Why the fuck do I know Obama’s minister’s name?! No, really. Why? I don’t know John McCain’s minister’s name. (But he does have a “spiritual guide”.) I don’t know Hillary Clinton’s minister’s name? I don’t know John Edwards’ minister’s name. I don’t know Mitt Romney’s minister’s name, and Romney was in a church that is actually out of the mainstream and “raised questions”. I don’t know George Bush’s minister’s name, but I know that whoever he is probably thinks I’m going to burn in hell for all eternity for the sin of being a feminist atheist.
Nothing that Rev. Jeremiah Wright said from the pulpit is, in an objective sense, any worse than damning the majority of the population to hell, which is a bare minimum requirement for the religious right assholes in this country that we’re supposed to show such great respect for because it’s their beliefs and they’re religious. Oh, he shot himself in the foot by giving some liberals a toehold to get all bunched up and judge-y, but the only reason we’re in this place is because Obama’s church is being monitored closely, and it’s being monitored because he’s black, and because his church is a black church, and because a whole lot of white people are looking for a way to define “Christian” in such a way that Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago doesn’t count.
Because, as I’ve said before, the religious tensions in this country are not about actual tenets of faith, dogma, or anything like that. It’s tribal warfare in Sunday clothes. Obama’s church is being monitored by the press, and I for one am outraged. Hell, Huckabee’s fire and brimstone bullshit didn’t get half the attention this nonsense is getting. If we’re going to treat “people of faith” with respect, by god, we better have the same standard for white and for black. I don’t give a shit if someone worships a teapot—it’s all the same to me—I vote for them by their policies. We atheists think it’s all bullshit.
The sad thing is that this tip-toeing respect of religion has been used as a cover for a larger set of cultural issues that, without the Bible-thumping as a distraction, would be much harder to defend. Basically, it’s a culturally conservative, patriarchal, Anglo-Saxon, moneied class trying to demand that they be recognized as the dominant culture in the U.S. that all other cultures are divergences from. When they say, “America is a Christian nation,” they mean, “America is a patriarchal, white-dominated nation with a strict hierarchy that puts our people on top. You may be permitted to have other cultural choices, within limits, so long as you recognize ours publicly as the valid ones.” But boy, if someone from another culture really tries to lay claim to real power, the fucking mask of respect for “people of faith” comes flying off, doesn’t it?
There’s what Rev. Wright actually said and what this is about. John Cole has done a favor and rounded it up. I particularly liked Dan Riehl’s inability to speak in code.
Also, if that’s the case and Obama is a disciple of Wrights, exactly what type of change does Obama have in mind when it comes to race relations in America? The church also celebrates Kwanzaa. I wonder, is this something Obama intends to continue if he’s elected president? His holiday cards are pretty generic … for a committed Christian.
Doesn’t get simpler than that, does it? “America is a Christian nation” believes that the problem isn’t racism so much as those irritating members of a minority group going off and being happy about themselves, instead of standing around wasting their time wishing they were him, which is something only the truly insane would do, but he doesn’t understand that.
God, I’m all stompy. Apologies if this came off as overheated—I’m trying not to be bitter about missing out on SXSW two years in a row due to flu and then I flip on my computer for some reading time and am confronted with this shit. Just read Roy Edroso for some more finely focused pissed-off.
From Sean Altman’s song:
I’m not bragging,
Don’t mean to blaspheme,
But Jesus was a short dude,
At least compared to me.
The average man at the time of Christ
Was four foot nine to five foot five.
I-I-I-I-I’m taller than Jesus!
http://www.seanaltman.com/lyrq-z.shtml#taller
Am I the only one who finds it rather odd that this comes out as soon as questions were raised about the McCain supporters (and religious nutjobs) Hagge and Parsley?
Amanda is right, this is no worse than pronouncing every Sunday people are going to burn for all eternity. For that matter, its in fact a little less objectionable than what Falwell said after 9/11.
Cheer up. At least they can’t say that Obama’s a Muslim any more.
IIRC, the One in the White House does not have a minister. God finds him sufficient unto himself.
Of course, He feels the same way about Satan.
Okay, here’s the playbill for “Candidates and Their Religions”:
http://christianity.about.com/od/religionpolitics/tp/candidatesfaith.htm
This will fade as quickly from memory as McCain and whatshername, the lobbyist…
The local conservative nutters in my area (small town in MN - MN says “Hi!”, MA Jeff!) are ranting and raving about how racist Obama is and how racist his church is. I’ve gone from trying to educate, to rolling my eyes, to clenching my fists. Someone is going to get hurt of these days. Could anyone pony up for my bail?
To be fair, Obama’s been on an “I’m a Christian” tear, reaching out to megachurches. Rev. Wright’s as fair game as other religious bigots as Rev. Hagee. There’s just no excusing the crap he tried to fling on Hillary Clinton, as if not being called n* was in itself “proof” of bigotry.
I’ll bet neither the Rev nor Obama has been called a cunt, either, but that particular fact alone and in itself doesn’t make them sexist (never mind get the torch and pitchfork set going.)
Disclaimer: I’ve been called a wide variety of racial, ethnic, religious and sexist slurs, though can’t admit to having n* as one of them.
Reverend Wright at the pulpit of the Trinity United Church of Christ: “Hillary has been married to Bill and Bill has been good for us? Oh no he ain’t! Bill did us just like he did Monica Lewinsky. (imitates humping the air). He was riding dirty.” (laughter and applause)
http://youtube.com/watch?v=86ZJYfyCRXc
Class act, huh? There were children in attendance. Mommy, what does “Dirty Riding” mean? Barack and Michelle bring their young daughters to the Sunday services at Trinity.
Riding dirty, I love that phrase for anal sex. If I had a pastor this entertaining and x rated, I’d start going back to church.
You know, if this goes on, and if our pathetic excuse for a media keeps on trying attack Obama, I wonder if Obama could possibly realize that there is no way to make these worthless pieces of shit like him, and simply stop trying?
If that would happen, not only could Obama possibly gain politically, but it could be a public object lesson in how worthless our media truly is.
I’ll keep watching.
Preach on, Amanda! Your rant kicks fucking ass!!
Athiest upstream,
Halle-fuckin’-lujah! (Please take that the right way)
Halle-fuckin’-lujah! (Please take that the right way)
I know what’cha mean….
Yeah, we can only hope.
Also, Obama & Obama supporters do attack Clinton. I don’t think they are the primary source of the misogynistic attacks against her tho
I can’t say, I’m following this controversy all that closely, but from what I can tell it goes something like this (correct me if I’m wrong):
1. Ferraro, acts as political suicide bomber for Team Clinton, throws out some race-baiting to get the Obama camp to react.
2. Obama, criticizes the remarks without overreacting. Wise move.
3. Rev. Wright, off-script, takes the bait and attacks Clinton in a manner that makes the campaign about race.
4. Obama knowing that if the campaign becomes about race, he loses. So he throws the nutty Rev. under the bus. Wise move again.
Politics is dirty and unfair. Get used to it, this election has a long way to go.
Excuse me…what? Please for the love of Christ tell me that phrase has been taken out of context and does not imply what I think it implies. Or was it Martin Luther King Jrs dream that little black children not be judged on the color of their skin, but rather on the content of their Christmas cards.
“Am I the only one who finds it rather odd that this comes out as soon as questions were raised about the McCain supporters (and religious nutjobs) Hagge and Parsley?”
Not only that, I haven’t heard of ANY stories of Republicans being forced to defend themselves against how Ted Bundy supported them or even directly worked with them.
For that matter, Hillary never had to defend herself against how OJ Simpson endorsed her.
Politics is dirty and unfair. Get used to it, this election has a long way to go.
Absolutely. You’ll find no argument from me there.
I’m just mentioning, I would like to lower public confidence in the US media, if possible. They are nothing but a drag on our national discourse.
