Pajamas Media

132 Comments

1. David Thomson:

“I must conclude by acknowledging that in one respect Bill is probably being absolutely truthful. When he says that “I never killed or injured anyone,”

Bill Ayers can also probably claim that he never raped a woman. He simply had his own brother and a roommate perform the dastardly deed. This is what Donna Ron alleges:

“At first I thought Ayers was joking. I got up; and went to the door. He moved quickly to block me at the doorway. He locked the door and put the chain on it. I went to the couch and sat down and told him that I had no intention of having sex with his roommate and his brother or him. He said that I had no choice but to do as he said if I wanted to get out of there. He claimed that I wouldn’t sleep with his married roommate because he was black — that I was a bigot. I had gone to school with black kids and had them as friends all my life. I couldn’t believe he was saying that to me.”

http://tinyurl.com/5meoey

Will the scandals involving the New York Times ever cease? Bill Ayers lies are extremely easy to debunk. Let us hope that sometime in 2009—the New York Times can finally be ignored. It is rapidly deteriorating into something useful only to clean up dog poop.

Dec 23, 2008 - 1:03 am 2. Benson:

David Thomson asks a good question — can there be no end to the scandals? IMHO the ideologues who see themselves as the arbiters, the gatekeepers, do not think of themselves as activists. They believe they are centrists who simply report the facts and cheer for the Good Guys.

That describes incredibly naive people, doesn’t it? How can these perceptive, experienced observers of the human comedy be so lacking in insight? The skilled wordsmiths don’t know how their prose affects the reader? They don’t understand the subtleties of literary advocacy? They don’t see how article placement affects the impact of news, and they are not aware of the many stories that never appear in their paper?

It beggars the imagination. Which is why I’ll bet on unending scandals and continued elitist scorn for “flyover country.” The Times gang is made up of hardcore, dyed in the wool cultural warriors, not true journalists.

Dec 23, 2008 - 2:33 am 3. Craig:

David,
Thanks for the link. I’ve not heard of this before. Fascinating to read.

Dec 23, 2008 - 4:55 am 4. epb:

Obama’s friend, er, neighbor (only) is a calculating pathological liar. Contemptible! And the “see no evil; hear no evil; speak no evil” media is complicit.

Dec 23, 2008 - 5:08 am 5. tanstaafl:

Psychologically, it’s interesting, the lengths to which the 64 YO Ayers is going to rehabilitate his image and/or justify and rationalize his exploits of the 60’s & 70’s.

Sorry Billy, try as you might (even with the complicity of the brain dead media giving you a platform) it ain’t gonna work.

To those of us who watched you up close and personal in real time, you and the not so lovely Bernadine will always be the same stoned, self-aggrandizing idiots you were back then.

While the ideologically bent media (ABC, MSNBC, NYT…) give this guy a platform and (pretend) that he’s worthy of examination and inquiry or something.

Billy continues to exploit his culture, with tactics just a little tamer than back then.

Dec 23, 2008 - 5:31 am 6. Assistant Village Idiot:

David Thompson, Ayers’ lies are not only easy to debunk, they are apparently pretty easy for him to say. Repentance, apologies, gestures of conciliation - all these can change the picture over time. Ayers has produced none.

Dec 23, 2008 - 5:38 am 7. Yehudit:

“….To those of us who watched you up close and personal in real time,…”

Unfortunately that’s the key. Most people who weren’t around then don’t get it. At this point that is most of the country, including Obama’s youth demographic.

(I was in high school and I do remember reading about the Weathermen and Dohrn, although not Ayers.)

“….repentance, apologies, gestures of conciliation - all these can change the picture over time. Ayers has produced none…..”

Historical distance also changes the picture, unless the truth is kept alive, and it’s not easy.

Dec 23, 2008 - 5:54 am 8. Mary Grabar:

Our democracy will survive if we have outlets like this one to counter the propaganda of the New York Times.

Dec 23, 2008 - 6:03 am 9. Michael Hiteshew:

People keep referring to the NYT as a news source. It’s not. It’s a left-wing propaganda outlet that masquerades as a news source. Try to keep that in mind and their actions will make a lot more sense.

Dec 23, 2008 - 6:05 am 10. Albertgator:

I finally got my parakeet to talk. He asked me to quit using the NY Times in his cage!

Dec 23, 2008 - 6:15 am 11. tsj017:

If I ran the world (or just America), Bill Ayers would have probably been executed for treason a long time ago.

Dec 23, 2008 - 6:18 am 12. Wild Bill:

What I don’t understand is how a university can give this guy tenure, and allow him to be viewed by anybody as a recognized educator. Some, looking at the Annenburg project, have observed his radicalism in the texts that project funded.
Oh, well, ‘the 60s made him do it. Yuck, and double yuck.

Dec 23, 2008 - 6:18 am 13. mountainaires:

Bill Ayers is a psychopath; psychopaths will look you right in the face and lie outright. It infuriated me when the NYTimes ran his op-ed, and I still get outraged everytime I think about it. Ayers doesn’t mind hawking his marxist viewpoints when he’s selling a book like a good little capitalist though, does he? He’s a “machiavellian” manipulator; anyone who believes anything Ayers says is a fool. Thank you to PJM for giving space to alternate viewpoints, unlike the pathetic NYTimes, a paper I now despise as much as Bill Ayers.

Dec 23, 2008 - 6:20 am 14. Mekan:

Are you kidding me about not understanding how this man got tenure? Most of the professors look to the acts of Ayers with great awe and reverence. This is the state of our universities today.

Dec 23, 2008 - 6:27 am 15. Mike:

Remember that the NYT also rejected an op-ed from John McCain, but they’re happy to publish one from a terrorist.

Dec 23, 2008 - 6:33 am 16. James Sanders:

It’s not only the stock of this fishwrap rag that is junk. One of many rags that will richly deserve its demise.

Dec 23, 2008 - 6:36 am 17. Bilgeman:

Mr. Owens:

“No amount of inspired fantasy, however, can omit the simple truth that there is only one significant difference between Bill Ayers and Timothy McVeigh.

Competence.”

You do a disservice to Timothy McVeigh. There are at least two other differences between the two.

McVeigh served our country honorably in wartime, and was decorated with the Bronze Star.

Ayers did not, and was not.

Dec 23, 2008 - 6:37 am 18. Mwalimu Daudi:

What I don’t understand is how a university can give this guy tenure, and allow him to be viewed by anybody as a recognized educator.

That is an easy one. Most universities are hip-deep in William Ayers wanna-bes. Left-wing faculty members all have vivid fantasies about kangaroo courts for their political enemies, political witch hunts, concentration camps for counter-revolutionaries, and final solutions for anyone who happens to annoy them. Ayers is a hero to them because he actually tried to live their twisted dream.

Dec 23, 2008 - 6:41 am 19. Willys:

“If I ran the world (or just America), Bill Ayers would have probably been executed for treason a long time ago.”

Wouldn’t it be more effective to hang him by Bernadine’s balls?

Dec 23, 2008 - 6:44 am 20. Gloria Steinberg:

William Ayers and The New York Times. A perfect combination. One tried to destroy this country with bombs and terror, and the other continues to try to destroy our country with lies and traitorous stories. It will become a mute subject when the Times closes it’s doors due to a lack of America consumers who don’t believe their lies but want the truth. The ironic part of this is that the writers will just start writing blogs and continue to spread the anti-American lies on line.

Dec 23, 2008 - 6:45 am 21. jeff clark:

“Bring the War Home, Kill the New York Times”

Dec 23, 2008 - 6:50 am 22. Gloria Steinberg:

If you are NOT a Keith Olbermann fan, check this out:

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/1/fire-keith-olbermann

Dec 23, 2008 - 6:51 am 23. Mongo:

What I find particularly disgusting about this piece of human filth is that his daddy was head of ConEd in Chicago. Little Rich Boy.

I grew up with these vermin, and went to school with them. They were delusional Marxists then and now, only now many occupy high offices in our society, so they are more dangerous.

Dec 23, 2008 - 6:52 am 24. AVERAGEMELON:

What university keeps this cretin to teach? It needs to be boycotted and fail like the NYT.

Dec 23, 2008 - 6:58 am 25. misanthropicus:

Re Owen/Gratwohl & Thomson #1:

NYT has for long gotten the 1980-s Pravda’s views and ways, so not surprise that Gratwohl’s piece was bounced - as far as their editorial practices & integrity… my!

Thomson’s addition to the Owen/Gratwohl piece gives more contour to the perverted atmosphere in which Ayres, Dorhn, Andreas Baader, Ulrike Meinhoff, Negri, the Red Brigades and their ilk pursued their majestic acts.

Now, since Del Torro and Soderbergh are pushing their own “Che” crap around, it is good to remind people the streaks of crime which have connected (and ever will) the left’s enterprise throughout the world - enterprise whose idealization by liberal outfits like the NYT has for long transcended from absurd to criminal.

Dec 23, 2008 - 7:02 am 26. Letalis Maximus, Esq.:

Wild Bill:

The University of Illinois at Chicago hired Bill Ayers for its College of Education. Bill’s father was Thomas G. Ayers, former Chairman and CEO of Commonwealth Edison (1973 to 1980), Chicago philanthropist, and the namesake of the Thomas G. Ayers College of Commerce and Industry. In other words, Daddy was a Made Member of the Chicago Political Machine. Any other questions?

Dec 23, 2008 - 7:04 am 27. dan:

I think it’s interesting that there isn’t more interest in FBI reports 1976, obtained via Freedom of Information Act, that reveal the relationship between the activities of SDS splinter groups - including the Weather Underground founders - and their meetings with Communist intelligence in Havana and Czechoslovakia in 1968 - 1970. Why is that not interesting to people? Is there some spell on otherwise inquiring minds? Have the anti-anti-Communists made all explanations of basic Soviet statecraft absolutely unbelievable to anyone?

Or do people believe that these SDS types, all utterly dedicated to the destruction of the Untied States through Communist revolution, just booked a flight and hung out drinking absinthe in the Soviet Bloc Czech police state? During the same years as the Prague Spring?

Or do they just not ask themselves the question? I don’t get it.

