Obama’s Guilt by Association?
That’s the charge from The Left. Undeserved, unfair, “guilt by association.” Obama strenuously objects when incendiary remarks by his pastor, friends and supporters are, in his words “imputed to me.”
Guilt by Association is a form of logically fallacious, campaign attack wherein a candidate’s stated views are associated with the views of acknowledged evildoers. If, for example, candidate Jones, running for Mayor, advocates more urban mass transit, the textbook guilt-by-association attack would be that the Soviets also advocated more urban mass transit, and therefore Jones is aligned with Soviets.
Questions about Obama’s relationships with radical leftists, overt racists and, in the case of Tony Rezko, a criminal who corrupted elected officials for profit, are not “guilt by association.” They are legitimate inquiry, given the Senator’s self-portrayal as bridge between the races and one who can overcome ideological divisions and “get something done for the American People.”
The Obama campaign is much more personality driven than idea driven, and it’s based on a personality with no track record for voters to review. He wants us to believe he can, by the power of his charismatic personality, transform political adversaries into team players which will in turn…
- empower government to give free or affordable medical care to everyone,
- empower government to give free or affordable college education for virtually everyone,
- bring about improvements that make local public schools work,
- lower gas prices even as oil companies are punished with higher taxes and further restrictions,
- “End” the conflict in Iraq by abandoning it, and,
- Empower Obama to subdue dictators, and potential enemies by talking to them.
Obama has no credentials or record of accomplishment that would make his claimed ability to work miracles through politics credible.
His record of associations may not be the best indicator of how he thinks and what his governing philosophy would be, but so far it’s all we have. And it largely contradicts the Messianic, post-partisan image he has packaged for himself.
Boomer Jeff makes two very important observations that evicerate the diversionary excuse of “guilt by association.”
First, he correctly points out that Obama has not given us anything else to base an opinion on. Ethereal notions of “hope,” and promises of “change” (which are really just thinly veiled old style pandering for votes) are no substitute for an identifiable track record of accomplichments in legislative, business or some tangible pursuit.
Second, vague associations with, in Boomer’s example, the Soviet Union, hardly apply to Obama’s associations. Its apples and oranges. Tony Rezko is a contributor and, at least once, business transaction partner. And he’s on trial in Chicago for influence peddling. Rev Wright? Pfleger?? Those are – by Obama’s own admission – mentors, friends and confidants. Trinity Church, home of racist and bigoted tirades that should make honorable people blush, (but apparently not the attendees, who cheer wildly) isn’t some place he stopped in once. That’s his church of twenty years. And if you don’t think the association matters, then why did he just quit?? He obviously differs.
The Obama campaign strategy is clear: 1) promise a concept of hope and political bipartisanship without any evidence of the capability to do deliver, 2) promise political goodies for everybody for everything – without any way to pay, 3) just dismiss out of hand any criticism so he does not have to grapple with reality………………and hope the media and voter naivete don’t catch up too soon. Its a booze and opium party – but boy the day after…..
But I have a suspicion. That inch deep strategy is getting a little long in the tooth. Sen Clinton’s relative strength in the last 60 days shows people are catching on to the emptiness of the message, and questioning “just who is this guy? What has he done? What does he really think?”
Imagine if another piece of evidence came out showing who this guy really is. His character. His views on race. His views on America. Pandering to the flock at Trinity Church might have served him well in the past. If you know Chicago, you know that’s quite a crew. But a national coalition it does not make.