# What's the Straight Dope on Obama and Ayers? **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [September 24, 2008, 12:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-straight-dope-on-obama-and-ayers/464967 "2008-09-24T12:18:36Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 4
**Author:** ![Marley23](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/45deac/32.png) [@Marley23](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Marley23)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2008, 6:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-straight-dope-on-obama-and-ayers/464967/61 "2008-09-24T18:52:55Z")
> [@Stephe96](#): > > Liberals never fail to amuse me; Ooh, tough break. I don’t think the condescension card is nearly as effective following **Hamlet** ’s long post. Perhaps you’d care to respond to it? ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2008, 6:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-straight-dope-on-obama-and-ayers/464967/62 "2008-09-24T18:53:43Z")
You’ve got a presidential candidate who was fascinated with communism as a teenager hook up with a “non-terrorist” bomber communist (with a little “c”) and uses this lowlife to launch his career. Said candidate then tries to distance this connection and is given a complete pass by the media. Obama is not what he appears. His connection to Ayers was not an accident nor was his connection to Frank Marshall Davis. In fact the 2 men connect Obama the child to Obama the man. He’s a left wing un-vetted opportunist whose only job has been to run for office. He’s tried to distance his past associations as coincidental when in reality he sought these people out. If he were a Republican the media would have crawled up his ass with an electron microscope. ---
**Author:** ![Gangster\_Octopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a8b319/32.png) [@Gangster\_Octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gangster_Octopus)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2008, 6:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-straight-dope-on-obama-and-ayers/464967/63 "2008-09-24T18:55:30Z")
> [@Stephe96](#): > > Liberals never fail to amuse me; Bush called Ken Lay “Kenny Boy” so, of course, that meant he was at least partially responsible for the collapse of Enron. But Barack Obama spending his early political career working alongside a domestic terrorist who tried to blow up the Pentagon? Well, that means _nothing_! Move along, folks. Nothing to see here!:rolleyes: Well, there is a teeny bit of difference between being friends with someone at the same time they used political influence and shady accounting to enrich themselves at the expense of others, and working with someone who 25 years in the past, during a different time and when he was a different person, was involved in some “terrorist” activity, but when Obama knew him was actually NOT a terrorist and was, actually, a respected member of the community and, dun dun dun, an English Professor. That they worked together, albeit hardly side by freaking side, to actually try and improve the schools of South Chicago. Yeah I completely see the moral equivalency here. ---
**Author:** ![stolichnaya](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bcef8e/32.png) [@stolichnaya](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/stolichnaya)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2008, 6:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-straight-dope-on-obama-and-ayers/464967/64 "2008-09-24T18:55:47Z")
> [@Stephe96](#): > > You honestly cannot seriously describe Obama’s relationship with former domestic terrorist Bill Ayers? I am _trying_. “traitorous consigliere”? ---
**Author:** ![Chefguy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chefguy/32/138_2.png) [@Chefguy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chefguy)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2008, 6:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-straight-dope-on-obama-and-ayers/464967/65 "2008-09-24T18:55:57Z")
> [@Stephe96](#): > > You honestly cannot seriously describe Obama’s relationship with former domestic terrorist Bill Ayers? How about something non-inflammatory like “colleague” or “associate” or “fellow board member” or “fellow community activist”? Or is it just your goal to stir shit up? ---
**Author:** ![Weirddave](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/919ad9/32.png) [@Weirddave](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Weirddave)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2008, 6:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-straight-dope-on-obama-and-ayers/464967/66 "2008-09-24T18:57:19Z")
> [@Hamlet](#): > > Dave, I like you. But you’re being a jagoff with idiotic, substanceless posts like this. Just so you know. It seems to me that the ones making the substanceless posts are the ones who refuse to simply acknowledge the facts that they can’t refute. I never called Obama a terrorist, never said he was anti-American or any of that garbage. I simply stated “here are the facts, it’s up to each person to decide if they matter for themselves”. Since the facts aren’t in dispute, what we get is the usual spinmasters in here attempting to explain them away, diminish them, dismiss them as “talking points” or outright lie about them. They’re puppets on a chain. If one says anything about Obama other than he’s bigger than the Beatles and twice as wonderful, their chain jerks and they foam at the mouth and attack. No substance. No thought. Nothing but partisan bullshit. Here’s what isn’t in dispute in the least: _Obama is a close associate of an unrepentant terrorist._\* That is the plain, unadulterated FACT of the matter. The rest…it’s up to the individual to draw their own conclusions. Jayjay said it doesn’t matter to him. OK, fine. Personally, it matters a little bit to me as it speaks to Obama’s poor judgment, but it wouldn’t decide me one way or the other. Anyone else? Well, that’s, as I said, up to them, isn’t it? \*Meets my definition of close, but since that’s subjective, opinions may vary. ---