Well, to say the very least, the Rev. Wright’s god-damn-America routine strikes me as being what our Enlightenment-era forbears would have called “impolitick”. But since the Hagees and Phelpses of this world express themselves in nearly identical terms, I refuse to get too overwrought about the Rev. Wright’s pronouncements—which can’t, by the same token, be characterized as racist, since radical preachers on the right persist in airing the same views in a race-neutral context.
Wasn’t it Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell who first said, at a time when the dust of 9/11 had yet to settle over Manhattan, that America by dint of her irreligiosity had brought destruction down upon herself? I seem to remember the utterance of a certain number of words to that effect. Last time I looked, neither Falwell nor Robertson were black (which may explain why their dicta were neither widely questioned nor endlessly publicized). Neither one of them had Barack Obama as a parishoner either, which may help explain the same thing.
A couple of days ago James Lileks took it upon himself to opine that, in the event of another substantial attack upon America by a foreign power, the Quislinglike lib-ruls would, as one body, lay the responsibility for the attack at the feet of the Statue of Liberty. He seems to be unaware of the fact that the first post-9/11 example of that kind of dust-licking on the part of Americans was set, and set indelibly, by a couple of rightie preachers. But possibly that incident doesn’t qualify for admission into the Institute of Official Cheer, and consequently hasn’t made it onto Lileks’ site.
dear Amanda
You know Obama’s minister’s name because he has been shoving it down everyone’s throat. Because he is the only candidate going to say that his pastor was his “mentor”, that he helped on at least one of his books ( down to choosing its title), and the list can go on.
I like the fact that you fail to acknowledge Wright’s sexist attacks at Clinton. Yet again you are shitting on Pandagon’s reputation of being a feminist blog, but don’t let that bother you.
If Wright’s attacks would have been aimed at any other ethnicity than white, it would have been recognised for the hate speech that it is.
But don’t let that bother you. You have a book to sell, and some Obama ass to kiss, so please kindy go and continue with these pleasant activities.
But don’t let that bother you. You have a book to sell, and some Obama ass to kiss, so please kindy go and continue with these pleasant activities.
If you focus on the petty attacks that candidates make on each other, and ignore the larger picture, and the source of the vitriol, you’ll never be able to analyse politics and understand it.
But, maybe understanding isn’t your aim.
If you are gagging, then why don’t you shut up?
I find it a little strange that “this whole Wright thing” reemerged on blatheradio the VERY same night you went off on it yourself, stupormoose.
The fact is, people who are shit on regularly have a right and some room to rant when it comes to complaining about the patriarchy! You would deny that from your position of rich white privilege? That, dearie, is racism. So shut up and get the nearest male a beer because you don’t get to talk? That’s the analog you can’t see through Hillary’s skirts.
“Feminist” is like “democratic” - the more orthodoxy, the less there is of it. This business of “can’t be feminist unless you do as I say” is very very offensive. Take your little girl schoolyard clique zone diva politics and shove them! The domineering lord of the flies world of cheerleaders and popular chicks isn’t welcome here.
Besides, Hill and Bill have been warming the pews at all sorts of extremely bass-ackward racist and sexist churches for many many years - sometimes as official acts of their offices! Hold them accountable for that why don’t you? If their ears heard it in a church then they MUST believe it!
Oh well, Obamamania and tinfoil hat do make a lovely combination Ms kate, so do go on.
Let me know when you find out I am in fact Hillary Clinton
Oh, and Jim B - have you so completely sexualized your children with vivid descriptions of “sinful” acts that they would even have the slightest clue what that dude was going on about?
Mine might understand, but one of them is 12. At 5 or 6 they would not get it at all. Then again, I didn’t spend a lot of time detailing exactly what I didn’t like about my neighbors’ marital relations, either.
If Hillary Clinton spent time commenting on blogs when there are superdelagates to woo if she really wants a new job, that would be hill-arious evidence of a lack of sanity.
It’s 3am … the phone is ringing in the White House … and no one answers because SOMEONE IS WRONG ON THE INTERNET.
Let me know when you find out I am in fact Hillary Clinton
We know you’re not. Hillary Clinton is smart.
Oh, hell.
Confessional.
A bunch of the Wright polemic is in
pretty good accord with a lot
of my personal idea set.
Mea mega multi culpa, God.
Must be ‘cause I TOO, attend a UCC church.
[Y’know… they’re so homophobic too]
A little wisdom from Billy Bragg:
- Waiting for the Great Leap Forward
SM:Yet again you are shitting on Pandagon’s reputation of being a feminist blog, but don’t let that bother you.
If nobody seems to do as you say, start your own goddamn blog and go away!
If Wright’s attacks would have been aimed at any other ethnicity than white, it would have been recognised for the hate speech that it is.
Poor whitey. Black man’s always keeping him down. I mean, white people only make up something like 99 percent of the Senate. We’re so put-upon. It’s so very hard to be us.
Spare me. The reason an African-American preacher attacked white America for being bad to black America is that white America has been bad to black America for a pretty much unbroken half of a millennium.
I assume that you also feel that there’s such a thing as misandry, no?
For God’s sake, if I were a black man and old enough to remember Jim Crow–as Wright is–I would be doing an imitation of the Prophet Jeremiah every single day. Which is to say, I would preach sermons saying “Goddamn America”. The man was born in 1941 and lived under Jim Crow, attack dogs, and firehoses most of his life. Give him a break!
I think Amanda is wrong about it being the WASP moneyed classes, because almost all of them would think it really not done to bring up their pastor’s name in public. It’s a rich conservative christianist thing, but I think it comes from people who have always resented being looked down on by the WASPs.
Why I think this may be important: because the rich moneyed conservatives who only go to church on the high holidays (like GWB) are playing this game both ways, and will be glad to condemn Obama as excessively religious at the very same moment that their downscale proxies claim he’s a cryptomuslim unitarian.
“The fact is, people who are shit on regularly have a right and some room to rant when it comes to complaining about the patriarchy! You would deny that from your position of rich white privilege? That, dearie, is racism.”
The fact is “God Damn America” is an unacceptable sentiment for anyone in our political culture, and to give black people a pass because of “blah blah patriarchy” is itself the soft bigotry of low expectations. I expect better of everyone in the Obama campaign, and that you don’t is itself a form of racism.
And that’s consciously ignoring the spiritual and ethical idiocy of thinking innocent people “deserved” to be murdered on 9/11 as punishment for the murder of other innocent people . THIS is his “spiritual mentor”? THIS is the person he wants on his religious committee?
How much money do you think Obama has contributed to give this alleged “pastor” a pulpit to hate from? How many comments like those has Obama exposed his children to? What does it mean that his children have been raised to view him as a moral authority?
Falwell was crucified for saying exactly what Wright said about 9/11, and rightly so. To hold Wright to any lower standard is racist.
Go ahead and call me a concern troll- I’ve been called worse by better.
soopermouse–proof that the Southern Strategy still pulls in votes. How long ’til we hear about welfare queens, quotas, and nasty brown immigrants?
We’ve already heard all about “eeevile affirmative action” or the presumed unfair results of it.
Does anyone know if Huckabee ever released any of his sermons? That would make an interesting contrast.
As for the people decrying Wright’s sexism, that is NOT why these videos are making the rounds. The people pushing don’t give a damn about sexism. It’s all about scaring the white folk.
Of course, excepting the crazy AIDS thing, most of what was in there was factual. And if I were a black man in America today, I’d be plenty pissed off about it. Hell, I’m a white chick, and I’m plenty pissed off about it.
Crucified? Crucified? Falwell still appeared regularly on cable TV and talk radio as some kind of religious expert even after he made his 9/11 statement, so cute me a break. He even got John McCain, now the Republican nominee for the Presidency, to speak at the commencement of his so-called degree mill “university”. If he had been black, though, you can bet he never would’ve appeared on tv again.
