« Brooks on Palin: “A Fatal Cancer to the Republican Party”
Does “Phone Sex” Make One a Terrorist? »



Senator McCain: Encouraging the Very Mentality He Condemns

October 9th, 2008
By PETE ABEL, Managing Editor

Print Print

Watch the first video, if you didn’t watch it earlier, when Shaun posted it. Next, in the second video, see the type of dangerous idiocy the first one yields. Now, answer my suggested question from the other day: Judged on the merits of Ayers’ and McCain’s current behavior, who should we view in the better light? The destructive youth turned lauded citizen and professor? Or the irascible youth turned lauded U.S. senator and presidential candidate?

_______________________

H/t Andrew Sullivan for sharing both clips.



This entry was posted on Thursday, October 9th, 2008 at 2:17 pm and is filed under Bill Ayers, Newsweek Blogitics, John McCain, Barack Obama, 2008 Elections. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

Viewing 92 Comments

    • ^
    • v
    "The destructive youth who became a peaceful, productive citizen/professor?"

    Ayres has been notably equivocal in his "apologies" for his youthful violence. He claims he was never a terrorist as his bombs targeted the state instead of innocent people...though there was, of course, the risk of collateral damage from his bombing American sites.

    To represent Ayres as a "peaceful, productive citizen/professor" is a grave mistake. He has never done time for his actions, nor has he shown any particular remorse.

    Ayres is peaceful simply because he has gotten older, secure in his academic position. He was a member of that generation of leftists, in Europe and America, committed to direct violent action. In Europe in particular there has been a reluctance to confront the reality of their crimes. Note, for example, the controversy over the current film "The Baader Meinhof Complex" in Germany.

    One may add, there are numerous war criminals who...years after their crimes...are found living the life of a peaceful citizen.

    Radovan Karadzic, for example, was working as a peaceful doctor when he was arrested for his war crimes.

    Many of Obama's supporters -- Shaun Mullen, for example -- have never attempted to say Ayres was a model citizen. Ayres' views on the United States, his contempt for its political process, parties, etc. are very extreme.

    PS: I should add, as most folks know, there is no real relationship between Ayres and Obama.
    • ^
    • v
    Pete, I'm trying to remember if you commented on the dangerous idiocy of antiwar protestors like the ones who heckled McCain at the GOP convention, or many other similar incidents? If you feel this is different, why is that? I just don't get it.

    Notice too that the interviewer in that clip focused on a few individuals- do you believe they're representative of the entire crowd at that campaign event? Do you think that an Obama opponent couldn't find some idiotic people at an Obama rally and film them?
    • ^
    • v
    Marlowe: Good, balanced comment except I beg to differ with your PS unless you are parsing the word 'is' as Bill Clinton did.

    The degree of closeness of the Ayers'- Obama relationship can certainly be debated, and whether or not there's any overlap in their views (I don't think there's much except for the benign stuff) but there most certainly was a working relationship between the two of them.
    • ^
    • v
    CStanley -- The problem with this, as I see it (and my view may very well not align w/ Pete's) is that there's a well of dangerous paranoia being tapped. I have no idea how shallow or deep that well is, and I won't try to speculate on when it was originally dug -- but that well was deepened considerably after 9/11. And it was deepened deliberately -- in part to gin up support for the Iraq War, but also as part of the ever-wider toxicity of partisan politics. (Think Rovian tactics as one of the drill bits)

    So Palin and McCain's stump rhetoric (and now ads) are working on a very dark side of some folks' psyches.

    It's one of the more disturbing (to me) trends in the GOP in recent years.
    • ^
    • v
    Well, I understand that Polimom and although I suppose this sounds like a "but they do it too" argument, I just honestly don't see the vast difference that you guys do.

    Soldiers families have been harassed at funerals by Code Pink- so are antiwar politicans to blame for that (particularly those who've used flaming rhetoric, like the Senator -was it Reid?- saying that Bush sent boys to die in Iraq for his own enjoyment, or Murtha accusing marines of war crimes?)
    • ^
    • v
    Marlowecan -- Thanks for the comment. I guess I give Ayers some latitude here for two reasons:

    (1.) There's no evidence he has bombed or encouraged anyone to bomb anything in 40 years. Does that make up for what he did 40 years ago? No. I find what he did 40 years ago as horrid, as reprehensible, as WRONG as anyone. But I also believe we atone for past sins primarily through our actions, and on that front, for 40 years, Ayers has walked the walk, even as he has failed to consistently talk the talk.

    (2.) As noted in earlier posts, Ayers has been recognized as a valued citizen in Chicago. If the community feared him, or if America thought he was dangerous , there would surely be an outcry when the mayor lauds him in public or when he's granted a model citizen award by the third largest city in the US. Furthermore, if he was dangerous, I just don't think he'd be allowed to operate as freely and openly as he does, nor be allowed to be a "Distinguished Professor" at U-of-I-Chicago.
    • ^
    • v
    CStanley -- I don't think I have posted on the whacko right's bad behavior any more or less frequently than the whacko left's. Regardless, I agree, both are reprehensible. I'll also add that I expected better of Sen. McCain and his camp. It's one thing to question an association, it's another thing all together to engage in blatant fear-mongering. And that's precisely what their current tact is. Net: Should anything dire happen to Sen. Obama, Sen. McCain must surely be held partially accountable. We are culpable if we become extremists or foment extremism.
    • ^
    • v
    The contrast is pretty clear here. Obama has never demonized war supporters, accused them of treason, or what have you. He even chose a war supporter as his VP.

    If war protesters take their demonstrations too far, it's not because they are following the respectful example set by Obama.

    Then there's McCain. He wants you to believe that Obama is an America hating terrorist, with the implication he'll bring down the country from the nation's highest elected office. How can you not get riled up about that if you take McCain at his word?
    • ^
    • v
    chriswww, the far left is already rabidly anti-Bush, and although Bush doesn't deserve the same level of scorn as terrrorist Bill Ayers, when Obama focuses on the fact that McCain has voted with Bush he's doing the same kind of fearmongering that fires up his base.

    Do you deny that many on the left consider Bush himself to be a terrorist?

    And if McCain doesn't say anything like what you claim he 'wants us to think', then why should I blame him for it when it's your inference, not his statements that are putting that out there? Obama has had past working relationships with people who are radical extremists, and many voters don't find that acceptable. I do think that McCain and Palin could present it more in the way that I stated it, but my statement is closer to what they actually say than yours is.
    • ^
    • v