margie| 9.5.11 @ 1:10PM

"We?"
We who?
You Yourself and You?

Oldefarte| 9.5.11 @ 12:46PM

He's trying to put the oil companies out of business by his Interior Dept's refusla to grant drilling permits. His Justice Dept is suing major banks currently over some bogus investment issue. No/wrong, GM/Chrysler was loaned money to keep LABOR UNION workers from losing their jobs [just as the $800 billion NON-STIMULUS was solely to keep LABOR UNION government workers from being fired]. PS, moron, the car companies are the only government borrowers who have not to date repaid their government loans and never will do so. Also, your LARGEST SPENDING DROP IN 60 YEARS would have been 300% larger if not for your Marxist friends [aka Democrats] that continually scream their Marxism about FAT CAT BANKERS etc and prevent governmental spending reduction due to their socialistic criminality!!!!!!

Margie| 9.5.11 @ 1:10PM

The 'retards" that "Paul" mentions is anybody who understands what he's all about. A phony and a lying Liberal.. and that's putting it lightly.

Oldefarte| 9.4.11 @ 1:26PM

I gave you EXAMPLES above. Read them and think!!!!!!

Paul| 9.4.11 @ 2:16PM

You copied and pasted that from some external site, and you don't even know what it means.

Oldefarte| 9.5.11 @ 12:53PM

No, you're the dumb ars whose too stupid to respond intelligently concerning this because you can't/won't. The above definition of Marxism is the facts, the truth. It basically and generally says that he's [by his own GD words to Joe the Plumber] a WEALTH-REDISTRIBUTOR, who wants to destroy our capitalistic country and re-create it into a socialistic one [whereas the government steals or taxes the income from its rightful owners and REDISTRIBUTES same to the indigent and worthless among society]. By his own words, ie FAT CAT BANKERS AND INSURANCE COMPANIES, constantly screaming for INCOME TAX INCREASES and for every taxpayer to have to PAY A LITTLE BIT MORE etc. Explain yourself, you ignorant programmed dumbars [clean off behind your ear lobes since you've got his excrement behind same from kissing his rear-end]!!!!!!

Margie| 9.5.11 @ 1:08PM

"Paul" has to render everyone who is actually intelligent as incapable of reasoning because otherwise, he'd have to face the fact that he's a fraud.

Nick| 9.2.11 @ 8:09PM

Paul,

"Time and again, he has prioritized the interests of multinational corporations over the average working American."

This surprises you? Marxists have always been hypocrites. Lenin, Trotsky, and Stalin didn't live in tiny apartments and eat stale bread and water.

They lived just like the Tsar and his ministers. And, so does President Downgrade and his regime.

Paul| 9.2.11 @ 8:18PM

So...when I show you how he does non-Marxist things, that just proves that he's a Marxist? I suppose if we take that even further, let's say he does the least Marxist thing in the world...like deregulating everything so we were all living in a Dickens novel. To you that would prove that he's the ultimate Marxist, because only a Marxist would do something so opposing to Marxism while still being a Marxist.

Do you ever listen to yourself?

carnot| 9.2.11 @ 8:46PM

ummm...the New Economic Policy was "non-Marxist". what kind of bilge are you selling. you're conflating means with ends.

dissembling pinhead.

Nick| 9.3.11 @ 1:02AM

Paul,

"So...when I show you how he does non-Marxist things, that just proves that he's a Marxist?"

No, I was just proving that your statement was false, as proven by history.

President Downgrade has admitted that he chose the "Marxist professors" as his friends, in Dreams of My Father:

"To avoid being mistaken for a sellout, I chose my friends carefully: the more politically active black students, the foreign students, the Chicanos, the Marxist Professors and structural feminists and punk-rock performance poets."

The one thing that leftist learned in the 1950's was that they could not express their marxism overtly. So, they always deny that they are socialists, or marxists, or fascists.

But, President Downgrade lets his marxist tendencies slip out when the teleprompter isn't around. Like when he told Joe "the plumber" that he wanted to "spread the wealth around."

And, actions speak louder than mere words. Such as appointing avowed marxist Van Jones to his regime. Jones was just one of the many marxists who have been appointed, and continue to infest O'Bama's administration.

There haven't been this many communists in the Executive branch of the Federal Government since the Polio Prince, FDR, was president.

Paul| 9.3.11 @ 1:04PM

==========================
No, I was just proving that your statement was false, as proven by history.
==========================

You didn't prove anything, though it's kinda cute that you think you did. You basically said "Obama is rich, and so were Lenin and Trotsky. Therefore, Obama is a Marxist." Do you want me to explain why that reasoning is stupid?

==========================
President Downgrade
==========================

This is easily the most dishonest teabagger slogan of them all. The cause of the downgrade is due to the teabaggers in Congress who were fully prepared to let the country default on its loans so they could score political points. This fact was not lost on the investing community, which inevitably reduced confidence in our government bonds, which resulted in S&P downgrading our credit. Your inability to connect these simple dots does not change these facts.

==========================
admitted that he chose the "Marxist professors" as his friends, in Dreams of My Father:
==========================

OK, I get that you've never been to college so let me explain a few things. Kids in their 20s widen their horizons when they get into university, and explore things that they're apt to be done with by the time they're adults. So Obama hung out with "Marxist professors" in college (the result of which has not influenced any of his actions, as you've all demonstrated on this very thread). Compare what George W. Bush was doing during the same period in his life: getting drunk, doing loads of coke, wrecking cars, causing scenes. You managed to overlook Bush's youthful dalliances, but not Obama's. This is the attitude of a partisan hack, not an honest, principled person.

==========================
The one thing that leftist learned in the 1950's was that they could not express their marxism overtly. So, they always deny that they are socialists, or marxists, or fascists.
==========================

In other words, in your revised version of history, the 60s never happened. Interesting. Also interesting how you conflate socialism and marxism (left with ideologies) with fascism (a right wing extremism). You really do not know what you're talking about, and are making a fool out of yourself in front of those that do.

==========================
But, President Downgrade lets his marxist tendencies slip out when the teleprompter isn't around. Like when he told Joe "the plumber" that he wanted to "spread the wealth around."
==========================

Again, you conflate words with actions. Obama has said all sorts of things that never translated into action. The "spread the wealth around" comment is just one more example of this. He actually has done nothing to spread around any such wealth. Quite the opposite: he has overseen greater cuts in public spending than any president since Hoover.

Charie| 9.3.11 @ 3:24PM

You must work for the Democrat Party. You have as good a handle on spin as anything else I've seen. Spin as much as you like. It still doesn't make what you say the truth.

Nick| 9.3.11 @ 6:27PM

Paul,

"You basically said "Obama is rich, and so were Lenin and Trotsky."

No, that is not what I stated. Is English your second language?

You claimed that because President Downgrade "has prioritized the interests of multinational corporations over the average working American," that this somehow proved he was not a marxist. I proved that your assertion was false, because all marxists who attain power do the same thing.

"The cause of the downgrade is due to the [T.E.A. Partyers] in Congress [...]."

O'Bama had two and a half years to raise the debt ceiling, and did nothing. That is why he will be forever known as President Downgrade.

"Kids in their 20s widen their horizons [...]."

When I was in my 20's, I was well aware of how truly evil the marxist ideology was to the societies it infected. So did most of my friends. Because we could think for ourselves.

"In other words, in your revised version of history, the 60s never happened."

Oh, I didn't realize that there were members of the democrat party running openly as marxists in the '60s. Except, maybe, Eugene McCarthy, that is. Would you please name these out-of-the-closet marxists? You are aware what the underground in Weather Underground stands for, don't you?

"Also interesting how you conflate socialism and marxism (left with ideologies) with fascism (a right wing extremism)."

Fascism is an ideology of the left. Try reading some history. Mussolini was a man of the left. His father was a communist.

"Again, you conflate words with actions."

I listed the actions in the next paragraph. Did you stop reading? Or, did the person reading it you, stop at that point?

President Downgrade/Ditherer, and his regime, are a bunch of marxists. No one really disputes this anymore. You really shouldn't try to debate at the adult table, sonny.

RCV| 9.4.11 @ 2:44PM

Nick, ifhe you really believe that President Obama and his administration "are a bunch of Marxists" and that "no one really disputes this anymore," you need to get out more and widen your circle of information. Millions and millions of Americans dispute that, including everyone I know personally, even those who are ardent conservative Republicans. They recognize that President Obama is a liberal Democrat (most Democrats I know believe he is a centrist compromising Democrat, to thir chagrin) with whom they vehemently disagree on policy issues.

Nick| 9.4.11 @ 6:48PM

RCV,

Okay, you caught me. I was just pushing Paul's buttons to get a reaction. You should know me better, by now.

I refer to O'Bama as a marxist in a general way. There are too many branches of socialism, since the time of Marx, to try to figure out which school best describes President Downgrade.

You don't have to believe 100% of what Marx spewed to be a marxist, by the way. From where I stand, way over here on the far-right, it doesn't really matter whether you agree with 90% of what Marx said, or, only 60%. It still means that you have marxist/socialist tendencies.

Also, believing that someone is a marxist does not mean that I believe they are a Stalinist or Leninist. It is hard to be precise on this forum, sometimes. A quick quip can be totally misunderstood.

John II explains this to Paul with great eruditeness and aplomb, below. I agree with everything he wrote. He states things so much better than I ever could. O'Bama is better described as a "Euro-socialist," as John II referred to him, below.

Enjoy the rest of your Labor Day weekend, comrade! Ha-ha!

Nick| 9.4.11 @ 6:51PM

p.s. Did you notice that Paul didn't even try to reply/rebut what I wrote, even though he was here today?

RCV| 9.4.11 @ 7:31PM

Same to you, Nick. And actually, Labor Day was designated as the capitalist alternative to May Day, the international workers' day, so it's okay for good conservatives to enjoy it! All honest labor deserves respect! Be well, friend!

carnot| 9.3.11 @ 10:52PM

"he actually done nothing to spread around such wealth" bahahahahaahaha

OBAMACARE. STIMULUS.

again...dissembling little liar. redistribution and spending cuts (which he hasn't done) are not mutually exclusive.

George| 9.4.11 @ 8:09PM

Paul
You have way too much time. Get a job and help the deficit.

Oldefarte| 9.4.11 @ 1:27PM

See my above posts for a definition of Marxism and examples of why El Chosen One is one!!!!!

Oldefarte| 9.5.11 @ 12:55PM

regulation [de-regulating] has nothing to do with Marxism, idiot!!!!!!!!

shipley130| 9.2.11 @ 1:47PM

I would like to put a theory out that hasn't gotten much airtime. America does not know Chicago politics, therefore, Americans do not understand what Obama is. As a subtitle, Americans have been told that the Cold War is over, therefore, have forgotten the rotten Communist Manifesto.

Betina| 9.2.11 @ 2:05PM

No surprise about Bernadette's DNA. No doubt the Marxist fervor can be traced directly to her Jewish genes. What is it with these people? Communists, Socialists, revolutionaries. Take a look at the biggest mouths of the Vietnam Era - most were red diaper babies, born to and raised by Jews to wage war on the rest of society. They are no different than their counterparts in the Soviet Union who murdered millions and made a particular target of the religious. Until Americans know of and are taught of the perfidy of left wing Jews in this country and around the world, we will still be at their mercy. Take a look at George Soros who is the epitome of the species. The ACLU, Lawyer's Guild, "progressive" movement, Women's Movement, the attempts to bleach America of all Christianity, all front groups for international communism whose members are disproportionately Jewish. Who is defending the Muslim incursion with the loudest voices? And they wonder why anti-Semitism is on the rise and people hate them Only an arrogant devious slimeball would rain hatred on the heads of everyone they come in contact with and demand to be loved and tolerated.

Ken (Old Texican)| 9.2.11 @ 5:04PM

Betina, Heil Hitler!
Let's kill ALL the Jews.
(sarcasm)

Paul| 9.2.11 @ 5:34PM

Don't be surprised, Ken. That's where your kind of movement eventually goes.

Dan Hirsch| 9.2.11 @ 5:48PM

Paul:

Are you just stupid or a truly useful idiot?

We want to know!

Paul| 9.2.11 @ 6:18PM

You notice I don't ask you this question? I already know that answer.

Ken (Old Texican)| 9.2.11 @ 7:10PM

Dan,
Paul is definitely a "useful idiot". His talking points go all the way back to 1950.

He would not recognize "Truth" if it slapped him upside the head.
Poor sod.
Pray for him.

Paul| 9.2.11 @ 7:18PM

You know, guys, you're making these utterly insubstantial comments when you could be actually addressing my points with tangible counter-points.

It's hardly a secret why you aren't doing that. From what I've seen, no one here has a grasp of Obama's policies nor any understanding of Marxism. It's like a bunch of fish getting together to describe what it's like in the desert.

Anyhow, I'm sure you can all convince yourselves that you're correct. That's the definition of an echo chamber. However, that disquieting feeling that causes you to come on here and call me stupid and whatnot, while being totally unable to refute anything I've said? That's called "Cognitive Dissonance." It's what happens when your cherished beliefs clash with an undeniable reality. The response is an almost violent need to shut the person up who is the voice of reality.

Is there anyone here with a brain and an understanding of Marxism who wants to discuss this?

Margie| 9.2.11 @ 7:49PM

Paul needs to actually go and read the article, methinks.

carnot| 9.4.11 @ 5:23PM

you don't make points...you randomly align unproven assertions and then scream: "see?!"

George| 9.4.11 @ 8:12PM

Paul.
Nobody wants to discuss a loser ideology like Marxism. Are you still in college, get a job and help the deficit by paying taxes.

Paul| 9.5.11 @ 12:07PM

George, this article is about Marxism. Your claim that nobody wants to discuss it is belied by this article itself and hundreds of comments about it.

idalily| 9.5.11 @ 12:04AM

The reason we're not debating with you is simple: you just aren't worth the bother. Someone like you will never be convinced by any logical argument, so we're just...well, toying with you. Sorry, but you do bring it on yourself. Please trot back to Huff Po.

Oldefarte| 9.5.11 @ 12:58PM

You're obviously some kind of artsy-farsy Ivy League sociology major working for Acorn, right????????

Margie| 9.2.11 @ 7:03PM

Doesn't he sound an awful lot like RCV?

Ken (Old Texican)| 9.2.11 @ 7:16PM

Naw, Margie.
RCV is simply a limosine liberal. I truly don't believe RCV is a committed communist. I think he merely carries a ton of guilt being a "gunslinger" for some crappy corporations and making a ton of money out of it.

Margie| 9.2.11 @ 7:52PM

Aww, you're being kind, Ken. LOL. I am sure RCV will appreciate it.
Liberal guilt is truly as they say, "a real bitch!"

Paul| 9.2.11 @ 7:45PM

Let me guess. This RCV person is the only other person you've ever encountered with an IQ over 80.

Margie| 9.2.11 @ 7:55PM

"Talk no more so very proudly, let not arrogance come from your mouth; for the LORD is a God of knowledge, and by Him actions are weighed." 1 Sam. 2:3.

Guess that must be where that old saying comes from.. "actions speak louder than words."

Margie| 9.2.11 @ 7:56PM

That was to Paul See Paul, it depends on what kind of knowledge, and how it is used that's important.

Right?

Paul| 9.2.11 @ 8:00PM

=========================
"Talk no more so very proudly, let not arrogance come from your mouth; for the LORD is a God of knowledge, and by Him actions are weighed." 1 Sam. 2:3.
=========================

That's funny, considering you were the author of this oh-so-proud (and also completely untrue) comment:

"They always keep asking for examples and yet when they're given ignore them and act like none were given.

Like water off a duck's back!!"

=========================
Guess that must be where that old saying comes from.. "actions speak louder than words."
=========================

That's pretty ironic, considering that the only thing people can point to as an example of "Obama's Marxism" are his words rather than actions.

Margie, I'm afraid I can use your own words to refute every single inanity you utter. This is a sign that you're out of your depth in this conversation. You might want to go turn on the teevee. It will make you feel better.

Margie| 9.2.11 @ 8:03PM

Aww, I don't have teevee. I got sick of listening to hacks like you, "sir."

Keep 'em coming, big man.

Oldefarte| 9.5.11 @ 12:59PM

He sounds [box-of-nails] STUPID !!!!!!

Charie| 9.3.11 @ 3:30PM

No. It's where your kind of Leftist movement goes. The rise in anti-Semitism can be laid right to the beginning of the leftist movement being on the side of the PLO and its subsequent incarnation.

Perhaps Jews are doomed to always choose the wrong side until it's too late.

It makes no difference though. They are beleaguered by "Palestinian" terrorists in Israel and by all reports, their Left seems to be frothing at the mouth to turn their country (and the lives of their citizens) over to their enemy.

I think "useful idiots" really does apply here.

carnot| 9.3.11 @ 10:54PM

well...if that is the sad truth...hope they show up at your door first! one less fabricator won't show up on the debt side of the ledger!

Oldefarte| 9.4.11 @ 1:35PM

Betina [what's that Black Muslim possibly....if so HOW'S YO MOMMA AND THEM or GO SLAP YO MOMMA maybe]: You and your ilk simply hate Jews simply because they are smarter than you, more productive than you, own more assets than you, etc. They OWN things, as compared to you who are forced to [due to your stupidity] WORK FROM NINE TO FIVE [and probably fro Jews]. They are lawyers, doctors, business owners, entertainment producers/financiers, book writers, architects, etc; while you are govmet laborers, welfare collectors, unionized teachers, ditch diggers, latrene cleaners, horse manure salesmen, etc. Sorry for your loss, but don't blame those who are intelligent, hard working, religious, stupious, asset acquirers/owners for your failings in life, okay???????????

