Known by the company he keeps

Whether or not Barack Obama is or was, in fact, a Muslim, or whether he actually attended a madrassa, is not of any particular benefit in this commentator's mind.

That said, what is not only of benefit but germane pursuant to his being trustworthy of American ideals and our Constitution are the lifelong associations he has kept and then systematically disregarded when evidence of their anti-American viewpoints came to light.

In no particular order, there is, of course, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright. Wright's anti-American, anti-white, afro-centric rantings have been well-documented. The Obama family's 20-year association with Wright should remain a troubling concern. I write nothing new, at this point, that I and many others have not chronicled before.

The difference this time is the furor that has erupted over vice-presidential nominee Sarah Palin's remark that Obama's past associations with "[domestic] terrorists" make him "unfit" to be president.

For those who are prone to being overly sensitive, "unfit" can be argued as being harsh – but with that said, his "fitness" pursuant to holding the highest office in the land is open to question and examination based on the company he kept prior to holding office and subsequent to same.

The problem I see is not necessarily that he held close, valued relationships with domestic terrorists and preachers of hatred and anarchy – rather, it is the length of time said relationships flourished and how quickly he (supposedly) abandoned them when they were exposed to open criticism.

Prior to Wright becoming the lead-in for newscasts and publications worldwide, Obama and family were perfectly content to sit adoringly under his tutelage. He was referenced as their spiritual leader, confidant, mentor and close friend.

Prior to Michael Pfleger's hate-filled diatribe from the pulpit of Obama's church, he was also called a close associate, mentor, personal friend and spiritual adviser. He donated and raised money for Obama's campaigns. He hosted faith forums and received a $225,000 grant for his St. Sabina's work, thanks to Obama. It should here be noted that both Pfleger and Wright have publicly bestowed the highest praises upon Louis Farrakhan.

Obama's relationship with Antoin "Tony" Rezko, the imprisoned slumlord and extortionist, is another one of his relationships that deserves examination. Rezko, as reported by Salon.com, "built part of his fortune by exploiting the black community that Obama had served in the [Illinois] Senate, and by milking government programs meant to benefit black-owned businesses. But Obama took Rezko's money even after the businessman was sued by the city of Chicago for failing to heat his low-income apartments and even after Rezko was caught using a black business partner to obtain minority set-asides for a fast food franchise at O'Hare Airport." ("How Close Were Barack Obama and Tony Rezko?" by Edward McClelland; Jan. 22, 2008.) There is also the problematic question of Obama and Rezko's sweetheart property deal.

Add to those three the domestic terrorist William Ayers, Frank Marshall Davis and Saul "The Red" Alinski. Saul "The Red" authored "Rules for Radicals" and was the subject of FBI and congressional investigations. Davis also came under surveillance and investigation by the FBI, yet Obama references Davis as someone who gave him advice on various matters, including race.

Davis, a communist, viewed capitalism as a "thoroughly rotten system." Ayers is quoted as not regretting any of his domestic terrorism. He is married to Bernardine Dohrn, a former FBI "10 Most Wanted List" member. The picture that emerges from these relationships and other equally problematic associations with anarchists – both past and present – is one of a man who has either been inexplicably drawn to the most reprobate of anarchists, or a man that has spent a lifetime making extraordinarily bad intra-personal judgments.

Regardless of which is the case, Sarah Palin is right to question exactly what he truthfully stands for, and so should the voters. How can one man make so many incredibly poor decisions unless they weren't by accident? Was he lying to them about his true feelings, or is he lying to the American public about his true feelings? Either way, it calls into question his "fitness" to be president.