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

[Ivan Seeking]

Rev Wright was on Bill Moyers Journal tonight
http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/04252008/watch.html

 

[Amp1]

I saw it. He was very eloquent and lucid. The sound bites I was suprised to learn were from sermons that occurred shortly after 9/11 and 7, 10, and 15 years ago. They were almost totally re-contexted and misrepresented by the particular media companies that tried to blow it up.

The entirety of Rev. Wright's so called diatribes were enlightening to all those people who perhaps still believe there was WMDs in Iraq or that the US is squeaky clean. From the metaphors to the comparisons Wright used, he was dead on point about the relationship to things like terrorism, oppression, and disregard for humanitarian values that the "failed nations" realized, instituted or supported.

The point that a US ambassador made, whom he named in the sermon, "Americas chickens have come home to roost" is basic karma, even biblical - 'what goes around comes around' and 'you reap what you sow'. It happens to be true.

The man's words will still be twisted even though his rebuttal refuted all the negative claims made on him. And the prodigious humanitarian work he and his church have been and are performing is incredible in the face of the obstacles they deal with.

 

[Amp1]

http://www.streetprophets.com/storyonly/2008/4/26/13582/1350

Great link for summary and thoughts.

 

[chemisttree]

I saw it. He was very eloquent and lucid. The sound bites I was suprised to learn were from sermons that occurred shortly after 9/11 and 7, 10, and 15 years ago. They were almost totally re-contexted and misrepresented by the particular media companies that tried to blow it up.

That couldn't be further from the truth. You obviously haven't seen any of the original sermons. See them http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,352661,00.html". (if you dare)

The entirety of Rev. Wright's so called diatribes were enlightening to all those people who perhaps still believe there was WMDs in Iraq or that the US is squeaky clean. From the metaphors to the comparisons Wright used, he was dead on point about the relationship to things like terrorism, oppression, and disregard for humanitarian values that the "failed nations" realized, instituted or supported.

The point that a US ambassador made, whom he named in the sermon, "Americas chickens have come home to roost" is basic karma, even biblical - 'what goes around comes around' and 'you reap what you sow'. It happens to be true.

Al-Qaeda declared war on the US for stationing troops in Saudi Arabia (at their request) to protect them from imminent invasion by Iraq, not for Hiroshima, Nagasaki or for "bashing the heads of babies against rocks" as Pastor Wright puts it. There is no doubt that THIS MAN HATES AMERICA. His sermons are pure political garbage (especially when viewed in their entirety) backed by his own flawed intrepretation of scripture. He chastises America for it's economic interests and power but somehow finds within the scripture of the New Testament justification for that repulsive attitude.

Compare that attitude with:

"Then went the Pharisees, and took counsel how they might entangle him in his (Jesus') talk.
And they sent out unto him their disciples with the Herodians, saying, "Master, we know that thour art true, and teachest the way of God in truth, neither carest thou for any man; for thou regardest not the person of men."
"Tell us therefore, What thinkest thou? Is it lawful to give tribute unto Caesar, or not?"
But Jesus perceived their wickedness, and said, "Why tempt ye me, ye hypocrites?
Show me the tribute money." And they brought unto him a penny.
And he sayeth unto them, "Whose is this image and superscription?"
They say unto him, "Caesar's"; then sayeth he unto them, "Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar's; and unto God the things that are God's" (Matthew 22:15-21)

I think the good Pastor has forgotten that bit.

The man's words will still be twisted even though his rebuttal refuted all the negative claims made on him. And the prodigious humanitarian work he and his church have been and are performing is incredible in the face of the obstacles they deal with.

No twisting required. Wright is as twisted as they come.

 

[Art]

What has the Rev Wright said that is factually wrong??

Is there a white upper class predominant in America?
Is there still racism in America?
Did Al-Qaeda attack America because of it's ME policies?

It's seems nobody can refute what he said they are just teed off that he had the temerity to say it.

 

[drankin]

What has the Rev Wright said that is factually wrong??

Is there a white upper class predominant in America?
Is there still racism in America?
Did Al-Qaeda attack America because of it's ME policies?

It's seems nobody can refute what he said they are just teed off that he had the temerity to say it.

I heard about this speech. I heard that he had said that black human brains and white human brains are different and this is why blacks have trouble in school. Now, that is straight up racism. Yes, there is racism in America and Wright is one of the reasons it continues. White supremists say the same damn thing. He is promoting continued racism.

