Written by Cliff Kincaid
October 13, 2008
By Cliff Kincaid
The headline over Harold Ford Jr.'s Washington Post column was, "Will McCain Do Anything to Win?" The former Democratic congressman, who lost a bitter race for senator in Tennessee, insisted that McCain was attacking Obama "in harsh, personal terms" and smearing him. But this is patently absurd.
This explosive and close personal relationship, which casts doubt on Obama's judgment and sheds light on what he truly believes about religion, politics and world events, could drive millions of voters away from Obama. But McCain steadfastly won't touch it. Yet Obama relentlessly pounds away at McCain for being a Republican like George W. Bush. Needless to say, this kind of "guilt by association" is perfectly acceptable to the liberal media.
Contrary to Harold Ford's ridiculous assertion, some Republicans are openly wondering if McCain really wants to win.
In some ways, McCain has laid a trap for himself. It is difficult for McCain to label Obama a socialist when he has just come down on the side of Obama and most congressional Democrats and against the House Republican conservatives on the matter of the $700-billion Wall Street bailout.
It didn't have to happen this way. McCain could have voted against a bailout bill that benefitted China. He could have threatened as president to investigate and prosecute those federal officials who let the U.S. become vulnerable to Communist China's holding of U.S. debt and assets. Instead, he called for the head of Christopher Cox of the Securities and Exchange Commission, who is far down the totem pole of responsibility.
McCain had a concrete opportunity to break with Bush and other top officials and he didn't take it. Then, to make matters worse, he used a presidential debate to promote another federal bailout of bad mortgages. He was trying to move to the left of Obama. No wonder Republicans at McCain's town hall meetings are frustrated.
Having realized that McCain blew an opportunity to come down on the side of the American people by opposing the bailout, McCain's top advisers, who will return to their lucrative lobbying practices no matter who wins on November 4, have apparently decided that all they can do now is question a few of Obama's associates. The timing is bad and it looks like too little and too late. But it is still worthwhile to get the information out on the table. After all, the American people are entitled to know the truth about their next Commander-in-Chief.
However, one of the most glaring taboo topics, even for the McCain campaign, has been Frank Marshall Davis, the black communist "poet" and "journalist" who mentored Obama in Hawaii for about eight years. Davis was under investigation by the FBI for 19 years. His 600-page FBI file notes that he was even considered by his fellow communist comrades as anti-white. The Davis relationship helps explain why Obama would later attend and belong to Wright's church, where he would get married and have his children baptized.
Much is known about Obama being in the middle of two communist networks, one in Hawaii involving Davis, and the other in Chicago, involving Wright and terrorist Bill Ayers and the crook Tony Rezko. The pattern of controversial connections occurs over a 30-year period. But the Obama campaign has been quick to label any critical reports, no matter how factual and accurate, as "smears" and "personal attacks" and "guilt by association." The media echo these allegations and refuse to dig deeper. At this late date in the campaign, there is still a legal controversy brewing over whether Obama was even born in the U.S. and is therefore constitutionally eligible for the office of president. It is certainly suspicious that Obama's "birth certificate" originally surfaced on the Daily Kos website, the source of the false claims that Sarah Palin faked her last pregnancy.
A new book, The Dream Begins, co-authored by a journalist with the Honolulu Advertiser, is the latest example of the preemptive war that is being waged by the Obama campaign and its media supporters. This book acknowledges that Frank Marshall Davis helped "shape" Obama's world view but insists that Davis wasn't a communist, only a civil rights activist. In fact, Davis was identified by congressional committees, as well as his own biographer, John Edgar Tidwell, as a Communist Party member. Davis was also part of the "Toward Soviet America" movement. His FBI file suggests possible espionage activity on behalf of the Soviet Union.
Equally shocking, Davis was a sexual pervert and pornographer whose autobiographical Sex Rebel book describes having sex with a child. Leaving aside the personal nature of whatever may have occurred-and Obama has never been asked about it-don't voters have a right to know to what extent Obama has adopted Davis's attitudes about sexual libertinism?
In the context of cultural and moral issues, the McCain campaign aired a mild but misleading ad accusing Obama of supporting sex education for children. The broader concern is that Obama favors the homosexual and abortion rights movements, and wants open homosexuals in the U.S. military. But these seem to be "taboo" topics for the McCain campaign.
