Friday, March 14, 2008
Reverend Wright and the Obamas
Can somebody please explain why anybody thinks Barack Obama - who has no resume, a hard left voting record (to the extent he has one at all) and symbolically validates anti-American rhetoric promulgated by those closest to him -- has any chance of winning the general election in November?
If he emerges as the Democratic Party candidate, it is shaping up to be a landslide for McCain.
29 Comments:
By 
antithaca, at
Fri Mar 14, 01:12:00 PM:
I can't.
I used to think Obama was the strongest Donkey in the race. No more. I now think it's HRC. But I still think she's easier for McCain to beat...and have all along.
Yippee!!
By Christopher Chambers, at
Fri Mar 14, 02:25:00 PM:
I think it's due to the fact that most regular folks are sick of right wing pinheads like you. Could be...maybe...it's OVER. lol Too bad you don't have a fuhrerbunker to lounge in. Indeed, take a look at Rev. Parsley & crew before you start attacking other folks' churches.
Interesting retrosective on the Daily Show; John Stewart showing outright lies your Prez brayed to the "National Religious Broadcasters" convention at the "GayLord" resort. hehehehe. 2003 speech on WMD, Saddam's clear al Qaida connection (heavens to murgatroyd!)and the need to Christianize the world. After January 2008, Obama should give him a job as a shock jock on Air America.
McCain has certainly shown a vomiting distaste for your type of bullcrap...that also could present a problem for you all in the Fall. You might mobilize the usual fanatics and trivial fools and morons--that's not enough to win an election. Funny thing, I note Obama still seeks to reach out to ALL voters. As does McCain--beware of old dogs who turn on their masters, folks. Even right wing comic ben Stein said (lamented) that this is the new progressive era and that he's the standard bearer. Still has never sank to your level. Maybe you can learn something about that approach...even down there in the bunker, next time Tigerhawk jets in for Christmas Dinner and convivialtity, yeah, perhaps you all will have learned something.
By 
, at
Fri Mar 14, 02:39:00 PM:
Just remember, this stuff is just becoming visible for the first time to most voters and Obama hasn't defended his association with Wright just yet. Most Americans are very fair minded, and won't jump to conclusions unless and until Obama has had his say, or declines the chance. I still think Rezko is ultimately more damaging to Obama than Wright.
Hillary is something entirely different: Americans know all about her, and won't elect her.
Democrats are suddenly in a very tough spot, when by all indications this election should have been a cakewalk.
There is so much time left until the conventions that anything can still happen, but I think Clinton obviously looks tougher to beat today than she looked two weeks ago.
By , at
Fri Mar 14, 02:50:00 PM:
Because a very large number of Americans are generally sick to death of the politicians in DC. The rancor between left and right turns off everyone in the middle-Obama may vote far left, but he can still treat those on the right as humans with a different view. His far left viewpoint will be tempered by the moderates in Congress-we will get more done, with a more comassionate view of our fellow citizens. He is a breath of fresh air in an otherwise stagnant, smoke filled room. I will take your bet that the election is very close if Obama is the nominee. It will be a McCain landslide if HRC is at the top of the ticket.
By , at
Fri Mar 14, 03:09:00 PM:
Chambers ... seeing that Obama is effectively a follower of Louis Farrakhan is going to be a problem for him. His minister of 20 years is very problematic for him. Very.
Now, that won't stop blacks from voting for him because he's black, but it's going to be a problem with Caucasian voters, and voters with brains. And the party is going to have a problem with him, since it's tough for him to win with this kind of baggage.
By , at
Fri Mar 14, 03:29:00 PM:
Did not the Obamas donate $22k to the church last year? Doesn't that say enough?
By Escort81, at
Fri Mar 14, 04:08:00 PM:
This comment has been removed by the author.
By , at
Fri Mar 14, 04:27:00 PM:
Don't count Obama out yet. If he is the candidate, his campaign will be based almost exclusively on race. His surrogates, Oprah et al, will argue that anyone not for Obama is a racist. All the left wingers will shout the same messages.
The former Hillary people will back Obama 1000% as will the neocommunist media. If you think it feels like a cult now, wait 'til Hillary is out.
Think also of who his VP might be. It could be a female (but not Hillary) or a guy like Wesley Clark or Bill Richardson.
