Perhaps with the safety of the completed election securely behind, Peter Slevin of the Washington Post did a very cutesy article covering the not-so-cutesy terrorist, Bill Ayers.
Ayers was gracious enough to come out of the woodwork to offer his viewpoints on the Republicans demonizing him during the campaign.
"Pal around together? What does that mean? Share a milkshake with two straws?" Ayers said.
No William, palling around together might include one pal giving another a glowing review of their book, or perhaps the two of you serving together on the board of the Chicago Annenberg Challenge, or maybe even inviting Obama over to your home to help launch his political career. Hell, who's to say Bernardine Dohrn wasn't serving up milkshakes in your living room at the time? But maybe we're just splitting hairs on defining the term ‘pal.'
He goes on to say:
"I think my relationship with Obama was probably like thousands of others in Chicago. And, like millions and millions of others, I wish I knew him better."
Millions and millions of others do not have the same relationship that you have with Obama as outlined above, therefore, you do know him better.
Slevin continues on drumming up sympathy for Ayers, citing his perseverance in continuing to teach and write amidst very serious death threats.
He even manages to minimize the impact of Ayers past by writing:
Beyond the three conspirators killed in the 1970s when a bomb exploded prematurely, no one was injured in a campaign described by one critic as "immensely bad ideas and dreadful tactics."
Harmless really. It was only the three conspirators who were killed. No harm, no foul as we like to say on the basketball court. Though I am sure the family of Diana Oughton, a talented young woman who was used by Ayers to carry out terrorist attacks, might disagree that no one was injured.
The Post article conveniently leaves out the fact that one of Ayers bombings was designed to kill army officers in New Jersey, though it accidentally exploded in a New York townhouse.
Lest we forget that in regards to the day he successfully bombed the Pentagon, Ayers says, "Everything was absolutely ideal. ... The sky was blue. The birds were singing. And the bastards were finally going to get what was coming to them."
And of course, there is William's mantra to "Kill all the rich people. ... Bring the revolution home. Kill your parents."
But hey, no one was injured.
The article didn't stop there in its sheer absurdity, inserting a contradiction one finds difficult to understand.
In a story that appeared by coincidence in The New York Times on September 11, 2001, Ayers was quoted as saying that he did not regret setting bombs and, "I feel we didn't do enough." ...
Asked Tuesday if he wishes he had set more bombs, Ayers answered, "Never."
Ayers regrets not having done enough, but setting more bombs? Never! I'm sure when he refers to not doing enough, he was simply referring to all of those peaceful sit-in protests that the Weather Underground was famous for.
Some might think the topic of Bill Ayers is a moot point because the election is over. But that couldn't be further from the truth. There are still concerns about Obama's judgment in regards to associating with radicals, and palling around with terrorists. His election does not return Ayers status to outstanding citizen rather, he remains an unrepentant terrorist.
After all, you can put lipstick on a... well, never mind.
Photo Credit: Chicago Police Department