Also, I don’t think saying God Damn America is hating on America. I think it’s being angry at America. And sometimes, you have to get angry to make things better.
And Falwell was crucified after 9/11? Oh hah hah snort! That’s a good one. But I recall a slightly different version, one that had McCain embracing the pudgy sulfur boy himself a few years back.
http://archives.cnn.com/2001/US/09/14/Falwell.apology/
What, you people think he decided to apologize to us gays out of the goodness of his heart?
Of course, that’s an interesting question- Has Rev. Wright apologized for implying that store clerks deserved to die for the actions of the IDF? If not, that gives the moral authority to JERRY FALWELL.
As for Rev. Falwell continuing to reap the benefits of his 40 year old media empire- nobody fired Rev. Wright either. At least Falwell gave us a well-deserved apology.
Falwell was crucified for saying exactly what Wright said about 9/11, and rightly so. To hold Wright to any lower standard is racist.
Crucified? Are you out of your mind? He was given a pass by everyone!
He continued to head his media empire, politicians continued to seek his approval, and his show was continued to be shown everywhere!
He “apologized”? Get outta town. He got up an told everyone they were wrong for thinking he meant what he actually did mean.
Stop concern trolling.
Go ahead and call me a concern troll- I’ve been called worse by better.
So, wait…
if we call you a concern troll, and our betters call you a lousy, stupid concern troll piece of shit, or something,
what does that prove exactly? How does that work out well for you?
Obama’s in trouble if this is the best defense you can give.
1) Huckabee’s out of the race. And I really, really doubt he ever said, “God damn America.” So that doesn’t help you. He never got half the attention because he never had half the chance Obama has to win.
2) Obama’s church isn’t being “monitored.” They tape and sell copies of the sermons! The guy was part of Obama’s campaign and an inspiration for his book. This didn’t exactly take J. Edgar Hoover-level surveillance.
3) Having moral teachings is a far cry from damning a majority of Americans to hell, and besides, Wright damned America as a whole. And said FDR knew about Pearl Harbor. And that AIDS was invented. And that 9/11 was payback for Hiroshima. Hopefully you see the difference. Millions of undecided voters will.
4) Your “best” defense in the comments is that Wright is no worse than Falwell. Ok. So Obama has had a 20-year friendship and mentoring relationship with a Falwell-like character. And this is the man you’re going to vote for?
5) Even if Wright gets the “old angry black man” stereotype excuse that you guys have brought up, that doesn’t exactly apply to Obama. He’s already said that he transcends that.
3) Having moral teachings is a far cry from damning a majority of Americans to hell, and besides, Wright damned America as a whole. And said FDR knew about Pearl Harbor. And that AIDS was invented. And that 9/11 was payback for Hiroshima. Hopefully you see the difference. Millions of undecided voters will.
Shut up before you make me smile.
No-one said “Damn Americans to Hell”. You’re reaching.
Our best defense is not that Wright is no worse than Falwell. Our point is that Falwell is way worse than Wright. Our larger point is that Obama should realize that ignorant racist loons like you will never be on Obama’s side no matter what he said, so he should stop trying to get you on his side.
“Crucified? Are you out of your mind? He was given a pass by everyone!”
People who are given passes don’t need
to issue apologies. This current line of “The overwhelming public condemnation wasn’t CRUCIFIXION per se” is pitiful version of “No True Scotsman”. “Nu uh” is not an argument. Deal with it.
“what does that prove exactly? How does that work out well for you?”
It’s actually a subtle argument that “concern trolling” is a lazy ad hominem leveled at progressives with the audacity to have their own opinions. As for working for me- it’s an attempt at innoculating discussion from lazy ad hominems like yours.
It’s apparently unsuccessful. (Le sigh…)
Finally-
In the video of Rev. Wright shouting “God Damn America”, there’s thunderous applause at that particular line. That means that Obama’s “community of faith” (which we must be SO RESPECTFUL OF) is the sort of people that hear “God Damn America” and cheer.
And if I sound angry, it’s because I supported Obama right up until he called accurately quoting someone a “personal attack”. It’s because I believed in him, and then he lied to my face (”I renounce the remarks, but I wasn’t there, and I didn’t knoooowww!!!”)
Only suckers believe that.
The fact is “God Damn America” is an unacceptable sentiment for anyone in our political culture
I agree. If Wright runs for office, I will likely vote for his opponent. I can assure you that.
Look, I’ve received plenty of spiritual insight and mentoring from people regarding religious issues who also believed any number of ideas about politics and policy that are, to put it mildly, unacceptable stances to take in public discourse. That is actually one of the benefits of not running for political office– you don’t have to limit your public statements to those which are considered acceptable by the vast mass of the electorate.
Thankfully, never having run for political office, I was never called upon to “renounce and reject” every last statement anyone I studied or spoke with has said.
And, on the other hand, if Wright, who is not running for office, nor a politician, has made statements that are unacceptable sentiments for anyone in our political culture, why are statements such as the support for the use of torture acceptable sentiments for anyone in our political culture? What makes Wright’s statements so much more controversial than, say, that use of waterboarding is legal if the government says it’s ok?
And, on the other hand, if Wright, who is not running for office, nor a politician, has made statements that are unacceptable sentiments for anyone in our political culture, why are statements such as the support for the use of torture acceptable sentiments for anyone in our political culture?
Silly person! Republicans say those things, therefore, they’re fine! IOKIYAR. Sheesh.
“ignorant racist loons like you”
You apparently believe that the idea the USA “started AIDS” is a legitimate, but that accurately attributing that belief to a public figure makes you an “ignorant racist loon”.
You’re an embarrassment to atheists.
It’s actually a subtle argument that “concern trolling” is a lazy ad hominem leveled at progressives with the audacity to have their own opinions. As for working for me- it’s an attempt at innoculating discussion from lazy ad hominems like yours.
It’s apparently unsuccessful. (Le sigh…)
The reason it was unsuccessful was that “concern trolling” is actually a very good way of describing people who try to make you abandon your arguments by bringing unconnected, useless facts that have no relevance to the argument. If you want to talk to our betters, and have them tear you a new one, why don’t you just go to that better blog? This worse one just takes you at face value and responds.
And if I sound angry, it’s because I supported Obama right up until he called accurately quoting someone a “personal attack”. It’s because I believed in him, and then he lied to my face (”I renounce the remarks, but I wasn’t there, and I didn’t knoooowww!!!”)
Ah, so now you are angry that mean ‘ol Barack Obama said something dishonest.
Lissen up Chad. You have to face reality. Politicians lie. They have to lie, because they know from bitter experience that the US public is a bunch of scared, petty, ignorant, racist, morons who hate to hear the truth.
Carter tried telling people the truth. He said, “The US public needs to start conserving energy, and developing alternate forms of energy. We can’t let ourselves become addicted to Oil. It will tear our republic apart.” The public hated and shunned him for this honesty, electing someone next time who told them exactly the kind of lies they wanted to hear.
Anyone who cannot listen to politicians’ lies, and read between the lines, and consider why they have to lie, is totally useless as a political analyst or political actor. Anyone who expects politicians to always be honest is living in a fantasy world.
So, if this minor kerfluffle from the Obama campain was enough to turn you away from him, then all I can say is good bye and don’t let the door hit you on the ass on the way out.
You apparently believe that the idea the USA “started AIDS” is a legitimate, but that accurately attributing that belief to a public figure makes you an “ignorant racist loon”.
You’re an embarrassment to atheists.
Chad, I’m happy to embarass a bunch of atheists who are dumb enough that they take political statements, and political connections, at face value. Guess what Chad. Politicians have all kinds of connections to all kinds of people who believe dumbass things. They have to have them, because if they turned away the people who have dumbass (as opposed to evil and dangerous) beliefs, they would have absolutely no way to get elected. This is the reality.
