William Ayers defends himself and his relationship with Barack Obama on 'Good Morning America'

(UPDATE: See below.)

For months, William Ayers was one of the most talked-about men in America.

Ayers, who was a radical antiwar protester in the 1960s and who now teaches at the University of Illinois-Chicago, was ridiculed as a "washed-up terrorist" by Republican presidential nominee John McCain.

And McCain's running mate, Sarah Palin, accused Barack Obama of "palling around with terrorists" because he worked with on civic boards with Ayers and attended a reception at Ayers' home when he was running forIllinois state legislature.

But while the controversy churned, the man at the center of it remained silent.

That changed on election day. As soon as the polls closed on Nov. 4, Ayers opened up. In an interview with the Washington Post, Ayers complained that the Republicans had turned him into "a cartoon character." He also called the media's handling of the affair "kind of shameful."

Today, Ayers talked to the media again, this time in an interview with ABC's “Good Morning America." In the interview, which you can watch below, Ayers said that his relationship with Obama was exaggerated and insisted that the two never talked about Ayers' antiwar activities.

He complained that the whole controversy was a “dishonest narrative” used by Republicans to “demonize” him. And he defended his actions during the Vietnam war.

“Let's remember that what you call a violent past that was at a time when thousands of people were being murdered by our government every month, and those of us who fought to end the war were actually on the right side. I never hurt or killed anyone."

(UPDATE: Ayers also made an appearance today on Democracy Now! In the interview Ayers tells host Amy Goodman that his radical past "was raised up in an attempt to replay the culture wars."

(He also recounts his experience at Obama's acceptance speech on election night. "It was an extraordinary feeling," he said. "I've been in a lot of large crowds in my life, but I've never been in one that didn't either have an edge of anger or a lot of drunkenness or kind of performance. This was all unity, all love.")

You can watch footage of the interview on Democracy Now's website.

-- Kate Linthicum

To receive automatic cellphone updates on each new Ticket item go here and register.

Comments

[Jim M.]

I just love how the mainstream media begins asking all the hard questions AFTER the election. What a joke!

[Jay]

Wow, Ayers makes the media look as dumb as it is. Was it McCain propelling this myth or the media wanting something juicy? Either way, the idiots on these morning talk shows need to review the newspaper from November 5 and and trouncing that the Republicans got -- and remind themselves that Americans rejected guilt by association. We are not in kindergarten.

[Steve Rogers]

John Muraugh was only 9 in 1970, when Ayers' Weathermen tried to murder him. In Feb. 1970, his father, a NY State Supreme Court justice was presiding over the trial of Panther 21 indicted in a plot to bomb NY landmarks. On Feb. 21, three gasoline-filled firebombs exploded at his home in Manhattan.The same night, bombs were thrown at a NYC police car and two military recruiting stations in Brooklyn. Sunlight, sentences on sidewalk Free the Panther 21 The Viet Cong have won Kill the pigs. For the next 18 months his family lived in fear. The enormity of the attempt to kill his entire family didn't fully hit him until years later as a father himself. Though no one was ever caught or tried there was never any doubt who was behind it. The New York contingent of the Weathermen blew themselves up making more bombs in a Greenwich Village townhouse. Ayers said, "I don't regret setting bombs. I feel we didn't do enough."

[Skeptic]

Ayers justification for his shameful actions and lack of repentance is not surprising in the least. The man is a narcissist. Just flat out refuses to admit any fault, and instead deflects blame.

"You see, it's the US government that was killing people, not me."

I wonder if Ayers would say the same thing about the US efforts in WWII, Afghanistan, Somalia or other places where "the gov't" killed people.

This is moral relativism at its purest.

[Skeptic]

Ayers justification for his shameful actions and lack of repentance is not surprising in the least. The man is a narcissist. Just flat out refuses to admit any fault, and instead deflects blame.

"You see, it's the US government that was killing people, not me."

I wonder if Ayers would say the same thing about the US efforts in WWII, Afghanistan, Somalia or other places where "the gov't" killed people.

This is moral relativism at its purest.

[JohnRJ]

Who the hell was that interviewer? He's sitting there basically calling Ayers a liar, ignoring the points Ayers made about the nature of his relationship with Obama. This is exactly the kind of interivew that the Republicans would love to have seen during the campaign, because it put Ayers on the defensive and the interviewer had an obvious bias. As Ayers said, people forget that the United States was creating its own Darfur in South Vietnam in the late 1960's, defoliating and carpet bombing areas inhabited by innocent villagers. Ayers was only one of many thousands of people who protested the war and ended up being arrested for various forms of civil disobedience. Ayers' actions were more extreme, but, again, he was on the right side of the issue. The people who went along with what we were doing in Vietnam are at least as guilty as Ayers, if not more so.

[For Common Sense]

I think you missed the point. Ayers did not defend his relationship with Obama. He pointed out that the relationship was nothing special and a non issue that McCain/Palin used to pander to the fearful right wing. He also made a very valid point that most of America, at that time, was against the war.

