obama fans here are being disingenuous about what “associate” means in each case. khalidi has been among the most vehement postcolonialist writers in the country for many years; he is significant because he is one more of the most elite of the country’s radicals with whom obama is associated.
look, let’s get real: first of all, obama is not “postpartisan.” he is “postBush.” second of all, it’s hardly conceivable that mccain agrees with khalidi or ayers – we know this because of his long public record. with obama, the only public record we have is straight Left. he argues he’s post-partisan; his record and his associations say the opposite.
basically, obama is lying to you. he inveighs against wealth; he spends $650 million to get elected. one minute he’s post-partisan; in the very next sentence he’s wailing about bush. he starts out being the most anti-war candidate; now he’s making promises about a muscular defense and a surge in afghanistan to get bin laden. in fact he’s making tons of promises: he will, basically, do everything.
the khalidi association – not damning by itself – is far more intimate than mccain’s (as if this weren’t obvious) and is significant because it’s just one more association contradicting the post-partisan, meta-partisan, “only republicans/the right has an extremist base” theme that is supposed to be the ultimate reason for electing him president.
why all this lying? mccain may be a RINO in many respects, and that may offend some people, but he isn’t a liar.