Is Wright correct that the US created AIDS? Of fucking course not, it’s a dumb conspiracy theory popular among some blacks. It’s intellectually insulting, and lame. But if that’s the best attack you have on Wright, I’m not impressed. And if that’s the best attack you have on Obama, that’s just sad.
Um…Chadwick? The thing is that an awful lot of black folks do, in fact, believe that AIDS was created in government labs as part of a plan to get rid of “undesireables”. Hell, I’ve heard that from some white gay men, so…yeah.
But given this little thing called the Tuskegee Experiment”, is it really that surprising that black people just might think the U.S. government was up to something?
“And, on the other hand, if Wright, who is not running for office, nor a politician, has made statements that are unacceptable sentiments for anyone in our political culture, why are statements such as the support for the use of torture acceptable sentiments for anyone in our political culture?”
Tyro-
I’m actually going to vote for the Democratic nominee no matter who gets it, because Supreme Court Judges could die at any moment. Until, then, though, it’s tell the truth and shame the devil.
I wanted to preface with that, because while I appreciate your arguments, I think you’re conflating two different issues. Torture is MUCH worse than bad words that hurt peoples feelings (ie “God Damn America”), and no, it’s not fair that Rev. Wright is being held to a higher standard than some torture apologists, but the answer to that inequity is to hold torture apologists to greater scrutiny, not Rev. Wright to less.
As one of the “10 most influential black pastors” and a member of Obama’s election committee, he chose to be a public figure. Freedom of speech is not freedom from the consequences of your speech.
Finally, I happen to remember September 16, 2001, which I kept in mind while reading the sermon he delivered that day.
Fuck him.
There is documented evidence that the U.S. Public Health Service, under the guise of treating their disease, used nearly 400 African-American men as experimental subjects without their knowledge or consent.
Do I believe that the government created AIDS? Nope. But I do understand why some people might look at a disease that appeared to have come out of nowhere, and that initially only seemed to affect subgroups that were considered “undesireable”, and wonder if it was Tuskegee v. 2.0.
> The fact is “God Damn America” is
> an unacceptable sentiment for
> anyone in our political culture,
I have to say, I’m reading those words as “this thing America is doing is wrong and some change,” and some people seem to be reading it as a declaration of war or some kind of statement with a supernatural power to invoke divine punishment for individual Americans and American structures which God would otherwise have withheld. And perhaps it matters which of these was meant?
In one case, the line continues,
“for as long as she acts like she is God and she is supreme.”
Jenna
If it’s racist to scrutinize Wright, then it must be racist to raise any criticism of Barack Obama. When we look at candidates for our highest offices, the lives they lead come under scrutiny. We asked about Clinton’s college pot use, and Bush’s experimentation with cocaine (Obama’s drug use is off limits, because talking about it would be racist).
We looked at their business dealings, and Whitewater and Bush’s oil and baseball years were brought into question. We looked at Bush’s booze and Clinton’s women. We looked at what they were doing 30 years ago, and why they didn’t go to Vietnam.
These issues are much more remote and inconsequential than the fact that Obama’s church is founded on ideas that contradict the themes of Obama’s campaign, and that its pastor, a mentor and longtime advisor to Obama is a radical ideologue who seems to hate white people and America.
I think it’s very valid to suggest that Obama might believe the things that are preached in his church, and if he does, I think it is valid to question whether those values are inconsistent with my own, and whether I want to vote for a person who believes those things.
If Bush or McCain or Romney or Edwards or Clinton had a very close and influential advisor, religious or secular, whose public statements were inconsistent with the values espoused by the candidate, inconsistent with the values of people voting for the candidate, and offensive to most Americans, that would be newsworthy.
Everybody understood that Obama’s church was a black church and his pastor was black. Democrats love black churches. The Clintons have always been very much at home in black churches. But most black churches are not “God damn America” churches, and most black pastors are not Jeremiah Wright.
Candidates come under close scrutiny because we are entitled to know who these people are and what they believe. Obama orates on healing and unity, and Wright preaches divisiveness and separatism. Obama, under pressure, denounces or repudiates the support of Jew-hating Farrakhan, Wright gives the guy an award.
Obama’s mother raised him as some sort of pan-spiritual non-denominationalist, and, as an adult, Wright is the man who, as Obama says, brought him to Christ. Obama’s book title “The Audacity of Hope” was taken from one of Wright’s sermons. Obama has been active in this congregation for almost two decades.
This is a very influential person to the beliefs, spiritual and political, of Barack Obama, and scrutinizing Wright is as justifiable as scrutinizing Karl Rove. I don’t think it’s unreasonable to have serious questions about a candidate who was married in the church of “God damn America.”
“The reason it was unsuccessful was that “concern trolling” is actually a very good way of describing people who try to make you abandon your arguments by bringing unconnected, useless facts that have no relevance to the argument.”
You’re actually not able to see anyone else’s POV at all, are you? “people who try to make you abandon your arguments” makes me want to send a search party to rescue you from your own anus.
I happen to believe what I said. If you don’t like it, you’re free to continue the ad hominem, or even launch a substantive argument, should you actually be capable of it.
(”My candidate Obama is just a liar like everyone else” is substantive, but perhaps not all that wise…)
As for “ripping me a new one”- I’m sure the imagined victory of those virile rippers was terribly exciting for you, and I understand you needing to take those victories where you can.
(ps: You should really stop holding black people to lower standards than white people (intellectually insulting and lame). It’s somewhat hypocritical on an alleged progressive like yourself.)
Goodnight, punkin.
You’re actually not able to see anyone else’s POV at all, are you? “people who try to make you abandon your arguments” makes me want to send a search party to rescue you from your own anus.
No Chad, I said it was people who try to make you abandon arguments with useless, irrelevant criticisms.
(”My candidate Obama is just a liar like everyone else” is substantive, but perhaps not all that wise…)
Not only is it substantive, it’s realism. I’m saying that whatever lie you believe that you have unearthed from Obama is really, really petty. It is especially petty when you consider how much more honest Obama is than McCain. But if you want to abandon Obama because of petty bullshit, please don’t let me stand in your way.
And no, I’m not holding blacks to a lower intelllectual standard that whites fer crying out loud. You pointed out a stupid belief that some blacks hold. I agreed that it is a stupid belief but said that your focus on this one belief was petty and pointless.
In reality, millions of whites hold even stupider beliefs. For instance, many whites believe that what they view on television is almost always correct. They believe that statements would not make it onto television if they were incorrect. Blacks, on the other hand, usually have a more realistic, distrustful view of what is shown on television. If you had accused whites of this, I would have gladly agreed with you there as well.
So, please, go ahead and jettison Obama for whatever petty reason you like.
Another politician said the Obama benefits from his race! Let’s subject this guy to the ridicule he deserves!
If you can’t tell the difference between asserting that 9/11 was the result of God removing his protection due to secularism and homosexuality, and that 9/11 was the predictable result of over 50 years of atrocity and imperialism, there really is no hope for you.
“We are all friends here. Or should be; for the laughter of Mordor will be our only reward, if we quarrel.”
Does it bother anyone else that every Republican reading this thread (and a million like it on the intertubes) is cackling with glee?
All I could think when I listened to the clip was, “Wait, Hillary had a smooth ride just because she’s white?” Because life for women is all roses and kittens and fluffy cotton candy?
Maybe I’m lost on how being rich and white makes sexism go away.
There was probably a better way to get his point across than how he said it. And of course, if we consider how long Barack has been absorbing these messages, of COURSE there are going to be questions. You don’t go to the same church for umpteen years because you disagree with the pastor. It’s not to say that his beliefs and Barack’s are one, but more to say … yes, there’s some cause for pause. If I found out tomorrow that Hillary was a disciple of Jerry Falwell, I’d be concerned too. I think it’s reasonable to ask, “Are those YOUR beliefs as well?” when you hear someone’s favorite minister spouting filth.
