In response to my post on Bill Ayers (“The One Good Thing About the Ayers Relationship“), I’ve had the pleasure of getting into a spirited debate with a commenter (endithinks). With the latest back and forth, however, I came to the conclusion that the discussion had outgrown the Comments section and deserved to have a post all to itself. So here it is:
(endithinks)
“First of all this has all been investigated during the primaries. Hillary Clinton tried to bring this up and it was debunked as irrelevant.”
(jakoye23)
That was the Democratic primary. This is the national election. Many more people are just starting to pay attention now and are not aware of what was and was not brought up in the primaries. I think people have a right to know all the available information about the two candidates.
(endithinks)
“Secondly, if anyone you knew did anything in their past that would make you just as guilty? Have you ever known anyone who jaywalked? That means you are a criminal. Have you ever met someone who drove drunk? That means you are a felon. Have you ever known someone who did drugs? That makes you a felon.”
(jakoye23)
No, and I never said that Obama shares Ayers’ guilt. Obama’s “crime” is associating with an unrepentent terrorist. An unrepentet terrorist is a bit higher on the importance scale than a jaywalker or a drug-user. A terrorist uses violence, without state sanction, to achieve political ends. That’s what Ayers did and that makes him despicable in my eyes.
(endithinks)
“It is ridiculous. Ayers did his despicable actions in the 60’s when Obama was 8.”
(jakoye23)
Irrelevant. Think about it: would you associate with a former Nazi concentration camp commandant? Sure, there’s a difference in scale here, between such a person’s crimes and those of Ayers’, but at its base, the conduct is similar: harming others to advance/satisfy your political beliefs.
(endithinks)
“He was never convicted,”
(jakoye23)
Again, irrelevant. There is no doubt that Ayers is guilty of being a terrorist. He has admitted it himself (more like “boasted”, actually). The fact that he wasn’t convicted because of prosecutorial ineptitude is not an indication that he’s somehow innocent. Was OJ innocent?
(endithinks)
“and Obam met him when he was a Professor at a well respected University.”
(jakoye23)
Again, irrelevant. Would you choose to work with that same Nazi commandant if you had met him later in his life, when he had “settled down” and become a respected profressor at a university? To me, a “yes” answer to that question indicates a foggy moral mirror and very questionable judgement.
(endithinks)
“Just think about every person you have had a casual relationship with and then see if it passes the test. I hope I don’t offend you.”
(jakoye23)
You do not offend me. I enjoy the give and take.
(endithinks)
“Obama has said repeatedly that he abhors the violence used in demonstration against the illegal Vietnam war. He has made it clear that violence is not the answer. Obama had a casual aquaintance after the man was reformed.”
(jakoye23)
This is a start. What Obama hasn’t done is explain why he worked with the guy even though he knew about his terrorist past. I know, I know, plenty of people worked with Ayers, including Republicans. They should have to answer that question as well. But Obama hasn’t really answered that question. I know how I would answer the question. But no one has gotten a straight answer out of Obama. Why was it “okay” in his eyes to have Ayers host a “meet and greet” at his house that launched Obama’s political career? Was it a case of a young politician getting help from whomever he could and shady pasts be damned? Okay, then just say that!
Obama seems to have a history of “using” people until they become inconvenient to his political ambitions. This seems rather troubling to me.
(endithinks)
“Isn’t America the land of second chances? Don’t we say if you commit a crime (and are convicted which Ayers was not) then you do the time. After the time supposedly you are clear and free?”
(jakoye23)
Well, you may be one to forgive and forget, but I am not so Christian. I believe in revenge and an eye for an eye. I believe that killers should die. I believe that someone like Ayers should be shunned, despite his supposed rehabilitation. People were killed in the Weathermen’s campaign of terror. Ayers may not have killed anyone directly himself, but he was part of that group and planted bombs himself which very well could have killed people. And he certainly knew what all his fellow terrorists were doing. So no, I am not willing to forgive Ayers, ESPECIALLY because he is not repentent. How can you forgive someone who doesn’t ask for forgiveness?
But, and this is the important point I want to make to you, to me it does not matter very much what Obama’s relationship with Ayers was. It really doesn’t. I don’t like it and it’s not the path I would’ve chosen, but in the end I don’t think it amounts to much. I can understand how a young politician would accept help from someone with political power in his community, even if that person were somewhat unsavory.
The problem I have with this whole situation is Obama’s lack of transparency and his seeming inability to admit error. And this is not isolated to the William Ayers situation (the Surge, the housing crisis). For liberals who have complained about the Bush Administration’s veil of secrecy and George Bush’s stubborness and unwillingness to admit when he was wrong (all very valid points), for those same liberals to now DEFEND Obama’s attempts at obfuscation (“Oh, he was just a guy in my neighborhood”) is the height of hypocrisy. Obama is being disingenuous, like politicians are much too often. Does this disqualify him from the presidency? No. But it certainly strips away any kind of attempt by the Left to put a mantle of righteousness on him. Obama is blessed with unique gifts of speech and manner, as well as superior intellect. All good things, but he also has the faults that almost all other politicians have: narcissism, inability to tell the truth, pandering.
He is not the worst of our current crop of politicians, but I also do not think he is the best either. Is John McCain any better? Well, in the interest of keeping this post less than novel-length, I’ll give the short answer of “yes” and then leave it up to the verdict of the American people whether they agree with me or not.
