Obama's Radical Past

[jgaffney]

If all you knew was what you read in the Main Stream Media, you would think there is a big hole in Barack Obama's life, from 1985 to 2002. Actually, there's a lot of information out there, but it is being actively suppressed by the Obama campaign and the media.

Here's a good example from The Wall Street Journal:

Despite having authored two autobiographies, Barack Obama has never written about his most important executive experience. From 1995 to 1999, he led an education foundation called the Chicago Annenberg Challenge (CAC), and remained on the board until 2001. The group poured more than $100 million into the hands of community organizers and radical education activists.

The CAC was the brainchild of Bill Ayers, a founder of the Weather Underground in the 1960s. Among other feats, Mr. Ayers and his cohorts bombed the Pentagon, and he has never expressed regret for his actions. Barack Obama's first run for the Illinois State Senate was launched at a 1995 gathering at Mr. Ayers's home.

The Obama campaign has struggled to downplay that association. Last April, Sen. Obama dismissed Mr. Ayers as just "a guy who lives in my neighborhood," and "not somebody who I exchange ideas with on a regular basis." Yet documents in the CAC archives make clear that Mr. Ayers and Mr. Obama were partners in the CAC. Those archives are housed in the Richard J. Daley Library at the University of Illinois at Chicago and I've recently spent days looking through them.
...........
One unsettled question is how Mr. Obama, a former community organizer fresh out of law school, could vault to the top of a new foundation? In response to my questions, the Obama campaign issued a statement saying that Mr. Ayers had nothing to do with Obama's "recruitment" to the board. The statement says Deborah Leff and Patricia Albjerg Graham (presidents of other foundations) recruited him. Yet the archives show that, along with Ms. Leff and Ms. Graham, Mr. Ayers was one of a working group of five who assembled the initial board in 1994. Mr. Ayers founded CAC and was its guiding spirit. No one would have been appointed the CAC chairman without his approval.

The CAC's agenda flowed from Mr. Ayers's educational philosophy, which called for infusing students and their parents with a radical political commitment, and which downplayed achievement tests in favor of activism. In the mid-1960s, Mr. Ayers taught at a radical alternative school, and served as a community organizer in Cleveland's ghetto.
.............
Mr. Ayers is the founder of the "small schools" movement (heavily funded by CAC), in which individual schools built around specific political themes push students to "confront issues of inequity, war, and violence." He believes teacher education programs should serve as "sites of resistance" to an oppressive system. (His teacher-training programs were also CAC funded.) The point, says Mr. Ayers in his "Teaching Toward Freedom," is to "teach against oppression," against America's history of evil and racism, thereby forcing social transformation.

The Obama campaign has cried foul when Bill Ayers comes up, claiming "guilt by association." Yet the issue here isn't guilt by association; it's guilt by participation. As CAC chairman, Mr. Obama was lending moral and financial support to Mr. Ayers and his radical circle. That is a story even if Mr. Ayers had never planted a single bomb 40 years ago.

Instead, we get to read about Todd Palin's political affiliation 6 years ago, and Sarah Palin's ex-brother-in-law.

[ferrous]

Sen. Obama has already explained his relationship with Bill Ayers: "This is a guy who lives in my neighborhood, who's a professor of English in Chicago who I know and who I have not received some official endorsement from. He's not somebody who I exchange ideas from on a regular basis.

And the notion that somehow as a consequence of me knowing somebody who engaged in detestable acts 40 years ago, when I was 8 years old, somehow reflects on me and my values doesn't make much sense, George.
_________________________

Excerpt from the transcript of the April 2008 Clinton vs Obama debate:

[STEPHANOPOULOS: And, Senator, if you get the nomination, you'll have...

(APPLAUSE)

... to beat back these distractions.

And I want to give Senator Clinton a chance to respond, but first a follow-up on this issue, general theme of patriotism, in your relationships. A gentleman named William Ayers. He was part of the Weather Underground in the 1970s. They bombed the Pentagon, the Capitol, and other buildings. He's never apologized for that.

And, in fact, on 9/11, he was quoted in the New York Times saying, "I don't regret setting bombs. I feel we didn't do enough." An early organizing meeting for your State Senate campaign was held at his house and your campaign has said you are "friendly."

