News Jeremiah Wright: Why does Mr. Obama support him?

[Art]

I'm not following you here. How is this any different in principle from being a member of the KKK? .

lol As a right-wing conservative supporter Obama must be really worrying you.

I think you will find membership of a group or organisation is based on sharing the core beliefs and mission statements of the group in question. If you do not see a difference between being a member of a group whose core belief is christianity against being a member of a group whose core belief is protestant white supremacy then that's pretty pitiful.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

It really isn't a tough sell at all, it's a simple truth: Some of the worst racists are people who are racist against their own kind (I suspect, for example, many people here - myself included - have an automatic prejudice against certain types of southern whites). That's the point that chemisstree was making and you missed. By labeling blacks as automatically the "meek", he is putting them in a box and putting them down. That's stereotyping. That's racism.

But also, Obama pointed out in his speech today that his own white grandmother is racist against blacks.

My point was that it is tough to paint Obama as a racist. [Edit] Oh, I see what you were saying. I seriously doubt that anything will come out that supports that notion. This would be entirely inconsistent with his message and demeanor, and I doubt that anyone but extremists would believe it unless we see more evidence of this sort of thing.

As for how Wright was stereotyping blacks, yes, he is old school, and some old school blacks are angry. But what you see as stereotyping was not long ago the bond that united blacks. "We are the oppressed" [and we shall overcome] was the battle cry for the civil rights movement.

Meek? Know your place, boy.

 

[Gokul43201]

People generally don't spit on the graves of others even if they deserve it. So that's a non sequitur.

Did you miss that part where I did not restrict this to Falwell? Can show me any of the times that politicians had to hide the fact that they openly displayed support and camaraderie for people like Falwell?

Still, here's an article from the day he died that goes into detail about why people disliked him. It's a full third of the article: http://www.cnn.com/2007/US/05/15/jerry.falwell/index.html

I still don't see anything in the article denouncing him or his statements. Do you? It even quotes a conservative spokesman saying that people who disliked Falwell still admired him.

Wow is right: most of those statements are wildly inaccurate!

Which ones?

Falwell was a very controvertial person and was certainly not universally admired.

Who said anything about controversial? I claim that Falwell is a divisive, hate-mongering bigot and fraud. These are just the kinds of words being used to describe Wright (okay, he hasn't been called a fraud, yet), but I've never seen anything similar said (by anyone other than Christopher Hitchens) about the Falwell, Robertson, Schaeffer or the other revered megachurch pastors that win elections for the Republicans.

Also, I didn't say Falwell was universally admired. But it is clear that far from being the kind of liability that Wright has become, Falwell was an ally you needed to have in order to endear yourself to the conservative right. McCain, who previously couldn't stand Falwell had to suddenly become chummy with him when it came time to run for President.

There's a huge boatload of selectivity when it comes to denouncing godmen. Preachers that call feminists and homosexuals evil are controversial (though powerful election winners) while people that call rich, white folk evil are hateful bigots.

And Obama's preacher said things much worse than how you paraphrased it.

Let's get into the details then. What exactly is much worse? The only thing I found notably different about Wright is that he's also a nutty conspiracy theorist.

 

[chemisttree]

The debate here might be a moot point. The voters of PA are lining up in very interesting ways. Still too early to see if this trend will persist or begin to be reflected in the National polls.

A fresh poll from Quinnipiac (doesn't that sound like a character in a Herman Melville novel?) University finds Hillary Clinton adding to her lead over Barack Obama in the April 22 Pennsylvania primary. And you can't help but think some of this stems from the debate over race and the Rev. Jeremiah Wright.

Race does matter, judging by the poll numbers. Overall, Clinton led Obama 53% to 41% among all likely primary voters, a widened gap over the 49% to 43% lead she had Feb. 27. The poll, conducted over six days ending Sunday, has an unusually tight margin of error of 2.7%, which means Obama's slide is within the margin but Clinton's gain exceeds it.

