« BACK  |  PRINT

RS

FRONT PAGE CONTRIBUTOR

Bill Ayers’ Revenge: The Left’s Crocodile Tears on Domestic Terrorism

Reaping As Obama Has Sown

Because they usually lack the organization, training, funding, numbers and suicidal ideology of international terrorists, it can at times be difficult to distinguish domestic terrorists from ordinary psychopaths. But domestic terrorism has been a sporadic presence in the United States since at least radical Kansas abolitionist John Brown in the 1850s, running through the likes of Leon Czolgosz, Sacco and Vanzetti, the Black Panthers, Tim McVeigh, Ted Kaczynski, and more recenly Bruce Ivins and John Allen Muhammad. The causes they have killed for have ranged from the noble (Brown) to the nefarious to the outright deranged (Kaczynski), and their inspiration has ranged from the purely domestic to imitations of foreign movements like anarcho-syndicalism or Islamism. This being America, domestic terrorists have almost always done more harm than good to their stated causes.

It appears that Scott Roeder, the man arrested for Sunday’s murder of notorious late-term abortionist George Tiller, would qualify for membership in this group, given press reports that Roeder has a long record of extremism, possession of explosives and profession of belief in killing abortionists. Now, it’s hard to generate much sympathy for Dr. Tiller himself; whatever moral blinders it may be possible for a man to wear regarding early-term abortions, anyone who has seen a sonogram or felt a child kick against its mother’s womb can hardly imagine the cruelty required to repeatedly perform…”terminations”…of such helpless and innocent victims. But as long as we live in a nation of laws made by the people and as long as his conduct is permitted by law, the job of judging men like Dr. Tiller belongs to the Lord alone, and the job of stopping men like him remains with the democratic process and with peaceful protest and persuasion; the way of the domestic terrorist is the way of madness no matter the cause.

You and I know this already. The Left, however, is late to the party in having a problem with domestic terrorists and their pals.

Even before anything was known about Roeder, the left side of the blogosphere reacted to Dr. Tiller’s murder as if it was Christmas morning and they just got a pony; I was following the Twitter feed of Markos Moulitsas, the man best known for reacting to the murder of American contractors in Iraq by declaring “screw them,” and he and others were positively vibrating with giddiness about the possibility of using Dr. Tiller’s murder to discredit pro-lifers in general and critics of Dr. Tiller in particular.

Well, unlike the Left, some of us have been against associates of domestic terrorists all along. Most of us would, I think, agree that if Roeder somehow escaped prosecution, we would have serious reservations about supporting politicians who subsequently associated themselves with him in the process of cultivating favor with the Right. But that, of course, is exactly what Barack Obama did with Bill Ayers and Bernadine Dohrn. And anyone who supported Obama has zero credibility in criticizing anybody for associating with violent domestic extremists.

Ayers and Dohrn, you will recall, were participants in the Weather Underground, one of the few domestic terrorist groups that was genuinely organized and operated over a period of years, engaging in bombings (including bombing the Pentagon), riots and vandalism; when a splinter group led by a friend of Ayers and Dohrn committed a sensational armed robbery and murdered a security guard and two cops, Ayers and Dohrn took in her son and raised him as their own. Dohrn ultimately landed on the FBI’s Most Wanted List. To this day, they are wholly unrepentant. I discussed the cases at greater length here, here, here, and here. Obama not only appeared at Ayers’ home in one of the coming-out events that launched his political career (again: imagine a Republican doing this at Roeder’s home 20 years from now), he gave a glowing review to one of Ayers’ books, made joint public appearances with him, and most tellingly of all, Obama in the only executive role of any kind he held before the White House funnelled millions of dollars to educational projects under Ayers’ direction to help Ayers further a politicized educational agenda. Ayers was and is still dining out on the notoriety of his status as a domestic terrorist, and Obama abetted and financed Ayers in doing so. And the Left saw no problem with any of this.

Associating with known domestic terrorists is a very bad thing. I’m glad the Left has belatedly awoken to this fact. Now perhaps the people looking to make political hay over Roeder will extend some of their outrage to Bill Ayers’ benefactor in the White House.

Get Alerts

COMMENTS

  • bk

    but I find the term “anti-abortion violence” to be more than just a bit ironic.

  • furious

    …Obama was only eight-years-old when Ayers and Dorhn were trying to murder policemen and soldiers. He only began associating with them when he was a grown man with a law degree and should have known better…

    …especially when Bill Ayers still had“No Regrets” about his terrorist past.

    • furious
      • Dan McLaughlin

        The one that stuck out to me was how a guy who read up on Alinsky and went to hear Stokely Carmicheal speak in the early 80s could claim he was unaware of the Weather Underground when he was living in Manhattan at the time of the Brink’s case, which was a humongous local news story for many months. I was saturated in the coverage of that case at the time, and I was 10 years old.