Can you explain that relationship for the voters and explain to Democrats why it won't be a problem?

OBAMA: George, but this is an example of what I'm talking about. This is a guy who lives in my neighborhood, who's a professor of English in Chicago who I know and who I have not received some official endorsement from. He's not somebody who I exchange ideas from on a regular basis.

And the notion that somehow as a consequence of me knowing somebody who engaged in detestable acts 40 years ago, when I was 8 years old, somehow reflects on me and my values doesn't make much sense, George.

The fact is that I'm also friendly with Tom Coburn, one of the most conservative Republicans in the United States Senate, who, during his campaign, once said that it might be appropriate to apply the death penalty to those who carried out abortions.

Do I need to apologize for Mr. Coburn's statements? Because I certainly don't agree with those, either.

So this kind of game in which anybody who I know, regardless of how flimsy the relationship is, that somehow their ideas could be attributed to me, I think the American people are smarter than that. They're not going to suggest somehow that that is reflective of my views, because it obviously isn't.

CLINTON: Well, I think that is a fair general statement, but I also believe that Senator Obama served on a board with Mr. Ayers for a period of time, the Woods Foundation, which was a paid directorship position.

And, if I'm not mistaken, that relationship with Mr. Ayers on this board continued after 9/11 and after his reported comments, which were deeply hurtful to people in New York and, I would hope, to every American, because they were published on 9/11, and he said that he was just sorry they hadn't done more.

And what they did was set bombs. And in some instances, people died. So it is -- I think it is, again, an issue that people will be asking about.

And I have no doubt -- I know Senator Obama's a good man and I respect him greatly, but I think that this is an issue that certainly the Republicans will be raising.

And it goes to this larger set of concerns about how we are going to run against John McCain. You know, I wish the Republicans would apologize for the disaster of the Bush-Cheney years and not run anybody, just say that it's time for the Democrats to go back into the White House.

(APPLAUSE)

Unfortunately, they don't seem to be willing to do that. So we know that they're going to be out there, full force.

And, you know, I've been in this arena for a long time. I have a lot of baggage, and everybody has rummaged through it for years.

(LAUGHTER)

And so, therefore, I have an opportunity to come to this campaign with a very strong conviction and feeling that I will be able to withstand whatever the Republicans send our way.

OBAMA: Look, I'm going to have to respond to this just really quickly, but by Senator Clinton's own vetting standards, I don't think she would make it, since President Clinton pardoned or commuted the sentences of two members of the Weather Underground, which I think is a slightly more significant act... ]

end of quote.
____________________-

[jgaffney]

So, if I am understanding Obama correctly, he is admitting that he lied about his relationship with Bill Ayers, the former Weatherman bomber and current Chicago radical liberal, but that's OK because Hillary's husband pardoned a couple of Weathermen before he left office.

Did I get that right?

[The Big Dog]

Yes, I think you comprehend it perfectly.

As further evidence of just how deeply the deception can run I would point to the interview that Bill Clinton sat for with Greta Van Susteren the other day. When the exchange below happened, I had never seen Bill Clinton so completely at a loss for words. It took him a good ten seconds of silent, clearly nervous, reflection to come up with an answer. Transcript and video are available here.

VAN SUSTEREN: You raise the issue of values. And let me ask you a question that I ask very carefully because I don't want to be misinterpreted. I don't want anyone to read anything into my question and -- you know, because this is one of the hottest items that any of us can talk about and we have to face it.

But what is the difference between an association with someone like David Duke and an association with someone like Reverend Wright?

CLINTON: Well, I think that -- first, we don't have to go there because Senator Obama left the church.

VAN SUSTEREN: After two things happened.

CLINTON: That is correct.

VAN SUSTEREN: One was a lot of pressure from the media, and then the second thing was after Reverend Wright at the National Press Club took a personal strike at him. That's when -- well, that's when...

CLINTON: That's correct.

VAN SUSTEREN: ... He disavowed him. It wasn't until that point.

CLINTON: But to me, it's not necessary for those of us who are surrogates on either side to weigh into that now. To me, this election is fundamentally about how the American people are going to live and who is most likely to do things that will be helpful and empowering to them and their children.

