by Mark Silva
Alan Colmes of the FOX News Channel sat down with Bill Ayers, the University of Illinois at Chicago education professor and erstwhile Underground Weatherman. And Colmes will rejoin his erstwhile on-air partner, Sean Hannity, tonight to report on their talk.
Ayers had this to say about President Barack Obama committing an additional 17,000 troops to Afghanistan: "It's a mistake. It's a colossal mistake. And, you know, we've seen this happen before, Alan. We've seen a hopeful presidency, Lyndon Johnson's presidency, burn up in the furnace of war."
"I fear that this brilliant young man, this hopeful new administration, could easily burn their prospect of a great presidency in the war in Afghanistan or elsewhere,'' Ayers says in the interview airing at 9 pm EST on FOX's Hannity.
And Ayers had this to say about his own days in anti-Vietnam War protests, the group he cofounded sometimes making its point with bombs:
"I don't regret anything I did it to oppose the war. It was -- I did it to oppose the war. I don't regret it. I don't look back on those things and regret them, but I'm willing to rethink them. And there are many things which I'm going to rethink."
Ayers' friendship with Obama - the former Illinois senator served on civic boards with the professor, who hosted a small fundraiser for Obama's first state legislative campaign - became a target of the Republican rivals' campaign criticism last year. GOP running mate Sarah Palin accused Obama of "pallin' around with terrorists.''
Comments
Who cares what Ayers thinks.......Would this just be Faux News keeping the lie alive? How can we trust Faux with the associations they keep? It seems the red meat feeding frenzy marches on.......
Posted by: bill r. | February 23, 2009 3:38 PM
Bill Ayers is a friend of Daley's, nice...
Posted by: Bessie | February 23, 2009 4:05 PM
Leave it to Fixed News Channel to bring Bill Ayers back into the picture in order to distort the Aganistan conversation here in America.
We need to stabilize Afganistan and then get out of there. We never should have gone to Iraq, and Afganistan was bungled by Bush. The people who attacked us on 9/11 are in Pakistan. We should rethink our strategy on how to get at them without provoking the Pakistany govt. We can always re-enter Afganistan if we need to get someone there, it doesn't need to be done with hundreds of thousands of troops.
Posted by: Hulk Smash! | February 23, 2009 4:26 PM
Surges just postpone the inevitable. Take the American blood and money away, and you are back to the reality of the matter. We can't realistically sustain it. No real political gain happened in Iraq with our surge there. The Iraqis never got it together again after Bremmer, Rumsfeld, Bush and Cheney disbanded the Iraqi Army and security forces. Lots of people lied to us. The surge in Iraq was a failure. It just postponed things and gave Bush and Cheney cover--and McCain something to run on. Why would the Iraqis spill their own blood and money when America is so willing? They have yet to find a 1776 state of mind. And, once American troops leave--it would leave a big hole in the Iraqi economy. Not an incentive to get their act together. Please, no more American surges. No more lies. Read McNamara's book. He admitted that he--and all of them-- were wrong on Vietnam. No more expensive and heart breaking military action. How about the nation of Iraq do their own surge?
Posted by: Vivian | February 23, 2009 4:51 PM
Who cares what Ayers thinks.......Would this just be Faux News keeping the lie alive? How can we trust Faux with the associations they keep? It seems the red meat feeding frenzy marches on.......
Posted by: bill r. | February 23, 2009 3:38 PM
So if Ayers were to say the same thing on the Rachel Maddow show would you be as critical or dismissive of Prez Obama's friends' feeble attempt at understanding how to win a war?
Is your problem with the message, Ayers himself, - or the fact that it is more than ironic that the same words used to be critical of the Bush surge are now difficult to utter with Prez Obama running the show?
Bottom line --were you wrong before about a surge strategy being required to end a war in Iraq, or are you wrong now?
Posted by: heartburn | February 23, 2009 5:04 PM
Posted by: Vivian | February 23, 2009 4:51 PM
Vivian- when you say "We can't realistically sustain it." I have to ask do you understand the meaning of the verb "surge"? It is by definition a short term increased effort...of course it cannot be sustained- thats the plan!
The surge did work- Iraq has made vast improvements since ( and due to) the surge... where are you getting your info-other than McNamara's book of course?
Posted by: heartburn | February 23, 2009 5:19 PM
Bottom line --were you wrong before about a surge strategy being required to end a war in Iraq, or are you wrong now?
Posted by: heartburn | February 23, 2009 5:04 PM
...........
PrePuke,
The surge in Iraq worked? Is that why we're still occupying Iraq with 130,000 troops and are continuing to pay off sunni and shiite warlords not to kill us and each other?
Posted by: antacid | February 23, 2009 5:26 PM
The only reason FX has Ayers is they think he will be an embarrassment to Obama.
Other than that, who cares what he thinks?
Posted by: ornery | February 23, 2009 5:39 PM
heartburn--exactly. How long has "the surge"--or elevated troop level been going on in Iraq? Thanks for the concern.