Betina| 9.5.11 @ 12:18PM

Congratulations on making my argument for me. By cataloging the list of superlatives you have outlined you have highlighted one of the most obnoxious traits of the subject matter at hand: arrogance. Take a look around you. Jews did not create the most successful nation in the history of the world. Christians did. And in so doing provided a safe haven for Jews to multiply and divide one American against the other. That's the thanks we get? You assert they are the "best" of all, this from a group who is always pushing for EGALITARIANISM? What a laugh. That's correct. Push everyone to their lowest level, so they can REIGN and rule. Isn't it odd that those pushing for the dumbing down of America continue to demand the best for themselves? You can rail all you want, hurl invective after invective, bristle with righteousness which you think makes you better than everyone who disagrees with you but the facts speak for themselves: Jews (the left wing/marxist cancer) are more concerned with their own success and only leech from others in order to advance their socialism which is the loser's attempt to reap a capitalist's return on the misery and labor of everyone but themselves. By the way, your ID fits.

Margie| 9.5.11 @ 1:04PM

Betina sees only Jewish people as Leftist Marxist Cancer?
What does that say about her?
I wonder who taught her to believe such a lie?
Who is the father of lies?
Surely you know.
Jn. 8:44.

Oldefarte| 9.5.11 @ 1:10PM

Betina/Rowina etc: Where did you come from? Are you another one of the community organizers from Chicago perhaps? ['..leech from others, their own success, their socialism..'] You're obviously either stupid as Hades or a black Muslim best upon Jewish destruction. How do they leech? Why is dedication to one's own success a crime or fault [since we live in a capitalistic nation, fool]? By socialism, do you possibly mean their cohesiveness or family orientation nature [and if so, why is that a fault]? You need serious psychiatric assistence immediately!!!!!

RCV| 9.5.11 @ 5:38PM

Betina obviously shares most of your political philosophy, not the Democrats, and that hardly surprises me. She might be Clint's sister.

RCV| 9.4.11 @ 4:19PM

Back in your hole, Betina

Betina| 9.5.11 @ 12:20PM

After you.

Oldefarte| 9.5.11 @ 1:13PM

Is that consensual????????

Petronius| 9.2.11 @ 2:10PM

Like I said before, it's a shame that Sheriff Woods didn't give the command to open fire. These hippies in the White House west wing wouldn't be fulfilling their dreams of ruining our lives.

Nat X| 9.2.11 @ 2:21PM

An interesting article about two ignorant teenagers who are living proof that any 7th rate mediocrities can get into and get through our so-called best universities.

idalily| 9.5.11 @ 12:05AM

Scary, isn't it?

miken| 9.2.11 @ 2:39PM

You guys didn't investigate Jack Cashill's claim that Ayers wrote Dreams From My Father?
It even mentions an Obama girlfriend who is like Ayers' girlfriend, including looks and living on an estate with a lake in the middle.

davelnaf| 9.2.11 @ 2:46PM

I don’t know if it’s still on YouTube, but there’s an interview of Dohrn where she goes on and on in a scatterbrained way and some length about this and that—it was hard to tell what she was talking about.

Yes, one’s associations say a lot about who and what you are and Obama’s association with these two people suggests that he may live in the same alternate universe. The people of this country will long remember this experiment in the business end of what radicals do and what they are all about. It's almost as if Obama planted a bomb, too, only he can't run away from its consequences as they did.

Ron| 9.2.11 @ 3:20PM

Only in the great USA can an unrepentant terrorist psychophant, bent on the destruction of the United Sates, become a "respected" educator...or President of the United States.

unreceivedogma| 9.2.11 @ 3:28PM

Aren't we all getting a little tired of this? I associate with Republicans, that doesn't mean I'm a bad person.

Angus Macowpy| 9.2.11 @ 4:21PM

No, because it matters. Republicans would inspire you to be your best. As it it I perceive you must also associate with A-holes.

unreceivedogma| 9.2.11 @ 9:24PM

And you must associate with gasholes.

John II| 9.2.11 @ 3:54PM

The point has been made often before, but I've never quite got over the observation that the radical left, soi-disant defenders of the "working classes," draw their ranks exclusively from the very well-heeled upper middle class and from the out-and-out wealthy.

Nothing's perfect is this fallen world. The free market system delivers the bacon as no other, and, although a certain kind of capitalism can thrive in an authoritarian state, no real democracy is possible without a free market system shaping its economic arrangements.

That said, it must also be observed that one of the toxic byproducts of capitalism is socialism. Poverty can do terrible things to people, but so can prosperity. In my personal acquaintance with many hundreds of lefties and radicals and assorted fruitcakes of similar disposition, I have never met one who did not come from a prosperous background.

The prosperity, of course, is not a sufficient condition for lefty pretensions (among other things, it takes a certain smugness and self-importance and hypocrisy and stupidity and degeneracy), but the prosperity does appear to be a necessary condition without which there would be no Left.

And now back to "Easy Rider" (1969), in which the insufferable Peter Fonda and Dennis Hopper define a spoiled and toxic generation. The flick itself is a bore, but much of the critical response was inadvertently revealing. At least it had a happy ending.

Paul| 9.2.11 @ 4:25PM

====================
In my personal acquaintance with many hundreds of lefties and radicals and assorted fruitcakes of similar disposition, I have never met one who did not come from a prosperous background.
====================

John II, all this means is that you ought to get out more. Failing that, you can also look into some studies on demographics:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/L.....n_liberals

Here's the takeaway:
Of those who identified as liberal, 49% were college graduates and 41% had household incomes exceeding $75,000, compared to 27% and 28% as the national average, respectively.

That means 59% of self-identified liberals have household incomes under $75,000. From talking to your "many hundreds of lefties," how did you manage to miss the majority?

Ken (Old Texican)| 9.2.11 @ 5:09PM

Paul,
your "wisdom" cannot survive here. Why?
Because I am here.

You are a liar and the truth is not in you. You set up the same old straw-men you communists always set up.
Kiss my hiney.

Paul| 9.2.11 @ 5:28PM

=====================
You are a liar and the truth is not in you.
=====================

This is what passes for "wisdom" in your house? Seriously?

OK, genius, please point out exactly where I've lied, and demonstrate (using references as necessary) where I veered from the truth. Good luck!

Dan Hirsch| 9.2.11 @ 5:50PM

PAUL!!!!

Which is it? Stupid or useful idiot?? C'mon which is it?

Paul| 9.2.11 @ 6:17PM

I take your vacuous comment to mean that no, try as you might, you cannot find one instance where I lied. Failing that, you may as well call me stupid because hey, it worked great in the 3rd grade!

Margie| 9.2.11 @ 7:05PM

Paul,

You are living a lie. You are actually defending a lie and liars.
Clear enough?

Paul| 9.2.11 @ 7:24PM

Crystal clear! I've asked you to provide one single example of where I've lied, and you realize you can't. But you're still committed to calling me names, because you've got nothing else to say in defense of your worldview.

This is the level of discourse that takes place daily on elementary school playgrounds. It's not difficult to comprehend.

Margie| 9.2.11 @ 8:01PM

This is the level of discourse that takes place daily on elementary school playgrounds. It's not difficult to comprehend."

That's funny. If I recall, you're the one who started it with the taunts of, "Tell me one thing, just one thing Obama has done..!"

LOL. When we do, you continue with the mind games, and now you end with the name calling and insulting.. such a phony!

John II| 9.2.11 @ 7:23PM

For the record, you may be interested in rereading my post, Paul. On the other hand, you may not be. In any event, I did not use the term "liberal." That's because my topic was not about "self-identified liberals." I have no reason to suppose you're a liar, but you have indeed provided a fair chunk of evidence to indicate that you're not at all an attentive reader.

And now back to "The Manchurian Candidate," the superior 1962 version in which, for example, John McGiver plays a liberal of passing smugness. By and large, liberals present a different problem for the culture. Whatever their incomes or callings, they seldom seem apt at the business of raising good kids.

Paul| 9.2.11 @ 7:29PM

John, since I've refuted all your main points, you're flailing now. So you didn't mean "liberal." You meant " lefties and radicals and assorted fruitcakes of similar disposition." Which I guess can serve to mean whatever you want it to, in order to make your point that they're all rich. Your hypothesis is a logical fallacy, in that it's not negatable. You don't know what that means, I know, but others here who are smarter will.

Next you attack liberals as parents, offering nothing more concrete than your earlier point. You are grasping at straws here. Just admit it: you hate liberals because they're culturally different from you, and therefore you want to say bad things about them regardless what's true. Such an admission, obviously true, would be quite refreshing. But I know you guys don't operate in such candid truths around here (apart from the person above who wants to blame it all on the Jews).

John II| 9.2.11 @ 10:24PM

My dear Paul, you have refuted nothing. You have, however, attributed motives to me without any accompanying evidence. Which happens to be a logical fallacy, if you truly care about such things. The technical term is petitio principii, although it goes by the more charming appellation "begging the question."

I see, though, that you ARE a liberal, if not a lefty or radical or assorted fruitcake. Unlike the latter, a liberal is a person who pretends to anger or indignation over ad hominem slurs while dispensing such slurs himself, as you do both abundantly and ignorantly in your preceding posts, including the most recent.

A liberal is also a person who uses words like "travesty" to refer to the depredations of the Left, and then promotes a softer form of the same travesty.

A liberal is a person who, when he takes the trouble to have a family, takes it as lightly as possible and winds up raising a few troubled kids whom non-liberal teachers such as myself have to deal with. A few kids at most, thank God, for the sake of the environment or the career or stuff labeled with terms like "self-actualization."

A liberal is a person who promotes political correctness as a substitute for morality, including institutional speech codes and required training sessions in sensitivity to, well, liberal causes.

A liberal is a person with a soft head for criminals and a hard heart for unborn children.

A liberal is . . . Ah, there are so many definitions of a liberal: where does one start? Could one ever finish? One raises the eyebrow, skeptically.

And now back to "Mission to Moscow" (1943), an early liberal take on Soviet Russia and Uncle Joe Stalin. After which, perhaps another romp with "Viva Villa" (1934), a liberal disquisition on the charms of revolutionary Mexico. Then perhaps "Seven Days in May" (1964), in which a liberal president (Fredric March, in one of his less affecting roles) foils a dastardly attempt at a military takeover of the USA. The wicked general behind the conspiracy is played by that great Hollywood liberal, the late Burt Lancaster.

Gee. Regardless of the era, it seems that a liberal is a person with his head up his ass.

Paul| 9.3.11 @ 12:50PM

John, your lengthy screed describes a cartoon. Sure, there may be a few people who have a few of the characteristics you mentioned, but you're not describing any sort of objective reality.

What your comment confirmed is what I said earlier: you hate liberals because they're culturally different from you (and you have now attempted to describe those differences, but described your delusion instead). You will hate them because your leaders have stoked that hate, just like happened in Germany in the 30s. And you won't stop hating them until violence has quenched your hatred.

That's where we are as a nation. A civil war looms large in our future. It's so avoidable, but requires a more enlightened populace which, as is clear from this page, we do not have.

John II| 9.3.11 @ 2:09PM

That reminds me of another definition. A liberal is a person who pretends to a lofty rationality as a kind of veneer to cover fiercely resentful passions, which leak out almost constantly in the form of crazed projections revelatory of ignorance, arrogance, and a certain dogged stupidity that encompasses an odd fascination with violence. In public policy, this aspect of liberalness translates into the morally and intellectually bankrupt habit of doing the same failed thing again and again and again.

In short, as the dog returns to his vomit, so the liberal returns to his folly. (cf. Proverbs 26:11)

Which also reminds me, a liberal is a person who promotes the banishment of Scripture from the public school classroom and imposes instead the religion of secularism, which includes an oddly preferential option for Islam as one of the (what's the correct expression?) "world's great religions."

And now that I think about it, a liberal is also . . . gosh, this could go on forever. Perhaps I could open a small business marketing definitions for every occasion, except I'd have to get entangled in all those liberal regulations designed to choke off free enterprise and feed the nanny state.

And now back to "Way Out West" (1937), the best of the Laurel and Hardy feature-length flicks, in which Stan and Ollie save the conservative maiden oppressed by the calculating saloon-keeper and his liberal moll.

Paul| 9.3.11 @ 3:20PM

More cartoon representations of "libruls", I see. Not surprising. Before men can be compelled to kill other men, they first need to dehumanize them through cartoonish caricatures. The Gerries, the Japs, the gooks, now the Hajis and eventually the "libruls." Remember, the Huns used to spike babies on their helmets!! And everyone knows the Gooks do not mind dying because they have no appreciation or understanding of life! And the "librul" has an abiding hatred of the Lord Jesus, and would kill the little baby in his sleep if given the chance! Where would we be without this cartoonish nonsense?

Not in the hopeless spot we're in, that's for sure.

For what it's worth, we liberals will not fire the first shots. While we understand that you folks are stupid and dangerous, the very fundamentals of liberalism have us also seeing you as human. It will take seeing you come after our kids to change that.

John II| 9.3.11 @ 5:17PM

Yo Paul. Please refer to the top definition of my previous (2:09 p.m.) post. Read it carefully, and then, for a perfect example, jump ahead to your response. It is indeed true that an accurate definition of a liberal has a cartoonish quality about it, but you can't blame me for THAT.

This is getting strange. I don't know whether my definitions merely sum up my 68 years of experience on this planet or whether the definitions have some kind of weird kinetic power to control the responses of liberals.

Anyhow, you need to say something more so that I can give you another definition. Right now you're just repeating yourself.

Well, it's not much to go on, but I'll give it a try:

A liberal is a person whose thoughts are so meager and whose feelings are so insistent that his caressing fondness for those thoughts and feelings drives him to repeat himself endlessly.

I dunno. You need to give me more material.

And now back to "Invasion of the Body Snatchers," the superior 1956 version in which a small southern California town is turned into a hive of icy liberal pod-people by a strange force from space. Kevin McCarthy and Dana Wynter are first-rate in the lead roles, fighting the liberals. I always watch old sci-fi flicks late on Saturday afternoons. Reminds me of the good ol' summers of my youth at the kiddie-day matinee, when a large popcorn was only 10 cents a bag and a whole box of Junior Mints cost a nickel.

Margie| 9.3.11 @ 6:38PM

Vintage, classic John II material, love it!!

Can something be both classic AND vintage?

I say, yes.

carnot| 9.4.11 @ 5:29PM

nope. I rather prefer David Mamet's insights into the Liberal psyche. that I grew up among them only creates an ability to verify Mamet's conclusions & observations. hmmm...who to trust...someone of accomplishment and stature...or Paul?

Oldefarte| 9.5.11 @ 1:14PM

Lied or ventured from the truth: Marxism!!!

carnot| 9.3.11 @ 10:56PM

bingo.

more fundamentally.....he's flagrantly dishonest in his thinking. either that or simply not that bright!

skip| 9.3.11 @ 6:54PM

Paul

You've posted the following statements:

"eliminate the meaningless name calling" (Paul | 9.2.11 @ 5:24PM)

"if you don't have a valid point, you can try and make it up with ad hominem attacks" (Paul | 9.2.11 @ 2:58PM)

"feel free to call me a retard" (Paul | 9.2.11 @ 2:58PM)

"you're unable to read" (Paul | 9.2.11 @ 4:13PM)

"you don't have a strong point, and need to make up for this weakness by calling me names" (Paul | 9.2.11 @ 5:08PM)

"point out exactly where I've lied' (Paul | 9.2.11 @ 5:28PM)

"you cannot find one instance where I lied" (Paul | 9.2.11 @ 6:17PM)

"you could be actually addressing my points with tangible counter-points" (Paul | 9.2.11 @ 7:18PM)

"provide one single example of where I've lied" (Paul | 9.2.11 @ 7:24PM)

"you can't refute a word that I wrote" (Paul | 9.3.11 @ 1:27PM)

Here are more statements you've posted:

"delusion actually explains this article and most of the comments" (paul | 9.2.11 @ 6:16PM)

"you're making these utterly insubstantial comments" (Paul | 9.2.11 @ 7:18PM)

"I can use your own words to refute every inanity you utter" (Paul | 9.2.11 @ 8:00PM)

"I'm sure that really wowed the retards" (Paul | 9.2.11 @ 8:15PM)

"Do you want me to explain why that reasoning is stupid?" (Paul | 9.3.11 @ 1:04PM)

"You really do not know what you are talking about, and are making a fool out of yourself" (Paul | 9.3.11 @ 1:04PM)

"Your fellow imbecile above" (Paul | 9.3.11 @ 1:10PM)

"you're as dumb as a rock" (Paul | 9.3.11 @ 1:10PM)

"are you really this stupid?" (Paul | 9.3.11 @ 1:27PM)

"we (liberals) understand that you folks are stupid and dangerous" (Paul | 9.3.11 @ 3:20PM)

Here are even more statements you've posted, that you could provide clarification for:

"Obama has been just as corporatist in his policies as any republican" (Paul | 9.2.11 @ 1:44PM)

Provide your definition of 'corporatist'.

"claiming he's a Marxist is absurd" (Paul | 9.2.11 @ 1:44PM)

Provide your definition of marxist, which you have not provided in any of the over 30 posts so far, and use layman's terms where possible.

"can you point to anything Obama has done that can be considered "ultra liberal extremist"?" (Paul | 9.2.11 @ 2:58PM)

Obama has refused to vote for the elimination of partial birth abortion. Is this 'ultra liberally extreme'? Provide your definition of 'ultra liberal extremist'.

"there have been no examples of one single ACTION of Obama's that can be considered Marxist" (Paul | 9.2.11 @ 4:13PM)

Pending a definition of 'marxist' provided by you, does Obama's quote "I do think at a certain point you've made enough money" qualify?

"When drilling destroys the environment, as it did in the gulf last year, the impact on the economy and working Americans is massive" (Paul | 9.3.11 @ 1:27PM)

Explain how drilling has destroyed the gulf, or how drilling has destroyed the environment anywhere on the planet. Explain why it is necessary to drill under a mile's depth of water. Explain how the incident in the gulf had a massive impact on the economy. Explain how the incident in the gulf had a massive impact on American laborers.