  • NotSoBlueStater

    Moral equivalence-ishness.

    That man who committed this crime could be accurately described as a right-wing looney. That said, NOBODY sane on the right is endorsing what he did — on any level.

    The only way to win this particular game is not to play. Leave it to the nuts. Sane people understand what happened in Wichita. Twisted people will use it as they will.

    Nothing anyone you can say will change either.

    The result in this case is a weak diary from a strong diarist.

    • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens
      • E Pluribus Unum

        Look how well that worked out. All manner of sane and normal Americans, thanks to an unopposed war by the left-media, that Bush led us into an illegal war, that we had a terrible economy the entire 8 years Bush was president, and that Republicans are corrupt, and Democrats are somehow *not* corrupt.

        So, with all due respect, blow it out your arse. This is neither a weak diary, nor an unneeded one.

      • NotSoBlueStater

        … that any construct that argues this point inevitably sounds at least a little like a defense. It just does.

        Dan is a great writer. I don’t like this one on particular.

        Just sayin’

    • furious

      …then, sorry, you cede the battlespace to the Nut…er, Left. And the narrative plays on, unopposed.

      Begala, Carville, Beckel, and entire network news divisions play this game, AND IT WORKS.

      And it’s not really moral equivalence — that is (paraphrasing Bill Buckley):

      A purse snatcher knocks an elderly woman into the path of an oncoming bus, A bystander pulls the woman out of the path of the bus. An observer across the street thinks: “look at those two thugs pushing around the old woman”.

      • NotSoBlueStater

        … is condemn the murder (as Dan did).

        My question here is: Who is the audience when you point out this sort of hypocrisy?

        Rather than say: Suddenly they care about domestic terror, I’d simply say: We abhor this crime as much as we abhor abortion. Full stop.

        Just my .02.

        • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

          The point is to put them on the defense.

          If you aren’t comfortable with that, maybe politics isn’t right for you.

          • NotSoBlueStater

            The left is never on the defensive because they don’t seem to care about the veracity of their arguments in the first place.

            Bill Ayers doesn’t stick. He just doesn’t. It feels like sour grapes over a lost argument.

            Again, just calling it as I see it.

          • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

            “I voted for it before I voted against it.”

            “The CIA lied to me.”

            Pressure works.

          • eburke
          • redstatebluestate123

            “I voted for it before I voted against it” was actually true.

          • http://www.hakubi.us/ Neil Stevens

            He voted for an amendment. But when the one and only time came to pass the bill or not, he voted against it.

            The man voted against body armor for our troops, and there’s a reason for that: He hates them. He always has, he always will.

            and the Democrats tried to make him commander-in-chief.

            Of course now they topped that by nominating a corrupt machine politician who has a close relationship with an unrepentant terrorist, cop-killer, and socialist thug.

          • redstatebluestate123

            He voted for an amendment that would finance the bill by raising taxes. Then when that failed, he decided that body armor for the troops wasn’t worth borrowing money from China. Priority mix-up, rather than hatred.

          • Aaron Gardner

            even to the point that he worked with the NVA and threw away his medals.

            Not a priority mix up at all.

          • furious

            …that must be why the Left is “never on the defensive”, as you say, or why Clarence Thomas is still waiting for his first EBONY award.

            The Left are just better at it, and have the acquiesence the Press. Imagine if a Sixty-Minutes producer had pursued the Bill Ayers story with the same Ahab-like obsession that one did the ANG memos. At least they wouldn’t have had to forge documents in order to present a story.

          • eburke

            the audience is also the ‘uninformed’ and ‘independent’ voters who are not tuned in to politics on a regular basis.

            If all they ever hear are debates framed by the vitriol and unhinged, irrational arguments of the left while on the right hearing nothing but crickets chirping, how do you/we ever expect to be able to compete in the arena of ideas if we give up the moral high ground prior to the battle even commencing?

          • furious

            …Paul Begala vs. Tucker Carlson, all they’ll think is…

            That bow-tie dude is a wussy.

          • eburke

            comments which can lead to expectorating on your new keyboard)

            That is all :-)

        • E Pluribus Unum

          It was explained to you. You either don’t get it, or you don’t agree that the Right should fight back when slandered by the left.

          We can all move on.

        • furious

          …becomes the narrative, and the narrative sticks. The moral equivalence then attaches between those who protest abortion peacelfully and those who target clinics and doctors with violence.

          And it’s the sort of people advancing that narrative who now control the Depts of Justice and Homeland Security, and are distributing broadly-worded guidelines about who is an “extremist” and merits place on a “watch-list”.