Politicians have to operate in an arena that’s nothing short of sociopathic, as that’s what the average voter really wants. (Especially those swing voters). People really do have to realize that.
That said, Obama really threaded the needle on this one. He talked about having to recognize that, and why people are angry at the same time as working to move past the anger.
And yes, that American politics is dominated by rah-rah go us sentiment isn’t something to celebrate, it’s something to mourn. It’s what causes the worst to happen.
Folks, this particular attack slant was both expected and inevitable.
And the timing of it was the first major mistake made by the right.
For this to have been effective it should have been released in late October just before the general election with Obama as the nominee.
The average American voter is too shallow and stupid to retain this information for more han 2 - 3 weeks.
They have the same ability to focus on a singular point as a puppy “Throw the ball!” “Is that a cat???” “Hey, I’ll chase my tail now”
This will pass, because there is no ‘There’ there.
My experience is that the dumbest people in America are affluent, white suburbanites.
These people don’t have to be smart. They have enough money that they can afford to put their brains on autopilot, and many of them do. The suburbs exist because people don’t want to deal with the problems that exist in any city. Who would have ever thought that living as far away from your work and business was a good idea? So instead, they work long hours, spend half their lives in their overpriced SUV’s, stuck in traffic, while commuting to their McMansions, which are filled with shit they don’t need, while their children raise themselves.
You cannot possibly believe that this “minister,” a misogynist of the highest order, has had no influence on Barack Obama. Obama has donated LOTS of money to this man’s church. The Obamas were married by this man. They have attended his church for 20 years. He suggested the title of Obama’s book. Yes, I’m the hundredth person to say this, because it’s true.
It’s not some random crazy minister coming out from under a rock to endorse Obama while egregiously trashing, in the most hateful ways possible, the only female candidate in the ring. Obama has been invoking religion, Christianity, and Jesus in his campaigning. If this is the man who has molded Obama’s religious beliefs for the past 20 years, I’m glad I found out about him. If he hasn’t molded Obama’s beliefs, why the hell did the Obamas keep attending his church, and raising their children in it?
You would like to pretend this doesn’t matter. It does. This is a man who has been influential in Obama’s life since Obama was in his 20s. It matters.
“Does it bother anyone else that every Republican reading this thread (and a million like it on the intertubes) is cackling with glee?”
So, does that mean “Big” Dick Cheney is Saruman? Or his he really The Dark Lord himself?
***
If the Reichwing is “cackling”, rest assured that 90% of you/them will (eventually) be crying in your beers if there’s another Rethug victory in November.
Neither the economy of America, the culture of America, nor the legal foundation of America can tolerate more of the same “medicine” we’ve been getting over the last 7-years (really the last 28-years).
The Right Wing Authoritarian Cultists might be getting a hard-on for another Reichwing candidate, yet again, but as their corporate overlords continue the destruction of America’s economy, and the fascists continue the destruction of our bedrock founding principles, you will be on the target list along with the rest of us.
It’s serious business to find excuses for wingnuts to vote against The Negro, but if McCain gets in, we’ll all have to live with the consequences…
“My experience is that the dumbest people in America are affluent, white suburbanites.
These people don’t have to be smart. They have enough money that they can afford to put their brains on autopilot, and many of them do.”
This is the truth. And I wouldn’t limit it to white suburbanites either. I’ve known affluent people (not at the very top, but in the top 5-10%) who, regardless of cultural/racial background, have become Stepford Citizens always on the hunt for the next mindless politician wooing them with false promises of tax cuts, etc.
And then the same people will turnaround and bitch about how bad police/fire/medical services are, how bad schools are, how bad the roads are, and how terrible it is that we import engineers/scientists/doctors from every corner of the earth to fill jobs Americans won’t/can’t take.
“As ye sow, so shall ye reap…”
“If Wright’s attacks would have been aimed at any other ethnicity than white, it would have been recognised for the hate speech that it is”.
What did he say that was racist?
“And that’s consciously ignoring the spiritual and ethical idiocy of thinking innocent people “deserved” to be murdered on 9/11 as punishment for the murder of other innocent people” .
I’ve heard the 9/11 comment, and I didn’t hear him say anyone deserved to die.
It’s a rich conservative christianist thing, but I think it comes from people who have always resented being looked down on by the WASPs.
I resist the idea that the rich christianists differ from WASPs in any way that’s relevant. Cheney may not be a Bible-thumper, but wisely realized he has more in common with Bible-thumping Bush than not.
And if the price of keeping my feminist credentials is kow-towing to racism, you can have ‘em. Luckily, it’s not, since there is no feminist credentialing board and plenty of feminists see anti-racism as an equally important struggle.
ou apparently believe that the idea the USA “started AIDS” is a legitimate, but that accurately attributing that belief to a public figure makes you an “ignorant racist loon”.
You’re an embarrassment to atheists.
No, I’m saying that we can assume that anything a pastor says from the pulpit is a lie. If we’re going to start playing the games of this lie is worse than that lie, then we’re being selective and hypocritical. Americans pick: Either religion is a private matter and treated as such, or we demand that all people who run for office are atheists, because otherwise they are crazy people following those who preach a pack of lies.
The selective criteria here is what bothers me. It’s about how religious blooey is good if you’re white, bad if you’re black.
For the record, my opinion on Mitt Romney was identical. Leave his religion alone, because it ain’t no worse than yours.
Replying to pbg’s post on the wrong thread: “1) So Barack Obama isn’t a rabid America hating Muslim, them–he’s a rabid, America-hating CHRISTIAN. That’s good to know.”
pbg, I’m so glad that you were able to completely miss the entire point of this thread and still try to make Obama responsible for things the minister of his church said. Way to go!
It’s nice to have more proof that the rules are totally different for the Reichwing vs. Democrats…
(The bekabot is going go repeat herself now, just as she has in the past. Be aware.)
(Or, what Ben and the rest said.)
Falwell was not crucified. He gained political capital among persons who were already more or less of his own mind, he did not lose it. People who were not already more or less of his own mind ignored him because they’d never been subscribers to his worldview and were therefore unaware of what that worldview implied. A certain number of the kind of libertarianoid secularists whom evangelical righties despise—the sort of people who work for the MSM—turned down the corners of their mouths and said “tut tut” and let it be understood that they scarcely felt Falwell’s behavior to be the behavior of a gentleman. Falwell’s “apology” was issued for their benefit. Out of gratitude, once the apology had been issued, the talking heads of the MSM allowed the matter to slide, acting, no doubt, out of their conviction that it’s not the Done Thing to continue to needle an opponent who has said that he’s sorry.
However. If the guy under the microscope is an important black pol who’s been mentored by a mouthy black preacher, the accepted rules of knightly chivalry can no longer be said to apply. In that case, all bets are off.
(What was it that Rev. Wright had to say about certain individuals “just not fitting the mold”? How’d that go again?)
JMO.
I know a lot of white people who believe the equally ridiculous origin-of-AIDS story that posits that we got it from sex with apes. If you think about the extremely racist insinuation behind that theory (which scientists firmly deny, right along with denying that the government created it), you’ll see why it persists, even though it’s ridiculous on its face.
I put these kinds of erroneous beliefs into two categories for this sake of this discussion:
1) False beliefs that justify some kind of oppression.
2) False beliefs that basically overthink some kind of oppression being thrust upon a group.
In the former category, the “we got AIDS from sex with monkeys” belief, the belief that black people are naturally dumber but faster, the belief that women are naturally dumber, the belief that women want love and men want sex and relationships are a tense exchange of one for the other, the belief that AIDS was sent by god to punish us for immorality, the belief that rape victims must have been asking for it, etc.