Dec 23, 2008 - 7:09 am 28. David:

I wish billy had been in Vietnam with me and heard the widow of a village chief tell how the vc had killed him in front of the whole village because he would not support them. That’s why she told us to “kill cong” every chance she had. Why didn’t billy and others protest uncle ho for invading the south?

Dec 23, 2008 - 7:16 am 29. j sleepingquail:

Gee,
I guess terrorism from the past is a hot topic in this country as well it should be. What will the Iraqis think in the future about our invasion or the Vietnamese as i think about it. Perhaps This Ayers guy was thinking that the admistration in this country was a terrorist and he was legitimately acting in our nations best interests. So now 39 years later we are looking back and deciding, because we don’t like Obama, that this friend of his proves Obama has bad judgement. Did republicans think that Nixon had bad judgement at the time? Did He???
Leave it alone, who cares.

Dec 23, 2008 - 7:22 am 30. Al Reasin:

I always find it interesting and discussed by the media is that our culture is called out as the most violent in the industrialized world. Yet not discussed is the fact that as corrupt as so many financial institutions’ CEOs, Wall Street managers and politicians have been shown to be and the many on the Left that are so outspoken against American’s democratic institutions and political infrastructure remain safe and “free as a bird”; at worse they are ambushed by Bill O’Reilly’s producers.

Dec 23, 2008 - 7:27 am 31. Sam Barber:

Yehudit wrote:
“Historical distance also changes the picture, unless the truth is kept alive, and it’s not easy.”

Remember that statement when you write about The Deciderer’s administration ten years from now.

Dec 23, 2008 - 7:31 am 32. Maggie:

What I don’t understand is the reasoning of advertisers in the NY Times. Don’t they feel any responsibility for the content?

DT - thanks for the very interesting link.

Dec 23, 2008 - 7:32 am 33. DaveJustDave:

“No amount of inspired fantasy, however, can omit the simple truth that there is only one significant difference between Bill Ayers and Timothy McVeigh. Competence.”

A little disturbing in the hyper literal use of the word “competence”, but spot on. That this man was not tried and convicted for treason is a great tragedy.

Dec 23, 2008 - 7:32 am 34. Roy:

Now that the election is over, Bill Ayers is available for interviews on CNN and OpEd pieces for the NYT. Media manipulation? Nah, just a coincidence.

Dec 23, 2008 - 7:35 am 35. Forrest:

Check out this article that appeared in Time Magazine in 1975:

http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,913516-4,00.html

Just playing devil’s advocate here. I’m curious how well Grathwohl knew Ayres. It’s clear he knew the workings of the organization, or at least the cell he was in, although he was only inside the group for about 6 months. The article makes it sound like he didn’t have much direct contact with Ayres or the other leaders. Selective memory of history can go both ways.

I didn’t live through the late 60s or early 70s, so I can’t speak from personal experience. But it sounds like an incompetent group of thieves and anarchists that might have had some grand ideals but generally failed pretty miserably in bringing them about. Good thing they weren’t better at it I guess.

Dec 23, 2008 - 7:36 am 36. chiefpayne:

Hummm…let’s see. Do I take the word of a known, admitted and unrepentant thug who terrorized the country to make a political point (ie TERRORIST) or do I take the word of an FBI informant who risked life and limb in order to expose the filth trying to subvert our country’s leadership.

Decisions, decisions!

Dec 23, 2008 - 7:41 am 37. rita logan:

The only bombing I remember the Weather Unground taking credit for, in San Francisco, was a Selective Service office in a Federal Building. No one was injured. If this so-called informant was so knowledgeable, why doesn’t he give date of so called incident involving “Officer McDonnell”. Think this may be another case of swift boating.
The Left in this country was under major assault in those times. FBI was great at allowing white supremacist groups to commit violence and grow, while trumping up charges on groups from the left.
I do regret that those radicals from white upper middle class backgrounds are now free while those from poor backgrounds of color are still locked up. Leonard Pelletier, Ruchell Magee, and more.

Dec 23, 2008 - 7:44 am 38. chiefpayne:

Rita

Here the date. Make of it what you will:

http://www.odmp.org/officer/8924-sergeant-brian-v.-mcdonnell

Dec 23, 2008 - 7:50 am 39. elliewyatt:

Rita~

You’ve got some reading to do.

“KRON 4 News has learned that three years ago, San Francisco police secretly re-opened the case. Armed with new forensic technology and with State and Federal agencies helping, SFPD investigators began to work full-time on the murders.

And now, sources tell us, those investigators have identified potential suspects: former members of two militant groups in the ’60s and ’70s — the Weather Underground and the Black Liberation Army, people who’ve been out of the spotlight for decades. The most prominent among them is Bernardine Dohrn, a former leader of the Weather Underground and now a law professor at Northwestern University in Illinois.
……
‘On October 18, 1974, Larry Grathwohl, a former member of the WUO, testified before a US Senate Subcommittee that Bill Ayers, a WUO leader, had told him that Bernardine Dohrn, another WUO leader, had to plan, develop and carry out the bombing of the police station in San Francisco. Ayers told Grathwohl the bomb was placed on the window ledge and he described the bomb that was used to the extent of saying what kind of shrapnel was used in it.’

http://legendofpineridge.blogspot.com/2008/10/who-killed-brian-v-mcdonnell.html

Dec 23, 2008 - 8:20 am 40. Terry Gain:

Why did McCain go through an entire election campaign without even attempting to educate the public about this issue?

The public has now unknowingly entrusted the people who created the problem with the job of cleaning it up.

Dec 23, 2008 - 8:21 am 41. g.e.Taylor:

The date was February 16, 1970.
Ayers was and is a rich man’s son who got away with “murder”. He continues to lie about it.
The New York Times is a corrupt newspaper that will go out of business shortly (assuming it cannot gin up enough politicians to obtain a government bailout)

Dec 23, 2008 - 8:25 am 42. Peter the Sub Guy:

Sounds to me like j sleepingquail and rita logan are just a pair of trolls on this threat trying to spread the old lefty mantra of “Nothing to see here. Move along, move along.”

Dec 23, 2008 - 8:35 am 43. Forrest:

I think McCain and the republicans failed to go after this issue because there’s really nothing to the connection between Obama and Ayers. They did all they could - they hinted at a connection, and for a lot of people it worked. The Obama campaign couldn’t definitively prove the lack of a connection, because it’s hard to impossible to prove that negative. Lots of people still think Obama is a terrorist because he was (however loosely) associated with a former terrorist. Pressing the issue farther, when there was really nothing there, would have undercut that very effective, base-invigorating strategy.

Seriously… if there really WAS some kind of grand conspiracy between Obama and Ayers, it probably would’ve come out during the Democratic primaries. There were plenty of people who were desperate to see Hillary win the nomination - plenty of ‘liberal news organizations’. If they had a bomb to drop that would take him out of the race, they would’ve dropped it before the general election campaign even started.

I think there would be a real story here if Obama had given Ayers some sort of position in the administration, or if he was a close advisor. But Ayers is just a washed-up, mostly failed terrorist who is trying to clean up his image. I feel for the people his organization hurt, but we have some other rather important issues to deal with these days.

Dec 23, 2008 - 8:37 am 44. BT:

Face it, folks. YOU are now the fringe minority. You with your militias and compounds, where much worse things than the Weather Underground ever dreamed of take place. Stop the holier than thou stuff and get real. Your right-wing terrorists are worse than anything the left ever saw, and you’re proud of it. Until it ends up at the Federal Building in Oklahoma City, that is. Or did you forget that one?

Your side lost this time. GET OVER IT!

Dec 23, 2008 - 8:44 am 45. Ann:

So; Charles Manson, Hitler or the Rosenbergs never killed anyone either…

Dec 23, 2008 - 8:55 am 46. chiefpayne:

BT,

Oh yes, your side got all it wanted…AND will also have the full RESPONSIBILITY for what happens in the next 4 years.

Rest assured we will keep a close eye on things.

Hope you enjoy the heat!!!

Dec 23, 2008 - 8:58 am 47. Pervy Grin:

Bilgeman:

“You do a disservice to Timothy McVeigh. There are at least two other differences between the two.

McVeigh served our country honorably in wartime, and was decorated with the Bronze Star.

Ayers did not, and was not.”

McVeigh also owned up to what he did, expressed regret about the children he killed, and went willingly to his execution. If only Ayers would do the same.

Dec 23, 2008 - 9:14 am 48. Ann:

During that period about 4000 Americans were training in Castros radical KGB style training camps and sent back to filter into the US society.
Wonder what elite universities they are working at now? Ayers and company have not stopped their agenda to train our next generation of leaders to become communists, he just stopped bombing (maybe).
The ideology of these people are dangerous and they get away with; with a lot of help from their friends in the MSM..

Interesting how many of them actually converted to Islam..

http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/election/452

Dec 23, 2008 - 9:14 am 49. c:

Bill Ayers proved what a shallow and indulgent person he is in that editorial.
He got away with what he did because of his family connections. Period. People of less means involved in the same kind of activities are still in jail.
The upper class protects their own, regardless of politics. It’s important to remember this, and not ascribe this tendency only to The Left.

Thugs are thugs and ideology doesn’t excuse it, nor does claiming the “righteousness” of your cause.

Dec 23, 2008 - 9:36 am 50. dan:

Actually he got away with what he did because of illegal wiretapping and other FBI/police malfeasance. But I’m sure his father’s connections didn’t hurt him.

It’s interesting to watch the Communists come out and perform their strange prostitutions.

And of course Vietnam comes. Interesting how not one of you idiots ever - EVER - seems interested in the Communist side of things. Ever. Not once. Don’t you think that’s interesting?

Have you noticed that Communism was invented by a German? Or did you think the Vietnamese invented it?

I know I sound like a one-trick pony, but the level of historical ignorance is really and truly appalling and makes everything you say Wrong.

Dec 23, 2008 - 9:55 am 51. Mr Blackwell:

What next? Alger Hiss will do an unrebutted op ed on serving your country by espionage? Charles Manson on the unfairness of parole boards?

The New York Times has no idea of the damage it has done to the ideal that at its core, newspapers really wants to discover the truth.

One day in the near term, people will stand at the Time’s building and say “I wonder what they used to do here?”