 

[mheslep]

What has the Rev Wright said that is factually wrong??
...
It's seems nobody can refute what he said they are just teed off that he had the temerity to say it.

April 13, 2003, J. Wright:

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

http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2008/03/21/the-full-story-behind-wright’s-“god-damn-america”-sermon/

Here's some more ugliness from Wright, same sermon:

For every one Tiger Woods, who needs to get beat at the Masters, with his Cablanasian hips, playing on a course that discriminates against women, God has this way of brining you up short when you get to big for your Cablanasian britches.

 

[W3pcq]

According to Farrakhan's mentor, Elijah Muhammad, blacks were "born righteous and turned to unrighteousness," while the white race was "made unrighteous by the god who made them (Mr. Yacub)."}

{In response to the charges of being a "Black Hitler", Farrakhan responded during a March 11, 1984 speech broadcast on a Chicago radio station:
"So I said to the members of the press, 'Why won't you go and look into what we are saying about the threats on Reverend Jackson's life?' Here the Jews don't like Farrakhan and so they call me 'Hitler'. Well that's a good name. Hitler was a very great man. He wasn't great for me as a Black man but he was a great German and he rose Germany up from the ashes of her defeat by the united force of all of Europe and America after the First World War. Yet Hitler took Germany from the ashes and rose her up and made her the greatest fighting machine of the twentieth century, brothers and sisters, and even though Europe and America had deciphered the code that Hitler was using to speak to his chiefs of staff, they still had trouble defeating Hitler even after knowing his plans in advance. Now I'm not proud of Hitler's evil toward Jewish people, but that's a matter of record. He rose Germany up from nothing. Well, in a sense you could say there is a similarity in that we are rising our people up from nothing, but don't compare me with your wicked killers." [23]}

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louis_Farrakhan

This is the man Wright praises.

 

[Esoteric]

I heard about this speech. I heard that he had said that black human brains and white human brains are different and this is why blacks have trouble in school. Now, that is straight up racism. Yes, there is racism in America and Wright is one of the reasons it continues. White supremists say the same damn thing. He is promoting continued racism.

He was talking about learning styles, which are proclivities...not genetic habits, etched in stone. Nobody said Black people can't function in a linear-logical, Cartesian sense, only that our cultures tend to approach objective realities from a different slant. Also, that no value judgments should be attached to either approach.

What Wright has said here is nothing new, though it's been fought furiously by accommodationist Blacks for over half a century. He wasn't being Manichaean, only describing a theory for the affective slant of African education.

 

[Gokul43201]

...flawed intrepretation of scripture...

That, sir, if you ask me, is a doozy!

PS: On a different note, the words of another person, one who has been praised by millions of people:

I will say then that I am not, nor ever have been in favor of bringing about in anyway the social and political equality of the white and black races - that I am not nor ever have been in favor of making voters or jurors of negroes, nor of qualifying them to hold office, nor to intermarry with white people; and I will say in addition to this that there is a physical difference between the white and black races which I believe will forever forbid the two races living together on terms of social and political equality. And inasmuch as they cannot so live, while they do remain together there must be the position of superior and inferior, and I as much as any other man am in favor of having the superior position assigned to the white race. I say upon this occasion I do not perceive that because the white man is to have the superior position the negro should be denied everything.

-Abe Lincoln

 

[russ_watters]

He was talking about learning styles, which are proclivities...not genetic habits, etched in stone. Nobody said Black people can't function in a linear-logical, Cartesian sense, only that our cultures tend to approach objective realities from a different slant.

Wright doesn't appear to understand or be making that distinction. He does mention objects hung above a crib, which implies genetic differences (too early to get culture). But in any case, it's a moot point: the "white" way of learning has been proven to work. The "black" way doesn't actually exist and never has. If I were a black parent raising a child today, I would want to educate that child in a way that exists and is known to work, not try to 'fight the system'. It is the fighting against reality, more than anything else, that creates the divisions and puts blacks below whites in the US.

 

[Poop-Loops]

Not to mention that it's not just whites that use "the white system", but Asians, Latinos, Hindus, Persians, Arabs, whatever. All over the world. Blacks use it everywhere, too.

