Author Elizabeth Wurtzel has a piece in the Wall Street Journal on Barack Obama’s relationship with the “Weathercouple” of William Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn. The eyebrow-raiser is this:
Apparently, back when he was running for state senate, Barack Obama had fund-raising events at the home of Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn, and there’s been some press about the senator’s friendship with this controversial Weathercouple. Many reporters are well aware, even though Mr. Obama has described his connection to Ayers and Dohrn as “flimsy,” that the senator’s relationship with his radical Hyde Park neighbors is actually quite warm, even close.
As previously noted, Obama has been less than honest about his relationship with unrepentant domestic terrorist William Ayers. But Wurtzel is suggesting that reporters know even more than they are reporting.
Otherwise, Wurtzel’s thesis seems badly flawed. She argues that perhaps America has MovedOn from “the same kind of stupid scandals that have dogged all our recent elections.” To so argue, she makes the claim that Obama’s relationship with the Rev. Jeremiah Wright has not done him in, ignoring that his poll numbers are headed downward and Democrats are still debating his electability.ÂÂ
Moreover, Wurtzel’s perspective on the relevance of character questions may be a bit skewed. Not only did she have an adolescent fascination with Dohrn, but she also comes with her own deluxe set of baggage when it comes to issues of character — baggage she has an interest in society setting aside. This is the woman who commented about the 9/11 attacks:
“I had not the slightest emotional reaction. I thought: ‘This is a really strange art project.’ It was a most amazing sight in terms of sheer elegance. It fell like water. It just slid, like a turtleneck going over someone’s head…I just felt, like, everyone was overreacting. People were going on about it. That part really annoyed me.”
Whatever Obama’s relationship with Ayers and Dohrn is ultimately revealed to be, Obama certainly does not need media apologists like Wurtzel. He needs the ones Wurtzel is outing as remaining silent.
(h/t Memeorandum.)
Update: Insta-lanche!
Baracky is an incremental Marxist by day, but when no one’s looking he vicariously lives the dream I think. Having friends like these dorky radical peoples really flatters his self-image. He’s got a big empty space I think. Like Hugo Chavez but without the macho. It’s kind of pitiful really.
Elizabeth really is a twat. I am going to pre-emptively denounce myself. I had never seen that quote from her. Truly remarkable.
Baracky is dropping in the polls here in Indiana, despite outspending HillBill exponentially.
According to thor barrack is not a Marxist. I have thor’s word on that.
Hugo Chavez but without the macho.
The new tagline for his website!
Oh yum, KK’s fart left a stain on the page.
Yum? Well, I guess it takes all kinds.
By all accounts, Bernardine Dohrn and Bill Ayers are unfathomably charming, brilliant and comely people, absolutely irresistible. Everybody who meets them is taken and forgets what they should know.
Do all Obamaphiles write like thor?
They forgot the earthquakes go along with the weather.
Donna Ron and John Murtagh have somehow managed to resist Ayers’ charms. I’m pretty sure I could do it too.
How did this moron manage to get published in the WSJ?
Momma, there goes that uppity Obama man again. Can I use the computer?
John M. Murtagh
Fire in the Night
The Weathermen tried to kill my family.
30 April 2008
http://www.city-journal.org/2008/eon0430jm.html
Also appeared tonight on ON THE RECORD with Greta (FNC)
The Weathermen were young and felt disenfranchised. It wasn’t until they met Barack Obama that they overcame their fear of intimacy and learned to love again.
Healer of broken hearts, mender of broken wings, Love is.. what O’s got. Seek him. See him. Feel him.
[…] all just no big deal. In fact, it is a big deal as stated by Protein Wisdom. It gets even worse as the media refuses to cover a story that they know much more of. How pathetic […]
Even I will give props to #12.
