McCain and McVeigh

What if John McCain served on a foundation board with Timothy McVeigh?

Would that be a relationship the media would like to explore?

Or how about the Unabomber?

Suppose McCain accepted campaign contributions from Ted Kaczynski and planned the nation's future education policy together?

Would that be an association worthy of scrutiny?

I ask these questions because Barack Obama says his relationship with Weather Underground terrorist bomber William Ayers was no more than "tangential."

But, what if McCain had a similarly "tangential" relationship with some other terrorist bomber? Is it conceivable the man would still be in the presidential race? Or would the Big Media have drummed him out? I don't think there is any question about it. McCain would today be an asterisk in the history of presidential politics.

What is the difference?

Is the difference the body count? Is it because McVeigh and Kaczynski were more skilled terrorists? Is it because their deadly spree of bombings are more recent? Would anyone accept the excuse that McCain didn't know about the history of these terrorists when he first met them?

The only difference I see between McVeigh, Kaczynski and Ayers is that the former two have been punished for their crimes. Ayers, the scion of a nuclear power billionaire, inexplicably had a get-out-of-jail-free card. And he has gone on, ever since, to relish in his past, holding on to the same radical Marxist views that inspired his terrorist leadership and to find new ways to subvert the country he has hated since his misguided youth.

Obama says he was only 8 years old when Ayers went underground.

Big deal. I wasn't born for 30 years after Leopold and Loeb committed their heinous crime, but I still knew about them – long before I became an adult.

Barack Obama wants to be president of the United States. He wants to select Cabinet officials. He wants us to trust his judgment of people and policies. Yet, he thinks he can get away with pleading ignorance about the past and present of one of the most notorious and diabolical domestic terrorists in the history of the United States – a traitor, a self-declared enemy of the state, a bomber, the husband of a woman on the FBI's Ten Most Wanted List for three years.

While it's true that Obama has now called Ayers terrorist activities "despicable acts," he has not distanced himself from Ayers' ideas, his current activities, the agenda that has never changed. Are we to take comfort in the fact that Obama officially denounces the tactic of terrorism? Are we to excuse the fact that Obama is a partner with Ayers on promoting the same revolutionary agenda from which Ayers has never deviated?

I am gratified to an extent that the Ayers story is now getting some attention beyond the pages of WND and the airwaves of talk radio. But the story has hardly been fully explored – even by Obama's ill-equipped, unworthy opponent.

Think about it.

Ayers is simply a less competent terrorist than McVeigh and Kaczynski. As he will gladly tell anyone who will listen, he holds the same views today as when he and his terrorist wife declared war on America in 1970.

When is Obama going to denounce not just the bombings, but the ideology and worldview that inspired Ayers' reign of terror?

As long as the Big Media remain in Obama's hip pocket and characterize Ayers as some kind of misunderstood hippie, the Democratic presidential candidate should be regarded as a political ally of Weather Underground.

In fact, he should be considered the vanguard of the Weather Aboveground. The communist terrorist bombers of the 1970s – the folks who tried to blow up the Capitol and the Pentagon – are about to put their man in the White House.