Why is a NeoCon Defending Obama?

I was pretty certain neocons were a clueless lot, but John Podhoretz, editor of Commentary Magazine, has removed any doubts. The Pod man reacts to the Ben Smith story on Politico.com about Obama and his efforts to hide his relationship with William Ayers, an unrepentant American terrorist (I saw the Podhoretz comment thanks to the New York Times blog). John Podhoretz at Commentary insists:

Barack Obama is in no way responsible for anything William Ayers might have said or done, and anyone who suggests otherwise is guilty of demagougery [sic].

But here’s a thought experiment. What if John McCain had visited the Unabomber’s cabin? Or had been photographed with Terry Nichols? Or had stopped off at David Duke’s house at some point because he was gathering support and donors?

Dude! What are you saying? It is no big deal? It should be a big deal?

Your experiment lacks knowledge. The key component is the knowledge of Obama (or McCain). What politician in their right mind would visit a known terrorist? What politician in their right mind would accept money from someone who carried out terrorist attacks on American soil? What politician in their right mind would collaborate with an unrepentant terrorist on the board of a private foundation?

Is there anyone else other than Obama? I am certain McCain would know better (as long as the unrepentant terrorist was not a lobbyist with pockets stuffed full of cash).

I am not suggesting or insinuating that Obama had a role in any of Ayers’ previous activities. But William Ayers was more than some college kid spray painting railroad bridges with graffitti. Try this thought experiment John. What if Ayers was an elderly Nazi concentration camp guard? Let’s say it is 1995 and the former Auschwitz camp guard decided he wanted to back Obama in his first run for the state legislature? Any problem with Obama taking that money?

Further, let’s assume the guard goes on the record with the New York Times in 2001 and states he does not regret what he did to the Jews in Auschwitz? Any problem? And let’s assume that Obama and the guard serve on the board of the Woods Fund and decide to approve a grant to the Arab American Action Network. Is there heartburn?

We are talking about more than incidental, inconsequential contacts. For me this calls into question Obama’s judgment. Yes, he found his way to oppose the possibility of a war in Iraq in the most liberal district in Illinois in 2002. But that is not judgment. I realize some folks believe it was a principled stand. But if it was such a deeply held principle, I do not understand why Obama did not press that position when he arrived in Washington. He went along with the crowd. That tells me he was simply playing pander politics.

Nothing wrong with pander politics per say, nor would Obama be the first politician to do such a thing. What I don’t understand is why he would accept fundraising help and associate with someone like William Ayers, who says he didn’t bomb America enough. That’s the question Obama has not yet answered.