Video: Black Educator Catches Bill Ayers Lying About Charter Schools

Bill Ayers can’t tell the truth to save his life. He pretends to be anti-government, but wants to “invest more” in failing public schools while being anti-charter school. “Afro-Conservative” goes through the trouble of pointing out exactly where Ayers was wrong/lying in her excellent video, via Breitbart TV:

She says, “when white liberals are against options that help poor minorities (charter schools and vouchers)…it makes me wonder”.

Yeah, it makes me wonder why anyone believes a single thing this particular white lib says.

Marxists understand that  the masses have to be ignorant and propagandized in state schools in order for them to win totalitarian rule.

Linked by Michelle Malkin in Buzzworthy, and The Other McCain in Live at Five, thanks!



Wisconsin Republicans Need Your Help

They are on the front lines, and they are in trouble:

Wisconsin Republicans are being far outspent by unions and other far left groups.

Salena Zito writes at RCP:

Wisconsin has what can only be described as a screwy recall law; get enough signatures on a petition and you can trigger new elections.

Democrats hope to use this law to undo the GOP’s statehouse majority.

Recall elections could begin as early as June for 16 targeted Wisconsin state senators — eight Republicans who voted in favor of the law that ends most collective bargaining powers for public-employee unions, and eight Democrats who ran and hid in Illinois in what turned out to be a failed attempt to keep GOP lawmakers from voting on the measure.

When Republicans won big in 2010, Wisconsin was the best example of that midterm wave and the most significant warning to President Obama’s re-election campaign: Wisconsin’s three-term Democrat U.S. Sen. Russ Feingold went down and the GOP took the governor’s mansion, two more congressional seats and state legislative majorities.

All in a state that Al Gore, John Kerry and Barack Obama won as Democrat presidential candidates.

While Wisconsin’s story fell off the front page, the left — fueled by unions, the Democratic Governors Association and — has begun a multimillion-dollar TV campaign to support the audacious recall effort.

The only Republican strategy — and money — machine that really seems to understand the potential effect is the Republican State Leadership Committee (RSLC) headed by Ed Gillespie, former national GOP chairman. The RSLC is so worried that it is making an unusual mid-cycle investment of money that it could have used in 2012.

Unions and the left are far outspending pro-business interests and the right on recall ads.

Democrats are wise to see more at stake than a single state Senate majority and a new political map that could unseat two freshmen Republican congressmen. They know this is the first battle of 2012 — their version of 2010’s surprise election of Scott Brown, R-Mass., who won a blue-state U.S. Senate seat formerly held by Democrat Ted Kennedy.

Republicans won in Massachusetts because conservatives around the country poured money into Brown’s campaign; he raised a million bucks a day and couldn’t spend it all.

His opponent, Democrat Margaret Coakley, was strapped and forced to beg money from Washington lobbyists in the race’s last 10 days, which Brown quickly used in a commercial against her.

Massachusetts Democrats got ambushed. Will Republicans let that happen to them in Wisconsin?

This will have a chilling effect on every other state dealing with public-employee collective bargaining or pensions in the next two years — which is just about all of them.

If Walker and other governors cannot tame public pensions and union contracts, you will see tax hikes enacted under freshmen GOP governors across the country in the next few years. It is simple math.

You can donate, here. It’s important that Wisconsin Republicans get out of state donations, because instate donations have been suppressed due to union threats.

See also:

Robert Costa, NRO: Wisconsin Fight Goes to Court:

Pressure is mounting on the seven-member high court to weigh in. If they do, the bill risks being overturned. For the moment, judicial conservatives hold a 4–3 edge. But that could flip come April 5, when incumbent justice David Prosser, a former GOP legislator, battles JoAnne Kloppenburg, an environmental lawyer and veteran state attorney, for a ten-year term.

… Prosser’s ability to respond to the rising interest has been hamstrung. He, along with Kloppenburg, is the recipient of public funds — $300,000 for the general election, to be exact — and both have pledged not to spend a dime more. “Looking back, that was one decision they should not have done,” says one state GOP strategist.


The Greater Wisconsin Committee, a leftist organizing group with deep union ties, has funneled $3 million into anti-Prosser advertising, taking relentlessly to the airwaves. “They are the Left’s biggest political player in the state,” says Brett Healy, the president of the MacIver Institute, a Wisconsin-based think tank. “They run the ads that no one else wants to run.”

Indeed. The GWC is airing ads that tie Prosser to the budget bill. “Prosser equals Walker” is the usual theme. But those political attacks are fluff compared with the group’s latest smear, a dimly-lit, creepy spot that casts Prosser as soft on pedophilia. That ad alleges that Prosser, as a local district attorney three decades ago, failed to properly prosecute a Catholic priest accused of molesting several boys. Prosser, according to those who know him, is said to be furious about the ad, angry with its inaccuracies and how it sullies his name.

