The Times attempts (and fails) to whitewash the Obama/Ayers connection

That's just the sort of thing we would expected from the "leader" of the Tank Media for Obama PR team, isn't it?

Too bad for them that it's so easily blown out of the water.

Ed Lasky:

The New York Times continues its record of agenda-driven journalism in a 'story' about the connections between Barack Obama and unrepentant terroists (and founder of the Weathermen) Bill Ayers which the Times dismisses as inconsequential.

While the Times notes that Barack Obama has 'played down' his 'contacts' with Bill Ayers, this is spin. Indeed just the use of the word 'contacts' gives a flavor to the Times approach: to depict the relationship between Ayers and Barack Obama as episodic. Why not use a fuller term such as 'relationship' which most journalists use to describe the ties between the two?

The Times writes that Ayers is engaged in 'school reform'. That sounds nice except it certainly does not describe Ayers agenda. I guess the Times did not desire to delve further into what type of reform Ayers is advocating-which is the radicalization of our schools and the subversion of our education.

Also, have the journalists considered the fact that relying on people who know both men and Obama campaign representatives may not be the best way to uncover the truth? Rabbi Wolf , for example, is not a reliable source: he is far to the left and is a die-hard Obama supporter. He describes Ayers as a toothless ex-radical. In so far as it relates to planting bombs-true. In so far as it related to trying to indoctrinate our young with far left views -- false.

Nor did the Times bother to examine what sort of activities the Woods Fund supported-like anti-Israel agitprop. The Woods Fund (and its seven directors -- including Obama and Ayers -- who signed off on these grants) funded activities of a group that promoted harsh anti-Israel views that might be seen as countenancing terrorism.

Nor did the Times bother to look at Ayers true views on terrorism."