"look into the studies on demographics: en.wikipedia.org" (Paul | 9.2.11 @ 4:25PM)

The source you cite, wikipedia, sites New York Times / CBS and CNN polls as sources. What percentage of information you use to support your arguments in general is from these sources, in your estimation?

"(democrats) just presided over the single largest drop in government spending in the last 60 years" (Paul | 9.2.11 @ 7:10PM)

"(Obama) has overseen the greater cuts in public spending than any president since Hoover" (Paul | 9.3.11 @ 1:04PM)

Explain the cuts by Obama you refer to.

"This site is a bunch of monkeys flinging poo at Obama because he has a D after his name and black skin" (Paul | 9.2.11 @ 8:42PM)

Explain the basis for your statement that opposition in this thread is due to racism. Explain the basis for your statement that opposition from any demographic in this nation is due to racism.

"This is easily the most dishonest teabagger slogan of them all. The cause of the downgrade is due to the teabaggers in Congress who were fully prepared let the country default on its loans so they could score political points. This fact was not lost on the investing community, which inevitably reduced confidence in our government bonds, which resulted in S&P downgrading our credit." (Paul | 9.3.11 @ 1:04PM)

Explain what a teabagger is. Explain how the cause for a credit downgrade is not due to overall national debt, but to opposition by a relatively small demographic, from one of two parties, in one of two bodies, of the national legislature.

"(Obama's) suggested removing private lenders from providing student loans, as his response to the huge problem of crippling student loans charged at inflated rates" (Paul | 9.2.11 @ 5:24PM)

Explain what the huge problem of student loans provided by private financial institutions actually is. Explain how student loans provided by private financial institutions are crippling. Provide the definition of what a crippling rate is from a student loan provided by a private financial institution. Explain how providing student loans through publically funded government institutions is preferable to student loans provided by private financial institutions.

"Fact is, the US has one single party: the Corporatist Party. Its agenda is to hand over rights, power, and money from the middle class to the corporate elites at an ever increasing rate. Democrat vs. Republican is a meaningless distinction when looking at this overall picture. That's why we've got a jobless recovery." (Paul | 9.2.11 @ 2:54PM)

Provide the definition of a 'corporatist party'. Explain how 'corporatism' is responsible for a 'jobless recovery'. Explain what a 'jobless recovery' is. Explain how the nation is currently in a 'jobless recovery'. Explain what rights, what power, and what money is being transferred.

"a corporation is now granted all the same rights as a human being" (Paul | 9.2.11 @ 2:54PM)

Explain how a corporation has the right to vote, just like human beings. Explain how a corporation - an organized group of human beings - should not be allowed to express their freedom of speech collectively.

"There is no such thing as American conservativism as a movement" (Paul | 9.2.11 @ 8:42PM)

Provide the definition of 'conservatism'. Explain how the tea party movement can best be politically, socially, and economically described.

"the "librul" has an abiding hatred of the Lord Jesus, and would kill the little baby in his sleep if given the chance" (Paul | 9.3.11 @ 3:20PM)

Explain how liberals have not already killed over 54 million little babies in the womb.

"Let me guess. This RCV person is the only other person you've ever encountered with an IQ over 80" (Paul | 9.2.11 @ 7:45PM)

The comments of this poster, as well as every other poster in this thread, are archived by American Spectator, should you wish to revise your IQ estimation after a review of the archives.

The comments you have posted here consist primarily of intellectually dishonest hypocrisy, and consist mostly of emotional prattle. You can use reason and experience to intelligently and honestly carify them. Or not. Should you elect to do so, one particular comment or topic per post is preferable.

carnot| 9.3.11 @ 10:57PM

"The comments you have posted here consist primarily of intellectually dishonest hypocrisy, and consist mostly of emotional prattle."

exactly!!!! it's actually rather amusing!

skip| 9.4.11 @ 11:51AM

Amusing yet rather pathetic. And despicable. The irony of life.

Nick| 9.3.11 @ 11:01PM

Skip,

Nice smack-down of Paul.

Hey, did you see the CERN study that was published in Nature that claims the main cause of global warming is, shockingly, the sun and cosmic rays?

Too bad Margaret quit commenting here. I wonder what she would say about CERN?

Take care.

skip| 9.4.11 @ 12:24PM

Hi Nick

Thanks. Had not been to our old stomping grounds at "Global Warming Tales and Tails" in a while, where you performed so magnificently. Read your link. It is bad enough we are at the mercy of the sun, a nuclear reactor of fusion comprising 99.9% of the mass of the solar system, increasing its temperature 10% every billion years, but now cosmic rays from the farthest reaches of space are found to contribute as well. Yikes. Al Gore is going to have to come up with a really impressive invention to combat this, and a scheme to fund it, with nothing so trivial as the internet and carbon offsetting this time, which just isn't going to cut it with a crisis of this magnitude.

Reading Paul reminded me of ol' Mags, and I wondered if you noticed the similarity too. I'm still a little surprised we shut her up. She was resolutely impervious to any and all reason and experience, to the end, like any and all liberals worth their emotional prattle.

Your kind words, coming from a smack-downer extraordinaire such as yourself, is sincerely appreciated.

Enthalpy is not a weapon to be trifled with. Continue to use it well my brother.

Take care.

Nick| 9.4.11 @ 6:25PM

Skip,

Thanks for the compliment.

Maybe we can move underground, like the Morlocks. I'm sure Margaret is big H. G. Wells fan!

Enjoy the rest of the Labor Day weekend, comrade! Ha-ha!

Paul| 9.4.11 @ 1:12PM

Skip, all your questions boil down to the fact that you don't know what Marxism is, and yet here we are on an article where that term is getting bandied about by you and others who don't know what they're talking about. At least you've had the honesty to ask!

Marxism is the philosophy of Karl Marx (1818-1883). (That's why they call it that.) He's primarily known through 2 works: The Communist Manifesto and Das Capital. To be a marxist is to follow the ideology as written in those books. Since you've never read those books and have absolutely no idea what they're about, it frees you to refer to people as "marxists" even though they're the furthest thing from.

Marx boiled down all human interaction to its fundamental component, the labor power provided by an individual worker. He believed that this labor power must result in the ownership of the products of that labor, and to separate a worker from the fruits of his labor was to separate man from his own nature.

That's what Marx believed. However, just as we see with Christianity, what has passed as Marxism rarely conforms to the ideals espoused by its leader. Marxism normally includes the concept of "continuous revolution," where the people are constantly renewing the primacy of their ownership of the means and results of production.

By the way, I am no Marxist. Simply because I know about a topic doesn't mean I'm a follower of that topic.

Now, compare the above to anything Obama has done, and the stupidity of this comparison quickly becomes apparent to anyone with an IQ over 60.

George| 9.4.11 @ 8:16PM

Paul,
Nobody cares about marxism except you. And Obama. Go away.
You obsessed with IQ scores. Put up your score.

skip| 9.5.11 @ 3:41AM

Paul, all your comments boil down to the fact you don't know what teabaggers are, and yet here we are on an article where the term is getting bandied about by you and no others but you don't know what you're talking about. And you're not honest enough to admit it!

Teabagging is the activity of teabaggers. (That's why they call it that.) It's primarily known through 2 groups: homosexuals and liberals. To be a teabagger is to engage in the abominable sexually deviant perverted actions of a degenerate. Since you've not understood this and have absolutely no idea what you're talking about, it somehow frees you to refer to tea partiers as "teabaggers" even though they're the furthest thing from.

Teabagging boiled down is human interaction that is based on the fundamental component of irrational desire, a loathing and disrepect for themselves and each other. It is believed that this behavior is unhealthy physically, mentally, emotionally, socially, financially, and spiritually, and it separates the participants from their Creator and from their own human nature.

That's not what teabaggers believe. However, just as we see with liberalism, what passes for morality rarely conforms to the will for them espoused by their Creator. Teabaggers normally include the concept of "continuous defiance of reality", where the teabaggers are constantly renewing the primacy of their ownership of their relative morality.

By the way, you seem to be a teabagger. Simply because you call others teabaggers doesn't mean anyone else is really fooled by that.

Now, compare the above to anything a tea partier has done, and the stupidity of calling them teabaggers becomes apparent to anyone with an IQ over 60.

Paul| 9.5.11 @ 12:10PM

Poor skip. That was your chance to actually dig down and see if you had the brains and maturity to discuss a topic, and look what you did instead.

skip| 9.5.11 @ 1:06PM

Poor Paul. What I did was use your own words to reveal the inanities you utter.

Paul | 9.2.11 @ 8:00PM:

"I can use your own words to refute every inanity you utter"

Not only did you not recognize that your own intellectual dishonesty and hypocrisy was further exposed, you responded with even more, surprise, emotional prattle, lacking any reason and experience.

Margie| 9.5.11 @ 12:55PM

skip,

The more right you are, the deeper the demeaning of your person by the snake.

Your posts are some of most excellent, point blank explanations here. You, along with Oldefarte, John II and Simon.. so great!
Keep up the good work.

skip| 9.5.11 @ 1:20PM

Your kind words are sincerely appreciated.

Your defense of biblical scripture I believe qualifies for the same praise.

Margie| 9.5.11 @ 3:29PM

Thanks! I forgot Drunken Sailor too. You guys are all great. And Martin J. Smith and ALL the conservatives who post here in defense of the truth.

God bless you all. It's a pleasure to behold.

Paul| 9.4.11 @ 1:50PM

=====================
Obama has refused to vote for the elimination of partial birth abortion. Is this 'ultra liberally extreme'? Provide your definition of 'ultra liberal extremist'.
=====================

If your definition of "ultra liberally extreme" includes any president that fails to criminalize partial birth abortion, then you need to include every republican as well. Puts you in a funny spot of having voted for many "ultra liberally extreme" folks.

=====================
Explain how drilling has destroyed the gulf, or how drilling has destroyed the environment anywhere on the planet.
=====================

http://read.bi/nWrcim

=====================
Explain the cuts by Obama you refer to.
=====================

By this, I gather you don't read the news. The budget discussions? The debt ceiling? $2 trillion in cuts? Social security and medicare on the table for the first time in history? Any of this ringing a bell?

=====================
Explain what a teabagger is.
=====================

A teabagger is a republican who eventually started to feel shame over his/her support for the disastrous Bush presidency, and realized he/she needed to reinvent himself to keep from feeling like they betrayed their country. Coincidentally, the GOP leadership was looking to reinvent itself too, for the same reasons. And so they pumped hundreds of millions of dollars into an astroturf movement, and started promising "bread and circuses" to the rank and file who have too sparse an understanding of history to understand that they're being sold a bad bill of goods.

Teabaggers have an enormous distrust of big government...when it's being run by democrats. When republicans run the government, they want the government to be all-powerful, and they'll call anyone a traitor who doesn't agree with them.

Teabaggers like to believe they are restoring the original founders' intent in this country, when in fact they've turned it on its head. Their unquestioning support for torture and warrantless wiretaps are 2 examples of this hypocrisy.

The Teabaggers are the lastest incarnation of the Know Nothing party of the 1840s.

=====================
Provide the definition of a 'corporatist party'. Explain how 'corporatism' is responsible for a 'jobless recovery'. Explain what a 'jobless recovery' is. Explain how the nation is currently in a 'jobless recovery'. Explain what rights, what power, and what money is being transferred.
=====================

It really sounds like you need to read the newspaper from time to time and maybe take a few classes in history and political science, because your questions are pretty extensive. I would hope that you'd know the answers to these before trying to discuss them with someone else.

Corporatism has meant a range of things over the past 150 years. But now in the modern economy, it comes to mean elevating the business interests of large corporations to the primary interests of society, with wealth being divided accordingly. The result is the collectivisation of all resources under corporate control, and the concentration of wealth generated by those resources within a small number of hands running the corporations. As one of many, many examples of this, I point to the decline of the factory farm, and the rise of mega agricultural conglomerates like Monstanto in its place. In the US, this is evolving into a government/corporate partnership, where people migrate between government (that is meant to regulate the activities of corporations) and the private sector (which benefits by lack regulation by government).

A "jobless recovery" is one where we recover from our recession (defined as 2 consecutive quarters of negative growth) but the unemployment rate remains high. This is achieved in a corporatist state like ours through regulation that encourages corporations to move oversees to cheaper labor markets and looser regulatory environments.

Did you really now know any of that? If not, what on earth are you doing here trying to discuss it?

=====================
Explain how a corporation has the right to vote, just like human beings.
=====================

A corporation has the right to buy an election outright, making voting moot. They do this by pouring unlimited resources into elections. For example, Hugo Chavez, who runs the national Venezuelan gas company Citgo (which was incorporated in the USA) is free to pour unlimited funds into US elections to affect its outcome.

=====================
Provide the definition of 'conservatism'. Explain how the tea party movement can best be politically, socially, and economically described.
=====================

Sigh.

Conservatism (Latin: conservare, "to preserve") is a political and social philosophy that promotes the maintenance of traditional institutions and supports, at the most, minimal and gradual change in society.

The teabaggers are not conservative. Through their support for torture, wars of aggression, warrantless wiretaps, and prayer in schools (to list a few), they are agitating for radical change in our society. However, because they have no grasp of history, they are free to believe there was a past time in our country when these things were part of our framework, and believe they are simply getting us back to where we belong.

=====================
The comments you have posted here consist primarily of intellectually dishonest hypocrisy, and consist mostly of emotional prattle.
=====================

Let's be clear. You have failed utterly to demonstrate that. You have simply asked me a wide range of questions, the answers to which you should know already. If you believe that counts as some sort of refutation, I have no reason to be surprised. The idiocy expressed on this site is outdone on each successive post.

John II| 9.4.11 @ 5:31PM

Actually, Skippy provided many, many direct quotes to demonstrate "emotional prattle" and, as well, an apparent addiction to smug question-begging. And your loosey-goosey expression "failed utterly" is another example. As is the lame stemwinder "outdone on each successive post," which, if you'd take a moment to think about it, is meaningless.

Your previous chirpy Cliff Notes disquisition on Marxism is also lame, by the way, beginning with your designation of Marxism as a "philosophy."

Marx himself was a gasbag and a cheat, who never bothered to do any direct observation of the universe he expatiated on. In Capital, for example, he cribbed much material from his associate Engles's "Condition of the Workers," which itself was already 20 years old and had long been refuted (in the strict sense of the term "refute," Paul--not the lazy and inaccurate way in which you lay claim to the term as a serial achievement) by reputable and non-ideological contemporary scholars.

Yet earlier, Marx himself, in the German Ideology (the only one of his works worth reading--the rest is derivative crap, remarkably similar in its tone to your postings), declared that he was not a philosopher and that philosophy itself was no longer of any interest to him. (He had written his doctoral dissertation on an aspect of Greek philosophy.)

So when you refer to Marxism as a "philosophy," that is only one way in which you betray the shallowness of your vaunted knowledge of Marxism and, withal, your astonishing ignorance of philosophy--I mean, of what the term really means when used accurately.

For now, I have no certain way of knowing whether Professor Obama is a Marxist in any of the formal senses of the various strains of Marxism (although Stanley Kurtz's "Radical-in-Chief" offers abundant evidence that the Professor, to the extent he reflects on anything at all, is much attracted to Euro-socialism, principally because it has a certain chic with which he likes to identify), but I am certain that he is basically Marxian in his disposition.

Like Marx himself, the Professor is a spottily educated intellectual fraud with an inflated sense of himself and a peculiar addiction to cliched rhetoric. Like Marx (and Wagner and Darwin and Huxley and Nietzsche and a slew of other 19th-century lightweights who have exercised an undue influence on similarly lightweight culture-vultures and politicos of the past century and a half), the Professor is preeminently a child of his times. Like Marx, the Professor has pretty serious daddy-issues that play themselves out in a tediously predictable fashion: the Professor is, really, not very manly. Like Marx, the Professor fairly exudes a peculiarly angry smugness and no serious interest in the world around him.

No, I wouldn't necessarily call the Professor a Marxist precisely; I'm sure he's never read Marx, nor much of anything else: it shows in his demeanor and his unguarded public remarks. But I think "Marxian" surely fits in the ways I've described and in many others. Indeed, Marx himself would have long been relegated to the footnotes of history (the system itself was thoroughly refuted within Marx's lifetime by the Austrian economist Eugen von Boehm-Bauwerk, among others) if so many political thugs in the following century had not exercised so much power in Marx's name, and if so many fraudulent academics had not continued to preach the system and its variants to half-educated undergraduates. And, above all, if Marx himself, by his personal disposition, had not embodied a key sickness of modernity.

Anyhow, your response gives me the material I needed for another definition of liberal: A liberal is a person of small learning and large ego who is eager to be counted among the self-appointed stewards of a culture slouching toward degeneracy.

And now back to "36 Hours" (1964), a World War II thriller in which James Garner displays an unexpected range after being typecast as TV's original Maverick. It's a tightly plotted movie about liberal--er, I mean, Nazi--deception, and includes among a hugely talented cast John Banner, who later played Sergeant Schulz in the "Hogan's Heroes" series. Nice late Sunday afternoon fare.

Nick| 9.4.11 @ 6:19PM

Game. Set. Match.

Well done, John II, well done.

And, 36 Hours is a great movie. I only saw it for the first time a few years ago. I thought I had seen just about every WWII movie ever made, but, I guess I have not.

skip| 9.5.11 @ 4:57AM

The comments you have posted consist of intellectual dishonesty. Your comments are emotional prattle devoid of reason and experience.

The comments you have posted reveal blatant hypocrisy. You use literal strict terminology concerning descriptions of Obama as 'marxist'. You use figurative disingenuous terminology concerning descriptions of tea partiers as 'teabaggers'.

Typical of your unintelligent and dishonest emotional prattle lacking reason and experience are these two gems:

"The cause of the downgrade is due to the teabaggers in Congress who were fully prepared let [sic] the country default on its loans so they could score political points."

