The Prophet Barack’s best friend gives him some straight talk:
(via Jawa Report)
"It’s not based on any particular data point," a Treasury spokeswoman told Forbes.com Tuesday. "We just wanted to choose a really large number."
They made it up to be sufficiently ginormous to frighten everyone into rapid action.
And it worked.
Argh! Are there no responsible adults in Washington?
(hat tip: LGF)
Again, the problem with Obama’s association with William Ayers isn’t that Ayers was a murderous communist terrorist in the 70s (although that’s bad enough), it’s that Obama was funneling millions to Ayers-approved educational projects that implemented the ex-Weatherman’s radical agenda to no improvement in the students’ basic skills, and that he has then tried to cover up and diminish that association. Stanley Kurtz, whose work I discussed here, gives a summary in this Fox video:
Now, do I think the Prophet Barack is a "crypto-commie?" No, no more than I think he’s a secret Muslim. But his history with Ayers and Annenberg should trouble anyone who stops to think about it. Remember, Ayers was head of a group that planned to bomb the Army post at Fort Dix – only an accident stopped what might have happened. And Ayers has stated that his only regret was that he hadn’t planted more bombs.
Moreover, according to the records, the only reason for the Chicago Annenberg Challenge’s existence was apparently to fund the radical, anti-American educational ideas of Bill Ayers and his allies. Senator Obama didn’t care (as far as anyone can tell) that the money spent –over $100,000,000- did nothing to improve reading and math skills. Yet, during the recent debate, Obama made a large point about funding early childhood education. Given his tenure at CAC and his working partnership with Ayers, one has to ask what these programs would entail.
Beyond hyperbolic accusations of Obama as some sort of "Manchurian candidate," we should be disturbed by a would-be Chief Executive who apparently didn’t care that the organization he ran was wasting millions and doing no good for the very people it was (supposedly) meant to help. At its most charitable, Obama’s history with CAC and Ayers shows him to be a callow individual who doesn’t think through the implications of what he’s doing and who he’s doing it with, so long as it advances his career.
Elections are about character as well as policy, and, on both counts, I prefer the other guy.
(hat tip: Jennifer Rubin)