Barack Obama...William Ayers issues a stirring dilemma!

Until now, I have stayed out of the fray in respect to issues surrounding Obama's so-called ties with alleged "Weatherman" terrorist, William Ayers.

I'll start by noting for the record - that while the former "Underground" leader and I both have similar last names (unlike me he has an "e" in his surname) - there is no relation.

For starters, I find the arguments regarding the issues quite compelling.

To begin with, I think it important that those who are deeply troubled by the allegations, should take a look at the circumstances in their original context.


At the time Mr. Ayers was part of the alleged "terrorist" group there was an unpopular war raging in Vietnam.


Many rose up against the administration and were inclined to consider anarchism the route to go to rectify what they perceived as a "wrong".



Was that so out-of-line in view of the circumstances?




After all, the founding fathers of this great Nation once wrote in a preamble - when they were drafting the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights - that the U.S. Government should be "by the people" and "for the people".

Likewise, they asserted - that when the U.S. Government ceased to be for the people - it should be abolished.

Were the founding fathers anarchists (or terrorists) at heart?

That stickling point out-of-the-way, it's important to take a look at the "crimes" Ayers was accused of committing.

By virtue of his ties with the "Weatherman Underground" - it was alleged he partook in the bombing of buildings - which resulted in at least one death that I am aware of.

These were heinous illegal acts - which cried out for prosecution - under the strictest letter of the law.

No government or its people can condone such conduct in a civilized society.

However, now comes the tricky part of the scenario.

Charges against Mr. Ayers were dropped on what some perceive as "technical" grounds.

In sum, a Judge ruled that because the government engaged in "misconduct", the proceedings were essentially tainted and warranted a dismissal.

Although Ayers was set free - he was never cleared of the alleged "crimes" accused of - to the satisfaction of many.

In fact, doubts still exist today as to his guilt, the extent of his involvement, and so forth and so on.

In view of this, I find the outrage of some, understandable.

Crimes of the ilk he was accused of - demanded prosecution - but it appears he may have eluded the long arm of the law by virtue of legal snafus.

Next, we move on to the issue of Obama's alleged ties with Ayers.

The acts Ayers was accused of were allegedly carried out when Barack was a boy of eight.

Some argue that for this reason, Barack should not be criticized for working alongside Mr. Ayers in the Chicago area, years later as an adult.

Contrary to what Sarah Palin asserts, Mr. Obama was not pals with the man - nor did he move in social circles in any capacity with Ayers - beyond the realm of their mutual involvements in local politics, charitable organizations, etc.

But, another bone of contention arises, at this juncture.

Was Obama aware of Mr. Ayers' past?

If so, did he ever question the extent of the man's involvement, with a known "terrorist" organization?

In that event, what conclusions did he come to?

If Obama had any doubts - did he raise them with Ayers when an opportunity arose to set the record straight - or at least try to appease his own conscience in some respect?

Or - did he "not go there" - because the court dismissed the charges against Ayers?

I wonder, too, if he ever questioned Ayers' role in the bombings - especially in view of the fact - the dismissal was based on technicalities.

After all - all the facts and evidence pertaining to the alleged extent of Ayers' involvement - were never properly adjudicated in the courts (nor was there a legal finding of innocence in a Court of Law).

So, there it is in a nutshell.

Essentially, it's a can of worms that continues to wiggle its way around the political landscape, as foes and allies on each side stridently thrash out the specifics.

If the process sheds light in dark corners, and turns up the truth, Amen!

Otherwise, maybe it's time to let go of the past and move on.

As one voter noted, "people" change.

More importantly, they should be forgiven and allowed the chance to rehabilitate themselves and start fresh in life, which is one of their inalienable rights.

Is the ghost of the past that haunts Ayers today, sufficient gut-wrenching punishment?

You decide.