Even the McCain campaign's belated attacks on Obama associate Ayers are missing the mark. He wasn't just a "domestic terrorist" and didn't just run a "violent left-wing activist group," as a McCain ad says. Ayers and his wife Bernardine Dohrn were communist terrorists with links to foreign communist regimes in Hanoi and Havana. Declassified intelligence information also demonstrates links between their Weather Underground terrorist movement and the Communist Party USA and the intelligence services of Cuba and the Soviet Union. They succeeded in forcing a U.S. military withdrawal from Vietnam, resulting in hundreds of thousands of "boat people" and political prisoners in Vietnam and over a million dead at the hands of the communist Khmer Rouge in neighboring Cambodia. McCain should know all of this. After all, he was in the middle of it.
Yet the McCain ad is so careful not to offend Obama that it says that his friendship with Ayers "isn't the issue" and that the controversy is whether Obama has been truthful about his relationship with the terrorist. So if Obama had been honest about associating with a terrorist it would be all right? The ad fails to make the basic point that Ayers was a member of a communist movement that aided the enemies of the United States-and that he and his wife are still members of this movement. What's more, the ad fails to connect Ayers to Davis and Wright.
As I discovered, when I attempted to interview Ayers at his university office, his views haven't changed since the time he and his wife were bombing federal buildings and police stations. I took photos of the left-wing, pro-homosexual, anti-Israel and Marxist propaganda plastered outside his office door. One big poster highlights an Ayers visit to see his "education" comrades in Hugo Chavez's Venezuela. It is there for anyone to see. But the eyes of the media, of course, are looking elsewhere.
When anti-communist analysts and security experts examine Obama's history of associations with unsavory characters and communist figures, and his open backing from an assortment of communist and socialist groups and individuals, they have to wonder if Obama is a Marxist mole or a communist collaborator. The answer has to be somewhat speculative because, as a candidate, Obama doesn't have to undergo a background security check. As president, however, he will have instant access to our most closely guarded and classified state secrets. If the truth comes out then, it will be too late.
Many current and former officials have expressed alarm about Obama avoiding a background investigation. One said, "I used to have top secret clearance, and if I had the contacts that Obama had, I would not have gotten that clearance."
John W. Slagle, a retired career federal law enforcement agent, who said that he had held "secret" and above security clearances for over 30 years, pointed out that the questionnaire for obtaining working clearances at the National Security Agency (NSA) is clear and concise in every area. He explained, "Persons known with possible criminal contacts to personal problems, misdemeanors, to any ‘gray' areas in a person's past, are grounds to revoke a NSA security clearance until the problem is explained and examined in great detail."
"For those of us, current and prior military, federal law enforcement agents who hold or have held Secret and above NSA classifications, our continuing re-investigations year-to-year never end," he said.
But the media ignore this aspect of Obama. Instead, they would prefer to focus on matters such as what Sarah Palin did to protect her family from a state trooper with personal problems.
On the American Thinker website, Professor Paul Kengor has attempted to explain why information about Obama's controversial connections to communists like Ayers and Davis has "failed to resonate beyond the political right" and make headlines in the major media. He believes that the history and truth about communism are not taught by our educators.
But this goes beyond media ignorance. How, for example, does one explain Newsweek's editor, Jon Meacham, writing an article about Obama that mentions Davis but insists that Davis was the victim of a false charge of being a communist? Somebody like Meacham has to have some elementary awareness of the bloody record and failures of communism. A simple Google search would disclose Davis's communist affiliations. But Meacham decided that the best way to handle this information was through deceit and cover-up. He didn't want his readers to know the truth.
Bill O'Reilly of the Fox News Channel has berated Meacham for moving Newsweek in a left-wing direction but O'Reilly hasn't been much better than Meacham in getting out the facts about Davis. His producers have made it clear they will not examine Obama's "Sex Rebel" mentor in any detail. Sex sells, except when it involves Obama's communist mentor.
There seems to be a desire, at least in the case of Fox News, to avoid being labeled a "McCarthyite" or "red-baiter." This shows how the attitudes of the liberal-left even taint and shape the coverage of a so-called "conservative" news channel.
Senator McCain, who was tortured by communists as a prisoner of war, should understand what is at stake far better than most people. But he doesn't seem to want to go there. Indeed, conservatives who raise any of these taboo topics are likely to get criticized by McCain.
No wonder some Republicans are acting mad as hell at his town hall meetings. They have an economic system that is being transformed into socialism under a Republican Administration while their presidential candidate seems to be clueless through it all.