Do voters think Obama has committed specific acts of terrorism? Or, do they think he’s just .. a low motivation terrorist who has yet to strike, and who is in the midst of a long term phase of terror dormancy?

I’m experiencing cognitive dissonance, as if we are speaking different languages, as if words mean two very different things, and I have no idea of the other meaning. Maybe this is where I am lost: doesn’t one need to commit an act of terror if one is to be a terrorist?

His middle name is Hussein and he’s acquainted with a man who bombed buildings 40 years ago. What else do you need?

Do voters think Barack has set off bombs? Has Barack shot people? Has Barack run people down with vehicles? Has Barack poisoned water systems or tampered with electrical grids? Maybe Barack has done logistics: driving terrorists to and fro, providing food, shelter, clothing, intelligence, instruction. I am seriously flummoxed. What am I missing here?

Am I completely missing some obvious point of yours? I must be, as I don’t know what else to think. If so, please explain it as if I am six. Since I am twelve, I will understand that explanation.

Is your use of “terrorist” a reference to persons implying that Obama is Muslim, and that the Koran says submit to Islam, or to Kuffar status, or to death, and therefore Obama must be a terrorist b/c he is a Muslim who believes we should submit or die?

I’m stretching here. Please help me understand what the heck you are talking about. I will not rebut. I just want to understand why in the world you believe voters believe Barack is a terrorist.

Open. Your. Fucking. Eyes.

Well, obviously, there *are* voters who believe that, judging from some of the audience participation McCain and Sarah Palin have been eliciting at their speeches.

Neither McCain nor Palin have objected to those characterizations either, or said anything to discourage them.

You are, at best, gcotharn, incredibly naive. I don’t know how an adult can be as naive as you are and still make it through the day. Maybe you’re not an adult. You could be 12 or 13 for all we know. You can’t tell on the Internet.

McCain’s drawing attention to Obama-Ayers is about drawing attention to exactly that. It raises questions in voters minds:
Why did a far left person, Ayers, so eagerly embrace Obama?
Why did Obama so eagerly embrace the far left Ayers?
Might Obama and Ayers share political sympathies?
Might Obama be a poseur?

McCain is not trying to brand Obama as a terrorist. Only the most fringe type voters would believe such a thing. McCain is trying to brand Obama as 1) a person with enough lax judgment to be comfortable consorting with a former terrorist, 2) a poseur whose true sympathies are too far left for him to be electable.

It baffles me that anyone accuses McCain of inferring Obama is a terrorist. It’s ridiculous to think voters would believe that; it’s ridiculous to think McCain believes voters would believe that.