I've been reading about the realtionship between Senator Barack Obama and two former Weathermen, William Ayers and Bernadette Dohrn f/k/a Bernadine Dohrn.

Ayers and Dohrn were involved in bombings of government offices and attempts to kill people for the purposes of a political purpose. Isn't a definition of terrorism the use of violence, and the threat of violence, to strike fear into a people to achieve a political goal? Their goal, the overthrow of the government of the United States or the system of capitalism, would logically make Ayers and Dohrn self-described enemies of the United States government.

Yet, Mr. Ayers has hosted a fundraiser for Barack Obama when he first ran for the Illinois state senate. Since Mr. Ayers has never repudiated his own past actions and rhetoric concerning the government, and in fact has gone on record still being in favor of his past actions, then his support for someone running for elective office as part of a government that he despises leaves me puzzled. Did Mr. Ayers believe that he knew something about Mr. Obama that would allow him, Ayers, to support Mr. Obama who wanted to be part of the government that he wanted to destroy?

Unless Mr. Ayers believed that Mr. Obama would be an agent of change - radical change in line with the stated goals of Ayers and Dohrn, then supporting Obama would be in support of the government that they wanted to destroy.

I am not of the opinion that Mr. Ayers and Ms. Dohrn are hypocrites.

Assuming that Senator Obama becomes President Obama, he would have to make the following oath:

"I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will faithfully execute the office of President of the United States, and will to the best of my ability, preserve, protect and defend the Constitution of the United States."

Would not his pledge to "preserve, protect and defend" place him at odds with people who believe in using bombs and bullets to change United States policy that was arrived at using the legal means under the Constitution?

Would not the past actions and current declarations by Ayers and Dohrn place them at odds with a President Obama?

Since Senator Obama has not condemned the terrorism of Ayers and Dohrn in the past or their current afformations thereof, would he be as neutral about their oppostion to his administration and its policies. and he has been to their opposition to the administrations of his predecessors?

After all, the Senator could not bring himself to criticize Reverend Wright in the Philadelphia speech and had nothing to add until the Reverend was seen making statements that made the Senator seem like another politician doing the expedient thing to get elected. How would President Obama react to similar statements made by Ayers and Dohrn? That the President was only doing what all politicians do - lying to the people?