Dec 23, 2008 - 9:58 am 52. Occam's Beard:

Bill’s father was Thomas G. Ayers, former Chairman and CEO of Commonwealth Edison (1973 to 1980), Chicago philanthropist, and the namesake of the Thomas G. Ayers College of Commerce and Industry. In other words, Daddy was a Made Member of the Chicago Political Machine.

Bullseye. Which is why, of course, Ayers was able to entice Obama from Columbia to Chicago: to come to the machine’s hothouse, where corrupt pols and hardcore leftists could run interference for him, and did.

Btw, I take issue with the characterization of Ayers as a “former terrorist.” Since he hasn’t repented in any way, shape, or form, he is still a terrorist. He’s just in between bombs, that’s all.

Dec 23, 2008 - 10:09 am 53. John Moore:

I think it’s interesting that there isn’t more interest in FBI reports 1976, obtained via Freedom of Information Act, that reveal the relationship between the activities of SDS splinter groups - including the Weather Underground founders - and their meetings with Communist intelligence in Havana and Czechoslovakia in 1968 - 1970. Why is that not interesting to people?

For the same reason it wasn’t interesting to the media in 2004 that John Kerry, while an officer in the Naval Reserves, had one admitted (and one suspected) meeting with our North Vietnamese enemy and with Viet Cong representatives. Nor were they interested in the direct cooperation of his organization, VVAW, with North Vietnamese intelligence.

They did not even investigate the suspicious circumstances under which he received his honorable discharge (6 years too late), nor did they properly report that he never released his full service records to the public.

The Main Stream Media, led by the NYT, is not interested in the truth about controversial subjects - it is interested in “correct” results. In that sense, the NYT is like Bill Ayers.

BTW, in Prairie Fire, Ayers and group wrote that tens of millions of Americans would have to be executed after the government was overthrown.

He was not just a conspirator in terrorism, he was an aspiring mass murderer of Stalinesque proportions.

Dec 23, 2008 - 10:20 am 54. Jojo:

You all are just as blind as you think the NY Times is (and its readers). You read this story and believed it wholeheartedly, and unquestioningly because it matches what you already believe. I am a lefty who reads the Times, but I am smart enough to question everything I read. I balance it by reading the Economist, the Wall Street Journal, and NRO. Please consider doing the same, instead of just reading a blog like this that is unverifiable.

Dec 23, 2008 - 10:20 am 55. bill:

If all this true why isn’t Bill Ayers in jail for rape?
This is like the stories they tell about George Bush and Karl Rove, if it’s true let’s bring them to court and charge them.

Dec 23, 2008 - 10:21 am 56. James:

Well whats the big fuss… All these years later and Ayers is changing his own personal history.
So What!
Bush, Cheney,Condi and the rest of the gang are in the last days of power trying to change their recent history in which their lies have led to the deaths of thousands and thousands of innocent baby’s and children.
I would like to think it is because they are ashamed but it is in reality just a skin saving exercise.
Big Lie 1 - Bin Laden was responsible for 9/11….
Just visit his FBI wanted page and not one mention of 9/11 and the FBI openly admit they do not have a SINGLE piece of evidence that Bin Laden was involved in the events of 9/11 and last year in a ‘Friendly’ interview with Tony Snow Vice President Dick Cheney Said ‘I have never stated Osama Bin Laden was responsible for the attack on 9/11 and neither has anyone in this administration’
Then why may i ask are American troops being killed in Afghanistan hunting him down and more importantly - If as the FBI & Dick Cheney says Bin Laden was not responsible for 9/11 because there is not one single piece of evidence to say he did it - THEN WHO DID DO IT!
Maybe Ayers came out of retirement and did it!
All The Best James in the UK.

Dec 23, 2008 - 10:30 am 57. PeterWimsey:

Incompetent FBI infiltrator now inflates his alleged knowledge of the Weatherman to bid for his 15 minutes.
It did work for the tax-deadbeat, Joe the unlicensed plumber.
The Times is right to have the guy offer his objections in a letter.
I’m no fan of Bill Ayres, but after the unrelenting myth-making about “60’s radicals”, he should get a shot at telling his own story.

Dec 23, 2008 - 10:36 am 58. PeterWimsey:

That would be “Bill Ayers”; I often fail to proofread.

Dec 23, 2008 - 10:43 am 59. Anonymous:

It’s interesting that the Marxist loonies often post on PM threads after the English have made it home from whatever they do during the day. I thank God that my ancestors embarked on those ships in the 1600’s and 1700’s.

Dec 23, 2008 - 10:44 am 60. ridgerunner:

It’s interesting that the Marxist loonies post on Pajamas Media threads after the English have got home from whatever it is that they do during the day. I thank God that my ancestors embarked on those ships in the 1600’s and 1700’s, and that they shot enough Lobsterbacks to get us free.

Dec 23, 2008 - 10:48 am 61. kt:

NYT, dropped the ball with this op-ed. It is not the impartial journalistic institution any more - remember how they supported Bush during the witch hunt in the name of non-existent WMD? They dropped the ball there too….

Dec 23, 2008 - 10:57 am 62. victor IRELAND:

Not only the NYT but NPR’s salacious Terry (Heh, Heh, Heh) GROSS gave Bill Ayer’s a pass cum endorsement during a recent touchy-feely interview. When and by whom will the psycho-babblers of baby-boomerdom be exposed for what they really are viz pretentious, exploitive, frauds; rationalists and lobbyists for their own inflated expectations.

Dec 23, 2008 - 11:24 am 63. john galt lives:

THE GREENWICH VILLAGE TOWHOUSE THAT BLEW UP IN 1970 BELONGED TO MR BILL WILKERSON, THEN THE CEO OF WR GRACE INC. MR WILKERSON HAD ALLOWED HIS DAUGHTER SUSAN TO STAY AFTER HER UNEXPECTED ARRIVAL THE DAY BEFORE HER PARENTS WERE SUPPOSED TO GO ON A TRIP TO THE BAHAMMAS. THE EXPLOSION AT THE TOWNHOUSE OCCURED 48 HRS AFTER THE WILKERSONS LEFT TOWN. AMONGST THOSE KILLED IN THE BLAST WAS TED GOLD, LATER DESCRIBED AS THE CHIEF BOMBMAKER FOR THE WEATHER UNDERGROUND. AYERS LIES ARE EASY TO DISPROVE IF THE COMMIE MEDIA WERE INTERESTED IN INVESTIGATING. OH, BUT THEY ARE TOO BUSY SENDING FOLKS TO RUMMAGE THRU THE GARGABE BINS OF WASILA,ALASKA. I THINK MAYBE MR GRUNTHWOL SHOULD INVITE THE PUNK AYERS TO A WWE DEATH MATCH. THE COWARDLY PUNK AYERS WOULDNT EVE SHOW.

Dec 23, 2008 - 11:25 am 64. Paul_Unalaska:

‘I am a lefty who reads the Times, but I am smart enough to question everything I read.’

-Oxymoron

Dec 23, 2008 - 11:41 am 65. MikeD:

The NYT is predicted to be one of next year’s most likely business failures/bankruptcies. Can’t happen soon enough.

Dec 23, 2008 - 11:45 am 66. zefal:

Dear Larry,

The problem with you writing the Slimes to point at Ayer’s revivisonism is that the people at the NY Slimes already know it’s revisionist bs. arthur sulberger jr is a comrade in arms with these thugs. artie wishes he had been blowing up stuff too. As a consolation to himself artie as blown up the NY Slimes creditbility. So he’s got that going for him, which is nice.

Dec 23, 2008 - 12:26 pm 67. Jerry:

Regarding Maggie comment 32:

“What I don’t understand is the reasoning of advertisers in the NY Times. Don’t they feel any responsibility for the content?”

If you would like to help the NYTimes commit euthanasia, simply purchase a copy of the Times and send the advertisers Larry Grathwohl’s piece and the PJM link. As a form of protest, I doubt that there is anything illegal about it. Your influence would be so much greater. Indeed, it is a finer way of influencing events than by complaining within a forum that essentially agrees with you.

Dec 23, 2008 - 12:42 pm 68. Forrest:

“I thank God that my ancestors embarked on those ships in the 1600’s and 1700’s.”

And then some of your more recent ancestors took it upon themselves to overthrow the establishment and create something new. If I recall, there was quite a bit of violence involved in that uprising as well. It all depends on your point of view.

These days we mostly agree with the establishment, so we abhor anyone who would commit acts of violence against it or its people. What if this country really WAS going wrong from your point of view, though? Would you sit back and just do as you were told, or fight to the death to preserve that which you hold most dear?

I’m not so naive to think that the Weather Underground’s motives were completely altruistic, but maybe some of them at the time thought they were doing what was best for the country? That doesn’t excuse excessive and needless violence and destruction, however. But if you condemn them without a second thought for their revolutionary actions, then why don’t you do the same to Washington, and Jefferson, and Franklin, and Adams? I’m not saying the members of the Weather Underground could hold a candle to those men in terms of courage, foresight, and honor, but they all did have something in common - they resorted to violence in a cause that they thought just, and true.

Dec 23, 2008 - 12:47 pm 69. nynick:

The revisionist history of the Weather Underground is breathtaking. Somehow, the media decided it was beyond the pale to discuss Bill Ayers and the Weather Underground’s activities. Doing so might reflect poorly on Barack Obama. Has the media even bothered to read the Weather Underground’s manifesto? They were actively trying to start a race war.

http://www.discoverthenetworks.org/groupProfile.asp?grpid=6808

I’m no wingnut either. I’m a moderate Democrat but whenever I brought this up to Obama supporters, they assumed I was a racist. How did we get to this point? A radical who led a domestic terror group who’s stated goal was to spark a race war becomes a media darling and a behind the curtain advisor to our first black president. Anyone who brings up these facts is labeled a racist. Too bad Kafka isn’t around to see this.