Re comment #1:
Hannity’s America focused tonight on the history and meaning of ‘Black Theology’. Funny thing is, it is, indeed, formed from Marxism and has been denounced by Christians repeatedly. I didn’t know that the ‘liberation’ theology originated with Latin countries and, in some cases, ‘revolutionaries’ were portrayed as Christ.
I feel certain that there are fringe elements to most all religions and this is no exception, but I’m a bit embarrassed that it took some prodding through passing that show tonight to do some research.
I mean, I think the Marxist Obama was pretty well understood by all, but I didn’t appreciate that the very roots of his religion itself was centered there as well.
Oh hey, jmflynny, yeah he’s a lot Marxist. Gruesomely Marxist, really. Karl did some heavy lifting you might want to check out here, and a bit lighter of a read here. Lots of other stuff in the archives but it would be kind of overwhelming I think to throw it all at you at once.
I’m trying to figure out how to spell the sound of this Bim’s butt hitting a hot griddle, which, I would sugest, is where it belongs.
“Ssssssssst”?
“Boooooosh”?
“Yeeow”?
“Sizzle”?
“Shhhhhhhhhhhh”?
Any help would be appreciated.
Obama’s Marxism is on display for anyone who takes the time to look. When he said “I will raise taxes because that’s fair”, it was a dead giveaway.
He wants to punish all white people who have “stolen” the money that rightly belongs to black people whose lives and families have been destroyed by the government.
You see, here’s the deal. The story is, there is a finite amount of money (ummm…progg bullshit), according to our Marxist brothers, and anyone who has worked their butt off and has more of it than you, has stolen it from you! You poor, stupid idiot bastards!
Fucking idiots. Playing to total ignorance is the empty promise of the proggs. They are absolutely INSANE, and they are out to totally fuck this country for their unstoppable belief that we are too stupid to live without them, and that they are too stupid to live without our money. It actually belongs to them, you know?. Unfortunately, it looks like it soon will. Hillary? Obama? McCain?
They all have the same last name, as far as I am concerned. And that name is DISASTER.
I need to stop before I go postal.
Not a great day.
Maybe tomorrow will be another “all is well” day, and I can believe that my life will be over before these fucks finally gain control.
It’s always much more fun to not feel like your head is going to pop like a too ripe tomato. And on top of that, I just had to listen to Crystal Gayle. And her sliders can’t touch White Castle sliders.
See ya guys. This place is great. Without it, I might have had to randomly pick someone to verbally abuse today, and, I think that in this new milleniom, it’s against the law. Or soon will be.
STFU, Dog…
G’night
Maybe tomorrow will be another “all is well†day, and I can believe that my life will be over before these fucks finally gain control.
They already have control. Just ask around and see how many people think our rights are given to us by the government. The real question is how do we go about getting control back.
It was the mention of the LSD use that caught my attention. Youthful indiscretion is one thing. Making seems okay because of “the times” is another.
Wurtzel also mentions that Dohrn worked at the brown-shoe law firm of Sidley Austin with “the two Obamas” and there is speculation that Michelle was “mentored’ by Dohrn when MOmarosaObama interned at SA in the ’80s. Michelle in turn “mentored” Barry Hussein Obama & married up when he joined the firm.
A slo-mo Manchurian Candidate? Ayers for Sec. of Education? Dohrn for Asst. AG? Chavez without the macho, I like that!
[…] Wurtzel’s self-obsessed and confused ramble through the 1960s/80s to the present is here. Karl at Protein Wisdom reads it so you don’t have to, and also helpfully reminds us someone who has made utterances […]
Great. A big long string of red-baiting here. As if the people of Illinois have no problem electing a Marxist senator. And as if the tough newspapers of Chicago never investigated Obama’s past.
Oh, and restoring higher taxes for the wealthiest Americans is Marxist? Actually, it was something McCain supported until he felt he had to pander to anti-tax conservatives: so much for straight talk.
And now Obama will appoint former radicals his Cabinet members, with the full approval of Congress? Geez, you guys are paranoid.