By , at
Fri Mar 14, 05:01:00 PM:
"The former Hillary people will back Obama 1000% as will the neocommunist media."
I don't think so at all. I believe that Hillary people (excluding the socialists) will find voting for McCain, or not voting at all, ultimately more palatable than voting for Obama.
By SR, at
Fri Mar 14, 05:08:00 PM:
Let's see. "Hillary people minus the socialists..." equals how many?
Hill and Barry are both running on a platform of euro-socialism. The tip off? CC thinks it is moderate.
By Escort81, at
Fri Mar 14, 06:10:00 PM:
CP -
There's no way McCain wins in a landslide versus Obama, although he may win.
Given Bush's overall unpopularity as a Republican president, and the state of the U.S. economy in 2008, it's a wonder a Republican candidate could even be competitive. Furthermore, the Iraq war is still unpopular (many people would rather forget about it at this point), and McCain bet his candidacy on the surge -- putting more resources at work in Iraq -- and so far it has been a good bet. It remains to be seen whether all of the Republican base will turn out for McCain in November, since he has never been their favorite guy.
With respect to Obama, most voters will give him the benefit of the doubt and not blame him on the basis of guilt by association. My sense is that he will personally have to disavow some of the more inflammatory statements (AIDs, AmeriKKKa, GD America) made by Rev. Wright that have been captured on video previously and shown this week. Michelle will undoubtedly be choosing her words more carefully if her husband is indeed the nominee.
I think the general election will be quite competitive if it is McCain-Obama. If Hillary somehow gets the nomination with fewer elected delegates, and a big part of the Democratic base that was pro-Obama stays home in the general, and the Republican base turns out to vote against her, then that's the only way I can see a landslide.
As I updated this post for typos, I saw on CNN that the Obama campaign published this note from the candidate on the Huffington Post, which I think may give him the political distance he needs from this matter:
Barack Obama: On My Faith and My Church
The pastor of my church, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, who recently preached his last sermon and is in the process of retiring, has touched off a firestorm over the last few days. He's drawn attention as the result of some inflammatory and appalling remarks he made about our country, our politics, and my political opponents.
Let me say at the outset that I vehemently disagree and strongly condemn the statements that have been the subject of this controversy. I categorically denounce any statement that disparages our great country or serves to divide us from our allies. I also believe that words that degrade individuals have no place in our public dialogue, whether it's on the campaign stump or in the pulpit. In sum, I reject outright the statements by Rev. Wright that are at issue.
Because these particular statements by Rev. Wright are so contrary to my own life and beliefs, a number of people have legitimately raised questions about the nature of my relationship with Rev. Wright and my membership in the church. Let me therefore provide some context.
As I have written about in my books, I first joined Trinity United Church of Christ nearly twenty years ago. I knew Rev. Wright as someone who served this nation with honor as a United States Marine, as a respected biblical scholar, and as someone who taught or lectured at seminaries across the country, from Union Theological Seminary to the University of Chicago. He also led a diverse congregation that was and still is a pillar of the South Side and the entire city of Chicago. It's a congregation that does not merely preach social justice but acts it out each day, through ministries ranging from housing the homeless to reaching out to those with HIV/AIDS.
Most importantly, Rev. Wright preached the gospel of Jesus, a gospel on which I base my life. In other words, he has never been my political advisor; he's been my pastor. And the sermons I heard him preach always related to our obligation to love God and one another, to work on behalf of the poor, and to seek justice at every turn.
The statements that Rev. Wright made that are the cause of this controversy were not statements I personally heard him preach while I sat in the pews of Trinity or heard him utter in private conversation. When these statements first came to my attention, it was at the beginning of my presidential campaign. I made it clear at the time that I strongly condemned his comments. But because Rev. Wright was on the verge of retirement, and because of my strong links to the Trinity faith community, where I married my wife and where my daughters were baptized, I did not think it appropriate to leave the church.
Let me repeat what I've said earlier. All of the statements that have been the subject of controversy are ones that I vehemently condemn. They in no way reflect my attitudes and directly contradict my profound love for this country.
