Me for VP: because I'm not one of those who maybe came from a background of, you know, reading Bill Shakespeare but I sure as heck can make much ado about nothin.'
Seriously, "pallin' around with terrorists?" This just smacks to me of the same kind of tactic whereby you say 9/11 and Saddam Hussein enough times in the same sentence in an attempt to get people to equate the two (and unfortunately they will. There are still people who think Obama is Muslim, all evidence aside). Never mind that charges against Ayers were dropped, that he is now a university professor (are all of his students pallin' around with terrorists too?), and that it could be seriously argued that calling him a terrorist is debatable. In fact, read this segment obtained from Wikipedia about the
Weathermen:
In his 2001 book about his Weatherman experiences, Bill Ayers stated his objection to describing the WUO (Weather Underground Organization) as "terrorist". Ayers wrote: "Terrorists terrorize, they kill innocent civilians, while we organized and agitated. Terrorists destroy randomly, while our actions bore, we hoped, the precise stamp of a cut diamond. Terrorists intimidate, while we aimed only to educate. No, we're not terrorists." Dan Berger, in his book about the Weatherman, Outlaws in America, quotes Ayers' objection, then adds, The WUO's actions were more than just educational — one could argue that there was a component of 'intimidating' the government and police attached to the actions — but the group purposefully and successfully avoided injuring anyone, not just civilians but armed enforcers of the government. Its war against property by definition means that the WUO was not a terrorist organization — it was, indeed, one deeply opposed to the tactic of terrorism." Berger also describes the organization's activities as "a moral, pedagogical, and militant form of guerrilla theater with a bang."
I think this is a case of demonizing the scary liberal left-wing, or "the other" in a way akin to McCarthy ranting about the commies. It's very convenient to find some method where you can attach the word "terrorist" to something, take it out of context, stick it in a sentence with Obama's name, and generate images of the twin towers connected to the man with the middle name Hussein. We're back to the "be afraid, be very afraid" mantra that was so pervasive during Bush's second run for office: "vote for me or die." The irony is that it seems to me the people who fall most heavily for this sort of pandering to their basest fears are those who are the least likely to actually be attacked. The New Yorkers who witnessed 9/11 and its aftermath (including me and my husband) are almost overwhelmingly in support of Obama. Those of us who live and/or work in big cities are the most vulnerable, and yet these very cities mostly vote democratic. So I take a bit of offense to people acting as if they have something to be afraid of, when they'll be just fine should another strike occur. Joe Six-pack, you gonna fall for this one? Remember WMDs?
And I'd like to bring up the topic of an incurious mind again, which I touched on in
this post about Palin; there's a great article by Charles J. Brown called "Palin, Passports, Fake Snobs, and Real People." Here's a quote: "I know I have one quality that Sarah Palin never will: curiosity about what exists beyond my corner of the planet." Read it in full
here.