Obama rocks teh knockturn with a cunning, iridescent effect.
You say that like they wouldn’t be afraid of being called RACIST!!!!eleventy!! for doing so.
Tom Robinson is clearly unaware that Obama won his Senate seat largely because the Chicago newspapers spent their time inestigating domestic issues regarding his primary rival, Blair Hull, and his GOP opponent, Jack Ryan. He also seems to be unaware that Dem circles in Chicago are very forgiving of Ayers because his dad Tom has been a huge wheel in local politics going back to the first Mayor Daley. (That’s how Dohrn got a job at Sidley & Austin, btw).
#23
Well then vote for him.
Uh. When a reporter is too investigative of the machines pet candidates, the reporters are denied access to city hall and the county board.
I don’t care who proposes it, higher taxes are regressive, and marxist.
A president can appoint whomever he wants to his cabinet. Congresses approval is window dressing.
thor is the Obama love machine, rich in gooey goodness and and shivers and sighs. The machine is powered by hope, change and unity. Everyone who faints in His presence feeds the awesomeness and the dulcet, angelic tones sooth the partisan beast within.
You will not harsh the mellow of The Love Machine!©
UNICORNS!
Higher taxes are not Marxist. Or else George Bush I is a Marxist.
And please continue insulting the people of Illinois for electing a Marxist senator.
Pure red-baiting, dude. How boring.
Transcendant belief in government redistribution as the solution to all of life’s problems (cut up that pie) along with a sense of entitlement based on smarter and more caring is very Marxist, Tom.
If it walks like a duck…
A big long string of red-baiting here.
We’re not going to let you murder another hundred million people this century, Tom.
Sorry about that.
Oh, and restoring higher taxes for the wealthiest Americans is Marxist?
From each according to his abilities? Ring any bells?
#29 quack!
SBP, I wouldn’t be too optimistic.
“Red-baiting” is synonymous with “swift-boating”. Once The Savior™ has been Anointed, no inquiry into past attitudes or performance is permitted — it is sufficient that The Savior™ has been Anointed by The Wise®. This forms a ratchet effect, which is of course the intent.
Regards,
Ric
TomR,
The people of Illinois didn’t vote for a Marxist Senator, mostly Chicago & it’s suburbs did. There, feel better? What next you’re going to roll your eyes at suggesting that Chicago is known for political corruption or for supporting criminals?
“Comment by Tom Robinson on 5/3 @ 8:44 am #
Great. A big long string of red-baiting here. As if the people of Illinois have no problem electing a Marxist senator. And as if the tough newspapers of Chicago never investigated Obama’s past.
Oh, and restoring higher taxes for the wealthiest Americans is Marxist? Actually, it was something McCain supported until he felt he had to pander to anti-tax conservatives: so much for straight talk.
And now Obama will appoint former radicals his Cabinet members, with the full approval of Congress? Geez, you guys are paranoid.”
Tom =
It is people like you who are scaring the shit out of me. Your cluelessness about higher taxes shows just how ignorant you are of economics, and what the result of higher taxes ultimately does to the economy. You want rich people to suffer, but your misguided “concern” is actually like pointing a gun at the lower and middle classes.
Check your history (if you dare), and see what the results of tax cuts have historically been. You might be surprised, but my feeling is that the results will fly right over the top of your befuddled head.
It is fine to “care”, but facts actually make it easier to deal with reality.
Obama is a Marxist, and whether you are smart enough to see it or not has no bearing on reality.
Raising taxes because “it’s fair”? Jeebus! That is tantamount to saying “I WILL PUNISH YOU FOR YOUR HARD WORK!” And on top of that, you are willing to kill thousands and thousands of jobs because rich people piss you off.
Don’t buy into the myth that there is a certain amount of money, and those who are rich have stolen most of it. There are a very small group of people who have inherited their money, but the vast majority of “rich” people have busted their ass for what they have. They already pay most of the taxes in this country, but, hey! “Sensitive” people like you want more of their money, because you are another outraged ignoramus.