In the latter category, you have a lot of conspiracy theories. (Though not all—the idea of a Jewish conspiracy that justified the Holocaust belongs in the former category.) Conspiracy theories, while irritating because they distract from the real issues, are often not malicious in intent. Often, what happens is that some oppressive system is correctly identified, and then the rationalizing human brain seeks actual people to blame, instead of systems.
So the person in question sees, correctly, that the Bush administration cynically exploited 9/11 as an opportunity. Once you get there, it’s not that hard to make a leap towards saying, well, they caused it. It’s bullshit, and it doesn’t follow, but it’s a common logical error that persists because in most situations, following the money is a legitimate strategy. Same with conspiracy theories about AIDS. The person who believes them correctly sees that the government and larger society was willing to let this one slide because it was mainly killing the “right” people.
Conflating opportunism and the deliberate act of creating a problem is a dangerous place to tread, but it’s not irrational to think someone who engages in the former will happily move into the latter territory. The government lied about WMDs, so it’s not utterly out of the question that they’d lie about 9/11. In the case of the link between crack and the CIA, the “crazy black people pushing conspiracy theories” turned out to be right.
“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,” he said in a 2003 sermon. “God damn America for treating our citizens as less than human. God damn America for as long as she acts like she is God and she is supreme.”
Hmm. Yeah, that’s racist. It’s racist in the right-wing reframing of “racist” in which black people who complain about racism and discrimination are racist. So here I am, a black man, looking at this quote and thinking about what happened in Central America and Los Angeles in the late eighties. I’m thinking about the rise of the prison/industrial complex, and the fact that we have more people in prison than any other country on earth. I’m thinking about that JPI survey that details the truly astounding disparity between whites and blacks in state prison admissions on drug convictions. I’m thinking about how, in U.S.-occupied Afghanistan, the opium poppy crops are flourishing more than they have in years. Then I’m thinking about Central America and Los Angeles again.
Yeah- God Bless America.
Crap like this floods the airwaves, and conservatives still bleat that Obama is getting “a free pass” from “the MSM.”
“If you had accused whites of this, I would have gladly agreed with you there as well.”
If I had made baseless, racist accusations that “white people believe everything they see on TV”, you would agree with that? What the fuck is wrong with you?
I’m not talking about “blacks”, I’m talking about the documented views of a single public figure. The people talking about “blacks” are the ones who don’t think he should be accountable for his words because (paraphrased) “a lot of blacks believe that stupid shit”.
And when you get called on that blatant racism, you double down with “White people are stupid too! They’re the stupidest!”
Those two don’t cancel out- they just make you twice as racist.
“So, please, go ahead and jettison Obama for whatever petty reason you like.”
I’m already on record on here as intending to vote for whoever the Democratic nominee is (Supreme Court Judges- remember?) I just don’t have to treat patronizing racists with respect to do so.
“If you can’t tell the difference between asserting that 9/11 was the result of God removing his protection due to secularism and homosexuality, and that 9/11 was the predictable result of over 50 years of atrocity and imperialism, there really is no hope for you.”
If you can’t see that both Falwell and Wright’s statements justify mass murder and implicitly blame victims, then there’s no hope for you.
(Incidentally, “chickens coming home to roost” implies a level of responsibility that “predictable result” doesn’t, but nice try.)
Later, hypocrites.
A couple of days ago James Lileks took it upon himself to opine that, in the event of another substantial attack upon America by a foreign power, the Quislinglike lib-ruls would, as one body, lay the responsibility for the attack at the feet of the Statue of Liberty.
I guess losing his newspaper column didn’t do much for Lileks’ disposition.
Chadwick, it’s deeply disingenuous to think that Wright’s false beliefs aren’t being tied to his race in a way that insinuates—wrongly—that black people are especially prone to conspiracy theories or superstitions. A lot of white racists like to dwell on conspiracy theories and superstitions held by black people (and sometimes they hide behind the “I’m only picking on them one at a time!”), but the fact of the matter is that the tendency towards false belief is something humans have in common.
It’s just amazing to me that suddenly we’ve got this rationality standard put, well, not on all the candidates. Just the black one. Who still has to demonstrate irrationality to get in the door—we’re hardly a rational nation. We require that all presidential candidates lay claim to belief in the biggest bullshit of them all, that there’s a god above who loves us and sent his only son to die for our sins. But then we have a super selective bullshit standard—if your bullshit differs from the official WASP bullshit, then we raise a fuss. But standard WASP bullshit is published in mainstream newspapers.
What’s relevant here is how the candidates will govern. The problem I have with the theocrats is they want to govern according to bullshit. They can’t leave it at the church door. Bush pushes an anti-science agenda from the White House. I have zero reason to believe that Obama will sculpt White House AIDS policy according to a socio-religious myth, just because he runs in circles where that myth might be spoken. Like most religious people who are secular in their views on government, he will most likely be perfectly capable of talking god in church, and deferring to science in policy.
Gee, the blacks watch white folk drive into the ‘hood and not one is arrested while the brothers are stacked like cordwood. The Taliban eradicate drugs from Aghanistan and then Bush invades to…hmmm…the drugs return. See Ted Rall for even more cynicism.
As a biologist of no repute, I found the AIDS virus to be really odd. It had attributes found in other virii but not shared, except by the AIDS. It truly resembles what a “manufactured” virus would look like.
One reason I differed from the Fundies I was raised with was the incongruity of Jesus’s location and the TB infected whites found on the walls.
Humans period are prone to conspiracy theories. We’re pattern seeking animals, so we have an instinct to accept a bullshit theory or a crank theory rather than no theory at all. Strangely enough, this is where the impulse towards religion comes from too.
FWIW HIV did originate in non-human primates but didn’t cross over from sex.
Exactly.
In the explaining of any event both untoward and highly improbable, the human mind, which always seeks a reason or ‘probable cause’ will often find satisfying explanations which fall far from the mark…and reality.
Just as the event itself was a far Gaussian outlier.
[Lot like magical thinking too , I suppose.]
Well said.
These people don’t have to be smart. They have enough money that they can afford to put their brains on autopilot, and many of them do. The suburbs exist because people don’t want to deal with the problems that exist in any city. Who would have ever thought that living as far away from your work and business was a good idea? So instead, they work long hours, spend half their lives in their overpriced SUV’s, stuck in traffic, while commuting to their McMansions, which are filled with shit they don’t need, while their children raise themselves.
okay, seriously, fuck off. i live in the suburbs because i cannot afford to live in the city. appartments in my city start over $300 grand for a studio. rents are sky-high. so my husband works out here, and i go to school out here, and we raise our children. oh, and my parents have a suite in our basement, thus increasing our density. we grow our own vegetables (we ripped out the water-guzzling lawn) and we drive fuel-efficient vehicles.
most of the people that i know are nothing like your stereotype. but please, continue with the sweeping generalizations. because that is the best way to handle people who are different from you, or have made different choices.
“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,” he said in a 2003 sermon. “God damn America for treating our citizens as less than human. God damn America for as long as she acts like she is God and she is supreme.”
Hmm. Yeah, that’s racist. It’s racist in the right-wing reframing of “racist” in which black people who complain about racism and discrimination are racist. So here I am, a black man, looking at this quote and thinking about what happened in Central America and Los Angeles in the late eighties. I’m thinking about the rise of the prison/industrial complex, and the fact that we have more people in prison than any other country on earth. I’m thinking about that JPI survey that details the truly astounding disparity between whites and blacks in state prison admissions on drug convictions. I’m thinking about how, in U.S.-occupied Afghanistan, the opium poppy crops are flourishing more than they have in years. Then I’m thinking about Central America and Los Angeles again.
Yeah- God Bless America.
You would like to pretend this doesn’t matter. It does. This is a man who has been influential in Obama’s life since Obama was in his 20s. It matters.
And why don’t we start going into anything that McCain’s father ever may have said, as an Admiral, about forced desegregation of the armed forces?