At a debate late last week, Prosser, his displeasure barely concealed, urged Kloppenburg to ask the GWC to pull the ad. “It is the worst ad that has ever been run in a judicial campaign,” he asserted. Kloppenburg would not budge. “Like it or not, third parties have a right to run ads of their choosing,” she replied.Prosser fired back: “If some third party ran an ad supporting me and attacking you, and it was despicable, and it was a lie, I would stand up and ask that the ad be pulled,” he argued. “You are not willing to do that, even at the request of the victim in the ad?”

Prosser noted that Troy Merryfield, one of the abuse victims, has spoken out against the clip, and in support of Prosser’s decision to not prosecute at the time.

Justice Prosser’s website is here.

Linked by Michelle Malkin, and Doug Ross in Larwyn’s Links, thanks.

Hat tip Charles B.


The Ramifications of Obama’s War On Oil

graphic via

Obama’s anti-drilling policy is drastically hobbling the American oil industry, as the Foundry Reports:

The Obama Administration has already presided over the steepest rise in gas prices since the Carter Administration. And like President Jimmy Carter, PresidentBarack Obama has restricted traditional domestic energy development at every turn. According to the Energy Information Administration, President Obama’s Gulf drilling moratorium will cause domestic offshore oil production to fall 13% this year . Absent the Obama moratorium, the EIA had predicted a 6% increase in offshore production from 2010 levels. That means President Obama’s Gulf moratorium alone will cost American consumers 220,000 barrels of domestic oil production a day.

And the drilling moratorium is having an effect on jobs not only in the Gulf, but throughout the United States:

President Obama’s hometown of Chicago is nearly 1,000 miles from the Gulf of Mexico. But like many other communities across the country, it is suffering the consequences of his Administration’s anti-drilling agenda.

Illinois accounted for $376.2 million in shallow-water drilling expenditures over the past three years, according to an analysis by 14 oil and gas companies that spend money on vendors and subcontractors. The bulk of that money—$242.2 million—was spent in the Chicago district represented by Representative Danny Davis (D–IL).

It’s fresh evidence that Obama’s anti-drilling agenda is having a ripple effect across America since last year’s oil spill, claiming jobs not just in Louisiana and Texas but also in communities far removed from the shipyards in the Gulf of Mexico.

The study from the Shallow Water Energy Security Coalition paints a picture of the nationwide economic ramifications. Obama can’t even be blamed for playing politics. Five of the states that benefit most from shallow-water drilling backed him as a candidate in 2008. And Democrats represent many of the congressional districts that stand to lose millions.

The cost in jobs is startling. A new analysis by Louisiana State University professor Joseph Mason projects national job losses at 19,000 from the drilling moratorium, with wage losses at $1.1 billion. About one-third of those jobs are located outside the Gulf region.

Now why would a guy who wants to be re-elected inflict such a damaging policy on the nation?

PrestoPundit, (who no longer blogs) may have hit on the answer in his last post, 12/04/2008, WHO IS BARACK OBAMA? LET ME TELL YOU:

Obama’s relatives on his mother’s side come out of a natural resource extraction business, the oil business in Kansas.  And when Obama came of consciousness his step-father also worked in an extraction business.  Oil again.  Early in his life Obama, growing in Third World Indonesia with something of a Third World Indonesian’s world view, Obama seems to have equated capitalism and the inequality of capitalism with the wealth disparity created by unequal control of the wealth from oil.  We know that Obama’s mother was hostile toward American’s in the business of oil, and both his grandmother and grandfather seemed hostile to or alienated from the values of oil patch Kansas.  If oil = capitalism, we get a better sense of Obama’s life long commitment to socialism and sharing the wealth.

Notice how Obama seems to be “sharing the oil wealth” with Brazil.

Now, with a seven-year offshore drilling ban in effect off of both coasts, on Alaska’s continental shelf and in much of the Gulf of Mexico — and a de facto moratorium covering the rest — Obama tells the Brazilians:

“We want to help you with the technology and support to develop these oil reserves safely. And when you’re ready to start selling, we want to be one of your best customers.”

Obama wants to develop Brazilian offshore oil to help the Brazilian economy create jobs for Brazilian workers while Americans are left unemployed in the face of skyrocketing energy prices by an administration that despises fossil fuels as a threat to the environment and wants to increase our dependency on foreign oil.

For additional information on Crude Oil Prices, Natural Gas Price, or even Nuclear Energy visit they are a great source for price assessments in the physical energy markets.


It turns out Presto Pundit didn’t disappear off the face of the earth, after all.

You can find him at and

I’ll definitely be checking those out.

Hat tip: Brian B.