[Frank]

Look, Ayers was someone who did some bad things, but he did them for the right thing. Ayers is not a terrorist but an american who fought against the corupted goverment. Big difference. We real americans always think how to overthrow our greedy, corupted government that has cost thounsands for lives for nothing.

[Shyvooodoo]

"White Fear" has always been a favorite tactic of white politicians for many years and the fact that the american people DID reject the "boogeyman" theory like Ayers said is a testament to the american people.

[Me]

Once again, I will repeat. If Obama had been a white man or woman, with the same charism and lack of qualifications, he never would have made it even tot he primaries.

And I agree- that if Obama were trying to get a security clearance, he never would have gotten one with his associations.

[Arvin]

Let us remember what John McCain said, "The American people have spoken and they have spoken clearly." People have spoken clearly that they are tired of divisive politics, smear tactics, fear mongering and half-truths. If John McCain is glorified as an American hero and then we have to remember what the 60s was all about. It was an incredible period in American history: Black freedom movement and the anti-war movement. It is history of social movements compelled to force a racist, murderous and unjust government to answer to it's crimes and inequality. William Ayers has to be looked in this context not in the context of "War on Terror" propoganda.

[...and?]

There really is nothing here that isn't what is true in many community activist/organizer history with respect to Obama. A state senator asked him to host a brunch/lunch/coffee, they were related by a common cause. But if you want to go that extra mile ... Obama said he would sit down with dictators to define a common goal - he has practice, there you go (some of this is implied in democracies). So tell me, all the students taught through the many years by Ayers should do what? I have done a lot of those events myself ... I could not tell you who the heck was present. Is that the kind of democratic society we want? ... If we don't care for the person's ideology we austracize them or leave? You know, it is a very difficult discussion when we start talking about "freedom" in that configuration! Many of us, younger than the generation of the sixties and even seventies have worked with activists who, at some point, took on a somewhat rather extreme or radical action that had its time ... and many would not promote it in this era. Both Ayers and Bernardine Dohrn (his wife) were on Amy Goodman's Democracy Now and I think rightly reflected on what comes down to temporal issues - a set of mores that might have been acceptable then but does not translate now. Law allowed segragation back in the day ... because folks complied with the law then - should they not even hold office now? And "the day" was not that long ago. Let's make it more interesting - school teachers were often in a position to orchestrate and transmit pretty racist positions even after civil rights - should any one of them not rise to Superintendent of Schools? In organizing against the war ... it was an ongoing constant discussion that the movement of the sixties/seventies was NOT the movement opposing the Iraq war - and the actions then were not even a consideration. Some of the organizers were churches! ... Quakers ... Buddhist Monks! However, there were overlaps of organizers. After a session a bunch of us convened at a restaurant by default - only thing opened. So we all decided to sit together: Civil Rights activists, Anti-War activists from the seventies, anti-apartheid, union, black panthers, student free speech movement. I was the youngest person there. If you thought I was getting up and leaving because I attempt to ascribe to non-violence - you would be out of your mind. The reality is that these activists played a very important part in American History ... as was pointed out by both Ayers and Dohrm on the show. There is very little good point of view documentation for this living history.

One of the startling things was a guy who use to light fuel to bottles and throw it through windows ... he admitted he would never do that today! But all had a sense that they felt a drive, no - compelled to push through a kind of oppression from a systematic force that they saw as something they had to dismantle because they saw it as a force that harmed, pillaged and violated their own core values as Americans. This is an important discussion ... and oddly a very present one. Are these angry, vitriolic "terrorists" ... no. I would never construe it that way. One thing that is very clear is the love shared by Ayers and Dohrn. At one point of the interview, their hands subtly touched as they sat next to one another. Their legs were crossed facing one another. And when she started to speak, Ayers body language completely mimicked her's. With a divorce rate of 50% in the US ... that this couple would be so connected, caring and nurturing of one another through such radical times into now fascinated me. These are complicated people, reflecting a complicated society, with complex issues - and it deserves every bit of our attention on THAT level.

[Robin Martin]

Big media always wants to paint things all one way or the other. Any gray shades only muddy the water and limit the effectiveness of the 10 second sound bite. Interviews like this are for ignorant and impatient people. The Democracy Now interview lasting 53 minutes is much more insightful and answers these questions much better than the hectoring of this interviewer who seeks a confession that has no grounds in reality.

[Nick]

Yea, Bill Ayers and Barack Obama are as close as Barack Obama and Brad Pitt.

Here's a funny spoof I found on the whole situation.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3cpIjP9rprM

[David]

The important part is that even HE admits that a state senator set up the meeting in the living room, not Obama, and dozens more were set up, too. It seems pretty clear that Obama was "making the rounds" that were duly
appointed for him, a new Chicago politician.

Look at Barack. Look at his kids, and his wife. Tell me - do you see terrorist? Do you see one leaning towards terrorism? Do you anything the Republicans will put in front of you?

Mostly, are you claiming race helped a black man get a prominent job? The American people had 2 years to get to know this man. Give them some credit.