For that matter, I’m sure there are more than a few people who post here and people in public life who had racist, sexist fathers who, nonetheless, showed them some important things about navigating their lives.
Just because your father might have taught you how to work a job interview or buy/fix a car or throw a curve ball or write a paper and you love him does not mean that you believe everything the man ever taught you or ever said about women or people not like yourself!
I gotta ask, because i’ve been on the road and stuff and there’s this huge outcry, but when did the structure of society in America cease to be white supremacist?
There were children in attendance. - JimB
If you want to “protect” your kids from teh sex, don’t take ‘em to church/shul in the first place. You know how much sex (and violence) there is in the Bible?
I’m a little disappointed that so many self-described progressives are buying into the idea that Wright is “racist.”
I do have a problem with the sermon he gave on Hillary. To be fair, he gave that sermon at a time when she was polling ahead of Obama among black voters, and there was a sense that he wasn’t “really” black. It wasn’t an attack trying to imply that she’s a bigot, as someone suggest above. But 1) I think it was inappropriate for him to make such an obviously political sermon, and 2) even in the limited context of whether Obama or Hillary best represents the black experience in America, it’s sexist to suggest that Hillary, as a rich white person, has faced no oppression as a result of her identity.
But the rest of the stuff he said, which people are reacting to so strongly? I don’t really get it. Of course a 66 year old black man is not going to have generally warm feelings about America. It would be perverse if he did. For white people to act like black people who don’t share their experience of America are “racist” is pretty shocking. The 9/11 comments were in bad taste, but they were also true. People hate America largely because it’s been a lethal imperialistic force in the world for a long time. And “US KKK A” of America–I mean, America is a racist society. Is Wright not allowed to be angry about it, to say so in strong language?
I heard part of Wright’s sermon on the radio (Mike Gallagher) the other day and honestly, there were sections of what he said that I agreed with and understood his anger and frustration.
Later, I saw clips on TV, and while I didn’t care for how it was delivered, I still agreed with the messages conveyed.
Seriously, wayward. Get a grip.
I live in the suburbs in a 1050 sf 1954 house. My office is downstairs. So is my husband’s. I drive an 8-year-old Passat that gets 30+ mpg highway. He drives an 11-year-old Jetta; ditto on the mileage.
The schools in DC are SO BAD that even if I chose to spend my housing dollar living there, I’d have to opt for private school. Here in Fairfax County, VA — the eeeevulll suburbs — my kids get an amazing government-provided education. Also, all 4 of us in this family have IQs in the triple digits!
Besides, let’s take your snotty-assed comment to its most absurd extreme: Everyone should live in a city. Everyone, everywhere in America, should live in a city.
Yeah. That works.
You don’t actually sound all that smart for a non-suburbanite.
You dont know the name of McCain, Clinton, Edwards, or Bush’s minister because none of them cite their ministers as profound influences in their lives like Obama has done repeatedly. He says how Wright helped him discover his faith, inspired his views issues, worked with him to get involved in politics. We’ve all heard how the Audacity of Hope was inspired by a similarly titled speech given by Wright. Wright has been with him on numerous occasions and appears to have played a big part in his political life. Not to mention that he married him and baptized his daughters. None of the other candidates’ lives, personal or political, are so heavily intertwined with that of their ministers, so it attracts (and merits) additional scrutiny. Then when you add the very controversial statements Wright makes on a regular basis, it only adds fuel to the fire.
You dont know the name of McCain, Clinton, Edwards, or Bush’s minister because none of them cite their ministers as profound influences in their lives like Obama has done repeatedly. - Chrissy
Even so, the kerfluffle over some of the views of Rev. Wright (which are not so over-the-top when you think about how someone like him would come to those views, as others above have pointed out) is a bit much.
My wife’s synagogue has a very active listserv. Someone posted a link to one of those “oh noes, can you believe what Rev. Wright said” articles to the listserv and made the sort of argument you made. Someone else made an interesting comment to the effect of: “we all would cite our Rabbi as a profound influence on our lives … yet would all of us, if we were running for political office, want to be judged by our Rabbi’s political views?”
This synagogue is a large, urban synagogue with a history of social activism. The Rabbi obviously does not (and cannot) speak about issues in too much of a politically specific manner (if only for tax reasons), yet it’s pretty obvious he’s a moderate-liberal. If a Republican (or for that matter a moonbat lefty) from this synagogue (which has both) runs for office, would it be fair to say Mr. So-and-so claims to be a Republican, but he’s said his Rabbi is a profound influence on his life, so he must be a secret liberal?
Would that be fair? Would that be correct?
I dont think its fair to judge the average member of a congregation by his/her minister, but its clear Obama and Wright’s relationship goes much deeper than the average churchgoer and minister. If Mr. so-and-so authored a book espousing his world view and his political beliefs that was based on the preachings of said minister, I believe it would be fair to make some assumptions about similarities between the two.
“I dont think its fair to judge the average member of a congregation by his/her minister…”
…now that’s the kind of clear-headed sentiment we need a lot more of in this country. None of us get to completely structure our lives so every person we associate believes exactly as we do…
“…but its clear Obama and Wright’s relationship goes much deeper than the average churchgoer and minister.”
…uh oh, spoke too soon.
It’s obvious to Chrissy and the like that Obama is merely a vessel through which the views of his minister are projected into the community - wha?
All any of this really comes down to is giving (some) people an excuse for voting against the Negro. They were never going to vote for him to begin with, and if they can go into the voting booth feeling that they are justified - by one or more of the laundry list of crap we’re going to be subjected to until November - then they can vote for the white guy and defend their choice later without appearing to be bigots.
So all Rove and Co. have to do is generate a continuous series of Important Disclosures About Barack Obama until the election.
Power To The Sheeple!!!…
Wright has been important and influential in the life of Obama, and yet Wright’s public statements are inconsistent with those Obama has made central to his campaign.
Jeremiah Wright is not a pastor of unity, not a pastor of healing, and not a pastor of post-racialism. Either Obama has chosen a mentor, spiritual advisor and close friend whose views are antithetical to his own, or the coalition that has formed behind Obama is founded on a lie. “God damn America” is the opposite of “Yes We Can.” What is of concern about Wright is what these revelations suggest about Obama.
Obama’s candidacy is proof that a lot of white people are ready to back a black man for president. But most of those white people aren’t so riddled with guilt that they will vote for a black man who hates them. If Obama gets nominated, it will be by a mostly-white coalition of voters who expect him to govern on their behalf.
If Obama’s beliefs mirror Wright’s, then he should not be president, and if his beliefs do not mirror Wright’s then one has to wonder why he has such a long and close association with the pastor and the church.
We look into various aspects of candidates’ lives going back to their youth as part of the process for vetting them for the office of the presidency.
Bill Clinton had to answer questions about his pot smoking in college, his business deals in Arkansas and insinuations about sex he may have had.
George W. Bush had to answer questions about his college pot use, alcohol use and possible cocaine use. He had to answer questions about his business deals in Texas, and with questions raised about his time in the Texas Air National Guard.
I think it’s unfair, misleading and insulting to throw racism accusations around when Obama gets the same kind of scrutiny that every other political candidate has. The press has been sinking claws into Hillary for months.
Even McCain, who is beloved by his press corps because he is nice to them, was simultaneously accused of serious ethical breaches, hypocrisy and screwing around on his wife based on completely unsubstantiated allegations in the New York Times.
Kennedy had to deal with insinuations that electing a Catholic president would put a puppet for the Vatican into power, and Romney had to give a major speech to try and diffuse apprehension about his Mormon faith.
I don’t see how looking into this part of Obama’s life is unusual in the process of vetting a candidate, and I don’t see how criticising his association with a political ideologue whose ideas are offensive to many Democrats is racist.