 

[BobG]

I would say that Wright tends to say some fairly astute things, but also can't help himself in going over the deep end with some of his comments. You can easily find quotes that defend him and condemn him.

Bottom line is that he's a loose cannon that sees the current controversy as an opportunity to focus attention on himself. His affect on the Obama campaign is barely even a consideration to him. His actions and comments are completely separate from Obama's now.

Unfortunately, that's not how things are perceived. In the public's view, the two are associated with each other. Wright is starting to look like the disaster that just keeps on giving. This goes on too long or gets too big and the superdelegates just might become a realistic hope for Clinton.

 

[Amp1]

What Bob G says is true because you see it happening. I think Wright is showing Obama in much the same way as the 187^th post asserts he did Tiger. Chemistree, I hope that what I saw on PBS channel 13 on Mr. Moyer's program was the whole sermon otherwise it was misrepresented (eek) ... too.

Unfortunately, the scriptures do hold against the kinda 'failed nations' Mr. Wright was talking about. BTW, a distinguished scholar named Noam Chomsky wrote a book called 'Failed State' in which the USA figures prominently. Since he researched his subject so thoroughly, I give credence to his statements in the book about the US. The fact that the US was FOUND GUILTY of terrorism against Nicaragua by the World Court factors heavily in that knowledge.

I believe that Obama or Clinton should use Rev. Wrights thoughts and spoken statements to discuss ways that they would move the US away from unprovoked intimidation and coercion towards cooperation and a consciousness of our place as a part of the total synergism of this planets life forms.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

It seems to me that there are a few ironies here. First of all, the irony of a black liberation theologian going out of his way to damage the first serious black contender for President is mind boggling! And that is what happened yesterday. Wright was out to pay back Obama for denouncing him.

But here is the thing that strikes me about Wright's message: Wright has a message of anger that once acted as glue for the black community. Blacks WERE slaves in this country not that long ago, and racism has been a fact of the American culture ever since. Wright lived in a time when black people were hanged just for being black. He saw the water hoses and dogs turned on a crowd of innocent civilians just because they were black. He lived during a time when a black man was called "boy", and told to mind his place. He lived during a time when in many ways a black man was still 3/5 of a man. It is easy to understand how a man who lived through these times can cling to anger. In a sense, it is probably all that he has ever known.

Whereas blacks have been viewing this as an opportunity to engage the white community and to help whites understand the black culture, in fact it seems to me that the real lesson is for blacks. Black liberation theology had a place in 1965, but we have moved beyond that now. It is time for blacks to reject this rhetorical nonsense and move on as well. Whites will not learn to understand this sort of anger and bitterness because most whites living today had nothing to do with it. We are not responsible for the sins of our fathers.

Until Wright and other like him figure this out, THEY will be the force that keeps the injustices of 1965 alive and well. Wright is an anchor to hatred, not a liberator.

 

[drankin]

It seems to me that there are a few ironies here. First of all, the irony of a black liberation theologian going out of his way to damage the first serious black contender for President is mind boggling! And that is what happened yesterday. Wright was out to pay back Obama for denouncing him.

But here is the thing that strikes me about Wright's message: Wright has a message of anger that once acted as glue for the black community. Blacks WERE slaves in this country not that long ago, and racism has been a fact of the American culture ever since. Wright lived in a time when black people were hanged just for being black. He saw the water hoses and dogs turned on a crowd of innocent civilians just because they were black. He lived during a time when a black man was called "boy", and told to mind his place. He lived during a time when in many ways a black man was still 3/5 of a man. It is easy to understand how a man who lived through these times can cling to anger. In a sense, it is probably all that he has ever known.

Whereas blacks have been viewing this as an opportunity to engage the white community and to help whites understand the black culture, in fact it seems to me that the real lesson is for blacks. Black liberation theology had a place in 1965, but we have moved beyond that now. It is time for blacks to reject this rhetorical nonsense and move on as well. Whites will not learn to understand this sort of anger and bitterness because most whites living today had nothing to do with it. We are not responsible for the sins of our fathers.

Until Wright and other like him figure this out, THEY will be the force that keeps the injustices of 1965 alive and well. Wright is an anchor to hatred, not a liberator.

Well put, I agree completely. It's folks like him that want to keep that crap alive. Make white people uncomfortable about any racial distinction while people like Wright try to maintain a white vs black battle which is only a few generations from being complete history. He is not a true man of faith, IMO. His platform is his race and victimization.

 

[W3pcq]

I can see that making the distinction between black and white, and arguing that blacks are being oppressed by white america, may be a strong motivation for a black person to get involved, get educated, so that a change can be made. Him damaging Obama so badly, shows his goals are however a further division and rise of the black power movement. If Obama gets elected, how can Wright he profit off of the idea that America is an evil white country. The only goal I can see Wright having, is a revolution. Wrights idea of change is revolution, and destruction of the current system, and the white people in charge of it. How can this be carried out when a Black person is in charge of it? I think Wright and Farrakahn as well as the radical islamic sects in other places are communicating, and building up for a revolution against the white race, and against America.

Although I know that Obama does not think this way. The problem is that Wright has been Obamas close friend and advisor for 20 years. Maybe part of Obama's motivation and drive is due to Wrights speech. Obama now closer than ever to have the power to change the way things work, the power to elevate the black community, the power to end the "US supported terrorism of Irael", all the things that he has learned are wrong with America from listening to rev. Wright. The problem is that Wright profits from the bad doings of our government because he and Farrakahn can use it to recruit their army, and can profit from bad mouthing it. Obama actually wants things to improve, and is smart enough to know how to do it.

I feel sorry for Obama. I'm sure he joined the church based on the good it was supposedly committing to fight for justice and to help black people become successful in America. I respect this, and I am all for it. I am sure that as a black man, and a member of the African American community, it would be hard to disown a church that is fighting for their cause, especially with a history of oppression and feelings of current wrongdoings occurring today. It is just sad that these leaders of Black Power are not after change in the gov, they are after change of gov, as in revolution and overthrow.

 

[TVP45]

You know, it seems to me there's too much emphasis placed on Rev. Wright's influence on Sen. Obama. The pastor of the church I belong to regularly preaches sermons on sheep (who knows why his obsession) and he regularly tells how sheep drown in the rain or if they enter a body of water. I roll my eyes and read the hymnal or look at Cynthia's Carmen Miranda hat instead. Half the people in most churches couldn't tell you what a sermon was about by Tuesday if their life depended on it. I doubt Sen. Obama is much different.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

I feel sorry for Obama.

It strikes me that this may be what saves him, if anything can. Wright was so over-the-top yesterday that that Obama may start to appear more a victim of a friend gone looney than someone to be feared.

A couple of points though: First, Wright was his pastor. Now, I had priests who baptized me, gave first communion, and who mentored me in spiritual matters. I was confirmed by Cardinal Mahoney who at that time I viewed as a SuperMentor, if you will, but in no way would I want them to speak for me. They were one aspect of one chapter of my life. In no way would I consider them to be close friends or even like-minded. I don't know how close Obama and Wright really were, but to say that he was Obama's pastor and mentor doesn't define the true nature of their relationship. Wright and Obama may be no closer than I am to good ole Father whatshisname.

Next, you need to support your comments about Wright's intentions to start a revolution. Conspiracy theories are not allowed, and you need to provide specific evidence to that effect, such as a transcript in which he calls for a literal revolution.

As Wright pointed out, before you question his patriotism, note that he served six years in the military. How many years did Cheney serve?

 

[W3pcq]

Sorry, I shouldn't have said that. It is just the impression I got from him. The way he keeps saying "there is going to be a change" angrily after he talks about the evils of America. The way he acts as though, that he cares not whether Obama gets elected. Then he says of "I told Obama, you get elected, than I'm going after you". His connection with Lois Farrakahn, Louis Farrakahn provided his security. What kind of change is he after? Why are these issues being preached in a church?

I understand in a way why a person like him may feel the way he does about U.S. policy, especially considering how bad Bush's terms have been. I understand his points about terrorism in a way. The rule is generally, the winners write the history books, and the losers are the terrorists. THis doesn't however change the fact that we are at war with the "terrorists". That doesn't change the fact that he is aligned against America in this war. I know that those against America may have many good reasons to be in many cases. "The world trade center" has screwed a lot of people over. Many policies have left people much worse off. Of coarse we are going to have enemies in these cases. The fact still remains, will the American people turn against their own country to fight for the causes of its enemies against America? Perfectly acceptable within the system, how Obama will go about it, and to be a peacemaker, and to make resolutions.