Default was never a possibility. Federal revenue is 57% of federal spending. Borrowed debt is 43% of federal spending. Worse case scenario the government would not have been able to continue to borrow, which would not affect federal revenue. The federal revenue of 57% of spending is more than enough to service the public debt, the only requirement to avoid default. Only a stupid individual or a lying individual would ever claim otherwise.

"(democrats) just presided over the single largest drop in government spending in the last 60 years"

By your own argument that spending cut was caused by the 'teabaggers in Congress' who risked national 'default'. The spending cuts are over a ten year period and therefore imaginary. Actions by this Congress have no real binding effect on any future Congress. Any projection beyond two years is only hypothetical. And a 2% increase in the interest rate will wipe out any of the imagined ten year spending cuts.

In common usage the term 'marxism' refers to the political, social, and economic principles of the socialist policies advocated by Marx. Marxists are referred to as followers of these principles and policies.

Marxism and socialism are considered synonymous because Marx is the most noted socialist.

Socialism refers to the political, social, and economic theories advocating collective or governmental ownership, administration, and control of the production, distribution, and consumption of goods and services.

Marxists are anti-capitalist and pro-socialist, and seek to oppose and eliminate capitalism and support and promote socialism.

Marxists seek to replace capitalism with socialism. Which describes virtually every word and action by Obama.

Obama is a marxist. You are an idiot.

Oldefarte| 9.5.11 @ 1:27PM

Paul: Many thanks for your definition of teabaggers. No doubt also, you know the meaning of DOUCHE BAGGER [if not look up the word PAUL]!!!!!!!!!!

Oldefarte| 9.4.11 @ 1:42PM

No Paul, once again you're incorrect. True, college graduates exit their university propagandized brainwashing of four plus years liberalized due to their indoctrination from egghead professors and other radical incompetitents; but they soon within the real world learn the truth of life. IOW, they gradually become conservatives after a lifetime of witnessing the governmental theft and welfaric extortion of their incomes by socialistic governments. Most do anyway. Obviously you missed the signposts of life and therefore stayed a flamin' liberal fool!!!!!!!!

Red Phillips | 9.2.11 @ 5:49PM

It has been mentioned above, but I find it odd that this lengthy article on the Ayers/Obama relationship does not mention the high probability that Ayers ghostwrote Obama's memoir. Did AmSpec examine the evidence and find it wanting? Were they just trying to avoid anything "conspiratorial?" What gives?

USSAlabama| 9.3.11 @ 9:32AM

Red, what Dan is saying below is that it was mentioned in the comments. Without referencing anyone else's site I suggested a google search with keywords that will take you to the information. Also, quoted Jack Cashill.

Red Phillips | 9.4.11 @ 2:08PM

USSA, I think you are missing my point. I have followed this issue since the start. I am well aware of the evidence. My point is that for a long article on the Obama/Ayers relationship such as this to not mention the ghost-writing allegation has to be intentional. Surely Mr. Regnery was aware of it. So why no mention? Did he examine the evidence and find it wanting? Was he deliberately shying away from anything conspiratorial? I highly suspect the latter.

Bob From District 9| 9.3.11 @ 12:17PM

"Did AmSpec examine the evidence and find it wanting? Were they just trying to avoid anything "conspiratorial?" What gives?"

American Spectator avoiding anything conspiratorial? What cave have you been living in?

Red Phillips | 9.4.11 @ 1:58PM

BFD9, actually since the Trooper Gate articles of the Clinton era, I do think AmSpec has intentionally avoided anything too conspiratorial. Has AmSpec covered the birth certificate controversy? Has it covered the CT SSN issue? The fishy draft registration card issue? My hunch is that this is deliberate. I suspect AmSpec feels it was burned by the Trooper Gate stuff. Perhaps it is not I who have been living in a cave. Perhaps you went into a cave around Trooper Gate time and have only recently emerged and still think AmSpec is the same. If AmSpec has covered any of this stuff objectively and I missed it, I will be happy to be corrected.

Dan Hirsch| 9.2.11 @ 5:52PM

Red;

The voluminous blogs have covered your question - you need to do your homework....read through them all - the trolls are entertaining actually...

DebateRight| 9.2.11 @ 5:58PM

"They may have talked about childlike exuberance, but what they actually did was not childlike at all."
It was childlike in a "Lord of the Flies" sense.

Red Phillips | 9.2.11 @ 6:08PM

Dan, I'm not sure I get what you are saying? Other blogs have covered the ghostwriting issue and affirmed it? Debunked it?

I'm actually quite familiar with the topic and have followed it from early own. I think it is as near certain as you can be about such things that Obama did not write Dreams. I think it is nearly as certain that Ayers did.

My point is why a lengthy article like this with not even a passing mention of the possibility?

Red Phillips | 9.2.11 @ 6:29PM

Oops... I mean early on.

Bob| 9.2.11 @ 7:13PM

While this story is unusual due to unrepentant violence, the philosophy is not so strange for a college professor. I have family with similar viewpoints. My question is how pervasive is outright desire for communism among voters.

Bob From District 9| 9.3.11 @ 12:15PM

About as pervasive as the desire for laisez faire capitalism. Pretty much near zero.

carnot| 9.3.11 @ 11:00PM

and when was the last time laisez faire capitalism was practiced in this country?

your obfuscation belies the critical point....in which direction has this country been headed over the last 80 or so years?

cowgirl| 9.2.11 @ 7:52PM

For those of you who wish to learn more about the radical Ayers, Dohrn, Boudin, The Weatherman and The Black Panthers, read the book:
Family Circle - The Boudins and The Aristocracy of the Left by Susan Braudy.

This is an historical and eye-opening book about these radical people who hated America even though they benefitted tremendously from its wealth and free markets. Just think if they had been born into a socialist/communist country, they would have never had the freedom to do what they did.

Interesting note: Tupac Shakur (the rapper murdered at age 24 in Las Vegas) was the step-son of Mutulu "Doc" Shakur who was the mastermind of the Brinks Robbery that the Weatherman members (mainly Boudin) participated in that results in the death of the first African American police officer on the Nayack police force. Tupac's Mother was Afeni Shakur a member of the New York Black Panthers .

Margie| 9.2.11 @ 7:58PM

Wow. Interesting info. Thanks.

Bob From District 9| 9.3.11 @ 12:12PM

"This is an historical and eye-opening book about these radical people who hated America even though they benefitted tremendously from its wealth and free markets."

I could say the same about the Bush family, probably the most corrupt family ever in American politics.

Only I know the correct article is "a" historical.

John II| 9.3.11 @ 2:57PM

Actually, no. The use of "an" for "a" is governed by sound, not spelling. E.g., Professor Clinton often looks and sounds like a hysteric. But: Professor Clinton often projects an hysterical mien in her public persona.

Similarly, Cowgirl has read a history of radicals. But: Cowgirl has read an historical overview of radicals.

In general, nouns starting with "h" lose nearly all their initial aspiration in their adjectival forms--and, as I said, are thus governed by the indefinite article "an" to prevent hiatus.

I hope your knowledge of the Bush family is more reliable than your knowledge of English phonology, Bobby, but I doubt it. You need to get out and read more.

And now back to "Ball of Fire" (1941), in which Gary Cooper is slightly out of character as a befuddled English professor leading a team of scholars writing an encyclopedia. Charming nonetheless. Richard Haydn is superb with his usual adenoidal delivery.

Charie| 9.3.11 @ 3:45PM

Absolutely correct about cowgirl's use of "an" in its context, John II.

Wonder what other knowledge, unknown to the rest of us, BFD9 possesses.

cowgirl| 9.3.11 @ 3:20PM

When you have no facts to backup your beliefs - go for the spelling.... Liberalism is a mental illness.

skip| 9.3.11 @ 8:23PM

When last you graced us with your intelligence and honesty you were as usual railing against Bush tax cuts.

Bob From District 9 | 8.9.11 @ 3:23PM:

"Try actually learning some facts, and when you realize 100% of our real debt problem is the responsibility of three Republican presidents, maybe you will grow up to actually discuss it. Oh, yeah, Reagan/BushI/BushII. Look it up and believe."

skip | 8.9.11 @ 4:01PM:

"Per the Office of Management and Budget:
Federal receipts for 2003: $1,782,314,000,000
Federal receipts for 2007: $2,567,985,000,000
That is an increase of over 44% in federal revenues. When was George W. Bush president? When was the George W. Bush tax cuts?"

skip | 8.9.11 @ 8:19PM:

"You posted a blatant lie. I easily exposed the blatant lie. This is your 21st post since I easily exposed your blatant lie. I didn't count the blatant lies per post since I easily exposed your blatant lie 21 posts ago, but it is safe to say if each blatant lie is worth $100 billion, to be deposited in the U.S. Treasury, our current debt would be eliminated."

Never did get a response. Neither did a lot of other posters.

Ronald Christopher| 9.2.11 @ 8:09PM

OK, Bill Ayers committed murder. From his bombings several people died. There is no statue of limitations on murder. Why isn't he being charged with the crime of murder (in the first degree)?

Bob From District 9| 9.3.11 @ 12:14PM

Cause he didn't do any bombings. Others in the organization did, he didn't.

He was all talk.

OTOH Donald Rumsfeld, Dick Cheney and George W. Bush are responsible for thousands of deaths of Americans in, at least, Depraved Indifference Murder. Perhaps even pre-meditated murder. Yet they haven't been charged.

Charie| 9.3.11 @ 4:45PM

Were you a member of the Weathermen? You seem to have inside knowledge, even to knowing that Ayers was all talk.

I know that people who are all talk are liars.

Goodness, as to your second to the last statement...................... are you a (LOL) truther?

George| 9.4.11 @ 8:19PM

Bob,
You should go to the police dept and swear out a criminal comlaint against Cheney, Rumsfeld, and Bush.

idalily| 9.5.11 @ 12:22AM

Are you really going to use the "Manson didn't murder anybody" argument in this context? Given Dorhn's praise of Manson, I find that...ironic. And I find your use of the straw man trite, tedious and, unfortunately, typical.

Yeeeech| 9.2.11 @ 9:27PM

I would leave a longer comment right now, but I need to go take a shower.......the hypocrisy, evil violent rhetoric, destruction of property and life, thoughtlessness, broad disregard for others and basic ethical life on earth, and self-absorption of the Ayers, Daleys and Obamas makes me feel, well, dirty. Chicago is a sewer (or a moat) and all-about-me and-my-political-theory Obamas, Ayers and Daley's are the Crocodiles which float about consuming without giving, chewing, eating and spitting their vile (already failed) ideas, arrogant, nasty thoughts, ---they are degenrates who now foist their failed lives on a nation. And look where we are, their ideas Do Not Work - but then, they never have either, they are suckers at the taxpayer's tit.

MaryS| 9.2.11 @ 10:01PM

What I don't understand is how these two were indited, went underground, then surfaced and were given JOBS... WHY were they ever prosecuted????
I don't get that. For people who don't like our country, they seem to be living pretty well. Perhaps they should go to stay w/Hugo.

POST American| 9.2.11 @ 10:06PM

Sitting at th knee of Ayers----himself the son
of priveledge and USURY finance,
and 'radical proponent' of London Bankster
sourced 'Marks--ism' --ain't nothin' compared
to Obama's Globalist CIA links through Ann
Dunham, and his 'mysteriously financed'
Harvard/ Princeton 'innie' years, his secret
attendance at David Rockefeller's world
EUGENICS Bilderberg forum ----and his
first act, working as Henry Kissinger's aide.

And aside from the 'ROME-KNEE care'
inspired 'Obamacare' ---what exactly has
Obama done that's NOT in keeping with
the RED China sellout and TREASON OP
of Bush Sr./ Clinton/ Bush Jr. ?

---He's got Goldman Sacks
literally filling his 'Banker Bailout' White House!

Bob From District 9| 9.3.11 @ 11:54AM

Well, aside from being a whacked out space cadet, you hit a lot of valid points.

You actually did a better job of keeping within Mr Regnery's title than he did. They are *ALL* in it together is what you are telling us, and you are far more right about that than the right wing is willing to admit.

George| 9.4.11 @ 8:20PM

Bob,
It figures you agree with Post. He is the president of District 9.

Dan Mathewson| 9.13.11 @ 5:04PM

Where and when was The Prophet Obama an aide to Kissinger?

Texas Mark| 9.2.11 @ 11:47PM

I must say Al, this was a great piece of work.
Your cuz in TX,
Mark

Scott Varland| 9.3.11 @ 7:10AM

I do not see much new here.

Mr. Regnery should have focused on Ayers dedicating a 1974 book to Sirhan Sirhan, and Ayers (at the very least) editing Dreams From My Father that propelled Barack Obama to the presidency.

Ken (Old Texican)| 9.3.11 @ 9:12AM

FASCINATING ARTICLE
American Thinker...Perry and Islam

http://www.americanthinker.com.....ction.html

RCV| 9.3.11 @ 5:22PM

I must say, Ken, on both Islam and immigration, Perry has been much more thoughtful in his pronouncements than most of the other demagogic GOP candidates. (As has been Chris Christie.)

Reprobate Charlatan Vomitus| 9.3.11 @ 7:15PM

I don't bother with silly thoughtful pronouncements on Perry, when 'by the way, I have said before, and still believe, that the strongest ticket the Republicans could field is Perry', on several weeks earlier, by the way, I said, 'as bad as Romney is, he is the only Republican candidate with a chance of beating Obama', on by the way, one more, yet again, seemingly without end, ever, posting another stupid idiotic comment, stupidly, and idiotically, matters.

RCV| 9.3.11 @ 9:10PM

Man up, Skip. Zzzzzzzzzzz ....

skip| 9.3.11 @ 10:29PM

Perhaps, you would care to start slow, and man up for posting these, for instance:

RCV | 9.1.11 @ 11:26AM:

"BTW Nick, I have said before and still believe that the strongest ticket the GOP could field is Peryy/Rubio."

RCV | 8.5.11 @ 4:45PM:

"As bad as he is, Romney is the only GOP candidate with a chance of beating Obama."

which were just days apart, before you, perhaps, would care to man up for posting this:

RCV | 10.23.10 @ 9:30PM:

"At least, Skippie, I belong to a party that cares about human beings AFTER they're born."

so that, perhaps, you would then care to man up for posting all the comments about your lifelong expertise on Christianity and the Constitution, contrasted with some staggeringly pathetic and despicable comments I can provide from the archives, which would really put your intellectual honesty in a bad light, much to my satisfaction, because you are a liberal douchebag asswipe.

Idiot.

RCV| 9.3.11 @ 10:40PM

Finally, you came out from under the rock, Skip.

Romney was the strongest candidate in the polls because Perry hadn't yet announced. I've explained repeatedly why I've thought Perry/Rubio would be the strongest ticket, because it would guarantee Florida and might pull enough Latino votes to change the outcome in key swing states such as Nevada and New Mexico. (You should know this in light of your unhealthy obsession with me and the archives at your finger- tips.)

And I do know a lot about Constitutional Law and Christian history and theology, the former having been my profession for over 35 years, and the latter an academic focus of mine since college.

Please, Skip, feel free to consult your treasured RCV archives frequently. You might actually learn something other than juvenile name-calling and incessantly boring posts.

skip| 9.4.11 @ 1:24PM

...said the genius who finds it uninteresting (boring) when his very own words are exposed:

for lacking intelligence (stupid),
for lacking honesty (liar),
for lacking dignity (pathetic),
for lacking respect (despicable),
for lacking virtue (sanctimonious),
for lacking character (hypocrisy),
for lacking common sense (idiot),

in virtually every post,
over,
and over,
and over,
and over,
and over,
and over,
virtually every post containing the words of a poster exposed:

for lacking moral principle (reprobate),
for lacking true knowledge (charlatan),
and for lacking decency (vomitus),

even worse, virtually every post containing the words of a poster exposed:

for lacking true love, faith, and hope (Christianity),
for lacking true fundamental liberty (Constitutionality),

virtually every post containing the words of a poster exposed:

for lacking all of the above without class (douchebag),
for lacking all of the above without grace (asswipe),

and every post in the archives, which provides definitive proof, mocked (liberal),

in the very thread, which will be archived, that states:

"A liberal is a person who pretends to a lofty rationality as a kind of veneer to cover fiercely resentful passions, which leak out almost constantly in the form of crazed projections revelatory of ignorance, arrogance, and a certain dogged stupidity that encompasses an odd fascination with violence. In short, as a dog returns to his vomit, so the liberal returns to his folly."
(the magnificent John II | 9.3.11 @ 2:09PM).

"At least, Skippie, I belong to a party that cares about human beings AFTER they're born."
(the stupid lying pathetic despicable sanctimonious hypocritical idiot reprobate charlatan vomitus unChristian unConstitutional douchebag asswipe liberal RCV | 10.23.10 @ 9:30PM)

"Finally, you came out from under the rock, Skip."
(the stupid lying pathetic despicable sanctimonious hypocritical idiot reprobate charlatan vomitus unChristian unConstitutional douchebag asswipe liberal RCV | 9.3.11 @ 10:40PM)

Idiot.

RCV| 9.4.11 @ 2:49PM

Skip, Skip, Skip, you are a very angry little person with this personal obsession. I'm flattered, although a little skittish since I've seen what often happens to obsessed paranoid people with self-image problems. Professional help is suggested.

Reprobate Charlatan Vomitus| 9.4.11 @ 4:04PM

I don't bother with a silly post which, if examined intelligently and honestly, reveals a poster who is pretending to possess a lofty rationality such as the suggestion of professional help, which serves as a veneer covering fiercely resentful passions such as the suggestion of personal obsession, which leaks out constantly in the form of another crazed projection such as the suggestion of personal flattery, which reveals ignorance such as avoiding personal accountability for past posts, which reveals arrogance such as sanctimonious hypocrisy, which reveals dogged stupidity such as constantly posting in the same manner over and over and over, which encompasses an odd fascination such as vivid skittish imaginations of irrational paranoia, on yet again being a stupid idiot returning to wallow in his own vomitus of reprobate charlatan matters.