Dec 23, 2008 - 12:54 pm 70. fred:

#68 Forrest

The road to hell is paved with good intentions. I cut The Weathermen absolutely ZERO slack. They were Communists and understood themselves as such. Some of them, the dopey kind, believe that the Declaration of Independence and The Constitution are really socialist documents. I’m not exaggerating. Back when I was in college (1978-1982) and just starting out my sojourn through Marxism, I met not a few of these radicals from that era. First of all, some of them were stupid enough to believe that crap. LOL! They really considered themselves the true patriots, unaware of the provenance of socialist ideas. Others were more cagey and manipulative, to the point where they would tell me to call myself a “progressive” instead of the Marxist or socialist I thought myself to be. It takes a good amount of cunning to lay aside truth and advocate deception like that.

The men who founded this Constitutional Republic would order such people to be seized and hanged forthwith.

Dec 23, 2008 - 1:02 pm 71. Gerard:

It behooves Pajamas, or Larry G., to submit this response to Ayers to the NY Post, or the Daily News (although they too may behave seditiously as does the NYT), just so “regular” NY folk could read it. I want to take nothing away from Pajamas, but my gut feeling is that more New Yorkers read the newspapers than they do Pajamas.

Dec 23, 2008 - 1:07 pm 72. fred:

I knew we’d get a few Marxist trolls dropping in to run up the flag for Ayers, The Weathermen, and the NYT. One even attempts (and fails) at tu quoque (”James”)and changing the subject, deflecting and shucking and jiving, just like the Hard Left does so well.

Hey, Jimmy, this thread is not about Boooooossssshhhhh and Cheney. Wipe the frothy saliva from your mouth, focus your brain, and try to keep on task. Get some anti-psychotic meds for your Bush Derangement Syndrome.

You’re a disgraceful wretch for defending Ayers and the Times.

Dec 23, 2008 - 1:12 pm 73. nynick:

Forest,

“But if you condemn them without a second thought for their revolutionary actions, then why don’t you do the same to Washington, and Jefferson, and Franklin, and Adams? I’m not saying the members of the Weather Underground could hold a candle to those men in terms of courage, foresight, and honor, but they all did have something in common - they resorted to violence in a cause that they thought just, and true.”

What an odd comparison. Why these men were not without fault, their accomplishments speak for themselves. What exactly is Bill Ayers lasting legacy in the field of government? Washington, Jefferson, Franklin and Adams helped create a system of government that whatever it’s shortcomings, has proven unique in human history. These men were not just radicals. They were leaders. Washington led an army against one of the worlds great powers. He didn’t grab a few friends, plant a couple of bombs and go into hiding for a decade. Bill Ayers is a coward. He deserves a cell in a maximum security prison, not editorial space in the NY Times. If you’re looking for a comparison, why not Pol Pot? He was a radical leader with a similar love for violence, the product of a comfortable upbringing, a darling of European leftists, highly educated and he used surrogates to do the nasty work he was too much of a coward to do himself.

Dec 23, 2008 - 1:14 pm 74. Forrest:

Fred:

“The men who founded this Constitutional Republic would order such people to be seized and hanged forthwith.”

That’s what I’m saying. The men who defended the Crown in the late 18th century DID order those same men who founded this Constitutional Republic to be seized and hanged.

It’s all about point of view. There’s little to be done about their actions in the past, short of possibly finally convicting them for crimes they committed if the evidence exists. In my opinion we’re all better served by learning about past events and taking what we can from them for the future. Why not try to understand their point of view, rather than dismiss it out of hand? You don’t have to cut them any slack, and it doesn’t mean they should be free from prosecution under our laws. To ignore the reasons for their actions, however, dooms us to live through them repeatedly.

I think bits of our history like this present a GOLDEN opportunity to learn about terrorist organizations today. What drove these people to such action? Was it a group of impressionable, drug-addled youths led by a few spoiled, rebellious, middle-class sociopaths? Or was their some truth to the (supposed) reasons for their fight? How did they form? How did they operate? The description of underground groups I read in that Time article I linked above sounded a lot like what we’re dealing with on the foreign terrorism front today. Is there nothing we can learn from that period of our history that will help us today?

Dec 23, 2008 - 1:14 pm 75. cedarford:

Terry Gain:
Why did McCain go through an entire election campaign without even attempting to educate the public about this issue?

The public has now unknowingly entrusted the people who created the problem with the job of cleaning it up.</i?

I guess you missed all the debates and McCain rallies where McCain tried making the election all about Bill Ayers and more tax cuts for the well-off –while ignoring the economic catastrophe we were falling into and demanding new wars with Iran & Syria,

The public had bigger fish to fry in the 2008 election. It didn’t care about guilt-by-association charges that 20 years ago, Obama was tainted by being around Ayers anymore than they cared 20 years ago McCain was in bed with Charles Keating.

Nor is the Republican Party going to get out of it’s present dire straights without meaningful reform and renewal. Pinning their hopes on old scandals and the “may not know much but she is right in her heart” Right-Wing Goddess Palin isn’t going to do it. Ayers was already yesterday’s news 3 decades ago. Goddess Palin gave some new interviews in Canada and at the Governors conference that only reinforced the belief she is ignorant and only comfortable parrotting talking points.

Dec 23, 2008 - 1:19 pm 76. v for victory:

Thanks for exposing this Ayers - NYT combined effort to lie and cover up.

Dec 23, 2008 - 1:38 pm 77. Pat:

The statist New York Times and Ayers are obviously desperate for our moral sanction: trying to re-invent Ayers and evade full reality at the same time!

But the left’s corrupt subjectivists and rationalists have been trying to rewrite reality for decades. And because reality is inescapable, their childish tantrums have always been doomed.

Today, fewer self-reliant Americans are manipulated by the tantrums, and more of us recognize that the entire ideology of statism is in fact evil and impotent toward creating happiness. And more devastating proof is in store in the months ahead if Washington interferes further with individual rights in our economy through bailouts and other programs.

As a result of this coming second Enlightenment, more Americans are withholding their moral sanction of the left. Even as the left’s rationalists proclaim having received that sanction in Obama’s election, the fact is that Obama benefitted far more from Americans’ disgust with the Republicans’ destruction of individual rights, than he benefitted from his own statist ideology.

Force is inimical to the requirements of man’s life because it thwarts reason - man’s means of sustaining his life. Statism rests on force - from forcing taxpayers to use fiat currency to forcing them to subsidize parasites of the classroom like Ayers.

Only Capitalism is moral because only Capitalism bans force from human relationships. Our future Capitalist government will use force only in retaliation against those who, like Ayers, initiate it.

Ayers and the NY Times are dinosaurs. As more forums like this one spread the facts of reality, statism can finally die within only a few generations.

Dec 23, 2008 - 1:44 pm 78. Steve B:

Thanks for publishing this, a very interesting read.

Dec 23, 2008 - 1:56 pm 79. Chris Bolts Sr.:

Has anyone noticed that Fort Dix is also the base where those idiotic Muslim 5 were convicted for plotting to commit terrorist acts? This is the same base where Ayers tried to kill innocent officers. What is it about Fort Dix that attracts nutcases from out of the woodwork?

Dec 23, 2008 - 2:00 pm 80. Forrest:

nynick:

“Why these men were not without fault, their accomplishments speak for themselves. What exactly is Bill Ayers lasting legacy in the field of government? Washington, Jefferson, Franklin and Adams helped create a system of government that whatever it’s shortcomings, has proven unique in human history.”

Ayers and the rest of the Underground, as with so many other failed movements, have no lasting legacy in the field of government because they lost. Our founding fathers were given the chance to create such a unique, and I think ultimately successful system of government because they succeeded in their efforts to overthrow their oppressors. I think those same traits that allowed them to succeed in their efforts helped them establish such an incredible system of government. It’s the lack of those traits that have led so many others to fail, thankfully.

I chose our own founding fathers as a comparison because history has in general treated them very kindly. They did great things, but they were also not without their own shortcomings. And at the time, some of the military tactics used by the revolutionary forces were considered dishonorable, just as we consider bombings and terrorism as dishonorable today.

Please don’t mistake my arguments for any kind of justification of Ayers or any other terrorist - domestic or foreign. They’re criminals, they have violated our laws, and they should be punished under the law. That doesn’t mean that we should ignore their motives and dismiss them. What if someone who IS competent, and honorable, and courageous, and charismatic finds those same motives have merit and decides to lead a real revolution? Punishing those we perceive as wicked while dismissing their motivations is peril.

Dec 23, 2008 - 2:04 pm 81. Yashmak:

I cannot help but notice that ‘Rita’ never showed back up after the information on Officer McConnell was posted.

Doesn’t fit her narrative I imagine.

Dec 23, 2008 - 2:28 pm 82. Jim Lunsford:

Wow, there sure was a lot of response on this one. I didn’t have time to read all of the responses, but I would like to comment on a few. There does seem to be a general trend in how the sides formed up as left/right wing, whatever wing. In the regard that McVeigh was more honorable, because he served the Army, I’d like to point out that Ayers would have been less honorable had he joined. Remember he was fighting against the war. Which turned out to be a more moral course of action, as it was a smaller version of the war we have today. Just making billionaires into trillionaires. As to taking the word of a FBI informant when he uses the classic black man raping a white woman accusation commonly used against so many people during that time, and eons before in this country; I think I’d take Ayers word over the FBI. As to the rest, I don’t think I would have printed his response either, as I don’t find it credible, I find it deplorable. I also find it an insult to the many people who are attempting to truly be professional in that organization. Do I support Obama? Hell no. I think he is just as much a front man for the bankers as Bush was. We haven’t had a free government since Wilson gave it away to the bankers in 1913. You remember? When they illegally and unconstitutionally created the Federal Reserve. A system which was at the forefront of the American Revolution. Do I trust the NYTs? Hell no. They are owned by the same people who own every other mainstream media publication. They just pander to our lesser selves so that we may squabble over trivialities while the real issues get shoved up our rears. Just my opinion. However, I am glad you wrote this article. I don’t blame the NYT for not writing it, but that doesn’t mean it shouldn’t be written. Thanks, Jim

Dec 23, 2008 - 2:35 pm 83. Chuck Pelto:

TO: All
RE: Out of Curiosity….

…is Ayers of ‘Jewish’ descent?

Regards,

Chuck(le)
P.S. I ask because this form of self-defeating ‘interest’ seems all to common in that line.

Dec 23, 2008 - 2:38 pm 84. Chuck Pelto:

P.P.S. Just before you start accusing me of being ‘anti-Semetic’….

