Guilt By Association

The GOP is trying hard to find Sen. Obama guilty of anti-Americanism though guilt by association. There is only one problem - the charges have to stick in order for the tactic to work.

"It seems that there is yet another radical professor from the neighborhood who spent a lot of time with Barack Obama going back several years," said Gov. Palin at a rally in Bowling Green, Ohio.

So who is the lucky supposed anti-American this time? Well, he is an Ivy league professor named Rashid Khalidi. According to Columbia University's website, Khalidi teaches Modern Arab Studies and Literature. He is also the Director of the Middle East Institute at Columbia University. Khalidi has not publicly disputed that he is a critic of U.S. Foreign Policy when it comes to Israel and Palestinian relations. However, more importantly, he denies ever being a spokesman for the Palestinian Liberation Organization, as Palin weights very heavily in her claim.

Obama's campaign responded by saying "ugly insinuations about Barack Obama’s relationship with a former neighbor and university colleague, Rhashid Khalidi, are completely false. Barack’s record on Israel is clear: he strongly supports the U.S.-Israel relationship. He believes that our first and incontrovertible commitment in the Middle East must be to the security of Israel, America’s strongest ally in the Middle East."

So what sparked all of this? Apparently it was (at least partially) inspired by an article that was written in the LA Times in April of this year. The article reported a dinner party held in Khalidi's honor as he prepared to accept his current position at Columbia University. Obama attended the dinner party held in Chicago, along with many others. However, the title and subtitle of the article alone is worth a thousand words. "Allies of Palestinians see a friend in Barack Obama: They consider him receptive despite his clear support of Israel."

So why does the McCain camp choose to talk about this now? "Because we are one week away from potentially electing Barack Obama," said a McCain adviser.

This is a last-ditch effort to use fear tactics to get votes. I get it. Some Americans may be more comfortable with a leader who will not sit down at the same table as the labeled enemy. Some Americans may be more at ease having a leader who can show concession to opposition without losing ground and is able to communicate civilly with those who oppose him or her. That is a choice for the American people to decide.

And I also get how some Jewish Americans could feel threatened or angry if they thought that were to elect an American President who does not support the U.S's relationship with Israel.

But, there is another thing here...Is Palin also denouncing the well-revered Columbia University? Is she shaming the administrative staff, faculty, and students because they too share a commonality with Khalidi? I think she is walking a fine line here. I know that guilt by association is inescapable in the legal system when crimes are committed. But, this is not as cut and dry as that. If Columbia University elected to hire Khalidi based on his merits, I have faith that they made a good decision.

Ok...So let's say that we are all in agreement - Khalidi disputes some U.S. Foreign Policies...does that make him a bad person or a terrorist or anti-American? It sounds to me like Khalidi should deemed a maverick, as one who goes against the grain...So is that longer a good thing Palin?