The most interesting stuff, as usual, is in the details. The poll found that the racial gap has widened. White voters preferred Clinton by 61% to 33%, a change from the 56% to 37% lead last month. Similarly, black voters backed Obama 76% to 18% percent, compared with a 69% to 23% earlier finding.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/washington/2008/03/hillary-clint-8.html" , so believe it at your peril...

 

[Gokul43201]

That's just the LA Times being sloppy. Clinton's lead in the 5 most recent polls before the Quinnipiac poll have been 13%, 19%, 14%, 18% and 15%. What is notable though, is a new PPP poll, conducted in PA entirely after the Wright incident (but before the Philly speech), which gives Hillary a 26% lead.

 

[mjsd]

I find it hard to fathom how a candidate is responsible for the reported preachings of a minister of the church he is a member of.

I find it even harder to fathom how John McCain managed to shrink from Pastor John Hagee and Pastor Rod Parsley (who he did not even reject or denounce) so easily and with almost no media coverage, whereas Obama is losing so much popularity for this Rev. Wright whose comments Obama has repeatedly rejected.

Strange world? Or are we all a bit biased?

Ironically, Obama tried to boost his "christian" credentials (and counter any "is he a muslim?" talks) by pointing out to ppl that he has been attending that church for more than 20 years... ha, now he is in trouble for being associated with that church for too long.

God Bless America.

 

[arildno]

Ironically, Obama tried to boost his "christian" credentials (and counter any "is he a muslim?" talks)

Well, has he denounced Louis Farrakhan yet?
And how about his close association with the Kenyan Odinga, responsible for stirring up the recent Muslim attacks on churches there?

 

[arildno]

For a lot of people, it is much, much more than that, and I believe Obama is such a person. .

No argument there, russ.

But measurements of "absolute" commitment (i.e, how strongly you feel about your community) should be put into perspective relatively:

In the US, as long as you are member of SOME church community, then it doesn't mattter for your public standing whether you are a Baptist, Catholic etc. Nor, do I think, does it attach any particular stigma to leave one church and join another.

This is by no means the same in many other countries, where traditional belonging counts more than that the individual finds that church to which he or she feels the strongest affinity.

That is why it is extremely disturbing that Mr. Obama have had this person as his spiritual guide; he cannot have been ignorant of the hatred Wright has spewed out during his ministry.

If Obama had individually become repulsed by the rantings of Wright, no one would have thought the worse of him if he had changed his affiliation (which would in other countries have been more difficult).
But he didn't.
And he wasn't interested in distancing himself either, prior to external pressure.

Unfortunately, therefore, it is quite probable that Mr. Obama shares several of Reverend Wright's attitudes.

 

[lisab]

Unfortunately, therefore, it is quite probable that Mr. Obama shares several of Reverend Wright's attitudes.

I don't agree.

I have a lot of friends who have points of view that I don't share. In fact, the older the relationship, the more likely our views will have diverged over the years. I choose to keep those friendships alive in spite of our differences, because old friendships have value.

Obama, a Harvard-trained lawyer and former editor of the Harvard Law Review, does not strike me as a person who conforms his opinions to those around him. Quite the opposite, in fact - he comes across to me like a person who can influence others to understand his point of view. And he can do that without roiling up emotions.

In his speech yesterday (3-18), he describes the complexity of his relationship with Wright. People don't seem to understand it...maybe, because they don't choose to have any friends with beliefs different from theirs.

 

[arildno]

Well, do you sit in front of your friend lapping up the hateful rants he flings out from the pulpit?

That is what Mr. Obama has done for 20 years.

 

[Art]

'Let he who is without sin cast the first stone'

Funny how the right-wing manages to suppress their righteous indignation when right wing ministers who are close friends of conservative politicians spew their hate filled rhetoric and yet fall over themselves to denounce a left-winger like Wright without actually being able to point out anything factually wrong with what he has said.

 

[arildno]

"We are the oppressed" [and we shall overcome] was the battle cry for the civil rights movement..

