Obama claimed that because William Ayers committed his terrorist acts when Obama was only 8 years old that it's somehow okay for Obama to befriend him. Does that make it okay for Obama to lie to the American public about the extent of their relationship too?
Anyway, we all know that Ayers is unrepentant about his crimes and that only a "work accident" prevented him and his ilk from murdering US servicemen. His Sept 11th 2001 (published) interview is already reasonably well known (although not as widely as it should be- thanks to the MSM's singularly uninterested view of a major issue). After all, Obama touts his judgement as proof of his ability to lead America in place of executive experience. Never mind that his judgement was wrong on the Surge- what about his judgement in befriending a terrorist? In launching his political career at the home of a terrorist and using that terrorist's contacts to advance himself? What does that say about Barack Obama's judgement?
Have you ever been a friend or business associate of a terrorist? Not someone who, to your shock and horror, turned out secretly to have bombed government buildings. No, the question is whether you’ve ever befriended an unreconstructed radical whose past was well known to you when you entered his orbit and walked through doors he opened for you. Have you been chummy with an unapologetic terrorist who, years after you’d known and worked closely with him, was still telling the New York Times he regretted only failing to carry out more attacks — and that America still “makes me want to puke”?
Is that what American voters look for in a Presidential candidate these days?
What might not be quite so well known is this comment from Ayers, in his book-
I can't quite imagine putting a bomb in a building today--all of that seems so distinctly a part of then. But I can't imagine entirely dismissing the possibility, either.
This comes from a review at Slate from 2001-not a time when Barack Obama was 8 years old. Note at the link too, the crimes Ayers committed while on the run from the law.
Throughout Fugitive Days, Ayers reminds his readers that he's had to omit or change many facts throughout his narrative because they describe actions on his part that are, well, illegal.
No leadership experience, no record of accomplishment, close ties to a corrupt financier (Rezko), and close ties to a terrorist who carried out bombings on US soil.
How did Obama get to where he is today with a CV like that?