RCV| 9.4.11 @ 4:20PM

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz...........

Oldefarte| 9.4.11 @ 2:02PM

Great information, Ken, thanks [and post more if possible]. Being the one who posted Pam Geller's editorial previously concerning Perry connection to Muslims, this is of great concerning to many of us potential supporters of Perry [whose qualities vaguely known are outstanding]. From your linked article, I's generally question the idea that '.....Muslims often lack respect for Western traditions and points of view. The Muslim relationship to the West is colored by the belief that Western beliefs [whether Christian or atheist] are defective and therefore inferior to Islam...' and question that if they feel thusly, why do they even seek to reside/mingle with non-Muslims in this country etc? IMHO, they [like blacks etc] who blend into other societies do not actively participate in the required societal defences needed to preserve freedom/tranquility [ie when questioned by authorities concerning crime/terrorism etc, they avoid providing any personal knowledge regarding same in order to stay safely emerced within their Muslim/AA communities [when they know that by doing so they fail to protect society from future violence by providing their knowledge]. Most of us who are sane/charitable, do not want discrimination etc perpertrated upon any groupings simply due to their existence as members of such; but when those people fail to step forward and assist society toward prevention of criminality/terrorism etc, then i do not think that they are deserving of honor, protection or favortism!!!!!!!

stmichrick| 9.3.11 @ 11:29AM

Great article; it should be printed on every OpEd page.

Problem is; today's leftists combined with those who don't pay too much attention and those who see everything through a racial prism DON'T SEE WHAT's WRONG WITH ALL THIS.

Until a more graphic representation is made of the activities of 60's radicals is presented AND seen, Obama might as well have consorted with Vlad the Impaler.

Most people are well aware of what went on during the Holocaust because of the efforts of various 'mainstream' presentation and sympathetic Hollywood figures like Steven Spielberg. Sorry, but Sean Hannity cannot be the messenger here. We need penetration of the Kultursmog by something bigger.

Bob From District 9| 9.3.11 @ 11:50AM

That's the best you can do?

All I see is, you and Bill Ayers share similar backgrounds. The real difference is which side of the same coin you are on. He want's a Marxist dictatorship, you want a fascist dictatorship.

There is no real difference from what I can see. All you have done his shown that the children of the rich are corrupt and morally bankrupt and should not be allowed to hold any position of power or influence. Wish you had shown that before GW Bush was elected.

Your entire diatribe told us a lot about Bill Ayers, and, by reflection, about you, but nothing about Obama. Then again, from what we learned about you, we should not expect to learn anything about Obama from you.

Bill Gibbons| 9.3.11 @ 12:16PM

I've seen quite a few charlatans in politics over the years, but Obama takes the cake. He was mentored by domestic terrorists, Chicago mobsters, a black racist "pastor" and has spent millions hiding his birth certificate and college transcripts. Yet according the the US Constitution itself, Obama is STILL not eligible to be president, in spite of releasing a questionable birth certificate when pressured by Donald Trump, who was too powerful to ingore.

Obama was born Aug. 4, 1961, to Stanley Ann Dunham and Barack Obama Sr. Dunham was an American of predominantly English descent from Wichita, Kan., and was 18 years old at the time of Obama's birth. Obama Sr. was a member of the Luo tribe from Nyang'oma Kogelo, Nyanza Province, Kenya, which at the time was still a British colony.

Article 2, Section 1, Clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution stipulates presidential eligibility, requiring the nation's elected chief to be a "natural born citizen."

The clause states: "No person except a natural born citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any Person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty-five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States."

The Fourteenth Amendment to the Constitution specifically defines "citizen" but not "natural born citizen".

A "citizen" is defined as: "All persons born or naturalized in the United States, and subject to the jurisdiction thereof, are Citizens of the United States and of the State wherein they reside."

However, no definition of "natural born citizen" – which is only used in the presidential requirement clause – was provided anywhere in the Constitution, and to this day the precise meaning of the term is still being debated.

There are no records of any definitive discussion on the matter during the Constitutional Convention. That – coupled with the absence of definitive Supreme Court rulings and a wide array of opinions throughout the centuries – has only further confused the question of what "natural born" actually means.

Why won't Congress impeach this fraudster? What are they afraid of? Or does the spectre of mass riots in American cities cowed them into an embarrassing silence?

I was born and raised in Scotland and now live in Canada - yet even I can see the danger that this intolerable situation has placed the USA in.

May God help America.

Kathy Washburn| 9.3.11 @ 12:48PM

Yes, isn't it amazing that Americans get so wound up about treason? Amazing that Americans can get visceral about people trying to overthrow the government.

OF COURSE TAS readers care about treason!! All Americans should care about treason.

RCV| 9.3.11 @ 12:36PM

I am continually fascinated by the obsession TAS readers seem to have with Ayers, a minor figure of little consequence and even less merit. Rather than address pressing issues like how to revive the sorry economy still reeling from the world financial collapse of 2008, what to do about the lingering quagmires of Iraq and Afghanistan, how to resolve the dilemma of millions of undocumented immigrants and their families in our midst -- the editors and readers of TAS would rather obsess on this washed-up pathetic 60s radical.

It's the continuing need to find demons to blame problems on, instead of trying to find solutions to those problems. With the welcome collapse of tyrannical communism, some seem the need to find substitute demons to replace that evil. Fascinating phenomenon.

And welcome, Paul, to the conversation and for attempting to bring some rationality to the discussion. It's difficult, as you've seen, because many here would rather just name-call than discuss issues.

John II| 9.3.11 @ 2:32PM

"And welcome, Paul, to the conversation and for attempting to bring some rationality to the discussion. It's difficult, as you've seen, because many here would rather just name-call than discuss issues."

Would that include me, Roberto? After all, I called Paul a liberal.

Anyhow, that reminds me of another definition. A liberal is a person who calls everyone who disagrees with him a name-caller.

And now back to another episode of "Hogan's Heroes," in which the conservative Colonel Hogan calls the liberal Colonel Klink a bubblehead.

RCV| 9.3.11 @ 4:53PM

It actually didn't include you, J2 or Nick or Occam. But people who do dismiss everyone who disagrees with them as a "communist" does qualify.

RCV| 9.3.11 @ 5:20PM

Pardon. "do qualify"

Simon Templar| 9.3.11 @ 7:25PM

Ok, no more communist. You are just another GD Statist with left wing leanings. Is that better?

Simon Templar| 9.3.11 @ 7:43PM

Oh, and as a Statist with left wing leanings...just what flavor of the month are you?

There are so many to pick from?
Let see our choices:
Socialist, communist, socialist democrat, fabian socialist, national socialist, fascist socialist, marxist, maoist, lenninist, stalinist, social democrat, christian socialism, labour socialist, bolshevik, menshevik, international socialist, or liberal democrat?

RCV| 9.3.11 @ 9:11PM

A long list of terms Simon, which have precise meanings, none of which you apparently are capable of grasping.

carnot| 9.4.11 @ 5:32PM

but not as driven as your need for attention!

Margie| 9.4.11 @ 5:47PM

RCV,

It seems to me that you are incapable of answering his question.

RCV| 9.4.11 @ 6:11PM

I thought it was obvious: "none of the above " is the correct answer, at least for anyone who believes that words have actual meanings.

Margie| 9.5.11 @ 3:37PM

RCV knows that I believe that words have meanings, especially the Words of God.

So yes. I would peg you as a Socialist Democrat because you believe what Obama does, and are in agreement with everything he's doing~ which is Socializing America.

And nope. That's not vague. He really IS doing that.

RVC~ if you truly were a man after God's own heart~ you'd despise what Obama's doing. Socialism is the hatred of individual freedom. It is everything God hates. Jesus died to make individuals free.. to serve Him. Not Government!

RCV| 9.5.11 @ 5:52PM

I'm not a socialist, Margie, as I explained at least a dozen times. I believe a free market system produces the greatest economic good for the greatest number, while socialism - which is contrary to human nature, always fails.

I also believe that corporate capitalism -- which is a state construct (wisely allowing individuals to pool their resources to allow for massive accumulation of capital, necessary for industrial and post-industrial development, in exchange for legal protection for individual liability) is a positive thing. But corporate capitalism also requires regulation, prohibitions on things such as child labor, health and safety regulation, proscriptions against price-fixing and anti Competitive behavior, because state creation of corporations eliminates the individual liability that in a natural free market system would help deter such abuses.

Jesus did indeed die to make people free, and in no country has that dream been better realized than our own.

Margie| 9.5.11 @ 6:28PM

For some reason, I bet you sound just like Obama. Does he also refer to the free market enterprise in this country as "corporate capitalism?"

A "state" construct? States don't "create corporations", individuals do.

Our system of free market capitalism permits the individual to create a corporation, not the state.
The state only permits that creation.
The state "creates" nothing.

And it's the power hungry Leftist Socialist thugs that want to destroy the free market enterprise way of life that we have by enforcing the worst kind of regulations and laws upon the individuals who own these companies, thereby driving them out of business, or turning them into slaves to the Socialist scumbag Pretender-in-Thieves who get elected by the duped electorate because they don't know any better.
Or they do know better, which makes them partners in crime.

We already have laws on the books concerning child labor, and we don't need anymore regulations wether from the blasted EPA or any other politically correct mini-terrorists wanting to destroy business in this country.

Your last sentence says it all because you basically said that corporations are (to you and Obama) not part of our free market enterprise way of life.

You say you're not a Socialist, but again, you love Obama, his ways and his categorizing of America and Americans.

RCV| 9.5.11 @ 9:23PM

Margie, corporations are state-created enterprises, beginning with the English and Dutch India Trading Companies. They could not exist without the articial barrier of no personal liability that the state grants to the individuals who provide the capital for the enterprise (capitalists ). Capitalism is a good thing for many reasons, but it's a later development from a free market economy, one which enabled the accumulation of capital to build industry. There's nothing perforative about the term "corporate capitalism".

Tell me which specific regulations you object to - there's always room for disagreement about their benefits and costs.

And by the way, many industrialists fought tooth and nail against Progressive efforts to ban child factory labor. It didn't come without a fight. Nothing good ever does.

RCV| 9.5.11 @ 9:24PM

"pejorative" that should be

Margie| 9.3.11 @ 2:40PM

LOL! Thanks for proving my point, RCV.

You & Paul are birds of a feather, who take people around in mind game circles. The Masters at name calling and hypocrisy!!

Hilarious!

RCV| 9.3.11 @ 4:55PM

Wasn't clear to me that you had a point, Margie. But of all the posts on this subject, I'm most pleased to be lumped with Paul.

Shill Watch| 9.3.11 @ 6:46PM

Gay trolls are naturally attracted to each other. Well that is in a very unnatural kind of way. Make sure Paul wears protection.

RCV| 9.3.11 @ 9:12PM

Are you in eighth grade?

carnot| 9.4.11 @ 5:36PM

why? are you a pedofile?

lets run down the list

- narcissistic...check

- control issues....check

- little respect for others....check

- socially isolated....check

- frequently depressed....check

carnot| 9.3.11 @ 11:21PM

"With the welcome collapse of tyrannical communism, some seem the need to find substitute demons to replace that evil."

you mean like "racist" Tea Party'ers? spot on RCV!!!

Oldefarte| 9.4.11 @ 2:07PM

DIVERSION is a political/military tactic of war/politics that's often used to divert the public attention away from critical concerns. The MSM and Hollywood has been successfully using same for years sadly to trojun-horse its favored candidates subversively into elective office. DO AS I SAY, NOT AS I DO!!!!!!!!!!

Kathy Washburn| 9.3.11 @ 12:43PM

Thank you for this detailed accounting of Ayres and wife. What a deliberate waste of resources those two have been. They had every advantage and squandered it in hatred - hatred for which I can see no reason whatsoever.

I think of them as dangerously mentally warped souls. Amazing how the scum floats to the top.

Claire Solt PhD| 9.3.11 @ 3:31PM

It is well past time that jourbnalistsz stopped rehashing the past and realize that Ayers et al are busy reforming American education with a curriculum dictated by Washington-- a socialist curriculum.

coal carrier| 9.3.11 @ 4:16PM

When I was a young man, starting out in my career, I applied for a position that required a secret clearance with a specific federal agency. The FBI started its background investigation and I was granted a clearance in 6 weeks, which was really quick, probably because I was so young. I was 21. There was another individual at this same time that was also applying for a middle management position. After three months or so was he was denied a clearance and had to seek employment elsewhere. He said that he was told that he was denied a clearance because he visited his neighborhood bar too often. The security agency said that he was a security risk. Too many whisky sours had a tendency to loosen lips. Security information could slip out in a casual conversation with a stranger at the bar. You see in 1966, the Federal Government didn’t fool around when it came to national security. If they thought you were a risk, you were not given a security clearance and you wouldn’t be working in an area where you may compromise national security.

Now, 45 years later, we have an individual in the White House who frequented a church for 20 years that advocated the overthrow of this nation. Rubbed elbows with terrorists and radicals who bombed the Pentagon. Smoked dope. Refuses to display his school records. Has hired a slew of Marxists radicals, as named in this article, in his administration and now he is allowed to see and hear the most top-secret information with regards to the security of this nation. All while the Secret Service protects him to do so. We are in deep trouble.

antidote| 9.3.11 @ 4:29PM

O gee, it must be close to election time again, you are bringing up Ayers again, which tells me you got nothin on the prez and your desperation move is to drag Ayers out of mothballs. Give it up, it only makes you people look desperate.

Simon Templar| 9.3.11 @ 4:47PM

Oh, we do not have to rely on Ayers to get something on your prez, little troll, and we sure damn are not desperate. All we have to do is point to the latest polls on his wonderful popularity and the latest unemployment statistics. You are the one who is shitting your little government bought diaper.

Simon Templar| 9.3.11 @ 4:51PM

Oh, by the way all this article is doing and this thread is bemoaning the fact about how this complete, incompetent, radical jackass ever got to be prez and how a media willfully covered up for him and deceived the American public.
See in 2012! We are looking forward to it since the cat is now out of the bag.

RCV| 9.3.11 @ 5:00PM

Oh, please. We've been hearing non-stop about Ayers since 2007. Your fantasies about "media" cover-ups and conspiracies are rich. The "media" has long since consisted of the likes of Limbaugh, Hannity, Coulter and the rest of the ranters who dominate the airwaves these days and rail about the "mainstream media", meaning the point-of-view-less news on ABC, CBS and NBC that few watch any more. The conservative victim of conspiracy game is getting soooo tiresome.

John II| 9.3.11 @ 5:48PM

". . . the point-of-view-less news on ABC, CBS and NBC . . ."

I . . . it . . . we . . . [sputter] . . .

Roberto, we're both getting long on the tooth, and a certain latitude should properly be accorded the elderly, but this is ridiculous. As a fellow old man, I herewith order you to stop saying things too strongly redolent of senescence and dementia. You must fight it off, not just for your own sake but for the rest of us old bastards as well.

Read a good book. Study classical Greek. Cultivate an intense hobby, such as stamp-collecting or serious movie-watching. Don't let the aging catch up! Stay ahead of it!

And now back to "Grumpy Old Men" (1993), in which Jack Lemmon and Walter Matthau prove that even aging liberals can find dignity.

RCV| 9.3.11 @ 9:18PM

John, I confess. Much to the embarrassment of my children, I've been collecting stamps for 55 years, ever since I inherited my Dad's collection at 9. (The collection now numbers 130,000 in 18 Scott International volumes. ). And I am an insatiable reader whose library has long since overflowed into every room of the house.

John II| 9.3.11 @ 10:17PM

Embarrassment. That's an interesting way of putting it. I think I may have mentioned that my #3 son started an inventory of my movie collection, and simply gave up after cataloging a mere 1,200 or so. He just sighed and watch a movie with me.

My #2 son, as is his wont, was a bit more direct when he was visiting us with his own growing family. He looked over the collection, glanced at my #3 son, and looked sadly at me: "This is a sickness, Dad."

As to libraries, I have an excuse for all the books: that's how I make my living. The other excuse, which I use with my wife, is that all those bookshelves on all those walls in all those rooms do double duty as insulation.

Pay no attention to your kids now that they're grown. Collectors need to collect. I withdraw part of my unsolicited advice in the previous post. Perhaps I was put off more by the stylistically awkward expression "point-of-view-less news" than by the astonishing and disturbing thought behind it.

The MSM? No point of view entangled in their selection (and suppression) of news? No preferential option for liberal-left nostrums and our symbolically significant Narcissist-in-Chief? As Groucho Marx would say, "Nyah, hah, hah, hah, hah, hah, haaaaaaaaaaaa . . . ."

And now back to "A Night at the Opera" (1935), probably the best of the Marx Brothers' 16 flicks. There might have been more, but it was hard to find directors who could tolerate working with them.

RCV| 9.3.11 @ 10:53PM

Diane Sawyer, Nixon's loyal speechwriter? If she has a point of view on much of anything, it's hard for me to discern. Little George Stephanopolous, I'll give you. I don't find Brian Williams or whoever has replaced Sarah's gossipy nemises to represent much of anything.

All of the real viewpoint advocacy folks are on cable these days. Beck, Hannitty, Ingraham and Maddow, Matthews, Cooper, and that lunatic, Obermann. In my humble opinion, the only real newsman among them is Shephard Smith on Fox.

My son only reverts to mocking my stamp collection when I berate him for wasting time on video games. I'm left to explain how much history and geography I learned as a kid from those little squares of paper. My daughter, who is now a theatrical set and costume designer is a little more forgiving since she has started to develop her own little quirky collections of buttons, fabric swatches and historical hats.

John II| 9.3.11 @ 11:56PM

Smith is indeed good. I suspect he's a family man and a good man personally--he projects a sort of disinterested alertness and, withal, an engaged joie de vivre. He's alert to the world around him, with a kind of gently serious fascination.