**Author:** ![elucidator](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/8edcca/32.png) [@elucidator](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/elucidator)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2008, 6:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-straight-dope-on-obama-and-ayers/464967/67 "2008-09-24T18:57:31Z")
(too late) ---
**Author:** ![Gangster\_Octopus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/a8b319/32.png) [@Gangster\_Octopus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gangster_Octopus)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2008, 6:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-straight-dope-on-obama-and-ayers/464967/68 "2008-09-24T18:57:39Z")
> [@Stephe96](#): > > You honestly cannot seriously describe Obama’s relationship with former domestic terrorist Bill Ayers? Well since you wish to boil it down to a word or two, how about “past working acquaintance”. ---
**Author:** ![Jack\_Batty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jack_batty/32/3201_2.png) [@Jack\_Batty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jack_Batty)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2008, 6:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-straight-dope-on-obama-and-ayers/464967/69 "2008-09-24T18:58:42Z")
> [@Stephe96](#): > > You honestly cannot seriously describe Obama’s relationship with former domestic terrorist Bill Ayers? How about, “contemporary” and even that’s a stretch. What? Not damning enough for you? Sorry, them’s the breaks. You are making it out like Ayers took Obama, Bill Sykes-like, off the streets and taught every thing he needed to no about modern politics from how to point with his thumb to how to construct a pipe-bomb. Their connection is tenuous at best. To say they are so closely linked is tantamount to saying that I’m closely linked with the IT guy who reset my password for me a couple of times last month. ---
**Author:** ![Jack\_Batty](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jack_batty/32/3201_2.png) [@Jack\_Batty](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jack_Batty)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2008, 7:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-straight-dope-on-obama-and-ayers/464967/70 "2008-09-24T19:00:03Z")
And by the way **Stephe96** , why do I have to clarify what you are claiming? You are the one contructiong bullshit titles here. ---
**Author:** ![Hamlet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hamlet/32/2818_2.png) [@Hamlet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hamlet)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2008, 7:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-straight-dope-on-obama-and-ayers/464967/71 "2008-09-24T19:09:27Z")
> [@Weirddave](#): > > It seems to me that the ones making the substanceless posts are the ones who refuse to simply acknowledge the facts that they can’t refute. I never called Obama a terrorist, never said he was anti-American or any of that garbage. I simply stated “here are the facts, it’s up to each person to decide if they matter for themselves”. Since the facts aren’t in dispute, what we get is the usual spinmasters in here attempting to explain them away, diminish them, dismiss them as “talking points” or outright lie about them. I gotta ask, did you even read his article and my post? Because your idea that “the facts aren’t in dispute” is patently false. > [@Weirddave](#): > > They’re puppets on a chain. If one says anything about Obama other than he’s bigger than the Beatles and twice as wonderful, their chain jerks and they foam at the mouth and attack. No substance. No thought. Nothing but partisan bullshit. As opposed to your insightful, fact filled posts? The irony… it burns. > [@Weirddave](#): > > Here’s what isn’t in dispute in the least: > _Obama is a close associate of an unrepentant terrorist._\* > > … > \*Meets my definition of close, but since that’s subjective, opinions may vary. It is absolutely stunning to me that you can, with one post, contradict yourself and apparently not even notice it. What kind of wilfull blindness does that require? Here’s what isn’t in dispute: Obama had minimal contact with a man interested in furthering educational reform in Chicago. See how easy this faux “fact” game you’re playing is? ---
**Author:** ![Lightnin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lightnin/32/180_2.png) [@Lightnin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lightnin)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2008, 7:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-straight-dope-on-obama-and-ayers/464967/72 "2008-09-24T19:14:48Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > Obama is not what he appears. His connection to Ayers was not an accident nor was his connection to Frank Marshall Davis. In fact the 2 men connect Obama the child to Obama the man. He’s a left wing un-vetted opportunist whose only job has been to run for office. You’re contradicting yourself here. If Obama is, in fact, a “left wing un-vetted opportunist whose only job has been to run for office”, then why would he associate himself with a “known terrorist”? For the political influence? Please. I’d really like to see an answer to the question that’s been asked in EVERY Ayers/Obama thread- are you \*seriously \* implying that Obama is a secret terrorist intent on blowing up the White House once he gets into it? ---
**Author:** ![Weirddave](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/919ad9/32.png) [@Weirddave](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Weirddave)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2008, 7:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-straight-dope-on-obama-and-ayers/464967/73 "2008-09-24T19:19:28Z")
> [@Hamlet](#): > > Here’s what isn’t in dispute: Obama had minimal contact with a man interested in furthering educational reform in Chicago. Thank you for proving my point. The only thing you’re disputing is the degree of closeness of their relationship. ---
