• Wall Street Journal Opionon, September 23, 2008
• Obama and Ayers Pushed Radicalism on Schools

By STANLEY KURTZ

Despite having authored two autobiographies, Barack Obama has never written about his most important executive experience. From 1995 to 1999, he led an education foundation called the Chicago Annenberg Challenge (CAC), and remained on the board until 2001. The group poured more than $100 million into the hands of community organizers and radical education activists.

The CAC was the brainchild of Bill Ayers, a founder of the Weather Underground in the 1960s. Among other feats, Mr. Ayers and his cohorts bombed the Pentagon, and he has never expressed regret for his actions. Barack Obama's first run for the Illinois State Senate was launched at a 1995 gathering at Mr. Ayers's home.

The Obama campaign has struggled to downplay that association. Last April, Sen. Obama dismissed Mr. Ayers as just "a guy who lives in my neighborhood," and "not somebody who I exchange ideas with on a regular basis." Yet documents in the CAC archives make clear that Mr. Ayers and Mr. Obama were partners in the CAC. Those archives are housed in the Richard J. Daley Library at the University of Illinois at Chicago and I've recently spent days looking through them.

The Chicago Annenberg Challenge was created ostensibly to improve Chicago's public schools. The funding came from a national education initiative by Ambassador Walter Annenberg. In early 1995, Mr. Obama was appointed the first chairman of the board, which handled fiscal matters. Mr. Ayers co-chaired the foundation's other key body, the "Collaborative," which shaped education policy.

The CAC's basic functioning has long been known, because its annual reports, evaluations and some board minutes were public. But the Daley archive contains additional board minutes, the Collaborative minutes, and documentation on the groups that CAC funded and rejected. The Daley archives show that Mr. Obama and Mr. Ayers worked as a team to advance the CAC agenda.

One unsettled question is how Mr. Obama, a former community organizer fresh out of law school, could vault to the top of a new foundation? In response to my questions, the Obama campaign issued a statement saying that Mr. Ayers had nothing to do with Obama's "recruitment" to the board. The statement says Deborah Leff and Patricia Albjerg Graham (presidents of other foundations) recruited him. Yet the archives show that, along with Ms. Leff and Ms. Graham, Mr. Ayers was one of a working group of five who assembled the initial board in 1994. Mr. Ayers founded CAC and was its guiding spirit. No one would have been appointed the CAC chairman without his approval.

The CAC's agenda flowed from Mr. Ayers's educational philosophy, which called for infusing students and their parents with a radical political commitment, and which downplayed achievement tests in favor of activism. In the mid-1960s, Mr. Ayers taught at a radical alternative school, and served as a community organizer in Cleveland's ghetto.

In works like "City Kids, City Teachers" and "Teaching the Personal and the Political," Mr. Ayers wrote that teachers should be community organizers dedicated to provoking resistance to American racism and oppression. His preferred alternative? "I'm a radical, Leftist, small 'c' communist," Mr. Ayers said in an interview in Ron Chepesiuk's, "Sixties Radicals," at about the same time Mr. Ayers was forming CAC.

CAC translated Mr. Ayers's radicalism into practice. Instead of funding schools directly, it required schools to affiliate with "external partners," which actually got the money. Proposals from groups focused on math/science achievement were turned down. Instead CAC disbursed money through various far-left community organizers, such as the Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (or Acorn).

Mr. Obama once conducted "leadership training" seminars with Acorn, and Acorn members also served as volunteers in Mr. Obama's early campaigns. External partners like the South Shore African Village Collaborative and the Dual Language Exchange focused more on political consciousness, Afrocentricity and bilingualism than traditional education. CAC's in-house evaluators comprehensively studied the effects of its grants on the test scores of Chicago public-school students. They found no evidence of educational improvement.

CAC also funded programs designed to promote "leadership" among parents. Ostensibly this was to enable parents to advocate on behalf of their children's education. In practice, it meant funding Mr. Obama's alma mater, the Developing Communities Project, to recruit parents to its overall political agenda. CAC records show that board member Arnold Weber was concerned that parents "organized" by community groups might be viewed by school principals "as a political threat." Mr. Obama arranged meetings with the Collaborative to smooth out Mr. Weber's objections.

The Daley documents show that Mr. Ayers sat as an ex-officio member of the board Mr. Obama chaired through CAC's first year. He also served on the board's governance committee with Mr. Obama, and worked with him to craft CAC bylaws. Mr. Ayers made presentations to board meetings chaired by Mr. Obama. Mr. Ayers spoke for the Collaborative before the board. Likewise, Mr. Obama periodically spoke for the board at meetings of the Collaborative.

The Obama campaign notes that Mr. Ayers attended only six board meetings, and stresses that the Collaborative lost its "operational role" at CAC after the first year. Yet the Collaborative was demoted to a strictly advisory role largely because of ethical concerns, since the projects of Collaborative members were receiving grants. CAC's own evaluators noted that project accountability was hampered by the board's reluctance to break away from grant decisions made in 1995. So even after Mr. Ayers's formal sway declined, the board largely adhered to the grant program he had put in place.