Posted by: Vivian | February 23, 2009 5:40 PM
The surge did work- Iraq has made vast improvements since ( and due to) the surge... where are you getting your info-other than McNamara's book of course?
Posted by: heartburn | February 23, 2009 5:19 PM
..................
They've been fighting each other for over 1300 years over there, PrePuke. We could stay there for 100 years (like the clowns you support want to) and when we left they would still fight with each other.
There's going to be a civil war there, it just remains to be seen how big it will be. This and the influence that Iran has in the area now are some of the things that the war-mongering neocons that you supported should have thought of before they trumped up their reasons for invading Iraq in the first place.
Posted by: antacid | February 23, 2009 5:45 PM
Bill Ayers will never fade away as long as Obama is President.
Posted by: Inky | February 23, 2009 5:58 PM
heartburn....who the heck cares what Ayers thinks? He has nothing to say for America.....I don't care if he is on the Howdy Doody show.....what has given this clown insight?
Posted by: bill r. | February 23, 2009 6:46 PM
Who cares about Ayres' opinon?!!
Afghanistan/Pakistan are now Obama's wars.
The stimulus's extras are Obama's failure to keep Pelosi in check. Get on it, O!
Posted by: Ono | February 23, 2009 7:36 PM
Afghanistan/Pakistan are now Obama's wars. The stimulus's extras are Obama's failure to keep Pelosi in check. Get on it, O!
Posted by: Ono | February 23, 2009 7:36 PM
Yeah right, dream on little delusional Wingnut whackjob.
If you GOoPer nuts are dumb enough to believe that the BushCo stench on your pathetic party and our country was going to go away when Pres Obama took office then you nuts are even more delusional than I thought. We're still going to be cleaning up after the Bush Republican reign of terror 40-50 years from now.
Posted by: dose | February 23, 2009 8:29 PM
surge = genocide
Posted by: wake up | February 23, 2009 10:48 PM
I'm wondering with all the censoring the Swamp censors do, how do all these posts calling Republicans PrePukes pass muster?
Anyway, Lefty Loons, the surge has worked in Iraq, even your leader Obama has said so. In Afghanistan (Bush began sending more troops there last year), Obama and his people know the alternative is no alternative at all. Afghanistan cannot fall to the Taliban and Al Qaeda. The U.S. and the West need to succeed there.
When will the Left ever get an IQ above Zero?
Posted by: John D | February 24, 2009 12:40 AM
While I do believe Fox News is trying to keep the fire stoked about Ayers, I do not understand why an educated man such as him agreed to talk about a subject he is not well versed in. It is curious they would ask him to speak about this subject when he is a professor of education. Looks like he has an ego and doesn't want his fifteen minutes to be over as well.
Posted by: lochnessmonster | February 24, 2009 6:56 AM
heartburn....who the heck cares what Ayers thinks? He has nothing to say for America.....I don't care if he is on the Howdy Doody show.....what has given this clown insight?
Posted by: bill r. | February 23, 2009 6:46 PM
The news is here is the dissonance between Obama and Ayers- when during the campaign they were pretty much in agreement on what the US should be doing in Iraq or Afghanistan...
Posted by: heartburn | February 24, 2009 9:39 AM
heartburn.......You're kidding me...right? Funny....I didn't hear about the deep advisorship that Ayers held with anyone. You give this guy much more credence than Obama ever did. This is garbage and you "should" know it if you really don't. If you care what Ayers has to say....by all means listen to him. To most Americans....we could care less.
Posted by: bill r. | February 24, 2009 11:08 AM
heartburn.......You're kidding me...right? Funny....I didn't hear about the deep advisorship that Ayers held with anyone. You give this guy much more credence than Obama ever did. This is garbage and you "should" know it if you really don't. If you care what Ayers has to say....by all means listen to him. To most Americans....we could care less.
Posted by: bill r. | February 24, 2009 11:08 AM
I don't care what he has to say- never had... I do care what his actions have been though- as did anyone that was injured by his bombs meant to communicate for him...
--
He also provides insight into where Obama came from as well as what may have influenced him at the beginning of his career...this is a valid point of view when you consider that Obama himself offered little in the way of details of how he would lead other than a healthy amount of "present" votes during his short congressional career- Because of this the media ( that didn't regularly fawn all over Obama) will look for this info on their own... Ayers, Wright and Rashid Khalidi all had more than casual relationships with Obama - none of these relationships were looked at anywhere nearly as closely as they should have been...might be anecdotal, but more coverage, and critical investigative reporting was given to Palins family and teenage daughter than any of Obama;s relationships
Posted by: heartburn | February 24, 2009 11:50 AM
Apparently Ayers means a lot to the Chicago higher education system. Chicagons should be proud that Ayers, as well as other low lifes like the Daley clan, represent their fair state.
Posted by: Helmuth | February 26, 2009 10:46 PM
It's amazing how full of hate you Liberals are when you claim to love peace.
Posted by: Al | February 27, 2009 7:08 AM