"The superior man, when resting in safety, does not forget that danger may come. When in a state of security he does not forget the possibility of ruin. When all is orderly, he does not forget that disorder may come. Thus his person is not endangered, and his States and all their clans are preserved." -- Confucius

Sunday, October 05, 2008

This just in from the Department of Thought Police Enforcement...

Analysis: Palin's words may backfire on McCain

AP - Palin's words avoid repulsing voters with overt racism. But is there another subtext for creating the false image of a black presidential nominee "palling around" with terrorists while assuring a predominantly white audience that he doesn't see their America?

In a post-Sept. 11 America, terrorists are envisioned as dark-skinned radical Muslims, not the homegrown anarchists of Ayers' day 40 years ago. With Obama a relative unknown when he began his campaign, the Internet hummed with false e-mails about ties to radical Islam of a foreign-born candidate.


Nothing new here. Question "The One" and his judgment or his record or his associations and you are a racist. It would be funny if the implications weren't so frightening. This may comes as news to Mr. Daniel, but being a terrorist does not, necessarily, have anything to do with a person's race any more than it does being a rapist and murderer or (are you listening Phil Donahue?) a serial killer.

There are, and have been, people who have a beef, in this case, with the United States, and have taken this to the level of violence. Bill Ayers happens to be one of those people. And Sen. Obama, as much as the "mainstream" media and Obama cultists (but I repeat myself) would like to deny it, is an associate of his. Ayers is an unrepentant terrorist. That doesn't mean he's "brown" or an Islamist anymore than Timothy McVey. It means he had a beef with the US and took it to the level of violence.

One of the reasons I have always had a problem with the use of the "war on terror(ism)" label is that terrorism is a tactic, not an ideology. We're not in a "war on terror" anymore than we were in a "war on kamikaze" or a "war on blitzkrieg" in the early-to-mid 1940s. We are in a war with racial Islamists. But they aren't the only people who would like the US, as we know it, destroyed. The problem being is that one of the guys running to lead the US has a predilection for hanging out with such people and should bear the scrutiny it would if the "mainstream" media was intellectually honest or... you know... the person in question had an 'R' after their name instead of a 'D'.