Did he lose his newspaper column? Now I did not know that. Gee, the poor fella. After all, it’s not as though he isn’t entertaining. It’s just that there are times when a person wishes he’d stick to deconstructing matchbooks and postcards and leave the politics and the religion alone.
…now that’s the kind of clear-headed sentiment we need a lot more of in this country. None of us get to completely structure our lives so every person we associate believes exactly as we do…
Exactly. That’s why this whole thing is so dumb. Not only is it dumb, it’s petty.
Who really gives two shits about whether Obama’s Rev. thinks the US govt. created AIDS. There’s plenty of st00pid out there to go around.
There’s the obligatory racist-calling! Thats seems to be the most efficient way to silence ones opponents. None of this info thats come to light about Wright has changed my mind - I wasnt voting for Obama in the primaries anyways for several reasons. If he wins the nomination, Ill vote for him and cross my fingers that his presidency turns out better than what I anticipate.
That doesnt change the fact that I find a lot of what Wright says very disturbing and offensive. Yesterday I spent some time watching youtube videos of him and googling him for speeches and I really didnt like what I heard. The fact that Obama cites him as such an inspiration in his life is very troubling to me.
While everyone’s going off on Obama, what about Hillary’s membership in a Bible study group with Brownback and Santorum?
This isn’t a tit-for-tat thing, but I just wish it were possible to choose a candidate who didn’t find woo, or kissing up to woo-believers, necessary.
Relax Chadwick. Amanda was just trying to make the standard Obamamaniac argument that “Obama did something wrong and that’s Hillary’s fault”. You see, their candidate is a Holy man and normal standards of judgement don’t apply to him.
As you might have seen above, I got a lot of shit thrown at me for disagreeing with the Obama sheep cub. After all, how better to be a “progressive” than by tryin to silence your opponents with insults?
These are the same poeple who live in a fantasy land where Obama’s campaign is clean and Hillary’s done all the attacks. bad bad Hillary… too bad facts show otherwise. Like here
http://www.theleftcoaster.com/archives/012114.php
After she had spent a long time in vetting the church/endorsements received by Mc Cain ( who isn’t remotely my preference for a candidate), Amanda comes and yells in utter befuddlement about “why does her candidate have to be subjected to the same treatment” and wah wah. And if you try to call her on it, the rest of the pack will atack you because, well, you spoke ill about Holy Obama and Amanda, his prophetess.
After the Obama campaign has barked about Ferraro, they desire a different standard to be abpplied when the bad words come out of one of their people.
Of course Obama has nothing to do with his pastor of 20 years, who has been a prominent member of his campaign, chose the title of one of his books and was supposed to announce him on the day he officially started his campaign. How dare we suggest that such a man might have anything to do with Holy Obama?
And of course Holy Obama knew nothing about Wrigt’s hatespeech and batshittery. It’s not like he consciously tried to push Wright aside when he realised that Wright was a bit too batshitty for his campaign.
And of course nobody realizes that giving the excuse “he’s just an angry old black man” is dehumanizing Wright, because it implies that he is not responsible for his words and actions. It’s not like that’s racist or anything.
If Obama had a problem with Wright, he would have left the church. It’s a very very simple thing. He didn’t.
That implies he accepted Wright’s positions.
And since Wright and Farrakhan are such good friends, one has to start wondering whether that endorsement wasn’t a little time bit sought for.
What can I say? Let them enjoy Mc Cain and may Dog help us all.
soopertroll, shut the fuck up. Good God, nine paragraphs of noise out of you is more than enough.
Who is this fucking guy “Chadwick” who thinks that Wright speaks for Obama or any other black people? If you think he is an asshole then good for you, fucker. Don’t lay that shit in my door because I am black.
Every time a black person says something controversial, ALL black people have to pay the price for it. And god HELP us if you discover a prominent black person that KNOWS the black person who said something controversial. ZOMG, they are plotting against AMURIKA!!!
What if everytime a white person said something fucked up (especially one that you knew and perhaps cared for) YOU were held responsible for it and were denied a job because of it….you would cry like a little kitten.
So shut up, you holier than thou asshole.
Sorry for my ranting, but this shit makes me angry. McCain can play kissy face with a TRULY hateful guy and people say “hey, he is his own man, while some of Hagee’s views may be odious, they share a love of Jesus”
But black people can’t do that. Everyone knows we are not capable of such complex relationships. All we do is get together and hate white people and America (and praise Allah, to boot).
Oh lookie, the strawman brigade ” and if you disagree you’re a racist” has made an unscheduled but expected appearance.
Lisa, Chadwick has not stated that Wright was speaking for all black people. However, his ties with Obama are far too deep for one not to question how much of these views are shared by Obama. It’s not just a matter of “Obama knew Wright”, it is a matter of “Obama has been bragging about his relationship with Wright for ever, and now he is paying for it”. If youc annot see the difference, read more.
Wright was a lot more tied with Obama than Ferrero was with Hillary, but you guys just can’t fathom being held to the same standard can you? I have been a long time supporter fo the idea that Obama’s campaign was based on lies and hot air, and the guy and his worshippers are so eager to prove me right it’s not even funny anymore.
Damian- please accept my apologies for posting large blocks of text that your little tiny brain can’t comprehend. maybe you should consider going back to coloring books, which seem to be a lot more suited for your reading skills.
what worshipping, idiot?
Seriously, you’re a tiresome little troll. I’m not a supporter of Clinton or Obama. I like her health care and SS policies better, but her campaign is, well, incompetent, racist, and attempting to write off large segments of the country as though they don’t matter.
But, hey, keep up the fun crazy. You do provide a certain level of entertainment.
Jeff, thank you for your unbelievable rhetoric skills. I am almost tempted to believe you are suited to have an actual inteligent conversation. But then again, people who do retort to insults do it because… let me see… they don’t have other arguments?
So please, keep barking at me
You seem to be one of those people I wouldn’t wnat to like me anyway.
Or you could, you know, provide an informed and articulate answer, but that might be a bit too demanding for your particular level.
You seem to be one of those people I wouldn’t wnat to like me anyway.
*sniff, sniff*
articulate answer to what? All you do is shriek like a howler monkey about how everyone is part of some cult, which is causing them to become misogynists, or some equally crazy nonsense.
Get help.
These are the same poeple who live in a fantasy land where Obama’s campaign is clean and Hillary’s done all the attacks.
When did anyone say that? I said that both of them had their good and bad points, but overall I preferred Obama. I realize he’s not that great. Here’s what I see: as long as McCain doesn’t get the presidentcy, we have good a shot at keeping the USA together. If McCain becomes president, I’m afraid that he will do something bad enough to wreck this country.
Has Clinton’s campaign been racist? Sure. Has Obama’s campaign been misogynist? Sure. The big picture is that either of them would be way better then McCain. That is what we should focus on. Defeating McCain. If Obama gets the candidacy, I’ll vote for him. If Clinton gets the candidacy, I’ll vote for her.
I’m sorry if I have been too hard on people on this thread, too ready to fight. But frankly, when people make petty, stupid, lame attacks on Obama, I get mad. Even if he’s not that great. Conversely, when people make petty, stupid, lame attacks on Clinton, I get mad too. They just aren’t doing that now, because Obama is the presumed frontrunner.
We can’t let this kind of thing tear the entire progressive movement apart. Rather than assuming that any attack on Obama is coming from the Clinton campaign (many of them are not), we should just tear apart attacks on Obama because they are petty and dumb. Don’t focus on fighting against someone, focus on showing the attacks on Obama for the lame, nonsensical garbage that they are.
Whether you know it or not, and whether you believe it or not, this is exactly the kind of thing that will sink Obama with 60-70 percent of voters across the country.
I read today that Hillary is up by as much as 20 points in Pennsylvania. I don’t know what Obama can do to stop this issue from destroying him, but I suggest running like hell from his paster of