No, it was not. "I have a dream" was the rallying cry.

Those who screamed "We are oppressed" joined terrorist groups like the Black Panthers.

 

[arildno]

Furthermore, the despicable smearing Obama made of his granmother shows precisely what type of person he is. She didn't deserve this, she was not a public person.

Here is Bruce Bawer on that:

Watching Obama's speech, I winced at his equation of unspecified remarks by his maternal grandmother ("on more than one occasion [she] has uttered racial or ethnic stereotypes that made me cringe") with Wright's twenty years of wacko racist harangues. "He's throwing his grandmother under the bus," I caught myself thinking. Reading online comments about the speech, I've been struck by the number of times I've run across that exact metaphor: "He threw Grandma under the bus!" This line from the speech has plainly resonated very strongly with a lot of people, and with good reason, for it says something important about his character - something that somehow managed to slip through all the painstakingly calculated image-mongering.

brucebawer.com

 

[RonL]

Well I'm really on the fence at this time.
When i see, and hear the quality of presentation from Obama, and i then think what would George W. say to get out of the same situation, i cringe a little.
I remember almost the exact same controversy, when Kennedy ran for office, and every one said we would all be Catholic 6 months later.
This man seems to have the intelligence, and skill, to serve as a good mediator between the great divide we witnessed at the end of the OJ trial, to me this was a truly shocking revelation, of how our country is divided, even at this time and date.

There have been few that show the ability to accomplish some of the things this country needs to overcome this, deep, and strong separation. Maybe he is the first step to a better unity in this United States of America.

Who would he bring in ?

 

[arildno]

Well, the problem is that actions tell more than pretty words.

If you are sincerely interested in reconciliation and mediation, you do NOT choose to associate yourself with a hate-filled divisive racist like Mr. Wright.

There have been numerous other reverends than him, with a lot more moral competence that Obama could have affiliated with, but he CHOSE to join the most hate-filled, bigoted church around.

Mr. Wright's generation was not, as Obama smears them, all filled with an irrational hatred and anger towards whiteys, there were lots of sane, moral persons around. Some of them even became reverends! Why did Obama not join them?

 

[lisab]

...and, breathe!

You're a bit ranty right now, so I'm probably wasting my time. But if you think he threw his grandma "under the bus," if you think he has been "lapping up hateful rants," you totally missed the point he was making in his speech.

You have no idea if Trinity is "the most hate-filled, bigoted church around", but clearly you want to believe that.

Your mind had been made up and closed before Obama stepped onto the podium on Tuesday.

 

[arildno]

Ranty?
Look at how Obama smears all blacks of Wright's generation to have the same racist, fascist attitudes as him:

This is the reality in which Reverend Wright and other African-Americans of his generation grew up. They came of age in the late fifties and early sixties, a time when segregation was still the law of the land and opportunity was systematically constricted. What’s remarkable is not how many failed in the face of discrimination, but rather how many men and women overcame the odds; how many were able to make a way out of no way for those like me who would come after them.

But for all those who scratched and clawed their way to get a piece of the American Dream, there were many who didn’t make it – those who were ultimately defeated, in one way or another, by discrimination. That legacy of defeat was passed on to future generations – those young men and increasingly young women who we see standing on street corners or languishing in our prisons, without hope or prospects for the future. Even for those blacks who did make it, questions of race, and racism, continue to define their worldview in fundamental ways. For the men and women of Reverend Wright’s generation, the memories of humiliation and doubt and fear have not gone away; nor has the anger and the bitterness of those years

That is, the type of bitterness Wright has was a perfectly "normal" , even necessary, thing.


Obama could have joined churches of Martin Luther King's version, there are many of these. He chose not to.

 

[Art]

Ranty?
Look at how Obama smears all blacks of Wright's generation to have the same racist, fascist attitudes as him:

That is, the type of bitterness Wright has was a perfectly "normal" , even necessary, thing.Obama could have joined churches of Martin Luther King's version, there are many of these. He chose not to.

