The big news in election coverage this weekend was the controversy over Barack Obama's pastor Jeremiah Wright [1].  Wright has been quoted as saying a variety of things, such as: 

"The government gives them the drugs, builds bigger prisons, passes a three-strike law and then wants us to sing 'God Bless America.' No, no, no, God damn America, that's in the Bible for killing innocent people."

"We bombed Hiroshima, we bombed Nagasaki, and we nuked far more than the thousands in New York and the Pentagon, and we never batted an eye."

And my personal favorite:

"The government lied about inventing the HIV virus as a means of genocide against people of color."

So I don't think I need to spend a lot of time establishing that Wright is an anti-American lunatic.  But should Wright's foolish views hurt Obama?

Obama has known Wright for over 20 years, and has considered him a personal friend.  Wright married Obama and his wife, and baptised their children.  But should a politician be judged by the company they keep, or only the views they themselves hold?

I think this depends on the specifics.  In this case, Obama has condemned the things Wright has said, and stated that he had never heard any of them in person.  He went on to suggest that if he had ever believed that these types of statements would be regularly part of his church's activities, he would have found another church.  Now I think he waited far too long to say this, but I tend to believe he is being sincere.  I haven't seen any credible evidence suggesting the Obama holds any of the radical views that his pastor has put forth.

Really, I don't think that people should always be judged by their associates.  Sure, if someone has a radical friend whom they are helping advance and agenda, that's a problem.  But just because you don't cut someone totally out of your life because you disagree with them doesn't make you their supporter or advocate.  I think there's a big difference between someone who simply holds radical views and expresses them on occasion, and someone who actively tries to advance a radical agenda.  From what I can tell, Wright is just a nut who says dumb things.  He's not out trying to actually hurt anyone, change laws, or otherwise do any major damage to this country.  So I think it's reasonable to accept Obama's rejection of his comments, and let it go.

That said, Obama is still basically a Socialist, so I want to make it clear that I don't support him.  But I think it's only fair that we criticize him for factual reasons, rather than simply cosmetic ones.  If we see a pattern of Obama associating with radicals, then I'd say that's a valid point.  But simply having one moron for a friend doesn't automatically make him a bad person.