...
i didn't mean just in the ayers case. obama has a few skeletons, real or otherwise. rev. wright, to name another.
still, wouldn't it be advantageous to his campaign, his credit, and his credibility to make that type of dismissal? and it doesn't have to be "an apology", per se. i'm sure someone in the political higher-ups can write one of those crafty, eloquent message that dismisses accusations, separates the claims, apologizes for "perceived" associations, and moves on. and to pre-empt the notions of "he's already done that", i would eagerly claim the opposite.
and i'm not passing judgement, just reacting to the overall situation and how it's being carried out.
i think its a disservice to yield to simple notion that public minds are already made up. surely, some have wavered in either direction, just as surely as there are those still yet undecided.
there has been a lot of time and money defending (and explaining, and comparing, etc) questionable actions, relations, and situations. i'd think making the above statement would not only show a top-level, executive-like decisive ability, but also appease current supporters and garner new ones.
I don't think it would help Obama get elected by bringing up Wright a couple of days before the election in any shape or form. If McCain was hammering him on it he would probably have to address it but as it is I don't see a political advantage in it.
