Fluffy Bunny with Teeth

Talk about ugly. Talk about desparate.

The AP has clearly shown its bias. Take a look at this story.

And this story.

Let's break it down. Palin finally 'goes public' with Obama's connection to Bill Ayers, an issue which has only been explored by Fox and conservative talk hosts, except when briefly mentioned with scoffing dismissal by the Main Stream Media. Because Palin, the Veep candidate, actually said it, three times, in fact, the AP has no choice but to report it. So, it reports it. Here's how:

During her stop in California, Palin was asked about an Associated Press analysis that said her charge about Ayers was unsubstantiated, a point made by other news organizations, and the criticism carried a "racially tinged subtext that McCain may come to regret."

"The Associated Press is wrong," Palin said, before arguing that the issue had not been adequately discussed.

In fact, Obama was questioned about Ayers during a prime-time Democratic debate against Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton prior to April's Pennsylvania primary.

Oh, it was adequately discussed? Because it came out as a question in a primary debate? How come I don't recall seeing any mention of that in the media at that time?

Unsubstantiated? The AP seems a little contradictory here...

Her reference was exaggerated at best if not outright false. No evidence shows they were "pals" or even close when they worked on community boards years ago and Ayers hosted a political event for Obama early in his career.

Obama, who was a child when the Weathermen were planting bombs, has denounced Ayers' radical views and actions.

Just like he denounced that preacher dude?

And what was this "racially tinged" stuff?

Palin's words avoid repulsing voters with overt racism. But is there another subtext for creating the false image of a black presidential nominee "palling around" with terrorists while assuring a predominantly white audience that he doesn't see their America?

In a post-Sept. 11 America, terrorists are envisioned as dark-skinned radical Muslims, not the homegrown anarchists of Ayers' day 40 years ago. With Obama a relative unknown when he began his campaign, the Internet hummed with false e-mails about ties to radical Islam of a foreign-born candidate.

Whether intended or not by the McCain campaign, portraying Obama as "not like us" is another potential appeal to racism. It suggests that the Hawaiian-born Christian is, at heart, un-American.

Republicans, when will you learn? You have got to avoid using the following racially charged words:

1. we

2. us

3. they

4. them

5. our

6. their

7. Constitution

8. God

9. bless

10. America

The AP, in the spirit of bipartisanship, did at least acknowledge that:

Obama isn't above attacking McCain's character with loaded words, releasing an ad on Sunday that calls the Arizona Republican "erratic" — a hard-to miss suggestion that McCain's age, 72, might be an issue.

"Our financial system in turmoil," an announcer says in Obama's new ad. "And John McCain? Erratic in a crisis. Out of touch on the economy."

Only to point out that:

A harsh and plainly partisan judgment, certainly, but not on the level of suggesting that a fellow senator is un-American and even a friend of terrorists.

The AP then just went on to point out how wrong this 'unsubstantiated' 'Swift-boat' 'character' attack is.

Yes, this is actually being considered a 'character attack', rather than an attack on the man's political viewpoints. A character attack is generally dismissed by the public. Political viewpoints, however, really ought to be aired in the public laundromat.

Quote of the day:

"It's a giant changing of the subject," said Jenny Backus, a Democratic strategist. "The problem is the messenger. If you want to start throwing fire bombs, you don't send out the fluffy bunny to do it. I think people don't take Sarah Palin seriously."