Associated Press writer Douglass K. Daniel recently came out attacking Sarah Palin for having a racially tinged subtext by claiming that Barack Obama was "palling around with terrorists."

Palin's words avoid repulsing voters with overt racism. But is there another subtext for creating the false image of a black presidential nominee "palling around" with terrorists while assuring a predominantly white audience that he doesn't see their America?

In a post-Sept. 11 America, terrorists are envisioned as dark-skinned radical Muslims, not the homegrown anarchists of Ayers' day 40 years ago. With Obama a relative unknown when he began his campaign, the Internet hummed with false e-mails about ties to radical Islam of a foreign-born candidate.

Whether intended or not by the McCain campaign, portraying Obama as "not like us" is another potential appeal to racism. It suggests that the Hawaiian-born Christian is, at heart, un-American.

Here's where the problem lies though - Racism is not implied in any way - Judgment is. William Ayers is white, not "dark-skinned" even if that is the typical terrorist today. Terrorism is defined as the systematic use of terror especially as a means of coercion. By implying that connecting Obama to a "home-grown" terrorist like Ayers is racist, he is in fact the racist one by thinking that people can only equate terrorism with "dark-skinned" people.

This isn't the first case of Daniel's extremist opinions being purported as news. When Joe Biden claimed that paying higher taxes was patriotic, Daniel cited a left leaning tax group as cover for Biden's statement, claiming they were independent. This wasn't the worst atrocity though - Daniel took cheap shots at journalist Tony Snow after he passed away - The AP has since removed the story but a copy can be seen here.

Douglass K. Daniel's articles have as much of a right to be in the news as do that of Sean Hannity. They would be better served with credibility if the pieces were in the opinion section.