Articles

Friday, May 02, 2008

If You Want "Credit by Association", Accept "Guilt by Association"

The complaints of Obama and his supporters that with the Wright issue the press is unfairly subjecting him to "Guilt by Association" would ring less hypocritical if Obama had not trotted out Wright to gain "Credit by Association" in the first place, in an attempt to dispel suggestions that he had ever been Muslim while gaining credibility with African-American voters.

In a true display of political cynicism, Obama expected the press and the public to give him credit for his association with Jeremiah Wright, back when Wright had a positive public image, while cutting him loose the moment using Wright began to backfire on him. But it doesn't work that way. Obama wanted to gain "Credit by Association" from using Wright as his Christian spiritual compass, he needs to accept the flip side of that, the "Guilt by Association" that comes from tying his political and religious affiliation to an ex-Muslim racist anti-American hatemonger.

It's not only fair, it's right.

Obama's supporters aren't outraged because the press is unfair to him. They're outraged because their free ride has hit a bump in the road and the media isn't coddling Obama as much anymore. They're actually asking him questions, shocking as that may be.

They're outraged because Obama is actually being held to the standards that the other candidates are being held to.

Wright was where Obama's free ride ended, where voters began to see past the halo to the man beyond. And that man is corrupt and weak, beholden to racist beliefs he struggles to cover up with feel good rhetoric and a dose of spreading the blame. As Obama's bandwagon becomes a parade of lies, the very people hopping on are doing a double take and wondering if they switched sides too soon.

The free ride is at the heart of Obama's campaign. All his slogans are geared toward shifting responsibility through a phony empowerment of the voter that has no substance or credibility. We are not the ones we were waiting for. We are waiting for a candidate with a real plan, a real platform and some honesty. Obama is not that man.

When Obama's supporters whine about "Guilt by Association", they should be equally willing to disclaim the "Credit by Association" that Obama benefits from every time he trots out a Christian minister, a Jewish leader or a fellow politician. Obama's campaign touts his endorsements, but won't take responsibility for them, just as he can't take responsibility for even his own statements or the consequences of his own policies and beliefs.

The self-help guru is not a credible therapist, building a brand for himself rather than helping his patients. Obama is the self-help guru as politician, doing nothing for the public, while building a brand for himself as the agent of change. Irresponsibility is at the heart of both the self-help guru and the self-help politician, preaching a platform of change for people who don't want to change and pocketing their money to appease their guilt.

Obama is not the candidate of change, he is the candidate of irresponsibility-- and the Wright debacle proves it again.

Obama wanted Wright's credibility, now he'll have to accept the consequences of running a campaign of photo ops, which is that the people you use to gain favor with the voters may also become the red stain of your guilt. Obama was Wright's Frankenstein monster but now Wright has become Obama's monster, the grim stitched together cadaver of his real beliefs showing through the rotting flesh beneath.

14 comments:

Lemon said...

Their true colors come shining through each disguise they try on.
Obama has many skeletons in the closet some of which no one has seen yet. But hopefully no one will be stupid enough to vote for him based on the things we see right now.

Barbara said...

I still can NOT believe this guy's got MORE superdelegates switching over to him. He's a snob, a liar and a really poor judge of character.

Masterful post, SK!

APRPEH said...

good take on the story and a logic which can be applied in the future.

Sultan Knish said...

barbara, rats jumping the ship. The switch only began when obama began winning primaries

thank you arpeh

Friar Yid (not Shlita) said...

Obama's supporters aren't outraged because the press is unfair to him. They're outraged because their free ride has hit a bump in the road and the media isn't coddling Obama as much anymore. They're actually asking him questions, shocking as that may be.

For what it's worth- I'm not outraged because he's being asked questions. I'm annoyed because the issue is stupid and has been done to death. Obama is not the first politician, or the only candidate this cycle, to do something stupid or associate with jackasses.

They're outraged because Obama is actually being held to the standards that the other candidates are being held to.

Ridiculous. Have you heard even a fraction of the Wright media buzz about McCain associating himself with grade-A wacko preacher Rod Parsley? The man wants adultery to be a criminal offense, but somehow THAT'S mainstream? And McCain's actively campaigning with him to appeal to the wacko evangelical vote. But as long as they're not liberals, I guess appealing to that fringe is just fine.

What pisses me off about the Wright thing, once again, is that it's being used as a stick to beat Obama over the head. It's not about Wright anymore, it's about "how far can we keep the outrage going to sink Obama." And it's getting obvious. THAT'S what's frustrating.

Yobeeone said...

