Obama Challenges Radio Station For Airing Ayers Smears

Chicago Tribune:

Just hours after Democrats formally nominated Barack Obama for president, his campaign launched a call-in offensive to WGN radio to protest the appearance Wednesday night of a conservative Obama critic on the "Extension 720 with Milt Rosenberg" talk show.

"WGN radio is giving right-wing hatchet man Stanley Kurtz a forum to air his baseless, fear-mongering terrorist smears," Obama's campaign wrote Wednesay in an e-mail urging supporters to flood the stations phone lines with complaints. "He's currently scheduled to spend a solid two-hour block from 9:00 to 11:00 p.m. pushing lies, distortions, and manipulations about Barack and University of Illinois professor William Ayers."

Read the whole story: Chicago Tribune

Comments

[CTmom13]

Why is OK for Ayers to be mentioned, but my posts about McCain's association with G Gordon Liddy are deleted?

[Durango]

If there is any rhyme or reason for them scrubbing posts I can't figure it out.

[CTmom13]

A John McCain supporter advocates killing police officers, even telling people how to do it - "If the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms insists upon a firefight, give them a firefight. Just remember, they're wearing flak jackets and you're better off shooting for the head."

G. Gordon Liddy.

Not four years after Liddy advocated shooting Federal agents in the head, John McCain had a fundraiser at this terrorism advocate's house.

[CTmom13]

A John McCain supporter advocates killing police officers, even telling people how to do it - "If the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms insists upon a firefight, give them a firefight. Just remember, they're wearing flak jackets and you're better off shooting for the head."

G. Gordon Liddy.

A quick search of Opensecrets.org shows that the man who suggested shooting Federal agents in the head in 1994 (when I was alive, and even could legally drink) donated $1000 to John McCain on February 11, 2008
Opensecrets.org doesn't show McCain returning the money of someone who advocates shooting Federal agents in the head.
Not four years after Liddy advocated shooting Federal agents in the head, John McCain had a fundraiser at this terrorism advocate's house.

[DaOne]

All O supporters should contact the advertisers on WGN and tell them to kiss their customer base goodbye.

[DesertLight]

That is beyond laughable. OK Hysterical. Do you think they are listening anyway? Uh, no!

[DaOne]

Hey go f u c k y o u r s e l f

Hope you are ready to serve in Grandads army? Enlist yet? Don't worry he'll come find you.

[DWP]

As I understand it the Ayers ad is false. I hope he sues them. It is time to put a stop to all these ads who are lies. That goes for both sides.

[Nofuzzydreams]

It is not your or my understanding but the understanding of the courts in our legal system. Everything else is opinion. If you don't like them that's fine but if you try to suppress them you are a communist.

[Durango]

If a radio station airs an ad they know to be false that is libel.

Even if the station had nothing to do with writing the ad.

But talking to the sponsors of a scurrilous ad is another thing altogether.

Granted you are entitled to your opinion. But i am entitled to contest it.

[JJeff88]

WGN has the right to put anyone it wants on the air.

And Sen. Obama and his supporters have an equal right to tell it like it is and voice a loud public complaint.

That's how Democracy is supposed to work.

[frappe]

Yes, we know that your party -- the Republican party -- believes it is okay to lie and deceive your way to an objective. After all, that's exactly what you did with Iraq. America will know your party for what it has become -- a breeding ground for those who promote lies, distortions, and failure.

[rollingdivision]

You'll find that many of those who most stridently rail about the abuses of personal rights by the Bush administration are fine with suppressing freedom of speech when it's speech they don't like.

[Chad53916]

Examples?

[1dogs2]

No, you'll find that we are fine with holding liars and libelers accountable for their conduct. Since libel laws are of little use to public figures, encouraging public outcry is is very nearly the only weapon in a public figure's arsenal. We have no objection to fair comment even when we disagree with the message. It's the dissemination of lies and the corruption of public discourse we object to.

[milo9]

He should have equal air time for rebuttal.

[Pquilson]

They were offered to have an Obama person there to debate and rebut. Obama campaign declined the offer.

[DesertLight]

He hasn't even gotten in power yet and he is already pi$$ing on the Constitution.

[DaOne]

Slander and libel are not free speech.

[DesertLight]

That would be subject to opinion and very hard to prosecute. The thing is you folks can say and make up whatever you want against the other team and it is called "truth." Yet, when anyone has another opinion of your team is is called a 'smear" and now r@cism is attached for spite.

