Pants on Fire

McCain gets a Pants On Fire rating from Politifact for his ad about Obama and Ayers and CAC. Their analysis debunks the idea that Ayers and Obama ran the Challenge together and debunks the claim that CAC had a "radical" mission (yes, it sought "radical" reform of schools, but I think before this campaign a sensible person would understand what that meant and agree that radical change of poorly performing schools was a good thing), debunks the insinuation that there was anything sinister about the indirect funding arrangement.

But Ayers' views on education, though certainly reform-oriented and left-of-center, are not considered anywhere near as radical as his Vietnam-era views on war. And even if they were, there was a long list of individuals involved with the Chicago Annenberg Challenge whose positions provided them far more authority over its direction than Ayers' advisory role gave him.

Let's look at a few, starting with the funder. Annenberg was a lifelong Republican and former ambassador to the United Kingdom under President Richard Nixon. His widow, Leonore, has endorsed McCain. Kurtz might just as plausibly have accused Obama and the foundation of "translating Annenberg's conservatism into practice."

Among the other board members who served with Obama were: Stanley Ikenberry, former president of the University of Illinois; Arnold Weber, former president of Northwestern University and assistant secretary of labor in the Nixon administration; Scott Smith, then publisher of the Chicago Tribune; venture capitalist Edward Bottum; John McCarter, president of the Field Museum; Patricia Albjerg Graham, former dean of the Harvard University Graduate School of Journalism, and a host of other mainstream folks.

"The whole idea of it being radical when it was this tie of blue-chip, white-collar, CEOs and civic leaders is just ridiculous," said the foundation's former development director, Marianne Philbin.

[...]

This attack is false, but it's more than that – it's malicious.