David Harsanyi defends McCain’s use of Ayers against Obama:

Former President Bill Clinton was recently asked by Fox News’ Greta Van Susteren: “What is the difference between an association with someone like David Duke and someone like Reverend [Jeremiah] Wright?” Clinton, as suave as they come, fumbled for a several moments, before he finally stating that “we don’t have to go there” and moved on to more comfortable environs.

The answer, of course, is, that anyone linked to Duke would never have been running for national office in the first place.

But Van Susteren could have asked an even more pertinent question: If McCain had a 20-year relationship with a disreputable character, would the Obama campaign make hay of the situation? Of course it would.

Associations — and in some cases political affiliations — are valid subjects for voters to chew on. Bringing it up is not a “smear,” nor is it a “distraction,” nor is it racist (though a few pundits have contorted themselves trying to prove it so). Your acquaintances speak to your judgment and character.

Exactly right.

Here’s the video of Susteren asking Clinton about David Duke and Jeremiah Wright:

I think it’s a fantastic point, and speaks to a rather egregious double standard.  Rev. Wright has expounded from the pulpit about AIDS being a government plot by America’s white government to kill off black men.  He’s rails against “whitey” on a regular basis, and blames white people for a myriad of problems (both real and contrived) that black Americans face.

Isn’t that sort of conspiracy-mongering and racial-scapegoating exactly what racists like David Duke does?  And yet, Obama gets a pass for having attended Rev. Wright’s church for twenty years.  And getting married by the pastor.  And having his children baptized by the pastor.  And referring to the pastor as his “spiritual mentor” and “sounding board.”

But John McCain wouldn’t get that sort of a pass if he palled around with someone like David Duke.