**Author:** ![Whack-a-Mole](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/whack-a-mole/32/141_2.png) [@Whack-a-Mole](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Whack-a-Mole)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2008, 7:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-straight-dope-on-obama-and-ayers/464967/74 "2008-09-24T19:29:12Z")
> [@Weirddave](#): > > Thank you for proving my point. The only thing you’re disputing is the degree of closeness of their relationship. Did you _read_ **Hamlet’s** post at the end of the first page? Seems to me he is pretty much disputing the “facts” of the entire WSJ opinion piece as well as your assessment of the facts. If you think **Hamlet’s** points are wrong then point out where. ---
**Author:** ![Stephe96](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/bbe5ce/32.png) [@Stephe96](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stephe96)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2008, 7:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-straight-dope-on-obama-and-ayers/464967/75 "2008-09-24T19:47:02Z")
> [@Weirddave](#): > > Thank you for proving my point. The only thing you’re disputing is the degree of closeness of their relationship. Great point. And can we all agree that Obama was…um, lying…about the relationship when he laughably claimed Ayers was “just a guy who lives in my neighborhood.” I mean, there are plenty of guys who “live in my neighborhood” who have never hired me, appointed me to boards, sat with me on boards, and hosted fundraisers for me in their living rooms. 😃 ---
**Author:** ![Mr.Moto](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/9de0a6/32.png) [@Mr.Moto](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mr.Moto)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2008, 7:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-straight-dope-on-obama-and-ayers/464967/76 "2008-09-24T19:48:25Z")
I’d like for people all across the spectrum to stop kidding themselves. Sure, Obama and Ayers weren’t all that close - it was a working relationship. But the relationship was far closer than that admitted to in Obama’s debate with Hillary Clinton when he dismissed Ayers as just a neighbor. I don’t think anyone here will dispute that. I also think it is really a stretch to just call Ayers a professor - he remains unrepentant about his activities and says he didn’t do enough. He remains pretty far out there on the political fringes - he isn’t what we would consider a mainstream Democrat, to say the least. Mainstream Democrats don’t generally get photographed standing on a flag. His right, I suppose, but let’s face it, that isn’t the image Obama wants to be associated with, and indeed he spent considerable time during the campaign denouncing Ayers’ actions, while not going into detail about their relationship. [This article by Mike Kinsley](http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1810338,00.html) sums it up well - Kinsley is broadly dismissive of Ayers and Dohrn both, while noting that if Obama is guilty of dealing with them, it is a guilt most of Chicago shares. I think there is a lot to this, and I still wonder why Ayers gets to play in politics while other unrepentant violent felons wouldn’t be allowed anywhere near a responsible candidate. If anyone has any fault with anything I’ve posted here, chime up - but I think I played it straight. ---
**Author:** ![Weirddave](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/919ad9/32.png) [@Weirddave](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Weirddave)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2008, 7:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-straight-dope-on-obama-and-ayers/464967/77 "2008-09-24T19:54:48Z")
> [@Whack-a-Mole](#): > > Did you _read_ **Hamlet’s** post at the end of the first page? Seems to me he is pretty much disputing the “facts” of the entire WSJ opinion piece as well as your assessment of the facts. If you think **Hamlet’s** points are wrong then point out where. So, Hamlet posts a bunch of unsupported interpretations of the CAC and his word is sacrosanct, the author of the op-ed piece provides his interpretation of CAC’s activities and he’s a lying dog. Oh no, there’s no bias driven analysis going on here, none at all. The author of the opinion piece is a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center (which seems to be somewhat conservative in his bias, I’m not going to spend an hour researching exactly where on the spectrum they fall) and his conclusions are based upon his study of CAC records. Hamlet’s got…what bona fides? He does link to a document that’s mainly a report on how the CAC failed miserably at it’s stated purpose, but other than that? Calling this a he said/he said situation is being generous. The point, however, is Obama’s association with Ayres. In my opinion it has been demonstrated to be significant and long term. Obama’s relationship with Reverend Wright was significant and long term. The Obama camp is doing it’s best to deny and downplay this because both of them are unpleasant people with offensive beliefs that have the potential to negatively hurt a politician running for office. I understand _why_ they are doing it. I understand why a mass murderer shaves, puts on a suit and shows up in court with a bible in his hand. I just don’t discount the history behind either one. ---
**Author:** ![Hamlet](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/hamlet/32/2818_2.png) [@Hamlet](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hamlet)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2008, 8:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-straight-dope-on-obama-and-ayers/464967/78 "2008-09-24T20:04:09Z")
> [@Weirddave](#): > > Thank you for proving my point. The only thing you’re disputing is the degree of closeness of their relationship. _sigh_ If that is the conclusion you reached from my posts, I fear there is no point in any further explanation to you. Enjoy your partisan hackery. ---
