1000 Doors for Obama — 1 month, 1000 doors, $5000

21 days left: Scary Associations Edition, oh yea, and he’s a Muslim.
October 14, 2008, 1:16 pm
Filed under: Uncategorized

Over four years ago, right after the speech at the 2004 DNC that would launch Obama into national prominence, we first heard the whispers that would pervade the underbelly of the narrative even to this day:  

“Obama is a Muslim who has concealed his religion.”

That idea was picked up in the right-wing blogosphere, and spread like wildfire through the ‘tubes, and just last week, a woman at a McCain rally stood up and said “I’ve read about him, and he’s an Arab.”  

Where did this rumor come from?  We now know that it was started by Andy Martin, who appeared on Sean Hannity’s fear-peddling and bigoted one-hour anti-Obama-fest Sunday show, “Hannity’s America” (because a daily 1 hour TV show and a daily 3 hour radio show just isn’t quite enough time for all the hatred – you need that extra hour on Sunday for the really dirty stuff), with the chyron displaying his name along with the title “Author & Journalist” (this will be funny (if it weren’t so sad) later).

Ok, so who is Andy Martin?  

The New York Times has a nice expose out yesterday on Andy Martin, which is worth a read in full, but I’ll excerpt a bit here:


An examination of legal documents and election filings, along with interviews with his acquaintances, revealed Mr. Martin, 62, to be a man with a history of scintillating if not always factual claims. He has left a trail of animosity — some of it provoked by anti-Jewish comments — among political leaders, lawyers and judges in three states over more than 30 years.

He is a law school graduate, but his admission to the Illinois bar was blocked in the 1970s after a psychiatric finding of “moderately severe character defect manifested by well-documented ideation with a paranoid flavor and a grandiose character.”

Though he is not a lawyer, Mr. Martin went on to become a prodigious filer of lawsuits, and he made unsuccessful attempts to win public office for both parties in three states, as well as for president at least twice, in 1988 and 2000. Based in Chicago, he now identifies himself as a writer who focuses on his anti-Obama Web site and press releases.

Mr. Martin, in a series of interviews, did not dispute his influence in Obama rumors.

“Everybody uses my research as a takeoff point,” Mr. Martin said, adding, however, that some take his writings “and exaggerate them to suit their own fantasies.”

As for his background, he said: “I’m a colorful person. There’s always somebody who has a legitimate cause in their mind to be angry with me.”


So we’ve got a virulently anti-semitic nutcase, who is a perennial political candidate, has run for office on the platform of “exterminating Jew power”, and has filed enough lawsuits, many of them against judges for unfavorable outcomes of previous lawsuits (and not without the requisite anti-semitic slurs towards said judges), that he can no longer do so without approval, given a national platform with millions of viewers to spook jewish voters into thinking Obama is a Muslim.  Again from the NYTimes article:


A motion he filed in a 1983 bankruptcy case called the judge “a crooked, slimy Jew who has a history of lying and thieving common to members of his race.”

In another motion, filed in 1983, Mr. Martin wrote, “I am able to understand how the Holocaust took place, and with every passing day feel less and less sorry that it did.”


Oh, and the ‘author and journalist’ stuff – that refers to his random anti-Obama press releases (a la Obama is a Muslim) and his book which is no doubt about as well-researched as all the rest of the random crap he sputters.  And his citation for where he got his ‘Obama is a Muslim’ rap?  From the Nation magazine:

When I asked Martin for the source of his allegations about Obama’s past, he told me they came from “people in London, among other places.” Why London, I asked? “I started talking to them about Kenyan law. Every little morsel led me a little farther along.”

Um, Ok, I heard from ‘some people in Durham’ that Andy Martin is a racist and anti-semitic lying sack of crap.

So back to Hannity’s Hate-Filled Hour of hate.  Andy Martin is now pushing the latest meme – that Obama is a terrorist-loving radical with scary friends who will no doubt be given cabinet positions so they can begin their effort to enslave the white race and use home-made bombs to level the cities and towns of America and convert them into Wahabbi terrorist training sites.  Andy Martin (I promise I’m not making this up – although I kinda wish I was) weaves a story worthy of a summer Hollywood blockbuster that (cue scary music and gravelly voiced narrator) after leaving Columbia, Obama (having already met Ayers, of course) was recruited for a small-time job of street-level rabblerousing in Chicago to prove his muster for Ayers as a member of his radical America-hating mafia.  Once he proved his allegiance to Ayers, he’d be able to launch his political career.  Andy Martin finds it completely impossible to believe that someone would actually do something good in the world, without having some devious ulterior motive for the whole thing.  Why would Obama want to leave his nice job in NY to come to Chicago to do so-called community organizing?  Why its simple silly – because he had already met Ayers and subscribed to his radical philosophy and he needed a ground-level entry position in the Ayers mafia so he could work his way up to eventually becoming the president and overthrowing the government!  (duh.)  Oh yea, and Obama lives within a mile of Farrakhan!  Socialist!  Radical!  Once Obama proved himself in Chicago, Ayer’s then funded his way through Harvard law school as his protege (disregard the fact that Obama was still paying off those loans until he wrote his best-selling book).  

A bit about William Ayers – he was an original member of the group the Weather Underground, a militantly anti-Vietnam activist group.  He was investigated for his role in a series of bombings in 1974, and Obama has outwardly and forcefully denounced Ayers’ actions in those turbulent times.   Charges were dropped in his prosecution, and he later rehabilitated and reintegrated back into society as an upstanding member of the Chicago community.  He is now a professor of education at the University of Chicago.