Despite the unsettling premise of "The Collector" (1965) and especially the chilling John Fowles novel on which it's based--not to mention a nerdy abstraction one often encounters in the hobbyist--I think collecting can be good for the soul.

At its best, it reminds me of the teaching technique of the 19th century naturalist Louis Agassiz, who trained his students in the most minute habits of observation in the lab and in the field. Collecting, I think, can similarly foster a keen awareness of detail in a dazzlingly complex and beautiful world.

It can inspire decent poetry as well as deep reflection and personal engagement. It can help one achieve a kind of connectedness to things, without which we cannot be entirely reliable in our relations with others.

It may even delay dementia. I hope so.

blackknights1802| 9.4.11 @ 7:26AM

Shephard Smith is another drama queen. He belongs on CNN. Remember the news stories are formulated behind the scenes and read through a teleprompter.

skip| 9.5.11 @ 2:09PM

Whenever I see Shepherd Smith I think of a douchebag and an asswipe. He seems to hit his stride whenever he is commenting on live coverage of a car chase. He constantly peppers his daily news program with sanctimonious subjective asides that have a liberal bent. I experience a visceral reaction similar to the reaction I experience observing Obama, but turn off Smith more, because Smith's intellectual dishonesty is entirely irrelevant to the nation's interest compared to Obama's. I suffer observing Obama's intellectual dishonesty to keep the reasons for opposing him fresh and strong in my mind, the stakes have become that critical. I like Bret Baier, who covers his daily news program objectively.

RCV| 9.5.11 @ 6:05PM

I disagree with you on Smith, but I share your admiration of Bret Baier, who is indeed a fine and objective newsman, though a bit on the dour side for my taste. I prefer, as John II says, Smith's joie de vivre.

And, Skip, people will take what you say a bit more seriously if you refrain from such childish terms as "douche bag and asswipe". They're not very Christian, and much too evocative of Clint.

Reprobate Charlatan Vomitus| 9.5.11 @ 7:41PM

I don't bother with a silly post which, if examined with intelligence and honestly, reveals a poster who is pretending to possess a lofty rationality such as his opinion at this time is appropriate and warranted considering the current situation, which serves as a veneer covering fiercely resentful passions such as the assumption he is not being thoroughly ridiculed for thoroughly appropriate and warranted reasons, which leaks out constantly in the form of crazed projections such as he does not create the vomit much less will return to it, which reveals ignorance such as the possessing lofty rationality on childishness, which reveals arrogance such as the veneer covering fiercely resentful passions on evocation, which reveals a dogged stupidity such as continuing to make even worse the vomit of his own creation he will return to, which encompasses an odd fascination for readers of adject stupidity, on the odds of how much worse, and soon, and how often, he will return to his own vomitus matters.

RCV| 9.5.11 @ 9:33PM

Could you get any more boring, Skip?
Zzzzzzzzzzz .........

skip| 9.6.11 @ 12:39AM

...said the genius who in this thread has exemplified the epitome of a liberal pretending to pompous justifications, covering tempestuously bitter emotions, revealing deranged impulses of not only oblivion and condescension, but tenacious absurdity that comprises a queer fixation with cruelty, in other words like a mutt seeks out his own puke, you've posted idiotically, over, and over, and over, as proof;

and is the genius who in this tread posted

"welcome, Paul, to the conversation and for attempting to bring some rationality to the discussion",

and

"I'm most pleased to be lumped with Paul";

and is the genius who in the above post sanctimoniously espouses hypocritically on 'childishness' and 'piousness', which 'evokes' the nugget

"I abhor sanctimonious conservatism of the tea party brand, an ideology wholly lacking in intelligence or a shred of real Christian love and compassion. It espouses policies dangerous, damaging, and detrimental to our country and it's future. It will have a lifespan much like its intellectual forebearer, Know Nothingism.",

and is the genius who is in reality not intelligent enough to ever learn, and is in reality exceedingly more boring than Post American and Alan Brooks combined, but is in reality too stupid to know it.

RCV| 9.6.11 @ 10:17PM

Zzzzzzzzzzz...............

Simon Templar| 9.4.11 @ 5:53AM

So, is your denial...sooooo tiresome..let alone your liberal utopian fantasies. One hundred years of failed Liberalism.

RCV| 9.4.11 @ 2:52PM

I have no utopian fantasies, Simon. I like my country just as it is -- not perfect, but probably as close to perfect as man alone will ever achieve.

Reprobate Charlatan Vomitus| 9.4.11 @ 3:50PM

I don't bother with silly this country is as close to perfect as man alone will ever achieve, give or take over fifty four brutal murders of innocent defenseless Americans I sanctimoniously support, on just one reason I am a douchebag asswipe matters.

RCV| 9.4.11 @ 4:22PM

Z...z...z...z...z...z....z................

John Navratil| 9.4.11 @ 5:22PM

RCV,

I cannot say I like my country just as it is. I do share your love of country and if more people, from all political stripes, did and weren't out to destroy it (Ayers, e.g.) the battles might not be so pitched.

We can disagree at the voting booth and spend our efforts trying to convince others of the rectitude of our positions. When we start in with the revolution, the outcome will not be anywhere close to perfect.

Ayers has, long ago, removed himself from the realm of political discourse. Political associations with him are, to say the least, suspect.

RCV| 9.4.11 @ 6:40PM

Agree with you completely on Ayers, a despicable amoral leftist blowhard. The attempts to link Obama with him, however, I find pretty lame. Obama has explicitly condemned Ayers' vile activities as a "weatherman". The claim that Obama "started his political career in Ayers' living room at a reception hosted for him by Ayers and Dorn" is a distorted half-truth. The event in question was a reception honoring the retiring Alice Palmer, hosted by Ayers, a professor at the University of Chicago. Palmer invited Obama to the reception as her guest, because Obama was seeking her seat, and Obama attended. That's it. I think that hardly qualifies it as a close association. Ayers was a sorry little footnote in 60s history, and deserves to remain so.

John Navratil| 9.5.11 @ 12:06PM

RCV,

I'm pleased that you disdain Ayers. I give him more credit, if that's the word, than being merely a blowhard. He actually blew people up.

It's irony that the left consistently brings up McVeigh and a domestic terrorist and always links him to the right. He was, of course, executed for him crimes. Ayers get apologia.

Perhaps Obama's associations with him are merely happenstance. It's not the way I'd bet.

Oldefarte| 9.4.11 @ 2:12PM

Ph yeah you're right, we're desperate alright! We desperate for a decrease in our current 20% effective unemployment, for a government that dosen't legally sue/harass/regulate to death its citizens/taxpayers, that doesn't play politics with everything that it does for three years after election, that doesn't bow/scrape to enemy-dictators cowardly, that know how to ACT PRESIDENTIAL, etc. Yeah, we're so desperate that WE WILL CEASE TO EXIST AS A MAJOR NATION OF THE WORLD IF WE IGNORANTLY GIVE THIS PRESIDENT ANOTHER FOUR YEARS IN WHICH TO COMPLETELY DESTROY THIS NATION FROM HIS POLICES!!!!!!!!!

Simon Templar| 9.3.11 @ 4:41PM

Just for the record.
Our little troll on this thread by the name of Paul arrogantly challenges many of us here to prove that Obama was a marxist by evidence of his actions, programs, and policies.

Now, many of us including myself took the bait but forgot one important fact about liberal trolls - their use of the false premises. So, we went around and around trying to give evidence of doings that we found frankly un-American, 'socialistic', and Marxian trying to prove he was or is a Marxist.

Now, the fact of the matter is that he is not a MARXIST in the strictest definition.

HE IS A FABIAN SOCIALIST. There is a big difference between the two. His actions, world view, his policies, his keynesian economics, and many of his policies are in fact more closely alligned with fabian socialism...and offshoot movement that has largely been successful in most parts of the world including right here in the US with our left wing and progressive parties since its beginnings in 1883.

Now, this helps us put him in the proper perspective and also helps us understand why he has associations with other leftist having different strains of socialism and has has formed alliances with them.

One thing we conservatives know for sure is that socialism in whatever form it takes is not in keeping with our capitalistic, free market, constitutional Republic designed, developed and birthed by our founding fathers.

RCV| 9.3.11 @ 5:06PM

Gee, thanks for that amazing concession that President Obama "is not a Marxist in the strictest definition". Lordy, what a shock to learn that! Here's some news, Simon: He's not a Marxist by any definition. Nor is he a Fabian Socialist or any other kind of socialist. He is a Democrat, elected by the majority of the American people, to head our capitalist, free market, constitutional Republic, bequethed to us by the brilliant young men who were our founding fathers. Branding your opposition as communists, socialists, marxists, etc. is an old Republican tactic that dates back a good century or so, and it's lost whatever shock value it ever had because folks like you have just worn it out. Give it a rest.

Simon Templar| 9.3.11 @ 7:05PM

Your game for nearly a century and a half is to deny what you are and constantly change your names to hide what you are... we had democrat, then progressive, then liberal, then back to progressive and now democrat.

You can call yourself whatever you want but your party and left wing political movements have been riddled with socialist, social democrats, and yes fabian socialist, communist, and just plain old useful idiot democrats. Your media champions do not seem afraid anymore...they just admit now they are socialist. No, you give it a rest. The last democrat died in 1962.

Do not lecture me. I WAS you and I know exactly who what you believe and what your game is. In fact, I remember attending meetings in the old day at all the social movement groups where we would make fun of the conservatives as how they did not have a clue about who we were..you know the old 'look how stupid these suburban republicans are crap'.

Please do not talk to me about brandishing anything. Man, I would knock your head off for that one if you were in the same room. My lord, your ilk damn near invented the smear and brandishment. Infact your left wing shits actually invented political correctness.

As far as ideologies, you can duck and cover all day...but at the end of it history, facts, documentation, and experience is on my side of the argument. You got nothing. His ideas, his world view, everything from his keynesian economics to his communist mother and his involvement with ACORN to his education screams fabian socialist. What do you have? Your idiot opinion. Yeah, we are all going home now and hanging our hat because you said so.

Yes, give it a rest. Prove your point with some evidence that his world view, his class warfare rhetoric, his tactics, his statements in his books, and his program to transform America does not find its origins in socialist and left wing dogma and ideological origin.
You are lame and laughable. Guess what? People are waking up. The gigs up, pal.

RCV| 9.3.11 @ 9:23PM

I can assure you, Simon, that you were never me. Not even close.

Simon Templar| 9.4.11 @ 5:26AM

Heavy dude! Wow, man! That certainly put me in my place.

You are a dime a dozen my comrade friend.

Simon Templar| 9.4.11 @ 5:40AM

Yeah, you are right..you were nothing like me. I remember you well though, you were the liberal democrat useful idiot that would attend our meetings on an irregular basis and had that distant superior attitude that you knew better than anyone on how to bring social change. You never had an original thought in your head that was not put there by someone else.
Sheppard Smith! LOL. That says it all. Yes, I do know you.

RCV| 9.5.11 @ 10:17PM

You're telling us a lot about yourself, Simon, not about me. I'm not surprised you attended those meetings you described - you haven't really changed, just switched people to disdain.

Reprobate Charlatan Vomitus| 9.3.11 @ 7:08PM

I don't bother with silly communists, socialists, and marxists when the over / under is as yet undetermined, on the number of readers who saw the subtitle of the 9/1 article by Lars Walker that was, quote:

"It isn't often that human excrement brings clarity",

and wondered if it could really, truly, actually be the repulsive contemptible vile one himself, finally deigning to shed light on sanctimonious statements of such genius as:

"At least, Skippie, I belong to a party that cares about human beings AFTER they're born",

or:

"I supported Obama from the beginning",

or, any other of many, many comments posted that represent not only the lifelong expertise on Christianity, and represent the lifelong expertise on the Constitution, but also represent the intelligence quotient of possibly the brilliance of an 80, matters.

RCV| 9.3.11 @ 9:21PM

Zzzzzzzzzzz....

Reprobate Charlatan Vomitus| 9.3.11 @ 10:39PM

I don't bother with silly signing petitions, that have been signed only by legitimate scientists, thirty one thousand four hundred eighty seven legitimate scientists, who also bothered to provide their degrees, as well as bothered to also provide their scientific specialties, in order to thoroughly debunk manmade global warming definitively, on being so stupid, and such an idiot, I didn't bother, as I don't, over, and over, and over, with silly intelligent or honesty matters, which is why I definitively do not bother with signing silly petitions on silly science matters.

RCV| 9.3.11 @ 10:55PM

Well said, Skip!

skip| 9.4.11 @ 1:54PM

Reprobate Charlatan Vomitus renders a public service.

RCV | 10.20.10 @ 7:06PM:

"I don't sign silly petitions on scientific matters."

...posted the genius, commenting on the petition at:

www.petitionproject.com

which was signed by 31,487 legitimate scientists. If they need the signature of a stupid lying pathetic despicable sanctimonious hypocritical idiot reprobate charlatan vomitus unChristian unConstitutional douchebag asswipe liberal I'm sure they'll contact you.
Idiot.

RCV| 9.4.11 @ 2:54PM

Even under your own name, Skip, Zzzzzzzzzzzzz....

skip| 9.4.11 @ 3:46PM

Man up, douchebag asswipe. What does RCV stand for?

Even under your own hypocritical rock, er, 'name', of 'RCV', why did you state, definitively, and sanctimoniously, that you don't sign just petitions, but, emphatically, silly petitions, when the silly petition in question is signed by 31,487 not just scientists, but legitimate scientists, who provided their degrees and scientific specialties, on a topic of not just importance, but potentially critical importance, on causes of potentially catastrophic global warming?

It is obvious to everyone but you the only intelligent and honest answer is because you are a stupid idiot liberal. Which is a tautology. And redundant. And repetitive. And superfluous. But I repeat myself.

Idiot.

RCV| 9.4.11 @ 4:24PM

I stand by all my posts, Skip, including my response to your assinine petition post. You might consider addressing issues instead of boring everyone with your repetitive nonsensical ramblings. And your obsession is, well.......

Reprobate Charlatan Vomitus| 9.4.11 @ 5:09PM

I don't bother with a silly post which, if examined intelligently and honestly, reveals a poster who is pretending to possess a lofty rationality such as the standing by all posts no matter how idiotically stupid, which serves as a veneer covering fiercely resentful passions such as the accusation that a petition signed by 31,487 legitimate scientists is asinine rather than the asinine statement about it, which leaks out constantly in the form of another crazed projection such as responses criticizing the posts that are stood by is nonsensical, which reveals ignorance such as continuing to yet again avoid personal accountability for past idiotically stupid posts, which reveals arrogance such as continuing to yet again sanctimoniously post hypocritically, which reveals dogged idiotically stupidity such as continuing to yet again unaccountably post sanctimoniously hypocritical stupid idiocy over and over and over, which encompasses an odd fascination such as continuing to yet again vivid imaginations of irrational paranoia about obession with overtones of violence, on yet again being a stupid idiot returning to yet again wallow yet again in his own vomitus yet again as a reprobate charlatan yet again, while avoiding yet again matters.

RCV| 9.4.11 @ 7:36PM

Oh, zzzzzzzzzzz .......

Margie| 9.5.11 @ 4:15PM

And readers will take note that he still didn't answer your question!

RCV| 9.5.11 @ 4:32PM

Margie, if you want to put your full name, address and phone number on a post, I'll reciprocate. All I ask of Skip is that he consistently post under his moniker so we can know who's speaking, just as you do with the other foul- mouthed drive-by, Clint/Tim*.

Margie| 9.5.11 @ 5:55PM

RCV,

I wasn't referring to your name, nor would I ever.

I was referring to this question that he asked you:

"Even under your own hypocritical rock, er, 'name', of 'RCV', why did you state, definitively, and sanctimoniously, that you don't sign just petitions, but, emphatically, silly petitions, when the silly petition in question is signed by 31,487 not just scientists, but legitimate scientists, who provided their degrees and scientific specialties, on a topic of not just importance, but potentially critical importance, on causes of potentially catastrophic global warming?"

RCV| 9.5.11 @ 6:15PM

I explained at the time, Margie, that I think signing petitions is a rather silly way to resolve scientific disputes. I noted around the same time that I was a global warming sceptic in the sense that as a non-scientist, what I have read convinces me that while global warming is a real phenomenon, it is largely a function of natural cyclical warming/cooling patterns. While human activity does indeed have marginal effects on the degree of those cyclical changes, there is probably little we can do to affect long-range trends, and we ought to therefore seriously factor in the economic costs of any efforts to ameliorate the effect of human activity on climate. There may be, of course, other benefits to cleaning up our air and water from man-made pollution which we should not ignore.

Reprobate Charlatan Vomitus| 9.5.11 @ 7:16PM

I don't bother with a silly post which, if examined intelligently and honestly, reveals a poster who is pretending to possess a lofty rationality such as holding a reasonable scientific view, which serves as a veneer covering fiercely resentful passions such as sanctimoniously not bothering with silly petitions on scientific matters several more times after it was specifically pointed out pointedly that stupid idiot liberals can't sign the petition, which leaks out constantly in the form of crazed projections such as the archives don't really matter as proof, which reveals ignorance such as avoiding, still, accountability for assuming the petition could be signed by him, which reveals arrogance such as avoiding, still, accountability for assuming the petition could be signed by him, which reveals a dogged stupidity such as continuing to avoid, still, accountability for assuming the petition could be signed by him, which encompasses the oddly fascinating reality that all this is archived, and the assuming done that the petition could be signed by him was sanctimoniously repeated several more times back then, even after it was pointed out pointedly, several more times after the initial assumption, that stupid idiot liberals can't sign the petition, on yet again, seemingly distorting reality itself, continuing to make even worse the vomitus of his own making, which can not be remotely conceivable, even though that is actually what is happening, unbelieveably, matters.