**Author:** ![DoctorJ](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/doctorj/32/2904_2.png) [@DoctorJ](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/DoctorJ)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2008, 8:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-straight-dope-on-obama-and-ayers/464967/79 "2008-09-24T20:06:42Z")
“Close” is such a subjective word. I’m sure there are hundreds of people who could have at least similar lines drawn between them and Obama; you just don’t get to where he is otherwise. But let’s say Ayres really is in Obama’s Top 8. Regardless of what Ayres did 30 years ago, by the time Obama knew him he was devoted to charitable work toward goals that Obama happened to strongly agree with. Should Obama have shunned him even if it meant progress wouldn’t be made toward those goals? If anyone should have shunned Ayres, it should have been the people who worked with him in the early 80s when he first emerged from underground and started to become involved in education and urban activism. But they didn’t, and by the mid-90s he was a strong player in Chicago philanthropy. Obama could have made a political point, refused to associate with Ayres, and passed up the chance to do good work. Instead he decided (as many before him already had) that the past was the past and progress was progress. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [September 24, 2008, 8:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-straight-dope-on-obama-and-ayers/464967/80 "2008-09-24T20:16:10Z")
> [@Hamlet](#): > > 1. The CAC did not "pour more than $100 million into the hands of “radical education activists.” (whatever the fuck those are). It gave millions to 210 different public schools and public school supporters in Chicago to help children learn and have better lives. I was talking about factual assertions. You are merely spinning, just opposite in direction to the author of the piece. > [@](#): > > 1. “The CAC was the brainchild of Bill Ayers,” While Ayers wrote the grant application, he was not, in any way, the sole “brainchild” of the CAC. It actually started with the decentralization of schools in Chicago in 1998 and involved numerous people, including, most importantly, Anne Hallett and Warren Chapman. I notice you had to introduce a new word into the assertion to deny it. He wrote the grant application and co-chaired the policy board. But it wasn’t his brainchild. Oooookay. > [@](#): > > 1. “Barack Obama’s first run for the Illinois State Senate was launched at a 1995 gathering at Mr. Ayers’s home.” That one meeting did not “launch” Obama’s first run for Senate, it had been planned for awhile before then. Again, a distinction without a difference. I assume you would agree that launching a rocket also takes planning ahead of time. However, it would be incorrect to the point of incoherence to say that the rocket had been launched long before it was built. > [@](#): > > 1. “Yet documents in the CAC archives make clear that Mr. Ayers and Mr. Obama were partners in the CAC.” A gross simplification. It’s like saying the janitor of the GM plant and Bill Ford are partners. They were both involved in the same program, yes, but pretending they were “partners” is more rhetorical bullshit. No, it would be like saying that those who serve on the board of directors are partners with the chairman. > [@](#): > > 1. “In early 1995, Mr. Obama was appointed the first chairman of the board, which handled fiscal matters. Mr. Ayers co-chaired the foundation’s other key body, the “Collaborative,” which shaped education policy.” There were actually 3, not 2, parts to the CAC. Kurtz, as he is wont to do, is wrong. No, he is saying that there were two key parts. Ayers, the former terrorist was head of one. Obama was the head of another. > [@](#): > > 1. “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.” Ayers was one of 5 people who OK’ed Obama, but he had nothing to do with getting Obama to that point. This essentially doesn’t mean anything. Ayers was part of the group that assembled the baord; but he had nothing to do with getting Obama onto the board. It’s not even spin; it is more of the liberal “that depends on what the meaning of the word is, is” stuff when they are confronted with inconvenient facts. > [@](#): > > 1. “Mr. Ayers founded CAC and was its guiding spirit. No one would have been appointed the CAC chairman without his approval.” More bullshit. The CAC was not Mr. Ayers’ to found, he was one person among hundreds, involved in a program that tried to help public schools. And he wasn’t the “guiding spirit”. The CAC was founded according to the principles of, and was run pursuant to, the Annenberg Challenge. > [@](#): > > In works like “City Kids, City Teachers” and “Teaching the Personal and the Political,” Mr. Ayers wrote that teachers should be community organizers dedicated to provoking resistance to American racism and oppression. > [@](#): > > 1. “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.” Another lie. The CAC was bound to use the principles and goals of the Annenberg Challenge. Read the link. See above. > [@](#): > > 1. “CAC translated Mr. Ayers’s radicalism into practice.” Again, Ayers had nothing to do with setting the principles and goals of the Annenberg Challenge. Right, right - members of the board have no influence on the organizations they create and direct. 🙂 > [@](#): > > 1. “Proposals from groups focused on math/science achievement were turned down. Instead CAC disbursed money through various far-left community organizers, such as the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (or Acorn)” Not every proposal focused on math/science was turned down, just as not every partner was a “far-left community organizers”. I didn’t see the word “every” in the quote. One wonders why you needed to add it. Regards, Shodan [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-straight-dope-on-obama-and-ayers/464967.md?page=3) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-straight-dope-on-obama-and-ayers/464967.md?page=5)