…realize THIS….

I’m a ‘born-again’, evangelical Christian who believes the Hebrews ARE, literally, “God’s chosen people”.

My query is based on the fact that for some strange ‘reason’, my comments on Chesler’s thread about Madoff, have not been published. This, despite the fact that they were all in support of the children of Abraham.

I think it rather ‘odd’…..

….and certainly more complicated that most people would care to consider.

Dec 23, 2008 - 2:43 pm 85. Judith:

It is evident to me that William Ayers has clear intentions of rewriting history so as to save his reputation and legacy.

Dec 23, 2008 - 2:48 pm 86. Alex Bensky:

Now, people, let’s not sling accusations around. I’m a lawyer…Ayers could certainly make a good case that he is not guilty of murder and is therefore not a murderer.

By his own words, of course, he is guilty of attempted murder and conspiracy to commit murder…but not necessarily murder. Let’s give him that.

Dec 23, 2008 - 2:58 pm 87. Locoweed:

Okay,
Is Two Minutes Hate up yet?
Just Askin’

Dec 23, 2008 - 3:12 pm 88. zefal:

I corrected the errors in my above post. Since it hasn’t been posted yet and assuming that it will be :-)could you post this corrected version:

Dear Larry,

The problem with you writing the Slimes to point out Ayer’s revivisonism is that the people at the NY Slimes already know it’s revisionist bs. arthur sulzberger jr is a comrade in arms with these thugs. artie wishes he had been blowing up stuff too. As a consolation to himself artie has blown up the NY Slimes creditbility. So he’s got that going for him, which is nice.

Dec 23, 2008 - 3:38 pm 89. TJ:

Forest (80) says: “And at the time, some of the military tactics used by the revolutionary forces were considered dishonorable, just as we consider bombings and terrorism as dishonorable today.”

Like what, for example?

Dec 23, 2008 - 3:51 pm 90. myth buster:

Yes, Ayers never killed anybody because the Weather Underground was full of incompetent hacks. The only people the Weathermen ever killed were themselves when a bomb exploded while they were building it.

For the record, the Rosenbergs didn’t kill anyone either, not directly anyway. No one knows what impact the information they gave to the Soviets had on the brutality of the regime or how quickly communism expanded because of it, but the Rosenbergs neither shed blood nor authorized the shedding of blood. They were executed for Treason for giving the Soviets information about the Manhattan Project in order to expedite the Soviet nuclear weapons program.

Dec 23, 2008 - 3:55 pm 91. fred:

What in the hell is this insufferably stupid tu quoque which elevates modern terrorists to the same level as our rebels in the American Revolution?

Dec 23, 2008 - 4:08 pm 92. fred:

“That doesn’t mean that we should ignore their motives and dismiss them. What if someone who IS competent, and honorable, and courageous, and charismatic finds those same motives have merit and decides to lead a real revolution? Punishing those we perceive as wicked while dismissing their motivations is peril.” Mr. Forrest at #80

It is PRECISELY their motives that I, being a former Marxist, understand, note, and judge as immoral and unacceptable. I guess I don’t understand what you are getting at, even though in the above statement you lay it out. It doesn’t make sense to me because you cannot have motive and all those attractive qualities without content. The content of their ideology fuels their motive. This isn’t some kind of vapid romanticism, sir. We have a perfect right to judge the motive and its content to be reprehensible and unacceptable to our society.

Your question, perhaps, would be more familiar to me, of my Roman Catholic background, in the form: Can someone do a deed which, in their conscience, they truly do not perceive as wrong and believe to be right (even though it be objectively wrong) and thus escape moral culpability for the act? This is called the argument of the uninformed conscience, and it is, realistically, a purely hypothetical. Why? Because the objectionable and morally wicked deeds HAVE CONSEQUENCES FAR BEYOND THEIR UNDERSTANDING AND THOSE CONSEQUENCES HARM A LOT OF PEOPLE. In fact, I would argue that the people in The Weather Underground knew exactly what they were doing, knew that our society rejects it, and they went and did it anyway. They hardened their hearts to the victims. And in their meetings with the informant present they talked about re-education camps and even liquidating reactionary, recalcitrant people. In other words, the very same plans and deeds of Lenin, Stalin, Mao, Ho, Castro and Guevara, and Pol Pot, to name a few.

You seem to be saying that the scant “admirable” qualities of these Communist terrorists somehow can earn them a sliver of the benefit of the doubt, because of their alleged good intentions.

You see this is the kind of moral reasoning that corrupts our young people today that is disseminated from those practitioners of post-modernism and deconstructionism. The school of “thought” that says there are no moral absolutes and no correspondence theory of truth. It’s all PERSPECTIVAL! Therefore, we can invent our own absolutes and how dare we criticize the motives of others.

Folks, feast your eyes right upon this, for what you are observing is the influence of cultural Marxism at work. The ethics of expediency. Now, I’m not saying Mr. Forrest is advocating it. He may just be playing Devil’s advocate here. But I believe it’s my duty to expose the underlying logic of what he gave expression to. He may deplore the terrorists, but he certainly is pointing out a current that is quite popular in our intellectual circles for a few decades now. I’m just trying to point out the nonsense that it is.

So, what could be morally attractive about Communist ideology, its ethics of expediency, and the actions required to bring about the socialist revolution?

Dec 23, 2008 - 4:34 pm 93. Hard Right:

Forrest, you area a POS. You are truly mentally ill to compare the founding fathers to Ayers.
They fought for a system of freedom. Ayers fought to take away that freedom and murder millions who didn’t fall into line whil puting themselves into power.

You can shove your moral equivalency where the sun doesn’t shine.

Dec 23, 2008 - 5:05 pm 94. Donna V.:

I’m no fan of Bill Ayres, but after the unrelenting myth-making about “60’s radicals”, he should get a shot at telling his own story.

Er, Petey, Ayers has published his memoirs, so it’s not like he hasn’t “had a shot at telling his own story.” Unfortunately for Bomber Billy, his book came out in Sept. 2001. Although the NY Times infamously printed a puff piece on Ayers on 9/11/01, even the Manhattan media were in no mood to lionize him in the weeks after the World Trade Center came down. Brent Staples of the Times solidly panned Ayers’ memoirs as, well, as the unrelenting myth-making of a 60’s radical. You’ve got things a bit backward, Pete - it’s the old lefty geezers themselves who have portrayed themselves as idealistic, romantic young folk (pay no attention to those paeans to Charles Manson, people) “protesting” against an unjust war. We’re just setting the record straight.

Dec 23, 2008 - 5:14 pm 95. Donna V.:

What in the hell is this insufferably stupid tu quoque which elevates modern terrorists to the same level as our rebels in the American Revolution?

Well, let’s see,…,the Founding Fathers believed in and fought for an ideal which resulted (however unevenly and imperfectly) in a massive expansion of human liberty, prosperity and potential.

Bill Ayers believed in and fought for an ideal which has always resulted in a massive expansion of human bondage, poverty, death, and fear. (Not to mention a massive expansion of human stupidity, as our leftists prove daily.)

Other than that, there’s no difference at all between Ayers and the author of the Declaration of Independence.

/sarc

Dec 23, 2008 - 5:25 pm 96. BMoon:

“As scarce as the truth is, the supply has always been in excess of the demand.”– Josh Billings

Dec 23, 2008 - 5:31 pm 97. Donna V.:

Oh, Pete, here’s the link to the Staples review of Ayers’ memoirs:

http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9402E0D6103BF933A0575AC0A9679C8B63

You seem to be under the impression that Ayers has been kept from telling his side of things. Not at all. He’s told it, said he regrets nothing and others have said (and proved) that he’s a liar and a crock o’ cr*p. Staples is not a conservative, BTW.

Dec 23, 2008 - 5:42 pm 98. Pappadave:

There is a small grain of truth to the idea that the reason Ayers and Dorhn’s “legacy” is only as terrorists “because they failed.” However, they failed, in large measure, because what they were trying to do was simply evil–quite unlike the Founding Fathers, who were trying to overthrow an extremely oppressive foreign regime. Because these communists made up their pea-brained minds that our involvement in Vietnam was “illegal,” they decided to destroy the country–hoping to usher in what they thought of as “a workers’ paradise.” It was a none-too-well-kept secret that most of their funding was provided by the KGB through the American Communist Party, because the USSR had a vested interest in helping the communist north in Vietnam succeed in solidifying the rice bowl of Asia–Vietnam, Cambodia, Laos and eventually (hopefully) Thailand. They succeeded quite nicely in Vietnam and Laos and the only reason they more or less failed in Cambodia was because of Pol Pot’s idiocy in permitting the Khmer Rouge to kill off millions they thought of as “intellectuals,” who they decided would be counter-revolutionaries–if not now, then later. It got so stupid that people with glasses were murdered out of hand because these idiots believed wearing eye glasses was caused by too much reading!

Ayers and his ilk weren’t “freedom fighters.” They were communist-inspired terrorists of the worst sort, who ultimately took advantage of our defendant-friendly legal system to escape punishment for their numerous crimes.

The leftie trolls posting here would have us believe (against ANY logic, by the way) that Obama could associate with these people regularly for 20 years and remain aloof and unaffected by their radical philosophies. I’m very much afraid that we’re in for 4 years of the worst sort of of government we’ve ever even imagined.

Dec 23, 2008 - 6:09 pm 99. Omar:

Why not try to understand their point of view, rather than dismiss it out of hand?

Forrest you can find transcriptions and digital copies of their literature online (e.g. Prairie Fire). Read it for yourself. It’s not as though their ideas have been censored or misrepresented. The WU wanted to initiate a war against the US government, impose a socialist dictatorship, and purge society of their perceived enemies - they were very candid about their ambitions. Ayers advocated slaughter and mayhem for their own sake.

* you know, just because you’re not familiar with their history, it doesn’t mean that no one else is either.

Dec 23, 2008 - 6:41 pm 100. fred:

When I look upon the face of William Ayers I see the visage of Vladimir Lenin, and when you read about what he’s really like as a man, in his younger days on up to the present you see the life of a cruel monster with a cold mean streak that could order the deaths of millions. It makes you wonder what Billy’s father was like. Chilling to contemplate…

I had also read the same story of how he had forced this college girl he picked up to have sex with his room mate and his brother. And I know he must have date raped other women himself. I’ll bet over the years as a college prof be boffed his share of coeds. Truly a scum bag through and through.