1. Frankenmuzlim makes Hitlery look honest and decent. When Hit can look that way - you know the world is coming to an end. LOL

2. Black voters and others obviously don't accept the ol' saying that you are who you hang out with.

3. Barb: birds of a feather flock together. :] And this flock is a bunch of freaking vultures.

Dang. I shouldn't say that. I like vultures. They're cool and they barf on you when you get close. The barf is full of magots. Ah HA! That's it! Frankenmuzlim's flock is the barf in a vultures gut!

Sultan Knish said...

Obama was claiming the issue was done to death ever since it was first raised. Obviously it wasn't done to death another to make him disavow Wright back then. So maybe the beating is what it finally took to get Obama to do the right thing and dump Wright, instead of giving speeches about his racist white grandmother.

Obama hasn't just associated with Wright. Half his clergy endorsement page consists of people who love Farrakhan. That's no coincidence.

If Parsley has dubious views then he's fair game for criticizing McCain. But then again McCain hasn't been going to Parsley's church for two decades or billing him as his moral compass. And considering South Carolina in 2000, painting McCain as a fundie will be a tough sell.

Criminalizing adultery isn't mainstream, but then again that's because adultery has become mainstream. I doubt the right would support a genuine law criminalizing adultery because adultery is not limited to the left. I can see a case for such a law if it was evenhandedly applied, but a clause in a marriage contract rendering adultery as a form of fraud and enabling the collection of damages might be a more reasonable free market solution.

cary said...

Well done. I pointed this out to Holly over at The Obama Nation.

Anonymous said...

As a Chicagoland resident...the big O is just that-zero. The Chgo machine picked him up and placed him in office and he's done nothing for our state.

Sultan Knish said...

thanks cary

yup that seems to be the skinny on it, obama had a low performance record in office, did his share of political favors and then took credit for the legislation of others to move on up the ladder

Friar Yid said...

But then again McCain hasn't been going to Parsley's church for two decades or billing him as his moral compass.

No, just praising him as a "great moral guide" while asking Parsley's flock for their votes. I'm not saying that staying put among radicals for 20 years is a good thing or reflects well on a candidate. But I don't see how actively "jumping ship" during a campaign to get religious radicals to support you is much better. And it seems to expose McCain to the same line of criticism in terms of using religion for political means, charges of insincerity, et al.

And considering South Carolina in 2000, painting McCain as a fundie will be a tough sell.

Actually, it just demonstrates to me that McCain is just as big a whore and suck-up as the other two in the race. I can understand why it might not be enough to make people not vote for him. But it sure would be nice to see it being acknowledged as people hammer Obama on the millionth supposed example of how he's a duplicitous crypto-Muslim-socialist-Afrocentrist-elitist with a pathological lying problem.

Sultan Knish said...

Assuming Parsley is bad, it opens McCain up to the line that he's dealing with iffy people in a campaign

that's a charge that can be made against most politicians

the charges against Obama however go well beyond it because his ties with Wright go well beyond any campaign and they raise the question of what Obama really believes

Keli Ata said...

Parsley IS bad in the sense of being a typical greedy TV preacher out for viewers money. I think he's also been sued a couple of times.

But McCain is only using him only to schmooze with the Christian Right. He isn't a member of Parlsey's congregation and never has been.

Obama's been affliated with Wright for 20 years. This man married Obama and his wife, baptized his children. Ask yourself--if this was your rabbi, your priest, your minister--would you remain a member of his congregation?

I sincerely doubt Wright's racism only began to surface when Obama decided to run for president.

When Jessie Jackson was running for president his "Hymie Town" slur was enough to take him out of contention. That was the nail in his political coffin.

People continue to make excuses for Wright and Obama and that is alarming.

If have a theory (which I can't substantiate entirely lol): Obama is failing to gain the support of white working class Americans. Wright was on the Bill Moyers PBS show.

Essentially, Wright said that Obama's claims of distancing himself from him was merely "a politician doing what a politician must do."

My theory? Obama is saying he doesn't condone Wright's comments/beliefs in an effort to gain white working class votes.

While at the same time...Wright is going public with his racist hateful comments to garner support of working/poor blacks.

It's win-win for Obama. He gets white votes by distancing himself from Wright and gets black votes by having Wright continue to make hateful comments. Wink wink.

Too shrewd for Obama to come up with? I don't think so. I think he'd be sly enough to stoop to something like this.

Sultan Knish said...

yes I think that's dead on

the issue has gone far enough that obama has to break with wright in a public way to preserve his candidacy

he is taking a beating among working class whites, catholics and jews... and wright is pouring oil on the fire

wright meanwhile has a book and he knows his demographic too and he knows that race baiting pays off in the end, as it did for sharpton

Post a Comment