If this were still a big issue, then, you know, we could all deal with that. But I think that -- I think that that was something that was exhaustively looked at in the primary, and I just don't -- you know, I don't have anything to say about it.

Senator Obama has already spoken in his own behalf there, and there's nothing -- people either accepted what he said, or they didn't. For me, the most important thing is -- who's going to make decisions that affect the American people in a positive way?

Bill Clinton got waxed by, apparently, a much sharper attorney than himself. That he completely dodged it speaks volumes to just how bad he knows some of Barack's associations and beliefs are, and is a window into just how painful whatever deal was cut with Hillary to quit must have been.

[mrroqout]

BRIEF EXCERPT - Something I found quite easily. All these names keep coming back around again and again linking to B. Hussein Obama.
__________________________________________________________________________


In the 1980's, the Ayers/Dohrn revolutionary terror network was still working through individuals such as Al-Mansour, who had sufficiently laundered his radical past to assume respectability as a front for a Saudi Prince. The same way Ayers laundered his own past to become a professor of "education" at Illinois' taxpayer-subsidized university.

Ayers and Al-Mansour appear to have been in contact. Ayers vouched for Obama to Al-Mansour, who then began a law school fund-raising campaign among prominent African-Americans.

Obama's law degree thus appears to have been financed through the encouragement of persons who had been violent revolutionaries and remain unrepentant to this day, the same unconventional way the purchase of Obama's Chicago mansion was party financed by an Iraqi billionaire.

Why did Obama get hired as a "summer associate" in 1989 at the law firm which had hired Ayers' wife, and where Ayers' father was a prominent friend of the managing partner at Sidley & Austin? The answer is obvious. Ayers was grooming Obama as his future "front."

Where did Obama get his first and only legal job after Harvard? At a law firm where Tony Rezko was a prominent client and where name partner Judson Miner was a law school classmate of Bernadine Dohrn-Ayers. Yes, the pieces are starting to come together.

Was Obama telling ABC the truth when he said met the Ayers' at a coffee klatch at the Ayers home in 1995? Ayers had already been working with Obama for seven years; Ayers had appointed Obama to head a $50 million foundation. Did Ayers appoint a stranger? Or a front man? The answer is obvious.

Obama has relentlessly tried to conceal the Ayers/Obama time line, and the ongoing connections between the men. When bits and pieces of the Ayers/Obama relationship have popped up this year, Obama has sought to debunk and deflate each isolated piece of information. No one was able to grasp the big picture.

[jgaffney]

Bill Clinton says, regarding Obama's relationship with Rev. Jeremiah Wright, "If this were still a big issue, then, you know, we could all deal with that. But I think that -- I think that that was something that was exhaustively looked at in the primary, and I just don't -- you know, I don't have anything to say about it."

NO IT WASN'T. And, that is exactly the rap against Obama from the Right. There are things in his past that he is actively working to supress, and the media can be labelled as a willing accomplice in that effort. Obama is the least-vetted candidate to make it as far as he has.

[mrroqout]

The bottom line here is that this guy is sneaking under the media radar and not being vetted properly...AT ALL.

The MAJORITY of his campaign finance is SUPER QUESTIONABLE...

To come directly to the point, Barack Obama, Joe Biden, David Plouffe, David Axelrod, Steve Hildebrand and Penny Pritzker are guilty of money fraud in hundreds of millions of dollars.
This is not money laundering, but a system of dry cleaning the funds to give them the appearance that they are legal in flowing into his campaign at now over 500 million dollars.


The Obama machine has even surpassed the direct laundering of Chinese communist funds into the Clinton campaign.



BUT Without doing the research YOURSELF you will NEVER EVER Hear of ANY OF this..

Just how they want it.

Type "Obama money laundering" in Google and then choose from the 360,000 pages.....