Mr. Ayers's defenders claim that he has redeemed himself with public-spirited education work. That claim is hard to swallow if you understand that he views his education work as an effort to stoke resistance to an oppressive American system. He likes to stress that he learned of his first teaching job while in jail for a draft-board sit-in. For Mr. Ayers, teaching and his 1960s radicalism are two sides of the same coin.

Mr. Ayers is the founder of the "small schools" movement (heavily funded by CAC), in which individual schools built around specific political themes push students to "confront issues of inequity, war, and violence." He believes teacher education programs should serve as "sites of resistance" to an oppressive system. (His teacher-training programs were also CAC funded.) The point, says Mr. Ayers in his "Teaching Toward Freedom," is to "teach against oppression," against America's history of evil and racism, thereby forcing social transformation.

The Obama campaign has cried foul when Bill Ayers comes up, claiming "guilt by association." Yet the issue here isn't guilt by association; it's guilt by participation. As CAC chairman, Mr. Obama was lending moral and financial support to Mr. Ayers and his radical circle. That is a story even if Mr. Ayers had never planted a single bomb 40 years ago.

Mr. Kurtz is a senior fellow at the Ethics and Public Policy Center.

Taking a jab at Sarah Palin, the Los Angeles Times reprinted an article from Toronto's Globe and Mail that said a top Canadian doctor was afraid Governor Palin's decision to carry her Down Syndrome baby to full term would discourage woman from aborting their babies. But now you can't find the story on the Times' website, because editors undoubtedly realized just how bad it made pro-abortionists sound. Instead, there is this clarification:



The Canadian website Free Dominion still smells something rotten, gives a fuller version of the story and a more appropriate response:

Sarah and Todd Palin's decision to complete her recent pregnancy, despite advance notice that their baby Trig had Down syndrome, is hailed by many in the pro-life movement as walking the walk as well as talking the talk.


But a senior Canadian doctor is now expressing concerns that such a prominent public role model as the governor of Alaska and potential vice president of the United States completing a Down syndrome pregnancy may prompt other women to make the same decision against abortion because of that genetic abnormality. And thereby reduce the number of abortions.


Published reports in Canada say about 9 out of 10 women given a diagnosis of Down syndrome choose to terminate the pregnancy through abortion.


Dr. Andre Lalonde, executive vice president of the Society of Obstetricians and Gynecologists in Ottawa, worries that Palin's now renowned decision may cause abortions in Canada to decline as other women there and elsewhere opt to follow suit.


He says not every woman is prepared to deal with the consequences of Down babies, who have developmental delays, some physical difficulties and often a shortened lifespan.


Wider use of blood screening and amniocentesis during pregnancies can now accurately predict the presence of Down syndrome.


Lalonde says his primary concern is that women have the....


...choice of abortion and that greater public awareness of women making choices like Palin to complete a pregnancy and give birth to their genetically-abnormal baby could be detrimental and confusing to the women and their families.


"The worry is that this will have an implication for abortion issues in Canada," Lalonde tells the Globe and Mail.


In her widely-viewed acceptance speech to the Republican National Convention and a TV audience of some 37 million last week, Palin did not refer to her baby's birth as a decision or choice. "In April," she said, "my husband Todd and I welcomed our littlest one into the world, a perfectly beautiful baby boy named Trig.


"From the inside, no family ever seems typical. That's how it is with us. Our family has the same ups and downs as any other, the same challenges and the same joys.


"Sometimes even the greatest joys bring challenge. And children with special needs inspire a special love.


"To the families of special-needs children all across this country, I have a message: For years, you sought to make America a more welcoming place for your sons and daughters. I pledge to you that if we are elected, you will have a friend and advocate in the White House."


Others in Canada, which has just begun its own national parliamentary election campaign, see the Palins as positive parental role models who could help reduce the tide of Down syndrome abortions.


Krista Flint is executive director of the Canadian Down Syndrome Society, which says its goal is to foster "a climate of understanding and mutual respect for the dignity, worth and equal rights for ALL people."


The society now displays a photograph of the happy Palins with their baby on its homepage and offers to provide "positive and factual information" for an open discussion of Down syndrome.


However, Flint says doctors usually give couples very dark messages about life with a Down syndrome child.


"We know overwhelmingly the message families get is 'Don't have this baby, it will ruin your life,'" Flint says. "And I don't think people would loo


Lalonde says giving women detailed information on the consequences of their decision is not actually encouraging them to seek abortions.

Hugh,


I want to tell you why your column touched me, and one reason why I both support Sarah Palin and positively detest those who use Trig against her.



About 35 years ago, a very scared young woman gave birth to a profoundly birth-defective child.  He had hydrocepahic problems and doctors said he couldn't hope to live more than six weeks. 



However, this woman - one of the bravest persons I've ever met - would not give up on her hopeless son.  I wish the story had a happier ending, but that boy lived for nearly four years because of his mother's unbroken will.