These are the kinds of people recruited by the KGB in those days to run their programs of dezinformatzia and disruption. What does it say about the men and women who ran in his wolf pack? Dirty, amoral, opportunistic predators and manipulators.

Dec 23, 2008 - 7:29 pm 101. fred:

I wonder if our soon to be Pres. Oobonga has read the FBI and CIA files about Billy and his cohorts? Would he read them if they were slapped down on his desk?

Dec 23, 2008 - 7:33 pm 102. Forrest:

Yikes, I guess I should have prefaced each of my statements with the whole “Devil’s Advocate” bit.

I’m in no way saying that the members of the Weather Underground should be held to anything remotely approximating the standard of our Founding Fathers. I had hoped to foster some kind of discussion, and it appears I have.

“Forrest, you area a POS. You are truly mentally ill to compare the founding fathers to Ayers.
They fought for a system of freedom. Ayers fought to take away that freedom and murder millions who didn’t fall into line whil puting themselves into power.”

This is what I’m talking about. Why resort to name calling and insults? These people felt that something with our society was wrong. We can choose to agree or disagree with what they found wrong, we can find it morally reprehensible, etc. But these people acted out for a reason. Shouldn’t we at least investigate those reasons to see if there’s something that can change to prevent OTHERS for taking up that mantle and committing more acts of violence? If they’re crackpots, ignore them. If there IS even some remote nugget of truth to their justification, though, I think it deserves some attention lest someone else come along and use the same justification to do us real harm.

I guess I may have gone a bit too far in comparing these fools to our Founding Fathers - I was just trying to make a point about “Point of View”. To the English, our founding fathers were rebels and terrorists. I for one believe the motivations of our Founding Fathers were morally sound. They laid out a pretty convincing argument in the Declaration of Independence. Why wasn’t that enough for the English, though? Do you think the English of the time felt that those same ideals were morally sound?

Actually I’m not sure why I even started down this line of reasoning. But I’m not siding with the Weather Underground or their actions, or any terrorist actions. What I’m saying is you can’t ignore them or their motivations if you ever want to finally stop such activities. Sure, you’ll always have people acting out because they feel they’ve been wronged. That doesn’t mean that our society is perfect as it stands. We can always improve.

Omar - I’m not arguing specifically for their point of view, but more against people in general just calling terrorists criminals and not taking a look at WHY they terrorized. Maybe using the Weather Underground for this is a bad example, as by almost any sane, reasonable person’s standards (mine included) their motives and ambitions were horrific.

Fred - Interesting argument, and I guess I’ve not made myself well understood, maybe because I was posting while at work and not sticking to a central point. I guess my question was more of a warning. If we ignore the underlying causes terrorists use for justifying their actions, we risk someone who IS a real, competent leader taking up that cause and doing even more, lasting harm to our society.

I’m not saying to give them any benefit of any doubt. They committed crimes, and no line of reasoning should free them of their debt to society for those crimes.

I think maybe this will be my last post on this topic. I really am not insane, or a Marxist, or socialist. I in no way advocate the actions of terrorists. I just try to keep an open mind and give real thought to issues.

Dec 23, 2008 - 7:48 pm 103. fred:

Forrest,

What do you think - venture a guess - are the underlying causes for the terrorism of the Communists in the WU?

Billy certainly was not from poverty, so class envy is not a factor here. He grew up wealthy and privileged. What grievances could he have? His life’s actions indicate that he is not a saint and is not a caring person. He was not motivated by love of his fellow human being.

His fellow Communists in the movement were largely from at least comfortable backgrounds. They are not the lumpen proletariat.

The psychological profile of these people is pretty standard: narcissistic- personality disordered. Sociopathic.

Billy Ayers ended up a Communist revolutionary clearly out of some other motivation. Let’s be laser-like in getting at what that could be, since you brought up the issue of what motivates them. It’s a valid question and should be discussed on its own merits, although you won’t find me very sympathetic towards those people.

I went very deeply into the entire history of socialist thought, from its roots on up to the Critical Theory of The Frankfurt School Marxist thinkers, including Antonio Gramsci. I did this on my own and in parallel with my undergraduate and graduate school work in philosophy and economics, which overlapped with my three years as a Jesuit seminarian. I was attracted to Marxist thought initially because my life’s experiences had brought me very close to the experiences of the Third World poor. I even lived in Brazil briefly with Maryknoll priests in Sao Paulo and Rio de Janeiro. Billy Ayers and I have almost NOTHING in common. I was a bookish, quiet aspiring intellectual who also wanted to be a priest. I wanted nothing to do with power and violence. I merely wanted to advance a discussion in theology, philosophy, and economics and took the academic path because I wanted to take seriously the critiques of socialism coming from Michael Novak and others. Eventually I turned away from Marxism because of a variety of reasons, some academic and some having to do with the sorts of people I encountered in the Communist movements. The evidence of history and my scientific inquiries convinced me that the critiques of socialism were correct and there was no workaround to be found. I changed and moved on.

But people like Billy Ayers are an entirely different animal. I cannot relate to his cold blooded willingness to murder millions, and the ethics of expediency in Marxism. Socialism claims that it will produce the New Moral Man. That’s nonsense, as the evidence of history and any honest intellectual inquiry can blow apart. And any man who lusts after power, however surreptitious about it he is (or she is, as his wife attests to), is corrupt and evil to the core.

My best guess as to Billy’s motivations: he was in some way malformed, maybe traumatically, by his parents. His singleminded determination to get power, even if only over the minds of other people, indicates to me that his parents were over controlling and cruel. He then did what many people of his profile do: they engage in projection and scapegoating in order to deal with their inner suffering. My guess is that his family is thoroughly corrupt, cynical, and cold to the core.

Behind his professorial demeanor is the soul of a man who cares not a whit about real humanity.

Dec 23, 2008 - 8:20 pm 104. Forrest:

Thanks so much for the well worded, informative post Fred

Based on the little research I’ve done of their justification, I’d say they were motivated by either personal gain or just a desire to rebel against society, and given their ages and social standing, their parents. The vague impression I get is that of kids playing at being revolutionaries. I’d guess they would’ve latched on to any cause that would help them grow their membership and further their personal goals. Communism and the war in Vietnam were just convenient causes. If society had been vehemently opposed to the depiction of unicorns on public buildings, you can bet they would’ve had their finger paints out too While I’m not sure that many, if any true ‘revolutionary’ behavior is completely altruistic, these folks were either out almost solely for personal gain, or driven to self-delusion by it.

I see some of that in current Muslim terrorist actions too. I’m no expert, but it’s clear there are a few people at the top of organizations like Al Qaeda with very personal goals. They too use a convenient cause, in this case radicalized Muslim fundamentalism fed by various feelings of oppression and wrongdoing by the west, to draw young men and women to do their bidding and further their own goals.

Why has Al Qaeda succeeded where the Weather Underground did not? Superior numbers? Superior funding? Better leaders? Is their cause more attractive? Answering questions like that might help in this mess we currently find ourselves in.

Dec 23, 2008 - 9:52 pm 105. Judith:

Old old adage: You are judged by the company you keep. The liberals cannot rewrite everything. Obongo associated with Ayers, worked with him in the same building, on the same education committee (interesting to see how much more indoctrination our kids get in the public school system now..Annenberg…) and launched his “career” in Ayers living room. Facts recorded and not debatable. Better build yourselves a good bomb shelter because “competence” is not on the menu.

Dec 23, 2008 - 9:54 pm 106. The Historian:

OBAMA & THE DEMOCRAT PARTY OWN THE AFGHAN WAR: They can’t have it both ways. This one was with their support and is now on their watch:

http://greensrealworld.blogspot.com/

Dec 23, 2008 - 10:10 pm 107. Shoshana:

The need to whitewash Ayers is directly related to the need to whitewash the ’60s, to preserve the myth that this was the era of the great awakening of political, social and spiritual consciousness. The Weather Underground protrudes like a sore thumb in the re-brushed landscape of love-ins and flower-power, hence the impulse to re-shape the deeds and intents of these spoiled monsters. Unfortunately that myth will continue its grip on our imagination as long as we fail to educate kids to genuine pride in our imperfect– but nonetheless great — country.

Dec 23, 2008 - 10:33 pm 108. ridgerunner:

Forrest,
What alternate reality do you live in to believe that Al Qaeda has succeeded in anything, other than creating more death and destruction than the Weather Underground? Al Qaeda is simply a continuation of the 1400-year attempt by Islam to conquer the world. That you don’t understand such a basic fact is mind-boggling. The “mess we are in” is no different than that of the 7th century Arabs and Egyptians; the 8th century North Africans, Scilians, Spanish and French; the 10th through the 14th century Hindus; the 15th century Austrians and Poles; and the 18th century Americans who fought the Barbary pirates. All of these peoples were attacked by Islamic armed forces. Some were conquered. Others resisted successfully. Apparently something in your psyche drives you to assume that any foe must have a valid point. That, my friend, is adolescent thinking.

Dec 24, 2008 - 3:38 am 109. fred lapides:

Here is an idea you might consider.Instead of chewing your liver at each issue of The New York Times, why don;t you just ignore it since you detest it so much? You get all hot and bothered with every issue of a paper you think ought not exist.

Dec 24, 2008 - 4:33 am 110. monkeyfan:

Fred Lapides:

Personally I hate liver.
I’m not out and about searching for the perfect pate, I’m out to sink the New York Times, and all it represents, in any small way I can.

…Which is to say I’ll actively oppose the continuum of Marxist propaganda and its collectivist ends from Walter Duranty through William Ayers and beyond.

You’re essentially imploring us to live and let live?
The point of taking the fight to them is that if we ‘win’ they merely have to live honestly within their own means; if they win, recalcitrant volk (like me) have historically been herded into camps and executed.

Ayers and crew worked towards those ends and I don’t doubt that they would have done as they said had they been allowed to act unopposed. Anyone who sugar coats the evils they and their fellow travelers have committed and the great evil they continue to work toward must be opposed. Simple as that.