So later in Obama’s career, according to Martin, he graduated in the Ayers mafia to sit on a board with him.  Ok, so what’s the board.  The Chicago Annenberg Challenge is a charity foundation started by Walter Annenberg (a political conservative, by the way), that funded public-school programs in Chicago from it’s inception in 1995 to its dissolution in 2001.  Obama was the chair for the fund for four years (along with a host of other blue-chip, white-collar Chicagoan like the president of Northwestern Univ, former assistant Sec. of Labor in the Nixon administration, the publisher of the Chicago Tribune, venture capitalists, deans, and a host of other upstanding ladies and gents), although an executive director dealt with the day to day operations of the fund.  

The McCain campaign is now running ads claiming that Obama and Ayers “ran a radical education foundation together”.  Let’s break this down shall we.  As I mentioned Obama chaired the foundation for four years, so even though he wasn’t the director, its certainly not a stretch to say he ‘ran’ the foundation.  Ayers, on the other hand, did not run this foundation at all.  He helped secure some of the grant money that got the ball rolling prior to the selection of an executive director, according the man who would eventually take that post, Ken Rolling.  Ayers then became a member of the “collaborative” which was essentially a sounding board for that advised the actual chairs and directors.  Ayers, according to Rolling, “was never on the board of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge” and “never made a decision programmatically or had a vote… He (Ayers) was at board meetings, which, by the way, were open – as a guest.”  Ok, so thats kinda debunked – Ayers, by no stretch of the imagination, helped run this fund.  

But that brings us to the most important part of this whole puzzle – the notion that this fund was ‘radical.’  Now maybe the McCain campaign meant that it was just so totally freakin sweet in an 80’s spiked hair skateboarding thrasher kinda radical way, but somehow I doubt it.  The McCain campaign cites as evidence for this claim a 1995 invitation from the foundation for applications from schools “that want to make radical changes in the way teachers teach and students learn.”  It also cited two projects funded by the foundation – one having to do with a United Nations-themed Peace School and another that focused on African-American Studies.  So maybe it wasn’t radical in the skateboard sense, but it certainly wasn’t radical in the “advocating extreme measures to retain or restore a politcal state of affairs”.  What it was – also according to Webster’s dictionary – perhaps, was radical in that it referred to “a considerable departure from the usual or traditional”.  The notion that encouraging schools, through grants, to partner with scaaary external groups like the United Nations, the Chicago Symphony, the Univ. of Chicago, Loyola Univ, the Chicago Children’s Museum, the Field Museum, and the Logan Square Neighborhood Association, among others, to come up with innovative ways of learning to improve the scholastic environment is somehow outside the mainstream is patently ridiculous.  Not 60’s era, bomb-throwing, Weather Underground radical, but wow that’s a really unique, new, and radical way of thinking about something that may just be crazy enough to work radical.  These views on education, while certainly radical in the out-of-the ordinary sense, were in no way whatsoever extensions of Ayer’s radical-in-the-fringe-political-chaos sense – and this is the root of the association.

That is why, in an article by Politifact.com (where a lot of this information was sourced) investigating this so-called radical association, they come to the conclusion that not only is this a misleading statement, not only is this in fact a lie, but it is a malicious attempt to unfairly tar Obama (not to mention a slew of other upstanding Chicagoans) with this stigma of political radicalism and financing thereof, where all the evidence points to the mission as “nothing more than improving ailing public schools in Chicago”, and they conclude that this association is, quote, “Pants on Fire wrong.”  

Now, why the hell did I spend 2 days writing this.  Here’s why:

This is getting ugly, and I don’t like it.  In McCain’s defense, that video was created a couple of days ago, and since then he’s admonished a crowd member for calling Obama an Arab (albeit by saying no, he’s a decent man, as though Arab and decent are opposites, or as though Arab or Muslim is a disqualifier for higher office… but thats another story… and by the way, his admonishment was accompanied by boo’s from the crowd for calling Obama decent).  But this is getting scary.  We are 21 days out now from election day, and we have crazy mobs of people who actually believe that someone who is in all likelihood going to be our next president is a terrorist.  McCain needs to immediately crush these accusations and publicly and forcefully denounce all of his supporters that engage in this.

This is not a partisan thing.  I don’t care if those people dislike Obama’s policies, or even dislike his character and persona, and I don’t care if they don’t vote for him – that’s totally fine (and in fact, very American).  But giving proven anti-semites free reign on cable television to incite this hatred (and feign concern for the Jewish community in the process – which makes me completely sick) on Hannity’s Heaping Helping of Horseshit (complete with C-rated porn/slasher-flick background music), is not only bad television, but its indefensible.  And to use that platform insinuate that he is a terrorist is beyond the pale, un-American at its core, and could, as many of those pundits in the above clip mention, lead to violence.

Update:  One last thought here.  This is clearly a distraction technique.  Getting people whipped up about these non-issues is an attempt to steer your mind away from the crumbling economy, out-dated infrastructure, our two wars abroad, our sagging reputation around the world, and the myriad other problems facing Americans on a day-to-day basis.  Any day spent talking about Ayers or Wright or whatever else is a day not spent talking about the solutions for America, which is a truly cynical way to campaign.  And with only three weeks left in this campaign, time is a premium.


3 Comments so far
Leave a comment

Nice site. Theres some good information on here. Ill be checking back regularly.

Comment by Jeff Atkinson

Dahhh!!!!!!! Right now, I think my feelings towards this and these people are best emoted by Cartman in this clip.

Comment by David

[…] Chatter David on 21 days left: Scary Associatio…The Mad Afrikan on My Thoughts on “that…jchap on My Thoughts on […]

Pingback by Debate Reactions: Joe the Plumber Edition « 1000 Doors for Obama — 1 month, 1000 doors, $5000

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: