Monday, May 12, 2008 5:48am EST Make this your Home Page | RSS rss

Guilt By Association: The Obama-nation of a Wright Connection

Shannon J. Love | Posted May 1, 2008 1:51 AM

The strategy of winning "by any means necessary" is nothing new to politics. In the election of 2008, however, guilt by association has seemingly emerged as the weapon of choice for those who have no other means of attack.

Shannon J. Love is a freelance television producer and writer currently working for BET News.

Perhaps it's a foregone conclusion at this point that mass media outlets don't assign a great level of credibility to the intelligence of the American voting public. In unarguably the most landmark presidential race in the history of the nation, it seems astonishingly impossible to wade through the murky depths of political associations designed to manipulate American voters. The strategy of winning "by any means necessary" is nothing new to politics -- one of the few arenas where mudslinging is deemed far more effective a device than presenting the relevant issues facing the country.

Associations in politics have always been a useful tool. Celebrities and politicians aggressively campaign for their preferred candidate, and their endorsements accrue value through increased fund-raising potential and the level of prestige garnered from being allied with a familiar face. In the election of 2008, however, guilt by association has seemingly emerged as the weapon of choice for those who have no other means of attack.

Reverend Jeremiah Wright is perhaps as much of a household name as any candidate running for office in the 2008 presidential election, and by now needs no introduction. Wright, the presiding pastor over a thriving congregation, has been thrust into an unforgiving media spotlight -- though perhaps not unjustly. Reverend Wright's initial comments from a December 2007 sermon situated him upon a national platform, replete with media attention that seemed more focused on the content than the context of his words. Even until now, no media outlets have considered it sufficiently breaking news that much of Wright's words were paraphrases or quotes from other sources, and certainly don't replay his recent rebuttal as often as the initial excerpts of his sermon were televised.

Unbiased, balanced journalism has never been a requirement for any network, news program, or newspaper, and public opinion is almost entirely shaped by what limited information is meted out to the masses. It does, however, seem unfortunate that respected news entities haven't considered it necessary to present all sides of controversial issues. Still worse are the political opposition who have had no problem boarding the bandwagon already at full steam.

Senator John McCain thought it necessary to mention that Barack Obama is the presidential candidate supported by the militant terrorist organization Hamas -- despite the fact that most Hamas leaders (whose primary goal is to establish an Islamic Republic in Palestine), do not hold American citizenship and therefore are ineligible to vote in the upcoming election. McCain's unwarranted observation is perhaps a result of his lackluster media coverage, which up to this point has done due diligence in suggesting that something as personal as the reported bad temper of this senior citizen may directly influence United States foreign policy.

It also seems to go largely unnoticed that Senator Hillary Clinton's ties to her own husband speak volumes for the collective character of the Clinton household. Or even the fact that her fallibility as a "human" is sufficient excuse for egregious fabrications of her own experience arriving in Bosnia. Not to mention Hillary Clinton's plea to blue-collar workers promising much needed jobs despite the fact that years ago she aggressively upheld the importance of NAFTA, a trade agreement that would lead to a lack of American jobs, with substantial benefit to corporations. I guess Clinton's former position, and her recent decision to be identified as a "longtime critic" of NAFTA, are not considered sufficiently newsworthy to be subject to interminable televised repetition in an effort to associate her with her own inconsistencies.

Senator Barack Obama is left to be unjustly condemned by the views, beliefs, and comments of another individual. Obama is certainly no stranger to his own haunting comments, and his observation of the "bitter" plight of the blue-collar Pennsylvania workers has been effectively used to his detriment. His comments, however, were not framed as an observation that could easily be placed in the a socioeconomic context, which may support the argument that organized religion has long served as a distraction to promise hope to the masses who are discontent in their current situations.

The Reverend Jeremiah Wright is entitled to his every viewpoint, opinion, belief, and ideology. The timeliness of his public comments could be better, but Reverend Wright's agenda is to act "as [a] servant of God...to address that problem [of color lines] and eradicate it in the name of Him who came for the whole world by calling all men, women, boys and girls to Christ"* That's far more specific to a religious agenda than Barack Obama's political agenda to bring change to a nation through government and economic reform.

Of course many American politicians have been closely related to individuals with whom they disagree. It's certainly possible to be a friend or fan of someone and not be of the exact same mindset on every issue and perspective.

We get it. Every candidate wants to win. That's why they're here, and no one has any intention of going home a loser. Fair enough. The question left is which political candidate approaches this campaign with the integrity and value that would seem to best lend itself to become the future leader of a nation. Perhaps history doesn't tell the best tale of candidates who approached the political machine with honesty and integrity, leaving the salacious mudslinging, degrading references, and grimy campaign ads to those who have no other leg to stand on. Hopefully the American public is as intelligent and savvy as I'd like to give them credit for and are wise and capable enough to tell the difference.

*excerpt from Trinity Church mission statement

E-mail

Comments (5)

ton mon
May 1, 2008 1:37 AM

Obama will take another vacation. His suckers in his cult will still worship him. The media will continue the love affair of Obama. The news should of did their job and reported who and what Obama is before the IOWA Caucasus. How many in IOWA have voters remorse now after hearing Wright speak.

Your black so no matter what Obama is or does you will defend Obama to your death. But the whites in the CULT are slowly waking up.

TerryK
May 1, 2008 6:32 AM

(1) "The Reverend Jeremiah Wright is entitled to his every viewpoint, opinion, belief, and ideology".
_

No Shit Sherlock. The issue is Wright's choice to USE Obama and capitalize on Obama to bring attention to himself, his views, ideology, etc. Is Wright entitled to be an opportunist on the back, and at the cost of damaging a congregation member & the first viable potential Black President?

(2) but Reverend Wright's agenda is to act "as [a] servant of God...to address that problem [of color lines] and eradicate it in the name of Him who came for the whole world by calling all men, women, boys and girls to Christ"*
_

Wrong. Wright is a COWARD HIDING behind the Black Church. Wright is about Wright. Wright is a user too. He's an egomaniac typical shucking and jiving in the pulpit Negro preacher clown. There is no attack on the "Black Church", Wright is mustering a false non-existent issue - to justify his personal agenda to shout his views. Black America DOES NOT stand in solidarity with this Negro Preacher Clown Wright. We see what he is, _typical_.

(3) That's why they're here, and no one has any intention of going home a loser.
_

Wrong again. Hillary Clinton intends on going home a loser but not before damaging Obama in '08 to make him unelectable so she can run and win in 2012.

Overall your Op Ed is poorly written, constructed, and argued. Wright has personal issues of anger from his generation, things he's lived through that he's imposing on Obama in '08 at the expense of Obama's goals. Wright's behavior is inexcusable and selfish. Wright is a total clown on a stage, a modern day angry jiggaboo Negro demanding he be heard and recognized....even at the expense and damage of one of his congregation members named Obama.

Wright is soaking up this attention he ONLY has due to Obama. Wright does not give a f*ck about anyone but himself.

You seriously need to elevate your discourse and be willing to fault and note blame where it is merited - and that's with Rev. Wright. To your overall piece I can only say, "Negro please"....

James
May 1, 2008 9:25 AM

Well, we all know how the media loves to say all black men are in jail, drug dealers, thieves or just plain old trifling, all black women loose and on welfare with lots of kids, so, it comes as no surprise that Obama is considered the same as this nutty preacher.

Business as usual with the media, that has no blacks in any position of power to tell them that this is a non-issue, except to the rabid HRC voter who is looking for any excuse to dismiss the notion that a black man can do the job as well as anybody else. This country is still plagued by race, sad that a race that had two well qualified people in the hunt, Obama and HRC is now down to racial issues not one real ISSUE, but, this being the good old USA that's the way it goes.

Purl Gurl
May 1, 2008 10:34 AM

Shannon J. Love writes, in part,

"...guilt by association has seemingly emerged as the weapon of choice for those who have no other means of attack."

Your article is well written and does display a higher quality of balance in opinion than most. Your point is well made and done so with a minimum amount of personal bias, but not completely free of bias.

Political mudslinging is necessary and performs a good service for American citizens. Any given politician will not leap upon a soapbox then divulge, "These are my negative personal points." No, politicians will deliberately paint a positive portrait to a point of enjoying a perpetual heavenly halo about their heads. More succinct, all politicians are practiced liars.

The only way all American citizens can learn of these negative aspects of politicians is through mudslinging by both politicians and our media. We can, as individuals, read and research to learn about politicians but we do not enough time to learn about all negative aspects of all politicians. Cooperative nationwide mudslinging is critically needed for almost all to become aware.

Your "guilt by association" amuses me. I am reminded of a little known incident. A man is attending a Ku Klux Klan barbeque on a Sunday. This man is asked, "Are you a racist?" He is quite miffed, "No! I am only here for hot hamburgers and cold beer."

One of the measures of a person is the company he keeps.

Should I observe you, Shannon, hanging out with Bloods over in Compton, California, I would assume you to be a murderous street gang member. Contrasting, should I observe you hanging out with the Pope over in the Vatican every Sunday, I would assume you to be a good man.

Birds of a feather and all that, you know?

Okpulot Taha
Choctaw Nation

Anwar F Robinson
May 1, 2008 3:30 PM

Thank you, Shannon, for composing this objective and balanced piece. Compared to most that I have read here, I find yours to come the closest to fairness and objectivity.

While it is the Constitutional Right for people to express their beliefs in America, we must realize that human frailties will cause even the best intended of people to falter in the eyes of some, if not most. This statement can apply to each candidate and the Reverend aforementioned.

The extremisms that come from emotionalism cause many of the distractions...and, yes, I do agree that organized religion is one of the MAJOR distractions of those who have been disenfranchised and remain under the drones of the figures that promote the psychosis that the masses don't deserve to rise above their situations (opinion supported by fact).

So, you have Reverend Jeremiah Wright, whom I love and respect because of the work that he's done annually at a church I worked at in New Jersey, who is more educated than most of the people who are criticizing him...he is a business man and educator who happens to be Christian. He has a book coming out soon and he has the opportunity to kill two of his vultures with one stone: 1) quell the attacks against him for the snippet of his sermons that has been spun around in Media Hell and 2) CAPITALIZE on the hurt and Hell that he's been through and establish a legacy in the best manner that relates to those he relates to most-his audience. Thus, you get what we've seen take place this past weekend (National Press & NAACP). It is what it is...

...Ironically, like the aforesaid (hot-headed) senior citizen, Senator John McCain, Reverend Wright is also a Veteran. Where is the respect for his service(s) to this country...a country that during the Vietnam Era was dragged by its feet to establish Civil Rights and didn't even fully respect Minorities in America?

Now, as for Senator Barack Obama and his membership to Trinity...he (and I) have heard many sermons laced with the tone, content, views, and demeanor of Reverend Wright. Let me just say that I don't agree with the institutionalization of the Love that I believe Christ has for the Earth. There is much compassion and objectivity missing from many facets of the (Black) Church...and growing up in the Black Church, I can say that with full knowledge and authority on the subject. Back to point...it is okay to come up in an environment and evolve and/or matriculate into something new that suits the evolution of one's life...as Senator Obama clearly has. The same can more than likely be said of the other presidential candidates.

Now, if the circumstances illustrated so far places all of these people on the same plane (red-blooded humans), then how do we get into a media and society that just focuses on finding the ills of Reverend Wright and Senator Obama? It's because the framework of societal racism has been woven into the fabric of America long before this has become an issue and was placed here to supersede all reason and righteousness alike.

We need to deal with the fact that racism exists and respect the strides that all people have made given their circumstances. Then, we need to consider not only the best interests of ourselves, but the best interests of our country and world-at-large.

I think that we've all shared a portion of our lives associated with people that didn't share our best interests, however we need to learn from our past, maximize during our present, and plan for the future and just DO BETTER and BE BETTER. Everything else is just blocking progress...and change is inevitable. Remember that.

Peace and Love,

Anwar F Robinson

Leave a comment

Name
Email Address
URL