So people who were oppressed and discriminated against shouldn't be angry about it and if they are this is not normal behaviour? Such ingrates = it seems you just can't get good slaves these days who know and accept their lot. You must really miss the good old days

 

[Astronuc]

I don't see where Obama smears older African-Americans (of Wright's generation), but in fact, he provide a reasonably accurate assessment based on my experience.

What’s remarkable is not how many failed in the face of discrimination, but rather how many men and women overcame the odds; how many were able to make a way out of no way for those like me who would come after them.

But for all those who scratched and clawed their way to get a piece of the American Dream, there were many who didn’t make it – those who were ultimately defeated, in one way or another, by discrimination. That legacy of defeat was passed on to future generations

That is exactly how it is. Obama seems to be praising/marveling about those who succeeded while acknowledging those who didn't.

My best friend and colleague during my undergrad NE program is African-American from the south side of Chicago. He survived the environment of the 60's and 70's, and was a mediocre student through high school. Then he bloomed in university and went straight-A (except for one B) in his undergrad program. The B came from a professor who didn't think blacks should/could be that successful (I know this personally). He made perfect marks in his MS and PhD programs.

And I've seen the other side where white kids insulted and taunted black kids, some of whom were my friends, and later as an adult, I saw the racism and segragation first hand. One summer, I worked with a group of African-Americans at one company, and the last day when I said good-bye (I was headed back to university), one of them thanked me for the time we spent together and said "You know, you're not like other white people." I was stunned and sad, but I expressed my appreciation for the time I spent with them.

Recently on trip to NY City, I sat behind a group of African Americans. I could help but overhear the conversation in the two rows of seats in front of me. One guy rambled on about how tough it was to be black, and that "the system" was still putting down black men/boys. I just kept quiet. There was not point in disputing that rant.

As for Trinity United Church of Christ, members dispute the reports that apparently characterize the church as hate-filled, bigoted.

Chicagoans: Reports Misrepresent Obama's Church
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=88552254

Morning Edition, March 19, 2008 · The Rev. Jeremiah Wright's comments from the pulpit at Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago have put the spotlight on his church and his relationship with Sen. Barack Obama. The church being portrayed in the media, however, is unrecognizable to many who are familiar with the congregation.

He [Obama] denounced the harshness of Wright's words — not because they were false, he said, but because they did not acknowledge the strides that the U.S. has made in the fight against racism. Obama said his own candidacy shows how far the country has come.

A Closer Look at Black Liberation Theology

 

[Ivan Seeking]

he CHOSE to join the most hate-filled, bigoted church around.

One video of one sermon makes this the most hate-filled bigoted church around? How do you justify that statement?

Have you seen what I linked about McCains buddies? They WANT to start WWIII!

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Interestingly, one of the most common comments made about Obama's speech yesterday is that college students, and even parents and their children should watch it and get an education. He takes on issues that most politicians are afraid to touch.

 

[Astronuc]

One should be careful not to equate one minister with a church. The church body is the congregation, not the minisiter.

 

[Contrapositive]

At first I was really shocked and offended by Wright. But then I realized it really isn't anymore hateful than most other Churches supported by other politicians (gay hating, anti-abortionists, etc.). The only difference is Wright speaks with a higher volume in his rants, which makes it "hate-speech." But he at least has some merit in what he says (blacks are at a disadvantage in a lot of circumstances), although that does not excuse his vulgarity.

 

[mheslep]

I just listened to the most gutsy, hard hitting and honest political speech of any I've heard.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23687688/

Then you've never heard MLK's 'I have a dream' speech.

 

[mheslep]

Historically, black is a status of inferiority. Certainly you're not denying the long history of oppression in this country. And he is using "black" as a metaphor for being disadvanted, ...

I think this is why Sen Obama can't win the general election. He's a talented politician but as long as a large group of his supporters feel they have to preface descriptions of him this way the US will not elect him.