Reprobate Charlatan Vomitus| 9.5.11 @ 6:51PM

I don't bother with a silly post which, if examined intelligently and honestly, which reveals a poster who is pretending to possess a lofty rationality such as the violation of imaginary anonymous posting decency, which serves as a veneer covering fiercely resentful passions such as disingenuous indignant protestations to being mocked for his very own words, which leaks out yet again in the form of a crazed projection such as any reader with a modicum of intelligence is unaware of who is doing the mocking, which reveals ignorance such as this pathetic whining is just making him look even more pathetic, previously not thought possible by any reader, which reveals arrogance such as a pathetic refusal to accept he is the website's personal laughingstock, which reveals a dogged stupidity that encompasses an odd reality readers find fascinating that he continues to provide more and more fodder for being this laughingstock, on yet again, seemingly defying reality itself, wallowing once again in the vomitus of his own making, if this seems impossible, reread this last post being responded to, matters.

RCV| 9.5.11 @ 9:36PM

Zzzzzzzzzzz ..........

carnot| 9.3.11 @ 11:22PM

ok...we'll take your word for it!

Margie| 9.3.11 @ 6:39PM

Wait! I thought Fabian was that groovy singer from the 50's.

Nick| 9.4.11 @ 7:03PM

Ha-ha!
Good one, Margie.
God Bless!

Margie| 9.5.11 @ 1:20AM

Nick, for you~

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v.....re=related

Oldefarte| 9.4.11 @ 2:14PM

Nah, he's a Marxist alright. See my posted definition of Marxism above, and tell me that Chosen doesn't fit that definition to a tee!!!!!

idalily| 9.5.11 @ 12:29AM

Some of us went round and round with the trolls. Some of us did not. It just wasn't worth the keystrokes. Feeding trolls seldom is.

R. Kavanagh| 9.3.11 @ 5:46PM

It is no surprise that the President associated with these 2 individuals. They are a form of violent radicals that he chooses to emulate from behind a suit, degree and speeches that drip with the same vile beliefs. A long line of beats, hippies and other rag tag terrorists bent on nothing more than destruction have traded in their bombs for chairs in the teachers lounge. Of course their beliefs are the same all these years later. A wolf is a wolf, in sheep's skin or otherwise. They realized that indoctrination achieves far more lasting effects than outright violence. Breeding little class-envying warriors to hate achievement on all levels. Ayers & Dohrn, proud parents of a bouncing, blithering, bumbling socialist. Look how far he got, you must be proud of President ZERO.

Margie| 9.3.11 @ 6:48PM

Simon,

It's a good lesson in round n' round for certain. That's what they do. It's so classic!

They begin by saying, "Prove to me such and such!" So the decent person tries his best to do so.

Then, the instigator comes back with, "I'm still waiting for your proof! You haven't done anything!"

Then the decent person will keep trying, and the instigator will then take to personal humiliation of the the decent person, with degrading insults (usually, nine times out of ten it's with reference to their mental capabilities or level of IQ).

In truth, they aren't in the SLIGHTEST bit interested in the truth of the matter with which they came in here to supposedly seek~ but only to defend their idol of choice.

Anyhow~ great post as usual, simon. And I will just add my final thought:

A Socialist is a Socialist is a Socialist.

LOL.

Simon Templar| 9.3.11 @ 7:17PM

Marge, you are a brilliant gem! Have a great weekend.

Margie| 9.3.11 @ 9:25PM

You too, my conservative friend. And all my conservative friends whoever you may be.

Oldefarte| 9.4.11 @ 2:23PM

Marg, as Andy Griffith comically proclaimed in his 1950ish 'Romeo &Juliette;'.....I'S RIGHT CHEER!!!!!!!!

Oldefarte| 9.4.11 @ 2:16PM

Marg & ST: Please please see my posted definition of Marxism above and tell me that it's not a portrait of Obama!!!!!!

Margie| 9.4.11 @ 5:42PM

I saw. Perfect, and the "Pauls" will go on with charges of mental incapacity as usual as a response, because they can't deal with reality (the truth).

idalily| 9.5.11 @ 12:36AM

Just to expand on this, Margie. Yes, a Socialist is a Socialist, is a Socialist. But he is also a Marxist, a Fascist, etc. Point being, they parse out academic definitions of totalitarianism, as if there is a difference between these forms of government oppression, never seeing that they are all the same to the people. They are all toxic poisons to a free people. Tide, water, H2O, it's all the same to the person who drowned.

Margie| 9.5.11 @ 1:19AM

So true, idalily. We could also say all sons of the same father. And we know what father that is. The Devil.
There is a book by Richard Wurmbrand called Marx & Satan.
Pray before you read it, it is that scary.
The sad thing is, those who are being led by him do not even realize it. They truly believe they are doing the right thing.. well some DO realize it but don't care, too.
The bottom line is that I know from knowing the Bible, that the Enemy of God hates individual freedom, and prowls around like a roaring lion seeking whom he can devour. Communism, Socialism, Liberalism all have one main thing in common~ the very destruction of the individual's soul. And he uses many tricks and deception to get us there.
Only by the Grace of God does anyone escape it!
1 Peter 5:8.

Bob| 9.3.11 @ 9:50PM

Great article . But maybe people will stop putting down Glenn Beck. He explained all this 2 years ago. Old news. Give Glenn his due

PsychoDad| 9.3.11 @ 10:03PM

O Allen Allen Allen. Just found more of your nonsense. You desperately need to read this:
http://www.black-and-right.com.....-race-lie/

Please note the name of the website, "Black & Right."

In relevant parts:

June 24, 1940
Republican Party platform calls for integration of the armed forces; for the balance of his terms in office, FDR refuses to order it
March 12, 1956
Ninety-seven Democrats in Congress condemn Supreme Court’s decision in Brown v. Board of Education, and pledge to continue segregation

June 5, 1956
Republican federal judge Frank Johnson rules in favor of Rosa Parks in decision striking down “blacks in the back of the bus” law

November 6, 1956
African-American civil rights leaders Martin Luther King and Ralph Abernathy vote for Republican Dwight Eisenhower for President

September 9, 1957
President Dwight Eisenhower signs Republican Party’s 1957 Civil Rights Act

May 6, 1960
President Dwight Eisenhower signs Republicans’ Civil Rights Act of 1960, overcoming 125-hour, around-the-clock filibuster by 18 Senate Democrats
...
September 15, 1981
President Ronald Reagan establishes the White House Initiative on Historically Black Colleges and Universities, to increase African-American participation in federal education programs

June 29, 1982
President Ronald Reagan signs 25-year extension of 1965 Voting Rights Act

August 10, 1988
President Ronald Reagan signs Civil Liberties Act of 1988, compensating Japanese-Americans for deprivation of civil rights and property during World War II internment ordered by FDR

November 21, 1991
President George H. W. Bush signs Civil Rights Act of 1991 to strengthen federal civil rights legislation

Simon Templar| 9.4.11 @ 5:46AM

PD, absolute excellence. Great post.

Bob| 9.3.11 @ 11:01PM

Good points psychodad. Also don't forget Lyndon Johnson was against the civil rights act initially then realized he could turn it into political hay. His famous line was " we'll have them ni--ers voting democrat for 200 years". Another great democrat!

Simon Templar| 9.4.11 @ 5:30AM

Bob, in one paragraph you have succintly summarized the entire democratic party and its history.

Oldefarte| 9.4.11 @ 2:20PM

Bob & ST: Additionally the SOB from Texas also facilitated the unnecessary deaths/mutilations of hundreds of American GI's in Viet Nam by forcing them to fight the enemy with one arm tied behind their backs [that war could have been successfully won and ended in several months if nor for his micromanaging of the military to PC its effectively concluding same]!!!!!!!!

charlie nantoni| 9.4.11 @ 12:10AM

Keep investigating the Daley's - there is a lot there!

Jocon307 | 9.4.11 @ 3:40AM

It is a disgrace that Bill Ayers and his harridan wife, Bernadine Dohrn are not rotting in jail to this day.

martin j smith| 9.4.11 @ 8:26AM

Bob Gibbons refers to charlatans in Politics and I fully agree "Obama takes the cake". But, as for me--I have to stay focused on the truth and the charlatans do inhabit BOTH political parties.

Before I go on let me make it very clear I want to get rid of Obama and his fellow Socialists.

What I do is a look soberly as to what we will get in his place. The answer to that question can be answered partly at looking at the top tier candidates so far: Romney,Perry ( both have some problematic policies in their history ) and then there is Bachman. Palin is still on the fence.

Then the other part of the answer is to look at McConnell and Boehner. There lies the problem. yet I would take them over what we have now any day. But let us not get too enthusiastic. The issue of illegal immigration is closely ties to our economic problems as of course is a mini-version of Obamacare. I really wonder if these two guys Romney and Perry "get it" . Obama care's costs will be astronomical as will be costs of paying for services of illegals. What money tree is printing press will these guys get the dough ?

What needs done is get some one elected but ask pointed questions. Keep them on their toes so to speak.

Ken (Old Texican)| 9.4.11 @ 9:34AM

RCV
just keeps forgetting the centerpiece of communism....of whatever stripe.
ie: reinventing the actual past for present political purposes. (ie: lying )

The RCVs of the world are simply convinced that they can direct our lives better than we can. That is the eternal excuse for the lies....even the lies they tell themselves.
They simply consider themselves the modern day Nomenklatura.
Lawyers are the only Americans with a LICENSE TO LIE...especially in a court of law. Has anyone here ever seen a lawyer "sworn in" to tell the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth...before a trial?
Nope.
Rather, they are hired to "shade" the truth, "twist" the truth, or simply "conveniently forget" the truth as needs be for their client and hope the opposing liar (lawyer) is too stupid, or ill prepared, to call them out.

RCV| 9.4.11 @ 2:57PM

Ken, what you've said confirms for me the type of lawyers you deal with, and why I and my firm would never have countenanced you as a client.

carnot| 9.4.11 @ 5:38PM

in other words....you confirm what Ken posted! cool!

martin j smith| 9.4.11 @ 10:17AM

RCV--What is wrong with the right label. Is that something to be ashamed of ? I think that Obama and all of his supporters MARXISTS and that includes Warren Buffet . They support the same polices as the CPUSA and the CPUSSR.

Own it.

RCV| 9.4.11 @ 2:59PM

Ah, Warren Buffet is a Marxist now! What pray tell, then, is a Capitalist? Martin, you are devoid of even the simplist understanding of what those big words mean.

carnot| 9.4.11 @ 5:39PM

nah. he's a limousine Liberal no one pays attention to in the political sphere.

Gary B| 9.5.11 @ 8:06AM

It's simpler than that. Buffett is buying influence. His politics, whatever they are, are irrelevant. As Milton Friedman said, no one hates the free market more than university professors and corporation presidents.

Carlo P DallOlmo| 9.4.11 @ 12:39PM

Great article. Great job. This has to come out again. I think people may be more willing to listen this time. Obama's magic is gone.

martin j smith| 9.4.11 @ 3:45PM

R stands for Russia, C for China or is it Cuba ? V for Venezuela= ?
Anyone who licks the ass of Obama is a Marxist because that what they are supporting.
So it seems RCV that YOU DO NOT LIKE BEING CALLED A MARXIST. Well, La di Da. Recall V. Lenin calling American capitalists " Useful Idiots"
As far as I am concerned "useful idiots" in this case are Marxists.
When YOU RCV whoever you represent show civility maybe it will rub off in the meantime calling Obama and his ilk EXACTLY WHO THEY ARE BASED ON THEIR POLICIES IS JUSTIFIED. '

The State taking over Banks,and GM etc
The State taking over Health Care ( Obama Care)
The State imposing limitations and regulations that hamstring our economy
The State printing more money to devalue our currency
The State Media--the NYT is Pravda or is it Izvestia ?
Saul Alinsky ?
RCV--Your arrogant attitude is showing under your underwear. So if your objective is to convince me that I am wrong YOU FAILED.
Now when ayou review all of the legislation and actions by Obama et al. and still disagree--that is fine --go your way and I will go mine. Adios.

RCV| 9.4.11 @ 4:26PM

Adios, amigo

Margie| 9.4.11 @ 5:40PM

Martin,

Excellent, sir.
You see! They will NEVER honestly discuss.

RCV| 9.4.11 @ 7:05PM

I was doing what he suggested in his final sentence, Margie. Trying to have us go our separate ways in peace since we obviously disagree. I didn't see much point in addressing the vague charges that Martin apparently believes "proves" Obama is some sort of Marxist, but if you'd like me to discuss them, I'm happy to:

"The State taking over banks, and GM etc."
The government didn't "take them over.". The Bush administration passed the TARP legislation to prevent the American financial system from totally collapsing. I'm glad they did. But it doesn't make Bush, or Obama, a "Marxist". The loans to GM helped save tens of thousands of American jobs, and the surviving private company is clearly in better shape. A big plus in my estimation.

"The State taking over health care". Really? Tell me how health care has changed since the Health Reform legislation passed. Requiring purchase of health insurance from private companies is hardly instituting a National Health Service. Obama didn't even push the public insurance option, which would have pleased most Democrats, but would have been far from a government takeover. Any socialist would be appalled at the paucity of this reform.

"imposing limitations and regulations that hamstring our economy". You haven't identified any specifics, so it's hard to discuss their costs and benefits. If what you are arguing for is a wholly unregulated economic system, one hardly has to be a Marxist to reject that. Starting with abolition of child factory work, and governmental inspection of food and drugs, much governmental regulation and limitations are both necessary and beneficial - unless one is a attract Libertarian or Anarchist.

"printing more money to devalue our currency.". The constitution authorizes the federal government to print money. Monetary policy under folks like Greenspan --a disciple of Ayn Rand -- and his successors, may be wise or foolish, but it is hardly "Marxist" in any sense.

"The state media - the NYT". This is just silly. The NYT is a private company. You may dislike it, it may be liberal, but under our First Amendment, it has the right to any viewpoint it chooses, just as Fox News and Limbaugh do.

Saul Alinsky? What about him? I'm no fan.

RCV| 9.4.11 @ 7:38PM

Should be "strict Libertarian"

Red Phillips | 9.4.11 @ 10:31PM

"The constitution authorizes the federal government to print money."

NO IT DOES NOT! It authorizes Congress to coin money. Read what it says.

RCV| 9.5.11 @ 1:16PM

Your interpretation of the coinage clause was rejected by the Supreme Court in 1871.

Red Phillips | 9.6.11 @ 8:37AM

The important question RCV is was it rejected by the people who wrote the Constitution and the people who ratified it. Something we call original intent.

RCV| 9.6.11 @ 4:32PM

Read the Federalist, Red, on the role of the judiciary in adjudicating disputes of what the law means. That's what they are there for.

POST American| 9.4.11 @ 11:05PM

--------------------BOTTOM LINE----------------------

--Getting harder and harder to muster that
good old scripted and programmed indignation
response.

AYERS is from finance privilege and
one day we might find he himself was a
front all along. Again, 'Marks--ism' and
'Calm--you--nism' and 'So--shall--ALL--ism'.

Obama, with his 'Banker Bailouts' and UN agenda
advances, support of the illegal alien
turmoil, protection of Wall Street, and
pre-emptive, Globalizing war making is in
lock step with David Rockefeller's deadly
sinister 'vision'.

Of course American Spectator, most of its writers
probably beholden to some kind of Rockefeller
favor or support, REFUSE to look at this.

ractivist | 9.5.11 @ 7:12PM

Post american,
You should look at this, as it is dead on and telling.
Too know Ayers is too know Obama, and that is a very scary reality we face today. I get your cynicism, but having researched Ayers this is dead on....

martin j smith| 9.5.11 @ 7:34AM

I wonder how much money these trolls are being paid considering its a holiday weekend and usually it is quiet. In any even the TRUTH is seen in their true colors. They are liars and can never be trusted with anything except to lie.

martin j smith| 9.5.11 @ 8:21AM

This article was about the connection of Obama to extreme radicals ( I mean those were violent and killed people ) of the 1960's This is not new. It was well known before the election of 2008. Other things about Obama were known--mostly if not entirely ignored. Now there is a large percentage of voters who voted for Obama believing they had a NEW DAY now realizing its even worse than the " Old day". One reason for that is the refusal to admit who Obama is: In my oppinion to be more refined in my definition he is a MARXIST -LENINIST( Taking into, account not only his asociations but his tactical methodology and his political education ). it is very important for LEFT not to be connected with a FOREIGN POLITICAL SYSTEM. That is because most voters would not like that. But the truth is They NOW have a full blown foreign political system closer to EUROPE with similar language for example CLASS WARFARE. Look at the riots in London for instance. This is why it is imperative that the truth come out.

Neil Harper| 9.5.11 @ 7:15PM

Could YOU please HIGHLIGHT more random WORDS in your posts with CAPITAL LETTERS? It makes YOUR POST much easier TO READ and your message COMES across so much CLEARER.

THANKS.

martin j smith| 9.5.11 @ 8:29AM

Part-
If you listen commentators --including those who are moderate Republicans and commentators on TV who lean the right of center, you will notice a reluctance to actually state that Obama is a Socialist,Marxist of anything like that. Yet, these very people dislike his policies. You can sense a fear perhaps --like losing their jobs --if they should say the "wrong thing" even if it is true. This is what politcal Correctness has done --it has damaged free speech and prevented the TRUTH.
And, YET its OK for the SOCIALISTS to refer top TEA PARTY voters or members of congress as "terrorists" or Nazis" . It does not take much to figure out that there is something wrong here.
I sense--even if Sarah Palin does not run for President that she is onto something when she attacks CRONY CAPITALISM for these "fellow travelers" are very supporters of FASCISM,NAZIISM,SOCIALISM, AND COMMUNISM. Crony capitalism needs to be exposed for what it is. Not a group interested in the people of our nation but for their own profits at our expense.