Cross-posted at The Minority Report

“Operation Fast and Furious” Needs To Be A Bigger Story

Flopping Aces: What did the President know and when did he know it?

“The Fast and the Furious” was a gun-running program that allowed thousands of AK-47′s to enter Mexico from the United States ostensibly to allow tracking of their movements. At the same time it allows the AK-47′s to go into Mexico, it is the policy of this administration to arm border patrol agents with bean bags as their first line of defense against AK-47′s.

Such policy got border patrol Brian Terry agent killed in December. Terry was killed with one of the assault rifles that this administration sent into Mexico.

As I noted previously, at first this administration denied that it was policy to arm border patrol agents with bean bags to fight AK’s.

That turned out to be false.

Now Barack Obama claims that neither he nor Eric Holder authorized the operation and was quick to make sure he was free of responsibility.

Keep reading.

We already knew that the Obama administration was committed to protecting illegal immigrants and punishing those who want to take a tough stand on illegal immigration…..that’s bad enough – but literally putting guns into the hands of Mexican crime gangs to kill border agents is more than we as citizens should be willing to take. Who can defend this? How badly do these people hate this country?

Doug Ross reported on July 8, 2010: DOJ encourages illegal immigration by Mexican crime gangs

A study released earlier today calculates that illegal immigration costs U.S. taxpayers $113 billion annually… And rather than defending America’s citizens, which is his primary duty under the Constitution, President Obama instead has unleashed a professional defender of terrorists to expand his practice — protecting the Mexican crime gangs who now terrorize the southwest.

Two years into this God-forsaken administration, how many scandals have we already seen?  And how many have been all but ignored by the MSM?

DealergateDOJ Black Panther whitewash, the Obamafication of NEA art, the Sestak affair, the politically expedient IG Gerald Walpin firing, misspent Porkulous funds,  the DOJ’s secret astroturf propaganda unit, the Shorebank scandal, oilgate, Blagojevich Rezko Obama corruption, his  unaccountable Communist czars, and that’s just at the top of my head.

Michelle Malkin had written a 400+page book about the culture of corruption in the Obama administration only six months into his administration. Since then, it’s only gotten worse.

Here’s a website that tabulates all of the Obama administration scandals. They include everything from lies and general incompetency to the major scandals, so naturally the number is in the gazillions.

Darrell Issa has pledged to investigate Operation Fast and Furious, but last summer he also promised to investigate most of the criminal activity on the above list, and we got,  what?

According to an outline of the committee’s hearing topics obtained by POLITICO, the House Oversight and Government Reform is also planning to investigate how regulation impacts job creation, the role of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac in the foreclosure crisis; recalls at the Food and Drug Administration and the failure of the Financial Crisis Inquiry Commission to agree on the causes of the market meltdown. …


Do we the people have any recourse? Do we get to just sit here and watch this stupefying corruption until 2012, knowing there’s no guarantee Obama won’t find a way to steal that election?

Linked by Hyscience, thanks!

Video: After Talking About Revolution, Bill Ayers Tells Audience He Wrote Dreams From My Father

Ayers is just the latest of a long string of lefties talking up revolution. That barely qualifies as news, these days.

But then, Ayers seemed to validate Jack Cashill’s thesis about him writing Obama’s book, Dreams From My Father. He closed by saying the same odd thing he said to Ann Leary in that coffee shop at Reagan International, October 2009; “if you can prove it, we can split the royalties.”  The audience clearly believed he was joking…

Video via Jack Cashill at The American Thinker:

Says Cashill:

With his final comment, the Ayers-friendly audience laughed in relief.  The media will laugh nervously upon seeing the video as well.

The White House will not.Barack Obama knows what I know and what the people who have read my book, “Deconstructing Obama,” know: Bill Ayers is the principal craftsman behind Dreams.  The evidence is overwhelming.

Cashill’s latest book, Deconstructing Obama can be purchased here.

Over at Uncommon Misconceptions, Geoff isn’t buying it: William Ayers Didn’t Affirm Squat

But when I watch the video, it’s clear that Ayers didn’t “retreat into irony.” His statement that he wrote the book was a calculated jab at Cashill: he was ironic from the start, and continued that vein until the session ended. Everybody in the audience took it the same way, laughing at the claims because they think Cashill’s out to lunch.

Except Cashill isn’t “out to lunch”. At all. He’s a reputable research journalist, documentarian, and author of numerous excellent books. His  research is solid, and corroborated by Christopher Anderson,  another author who wrote a book sympathetic to the Obama’s, “Barack and Michelle: Portrait of an American Marriage”:

According to Andersen, Obama was “hopelessly blocked” in his effort to honor the $150,000 contract Simon & Schuster had advanced him after three years of trying.