 

[Poop-Loops]

Entire post.

What I love about politics is that anybody can claim total knowledge of a person based only on what they have read or seen on the news.

I might be going out on a limb here, but you've never actually met Obama or Wright before, have you? Have you eaten dinner with them? Played pool over some beers?

No, I don't think so. So I can't possibly imagine why you are speculating on either party so deeply.

Saying Wright wants to start a war against the white race? Or that you know Obama isn't like that? How can you?

First of all, it makes more sense that Wright simply makes money from the conflict you mentioned. He doesn't give a damn about starting a revolution, but he'll keep preaching about it, because that's what pays the bills. I've seen it before many times. My idea is a lot more probable than some conspiracy to overthrow the white race in America. How would they do it? Contract the gags in NY and LA? Believe it or not, Blacks do NOT have some sort of Hive Mind, and you can't just ask some random black person about what the black community thinks about an issue. The whole idea is so f-ing retarded. So, now that we've established that blacks are individuals, what makes you think a vast majority of them living in the US would band together with Wright and Co?

 

[Ivan Seeking]

From 1959 to 1961, Wright attended Virginia Union University,[1] in Richmond. Inspired by President John F. Kennedy's 1961 challenge to "Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country," Wright gave up his student deferment, left college and joined the United States Marine Corps and became part of the 2nd Marine Division with the rank of private first class. In 1963, after two years of service, Wright then transferred to the United States Navy and entered the Corpsman School at the Great Lakes Naval Training Center, where he graduated as valedictorian.[10][6] Having excelled in corpsman school, Wright was then trained as a cardiopulmonary technician at the National Naval Medical Center in Bethesda, Maryland where he graduated as salutatorian.[6] Wright was assigned as part of the medical team charged with care of President Lyndon B. Johnson (see photo of Wright caring for Johnson after his 1966 surgery). Before leaving the position in 1967, the White House awarded Wright three letters of commendation.[11][12][13]

In 1967 Wright enrolled at Howard University in Washington, D.C., where he earned a bachelor's degree in 1968 and a master’s degree in English in 1969. He also earned a master's degree from the University of Chicago Divinity School.[6] Wright holds a Doctor of Ministry degree (1990) from the United Theological Seminary in Dayton, Ohio, where he studied under Samuel DeWitt Proctor, a mentor to Martin Luther King.[14]

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/thumb/c/cc/Jeremiah_Wright_Dec_1961_Boot_Camp_Graduation.jpg/100px-Jeremiah_Wright_Dec_1961_Boot_Camp_Graduation.jpg

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jeremiah_Wright

He joined the Marines just as Vietnam was heating up.

 

[Astronuc]

Analysis: Rev. Wright's Comments on 'Black Church'
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=90024842

Morning Edition, April 29, 2008 · The Rev. Jeremiah Wright told the National Press Club that attacks on him are really attacks on the black church. Earlier comments about race and the Sept. 11 attacks by Barack Obama's former pastor have caused controversy for the presidential campaign.

Juan Williams makes some interesting comments. I think one needs to realize that Wright speaks for Wright - not Obama, not the African American community, not even Trinity Church necessarily - but himself.

Some are concerned that Wright is try to use his religious affiliation as a shield against critics.

Wright Decries 'Out of Context' Criticisms of Sermon
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=90011520

Rev. Wright: Critics Are Attacking Black Church
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=89999246

NPR.org, April 28, 2008 · The Rev. Jeremiah Wright says criticisms of his fiery sermons are an attack on the black church. Wright, presidential hopeful Barack Obama's former pastor, has begun speaking out since national attention fell on controversial opinions he expressed in the past.

Speaking at Washington's National Press Club on Monday, one day after he got a standing ovation for his speech at an NAACP meeting in Detroit, Wright said he hopes the controversy will have a positive outcome and will lead to an honest dialogue about race in America. Black church traditions are still invisible to many Americans, as they have throughout the country's history, he said.

Wright said the black church tradition is not bombastic or controversial. It is simply different — and misunderstood by the dominant culture in the United States, he said.

The bolded statement is certainly controversial. To criticize Wright or his sermons is not an attack on any church.

This is not going away any time soon.

 

[W3pcq]

If he is so smart and patriotic, then why did he mess things up for Obama so bad. A, he isn't really that smart after all, or B, he is that smart and doesn't care about Obama being president or not, or C, doesn't want Obama to be president.