Brewster| 9.5.11 @ 10:13AM

One of the most frequent visitors to the WH is: Bill A! He and Soros direct Jarrett and she controls The Suit. Ayers found a perfect way to control the Presidency. These termites have been at work a long time; they are radical communists, patient, dangerous, deadly. They will not give up the WH without blood in the street. It's as natural to them as breathing. If America is wrecked, so what? They control what's left. I have studied these folks for 25 years. If they feel the election is going south, they will use terror, like Stalin, to achieve their goals. If you love your country, Patriots, Get Ready to Rumble.

RCV| 9.5.11 @ 1:19PM

Please Brewster, tell us one occasion when Ayers "visited the WH" or directed Valerie Jarrett to do anything. You're making " facts" up out of thin air -- or thin Ayer.

Margie| 9.5.11 @ 3:50PM

Of course as a (former?) lawyer you well know that it would take a filing of a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) before we'd be able to see the list of White House visitors.
LOL.

RCV| 9.5.11 @ 4:34PM

So file one. In the meantime, don't make up facts out of thin air.

Margie| 9.5.11 @ 5:48PM

I didn't make up anything. I was just making a point.

RCV| 9.5.11 @ 6:17PM

But Brewster did.

Margie| 9.5.11 @ 6:31PM

And he may very well be right. After all, he does idolize him.

RCV| 9.5.11 @ 9:37PM

Only in your imagination, Margie.

ractivist | 9.5.11 @ 7:06PM

He made three trips prior to march of 2009, since then we do not know. Documented
Too know Ayers is too know Obama, and Brewster is exactly right. God, guns n grub...

Thanks for writing this article and including the stuff on the AERA, this could be an entire article in itself, as it is what paved the way for this sympathetic environment for socialism...the antithesis of our Republic....great article, I hope and pray it takes root, as it could be and should be all critical thinkers need, as if they need more...

martin j smith| 9.5.11 @ 10:20AM

What will happen with Obama ? That depends on too many unknowns But I will hazard a guess.
His speech coming up will either be typical Obama or A-Typical. Your typical Obma speech will be : Blame everyone else but himself. Class warfare, manipulate the disasters of Hurricane Irene et al. of course blame republicans and the tea Party. He will make offer of "his generosity" to one final time to bring republicans on board with HIS POLICIES which he knows full well
are unacceptable. this is the Leninist side of Obama.
The A-Typical response would be to invite Republicans, business people and others WHO DO NOT AGREE WITH HIM POLITICALLY to around table to hash a policy that work.
The likelihood of the first option is 99.99%
BUT I never say never. So I save .01& just in case.
What he does given how obvious are economic situation is, will either totally convince me that I am right on the money with this or--if some miracle happens-I would lets see where this goes goes. Lets wait and see the TRUTH.

My belief so far is this president is purposely destroying our nation thru economic policies that he knows full well are disastrous. He is not working in m isolation. People like George Soros have a great of meddling in our affairs and are
totally behind Obama. So in conclusion: Do not hold your breath, wait and see and if shocked too much take your meds.

Margie| 9.5.11 @ 3:55PM

I will not listen to or watch his fraudulent speech. I could, online, but won't. My stomach can't take it. I already know he hasn't repented of his intent on destroying America as we have known it, so his arranging of his words matter not a whit to me.

Why bother?

It's the voting him out that I hope everyone who doesn't want more of the same DOES.

Please people~ can we please hound this mind-numbed Socialist robot out of office??

Neil Harper| 9.5.11 @ 7:11PM

America "as you know it" is a nation that has been declining since the cold war ended. You have entered stage three in the life of empires - the decline. Better come to grips with that fast, because your "best country in the world" hasn't been any such thing by any measure for the last thirty years at least, and it won't suddenly change even if you replace one president with another.

RCV| 9.5.11 @ 9:38PM

Tellu, please, Neil, which countries you consider superior in any respect.

martin j smith| 9.5.11 @ 1:47PM

Look at the headline at Matt Drudge: "Labor Leader calls for war on republicans." Any questions ?

martin j smith| 9.5.11 @ 1:47PM

Look at the headline at Matt Drudge: "Labor Leader calls for war on republicans." Any questions ?

Neil Harper| 9.5.11 @ 7:06PM

Ah, good old USA. "Best" country in the world, and has the most ignorant/dimwitted people in the world as well, based on the awesomely stupid comments people have written for this article.

Don't you all realize that it doesn't matter if you put a democrat or a republican in the white house? They're all just puppets for the real power in the US - the corporations. Who are controlled by the aliens. Who were made by the New World Order. Who is secretly controlled by the Pope.

Keep up the show though - good stuff, good stuff :)
*eats some more popcorn*

Ken (Old Texican)| 9.5.11 @ 9:03PM

Neil,
take your meds.
Question, is it the pope, or the masons who are the biggest problem in your thinking?
(Heh)

NJK| 9.5.11 @ 9:55PM

Here is a video of Larry Grathwohl from the early 80's on the WU plans for America. I'm afraid they've succeeded in their plans to infiltrate the government in the form of Obama. http://youtu.be/HWMIwziGrAQ

I believe Fast and Furious was a plan for the invasion of the United States. The WU wanted the Cubans, Vietnamese, and Russians to invade the US, but now, it's probably Mexico, along with Hezbollah who is in Mexico.

Obama has also hired Muslim Brotherhood members throughout our government. I believe the Navy Seals were set up by Obama or some of his operatives within the government.

Muslim Brotherhood in Our White House and the Murder of SEAL Team Six
http://trevorloudon.com/2011/0.....-team-six/

NJK| 9.5.11 @ 9:58PM

Bill Ayers probably provided Obama with his Social Security number, and his birth certificate. I don't understand why more who are supposed to be protecting the country don't take this seriously, and allow Obama to continue.
An exempt from Ayers Fugitive Days:

After the Baltimore fiasco, stealing ID was forbidden. Instead we began to build ID sets around documents as flimsy as a fishing license or a laminated card available in a Times Square novelty shop called “Official ID.” We soon figured out that the deepest and most foolproof ID had a government-issued Social Security card at its heart, and the best source of those were dead-baby birth certificates. I spent impious days over the next several months tramping through rural cemeteries in Iowa and Wisconsin, Illinois and North Dakota,searching for those sad little markers of people born between 1940 and 1950 who had died between 1945 and 1955. The numbers were surprising: two in one graveyard, a cluster of fourteen in another. Those poor souls had typically been issued birth certificates—available to us at any county courthouse for a couple of bucks and a simple form with information I could copy from the death announcement at the archive of the local paper—but they had never applied for a Social Security card.
Collecting those birth certificates became a small industry, and within a year we had over a hundred. For years I was a paper-made Joseph Brown, and then an Anthony Lee, remarkably durable identities. My on-paper official residences: a transient hotel in San Francisco and a warehouse in New York.
As is typical Ayers, he throws you off on a story that is fairly true…instead of cemetery or archived newspaper hunts it was the local County vital records office where ‘infant deaths‘ of all dates–the earlier the better– were investigated by a ‘student researcher for his/her thesis.’ No funds were required as the information was only copied, conveniently both the birth and death certificate numbers were on the death certificate. And all states were involved…during his fugitive days I don’t think he’d be in Illinois or North Dakota looking around in cemeteries especially in winter, heck even in spring.
From there birth certificates, social security numbers, and drivers licenses were all easily made. Over the years it was probably thousands of identities. It is also possible to manufacture multiple identities off of that one death certificate. One of the Black Panther Party/Weather Underground’s 1981 Brink’s robbers who is still in jail used the manufactured identity of “Nathanial Tate” but his real name is Sekou Odinga, and yes, he is related to Raile Odinga, Obama’s cousin. The Brink’s robbery was north of New York City and three officers were killed.

Caroline| 9.5.11 @ 10:00PM

Here is a poem that appeared on Bill Ayers blog shortly after the election of Obama. What this media did to America can never be forgiven.

“The end of an empire is messy at best And this empire is ending Like all the rest Like the Spanish Armada adrift on the sea We’re adrift in the land of the brave And the home of the free Goodbye. Goodbye. Goodbye.”
Now why would Chicago educator unrepentant terrorist Bill Ayers quote this poem on his blog this month? Do you think he knows something, or hopes for something that we don’t?

POST American| 9.6.11 @ 12:02AM

-------------------BOTTOM LINE-----------------------

'A'---ers is capstone spawn and, in 2011, in these
FINAL stages of the Globalist-Bankster RED China sellout and TREASON OP ----a '70's Show'
throwback we can live without thinking about.

NOW, back to David Rock--F---L---O, the CFR/RIIA
and our looming 'world authority'
----the PRIVATE banking Globalist EUGENICS
front op ---United Nations.

-----NEVER talked about -----NEVER called out
by anyone.

AS Agenda 21 (ie 'Smart Future/ Planning/ Thinking')
is now the modus operandi for it all
----forget about 'conservatives' ----WHERE
in the name of God are the Americans? ----and
MAN kind generally?

------------THIS IS TREASON making way for GENOCIDE!

Caroline| 9.6.11 @ 7:41PM

Today Eduardo Sencion murdered National Guard Members in Nevada. He used an AK-47. Was it one of those from Fast and Furious?

I hope this gun is going to be checked to see if it was . Obama is trying to kill people. He killed the Seals. He wants them to invade America just like the Weather Underground planned.
Two National Guardsmen Killed in Nevada IHOP Shooting
http://www.thegatewaypundit.co.....-shooting/
HOW MANY MORE INNOCENT PEOPLE HAVE TO DIE FROM HIM????

Larry Grathwohl on Ayers’ plan for American re-education camps and the need to kill millions
http://youtu.be/HWMIwziGrAQ

They gave these weapons, these taxpayer funded weapons to the Mexicans to invade America and kill people. Today was part of that!

Hebe| 9.6.11 @ 11:27PM

McCain the wimp was afraid to attack Obama's lack of qualification/history/etc.
http://www.summer-products.com
http://www.topbrandsbags.com

Hebe| 9.7.11 @ 1:48AM

He will make offer of "his generosity" to one final time to bring republicans on board with HIS POLICIES which he knows full well
are unacceptable. this is the Leninist side of Obama.
http://www.wholesalesunglassesbrands.com

Heartlander | 10.11.11 @ 9:54PM

Excellent article. I only regret that it fails to mention the closest Ayers-Obama association of all: They were the two co-directors of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, a project to distribute over $100 million in grant money to far-left groups attempting to incite radical change in Chicago schools. In this capacity, Ayers and Obama crossed paths almost daily, since they had offices on the same floor of the same building for three years.

Arty Koestle| 1.19.12 @ 11:23PM

Here's a recent interview I stumbled upon with Bill Ayers: http://www.boldtypemag.com/sin.....ark-times/

Pam Forrest| 1.25.12 @ 9:30AM

Thank you for your story. If you know these facts, WHY have the FBI NOT done their JOB of "vetting" hussein obama?? WHY are the FBI, and the other "abc agencies" ALLOWING this seditious enemy to stay in our white house, who has access to our most sensitive information?? It is an abomination that a foreign enemy is allowed to be where he is!!!!
I call for IMPEACHMENT, CRIMINAL INVESTIGATIONS, AND IMPRISONMENT FOR THE ENTIRE PACK OF TRAITORS, SEDITIONISTS, AND IMPOSTERS!!!

Pam Forrest

Latest Headlines

The Inoperative Jay Carney

Jeffrey Lord|130 comments

Lerner’s Plea

Ray V. Hartwell, III|125 comments

Eugenic Abortion 2.0

Daniel Allott|51 comments

Holding AWOL Obama Accountable

Betsy McCaughey|16 comments

What Are the Risks of Syria Involvement?

Christopher Orlet|23 comments

Obama’s Imbroglios

R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr.|31 comments

Obama’s Drone War

Jed Babbin|15 comments

Catholic Culture In America

G. Tracy Mehan, III|25 comments

The Spectacle Blog

Lois Lerner Now on Administrative Leave

Kaylin Bugos | 6:13PM

Crisis Looms, and Kevin Williamson Can Hardly Wait

Luca Gattoni-Celli | 5:48PM

Dismantling Networks, Preventing Footholds

Ross Kaminsky | 5:30PM

Bill Would Ban All Abortions After 20 Weeks

Jordan Gonzalez | 4:15PM

Harry Reid Pushes for the Nuclear Option

Claire Healey | 1:11PM

Weiner: More Photos of My Junk Might Surface

Kyle Peterson | 12:55PM

#FreeKate? Movement to Normalize Pedophilia Finds Its Poster Girl

Robert Stacy McCain | 10:09AM

Morning Round-Up 5-23

Patrick Ryan | 10:06AM

FLASHBACK TO: 1995

Pope Culture

By George Sim Johnston

A man of faith in a godless age is hitting Americans where it hurts.
Why the GOP Does Not, Like, Totally Suck

By P.J. O'Rourke

Mr. and Mrs. American Spectator Reader, let P.J. O’Rourke talk sense to your kids.
Dames at Sea

By John Corry
In the Absence of Guns

By Mark Steyn

In Britain, defending your property can get you life.
The Metaphysical Martini

By Werner J. Dannhauser
Counting the Costs of Clintonism

By Robert H. Bork

The debacle of this president’s administration is both a cause and a symptom of the decline of American values. Unless Congress impeaches him, that decline will go on unchecked. An eminent jurist surveys the damage and assesses the chances for the recovery of our culture.
Chuck McHagel

By George Neumayr

It won’t take long for conservatives to scratch this presidential wannabe off their 2008 scorecard.
The Legacy of Old John and Mother Fresh-Roasted

By Douglas Bartholomew
It’s the Best Time of the Year

By Mark Steyn

The American Christmas, like the songs that celebrate it, makes room for everybody under the rainbow. Is that why so many people seem to be hostile to it?
The Bush Crack-Up

By Brit Hume

Was the President done in by the economy, or by the politics of the economy?

The American Spectator

Feature

They’re All in This Together

About the Author

Letter to the Editor View all comments (624) | Leave a comment Leave a comment

Ken (Old Texican)| 9.2.11 @ 6:32AM

David W| 9.2.11 @ 10:11AM

kate| 9.3.11 @ 2:49AM

Alan Brooks| 9.3.11 @ 5:22PM

Alan Brooks| 9.3.11 @ 5:34PM

Alan Brooks| 9.3.11 @ 8:27PM

PsychoDad| 9.3.11 @ 9:50PM

Alan Brooks| 9.3.11 @ 10:16PM

Alan Brooks| 9.3.11 @ 10:35PM

Dee Smith| 9.4.11 @ 3:55PM

victor| 9.4.11 @ 3:00AM

Alan Brooks| 9.4.11 @ 9:11PM

Kevin Dunn| 9.5.11 @ 3:01AM

Racer99| 9.14.11 @ 2:56PM

Superbowl 14| 9.5.11 @ 9:24AM

Alan Brooks| 9.6.11 @ 8:59AM

RCV| 9.6.11 @ 11:07AM

Alan Brooks| 9.29.11 @ 10:00PM

Timothy L. Pennell| 9.2.11 @ 10:20AM

Oldefarte| 9.2.11 @ 12:46PM

SpiralArchitect| 9.2.11 @ 4:23PM

Oldefarte| 9.3.11 @ 11:07AM

Oldefarte| 9.3.11 @ 11:09AM

victor| 9.4.11 @ 3:02AM

victor| 9.4.11 @ 3:03AM

Racer99| 9.14.11 @ 3:03PM

Dee Smith| 9.4.11 @ 4:08PM

Jeamar37| 9.4.11 @ 6:51PM

Oldefarte| 9.5.11 @ 11:03AM

Oldefarte| 9.5.11 @ 11:06AM

LiveFreeOrDie| 9.2.11 @ 1:08PM

WinnieR| 9.2.11 @ 5:38PM

D Rob| 9.2.11 @ 11:26AM

WinnieR| 9.2.11 @ 5:41PM

smokedaddy| 9.3.11 @ 4:28AM

Racer99| 9.14.11 @ 3:15PM

Tom R| 9.2.11 @ 11:27PM

Alan Brooks| 9.2.11 @ 1:20PM

Alan Brooks| 9.2.11 @ 1:32PM

tj| 9.2.11 @ 1:54PM

carnot| 9.2.11 @ 4:12PM

SpiralArchitect| 9.2.11 @ 4:28PM

Alan Brooks| 9.2.11 @ 5:04PM

carnot| 9.2.11 @ 8:30PM

Charie| 9.3.11 @ 2:14PM

Alan Brooks| 9.3.11 @ 3:03PM

Alan Brooks| 9.3.11 @ 3:15PM

carnot| 9.3.11 @ 10:37PM

Racer99| 9.14.11 @ 4:47PM

Dee Smith| 9.4.11 @ 4:15PM

Alan Brooks| 9.4.11 @ 9:30PM

Kevin Dunn| 9.5.11 @ 3:06AM

Southern_Comment| 9.3.11 @ 12:36AM

Oldefarte| 9.3.11 @ 11:30AM

Alan Brooks| 9.3.11 @ 3:29PM

Mary Mayes | 9.3.11 @ 5:32PM

Alan Brooks| 9.3.11 @ 5:40PM

Alan Brooks| 9.3.11 @ 5:42PM

idalily| 9.4.11 @ 11:21PM

Racer99| 9.14.11 @ 4:59PM

carnot| 9.3.11 @ 10:40PM

Oldefarte| 9.4.11 @ 11:12AM

rachelle| 9.5.11 @ 11:57AM

victor| 9.4.11 @ 3:16AM

old white guy| 9.2.11 @ 2:08PM

Alan Brooks| 9.3.11 @ 3:40PM

carnot| 9.3.11 @ 10:44PM

Oldefarte| 9.4.11 @ 11:19AM

Alan Brooks| 9.4.11 @ 9:35PM

idalily| 9.4.11 @ 11:24PM

Oldefarte| 9.5.11 @ 11:14AM

Racer99| 9.14.11 @ 5:13PM

sane person| 9.2.11 @ 2:51PM

Jack in Wi.| 9.2.11 @ 5:37PM

Oldefarte| 9.3.11 @ 11:34AM