The government has no mandate to fuck with your life, but you seem to be itching to give them more of one than they have already stolen from us.
When you have a hot car, putting a 45 caliber magnum bullet through the engine block will not make it even hotter. In fact, I bet that car wouldn’t even make it to the store.
But then again, I commend you for your “caring”. Very noble of you, sir.
And who cares if McDrooler supported higher taxes? He has the same last name as the other two candidates. Do you think anybody in their right mind would call him a conservative?
You need to read up a bit, my friend. Your freedoms are being usurped every day by these idiots, and you’re worried about taxing the rich?
Fucking rich people! That’s the problem, right?
Oh. And McGehee,
I am really entranced by this “eleventy” stuff. I hope you don’t mind if I borrow it sometimes.
Eleventy seven! That’s how much it costs me to live every day. Or is it a buck three eighty?
Brilliant!
TLD
Taxing our way to prosperity. That’s the Democrat way.
It will be too late when the majority of the asleep at the wheel
finally wake up. They’ll be in the middle of the wreck when they
realize how wounded they are. That’s history.
You ever wonder why Christ called us His sheep? Baaaaaaaaa..because
we are, we never learn from our mistakes.
“And as if the tough newspapers of Chicago never investigated Obama’s past.”
I live in Chicago. The “tough newspapers” here have been completely in the tank for Obama. Why do you think he’s been bumbling through explanations for Wright, Ayers, “bitter-gate,” etc.? It’s because he hasn’t been called to account for any of this before.
Oh, and the people of Illinois should be mocked for electing this empty suit. Mocked and pelted with rocks and garbage.
Hillary & Obama, Worse and Worser.
Well, face it, his competition was Alan Keyes, a certifiably batshit candidate.
[…] in her life, as well as some kooky opinions, and has not been shy about sharing them. She said this about the WTC falling on 9/11 for example: “I had not the slightest emotional reaction. I thought: ‘This is a really […]
Here is a piece on Obama’s work with the Annenberg Project with Bill Ayers. (This was in large part is already covered by a previous Protein Wisdom link to Larry Johnson.) An interesting aspect about this article on Obama and the Annenberg Project is that it links to a analysis of the effectiveness of the Annenberg Project Here is the summary of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge Experience. (271 page .pdf) (I apologize in advance for any mistakes in my typed transcription.)
IOW, Obama chaired a project that handed out $50 million in grant money for improvement in Chicago schools, and the $50 million had no result. That doesn’t say much about Obama’s abilities as an executive. It also stereotypes the stereotype of liberal solutions for social problems: throw some money at it. One can see why Obama has apparently not been inclined to volunteer to gush about his experience with the Annenberg Project. His ineffectiveness in chairing the Annenberg project , coupled with the Annenberg Project’s association with Bill Ayers, inform us why he has been less than forthcoming.
Although stated sarcastically I think TomR has a point here, “And please continue insulting the people of Illinois for electing a Marxist senator.”
After all, it is considered bad manners to say disgraceful things about the dead.
otpu
You people. I don’t know what is wrong with you, Elizabeth Wurtzel is a very talented young woman;-)
Hey! Tom Maguire did that thing where he talks about this same stuff and he mentions Karl and fixes it to where you can click on where he says Karl over there and it will bring you over here. I just did the same thing except backwards with the orangey Karl thing. Tom Maguire is the penultimate coolest one after Jeff I think.
“And please continue insulting the people of Illinois for electing a Marxist senator.†As a former resident of and voter in Illinois, I ask you to look at the total loon they’ve elected *twice* as governor. Blagojevich is a Napolean wannabe and Obama is whatever the heck it is that he is, but both got elected due to a severe lack of reasonable opposition. Of course, in Obama’s case it’s because in every election except the one he lost to Bobby Rush, his most formidable opponent has been eliminated prior to the election. Seems like a lot of luck to have happened to one guy three times in a row, woiuldn’t you say? Once is an accident, twice is a coincidence, three times is enemy action, as Churchill said.
