And again, that's your objective reasoning placing importance onto one portion and devaluing the other. That's fine to do, but it's also no different than what Obama is doing. You make the argument that without that "special" something in her first, the community wouldn't have mattered. Someone could turn right back around and say that she could have all the "special" in her she wanted....if the drugstore guy wouldn't hire her, if the school didn't have teachers that facilitated her education, if that college didn't deem it worth while to have night classes, if the places she worked full time didn't hire her, if the USPS wasn't an entity to work for, if she didn't likely have the family and friends that undoubtably must've helped her in some fashion while being "off her feet", if she didn't have her friend to start the accounting business with, etc etc etc...then that "special" in her would've been for naught or at least for less.
Again, there's nothing wrong with you valuing one side more and feeling that it means more and devaluing the other side. But excuse me if I don't buy individuals on either side getting so high and mighty as to believe that their opinion on it is some absolute truth regarding it because everything they use to argue is entirely subjective and guessing based.
I personally am one of those people that tends to value the individual more than the community and place a larger amount of the burden/praise on that. However, I recognize that it's my subjective opinion and not some universal truth.