[Nofuzzydreams]

Then he should find recourse in the legal system. Because whether it is free speech or slander is a matter of opinion that only the courts can decide in our constitutional system.

[gappedtoothgodwarrior]

How so, freedom of speech isn't also freedom from criticsim of said speech.

[DesertLight]

They you can cancel all the cable news shows right now.

[Eoin45]

Is that how Jesus would have put it oh Christian one? DaOne is right and it's you who doesn't understand the constitution.

[DesertLight]

"You shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free."

What are you afraid of?

[cyndeewi]

You don't even know the first line in the constitution desertlight, if you did you would know that Obama has a constiutional right to try and stop lies.

[DesertLight]

140 boxes of info came out this week with details of O's relationship with an known terrorist. i think the American public has a right to know about that relationship.

[american2008]

Pi$$ing on the Constitution? You have the ball$ to say that after 8 years of Bushy spitting on that document? Alberto the incompotent Gonzalez and spying on Americans? The list would be too long to review all the pi$$ing bushy did on this country.

[DesertLight]

That is precisely WHY I am saying it.

I am not defending anything that W did. You make that assumption. This is not about him. It is about protecting the fourth estate. Which you SHOULD be doing.

[UnbiasView]

Anyone find it strage that a potential President of the USA is trying to cut off the free speech rights?

[DesertLight]

Uh YEAH, it would appear that those who have been droning on with their endless W rantings about the Constitution might show more concern.

[Eoin45]

It would be even better if those who've not been droning on about free speech would get some understanding of it. I address this to Unbias, Dessert and Rolling Div. No one has a right to a platform for their speech. All are free to speak as they please but there is no entitlement to do it on a radio or TV show. I thought you guys were strict constructionists?

[wizardofoz]

What constitution?

[kellygrrrl]

I appreciate that someone with a voice is finally standing up to the Propaganda Machine.

Many people are sick and tired of the Faux Media and the dumbing down of America.

Smear Merchants and Hate Peddlers need to be called out and exposed.

[Maka]

Not if it's more lies and fear tactics, like the right are so fond of spreading. Are things like the "terrorist fist jab" free speech, or hate speech? I say the later and should not be allowed on the airwaves.

[american2008]

Ok, I take it that if someone went on the air and said that you had a friendship with an Osama Bin Laden associate and had no proof except you happened to be at a party that this guy was at, would that be free speech? Besides, read the darn article, it say's that they want to organize to confront the liar, since when is confronting liars against the Constitution? Bill Orally sends out idiots with cameras to peoples houses and confronts them when he disagrees with them, whats the difference?

[Grunty1]

Can anyone find a troll that understands what Freedom of Speech means?

Boycotting and protesting certainly fall well within Freedom of Speech. Lies and slander, do not.

[JiminNC]

Looks like the LA Times needs a little muscle as well. They should have "passed" on this story too.

[BethinIllinois]

It is not a smear. It was supposed to be a conversation about the Annenberg Challenge and Obama's work with Bill Ayers.

Is no one uncomfortable with Obama's overreaction and intimidation of those who disagree with him? I am simply amazed that people apparently think this is anything other than suppression of free speech.

I am about to listen to the radio station's midday show discuss this issue. I am listening with interest. (Hasn't started yet, at this moment, though.)

[kellygrrrl]

are you amazed that People are sick and tired of the Media and what they have become?

are you amazed that Americans are fed up with the LIES and the LYING LIARS and Smear Merchants and Hate Peddlers?

Are you amazed that people are standing up and refusing to be dumbed down?

I'm amazed ...

[DamageControl]

OMG i'm so concerned.

[vaughan]

I'm glad Obama is fighting back against the smears! It's his reputation and he has every right to organize a push-back against these smear artists. The right wing works the media refs all the time.

What bothers me is that McCain's campaign routinely lies in its ads and through surrogates on TV, and that gets a free pass.

[DesertLight]

All opposing voices must be silenced!

[kellygrrrl]

All Liars and Smear Merchants and Propagandists and Hate Peddlers must be called out
and exposed

[DesertLight]

Exposing them is one thing, silencing them is another. There is an obvious relationship that O had with Ayers that he dismissed and this week 140 boxes of info were released. The American public has a right to that info.

You must be as afraid as O and his team are.