With Rev. Wright's retirement and the ascension of my new pastor, Rev. Otis Moss, III, Michelle and I look forward to continuing a relationship with a church that has done so much good. And while Rev. Wright's statements have pained and angered me, I believe that Americans will judge me not on the basis of what someone else said, but on the basis of who I am and what I believe in; on my values, judgment and experience to be President of the United States.
That's a fairly specific repudiation of Rev. Wright. That was absolutely necessary to put the fire out, at least for the PA primary. The remaining problem for Obama is (as Tigerhawk remarked in yesterday's post, observing the enthusiastic response to Rev. Wright's extreme remarks among those seated/standing in the church): what is he doing in that congregation -- is he a minority moderate, does he stay in the church to try to pull it into the mainstream? If I'm Rev. Otis Moss III, I'm getting prepared for a lot of questions. I am not sure this election turns on America's perception of Liberation Theology, but Rev. Wright's remarks are somewhat dealt with for the moment.
By , at
Fri Mar 14, 07:43:00 PM:
Holy crap, that was an emotional response from you, Chambers. Not good trollin, my friend.
Whassa madda with you, you guilty about being whiter than rice?
By , at
Fri Mar 14, 07:54:00 PM:
Escort are you nuts?
Obama will be defined as Farrakhan Lite. Talk Radio, the internet, Fox News will keep this alive. And Clinton will FIND many videos and put them on YouTube of Wright saying the same things and Obama clapping.
He can't do ANYTHING at this point to fix that. He condemns Wright the way he needs to and he loses Blacks. He doesn't and he doesn't have much of any whites.
People want a WIN in Iraq and only McCain promises that. They're not happy at the cost, but they want the WIN. The economy is bad, but Dems offer nothing, only more Hate America(tm) rhetoric. Plus overt racism from Obama.
Obama is likely to win the nomination, and get crushed more than McGovern. It's a question of him carrying IL and perhaps one other state. Whites are not going to vote for merely a smoother Sharpton and Jackson, and that's what he will be defined as.
Those 527 ads will be devastating. And that's not counting all the corrupt stuff that's drip-drip-dripping out on Rezko and Saddam's bagman and corrupt Chicago deals. Earmarks to Michelle's employer who gave her a 200K raise. Corrupt deals on his house. Other stuff that pisses people off.
This is a tribal election. Which tribe do you belong to? America or the angry Black Nationalist tribe? Obama is not American, he's an angry Black Nationalist.
By , at
Fri Mar 14, 08:05:00 PM:
Chris,
What?!
If you are actually a published author, then you owe your editor everything!
Anyway...
Regarding this post, I think Obama is better than the sum of the incidents you mentioned, CP. The pastor seems like a real militant a-hole, but I think Obama has more perspective than that. His wife said something stupid, but it pales in comparison to the things Bill has done to torpedo his wife's run. And the flag-pin thing is "wrong-headed" to use BO's own phrase. Stacking too much of this stuff with deeper meaning is like risking the swift boat approach.
If Obama gets the nom, I look forward to actual debates about the war and the economy and foreign policy. I will likely vote for McCain on account of his stated position on the war, but I am hoping for some reasonable dialog about it on the national stage.
By , at
Fri Mar 14, 08:58:00 PM:
Mr. Chambers has proven himself to possess ills far beyond what mere medication might assuage. One fears only a scalpel in highly trained hands might soothe the voices that bray in his skull when all around him hear but silence. This sad case clearly lacks David's Mamet's ability to sit back, take a deep breath, read a few texts, and perceive what is actually occurring in the world he inhabits. Poor fellow.
By , at
Fri Mar 14, 09:05:00 PM:
Space --
1. It is likely Obama was there for that sermon and just sat there. Damning if you can get video and/or confirmation.
2. This is not the only nutty thing Wright said, and Obama likely sat there and applauded on video. Damning beyond all repair. And the Media won't be able to embargo it -- Youtube etc. will be the end run, Fox News, Rush will run with it. All over. Drudge will have it.
3. Obama is part and parcel of the Angry Black Nationalist who hates Whitey(tm). That's a loser.
By , at
Fri Mar 14, 10:44:00 PM:
Lately, every time I see a pic of Obama speaking, there are two or three distinguished-looking white geezers (all males) standing just behind. What's with that?