          In the absence of the true moral equivalence practiced by the Left in this case, I’d agree with you otherwise.

          • kcdude

            worked with Op Rescue in the 80s. I remember that he once told me that he felt he needed to be there to match his walk to his talk. He also felt strongly that he needed to be there to stand up to the loons who would do harm to the peacefull ProLife movement. The loons were those who felt the end would justify the means – eye for an eye types.

            Your point is the most salient. If nothing is said, all people who disagree with abortion or who are Pro Life will ultimately be lumped into the column of dangerous – right wing – watch list candidate.

            The Ayers left excuse that they never internded to hurt anyone simply does not stand the sniff test. Ayer’s postion would justify the actions of Eric Rudolph in his killing of Alice Hawthorne at the ’96 Olympics. The media has never called Ayers on it and if we remain silent on issues of this type, it will not only make the narrative stick but, in the minds of person who relies on a talking head to think for them, it will make it true.

    • Tbone

      Just what part of the “rightwing” is that?

      I think that your statement can be accurately described as ignorance coming from a bigoted mind.

    • eburke
  • E Pluribus Unum

    Look how well that worked out. All manner of sane and normal Americans, thanks to an unopposed war by the left-media, that Bush led us into an illegal war, that we had a terrible economy the entire 8 years Bush was president, and that Republicans are corrupt, and Democrats are somehow *not* corrupt.

    So, with all due respect, blow it out your arse. This is neither a weak diary, nor an unneeded one.

    • E Pluribus Unum

      This was meant for the NotSoBlueStater above….

      • NotSoBlueStater

        is counterproductive. Listen, or don’t. I just had this icky feeling that this sort of argument was creeping toward some sort of defense in a “well, they are just as bad!!” sort of way.

        Please pardon my honest reaction. Clearly it wasn’t welcome.

        My daughter once popped her head under the table at a company picnic and told a woman “your leg are fat!”. Her legs were fact. It was undeniably a true statement. It just wasn’t the time or place to make it.

        • janis

          And it’s not a defense for what the murderer of Tiller did. It’s a diary that points out the complete and unabashed hypocrisy of the Left. The fact that you saw it as something completely different says more about you than about the diarist.

          It says that you are much the same as those on the Right who cower rather than tell the truth out loud. It says that you feel apologetic about being on this side of the aisle, if indeed you really are. It says that you are no different from all those in Congress who purportedly were elected as Republicans but toss their voters overboard as soon as it’s politically expedient to do so and can’t wait to get on a Sunday talking head show to repudiate the beliefs of the base who got snookered into electing them.

          Go air your nervous nelly feelings elsewhere…….

          • NotSoBlueStater

            I’m not “on this side of the aisle”, per se. I am probably mushy to begin with — if movement conservatives are the standard. But I learn much here that affects my opinions.

            Here’s the rub with what you’re saying: I agree with the frequent arguments made by conservatives that moderate Republicans are not the answer. That said, I agree for a very different reason than many here: I simply want to get what I’m voting for. Therefore, I like my Republicans conservative, but I might not always feel like voting for one at any particular moment in history.

            You may feel like you don’t need the likes of me to get to 50.1%, but I think you do, frankly.

            What’s that got to do with this discussion? Simple, just tell me what you believe and don’t waste my time telling me what’s wrong with the other side. I just don’t care. I can read e-mails from my dad if I want to hear about Bill Ayers or Obama’s birth certificate.

            The conservative argument is strong enough on its own merits. I don’t give a doo-doo what people here think about what the Kossacks are saying, and I certainly don’t give a doo-doo what DU thinks about the people here.

            And, for what it’s worth (possibly nothing), I’d be really sad if what happens here starts to even remotely resemble those places.

            That’s all. Do with it what you will.

          • janis

            This isn’t about your feelings or mine either. This is about the truth regardless of how it makes someone feel. Just because you don’t care what the other side says doesn’t mean that it’s valid or safe for us to ignore it. As so many here have already pointed out, to try and stand on the high ground when the barbarians are clawing their way up to your position without defending yourself is just rank stupidity.

            So quit listening to your nervous gut and stop relying on your feelings so much. Use your head and think! Politics is war and war ain’t pretty, but it’s either fight it or roll over and politely die. Your choice.

            By the way, as to your child’s behavior on the “fat leg” thing, that doesn’t equate at all with this situation. That falls under the heading of “sweetheart, if you don’t have something nice to say, say nothing.” That’s about social manners. This is about much, much more. Your response here is the ultimate squish one “Offend no one, stand for nothing.”

          • eburke

            give seminars on how to combine incisive insights with brevity? If you do, where do I sign up?

            I’m jealous :-)

          • janis

            preceded by three paragraphs, I don’t know that brevity is my specialty. My motto, in fact, is “I know lots of words and I’m not afraid to use them!”

