Why Obama's Associations Matter

It matters who a politician associates himself with. Now, it may not matter if those associations were 50-60 years ago, as were Democratic Senator Robert Byrd's associations with the Ku Klux Klan, as the person's ideology may have changed radically since then, but if those associations were within the last decade or so, they are important. If they were in the last year or two, even more so. The reason why they are important is because it tells you something about the person's character and his ideology. A politician with a radical ideology is not going to advertise that ideology in a democratic election -- especially in the U.S. Such a politician is going to try to hide his basic ideology, while writing laws and voting in ways that reflect that ideology. But a few things will let us know what he really believes. One of those things is the people and organizations with whom he associates.

William Ayers was a member of The Weather Underground. They were a radical Leftist group who organized a riot in Chicago and performed several bombings. They believed that there should be a revolutionary war against the U.S. government and against the capitalist system. "Their founding document called for the establishment of a "white fighting force" to be allied with the "Black Liberation Movement" and other "anti-colonial" movements[2] to achieve "the destruction of US imperialism and achieve a classless world: world communism."[3]" (Wikipedia). Bill Ayers said in 2001 that he was not ashamed of what he had done, and in fact wishes he had done more.

Of course, Bill Ayers is now a Distinguished Professor in the College of Education at the University of Illinois at Chicago. As a professor of education, he has pushed for teaching for social justice (which is code for promoting a communist world view), urban educational reform (which has amounted to pushing schools to teach social justice -- his organization, of which Obama was chairman, never put up a dime for math, science, reading, writing, or anything else associated with education, but did push for teaching social justice), and helping children in trouble with the law (mostly by pushing to eliminate any sort of punishment or responsibility for their crimes). Ayers primarily sees his role as teaching teachers to be advocates for the communist world view.

Obama chaired the board of Ayers' organization, the Chicago Annenberg Challenge Project, which oversaw the distribution of funds to promote the communist-social justice world view in the schools. In 1995, the same year he described himself in an interview as considering himself a communist, Ayers hosted "a coffee" that launched Obama's political career. Between 2000 and 2002, both served together on the board of the Woods Fund of Chicago, an anti-poverty group.

Certainly being an associate of a man who is an admitted communist who believed there should be violent war against the U.S. and the capitalist system does not mean that Obama is a communist himself. But why would Ayers have him as the chairman of the board of his organization, or be the host of the meeting that launched Obama's career if Ayers did not think Obama agreed with him in deep, fundamental ways?

Of course, if Ayers were the only association Obama had with radicals, perhaps we could brush it away as almost coincidental. Certainly my having gay friends doesn't make me gay (of course, being gay isn't an ideology, either). But one would have a lot more explaining to do when it comes to the church Obama spend several years attending Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago, led by Rev. Wright. The admitted theology of Trinity is that of black liberation theology. This theology sees blacks as being oppressed by whites, and thus perpetuates the victimhood of African-Americans. James Cone, a founder of this movement, said that African Americans must be liberated from social, political, economic and religious bondage. Thus, for him, Christian theology is one of liberation -- "a rational study of the being of God in the world in light of the existential situation of an oppressed community, relating the forces of liberation to the essence of the gospel, which is Jesus Christ." It is founded in Liberation Theology, which was a Latin American Catholic movement that sought to unify Marxism with Christian theology (the Catholic Church does not consider Liberation Theology to be at all legitimate, and people have been excommunicated over it). Black Liberation Theology seeks to add the element of race to the mix. As such, it openly promotes Marxist and racist views. Obama could not have sat in that church for as long as he did without understanding the fundamental world view of that church and its theology. When he says he didn't, he is lying.

In 1995, Obama also sought the endorsement of The New Party (since defunct), a pro-Marxist political party. He did in fact receive their endorsement, along with that of the Democratic Socialists of America. So certainly, there can be little doubt about Obama's ideology.

One final connection we need to make is Obama's connection to pro-communist Kenyan Prime Minister Odinga, the man behind the riots in Kenya after he did not win the Presidential race there. It seems that Obama was advising Odinga prior to the election, even knowing that Odinga was using racially divisive tactics (which led to the riots and murders) and promises of enacting Sharia law in Kenya to get Moslem votes. After the election and during the subsequent riots, Joe Klein of Time Magazine reported that "In the days since his Iowa victory, Obama has had near-daily conversations with the U.S. Ambassador in Kenya or with opposition leader Raila Odinga. As of late this afternoon, before his rally in Rochester, N.H., Obama was trying to reach Kenyan President Kibaki." He had been in near-daily contact with Odinga, but hadn't even reached Kibaki? Doesn't that seem odd? Not when you realize that Obama has been advising Odinga and is a member of Odinga's tribe. Of course, Klein sees this work as admirable, but the fact is that Obama's connection to Odinga is very disturbing. It's yet another Marxist connection, and one that again involves racially-divisive politics.

One could also go into the corruption of Chicago politics, which Obama could not have escaped, being a Chicago politician. One could also go into his association with ACORN and the fact that it is currently engaged in highly unethical practices in registering voters for Obama. Many of the people with whom he associates or associated himself with, whether Rezko or Franklin Raines, whose decisions caused the current financial crisis, are also deeply corrupt individuals -- which should also speak to his character (or at least judgement of character). But for my money, his associations with people engaged in kleptocratic-style corruption pales in comparison with his associations with Marxists throughout his life. Apparently he has not gotten the message that Marxism does not work and that it results in dictatorships and the destruction of democracies. Well, perhaps he has gotten the message on that last point.