From Talking Points Memo:

We've obtained yet another McCain campaign robocall, and this one levels perhaps the nastiest charge yet: It claims that Barack Obama callously denied newborns needed medical attention by opposing a measure to force doctors to preserve their lives when they survive botched abortions.

Although I'm unfond of robocalls in principle, the charge made in this particular example of the genre is true and undeniable. In an attempt to prove that up is down, Sargent links to this article from the St. Petersburg Times, which must be in the tank for Obama. The Democratic nominee lied during the debate when he said that such a law was already on the books. In fact, nurse Jill Stanek had already provided evidence that viable fetuses which had survived the abortion procedure were being put to death. If the law already covered the matter sufficiently, then why were the doctors witnessed by Stanek not arrested and tried?

And before you say it: Yes, I still favor a woman's right to choose. I also favor candidates who tell the truth during debates. And I liked TPM a lot more when it told the truth.

TPM also scores a McCain robocall which ties Obama to terrorist Bill Ayers.

And now we have a third one that says Obama "worked closely" with a "domestic terrorist" who bombed the U.S. Capitol and the Pentagon and killed Americans. Needless to say, a major campaign is underway.

He did indeed work closely with Ayers. The fact has been established beyond challenge.

Oddly, Sargent does not attempt to present a counter-argument; he is content to pretend that the charge is absurd on its face. In this, he reminds me of the New Republic's Jonathan Chait, who pretended that his publication had investigated the Ayers/Obama link extensively, even though the New Republic has never published a story mentioning Ayers, Obama and the Annenberg Challenge. (Fire up Google and see for yourself.)

The progs and the mainstream media have conspired to keep the facts from the public. This Washington Post piece claims to "fact check" the linkage, yet this is a "fact check" without facts. The Post deceptively gives the impression that the only thing linking the two men is the neighborhood in which they both live. Fortunately, a reader supplies the information that the WP left out:

Obama stated on the April 22nd Pennsylvania debate that he had a "flimsy" relationship with our US terrorist Mr. Ayers, when in reality he worked with this guy for at least 8 years (1995 to 2003).

Eight years. Odd, isn't it, that the esteemed Washington Post could leave out an eight-year working relationship? By way of illustrative comparison, Bonnie Parker and Clyde Barrow knew each other only four years. I suppose the Post could, with just as much credibility, claim that they barely knew each other.

Ayers was the co-founder of the Annenberg Challenge and personally selected Barack Obama to be the Chairperson. The two men almost certainly met via their wives, who both worked at the Sidley Austin law firm. They must have had a previously-established relationship -- why else would Ayers have picked the youthful Obama (who had yet to achieve glory at Harvard) to help run a $160 million project? If the two men barely knew each other, then why did Obama's political career begin in Ayers' living room?

The records of the Annenberg Challenge have been covered up. Nevertheless, we know this:

The joint effort between Barack Obama and terrorist William Ayers to "reform" Chicago schools was a flop. After spending $160 million, Chicago's children were still being left behind.

On page 14 of the executive summary we find that "the Challenge had little impact on student outcomes." On page 15, the report says: "There were no statistically significant differences between Annenberg schools and non-Annenberg schools in rates of achievement gain" and that "any improvements were much like those occurring in demographically similar non-Annenberg schools."

In 1998-99, just 36% of the Annenberg school students in grades three through eight were reading at or above national norms compared with 35% in Chicago schools citywide. In math, the results were similar. Some 43% of Annenberg students were at or above national norms versus 42% for non-Annenberg students.

High school graduation rates for both groups of students were the same at 40%. The Annenberg schools edged out Chicago schools in dropout rates — 35% to 36%. As the report said, there were no signs of improvement that warranted the expenditure of $160 million.

The CAC did not improve the schools, and in some ways made things worse. The executive summary also notes: "Classroom behavior, students' sense of self-efficacy, and social competence were weaker in 2001 than before the Challenge."

The report stated: "In 2001, students in Annenberg schools were somewhat less inclined than in 1994 to respect each other, work well together and help each other learn." Neither student attitudes nor student achievements were aided by Obama's efforts.

Obama and Ayers were indeed joined -- in failure. Why do "progressives" lie?