            But thanks for the compliment anyway. Your commenting always adds much to the site. (Especially when you’re praising me. :-) )

          • eburke

            insightful comments is quite easy…so, get used to it :-)

            As for me, my motto is: “Never say in 5 words what you can say in 500″

          • NotSoBlueStater

            … but I can’t say I agree.

            In the end, you’re trying to win an argument, right? More importantly. you’re trying to influence people. The Ayers stuff was just as true during the campaign as it is today — and I’m telling you it didn’t influence anyone. That’s not to say it shouldn’t have, it just didn’t.

            Why? Because the argument was shrill, poorly framed, and dead simple to dodge (I was 8!!)

            Anyway, keep fighting the fight. Just remember that there are a lot of smart people out here who appreciate a nuanced argument. It’s what attracted me to this site in the first place, and lack of anything resembling subtlety drove me away from the angry left. That historical process of discussion here has made me far more aware of the wood behind the conservatives’ arrow.

            That said, Redstate has gotten somewhat more shrill with the passage of time. That’s unfortunate. I worry at times that it’s headed for that Kossack/DU sort of mindset.

            As a sympathetic traveler, I’ll just end my contribution to this thread by reminding anyone still reading that there’s a place in this world for reasoned debate. It’s not inherently mushy to not be a hardline subscriber to one side or the other.

          • janis

            .

          • Aaron Gardner

            Like “first you win the argument…then you win the fight”

            You on the other hand don’t even appear to want to have the argument all in the name of not making waves.

          • NotSoBlueStater

            I just don’t want the argument framed in context of a murder in a church. Maybe I’m wrong about that.

          • E Pluribus Unum
        • Dan McLaughlin

          is to remind people that before they blame anyone else for Roeder, they must consider that the President of the United States is an associate of a known domestic terrorist.

          We don’t get to pick the day’s news, but we can do what we must to put it in context.

          • NotSoBlueStater

            So don’t take the comment personally. I just happen to think that try as you might, using this moment to try to prove … anything … is tricky stuff.

            Let me ask you something: Did you feel at least a twinge of what I’m saying when you pressed “Post”? Just wondering.

            (I’m certainly feeling those twinges when I post to this thread, but swear to God I’m just calling it as I see it…)

          • Tbone

            Well Dan, in all fairness to the President, he can also be accurately described as a known supporter, enabler and fellow traveler with Tiller the known human butcher.

          • Dan McLaughlin

            but that just lets him play the victim. This week.

    • eburke

      ‘well, we’re not going to stoop to their level’, or, its cousin ‘it’ll never do any good’, is always crickets chirping then we will always be on the defensive because we never challenge the basic premise of the debate.

      • NotSoBlueStater

        This just feels radioactive.

  • furious

    …Cook County political machine in the 90s didn’t know that the son of the CEO of ConEd led the “Days of Rage” targeting the North Shore and the Loop.

  • rtechie

    [I don't know if i've used this video before but I was playing Etrian Odyssey this morning on the elliptical. So be it. ??NS]

    So what about Terry Randall and Operation Rescue in general?

    Operation Rescue is a terrorist organization. They have issued terse statements of condemnation after every attack they’ve sponsored, including this one. These formal statements do not reflect the reality that the leadership and membership of Operation Rescue strongly supports these actions and participates in them. Scott Roeder, the accused assassin, was a member of Operation Rescue. Operaton Rescue membership provides money, planning, weapons, safehouses, etc. for the “acting” terrorists like Roeder. It is likely the Roeder was involved in other terror attacks (he walked on an explosives charge due to a “bad search”) and was aided by Operation Rescue in those attacks.

    We have Muslim terrorists serving multiple life sentnces (and in Guantanamo serving time wiht no trial at all) for FAR more trivial crimes, like donating money to the wrong charities.

    And speaking of terrorists, following the “Bush doctrine”, shouldn’t we waterboard Roper and Terry Randall to force them to reveal their accomplices? Clearly the “ticking time bomb” scenario applies here, Operation Rescue is involved in ongoing bombings and attacks. If they aren’t planning anything, oh well. Waterboarding isn’t “torture” so they should have nothing to complain about if they’re innocent.

    • itrytobenice
      • itrytobenice

        Now I look stoopid. But I swear there was an idiot posting there when I hit that. Neil just did that to make me look foolish. :)

  • Joshua Persons

    Someone with even moderate Photoshop capability could form one. “REJECT DOMESTIC TERRORISM” in large letters in the center, bookended by high-contrast black and white mug shots of Ayers on the left and Roeder on the right with the red circle-slash NO symbol over each.

    • Aaron Gardner

      Good idea Joshua.

      • $peciallist

        if you find one send it..