I think and for me, the difference is someone who is repentant and
served their time.
By our current definitions, both Liddy and Ayers would probably be dt's.
Liddy served time and has been apologetic.
Ayers prouldy confessed his crimes, but charges were dropped because
the FBI illegally wiretapped him. He was convicted of possession of
explosive, but did no prison for the offense. He was a fugitive for
years and has since been unrepentant. In his mind, he did nothing wrong.
Had Ayers, over 40 years, come out and say, I was young and stupid and
my actions were terrible, horrible acts of violence against innocent
people, but today I realize that change should be affected through
non-violent means only, then I might feel differently about the guy.
IMO, just because the guy has not committed an act in some many years
does not make him any less dangerous, in fact, if there has been no
mental reversal, it may have him more dangerous.
The other difference is that McCain and Liddy have had a relationship
that is 'airways-open' for 'inspection', so to speak, and McCain has
addressed that and not lied about it.
Obama on the other hand, lied about his connections to Ayers, at first
saying he didn't know him-only a guy from his neighborhood. Now, he
gives us Ayers' resume and says Ayers doesn't advise him. I personally
don't think he is telling the truth, and that is certainly not the
extent of the relationship. Why is he hiding or avoiding talking about
the nitty gritty details?
_______________________________________________
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.