Dec 24, 2008 - 7:55 am 111. ndak:

Forrest: You really have no standing in this discussion; at least no valid position, only an opinion. I lived through the nuttiness of the 60’s. Those nuts who wanted college students (young people who really just wanted to rebel against anything) were invited by myself and others to vacate the premises and move to a county which embraced their views. To our disappointment they stayed and spread their shallowness to other young people. Sure, Vietnam was a nightmare, but do you remember why Japan started the conflict with the USA? The south pacific was vital to the US interests. A defendable position, I believe.
Ayers will, I hope, answer for his actions. Can anyone who really thinks about the Ayers/Communist/terrorist/Chicago connections not honestly question Obama about those connections? When I carefully read what Obama says about these connections, I feel as though I am being scammed.
Our country will suffer from the Obama decisions to create socialism in our time. The answer to our economic challenges is PRODUCTION, not REDISTRIBUTION. Production in real assets, not just government jobs funded by taxpayers dollars. Taking retiring peoples savings in order to continue a lie of what a good thing socialism is, requires a singularly revolting person.
Thanks to PM for this thread. ndak

Dec 24, 2008 - 8:25 am 112. Dlanor:

The NYT ain’t funny no more.
It’s a G-damn menace!

Dec 24, 2008 - 10:16 am 113. iconoclast:

Forrest

Good luck with your attempt on critical thought/devil’s advocate. It is nearly impossible to do in person and completely impossible to do in an unmoderated forum.

Fred came close to addressing your basic question–what gives with these people? Why do they reappear constantly over time–Socialist murderers over here (cue pic of a dead Che), religious murderers over there (cue pic of dead Zawahiri) and individual mass murderers everywhere else. Why are we constantly afflicted with them? How do sick individuals like Mohammed gather so many around them that their pathology turns into a religion??

While these scumbags love living the good life, I find it hard to believe that simple greed explains the thousands of years of tyranny and oppression that these psychopaths have wrought onto humanity. Their desire to oppress and control their fellow man is almost sexual in nature–they can no more stop their murderous ways than a pedophile can stop molesting children. Wealth is almost a byproduct–at the most it appears that wealth relative to their fellow man that matters most to them.

So, to answer your question, I think that any material or spiritual explanation for these oppressors and killers is superficial and fails to address that they are fundamentally damaged. Some (myself included) would label that damage as “evil”, realizing that that label itself begs your initial question. But until we truly understand thought and consciousness, we will not be able to explain this condition. We can only extirpate it when encountered; understanding that these are the beasts who can never be appeased. Put them down like the mad animals they are and categorize them as dead-end evolutionary attempts.

Dec 24, 2008 - 10:55 am 114. stuart Williamson:

The fire still burns in Billy Ayers belly - death to Capitalism! Viva a Revolucion! He has given up the Armed Revolution of his youth for a more mature Destroy from Within strategy. And it’s worked!

Here we deprecate and denounce the Bill Ayers that no longer exists, and ignore the deadlier Bill Ayers who is still the idol. the Great Guru, of Anerica’s growing Marsixt socialist community. What drew Obama to Chicago’s political machine? Who was an early supporter of Obama’s rise within it? Who gave Obama financial responsibility in the Annenberg Challenge? Who has used Obama as his surrogate? Who promoted Alinsky’s Rules for Radicals as Obama’s gameplan? Who is the Wizard behind the Curtain? Who never uttered a peep prior to the election and is now going around, chatting up the MSM accolytes, gloating in his success?

Bill Ayers has dropped his biggest bomb of all on America, hoping to
kill Capitalism forever.

Dec 24, 2008 - 11:57 am 115. Donna V.:

Their desire to oppress and control their fellow man is almost sexual in nature–they can no more stop their murderous ways than a pedophile can stop molesting children.

Exactly right. I’m Catholic, but sorry, I think St. Paul was wrong - it’s not the love of money that is the root of all evil, it’s the love of power. Money, of course, is one source of power, but the great tyrants and would be tyrants of history have never been content with riches alone. Hitler and Stalin did not surround themselves with lavish creature comforts; in fact, they lived relatively simply, even at the height of their power. It wasn’t about the money, it was about the thrill of having the power of life or death over millions, of being able to push around armies and civilian populations like chess pieces.

Dec 24, 2008 - 12:27 pm 116. Judy, NYC:

the nytimes is now a filthy rag. it is difficult to keep count the number of scarf people they photograph and write about in an obsequious toadying way. and take every opportunity to trash israel. naturally, they love bill ayers and never ever mention even a whisper about the actual facts regarding his real history. all they see fit to publish is ayer’s made up phantasies about himself and his murderous deeds.
this is likely because their uk edition is all that is keeping them afloat. may they drown there, just as they are drowning in their own crap here. (of course, in europe tragically the times has a better chance of survival, even profits).

Dec 25, 2008 - 10:23 am 117. steve:

Could anyone of sound mind explain what the Times and for that matter most mainstream media are doing to present the public with unbiased information? What is the benefit to the public in an orchastrated single world view…Times way or the highway?

Dec 25, 2008 - 3:38 pm 118. MossBack_Jim:

So why does the NYT remain this nation’s paper of record? That status requires nearly every library in the country to have that paper on its shelves.

Dec 25, 2008 - 6:41 pm 119. Virginia D.:

ndak wrote: “Our country will suffer from the Obama decisions to create socialism in our time. The answer to our economic challenges is PRODUCTION, not REDISTRIBUTION.”

Our country has been suffering for decades. Everything is now happening at a faster pace because capitalism is now reaping the harvest it has sown.
But, first, I must answer MossBack_Jim’s question about the NY Times and that is, just as other major papers, is just part of the CIA’s mechanism for the dispersal of propaganda that promotes the imperialistic idealology of the U.S. That is also why it is the most distributed paper in the nation. Secondly, Obama is not about socialism. He is just another face on the same system of capitalistic ideas and military imperialism. Ayers had the right idea that we need to rid the world of capitalism and stop the spread of U.S. imperialism, but went about it wrong. Besides, his group was poorly organized and not very large. What is needed before a revolution is to build a socialist system and have it in place to take over when a revolution takes place. That is why so many other revolutions fail. This one will not fail for the time is coming that a revolution is needed and will happen. The socialist movement is growing at an ever increasing rate in light of today’s economic disaster. I know, I am a proud member of a growing socialist party and we are signing up new members every day. We have offices across the U.S. We are now helping workers and others to fight back. We shall overcome the capitalistic system of the ruling class and replace it with a system based on the ideas of Marx and Engels. Si Se Puede! Si Se Puede!

Dec 26, 2008 - 2:32 am 120. waypasthadenough:

Forgive me if someone covered these points above. But I just don’t have time to read them all.

I did read a couple up top and one person couldn’t understand why the new yawk slimes could do what they do. Let me make it clear:

They are our enemies, the traitors within. They live for their commie revolution. Their ancestors infiltrated all the major media decades ago and our ancestors should have started killing them then just as the Jews shouldn’t have waited until they were corralled in the Warsaw Ghetto to start killing Nazis.

Yes, our enemies within are more subtle than the Nazis but the end result is the same: slavery, only worse than that which occurs under fascism.

If we don’t start killing them soon we will be bowing down to them and kissing whatever they stick in our face.

Don’t understand? Start with my quotes page:

http://willowtown.com/promo/quotes.htm

Then see what this type of evil authoritarian garbage has done to England:

http://willowtown.com/reality/britsinsane.htm

Dec 26, 2008 - 7:06 am 121. Betty Mack:

#39 jsleepingquail - You remind me of a young female relative of mine, senior in college, who was arguing with me about VietNam (I am a VietVet). She really got into the arguement with references from her prof about things he obviously knew nothing about. I pointed to the (antique) globe on my desk and asked her to point out out VietNam. SHE COULLD’T!!! She is typical of folks who argue about something they know absolutely nothing about. Eisenhower, Kennedy and Johnson all sent troops to VietNam (once called Indo China) long before Nixon had anything to do with it so why do identify Nixon as the culprit. As far as I know, he was the President who help negotiate the Paris Peace Accord and it was signed on his watch.

Dec 26, 2008 - 8:07 am 122. iowavette:

TJ, the Americans resorted to guerilla warfare to battle the British superiority in terms of training and weaponry. So, sniper actions were considered dishonorable by the Brits. They also thought ungentlemanly the American penchant to build bigger and better naval frigates soon outpacing the British in size and firepower.

While I admire the British, this penchant for whining when bested is tiresome.

Dec 26, 2008 - 9:58 am 123. The Historian:

TRIAL LAWYERS AND THE DEMOCRAT PARTY
What this unfit alliance does is all about self-interest, not the national interest:

http://greensrealworld.blogspot.com/2008/12/lawsuit-abuse-democrat-holy-grail.html

Dec 26, 2008 - 12:35 pm 124. AndrewD:

Is VirginaD a committed fan of mass murder and the principles of National Socialism, or is she just a troll trying to have a little fun here?

Dec 26, 2008 - 1:10 pm 125. John Schuh:

Betty Mack:

Nixon’s mistake was to conduct a fighting retreat rather than instantly withdrawing and letting S. Vietnam collapse. Ironically, Obama may have to do the same thing in Southwest Asia. He may even have to widen the war for a time, as Nixon did. But all this demonizing of Nixon is totally irrational, as there is no arguing with it.