By Assistant Village Idiot, at
Fri Mar 14, 11:34:00 PM:
An enormous number of Democrat voters are narrative voters. Who the candidate actually is, what s/he has done, and what s/he stands for don't matter as much as the story line of what people wish they would be like. When people say "It's time we had a woman," or "the election of a black man would send a message to the world," they are not thinking rationally, and no amount of negative evidence will change them. It is fascinating to listen to Democratic dueling narratives, and terribly revealing that they can only perceive Republican voting patterns through that prism.
By , at
Sat Mar 15, 12:16:00 AM:
Time for all those who attend rev wrights church of hate to just walk right out on his and tell his to TAKE A HIKE
By , at
Sat Mar 15, 11:45:00 AM:
At what point does the "preaching" that Rev. Wright has become famous for cross the line into endorsing a political candidate and threaten the tax status of his church?
By SR, at
Sat Mar 15, 01:23:00 PM:
I would never vote for Obama because I believe his leftward leaning political beliefs are not good for America or Americans. I do believe, however, he can get past this just as Bill Clinton got by the draft and Gennifer Flowers. If he would repudiate point by point the anti-Americanism of Wright (eg "The idea of the US Government creating AIDS is just complete rubbish") he could get in the clear. The real question is whether he has the cojones to make those statements. How many Black voters does anybody really think he would lose?
By , at
Sat Mar 15, 02:16:00 PM:
"The statements that Rev. Wright made that are the cause of this controversy were not statements I personally heard him preach while I sat in the pews of Trinity or heard him utter in private conversation."
That statement needs to be disproved in order to make this story last long enough to damage Obama in Pennsylvania and elsewhere. I maintain Rezko ultimately is more problematic for him, but we'll see if the MSM goes after this statement hard enough to undo this fairly equivocal effort at renouncing Wright by Obama's campaign.
That said, I agree that Dems are very often narrative voters and, as such, they're confused voters this year. Activist Dems don't seem to know if it's more PC to vote for the African American "Hope" narrative or the Gender Empowerment "It's My Turn" narrative, but they're all going to find themselves shocked to find themselves participating in the same-old Machine story when it's all said and done. By that I mean that since the voters have taken a complete pass on nominating someone, the party leaders are going to have an old time sausage making party convention, and it will be fascinating to see how the voters react.
By , at
Sat Mar 15, 02:23:00 PM:
LGF says Obama is "quite simply, lying" when he claims never to have heard Wright say these sorts of things over the years.
By , at
Sat Mar 15, 03:38:00 PM:
It appears Obama was in fact in the audience on at least this occasion, when Wright spouted his hatred.
By , at
Sat Mar 15, 04:32:00 PM:
One of the You Tube clips making the circuit had Wright telling the congregation to keep it down and that there were some small number of white folks in the audience. This reminded me of the Eddie Murphy SNL skit where he had himself made up in whiteface and went out to live as a white person for a day. When the last non-white rider got off the bus, the champagne was brought out and the music and dancing started. When the last black patron left the corner cigar/newspaper store, the proprietor starting giving stuff away to the whites.
Iconic and very funny.
JLW III
By , at
Sat Mar 15, 04:54:00 PM:
"The statements that Rev. Wright made that are the cause of this controversy were not statements I personally heard him preach while I sat in the pews of Trinity or heard him utter in private conversation."
Think Willie is the only slick in town. Parse this statement carefully. I'd look for Wright statements other than the ones "that are the cause of THIS controversy" [emphasis supplied].
This is Chicago, remember, where a racist black preacher has to coexist with violent black criminals and criminal black politicians who, in turn, coexist with the criminal black politicians who skulk in Springfield. Look for a Wright speech at the MLK annual celebration dinner, e.g.
As we speak, HRC's folk are matching BHO's public calendar with Wright cites in the Chicago Tribune to find common points.
An aside, I'm a visitor here why the attacks on Chambers? His posting, above, seemed reasonable and rational.
By Escort81, at
Sat Mar 15, 06:58:00 PM:
Well, there is a wealth of analysis in this thread, and most of it is probably more correct than my previous posting, so maybe I am "nuts" or just can't see into the future very well.
One of the problems I am having in trying to estimate how damaging this is to Obama is that I am not sure how far the political center of the country has moved to the left over the last decade or so (maybe comparing today to 1994, 14 years ago, following the astounding Republican takeover of the House, would be a worthwhile comparison). The outcome of this episode will be a good measuring stick.
