But there’s a larger problem with the argument. Even if Cashill and the advocates of this position prove their case or get an admission — a real admission — what does that change? It will show what we already know about Obama and Ayers, a relationship that got plenty of New Media coverage in the campaign, and also show that Obama hired a ghost writer. Neither of these issues are relevant now that Obama is in office.Maybe, but gee, if true it also might prove the man at 1600 told a fib about his literary talent and past relationship with the washed up terrorist (and his radical agenda for education reform). It would also bring up the obvious question of how long the small-c communist has actually known the president, not to mention exonerating Sarah Palin after all the criticism or her criticism. Maybe it would also call into question why the elite media allowed Ayers to hide in plain sight before the election.
But why the relative silence on this? Cashill adequately explains the mainstreamers:
Despite all evidence to the contrary, Alger Hiss will always be innocent in their eyes. Margaret Mead's Samoa will always be a sexual paradise. Rachel Carson's science will always be sound. Alex Haley's Kunta Kinte will always be real. Edward Said will always be a Palestinian refugee. And Obama will always be a literary wunderkind. Those who choose to say otherwise do so at their peril.Does anyone think the same news hounds that chased Bush around with the fake Rather documents wouldn't still be digging if Palin were linked with a reformed neo-nazi? Just look at the reaction to her book, or put another way, the idiot from Wasilla needs a ghostwriter while the Kenyan savant can crank out a masterpiece without practice proving his genius. But how likely is that?
Not very. In the immortal words of Danny DeVito in "Throw Momma from the Train", "writers write, always". Obama has refused to release materials from his college days, which could have provided an insight on his talent. Cap'n Ed surely knows such revelations could be relevant in light of current policy being pursued.
But their cautious silence makes a lot of sense in a risk-reward fashion. Had they bitten on the story and it later turned out false their lefty counterparts and the elites would never rest in comparing them all to Glenn Beck. Every future story would be couched in that framework, diminishing their impact. Cashill indeed has a checkered record of success in his past exposes and many consider him an outright kook based on his TWA 800 work (usually those without much knowledge on it), so there's that.
By reporting the encounter in a slightly condescending manner they satisfy their readers' thirst for a post without taking a hardcore stand. Then if the story takes off as true (and Backyard Conservative now has many incoming links from smaller bloggers meaning a grassfire, or maybe prairie fire, has started) they can go along for the ride and nobody is the wiser.
Now, if someone can truthfully explain the Fox News angle on this in light of the Glenn Beck show that would be great!
BUT WHAT DOES IT MEAN? 10/7/09
Speculation is free, and usually worth every penny paid. But here goes.. Ayers reminds me of a guy who likes to play head games with people. It's possible he realized she was a righty blogger and immediately told her what he knew she wanted to hear, being his sarcastic self. The bit about Michelle telling Obama to see Ayers was in the book. Simply denying the charge would not have satisfied the blogger, after all, so he immediately told her what he thought she wanted to hear.
But does that make it absolutely false? Sometimes people just blurt out the truth in a snide manner hoping people will think they're lying because it's so sensational.
There are a few definitive ways to prove this but like the birth cert thing none of them will ever happen. Nevertheless -- have Obama produce his book notes and college records, That would show how much editing was done, and whether he was a skilled and gifted writer or not. They could also locate the sources Andersen used, which is far-fetched because they wish to remain nameless. It's entirely possible Ayers was actually one of Andersen's sources, in which case it would be hard to prove he wasn't yanking Andersen's chain by furthering the myth.
Then there's the white girlfriend mentioned in Dreams who seemed to share a similarly laid-out home as that of Ayers' late girlfriend Diana Oughten. Good luck with that one, too.
Maguire is the go-to on this today. Go there and you'll find a timeline of how his surrogates have explained the Ayers-Obama relationship, which have been less impressive than the explanations about Wright.
Then there's Charles Johnson (can't resist). His effort is predictably negative, even using the codeword "wingnuts" much to the delight all the moonbats he once loathed who now use his site to score debate points. He mocks Backyard Conservative without providing any evidence that she's wrong on her facts.
He also refers to the whole thing as a conspiracy theory without mentioning Andersen's book. Perhaps he's been too busy calling people racists to notice, but Jack Cashill is the conspiracist--Andersen is the biographer. The charge of ghost writing was dredged up by the latter, so that's where the bombs should be directed. And sure, Ayers is having fun with this just like all self-important narcissist head-gamers would. But he hardly needs any help from LGF.
After all there was a time...not too far distant...when posts about the washed up professor would rank as "exclusives":
You may have read about this book, or seen it mentioned on Hannity and Colmes, but you cannot appreciate how radically insane and violent it is until you read it for yourself.And here's another one chastising old Billy for his bombings. Of course these random posts don't mean Johnson has changed his mind about the importance of the relationship between the former Weather Man and the present president, but applying LGF logic---past associations portend present behavior, no matter what--well it sure makes him one of the biggest wingnuts on the block.