Dec 26, 2008 - 3:18 pm 126. PAC:

Forest-I was in school during the 60’s. The radicals then, many who now call themselves anarchists, weren’t shy at all about their exact intent. It may have taken a bit to decipher it, due to their penchant for psuedo-intellectual and often drug enhanced language. But after a while their actions toward certain of our(those of us who didn’t agree with them) actions helped with translation. They screamed it in the media, in the classrooms and in our faces, so close we could count their teeth and hear the ringing in our ears. I was literally slammed against the wall physically and verbally with their message. What we heard them saying was basically-”Down with the establishment because our parents built it and they are wrong because they are controlling and money hungry and won’t agree with our point of view. Down with all of their laws and morals because they are wrong, because they don’t agree with us, and anyone who is not with us is against us.” This is the short version, since the original was profanely inserted every other word, with a four letter word.(although one of their all time faves was 6 letters added to ‘mother’)and also included whatever personal agenda each group hung onto as the only right way to go. The only thing they had in common is that they ALL agreed that the ‘establishment’ just had to be destroyed.
I went to school with them, encountered them on the street and lived with some of them. One of my exroom mates still keeps tabs on me, doesn’t talk to me because I don’t agree with her. She considers me to be wrong because I don’t do things her way.
Because I wore a mini skirt, didn’t smoke, drink, swear or toke and refused to give it away and insisted on wearing my bras, I was treated as one of the enemy. I was told that I was wrong because I had the gaul to disagree with them.It was alright for them to disagree with me, but I didn’t have the right to disagree with them.Many of the original ‘radicals’ of the 60’s came from wealthy and middle class families from the eastern states, or at least the ones I knew, did, and the ones they knew did. They were out to make the world a far different place than the one their parents had made. What is really ironic is that a lot of them gave birth to the yuppy movement, which was even more involved in what their parents were involved in.Hm…
When we were in junior high/middle school, we attended fairly clean and fairly innocent sockhops. By my senior year, senior cut day was an actual drunken orgy and I could smell the burning back 40 in the halls of our school(as in weed, not weeds). We were listening to such psychadelic music as ‘Lucy in the Sky With Diamonds’, ‘Light My Fire’and ‘In the Desert With a Horse With no Name’. Several girls were pregnant their senior year or already married-which isn’t, unfortunately, earth shattering, now. But then, it was still pretty touchy. This all influenced the attitude of the times. We heard the Beatles/Joan Baez/Judy Collins/Peter Paul and Mary the Smothers Brothers and Timothy Leary etc constantly telling us to not under any circumstances trust anyone who wasn’t from our generation or didn’t think like us. Plus Tom(Ted?) Laehr(sp) singing about pollution-for the generation who grew up having bombing drills in school by hiding under our desks. And on top of this we had Vietnam Vets coming home as very old men in young men’s bodies, experiencing what we didn’t have a clue about and dealing with very serious issues of drugs, reentry and post-traumatic-stress-syndrome and whatever they may have lost and left on the battle field and the way they had been pilloried on their return to this country. This was some of the confusing mix of the times-plus the assassinations/school shootings/publicized orgies/mass murders/drug over doses/kidnappings/hostage situations/riots/bank robberies-demonstrations-all kinds of demonstrations-marches/riots/sit-ins/sing-ins/takeovers, most to get one point across, that the party doing the damage insisted that the receiving party was wrong and therefore no longer entitled to running the country. But the other side was just as intolerant they brought out the cops in riot gear and billy clubs, which they did use, oh yes and a lot of teargas and some bullets.(Only some of this was about the Vietnam War)
This was also the generation who grew up on ‘Father Knows Best’, ‘Ozzy and Harriet’. ‘Andy Griffith” The Ed Sullivan Show’ ‘Jack Benny”,’The Smothers Brothers’ ‘Sonny and Cher’. and ‘Laugh-in’,etc to help to give you a flavor for the time.

As for the muslim issue. I have a cousin who was married into the muslim community for 25 years and I have talked to many muslims in my travels in and out of Europe over the past 10 years. This is what we have been told by almost every muslim we have talked to-When the day of the prophet comes all muslims are obligated to rise up and kill all infidels(non muslims)or be killed themselves, and that the people of the Book(Jews and Christians-read any non muslim)were replaced by the muslims because we all screwed up and the muslims are now god’s chosen people, and that it is their job to rid this planet of the scourge that we have become and to repopulate this planet with the only right way/religion-as in islam.

There is a similarity in the intolerance, which might explain why the anarchist movement doesn’t see the muslim terroists as the problem. However, just as in the Cold War, the Communists used ‘fellow travelers’ only as long as they were useful, then eliminated them, the same would be true for the muslims with the anarchists.-Fellow traveler-someone who helped to enable the actual sabatour, and was sympathetic toward the cause involved, but were not themselves a sabatour or spy.

Dec 26, 2008 - 5:58 pm 127. Virginia D.:

AndrewD: I am not trolling and I resent your remarks about socialism is about mass murder. Modern socialism is not about going out and start murdering people. I would advise you to do a little real studying and thinking for yourself instead of believing everything that your government spews out. Capitalist U.S. and it imperialistic hold it has on the world has caused the death of millions of people. Our party’s goal is not to make the same mistakes that past socialist revolutions have. The fallacies of capitalism is causing its own collapse. It is getting close to the point where the working class has had enough of the ruling class’s garbage and will rise up and fight back. If there is bloodshed, then the guilt will be on the backs of your disfunctional government.

Dec 26, 2008 - 7:05 pm 128. Michael P Macaluso:

The New York Times is a DYING company in the Dying print media industry.

Dec 26, 2008 - 8:28 pm 129. MomdeGuerre:

Aren’t you all missing the point? This psychopath is the VP of the largest educational organization in the US. He once said something along the lines that - education is the pivot point of the revolution. Do you want his ideology teaching our children? He is helping to decide the curriculum for US Education K - 12! His readings are required for aspiring teachers! Hello!!! Anyone awake out there to the threat??

Dec 26, 2008 - 9:02 pm 130. fred:

Virginia D bloviates the same “socialism did not fail, it was just not done right in the first place” logic that keeps them coming back for more punishment.

Virginia D, you cannot hold a candle to the enormous amount of reading I’ve done across all of the important minds in Marxism. I was a Marxist for ten years of my life, from age 22 up until I was 32 years of age. I was an aspiring academician who happened to take the critiques of socialism coming from the theologian Michael Novak seriously. Essentially, utopia is nonsense. There can be no socialist utopia because it is not consistent with or compatible with human nature. We are flawed in every respect and there is always going to be evil and evil people ruining every attempt at building heaven on earth. Dive into developmental psychology, genetics, and neuroscience as I have and you will realize that EVIL has an organic and cosmological basis.

Socialism is based on a lie, and anyone with any brains will eventually figure this out. It was personally liberating for me when I could finally make a break with it. Prior to that moment, I had to endure a fair amount of cognitive dissonance. The evidence of history is conclusive and decisive on the issue of the viability of socialism. It has failed to bring material prosperity and spiritual liberation to human beings. It did not result in The New Moral Man. If you go and look at the countries and societies where it has been tried, you will find rampant corruption, criminality, and evil of all kinds.

Dec 26, 2008 - 9:55 pm 131. Pappadave:

Fred -
Virginia D seems to be one of those people who refuse to even ACKNOWLEDGE the existence of evil and corruption (unless speaking of Wall Street, of course.)
I am another who lived through the 60’s as a young man. I graduated from HS in 1960, the product of a VERY materially-poor family. Where my classmates wore the latest fashions (white buck or blue suede shoes, button-down collars on sport shirts, belt-in-the-back, flannel slacks, etc.) always seemed to have enough money for dating and most even had cars, I walked, ran or rode a hand-me-down bike everywhere, owned two pairs of powder-blue Levi’s and four white T-shirts–the sort men wear today as undershirts. For shoes, I was limited to wearing the tennis shoes issued to the basketball team from the previous year (which we were allowed to keep after the end of the season.) During the 60’s, I was mostly on active duty in the Army, serving two tours in Vietnam–in 1965 and again in 1967-68…coming home for the last time a month or so after Tet in ‘68. During my Stateside duty, I was mostly in schools of one sort or another (Arabic language in 1964 and helicopter pilot training in 1966.) Since I was also an intel area specialist, I did some poking into what was going on in California before and after my two tours in Vietnam–especially on college campi. I became fairly familiar with the “shock troops” that were being used by the far left in their efforts to destroy the U.S. from within by subverting our kids.

I found the run-of-the-mill “hippies” to be just bored, spoiled brats who’d grown up with everything handed to them without having to put out much personal effort themselves. Oh, a few were “true believers,” but MOST of them went to “protest rallies” and “demonstrations” to meet members of the opposite sex…FOR sex. (Which seemed to be available to everyone EXCEPT returning Vietnam vets who weren’t inclined to talk down about the war, the government and the military.) A few, like Ayers, Dorhn, Angela Davis and Jane Fonda with hubby and former SDS president, Tom Hayden, took their roles as “revolutionaries” VERY seriously. Many of these, who internalized what passes for leftist “thought,” turned to education as a career. Ayers, Dorhn and Davis are all currently “professors” at various institutes of “higher learning.” University professorships were attractive for several reasons. A PhD was relatively easy to obtain–especially where schools judged doctoral theses by weight, instead of by actual content and rationality, and, best of all, the whole thing could be obtained on someone else’s nickel–Mom and Dad or the nanny State–the very people they so disdained. All they had to do was keep their figurative noses clean until achieving tenure and they were then free to promote and teach our children any crackpot idea they wanted to without fear of even mild reprimand. Most of ‘em chose to teach and promote Marxist theory–often disguised as a legitimate subject of study. One of the most obvious of these is the current fad of teaching “black studies,” in which black history has quite literally been invented out of whole cloth…such as the introduction of Kwaanza, which no African-born black person ever even heard of before coming to America, or the teaching that the Egyptian pharoahs “were all black,” which is a provable, historic lie. (They were mostly of Greek ancestry. It wasn’t just the best-known and most violent of these radicals who chose this route. Hardly a university in the nation exists without a virtual plethora of such “teachers.”

One would think that the fact that all those “communes” established by these 60’s hippies have completely disappeared would be proof enough to the left that socialism just doesn’t work, but they’ve invented all sorts of rationalizations as to why they all failed miserably. Instead, the indoctrination of our youth continues unabated.

Dec 27, 2008 - 1:53 pm 132. Arundel:

Ahhhh…..
The New York times again. We are kind of used to these boneheads here in NYC. Thank God their subscription base is the upper West side ( Who everyone knows is a bunch of former yuppies in search of a new name) It won’t be long now. Bye NYT. I am worried what to line the bottom of my birdcage with now. Perhaps the Daily Snooze same pov anyway..

Dec 27, 2008 - 4:56 pm

Write a Comment

Name:	(required, displayed)
Email:	(required, not publicized)
URL:	(optional, displayed) remember personal info?
Comments: