Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Sunday, May 04, 2008
Steve Chapman :: Townhall.com Columnist
McCain Finds His Own Radical Friend
by Steve Chapman
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


Can a presidential candidate justify a long and friendly relationship with someone who, back in the 1970s, extolled violence and committed crimes in the name of a radical ideology -- and who has never shown remorse or admitted error? When the candidate in question is Barack Obama, John McCain says no. But when the candidate in question is John McCain, he's not so sure.

Obama has been justly criticized for his ties to former Weather Underground member Bill Ayers, who in 1995 hosted a campaign event for Obama and in 2001 gave him a $200 contribution. The two have also served together on the board of a foundation. When their connection became known, McCain minced no words: "I think not only a repudiation but an apology for ever having anything to do with an unrepentant terrorist is due the American people."

What McCain didn't mention is that he has his own Bill Ayers -- in the form of G. Gordon Liddy. Now a conservative radio talk show host, Liddy spent more than four years in prison for his role in the 1972 Watergate burglary. That was just one element of what Liddy did, and proposed to do, in a secret White House effort to subvert the Constitution. Far from repudiating him, McCain has embraced him.

How close are McCain and Liddy? At least as close as Obama and Ayers appear to be. In 1998, Liddy's home was the site of a McCain fundraiser. Over the years, he has made at least four contributions totaling $5,000 to the senator's campaigns -- including $1,000 this year.

Last November, McCain went on his radio show. Liddy greeted him as "an old friend," and McCain sounded like one. "I'm proud of you, I'm proud of your family," he gushed. "It's always a pleasure for me to come on your program, Gordon, and congratulations on your continued success and adherence to the principles and philosophies that keep our nation great."

Which principles would those be? The ones that told Liddy it was fine to break in to the office of the Democratic National Committee to plant bugs and photograph documents? The ones that made him propose to kidnap antiwar activists so they couldn't disrupt the 1972 Republican convention? The ones that inspired him to plan the murder (never carried out) of an unfriendly newspaper columnist?

Liddy was in the thick of the biggest political scandal in American history -- and one of the greatest threats to the rule of law. He has said he has no regrets about what he did, insisting that he went to jail as "a prisoner of war."

All this may sound like ancient history. But it's from the same era as the bombings Ayers helped carry out as a member of the Weather Underground. And Liddy's penchant for extreme solutions has not abated.

In 1994, after the disastrous federal raid on the Branch Davidian compound in Waco, he gave some advice to his listeners: "Now if the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms comes to disarm you and they are bearing arms, resist them with arms. Go for a head shot; they're going to be wearing bulletproof vests. … Kill the sons of bitches."

He later backed off, saying he meant merely that people should defend themselves if federal agents came with guns blazing. But his amended guidance was not exactly conciliatory: Liddy also said he should have recommended shots to the groin instead of the head. If that wasn't enough to inflame any nut cases, he mentioned labeling targets "Bill" and "Hillary" when he practiced shooting.

Given Liddy's record, it's hard to see why McCain would touch him with a 10-foot pole. On the contrary, he should be returning his donations and shunning his show. Yet the senator shows no qualms about associating with Liddy -- or celebrating his service to their common cause.

How does McCain explain his howling hypocrisy on the subject? He doesn't. I made repeated inquiries to his campaign aides, which they refused to acknowledge, much less answer. On this topic, the pilot of the Straight Talk Express would rather stay parked in the garage.

That's an odd policy for someone who is so forthright about his rival's responsibility. McCain thinks Obama should apologize for associating with a criminal extremist. To which Obama might reply: After you.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Steve Chapman is a columnist and editorial writer for the Chicago Tribune.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
 
©Creators Syndicate
Worse yet!
McCain is buds with Kerry.

MUCH more of a condemnation that Liddy.

Response to Column
Mr. Chapman's effort to compare G. Gordon Liddy to Steven Ayers shows a distinct lack of common sense. Had he made the comparison with Reverend Wright, I might have let it slide. For the benefit of Mr. Chapman and any others out there who are drinking the Daily KOS Kool-Aid, there is a difference between extreme speech, non-violent political acts that were criminalized, and the planting of bombs. Words may offend, but bombs maim and kill. Mr. Chapman, please let me know if there is any part of that you have difficulty understanding.

Why does Townhall publish liberal column
Chapman is showing typical leftist moral equivalence. He sounds like that other Democrat stooge Bartlett, who is thankfully no longer pilluting Townhall with "vote Democrat" columns. Liddy never killed anyone, and advocated killing only in self-defence. Nor is he an America-hater who thinks that the American government created AIDS.

More to the point, Liddy wasn't McCain's pastor for 20 years. Liddy didn't perform McCain's marriage ceremonies or baptize his kids.

Lame column
Gee, Chapman, by that "reasoning" I guess the Kennedys (bugging Martin Luther King, Castro assasination plots, etc.) are also the equivalent of the Weather Underground so all Dims who have commented favorably about the Kennedys are also unfit for public office.

While we're on the topic, I guess all those who have "ties" to anyone who has supported an unconstitutional program (not among the "enumerated powers" in the Constitution) is also unfit. That would leave few candidates however, since it describes virtually every Democrat and Republican over the past 75 years.

This column has got to be in the the running for the lamest attempt at "moral equivalence" by a marginal thinker.

Lame column
Gee, Chapman, by that "reasoning" I guess the Kennedys (bugging Martin Luther King, Castro assasination plots, etc.) are also the equivalent of the Weather Underground so all Dims who have commented favorably about the Kennedys are also unfit for public office.

While we're on the topic, I guess all those who have "ties" to anyone who has supported an unconstitutional program (not among the "enumerated powers" in the Constitution) is also unfit. That would leave few candidates however, since it describes virtually every Democrat and Republican over the past 75 years.

This column has got to be in the the running for the lamest attempt at "moral equivalence" by a marginal thinker.

Liberal Logic
Liddy = the likes of Avery, Wright, and Fericon. I love liberal logic, a.k.a rationalization.

"Chapman!! Come Out With Your Hands Up"
this is the Idiot Police....step away from the keyboard....very slowly....we can help you... your mother is on the phone....she wants to speak with you...we have special scissors you can use...stop right where you are...PUT DOWN THAT TONER CARTRIDGE.....OH come on don't snort the toner.....

G Gordon
Liddy would oppose Avery--they are on opposite sides and I am four square with Liddy. At Waco our government burned up 90 Americans after gassing small children and Ruby Ridge is an addendum to that unlawful act by our government. Never in the annals of American history has anyone in government authorized the gassing of children and thereby causing their incapacitation to the point of making escape during a fire impossible. Someone in the Clinton administration made a decision that was tantamount to murder--that person (or persons) is still free. Liddy is right and someone needs to beat that drum.

On His Feet
Steve Chapman is walking in a chicken lot and he is not showing enough care, chicken sh*t is getting on his feet. To equate Ayers and Liddy is like favorably comparing George C. Marshall to Tojo.

Liddy
Liddy was a patriot. What he was doing was wrong and stupid. What information of any value could have been found in the Democratic headquarters? Besides, they would have lost the election anyway, but it wasn't hatred of the U.S. that promoted it. Liddy was punished. Was Ayers? Or the woman?
Liddy didn't roll as John Dean did.

Good Grief.
I don't have a problem with Chapman's columns appearing on Townhall.

Not even a dumb one like this.

Sometimes his columns are good.

I hope we've not descended to "group-think", where only certain views are permitted.

Tacitus X makes a good point.

The Kennedy's did wiretap people. LBJ, Nixon, others, did it too.

Some of Liddy's statements were "over the top", but to paraphrase Lloyd Bentsen(in the debate with Dan Quayle , "G. Gordon Liddy, you ain't no William Ayers".

weak;weak;weak
WOW STEVE! Don't throw your shoulder out reaching so far with this one. You're actully comparing G. Gordon to this moron. G. did his time for his crime. Only if Ayers was in that townhouse would he have paid the proper price for the crimes that he and his idiot wife committed.

MOON?
Did anybody from the GOP become Moonites??? Did anyone spend 2 decades listening to Moon? Did Moon counsel and pray with them? Did anyone take a their book title from a Moon sermon? Did anyone call Moon their spirtual advisor and mentor? I could go on, but you get the picture. You could say the same thing about Hagee and any other preacher the left tries to hook onto McCain.

If Wright had merely endorsed Obama, they would hardly been a mention, if he had NOT been a member of that church.

McCain
...Is not my favorite (lesser of three evils) - but this column streches a point. Did Liddy bomb the pentagon? He did his time - but what about Ted Kennedy who left a woman to die - and never paid for the death of Mary Jo...and John Kerry...clearly anti-American and should be, along with Jane Fonda, D tried for treason...Did Liddy say (G..D America? Michelle Obama says she likes this country (who has provided her with a great education and job) for the first time...should I continue?

If the G-man supports McCain...
I guess I could.

Liddy was quick to recognize that liberty is not free and the socialists in his day were a significant threat.

I know one of Liddy's sons in a Marine(?) or in an elite military unit.

What legacy have the Ayers left?

DON'T FRET JACY
None of us are crazy about McCain. But all conservatives have to come out of the woodwork and vote or else we will experience "JIMMY CARTER: THE SEQUAL". These two marxists make Bill Clinton look downright republican. So unlike the democrats re. Florida and Michigan, we need to let every vote count and "speak".

McCain vs. Deranged liberals
First concerning Chapman's column. He forgot to mention McCain's "outrageous" consorting with the North Vietnamese Communists for many years at the famous vacation Mecca, the Hanoi Hilton, whild being paid with taxpayer dollars!

Then the idiot liberal who tries to equate an endorsement from someone, with spending 20 years listning to a racist, anti-Semitic, anti-American, anti-white, pro-Hamas terrorist, and despite his putrid record of charitable giving. writing a check for $27,000 to Wright. And you wonder I believe that liberalim is merely a form of mental illness. By the way, the leader of Hamas endorsed Obama!

Chapman is a genius, or so he says but
he he sure has this need for attention....even though he occasionally finds a logic thought to opine, more often he just seems pitiful...does Chapman still collect a paycheck while he is institutionalized?

Original Thought, and Liberals
I'm sorry about King Liberal's malady. We can't all be born with functioning brains. Anyone with just a few brain cells would not attmept to make any kind of comparison to an endorsement, and calling someone a mentor, and spiritual advisor. You didn't mention the Hamas leader's endorsement of Obama! How about an original thought on that subject!

King Liberal to Tony
KL wrote, "but do you have an original thought? and Its sad that you are unable to debate without resorting to insults and inflamatory rhetoric."

----------------

Insults and inflammatory rhetoric are used by people as a substitute for original thought - most people who resort to that do it because they are unable to come up with anything original, interesting, or meaningful.

Generalizations and liberals-trashing are a kind of currency for a core group of regulars on this blog, but they spend it only to get approval from each other. Fortunately, there are others who aren't buying.


That having been said
It's constantly amazing to me that a conservative is never allowed to break from the ideological program even slightly.

sometimes I wonder if, when something happens that is genuinely surprising, or someone writes about a topic that hasn't already bee discussed a million times, you all look at each other to determine how you're supposed to think about it.

It's interesting to me that the really good liberal blogs (not Huffington, Daily Kos, or other TH equivalents) talk just as critically and openly about Democrats as they do about Republicans.

I guess they have more confidence in their strength as to not be threatened by self-criticism.

Just think,
In the 1500s you could have executed
this columnist for saying negative things about a guy you don't even seem to like!

This is just the tip...
...of the iceberg. It is vulnerabilities like this that make McCain unelectable. It matters not what any of us think of Liddy, pro or con, the key question is, can the Democrats use information like this to persuade the voters? The answer is a resounding yes.

Since the MSM picked McCain as "Most Likely to Lose the Election" candidate of their choice, I was certain that one of the Democrat candidates would ultimately occupy the White House. My opinion is unchanged at this time. McCain cannot win. The man is a patsy of the left-leaning media, and the darling of a few silly pesudo-consevative talk show hosts like Medved.

I am not a seer, but I am also not influenced by wishful thinking. My guess, from the moment Hillary entered the race was that she would prevail. Admittedly my certainty was shaken when Obama pulled ahead and showed continuing momentum, but now his campaign is imploding. Hillary is pulling ahead of McCain in the polls. While it gives me no pleasure to be right in this case, I believe my faith in the gullibility of voters is proving to be well founded.

If there are any uncommited Republican Convention delagates reading this, any that actually care about this country that is, now is the time to look for an alternative candidate to vote for. McCain is a loser's loser. Voting to nominate a loser, makes loser's of all who vote for him.


Insighting
I agree with much of what you say but you said "Since the MSM picked McCain as "Most Likely to Lose the Election" candidate of their choice"

I have read this statement before on TH, so it's apparently a common opinion, but on what is it based? What evidence is there that the press "picked McCain" that isn't subjective or filtered through a lense of biased opinion?

This is a sincere question, if you point me to a site that isn't a politically ideological forum for either party, I will gladly look at it, and if it provides solid evidence or proof I will accede to it.

In the meantime, I don't think Obama's campaign is imploding, although I thought it would. It seems to be turning out that voters care more about health care, the economy, education, the war, and keeping their jobs than they do about who is a supporter of whom. When the press rides a story 24 hours they make it appear that it's important, but in this case, people don't seem to have taken the bait.

Insighting
I have noticed this tactic occurs in all the media, not just the MSM. In one 24 hour cycle on TH there were 26 columns about Obama and Wright, a way of telling the more easily manipulated reader that this was an extremely important story. Medved did the same thing - he went on and one for hours every week - really a bore, actually, - trying to give the Obama-Wright story more legs than it actually deserved.

I think all of us, liberal or conservative, would benefit from staqnding back from all of the press and political propagandists once in a while and ask ourselves if they are actually right, if they were on a tight deadline and just decided to fax in the current meme, or if they are just full of sh--.

Last thought
As a barometer of how important much of this really is, the same day that all the Obama - Wright stuff showed up there was actually a column about Miley Cyrus, so one could possibly concur that columnists aren't necessarily the picture of what people care about. (Outside of teenagers and people who post and drink all day every day).

A McCain Supporter
I am a McCain supporter, but this issue cannot be dismissed. This campaign better have an answer when the "double-standard" is challenged on this one. Wright's past relationship seems to be a lot more of an influence on Obama, but in contrast, McCain's relationship with Liddy certainly mirrors that of Obama and Ayers.

Chapman is a pansy buttocks......
The G-Man, even in his advanced years could probably still whip a clown Chapman mano-a-mano. If you think Liddy is a radical, then you have defined yourself as nothing but an internationlist liberal. Giddy believes in US sovereignty and individual liberty. (Psst, thats the American tradition in case you were never taught that in government schools).

But McCain DOES has a radical "advisor". None other than Juan Hernandez, Mexican citizen and rabid open borders, Mexican Reconquista and all around buttocks-clown himself.

Why does Juan McAmnesty have Juan Hernandez as a consultant? To better outreach to the so called "Hispanic community" (i.e., illegal alien constituency).

Open borders for all! North American Union coming soon. Buh-bye US Constitution. We need more "free trade"! More immigration! Americans need to be reduced to 3rd world peasants, like the Mestizo who cross the Rio Grande every night to go on stealing identities and committing social security fraud!

Viva Bush! Viva McAmnesty!

Chapman is a panty-boy.....
The G-Man, even in his advanced years could probably still whip a clown Chapman mano-a-mano. If you think Liddy is a radical, then you have defined yourself as nothing but an internationlist liberal. Giddy believes in US sovereignty and individual liberty. (Psst, thats the American tradition in case you were never taught that in government schools).

But McCain DOES has a radical "advisor". None other than Juan Hernandez, Mexican citizen and rabid open borders, Mexican Reconquista and all around buttocks-clown himself.

Why does Juan McAmnesty have Juan Hernandez as a consultant? To better outreach to the so called "Hispanic community" (i.e., illegal alien constituency).

Open borders for all! North American Union coming soon. Buh-bye US Constitution. We need more "free trade"! More immigration! Americans need to be reduced to 3rd world peasants, like the Mestizo who cross the Rio Grande every night to go on stealing identities and committing social security fraud!

Viva Bush! Viva McAmnesty!

watergate death of republic
Someone trying to break into demo Watergate headquarters and the end of civilization as we know it is at hand! As pointed out above didn't Liddy do the time for his crime?

Someone bombing police stations and the pentagon with people dying then saying it is necessary because the bombers are "living in the belly of the beast." Ayers is now quoted as saying he didn't do enough. Sounds like he got away with murder and regrets he didn't kill more.


Burglary and terror bombing murder are morally equivalent? Kinda like Obama calling his own grandma a typical white racist for saying she was afraid of an aggressive black panhandler. Her seemingly rational behavior is then compared to Rev Wright with his hate whitey sermons!

You have to be completely nuts to go along with these comparisons!

Compare
To compare Liddy to ayers is ridiculous. Liddy was a threat to the rule of law? Again ridiculous. Lidddy may have been misguided but he was trying to save the country from the likes of McGovern. Ayers was trying to destroy the country for his communist buddies.

deathstar asks:
"What evidence is there that the press "picked McCain" that isn't subjective or filtered through a lense of biased opinion?"

The best evidence is the amount of free press the MSM showered on McCain, grossly exaggerating the importance of individual successes. And, the corresponding lack of coverage, pointing out the times he did not do well in a particular primary. Something like 92% of the members of the MSM lean liberal and vote for Democrats. They would not have been so generous with any candidate they thought the Democrat nominee could not beat.

The MSM players do not see McCain as a threat or they would be publishing more negative stories: the Keating 5, the gang of 14, his basic moral failures, and the stories from the veterans that want McCain's military records released in hope of exposing his allegedly traitorous behavior when he was a guest of the N. Vietnamese.

I do not and will not support McCain. Notwithstanding his liberal bent, I have one primary reason for my absolute unwillingness to support McCain, and it emanates from my love of my country. McCain neither understands nor support the U.S. Constitution. He has said so. I believe him. And that, as they say, is that.

When the time is right the MSM will pour enough negative commentary down upon McCain that the press G.W. Bush received over the past 7+ years will look like fawning flattery.

Frank:
Liddy and Ayers are opposite sides of the same coin. Both are willing to accept, and engage in criminal violence to achieve political or social goals.

If your goals are "conservative" you may be more accepting of Liddy's foibles than you are of Ayers'. If your more aligned with "liberal" goals Ayers' excesses may be more acceptable.

An objective viewer can easily establish valid comparisons between the two. I like Liddy, even admire some of his qualities, but I am aware of his flaws. I could not support someone with his penchant to apply situational ethics. I do not know Ayers.

Insighting
I'm waiting for the phone to ring about a ride to a friend's funeral, so I may have to suddenly break off partway through this.

I do understand what you are saying about the way the press can influence events by their lack of coverage or conversely, but their 24 non-stop coverage. We saw the media pile up on Clinton right before the impeachment hearings, we saw them virtually ignore printed evidence about the non-existence of nuclear or WMDs during the onset to the war, and now I am watching as they virtually ignore the truly important story about the defense department paying and instructing those so-called "neutral" retired officers who contributed "analyses" to war news on the major networks. (Of course, the reason that story's not getting covered is that it makes CNN, FOX and MSNBC look like the jerks they are).

So, even though I didn't perceive that they were deliberately loading up for a McCain nomination it doesn't mean I think that they aren't guilty of doing that kind of thing all the time. The past few weeks they have turned the Obama-Wright story into a soap opera but I don't think they are consciously working to put Hillary in the White House, for example.

Got to go - I'll try to finish in a few hours or so.

deathstar:
As to McCain being the anointed Republican
candidate, I just wanted to point to his
endorsement by the New York Times.

Since the NYT is little more than a propaganda
arm of the DNC, I think their endorsemement
speaks volumes about the editorial board's
opinion of Mac's electability.

Ayers and Liddy - There Is Equivalence
(1) McCain publicly criticized Obama for his association with Ayers.
(2) McCain clearly has an association with Liddy.
(3) Liddy states in his autobiography that he conspired to firebomb the liberal Brookings Institution.
(4) Liddy states in his autobiography that he conspired to murder columnist Jack Anderson (who was Brit Hume's boss at the time).

McCain's "pastor" problem is bogus and will vanish.

McCain's "Liddy" problem is real and will not vanish.

Full Disclosure: I am a Conservative Republican and no friend of John McCain.

deathstar:
Sorry about your friend.

I see that you did not finish your post. I will try to return to this thread later to see if you have posted another entry. If we are unable to connect here, and you want to carry on this discussion, you are welcome to contact me directly at my handle @gmail.com.

For now, consider this: the presses' primary goal is revenue for the company, and ultimately the individual author. All other considerations are secondary. Right wing conservative, radical leftist, or moderate of any stripe are all fair game if there is money to be made.

That is why Noam Chomsky can sell his tome detailing the "conservative" bias of the media, while poll after poll, survey after survey, and book after book lament the "liberal" bias of the same media. And, why individuals nearly universally see the press as unfair, or unassailably accurate. Virtually no one sees the press as biased in their favor.

conspiring?
Liddy talking about firebombing and murder is the same as Ayers doing the same and now saying he did not do enough. Zeesteve you would convict a man of murder and firebombing because he once talked about doing these things?

Maybe we can convict ole Rev Wright for murder! Doesn't he go along with BLT theologist Cone who says that if god doesn't support blacks killing whites we need to kill him.

JAG CA:
Zeesteve is making valid comparisons. Conspiracy is a crime. Zeesteve did not suggest that Liddy is guilty of murder because he once planned one. By his own statements Liddy appears to confess to conspiracy to commit murder. Zeesteve was just pointing that out.

Re: You convinced me
I didn't think it was possible but Steve your commentary has convinced me that I should vote for McCain. I wasn't aware of McCain's close relationship with G. Gordon Liddy.

As to your commentary itself, only an idiot would make someone who operated under the assumption that his actions taken against the DNC, which at the time was alligned with the enemies both our country and its Constitution, the "moral equivalent" of someone who murdered and bombed in order to bring down our Republic. In that vein, see John F. Kerry-Heinz's, Obama supporter and superdelegate, contemporary efforts to malign the US military in order to bring about our defeat in Southeast Asia, in conspiracy with Communist forces there.

BTW, the Watergate break-in was organized theoretically to confirm that the Democrats were receiving illegal contributions from foreign enemies of the US. Of course, the real reason John Dean put it together was to destroy the evidence that his new bride was part of the "escort service" run by the DNC for out-of-state dignitaries visiting Washington.

As for Liddy's take on the ATF, arguably the Waco massacre was a far more egregious violation of Constitutional rights than any of the "political dirty treats" employed by the Nixon Campaign in the 1972 Election cycle.

Re: Defining Patriotism down
"Liddy and Ayers are opposite sides of the same coin. Both are willing to accept, and engage in criminal violence to achieve political or social goals."

As I recall the "Sons of Liberty" raided British merchants ships in Boston Harbor and destroyed their in protest the British plunder forcing them to purchase only tea from British trading companies. According to Chapman, Sam Adams and William Ayers are the moral equivalent "opposite sides of the same coin". Amazing! I don't think that other great Chicago pundit, the Reverent Jeremiah Wright, could have put it any better.

Re: A Patriot by any other name
"I do not know Ayers."

Apparently neither does Obama!

King Liberal
Hagee and Wright are apples and oranges. Obama can not get elected without white voters who believe he is an idealistic uniter. His relationship with Wright has turned off many of these potential voters. Hagee is a turn off only for people who wouldn't vote for McCain anyway. His support from people on the religious right and conservative wing doesn't bother most of the people he is aiming for, so long as he doesn't actively court it.

John Acton
Thank you for your posts.They are 'right on'.The breakin at the Watergate was bungled,but it certainly had merit.Some went too far in trying to cover it up.

I remember John Dean testifying,saying he told Nixon ,"there's a cancer growing in your presidency." Well,in my opinion,he was that cancer.

G.Gordon Liddy is a patriot and a mighty man,even in his advanced years.I'll bet he could hold his palm over a lighted candle,all over again. Fearsome !!

Neither King Liberal nor Chapman
seem to have a CLUE when it comes to G. Gordon Liddy, the Watergate break in and what it was about or the Constitution of the United States itself.

I don't greatly admire Liddy or McCain, but comparing Liddy to Ayers is just plain silly.

Insighting Truth
I'm back - it was a long afternoon. If you don't respond, I'll send this to the address you gave me.

I agree with you that the press, like any other business, is about profits, but I do have to say that the few journalists I've known over time have personally felt very obligated to be truthful and objective. They also tend to feel as if they get nailed no matter what they do; and I do think that any two people who are very left and very right will tend to see the press skewed against them, I agree with you on that point as well.

But in the end, it's the profit motive that drives the major media and certainly drives what they choose to talk about and how they choose to report it. I doubt these decisions are made by the kind if individual journalists I've know, but by the suits who have to answer to stockholders.

I am what you would call very liberal, but it is only lately that I would admit that the press - particularly the print media - is mostly made up of liberals. But even if this is true it needs to be questioned: why would that be so, why would most journalism school graduates be more liberal-minded? Why does the press tend toward more liberal views? What's in it for them? If most of the national power is in the hands of Republicans, as it has been for most of the last 8 years, how does the press benefit from leaning to the left? And who actually benefits?

As for TV and Radio, it strikes me as mostly show business - TV channels fight to hold the attention of viewers, so cheesy drama and suspenseful teasers are the norm. TV advertising revenue involves alot more $$ than print, I would guess, there is alot at stake to just keep viewers viewing. I don't think any of it, MSNBC, CNBC, FOX, or CNN is about wanting to produce honest reporting and balanced news.


Insighting Truth 2nd part
I think the NY Times is an interesting case and not truly representative in many ways of the mainstream press. For all of it's bias and missteps, it still has the most depth in reporting and the best writers - it also offers more on science, religion, the arts, and global stories than any other paper on the market. It stays away from cheap scandal and celebrity gossip, which I really like and is probably the only printed daily media source that I take seriously. That having been said, there are serious mistakes that have infuriated me. During the run-up to the war, two journalists for the Knight-Ridder syndicate wrote daily stories that reported on the lack of evidence for WMDs in Iraq - the quoted people, first hand observors and inspectors - first rate reporting. The most attention the Times paid was to carry their revelations in two or three paragraphs below the fold on one of the back pages.

About Gordon Liddy
The first memory that comes to mind when I hear Liddy's name is an interview I once watched where he described holding his hand over a live flame to test his endurance and strength of character.

It always makes me laugh to remember it, but my amusement doesn't change the fact that he is certifiably crazy.


Re: Moral equivalence
"(3) Liddy states in his autobiography that he conspired to firebomb the liberal Brookings Institution.
"(4) Liddy states in his autobiography that he conspired to murder columnist Jack Anderson (who was Brit Hume's boss at the time)."

Considering and doing are two completely different things. You can consider robbing Fort Knox, but you don't go to jail for it. On the other hand actually bombing Federal buildings is a crime. Ask Timothy McVeigh!

Weather Underground's List of Shame:

*7 October 1969 – The Haymarket Police Statue in Chicago is bombed
*6 December 1969 – Bombing of several Chicago Police cars parked in a precinct parking lot at 3600 North Halsted Street, Chicago.
*13 February 1970 - Several police vehicles of the Berkeley, California, Police Department are bombed in the police parking lot
*16 February 1970: A bomb is detonated at the Golden Gate Park branch of the San Francisco Police Department, killing one officer and injuring a number of other policemen.
*6 March 1970 – 34 sticks of dynamite are discovered in the 13th Police District of Detroit, Michigan.
*6 March 1970 – WUO members Theodore Gold, Diana Oughton, and Terry Robbins are killed in the Greenwich Village townhouse explosion, when a nailbomb they were constructing detonates. The bomb was intended to be planted at a non-commissioned officer's dance at Fort Dix, New Jersey.
*10 May 1970 – The National Guard Association building in Washington, D.C. is bombed.
*6 June 1970 – In a letter, the WUO claims credit for bombing of the San Francisco Hall of Justice, although no explosion has occurred. Months later, workmen locate an unexploded bomb.
*9 June 1970 - The New York City Police headquarters is bombed.
*27 July 1970 - The United States Army base at The Presidio in San Francisco is bombed.
*10 October 1970 - A Queens traffic-court building is bombed.
*14 October 1970 - The Harvard Center for International Affairs is bombed.

Re: Moral equivalence
Weather Underground's List of Shame (cont.):

*1 March 1971 - The United States Capitol is bombed.
*29 August, 1971 - Bombing of the Office of California Prisons
*17 September 1971 - The New York Department of Corrections in Albany, New York is bombed.
*15 October 1971 - The bombing of William Bundy's office in the MIT research center.
*19 May 1972 - Bombing of The Pentagon
*18 May 1973 - The bombing of the 103rd Police Precinct in New York.
*28 September 1973 - The ITT headquarters in New York and Rome, Italy are bombed.
*6 March 1974 - Bombing of the Dept. of Health, Education and Welfare offices in San Francisco.
*31 May 1974 - The Office of the California Attorney General is bombed.
*17 June 1974 - Gulf Oil's Pittsburgh headquarters is bombed.
*11 September 1974 – Bombing of Anaconda Corporation
*29 January 1975 - Bombing of the State Department
*16 June 1975 - Weathermen bomb a Banco de Ponce (a Puerto Rican bank) in New York.
*September, 1975 – Bombing of the Kennecott Corporation
*October 20, 1981 - Brinks robbery, a joint-venture of the Weather Underground and the Black Liberation Army, over $1 million is taken at the Nanuet Mall, near Nyack, New York. The robbers were stopped by police later that day and engaged them in a shootout, killing two police officers and one Brinks guard as well as wounding several others.

Yeap, the moral equivalence of Liddy day-dreaming about bombing Brookings and taking out John Anderson.

G.Gordon Liddy
I remember watching Liddy testifying in the Watergate hearings.He was unapologetic then and he is more so now.That is when I became interested in politics.It was fascinating.Back then,I knew every congressman,their states and how they voted.

I wish I could have seen the McCarthy Hearings.I know they would have been interesting.McCarthy may have gone a little overboard with it,but he was right on so many things and so many people.

If Communism could have been stopped in this country back then,it would have saved a lot of hard times we have had to face,then and now.

Re: The 4th Estate wants more power
"But even if this is true it needs to be questioned: why would that be so, why would most journalism school graduates be more liberal-minded?"

Because Schools of Journalism are run by Leftist Elitists, and most students of journalism are even more clueless than are students of Education.

I say this as a former President of the Indiana Collegiate Press Association. When I studied journalism in college I learned that the "news" should be limited to "Who, What, Where, When and How". Today, these Leftist Elitists pretending to be journalists insists on also telling the reader their opinion as to "Why". This is why journalists are fast approaching the disapproval ratings of lawyers and politicians.

The 4th Estate
Not only are the our so-called journalists liberal and sometimes outright liars,but the Associated Press,Reuters,etc.,have all been caught slanting the news and reporting news they know to be false.We never know when we are getting a straight story.

Re: In your heart you know he is right
"I wish I could have seen the McCarthy Hearings.I know they would have been interesting.McCarthy may have gone a little overboard with it,but he was right on so many things and so many people."

I actually watched some the "Army-McCarthy Hearings" on black and white TV. They weren't nearly as entertaining as Ollie North's hearing testimony before the Iran-Contra Joint Congressional Committee, IMMHO.

Re: MSM vs. US
"But in the end, it's the profit motive that drives the major media and certainly drives what they choose to talk about and how they choose to report it."

If that were true, kindly explain the decline of the MSM and raise of the alternate media.

Col.North
I agree the North hearings were great.I learned to admire his demeanor and integrity.Some say he was a traitor.I say 'bunk'.He went against the Boland Amendment.Now,there was your traitor.IMMHO.

steve
to relate the two men makes you a friggin idiot

"Conspiracy" Is A Felony
Folks - conspiracy to bomb and conspiracy to commit murder are felonies. Please note that Liddy, a trained lawyer, did not acknowledge these crimes until AFTER the statute of limitations had expired. I think all of you need to sharpen your arguments against this issue. It is not going away. Zeestephen is the LEAST of your future worries. The MSM will not let go of this until McCain repudiates Liddy, or McCain apologizes for criticizing Obama and Ayers.

Wallace vs. Dean: McCain & Iraq

Re: Moral Equivalence
"Folks - conspiracy to bomb and conspiracy to commit murder are felonies."

Yes, but merely talking about same is not, else William Ayers would be in prison.

In Federal Law, "agreement" of two or more parties "to commit an unlawful act" is ESSENTIAL to establishing the crime of conspiracy.

"There are four elements necessary for proving a criminal conspiracy, each of which the prosecution must prove beyond a reasonable doubt. A conspiracy exists where there is: an agreement between at least two parties; to achieve an illegal goal; with knowledge of the conspiracy and with actual participation in the conspiracy; and at least one conspirator committed an overt act in furtherance of the conspiracy."

Mere discussion of a crime without the requesite agreement and an "overt act", such as actually purchasing the bomb making materials in a conspiracy to bomb Brookings", is not a crime under Federal Law.

Apparently all the "so-called" plots that Liddy personally generated for the "Committee to Re-election the President" ("CRP") were not accepted save for the one about breaking into the office of the Daniel Ellsberg's psychiatrist, Lewis Fielding. Ellsberg, who had leaked the "Pentagon Papers" was subsequently tried for theft, conspiracy, and espionage. However, this one was committed not by "CRP", but by a government agency (White House Special Investigation Unit (also called the "White House Plumbers") working out of the White House.

In William Ayers' case, however, he helped found a terrorist organization that not only fantasied about, but actually conspired and committed murder, bombings, jail breaks and robbery. If you can't see the difference it is because you don't want to. Liddy was tried and convicted on the only crime he actually committed, the Watergate burglary.

Re: The politics of judicial coercion
"I agree the North hearings were great.I learned to admire his demeanor and integrity.Some say he was a traitor.I say 'bunk'.He went against the Boland Amendment.Now,there was your traitor.IMMHO"

Democrats have made an art out politics by judicial edict. Just look at the law suits already this year involving elections.

As for the Boland Amendment, the Congressional Democrats are still making friends with America's worst Latin American enemies. The latest example is their rejection of the Columbia (an ally of the US in fighting drugs and terrorism) Free Trade Agreement in order to garner political favor with the US unions and suck-up to America's worst enemy in the hemisphere, Hugo Chavez of Venezuela.

John Acton
"Because Schools of Journalism are run by Leftist Elitists, and most students of journalism are even more clueless than are students of Education."

I once worked for the famous Medill School of Journalism at Northwestern and spent alot of time with students, so I have a pretty strong sense, based on experience, of how "elitest" they are.

IMHO, conservatives consider anybody with a college education and an ability to use polysyllabic words is an elitest.

ACTON
"If that were true, kindly explain the decline of the MSM and raise of the alternate media."

That's esy - print news is declining because the generation of Americans growing up and entering the mainstream spend most of their time at computers and don't want to be burdened with print, which is not so easy to access form anywhere at anytime, and requires more of an attention span.

In fact, circulation for the NYTimes and other papers is actually growing vs. their on-line editions.

DEATHSTAR IS right
Gordon Liddy is, and always has been, about three forks short of a full drawer.

Reading through this admiration society is like sitting through a meeting of the Captain Marvel Fan Club.

Chapman is nuts
Liddy was convicted and served time. Ayers never was, even though he essentially admitted guilt. And to the best of my knowledge, Liddy never planted explosives or had his cronies plant them.

Sometimes the ability to draw a distinction is paramount before writing a nonsensical opinion piece like this one.

think-4-yourself
Do you deny that many people who have a college degree tend to talk down to those of us who do not?

For the record, I know some very wise people with college degrees. I also know a few college grads who could not point out Iraq on a map.

And that is the amazing thing about this issue: Sometimes if I am in a group of people having an intellectual discussion, they seem shocked when they find out I did not go to college; as if the only way to learn or educate one's self is by attending a university.

There is a classic line in the film "Good Will Hunting" where the main character says to a cocky college student-after schooling him in a historical debate- "arent you bummed you paid two hundred grand for an education that would have cost you a buck-ninety five in late fees at the public library?"

There is a lot of truth to this. Most colleges outside MIT and a few others are not teaching cutting edge courses that can not be learned anywhere else. Pretty much everything one wants to learn from theoretical physics to quantum mechanics can be learned by reading books or published papers on the subject. But then college these days is less about an education, and more about getting a good job with your diploma.

think-4-yourself
Your thinking process is lacking,so I am glad you do not think for me and any of the other patriotic folks on this thread.You evidently only think with the left side of your brain,since you only think leftist thoughts.

Some people with lots of so-called education,but no common sense are nothing but 'educated fools'.They couldn't survive outside their little elite crowd.

The Captain Marvel fan Club is far superior to The Barack Hussein Mohammad Obama Fan Club.


Rowly
"You evidently only think with the left side of your brain,since you only think leftist thoughts."

------------------

LOL. This is what happens when science teachers have to spend valuable time teaching creationism.

McCains Radical Friend
Steve,

Thanks for the information on McCain's relationship with Liddy.

Guess even TOGS (The Old Gray Squirrel) has some good qualities too!


Thanks John Acton
Thanks Jon for pointing out that simply talking about something is not in and of itself a felony.

When looney lefties get into moral equivalences you know you're in trouble. BO thinks his grandma cracker and Geraldine Ferarro are rabid racists just like Rev Wright. BO also says Ayers & Dohrn are just like a US Senator who thinks abortion is murder and talks about the death penalty for abortionists. Is it murder to kill an infant at the moment of birth and call it an abortion? That is a moral and legal question that many might have different answers to. Not BO he seems to think any talk of restrictions on abortion is a crime against females.



Re: An elitist by any other name
"IMHO, conservatives consider anybody with a college education and an ability to use polysyllabic words is an elitest."

IMMHO, I believe elitists are those who uses dishonest stereotypes and have a condescending attitude for anyone who doesn't agree them. They prefer hyperbole to reasoned discussion and ad hominim to logical argument. I believe if you lookup "elitist" in the dictionary you may find you picture next to the definition.

Re: No news is good news
"That's esy - print news is declining because the generation of Americans growing up and entering the mainstream spend most of their time at computers and don't want to be burdened with print, which is not so easy to access form anywhere at anytime, and requires more of an attention span."

Oh, really? Apparently those "other" "generations of Americans" missed the fact that Radio and TV alternative news sources have been around since the early 20th century, as print circulation grew throughtout entire period. In fact, the only reason most households by newspapers today is to clip the coupons. But even that doesn't seem to able to circumation up anymore for the large Metro Newspapers.

"In fact, circulation for the NYTimes and other papers is actually growing vs. their on-line editions."

Hardly! In fact, amongst NYC newspapers, only Wall Street Journal and the NY Post have seen any circulation growth in either their daily or Sunday edition in recent years.

Dishonest Comparison
I want to make it clear, up front; I have no respect for either Liddy or Ayers. However, comparing the two as the same is ridiculous. One man was part of a group of burglars; the other man was part of a group of terrorists. One man’s crime did not include the destruction of life and property, whereas, that was the goal of the other man. The group of burglars killed no one, the terrorist’s group did kill people. Though neither man is repentant about their crime, one man served his time for his crime; one did not.

According to our laws, once you have served your time, your crime is legally behind you. Our laws also do not require that after serving your time that you must denounce your crime.

Both men are morally reprehensible; however, saying that a burglar is the same as a murderous terrorist is dishonest.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.