Obama was particularly worried because he had spent $75,000 of the advance and had produced nothing. In 1993, the publisher canceled the contract but let Obama keep the money after he pled poverty due to “massive student loan debt.”

After his agent secured Obama a smaller contract with the Times Books division of Random House, Barack and Michelle decamped to Bali in the hope that he would be able to finish the book without interruption. That did not happen either.

With the deadline pressing, Michelle recommended that Barack seek advice from “his friend and Hyde Park neighbor Bill Ayers.”

To flesh out his family history, Obama had taped interviews with various family members. Andersen writes, “These oral histories, along with a partial manuscript and a truckload of notes, were given to Ayers.”

Andersen quotes a Hyde Park neighbor: “Everyone knew they were friends and that they worked on various projects together. It was no secret. Why would it be? People liked them both.”

Andersen continues, “In the end, Ayers’ contribution to Barack’s ‘Dreams From My Father’ would be significant – so much so that the book’s language, oddly specific references, literary devices and themes would bear a jarring similarity to Ayerss own writing.”

To his credit, Andersen cites my contribution to his research, but he clearly has access to inside information that I did not have. His level of detail on the mechanics of the transmission goes beyond anything I could have discovered on my own.

Andersen concludes, “Thanks to help from the veteran writer Ayers, Barack would be able to submit a manuscript to his editors at Times Books.”

Cashill has proven his case, already. Ayers wrote the damn book.

Leftists  lie and misdirect as a matter of course. Geoff should know that. Ayers is  having lots of  fun with this issue, tweaking both his political enemies, and the ingrate in the White House at the same time.


Just by way of further explanation: Ayers has a history of peevishly disseminating inconvenient truths. For about two seconds, right after the 2008 election, I had thought that maybe Ayers was an honest commie, because  he had come out and admitted his friendship with the Obama’s, calling them, “family friends”:

Golly gee willickers what’s up with this? The Chicago Tribune reports:

In a new afterword to his 2001 book, Bill Ayers, former leader of the 1960s radical group Weather Underground, describes President-elect Barack Obama as a “family friend” and denies he wished his group had set off more bombs in the 1960s.

Ayers, a professor at the University of Illinois at Chicago, adds few new details about his relationship with Obama in the afterword to Fugitive Days: Memoirs of an Anti-War Activist. The book is being reissued this month.

“We had served together on the board of a foundation, knew one another as neighbors and family friends

But right-wing commentators tried to use those connections to smear Obama, he says.

Of course, this turned out to be a massive blunder on Ayers’ part because the Obama administration had been hotly contesting allegations that they were friends with the Ayers’ for most of the past year. According to Obama’s “Fight the Smears” campaign jokesite, he and Ayers were merely passing acquaintances who happened to work on a board together. Even without Ayers’ friendship claim, we knew that to be complete BS based on the extensive evidence to the contrary that had accumulated.

Anyway, within 24 hours, Ayers had completely changed his story:

Note the unbelievably tortured explanation of  his Obama as “family friend” characterization:

“I’m talking there about the fact that I became an issue unwittingly and unwillingly in the campaign and I decided that I didn’t want to answer any of it at that moment because it was such a profoundly dishonest narrative, but…I’m describing there, uh, how the blogosphere characterized the relationship. I would say…uh…really that we knew each other in a professional way, uh, again, on the same level as thousands of other people … uh, and I am a guy from around the neighborhood, incidentally.”


Wow. I take back what I said about him being a straight shooter. Talk about “profoundly dishonest”.

Also note how the event at his home that he had previously described as a fundraiser, and where he actually donated money to Obama, has become just a small “coffee”, per the Fight the Smears talking points.

Yeah, I’m taking Cashill’s side over this lying d-bag’s.


“uh, and I am a guy from around the neighborhood, incidentally.”

Was Ayers mocking Obama, there? Obama had famously made a similar statement in the Democratic Presidential Debate, April 16, 2008:

STEPHANOPOULOS: Can you explain that (Ayers) relationship for the voters and explain to Democrats why it won’t be a problem?

OBAMA: George, but this is an example of what I’m talking about. This is a guy who lives in my neighborhood, who’s a professor of English in Chicago who I know and who I have not received some official endorsement from. He’s not somebody who I exchange ideas from on a regular basis.

And the notion that somehow as a consequence of me knowing somebody who engaged in detestable acts 40 years ago, when I was 8 years old, somehow reflects on me and my values doesn’t make much sense, George.

Again with the strange dichotomy. Ayers could be tweaking Obama, or he could be tweaking the right wing blogosphere, who made tons of hay over that quote.

“And you know that I wrote it (the book), incidentally?”

Or both…

Cross-posted at NewsReal Blog.

Linked by Michelle Malkin in Buzzworthy, The Lonely Conservative, and Little Miss Attila, thanks!

Hat tip: Brian B.