That would be the talking point many respond with when Barack Obama’s relationship to William Ayers is brought up. Other strategies would include minimizing what Ayers, his wife Bernadine Dohrn and the Weatherman actually did and noting controversial figures who are connected to John McCain. Some will also complain that it is only a “scant” relationship that Obama had with Ayers. Let’s see how well these arguments hold up.
Let’s first deal with the actions of William Ayers, Bernadine Dohrn and the Weatherman over the years.
William Ayers did not care about innocent people being killed by his bombs.
Dohrn refused to testify in regard to the crime in which “two Nyack police officers and a guard were killed”.
According to the FBI informant Dohrn planted a bomb that killed a police officer.
They discussed killing 25 million die-hard capitalists in re-education camps.
William Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn are unrepentant to this day.
Trying to declare these people were only doing property damage certainly does not cover the extent of what they wanted to accomplish. One also has to wonder at the desperation of approving of the use of two bombs, each with at least a dozen sticks of dynamite, as an appropriate means of committing vandalism to make a political point. Then again, it may just be a complete lack of morality or a personal confession to future action that accounts for someone sinking to such a level of argument.
As for the guilt by association or merely scant relationship replies, those do not square with even the currently known facts. Obama chose to begin his political career in Ayers living room. He served on several boards with Ayers and also helped direct money to Ayers “education” projects. Obama also listed a Williams Ayers book as one of his favorites. This is guilt by choosing to participate. Let’s make it clear that this does not mean Obama is a terrorist but it does mean he chose to not only associate with but to participate in work with an unrepentant domestic terrorist and small c communist/anarchist radical. William Ayers has never been quite about his past and his views. (see here and here)
The attempt at moral equivalence has already failed due to this side of the argument being so flawed due to outright deceit or complete ignorance of those trying to use it. But let’s consider that McCain has associated with controversial figures as well. One could list Keating, Kissinger and Oliver North to name a few. However, it’s pretty obvious that none of these individuals set bombs in the United States with no care for the potential loss of life and still hope they could have done more to violently overthrow the capitalist system. They also did not consider it a good thing that regions of the United States would be occupied by the Soviet Union or Cuba after they overthrew the current establishment. Neither did they talk of how to exterminate 25 million who would stubbornly remain capitalists. This side of the argument also fails due to the extreme dissimilarities already obvious with the attempted comparisons.
But even if the moral equivalency gambit were not apples to oranges, what goes unstated by those who try to save Barack Obama from his Ayers problem is that Obama and surrogates have repeatedly lied about the depth of this relationship.
First is was just a guy in the neighborhood and their kids went to the same school. But their kids could not go to the same school because Ayers’ children are adults. Then Obama says it was just a board they worked on, but we’ve seen that isn’t the case. The story has continued to morph from Obama didn’t know about Ayers’ past to he thought Bill Ayers was rehabilitated.
What Obama’s relationship with Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn shows is that Barack Obama has no problem participating in radical causes with unrepentant domestic terrorists and that he lies about it. This has become a pattern of also participating with other radicals, race baiters and corrupt political fixers with the addition of Rezko, Jeremiah Wright, “Father” Michael Phleger, Rashid Khalidi, and Odinga in Kenya and being deceptive about those connections.
At best, Barack Obama has a serious and consistent inability to judge the character of individuals. Many, right and left politically, were dismayed at George Bush saying he had a sense of Putin’s soul; yet even now there are multiple radicals, domestic terrorists and corrupt politicians that Obama has actively worked with. If it’s simply a matter of these people not being who Obama thought they were, why should anyone believe Barack Obama will judge world leaders any better? There are still many countries that do not have the best interests of the United States or even liberal democracy in mind, and would have serious motives for being dishonest in their negotiations.
If Barack Obama, as President, should have to say that Hugo Chavez or some other leader is not the person he thought they were, the damage to this country will not be undone. Of course that’s working with the assumption that Obama is just the victim of his own poor judgment, that he was fooled by these corrupt and extreme individuals. Perhaps Obama was not deceived, but then this only confirms his dishonesty and extreme worldview. Should that be the case, the true picture of Barack Obama becomes ever more disturbing and is in fact even more dangerous for the United States, should he become President.
Trackposted to: Rosemary's Thoughts, , Political Byline, Faultline USA, Woman Honor Thyself, McCain Blogs, Right Truth, The World According to Carl, DragonLady's World, Pirate's Cove, Cao's Blog, NN&V, Democrat=Socialist, Conservative Cat, and Right Voices, thanks to Linkfest Haven Deluxe.