In thinking about it, Obama's problem now is one of credibility with respect to his claim that he hadn't heard Rev. Wright make such objectionable remarks. His bestselling book indicates that he had at least some exposure to underlying elements of parts of Wright's "greatest hits" video loop, as Rich Lowry points out over in the NRO Corner:
Wright in "Dreams of My Father" [Rich Lowry]
Before he ever thought he would have to deploy Clintonesque spin to try to get himself out of a campaign controversy, Barack Obama wrote (an achingly good) memoir. In the book, Obama makes it clear that Wright when he first got to know him was pretty much the same Wright we're getting to know now (the one that Obama is at pains to say is on the verge of retirement). Wright was striking some of the same notes, saying racially venomous things and attacking the bombing of Hiroshima. Note this passage about the first sermon Obama heard from Wright, the source ultimately of the title of Obama's second book and one of the central themes of his presidential campaign:
[begin excerpt]
The title of Reverend Wright’s sermon that morning was “The Audacity of Hope.” He began with a passage from the Book of Samuel—the story of Hannah, who, barren and taunted by her rivals, had wept and shaken in prayer before her God. The story reminded him, he said, of a sermon a fellow pastor had preached at a conference some years before, in which the pastor described going to a museum and being confronted by a painting title Hope.
“The painting depicts a harpist,” Reverend Wright explained, “a woman who at first glance appears to be sitting atop a great mountain. Until you take a closer look and see that the woman is bruised and bloodied, dressed in tattered rags, the harp reduced to a single frayed string. Your eye is then drawn down to the scene below, down to the valley below, where everywhere are the ravages of famine, the drumbeat of war, a world groaning under strife and deprivation.
“It is this world, a world where cruise ships throw away more food in a day than most residents of Port-au-Prince see in a year, where white folks’ greed runs a world in need, apartheid in one hemisphere, apathy in another hemisphere…That’s the world! On which hope sits!”
And so it went, a meditation on a fallen world. While the boys next to me doodled on their church bulletin, Reverend Wright spoke of Sharpsville and Hiroshima, the callousness of policy makers in the White House and in the State House. As the sermon unfolded, though, the stories of strife became more prosaic, the pain more immediate. The reverend spoke of the hardship that the congregation would face tomorrow, the pain of those far from the mountaintop, worrying about paying the light bill…
[end excerpt, bold is Lowry's emphasis]
03/14 05:33 PM
No doubt there are many on the left who have no problems with anything Rev. Wright has preached, and it is perhaps also the case that most of his sermons were not as off-putting, and that he has done much good work in the Chicago community. But it is simply not credible that Obama was unaware of the nature of his pastor's political beliefs, even if he wasn't present for any of the "greatest hits" loop. Obama's adult life has been too closely intertwined with TUCC and Rev. Wright for a smart man such as Obama not to know pretty much where Rev. Wright stood. There were other churches he could have attended, ones where the pastor does not ever use profanity, making it safer for his kids to be in the pews. (As an aside, the comparisons to objectionable things that right wing pastors have said, to the extent that these pastors have endorsed McCain, fall short because of the nature and longevity of the Obama/Wright relationship).
I do not believe Rev. Wright is typical of African-American pastors of his generation. Bill Gray is a decent man who would not ever say "G D America" from his pulpit, nor from the U.S. House floor. Bill Gray's politics may not be your politics, but he did not, to my knowledge, openly engage in the same kind of divisive race-oriented rhetoric that Wright did.
This is a pretty significant hickey for Obama. I think he still gets the nomination, just based on the math (unless he loses PA by, say, 20, which doesn't change the elected delegate numbers so much as it would give the superdelegates cause for concern), but I agree that the 527s will go hard on this video in the general election, and Obama acknowledged as much last night on MSNBC.
By Escort81, at
Sat Mar 15, 07:36:00 PM:
VDH thinks the damage is much worse -- an "implosion" -- and is more eloquent than anyone in this thread.
By Escort81, at
Sat Mar 15, 07:44:00 PM:
Gerald Posner (who, by the way, wrote one of the better books explaining how Oswald acted alone in the JFK murder) is an Obama supporter asking questions about Rev. Wright over at the Huffington Post.
