A quarterback looks out over the defense to see telltale signs. In a presidential election, keep an eye on the NY Times. Today, they published a story minimizing the contact between Barack Obama and unrepetent domestic terrorist Bill Ayers.
The Times knows attacks are coming at Obama on Ayers so it is laying down a protective shield. Already, today, other mainstream press is using the Times report to defend Obama.
The problem is the Times report is a shoddy piece of work that essentially says that Obama and Ayers only "crossed paths" since their introduction in 1995. The overall characterization of their relationship and the year of their meeting are almost certainly false. A couple of convincing takedowns of the NY Times story can be found here and here. A good roundup can be found at JustOneMinute blog. A compilation of relevant articles can be found here.
Just like with Tony Rezko, the Obama campaign has issued a series of incomplete and false characterizations of the Obama-Ayers relationship. Considering the rolling disclosures made in the Rezko relationship, why should believe the slow answers we are getting now? We still don't have good answers from Obama on questions such as:
1. Why would you associate with an unrepetent terrorist who posed for a picture in Chicago Magazine standing on an American flag? The Obama campaign has not denied contacts between 2001 and 2005.
2. Have you and Michelle socialized with Ayers and his terrorist cohort/wife Bernadine Dohrn? Dinner? Been to each others' homes? We know that Michelle and Dohrn both worked at Sidley & Austin law firm in 1988. We know that Michelle organized a panel on juvenile justice that included her husband and Ayers.
3. Why does your campaign insist that Ayers, who founded the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, a $160 million education grant program, had nothing to do with recommending Obama for chairmanship of the organization's board. The Obama campaign has answered few questions about the relationship in general but has specifically said the board chairmanship was recommended by someone else. It is simply implausible that Ayers had no role in picking Obama chairman. Which leads to the next question: Why?
4. Has David Axelrod been in contact with Ayers?
5. When is the candidate himself going to answer these questions instead of his spokesman?
6. Why is the Chicago Tribune completely uninterested in this story. Instead, it is examining Wasilla, Alaska board minutes for some of the silliest and most irrelevant stories of the campaign season.