[sarasotajeff]

calling out lies is not pi$$iing onthe constituti­on... it IS free speech.
he's not trying to have anyone silenced - just calling out the lies, asking others to be loud about this kind of hate-mongering.
Saying someone is lying - which Obama has so, so many opportunities to do - is NOT infringing on anyone's right to free speech. It's calling lies lies and calling hate hate and pointing out the stupidity of people who line up to repeat lies because their upstanding right wing a$$hole told them to

[Grunty1]

You have every right to say what you want.

You have no rights that others must pay or give time for your words.

[DesertLight]

The quit whining and move on.

[ShamusNYC]

What should be done is a boycott of Fox news & their advertisers for all the falsehoods they prompt.

Particular attention should be paid to the supporters of Corsi - like Hann-hatey.

Perhaps after the elections - particularly if O wins - they'll start the effort to take down these hypocrites, bigots, and racists. Maybe let Jon Stewart led the charge? He seems to be the guy with the biggest spine on this issue.

Faux News: promoters of a kinder, gentler facism

[UnbiasView]

So take down free speech because you don't like it . . .

[vaughan]

You don't get it. Protesting is free speech. You're saying you'd like to stop the protesting?? Very selective use of the First Amendment, bub.

[sarasotajeff]

how, at this point, do you have NO understanding of the concept of "free speech"??
exercising your own does not equate to trying to cancel anyone else's !

[gappedtoothgodwarrior]

Freedomn of speech does not mean freedom to have one's speech unchallenged or for people to mutely accept anything you say. You are free to say your piece and others are free to critascise you for saying it.

You also do not have the right to your own facts and if you are factualy inccorrect then you can expect to be challeneged.

[ShamusNYC]

Uh, no. If I was against free speech I would have said to outlaw and criminalize the existance of Faux news.

People who do not like their rhetoric are free to withdraw their support - direct and indirect.

For example, if you don't like a newspaper you won't buy it (direct) and if you really find it offensive you will not patronize the paper's supporters (indirect).

The paper - unlike in totalitarian states- still has the right to exist & people can still express their opinions.

The first amendment does not guarantee that America will provide venues for anything anyone wants to say. You have a right to say what you want and it is up to you to find the resources to get your message out.

It's great that you offer unbiased views - but they really should be informed. Otherwise, you run the risk of diminishing the strength of your arguments en masse.

[Nofuzzydreams]

And CNN too for the lies they propagate everyday.

[DesertLight]

they'll start the effort to take down these hypocrites, bigots, and racists

Precisely my post. Do I care that people are protesting, NO. But, the attitude that you pose is gaining more attention. I fear for silencing the right to speak. Anyone who has an issue with any point of O's policies or past is considered a r@cist to you folks.

[shubes61]

if i lived in chicago, i'd be happy to demonstrate against that jerk.

[BLinCincinnati]

They need to pass legislation to stop this kind of smear tactics using proven lies. I don't understand how slander and liable laws don't stop this kind of stuff. If they said this stuff about anyone but a politician they'd be sued for millions and shut down.

[k6007]

Reinstate the 'fairness doctrine', and 'truth in advertising laws.'
We are in serious need of media reform.

[vaughan]

I agree. People (and companies, for that matter) should not be allowed to smear others and lie.

[Freesia2]

Agreed. Last time I checked, you can't just print or broadcast blatant lies. It's character assassination and I thought there were laws on the books about this.

Another thing that's really bugging me about the press these days is that no one ever prints a retraction. They may remove the offending article, but they rarely follow up with a "Oops. Our bad" statement to re-educate anyone who got incorrect information.

Technically, he should sue them. I guess that would get messy mid capaign and draw more attention to the whole thing. But this sort of thing is just a dirty business. The press has protections because they have a job to do. But they're not doing their jobs.

[UnbiasView]

What on the Ayers ad is a proven lie?

I haven't heard it.

[Grunty1]

Take your fingers out of your ears, then.

[Nofuzzydreams]

Problem is none of it is a lie . Fact - Ayers was a terrorist. Fact - Ayers is not repentant. Fact - Obama associate dwith Ayers and it was more than just casual as these documents show.

[american2008]

Fact - Ayers was NEVER convicted of any terrorist act! Those so called documents dont prove anything! Fact- You are an idiot!
Fact- McCain was associated with Keating 5 scandal and was a corrupt Senator in the 80's. There are thousands of pages of documents that support McSames illegal activites, oh yes he wasn't convicted was he, but that doesn't make any difference does it?

[Makesense]

good