Barack Obama and William Ayers

Ancient history?

(via Flopping Aces)

Chicago Tribune columnist Steve Chapman:

“I don’t think there’s a statute of limitations on terrorist bombings,” Mr. Chapman said in an interview, speaking not of the law but of political and moral implications.

“If you’re in public life, you ought to say, ‘I don’t want to be associated with this guy,’ ” Mr. Chapman said. “If John McCain had a long association with a guy who’d bombed abortion clinics, I don’t think people would say, ‘That’s ancient history.’ ”

The New York Times downplays Obama's association with unrepentant terrorist Ayers.  The AP, in a story about Sarah Palin's comment, "he's palling around with terrorists who would target their own country.", closed with this one-liner:

Obama served on a charity board with Ayers in Chicago and has denounced his past activities.

Stanley Kurtz on the Times story:

As others have noted, today’s New York Times carries a story on the relationship between Barack Obama and unrepentant Weather Underground terrorist, Bill Ayers. The piece serves as a platform for the Obama campaign and Obama’s friends and allies. Obama’s spokesman and supporters’ names are named and their versions of events are presented in detail, with quotes. Yet the article makes no serious attempt to present the views of Obama critics who have worked to uncover the true nature of the relationship. That makes this piece irresponsible journalism, and an obvious effort by the former paper of record to protect Obama from the coming McCain onslaught.

And concludes:

The New York Times in the tank for Obama? You bet. And sinking deeper every day.

 Along with the Associated Press.  There is no doubt that if John McCain had the association with Ayers The New York Times would run it front page, above the fold, for days, maybe weeks, on end.  The AP would print more than one lame line about a charity board.  In. The. Tank.

***Update 3:11 PM CT***

Sarah Palin is a RACIST!  According to Associated Press writer Douglass K. Daniel:

By claiming that Democrat Barack Obama is "palling around with terrorists" and doesn't see the U.S. like other Americans, vice presidential candidate Sarah Palin targeted key goals for a faltering campaign. And though she may have scored a political hit each time, her attack was unsubstantiated and carried a racially tinged subtext that John McCain himself may come to regret. ...

Dear Lord.  What next?  John at Power Line (emphasis mine):

When the McCain campaign ran an ad that had a white woman in it, it was denounced as racist. When it ran an ad that had an African-American man (Franklin Raines) in it, it was denounced as racist. Now the McCain campaign links Obama to a white man, the former terrorist, and still anti-American, Bill Ayers. That's racist too. I think we've exhausted just about all the possibilities. The only non-racist thing McCain can do, apparently, is concede the election.

There once was a time when the Associated Press was a respected news-gathering agency. Some years ago, it began to abandon that mission in order to transform itself into a liberal advocacy organization. That transformation is now pretty much complete.

Check out Jeff Goldstein's analysis:  How the Left Hijacked the Magic Words. 

Comments

[Don]

Re: Stanley Kurtz.

Earlier this morning I was searching for information about the Chicago Annenberg Challenge (CAC) which was mentioned in a recent article by Stanley Kurtz (http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/09/barack_obama_and_the_strategy.html) and I found that the Obama-Biden campaign went to great lengths to attempt to discredit the writings of Kurtz as you can see in the article "Fact Check: Stanley Kurtz And The Chicago Annenberg Challenge" on the campaign website @ http://factcheck.barackobama.com/factcheck/2008/09/23/annenberg_1.php.

It's deceptive because it might make someone think it was written by FactCheck.org but I can't find anything like that on the FactCheck website @ http://www.factcheck.org/.

If anyone was going to try to discredit what Kurtz wrote about the CAC it should have been FactCheck because it's funded primarily by The Annenberg Foundation.