 

[TVP45]

I think there may be three religious/theological points that help explain this situation. First, before anyone argues my defense of Reverend Wright, that is not my intention and I won't go there. In fact, I strongly disagree with at least 60% of what the Reverend said in those clips (9/11 was not in any sense our fault and I believe the atomic bombs, or something similar, became inevitable in 1922 when the Washington Naval Treaty was signed).

But, an understanding of how a mainstream church (UCC really is not a nutty cult) could allow or tolerate some of what Reverend Wright said requires a little explanation. One thing that startled a lot of people was the vehemence with which he delivered his message, but that is simply the style seen in most Black churches. I've seen the same arm waving and shouting used to announce an upcoming potluck dinner to raise money for youth fellowship.

The second point is that very few people in the pews actually listen to or obey the words in the sermon. At least once every three years, most Christians get told that they absolutely, positively must treat their neighbor as good as themselves. On the way out the door, most of those people gossip about the Jews or complain about the dirty panhandlers. Most church attendance involves only lip service and not even a lot of that.

The third point is that Black churches have a fundamentally different theology from most White churches - they are steeped in the last part of the Hebrew scriptures which many people call the Prophets. Even when the lexionary rolls around to Micah, most White ministers speed read through it and deliver their sermon on a topic from the New Testament (perhaps the woman at the well for the ninth time?). Very few White churchgoers can name more than a few of the prophets and almost certainly have not read their books. Yet, many Black ministers regularly deliver sermons on Micah or Amos or Isaiah, and those books are fully of angy condemnations and calling down of curses. I quote from Jeremiah where God tells the Israelites what he is doing to them for their perfidy,
"Dead bodies are scattered everywhere, like piles of manure on the fields..." Not a nice message like the woman at the well.

For what it's worth, I have heard a Reform Rabbi deliver an equally strong sermon, save in measured, scholarly words, and nobody batted an eyelash.

 

[russ_watters]

I think you will find membership of a group or organisation is based on sharing the core beliefs and mission statements of the group in question. If you do not see a difference between being a member of a group whose core belief is christianity against being a member of a group whose core belief is protestant white supremacy then that's pretty pitiful.

Um, I'm not sure if you are just choosing not to look at what's already been posted, but the "core belief" in question here is not christianity, it is racist, militant black nationalism.

And you know nothing of my beliefs on Obama in general. In fact, I vastly prefer him to Hillary. I actually like the guy. But this does seriously shake my opinion of him.

 

[russ_watters]

I'll make a bold prediction here. Obama is finished. As discussed before, he's trapped by this and there really isn't any way out. A significant fraction of blacks are going to see him as a sellout and a significant fraction of whites are going to see him as a potential racist, militant black nationalist.

And I'll go a step further: he's going to take Hillary down with him. See here's the problem for the Democrats: With Obama likely to be leading heading into the convention, a late surge by Hillary and a loss of the confidence of his constituency will shift the superdelegates to support Hillary, which will push her over the top. This will disenfranchise the black community, causing them to stay home on election day.

He hasn't just trapped himself here, he's trapped his party.

 

[Art]

Um, I'm not sure if you are just choosing not to look at what's already been posted, but the "core belief" in question here is not christianity, it is racist, militant black nationalism.

Shouldn't you have prefaced that with an IMO or are you going to provide a source to substantiate your ridiculous slanderous claim that the core belief of the church Obama belongs to is not Christianity but racist, black militancy

And you know nothing of my beliefs on Obama in general. In fact, I vastly prefer him to Hillary. I actually like the guy. But this does seriously shake my opinion of him.

It seems most GOP supporters think Obama is a far better candidate than Clinton which is why they are trying so hard to ensure Clinton gets the democratic nomination.

 

[Evo]

This is a great article, from a link Zz provided on anoher story.

Was it Too Little, Too Late?

Why Obama's brilliant speech may not help him.

http://www.theroot.com/id/45336