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.