I have written quite a bit in this blog on William Ayers, his anarchist views, his Marxist views and his views on education.  I have also written about Obama’s ties to Ayers in the educational arena and specifically about them sitting on boards together that gave educational dollars to support Ayers educational objectives.

This story simply won’t go away because of the ties between the two and specifically Ayers’ ideas of radicalized re-education.  William Ayers can try to rehabilitate his image in the present tense, but unfortunately for him, his past is a clear indication of his true views and cannot be obfuscated in a present day narrative no matter what he says.

Now, new information comes to light regarding Ayers’ association with Linda Darling-Hammond.  As American Thinker reports:

Darling-Hammond is a prominent and widely respected, though controversial, Professor of Education at Stanford. She shares with Ayers long time support for what I consider an authoritarian and ideological approach to education that includes advocacy of “social justice” teaching (not to be confused with support for social justice itself, mind you) and so-called “small schools.” 

Ayers and Darling-Hammond share a deeply held view that race is critical to explaining problems in education. [snip] Ayers has also endorsed Darling-Hammond’s call for whites to repay the “education debt” to people of color that has allegedly accumulated for centuries. Darling-Hammond said that repayment of the “education debt” should be the top priority of the next President. She contributed a chapter to a book edited by Ayers called “Education for Democracy.”

According to American Thinker this supports the idea that William Ayers has an influence on Obama’s educational policies:

Ayers’ influence on the incoming Obama administration has quite likely made itself felt for the first time.  The campaign today announced the appointment of Linda Darling-Hammond as co-head of the Presidential transition policy team on Education. 

Read Full Story Here

No matter your position on William Ayers’ acts during a time when Obama was 8 years old, I have always argued here that the true threat of a William Ayers is his educational philosophies and his power over our youth today.  Unfortunately, in today’s educational system, there are far too many liberal educators that distort history and do not teach our youth a truthful history.  William Ayers being the poster professor for this type of educational system that our youth now endures.  It is time to take back our educational system and teach our youth the truth.

I’ve been very critical of CNN this election cyle, but have to give credit where credit is due; this is a fair and thoughtful look at the Obama Ayers connection.

One additional point from Sol Stern of City Journal in his article The Bomber as School Reformer; Bill Ayers is still a radical, and while his role in education reform sounds innocuous it is anything but.

Calling Bill Ayers a school reformer is a bit like calling Joseph Stalin an agricultural reformer…

…As I have shown in previous articles in City Journal, Ayers’s school reform agenda focuses almost exclusively on the idea of teaching for “social justice” in the classroom. This has nothing to do with the social-justice ideals of the Sermon on the Mount or Martin Luther King’s “I Have a Dream” speech. Rather, Ayers and his education school comrades are explicit about the need to indoctrinate public school children with the belief that America is a racist, militarist country and that the capitalist system is inherently unfair and oppressive.

Some may wonder why bring up William Ayers now? Hasn’t this already been addressed? No, it hasn’t. Last week Stanley Kurtz of the National Review wrote an article entitled Obama’s Challenge that details Senator Obama’s connection to William Ayers as much more than a passing aquaintance. Obama was essentially William Ayer’s money man on his foundation Chicago Annenberg Foundation. The full article is definitely worth a read, and below are excerpts.

The partnership between Ayers and Obama is about much more than the number of occasions on which the two were recorded together in the same room. As CAC board chair, Obama was essentially authorizing the funding of Ayers’s own educational projects, and the projects of Ayers’s radical allies. And especially in CAC’s first year, Ayers was largely in charge of the process. One of CAC’s own evaluations notes that during 1995, CAC was a “Founder-Led Foundation.” That is, Ayers was not merely an ex officio board member that year, but as the key founder and guiding spirit of CAC, he was effectively running the show…

…So when CAC’s own evaluators call 1995 the period of the “Founder-Led Foundation,” they are essentially saying that, in 1995, Ayers was the most powerful individual at CAC. The Obama campaign treats that suggestion as “absurd,” yet it is effectively made by CAC’s own evaluators. This needs to be kept in mind when considering the Obama campaign’s minimization of the Ayers-Obama connection that year…

…While the appearance of self-dealing receded after CAC’s first year, the reality may still have been in place. Evaluators, both internal and external, have criticized CAC for over-committing its funds in 1995, and also for doing far too little to demand accountability from grant recipients, very much including the initial batch. Many of the initial grantees continued to receive funds for years. Evaluators consistently note the lack of flexibility in grants, and complain that the huge 1995 commitments, with relatively few changes in follow-on years, significantly undercut CAC’s impact and effectiveness…

…The Chicago Annenberg Challenge stands as Barack Obama’s most important executive experience to date. By its own account, CAC was a largely a failure. And a series of critical evaluations point to reasons for that failure, including a poor strategy, to which the foundation over-committed in 1995, and over-reliance on community organizers with insufficient education expertise. The failure of CAC thus raises entirely legitimate questions, both about Obama’s competence, his alliances with radical community organizers, and about Ayers’s continuing influence over CAC and its board, headed by Obama. Above all, by continuing to fund Ayers’s personal projects, and those of his political-educational allies, Obama was lending moral and material support to Ayers’s profoundly radical efforts. Ayers’s terrorist history aside, that makes the Ayers-Obama relationship a perfectly legitimate issue in this campaign.

The radicalism Ayers wanted in the classroom is also discussed in the article The Bomber as School Reformer

As I have shown in previous articles in City Journal, Ayers’s school reform agenda focuses almost exclusively on the idea of teaching for “social justice” in the classroom. This has nothing to do with the social-justice ideals of the Sermon on the Mount or Martin Luther King’s “I Have a Dream” speech. Rather, Ayers and his education school comrades are explicit about the need to indoctrinate public school children with the belief that America is a racist, militarist country and that the capitalist system is inherently unfair and oppressive. As a leader of this growing “reform” movement, Ayers was recently elected vice president for curriculum of the American Education Research Association, the nation’s largest organization of ed school professors and researchers.