Obama’s *real* problem is that Hillary!! is not going to be rolled over the way his previous opponents have.
I check bylines first before reading articles and if the byline includes anything like “graduated from Yale” or “graduate of Harvard” or “graduate of Princeton” etc. I either ignore it or read it in the spirit of constructive criticism I’m sure they would appreciate. Wait, who am I kidding, I just don’t read it. I’m okay with people attending those places, so long as they show appropriate shame and don’t note it in the their byline. Just about any other factoid in a byline would give greater credibility to any given author than the one wurtzel has in hers. That is all. I have nothing intelligent or pertinent to say. Except perhaps this: Mr. Cloudo President of Heaven can resurrect dead unicorns simply by smiling upon them.
Lost Dog,
I’m one of the rich people. I pay over 50% in full tax burden.
You know, I wonder if we were to actually meet in person, wouldn’t we be a little more civil, and make a few less assumptions?
I don’t hate the rich (that would be hating myself, duh), but I think we’ve stripped out too much revenue to cover our expenses, ie, stripped out too much tax revenue to cover our government expenses. And the vast majority of our government expenses are fixed: military, entitlements, and medicare/medicaid. Bush and a Republican congress lowered taxes and raised expenses; I don’t know about you, but as a small businessperson, I can’t do that and stay in business.
Please tell me how lower taxes will pay for the war in Iraq. They don’t now, and won’t in the future. It’s not Marxist to raise taxes to pay for the war — it’s common business sense.
erm, the tax cuts eventually increased tax revenue. would think a small business person would understand cash flow a bit better than that. not saying the Fed doesn’t need to cut expenditures and I doubt there are really any “fixed costs” in the fed budget thanks to congresscritters all fighting for their piece of the pie.
It’s not Marxist to raise taxes to pay for the war  it’s common business sense.
What business are you in?
Taxation destroys wealth. That’s axiomatic. Repeat that out loud. Taxation destroys wealth. It is one of the police powers of the state. Which means you have no choice in the matter.I’ll repeat that. Taxes are not voluntary. When taxes are increased capital does not move around. It stays where it is comfortable.There is then less to tax. When taxes are lowered capital is more mobile. There is more to tax.
Another axiom you may not be familiar with. Individuals = net creators of wealth. Governments = net destroyers of wealth. The freedom to create wealth was a fundamental part of our nations founding.
#46,
If she is so talented she should grow some tits.
How about this:
You can attract rich people to the country by lowering taxes.
It’s not Marxist to raise taxes to pay for the war
It is Marxist to raise taxes to redistribute wealth. Stop giving away tax money to buy votes and we would have plenty left for defense.
Is everybody here gay? There’s not a single comment about how Wurtzel is hot in an artsy, self-regarding manner. I’d put up with her for at least two months.
Tom Robinson, let me invite you on behalf of the people of the United States to write a gift check to the US Treasury in the amount you feel you ought to be taxed. Nothing is stopping you.
Brian, I myself have a newfound respect for her. She’s just gotta keep that trap shut…most of the time, you know, when I needed it open.
Tom, how’s about a quick read of the constitution, then let’s eliminate the depts. of education, HUD, and energy (For starters). I beleive that would fix that whole tax issue.
[…] reviewed the piece in question, I think that Karl’s criticisms of Ms. Wurtzel’s analysis still stand on their own […]
hilarious, PW’ers advocating that their war profiteering should be voluntarily paid. I am all for that. They pay for their wars. Leave me out of it. I’ll keep my NPR and roads and universities and you can pay for the war stuff. (My taxes will be mmmmmuch lower…)
Shut the fuck up, dave. When I want to hear from someone with your level of intelligence, I’ll flush the goddamned toilet.