During all that time, however, "well-meaning" friends and family let her know that the child's birth defects were somehow her fault (if only as a judgment by an Angry God).  That was a grief-born guilt she could never release.



We were married nearly a decade after her son died; we had our own son, who tragically was killed in a one-car accident (he was driving, had only had a license for 8 days, and I taught him to drive - so I know something of pain and guilt).  But that original guilt was compounded by the death of our son - and years later, after "celebrating" the death of her first son and facing - in a couple of weeks - the anniversary of our son (and dealing with a depth of depression and delusion that her doctor completely missed - as did I), she sent me out to the grocery store then ended her life.  I know that a loving God understands and forgives her - that gives me the strength I need to carry on.



But this is about Sarah Palin.  Like my late wife, she is being blamed and judged by those - mostly people who don't know her and almost always by those who want to destroy her politically - who have no care about the crushing guilt they're trying to place on Sarah and Todd - but especially Sarah.



Ignorance is no excuse - it is only Sarah's inherent strength (and the special love that Down Syndrome kids seem to evoke and invoke) that will save her from the kind of crushing guilt that my Karol couldn't, ultimately, survive.



I KNOW what they are doing, and I KNOW what it could do to Sarah Palin.  And I will neither condone nor ever forgive (let alone forget) what they are doing - and not for high moral principle gone awry, but for mean and cheap and petty political gain. 



Will they in their evil hearts get the forgiveness I know my Karol received?  I am in no position to second-guess God, but if He was to ask me, I'd ask him to create a special circle of Hell for all who heap the coals of guilt (for any reason) on the grieving mothers who give birth to children with live-threatening or life-altering special needs.



Thank you for what you've said - you are right, and you are right to keep saying it.

I wasn’t expecting to be at the Beijing police station 4 hours after my 10K race, so when I ended up there, frantic and confused, it felt like I had just participated in a particularly grueling portion of the “Amazing Race.”  Unfortunately, my journey was not for television entertainment, rather it was to prevent my family from getting deported immediately.  I want to send a big “Thank You!” to the female students from the Columbia University that tried to mess with the Beijing authorities and, in so doing, caused an enormous international incident that affected quite a few Americans in Beijing.

So here’s how it got started.  A few girls from Columbia wanted to share their political persuasions with the world at the Bird’s Nest.  They had made signs with a political agenda that we typically see on bumper stickers in America (particularly in California and Santa Barbara) supporting a region that has been at odds with the Chinese government.  The local authorities didn’t like the political display at all and deported the girls immediately.  Unfortunately my family had been renting a short term apartment in the same complex as the girls and, since we’re all Americans, my family started to look rather suspicious.  The authorities demanded that everyone in the group report to the local police station immediately for an interrogation.

Unfortunately, the demands from the Chinese authorities were made during my 10k race, so immediately after I was done swimming, my family had to frantically hurry away from the venue to follow the orders.

The ordeal that my family endured opened my eyes a bit.  I suppose I was under the presumption that criticism is essentially a human right.  A few weeks ago, when I mused about the seemingly silly blogging laws during the Olympics, I believed that the Chinese warnings were more about posturing than anything else.  It seemed to me that the Chinese authorities wanted everyone to have a positive Olympic experience without a bunch of bickering about cultural differences.  The reality, however, is quite different.  There are real consequences behind the threats of obedience, and both foreigners and natives are subject to punishment for disobedience.
 
Sadly, I lost a bit of my enthusiasm for China.  When I first arrived here 2 weeks ago it seemed like the culture was firm but pleasant.  For instances, instead of using the word “No” the Chinese people use the phrase, “I’m sorry” constantly, and it seemed like a very polite way of communicating.  I now realize that, “I’m sorry,” actually means, “You’ll be sorry.”  No one in the group was deported and they all got to experience the rest of the Olympic Games, but it did put a damper on the festivities. 
 
In other news:
 
The Olympics ended yesterday.  The Closing Ceremonies were fun, I didn’t feel nearly as hot as I did at the Opening Ceremonies (thanks to a more manageable parade uniform) and there was plenty of room to sit down on the field and enjoy the show from a more relaxed setting.
 
In the days after my race I got to watch a few sports (beach volleyball and water polo significantly) and got to eat everything that I’ve been preventing myself from enjoying for the past few months.  At the USA House, an exclusive location for American athletes and their family members, I had 3 pieces of cheesecake at one sitting.  I also became an avid user of the Beijing mass transit system and got to enjoy the swap meet that ensues at the Olympic Village (athletes trade pins, T-shirts, warm-up jackets and whatnot with each other). 

I’ve had some nice moments with my family as we reflect on the significance of the moment, and reminisce about the journey that brought us here.
 
I’m going to end rather abruptly because I need a bit more time to process how I feel about the experience, and I also have to go to the Silk Market – a truly bizarre shopping experience.  My family leaves Beijing to go back to America this morning, but Diana and I are going to stay in China for a little longer to see some famous spots.  Thanks for reading all the posts.  It’s been a pleasure writing them and receiving your responses. 
 
mwd