larger view larger view

Guilty By Association?

By SamG, Bakotopia.com contributor

In response to the blog "Race and Politics," and subsequent comments:

I generally try to be very polite and vague here on Bakotopia in regards to political discussions, particularly when I disagree with someone else's comments ("I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it," and all of that). It saddens me, therefore, when those efforts are not returned by others. Having said that, I'm going to attempt to retain that respect... but, for once, I'm not going to force my words to be governed by tact. The last thing I want to do is alienate or offend anyone, so bear with me...

I think Obama's speech on racial issues and the state of the country was brilliant. There you have it, plain and simple. No more dancing around political debates with subtle, attempting-to-be-objective comments. I am not ashamed of my beliefs - and in this conservative town, they're admittedly somewhat of a departure from tradition - but I really hate our natural human tendency to immediately and completely judge others for a simple statement that may or may not claim a particular religion/political party/orientation/etc. I don't want to be pegged, categorized, or anything else'd because of this ONE perspective. In the past, this fear has detained me from expressing the full extent of my opinions here on Bakotopia, and in general, I suppose. That pesky want to be liked, to be regarded with respect and tolerance. Not to be dismissed just because I identify with one position or another. Because I believe that the moment one person decides to completely dismiss the values, opinions or views of another, the potential for healthy debate is instantly killed. Yes, I realize it will still happen... such is life.

So, in regards to the Rev. Wright controversy: I am utterly astonished by the view by some that Obama is "guilty by association." Does anyone else remember the recent incident which required the McCain camp to seek to distance itself from supporter and mutual admirer Pastor Hagee? It was just this February, I believe, when John Hagee (televangelist and megachurch leader) referred to the Roman Catholic Church as "the great whore" and a "false cult system." McCain later issued a statement to the effect of "I repudiate any offensive comments made by Pastor Hagee, but I still support Hagee." So, according to your logic, an1ok1joe (not trying to pick on you, just responding to your point on Chase's blog!), is McCain guilty by association as well? Is it reasonable that when someone endorses a candidate, the candidate is therefore assumed to embrace all of their views? Personally, I don't think so. I have plenty of friends - many of whom I admire a great deal - who advocate positions I strongly disagree with. We remain friends in spite of our differences of opinion and our faults. We choose to be associated, and not because we are bound by any familial ties. We all know that these types of relationships can and do exist. Why, then, do we see Obama, McCain, and others in such a remarkably different light? Naturally, as public officials and especially as presidential candidates, they are subject to a great deal of scrutiny... but they are human, after all.

I think that Obama touched on a good point when he mentioned this situation with regard to family members, because I imagine many of you will argue that comparing Rev. Wright - Obama's pastor of 20 years - to just some openly embraced religious endorser is completely without merit. However, Obama has stated that Wright has become like family to him (and, may I point out: Obama refuses to "disown" Wright for that reason, despite some of his controversial statements); their relationship is complex. Why is he not allowed to disagree with (and even condem) some of Wright's views? Some people are bothered by the fact that this is the man from whom Obama receives spiritual guidance, but perhaps Obama has taken everything he's said - both positive and negative - and used it to truly examine his own beliefs (note: again, responding to Joe). Maybe those views have enabled Obama to explore issues from all sides before attempting to find solutions... a quality I definitely want my President to possess. At one point in his speech, Obama said: 

"...What my former pastor too often failed to understand is that embarking on a program of self-help also requires a belief that society can change. The profound mistake of Reverend Wright's sermons is not that he spoke about racism in our society. It's that he spoke as if our society was static; as if no progress has been made; as if this country - a country that has made it possible for one of his own members to run for the highest office in the land and build a coalition of white and black; Latino and Asian, rich and poor, young and old -- is still irrevocably bound to a tragic past. But what we know -- what we have seen - is that America can change. That is the true genius of this nation..."

Clearly, Wright's statements challenged Obama to come to his own conclusion regarding the issue of racism in our society. I realize that we're used to dealing with extreme hypocrisy in the political arena... but maybe, just maybe, it's possible that politicians who stand for integrity, faith, and humanity, who recognize the country's current issues for what they are - nuanced and difficult - do exist.

Just recently, my grandmother and I took part in a mild argument - over the election, no less - and I was so fiercely (inwardly) outraged by some of the things she said, I walked away. I walked away, not because I was choosing to "admit defeat" or avoid confrontation, but because I grew uncomfortable when faced with the realization that I felt the need to admonish my own grandmother. I love her, I know that she is a good person, and we generally agree on many levels, politically speaking. I so completely disapproved of what she had said that, in that instant, I felt nothing but jarring distress, frustration, and a little resentment. I wouldn't dream of distancing myself from her entirely, even if those things had been said at a public function with all of my friends, family, employers, coworkers, and instructors present.

I know I'm kind of jumping back and forth here, stream of consciousness - but, keeping this in mind - am I to understand that even though Obama has openly criticized and condemned the attitude and phrasing of those choice awful comments made by Wright... he is still somehow at major fault for associating with him? Who truly believes that it would show greater character on Obama's part if he suddenly and easily dismissed Rev. Wright as soon as the controversy surfaced? Personally, I would be more inclined to distrust him had that been his way of dealing with the situation. Then there's the fact that the media jumped all over those particular statements without putting them in any sort of context. Who knows how skewed Wright's view of the country may or may not be, based on his individual perspective? This wikipedia article (I know, not always reliable, but in this case, goes into more detail) offers some sort of context for Wright's statements, if anyone is interested. Again, it does not excuse anything that was said, but perhaps it offers more information.

Ultimately, Obama felt the need to address his relationship with Wright amidst all the controversy, and rightly (and unfortunately) so. But, more so than the responses he provided to that pressing issue, his overall commentary on racism and the state of the U.S. is what really encouraged me:

"...Some will see this as an attempt to justify or excuse comments that are simply inexcusable. I can assure you it is not. I suppose the politically safe thing to do would be to move on from this episode and just hope that it fades into the woodwork. We can dismiss Reverend Wright as a crank or a demagogue, just as some have dismissed Geraldine Ferraro, in the aftermath of her recent statements, as harboring some deep-seated bias.

But race is an issue that I believe this nation cannot afford to ignore right now. We would be making the same mistake that Reverend Wright made in his offending sermons about America — to simplify and stereotype and amplify the negative to the point that it distorts reality.

The fact is that the comments that have been made and the issues that have surfaced over the last few weeks reflect the complexities of race in this country that we've never really worked through — a part of our union that we have not yet made perfect. And if we walk away now, if we simply retreat into our respective corners, we will never be able to come together and solve challenges like health care or education or the need to find good jobs for every American." 

He inspires genuine hope in people. He consistently displays intelligence, care, integrity, passion, and the ability to unite. He speaks frankly about issues that face America today. Disagree with me if you'd like (and I will respect your opinion just as any other)... but that is someone I can stand behind. 

Portion of this blog also printed in Bakotopia Magazine, issue 25, 4-3/-08

larger view

This was passed along to me by a friend (taken from the Opinion section of The Jerusalem Post):

"Dr. Laura Schlesinger has a penchant for inane and knee-jerk moralizing. But last week even she outdid herself, as she blamed Elliot Spitzer's long-suffering wife, Silda, for her husband's unfaithfulness with a prostitute.

Speaking on the Today show, Dr. Laura opined: 'When the wife does not focus in on the needs and the feelings sexually, personally, to make him feel like a man, to make him feel like a success, to make him feel like our hero, he's very susceptible to the charm of some other woman making him feel what he needs. These days, women don't spend a lot of time thinking about how they can give their men what they need.'"

(She went on to say "...The cheating was his decision to repair what’s damaged and to feed himself where he’s starving. But yes, I hold women accountable for tossing out perfectly good men by not treating them with the love and kindness and respect and attention they need.")

... I mean, have we been transported back to the 1950s?

(You can watch her video interview HERE)