Accuracy in Media

An interesting contribution to Barack Obama’s campaign shows up in the records of the Federal Election Commission. Casey Kauffman of Al-Jazeera, who lists his occupation as a journalist in Doha, gave the Democratic candidate $500 in February. 

Al-Jazeera, which most U.S.-based cable and satellite providers have rejected for airing because of its terrorist links and anti-American programming, probably won’t be playing much of a role in the American presidential campaign. But the contribution is indicative of the bias that infects the media here and around the world.

The depth of the deception that is now underway can be understood by analyzing the significance of Obama’s “I love America” foreign policy speech in Berlin, Germany, in view of the fact that the candidate and his media acolytes continue to conceal the central role that a Stalinist Communist by the name of Frank Marshall Davis played in his upbringing.

In Berlin, Obama almost sounded like Ronald Reagan, who became a strong anti-communist by fighting them in Hollywood. “And on the twenty-fourth of June, 1948, the Communists chose to blockade the western part of the city,” Obama noted. “They cut off food and supplies to more than two million Germans in an effort to extinguish the last flame of freedom in Berlin. The size of our forces was no match for the much larger Soviet Army. And yet retreat would have allowed Communism to march across Europe. Where the last war had ended, another World War could have easily begun. All that stood in the way was Berlin. And that’s when the airlift began―when the largest and most unlikely rescue in history brought food and hope to the people of this city.”

Obama sounded like a veteran anti-communist. But it was completely at variance with what we know about him. Obama closely associated with communists for much of his life and career. We’ve heard about some of them, including communist terrorists Bill Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn. But one communist that few in the media want to talk about is Frank Marshall Davis, his mentor and father-figure. Davis actually wrote a poem in honor of the Soviet Red Army that Obama denounced in Berlin. This helps demonstrate the magnitude of his flip-flop.

Obama refers to Davis as just “Frank” in his 1995 book, Dreams From My Father, but does note that he was a contemporary of black authors Richard Wright and Langston Hughes. What Obama doesn’t mention is that “Frank” stayed with the Communist Party USA (CPUSA) while Hughes and Wright broke from it. In fact, Davis was so extreme that he accused Wright of “treason” for exposing the CPUSA.

Davis’s influence over Obama is demonstrated by the fact that Obama left Davis in Hawaii, attended socialist conferences and picked Marxist professors as his friends in college, went to Reverend Jeremiah Wright’s church with his children, and then launched his political career in the home of Ayers and Dohrn.

While Ayers gets most of the attention, it is Dohrn who is more important. She refuses to deny credible reports that she planted a bomb that killed a San Francisco policeman. The whole story is detailed in our new AIM Report. But is anybody in the media willing to ask Obama about her terrorist activities?

While Ayers and Dohrn and their comrades took instructions and advice from Hanoi and Havana and even Cuban and Soviet intelligence operatives, Davis was even more notorious. He not only belonged to the CPUSA when it functioned as an apologist for Stalin, but Davis took the Stalinist line when Stalin made common cause with Hitler. The Germans at Obama’s speech might be interested in this aspect of the story. So might an American audience.

We already knew Davis was a Stalinist. NAACP member Edward Berman testified that “comrade Davis” tried to take over meetings of the organization in Hawaii “for the purpose of converting it into a front for the Stalinist line.”

But veteran anti-communist researcher and author Herbert Romerstein has now brought to our attention even more damaging information. He points out that Davis was one of the signers of a statement issued by the League of American Writers in June of 1941 during the Soviet-Nazi Pact.

It said in part, “We have warned that America must be defended not by involvement in this war, or by steps toward dictatorship, or by pursuing a course of imperialist expansion, but by preserving peace and expanding democracy on the economic, political and cultural levels. Today, we must ask whether the present policy of the administration and the program of big business are not leading us toward war and fascism in the name of resistance to war and fascism.”

In other words, as long as the Nazis and the Soviets were allies, Davis didn’t want the U.S. to go to war against the Nazis. 

The statement asked a number of questions, including, “How best as writers can we resist the drive toward war and reaction which threatens our democratic culture?” The statement is printed on page 973 of Appendix IX of the Special Committee of Un-American Activities in 1944.

Romerstein comments that “This is clear support of the Soviet-Nazi Pact by Davis a short time before June 22, 1941, when Germany attacked the Soviet Union and the Communist Party line changed from peace to war.”

The point bears repeating: once the Soviets came under attack, the CPUSA line, which was adopted by party member Davis, turned into one supporting war on the Nazis.

This is the man that Obama’s white grandfather selected as the future candidate’s role model and mentor.

And yet on Thursday in Berlin, Obama declared himself on the side of those who opposed Davis. “When you, the German people, tore down that wall―a wall that divided East and West; freedom and tyranny; fear and hope―walls came tumbling down around the world,” he said.

Davis was an apologist for that tyranny. He read his “poems” to a teenage Obama and advised him that black people had a right to hate white people, which certainly helps explain why he would eventually end up in Wright’s church.

Has Obama truly broken with the forces of international communism, which had so much influence over him? If the media don’t ask the question, the increasing numbers of those who know about Davis, Wright, Ayers, Dohrn and other questionable Obama links and associations will see the media coverage for what the McCain campaign labels it―a love affair with Obama. In short, the pro-Obama media bias will backfire in a big way. There is evidence it already is. 

Professor Paul Kengor, author of a book about Reagan’s anti-communism, examined the work that Herbert Romerstein and I have done on the Obama-Davis relationship and concludes that the evidence must not be ignored. Yet liberals and “progressives” in the press and elsewhere ignore, distort or downplay it. Some reporters, like Dana Milbank of the Washington Post, have treated it like a laughing matter.

Kengor wonders what the press would think “of, say, a John McCain mentor who had toed the line for Hitler? I can tell you that I, as a conservative Republican, would be pretty darned disappointed and would demand some answers. I would not turn it into a joke. And if McCain did not absolutely, convincingly repudiate it, I absolutely would not vote for him.”

But when it comes to Obama, Kengor notes that, “The end result is that the bad guys on the communist far-left, such as the likes of Frank Marshall Davis, continue to get a pass long after they’ve departed this world, as will those who consider them mentors. These were extreme leftists who hurt liberalism―who hurt some of the dearest liberal causes. Davis, in death, is protected, his dirty work covered up, by a press who must now protect their anointed one.”

Obama, of course, is the anointed one, for the U.S. press as well as reporters for the Arab government-funded Al-Jazeera. Now we witness the latest phase of the love affair as Obama, with the help of the media, portrays himself as an anti-communist in the Reagan mode who truly understands the battle between Soviet tyranny and human freedom and came down on the right side. Nothing could be further from the truth.

The good news is that a Rasmussen poll finds that many people aren’t buying it. It found that 49 percent of voters think that reporters are trying to help Obama win in November. It also found that 45 percent say that most reporters would hide information if it hurt the candidate they wanted to win.

What could that information be? Could it have something to do with Frank Marshall Davis? Or Bernardine Dohrn? Are there more red skeletons in the closet?   

Ready to fight back against media bias?
Join us by donating to AIM today.


Comments are turned off for this article.