Just because he was a marine doesn't mean he going to be patriotic now. Maybe that is where some of his resentment comes from?

I am not saying anything about the african american community. Is simply said that Obama considers himself a member of it. Wright being someone who does do a lot of good for the african american community in many ways. So I can see how Obama may get involved with him with nothing but good intentions. I do not blame Obama for Wright at all except the fact that he accepted him as a spiritual advisor, which makes me question on some level, Obamas judgment.

 

[Esoteric]

Wright doesn't appear to understand or be making that distinction. He does mention objects hung above a crib, which implies genetic differences (too early to get culture). But in any case, it's a moot point: the "white" way of learning has been proven to work. The "black" way doesn't actually exist and never has. If I were a black parent raising a child today, I would want to educate that child in a way that exists and is known to work, not try to 'fight the system'. It is the fighting against reality, more than anything else, that creates the divisions and puts blacks below whites in the US.

It appears so...I thought that lot of what the rev said was rubbish, but he has an idea, and that's fine. I disagree with most of it respectfully. However, one thing i do agree with is that black African learning style did exist. The main forum of the African historian was the ritual celebration, amidst drumming, dances and costumes. He used pneumonic devices to retain the vast amount of knowledge he was expected to store, and this explains the "folksy" or "tall-tale" nature of the griot's craft.

The rev makes a mistake in assuming that there's an unbroken continuity of African cultural learning style which is an obstacle to blacks learning process today...he appears to be unaware that prior to the 1960's black students performed on par with White students but with integration Black neighborhoods became less diverse class wise. So working class black children had less positive role models to look up to within their vicinity.

 

[Esoteric]

The bolded statement is certainly controversial. To criticize Wright or his sermons is not an attack on any church.

This is not going away any time soon.

I'm not one to stifle free speech but I think he needs to shut up and go away until after the election. He is a self promoter like most religious figure heads in America.

 

[TVP45]

.he appears to be unaware that prior to the 1960's black students performed on par with White students but with integration Black neighborhoods became less diverse class wise.

Do you have a source on this? Rosenberg and Simmons did a ton of research on this subject throughout the 60s and 70s and came up with a different conclusion. Are you aware that some Virginia counties provided little or no (yes, I mean no) schooling for Black students in the 1950s? What do you suppose that did to academic performance?

 

[russ_watters]

What I love about politics is that anybody can claim total knowledge of a person based only on what they have read or seen on the news.

I might be going out on a limb here, but you've never actually met Obama or Wright before, have you? Have you eaten dinner with them? Played pool over some beers?

No, I don't think so. So I can't possibly imagine why you are speculating on either party so deeply?

It's pretty simple: we have to choose who to vote for and this information is all we have to go on. So we have to make our judgements based on this information. That requires some educated guesses.

That Wright is a militant separatist is relatively clear - he's pretty explicit about his statements to that effect. How closely Obama follows his beliefs is obviously an open question, but the association between the two men will make people wonder about it and make them uncomfortable about voting for him.

 

[russ_watters]

It strikes me that this may be what saves him, if anything can. Wright was so over-the-top yesterday that that Obama may start to appear more a victim of a friend gone looney than someone to be feared.

As I've said before, Obama is trapped by this situation. He almost has to respond to Wright and he did - much more forcefully than the last time. And if he gives any response, the forceful disavowal is the right one. But then he risks starting a war between himself and Wright.

Incidentally, you and I have probably never agreed on anything quite so closely as I agreed with your previous post about Wright.

 

[russ_watters]

I alluded to it but didn't see anyone specifically mention it, so here is Obama, today, essentially recinding what he said about Wright in that speech in Philly that everyone loved:

"I gave him the benefit of the doubt in my speech in Philadelphia explaining that he's done enormous good. ... But when he states and then amplifies such ridiculous propositions as the U.S. government somehow being involved in AIDS. ... There are no excuses. They offended me. They rightly offend all Americans and they should be denounced."...

"What became clear to me was that he was presenting a world view that contradicts what I am and what I stand for," Obama said...

"The person I saw yesterday was not the person that I met 20 years ago," Obama said of the man who married him.

http://www.usatoday.com/news/politics/election2008/2008-04-29-obama-wright_N.htm