Do as I say, not as I do. I was thinking about this adage this morning after I read that there is not one black Republican in Congress, not one in the 247 Republican members of either house. My mind juxtaposed this fact with the antics of Rush Limbaugh and Joe Scarboro, not to mention other prominent Republicans and the sly Hillary machine, in seeing to it that Obama is continuously "vetted" (the new politically correct word for denigrating someone). Let's talk about the old Weatherman from forty years ago as an example. He is Obama's neighbor and apparently they serve on the board of some local organization together. Now the real scandal (remember I am doing this from memory which is why I cannot remember the guy's name) which has Obama having dinner with the man. A classic case of guilt by association, but these people have a job to do and they know their target audience very well indeed. They know that in this white man's world there are hundreds of thousands, if not millions, of people just waiting for Obama to screw up somehow so they can justify not supporting him as a presidential candidate. Need any further proof? How about the media reaction to Reverend Wright?
I can hear the wheels churning which say that the relationship between Obama, his associates and his minister are important considerations in evaluating the character and integrity of a presidential candidate. But consider this question; have the same standards of accountability been applied to the other candidates? Consider the Rev. John Hagee for example. This man is a major televangelist reaching millions of people every week with his version of the gospel, a man who John McCain sought out to obtain his endorsement. Before he was contact by McCain the man publicly declared that God had smitten New Orleans via Katrina because it was a sinful place. In an interview with a conservative talk show host in the past two weeks, Hagee repeated his charge:
HOST:I’m only trying to understand that in the case of New Orleans, you do feel that God’s hand was in it because of a sinful city?
HAGEE: That it was a city that was planning a sinful conduct, yes.
Hillary had an interesting exchange with Obama in one of the early debates regarding Louis Farrakhan who, as I understand it, has made some anti-Semitic remarks. I guess Hillary's reasoning was that because Obama's minister likes Farrakhan, some of that has got to rub off on Obama. She made a big deal about the difference between Obama's denouncing (which he did regularly and convincingly) the remarks of Farrakhan and his rejecting Farrakhan's support. Hillary was supported in her attack on this issue by Tim Russert who seemed not to be able to let the issue alone.
The details of the various exchanges discussed above, while illuminating, are not the reason for this brief essay. The reason is to truly contrast the hysterical reactions to Obama with the near total silence regarding McCain. I don't want hate, expressed or hidden, to determine the next president of the United States.