[jgaffney]

This is from Jerome Corsi's book, The Obama Nation:

Black-liberation theology is an inherently radical theology that owes its origins to radical black political thinkers, including Stokley Carmichael, Malcom X, and Frantz Fanon. Deciding to be baptized in Trinity United Church of Christ, Barack Obama had to comprehend he was joining a church whose principles were based on the black-liberation theology that Reverend Wright professes. If Obama was smart enough to get a Harvard law degree, he was smart enough to understand Trinity Church was and is a black-liberation theology church. When we read Wright's sermons in their entirety, and when we look at the black-liberation theology those sermons articulate, we see radical statements consistently flowing forth.

Thus Barack Obama's political problem in running for president in 2008 is that denouncing Reverend Wright is not enough. Obama will have to renounce black-liberation theology itself. However, Obama joined up with Wright and Trinity precisely because Wright's outspoken profession of black-liberation theology matched the radical political ideology Obama himself professed as a direct result of the lessons he had learned from his life experiences. As we have seen in previous chapters, Obama's political consciousness developed in the footsteps of his father's anticolonial resentment against the British in Kenya. For this reason, Obama felt a personal identification with the revolutionary anticolonial writings of Frantz Fanon. In Chicago, Obama advanced his radical ideology by working for a community organization driven by the principles of socialist radical Saul Alinsky. In his autobiography, Obama openly tells us that when reading the black radicals and civil rights figures of the 1960s, including Martin Luther King, Jr., he found his greatest affinity with Malcom X.

This excerpt is brought to you as a public service because the Main Stream Media has largely ignored this line of reasoning and questioning of the candidate in their rush to inaugurate him.

[mrroqout]

What about the 222 MILLION Dollars of funding that came into B. Hussein Obama's campaign..

That cannot be accounted for? He can account for 40 million of that 222.

Campaigns CAN accept donations of 200 or less without providing the donors name and address.

BUT John McCains camp has made it's FULL donor list available on the internet.

B. Hussein ...refuses to do so.

B. Hussein was ordered by the FEC to return large sums, from sources with FAKE NAMES. Another FEC Database shows 11,500 overseas contributions to B. Husseins campaign, totaling 33.8 Million listing their location as IR. 63 listings had UK other places that scratch came from include Abu Dhabi , Addis Ababa , Beijing , Fallujah.

Also disturbing is the 33,000.00 paid out for B. Hussein campaign Tshirts...Paid for by two Palestinian brothers from Gaza..The purchase IS considered a campaign contribution. Albeit an illegal one...

Shoot even CBS news discovered 7,722 that came from fake names.


WHY IS OBAMA AFRAID TO DISCLOSE WHERE THIS OVERSEAS MONEY CAME FROM?

Shoot even old Hillary changed her campaign website to REQUIRE a fax copy of a US passport before accepting money from abroad.

The FACT that he wont show where it came from, leads one to believe it is from less than legal sources.


FEDERAL LAW Prohibits the acceptance of campign contributions from foreign nationals..

[bolverk]

Foreign campaign contributions should be illegal. This is an American election.

[mrroqout]

It SURE should be.

And I am IN NO WAY saying that B. Hussein Obama, can possibly KNOW or be IN BED WITH.....ALL of the suspect nefarious contributors.


BUT THEY SURE AS HELL KNOW WHO HE IS AND WHY THEY WOULD LOOOVE TO HAVE HIM IN OFFICE.

[jgaffney]

In an effort to get this thread back on track, Jerome Coursi, in Obama Nation, had this to say about how David Axlerod is programming Obama's speeches:

On May 6, 2008, Obama's acceptance speech in the North Carolina primary was pure Axlerod, as Obama told a national television audience, "We intend to march forward as one Democratic Party, united by a common vision for this country." Obama hit on every Axlerod theme as he proclaimed, "We need change in America and that's why we will be united in November." He even returned to a stalwart red state/blue state Axlerod comparison when he argued, "The attempts to play on our fears and to exploit our differences, to turn us against each other for political gain, to slice and dice this country into red states and blue states, blue collar and white collar, white, black, brown, young, old, rich, poor...[applause]...this is the race we expect, no matter whether it's myself or Senator Clinton who is the nominee."

"play on our fears"

It seems to me that Sen. Obama is the one slicing and dicing, with his "tax breaks for 95% of working people," incipient calls of racism and implied trade protectionism. But, no one ever calls him on that, right?