Perhaps Obama could stop the ritual wringing of hands over negative ads long enough to examine the far more pernicious – “vile” and “sleazy,” even – tactics of his own campaign in systematically shouting down its critics. For the second time in less than a month, Team Barry has sent out an e-mail action alert to Chicago-area supporters instructing them to clog the call-in lines of a local radio show hosting conservative reporters uncovering, ahem, inconvenient truths about Obama. In late August, Stanley Kurtz of National Review appeared on the Milt Rosenberg show, a long-form interview show and Chicago radio staple on WGN. Kurtz had been investigating the connections between Barack Obama and his neighborhood unrepentant terrorist, Bill Ayers. The Obama Action Wire implored impassioned supporters to take a minute to call and counter the “lies, distortions, and manipulations about Barack and University of Illinois professor William Ayers,” by which of course was meant the duly sourced and sober reporting of Kurtz about Obama and Ayers. They clogged all five call-in lines for the show that night, and when their calls were answered, their message was that the interview must stop…well, just because. Last night, they struck again, taking issue with Milt Rosenberg’s hosting of David Freddoso, author of “The Case Against Barack Obama.”
It’s hope mongers vs. hate monger, and the Barack Obama smear-patrol isn’t going to let silly things like open debate or civil discourse get in the way, nosirree. The Obama campaign also isn’t shy about seeking unlikely criminal prosecution of critics to intimidate them. In late August, it submitted a letter to the Department of Justice asking DOJ to look into the American Issues Project, which had aired this ad about Obama’s connection to Bill Ayers. The Obama campaign argued that the newly formed 501 (c) 4 was violating its tax status by airing political ads. In fact, 501 (c) 4s are allowed to run political ads, as long as political activity is not the bulk of their expenditures, and as long as they don’t take corporate money. AIP argues that it is an educational organization, and it has the tax year to spend as much and more on education as it has on ads. The law is likely too ambiguous (lucky for free speech!) to take any action against AIP, least of all criminal action. If Obama were interested in getting something done about the tax status instead of merely intimidating AIP and other issues groups thinking of airing ads, he would have gone to the FEC or the FCC or the IRS. But he didn’t. It’s becoming clear to anyone who’s been paying attention (or who has read Dave’s book), that the “new politics” are just the velvet glove over a pair of old-fashioned Chicago brass knuckles. Update: More on the AIP fight from Allison Hayward in a recent issue of Weekly Standard. (Link corrected.)
