Using Stanley Fish to bolster your argument that the Ayers thing is no big deal is an interesting choice, I know there are lots of folks in government and academia in Illinois that haven't been within 10 feet of Ayers. Also they are not all Republicans by any stretch. But if you are going to use an academic to make your point you might as well use one who..
Camille Paglia, author of Sexual Personae, denounced Fish as a "totalitarian Tinkerbell," charging him with hypocrisy for lecturing about multiculturalism from the perspective of a tenured professor at the homogenous and sheltered ivory tower of Duke
but this takes the cake
Then again this idea kind of takes the cake.
But then again lots of folks with much more blood on their hands from that same period -- Henry Kissinger and his subordinates -- are even more respectable figures, key members of the national establishment.
Because trying and planning to kill people in the US is not the same as being secretary of state during a war, reguardless of the morality of the war. One is approved by the senate and subject to removal by the president and one is a rich kid with explosives and too much Marx. If you can't see the difference, then that is just sad.