Why Jeremiah Wright Is Willing To Destroy Barack Obama; This Campaign Really Is Generational

Remember when Barack first put himself forward? The Obama's not black enough kerfuffle among the old guard civil rights activists? Most of them slowly came around, driven partly by the Clintons' willingness to marginalize Barack after South Carolina but mostly because -- it was just crazy not to. After Iowa the impossible had become possible.

But still. At some level there was this feeling, and it didn't go away. A feeling of -- this isn't fair. It fell into his lucky lap. Look at him, swanning around in front of all those adoring white kids, reaping all the props. And he never paid his dues.

Jeremiah Wright is like the return of the repressed, a last desperate lunge of the undead 60s toward center stage. Wright represents a longing for enduring relevance so deep that it is willing to sabotage the very possibility of setting out on the long road that runs past race in order to preserve the claims of a certain righteousness, a certain rhetoric, a certain stance -- a familiar and heroic sense of self-in-the-world.

It's so hard to get old. It's so hard to watch history pass you by. It's so hard to look out across a public landscape in which your style of being once loomed so large and to realize that somehow -- you are suddenly yesterday.

People who say Obama needs to confront Wright are correct. But he needs to do it simply, he needs to tell the truth. He needs to say, kindly but firmly: old man, I love you and I thank you for your service -- but your day is done.

Comments

[DanoS]

Look there is no question Wright has done good things - he served his country, help the poor and provided scripture to his church members. He is smart, worldly and even funny. One could say it's admirable he stand up for what he believes and his church. Though as Obama pointed out "he contains contradiction like all of us".

The problem with what Wright did this past week is the way he went about clearing his name. He demeaned Obama by trivializing his speech, he was factually wrong, he was obnoxious, non-constructive and no, questioning Wright’s words are not an attack on the Black Church. All the valid points (and there were many) he made were lost in hostility, arrogance and nonsense.

The media was no help either since when do preachers get full complete live media coverage of everything they say? CNN broadcasted his speech 3 time! I can’t get more than a min. of Clinton or Obama talking about issues at a giving time tough. Doe’s the media offer the same scrutiny of Clinton’s or McCain’s preacher and associations and provide the same amount of coverage?

Wright isn't running for office!!!!!!!! Millions of people choose were they work too, where there bosses and policies may be controversial. Does that mean all the employees are wrong for staying there?

[Lemeritus]

For that matter, Dano -- since this is National Give a Minister a National Forum Week -- how about equal time for that purveyor of love and light, John Hagee?

[allonfla]

It's interesting how the press yawned at the Bill Moyers interview but got into a frenzy when he resembled the guy in the 30 second sound bytes at the National Press Club.

I'm for Obama all the way and I don't believe he has the same views as Rev. Wright. I also believe that Rev. Wright should have just left it at Bill Moyers and move on with his life. I lost a little respect for him when he made those comments about Sen. Obama, but he IS a private citizen who has the right to defend himself. I just would not have done it in the same way.

The media villanized him and that is where he should have spent most of his "bitterness". Leave the plight of the Black community for a forum, a book or a tv special which I'm sure would garner a lot of more positive attention.

[NCMan]

actually much of the press started to jump on this issue before the interview with Moyers aired in full. They focused on the statements where Wright said Obama was just saying what he had to say as a politician.

No one thought that was any help to Obama.

Yesterday in his Q&A session Rev Wright was given a chance to clirify what he meant by that. And he said the exact same thing. He left the same impression. That Obama doesn't really believe what he said in his Philly speech. But, he had to say it to save his butt politically.

[tomfact]

Am I the only person that thinks a public fight between Obama and Wright helps Obama with skeptical middle America whites?

[DudeOhio]

I agree with you. I also think Obama needs to distance himself from Wright more strongly than he has in the past.

[AguynamedWayne]

If Wright's views are so different from Obama's, then why did Obama stay at Wrights Church for twenty years? Why would Obama donate 275, 000 dollars to a church that espoused views so different from his own? Why would Obama put Wright in an official position within the Obama campaign, if he disagreed with Wrights views? Why would he want this man to marry him to his wife and baptise his children? Why? The only answer that rings true, is the one Wright has already given.

Obama isn't really distancing himself from Wright, he is just saying what a politician needs to say.

[Bertha40869]

If you are not black or a southern white, you could never understand what is going on here.

[DGregory]

you just dont get it do you?

Its not wright who kept obama at that church, but the people of the church that kept him there.
Again he donated to the "church" because of what the church did for the community of which it gave back. spiritual advisor? is that a politically run spot that dictates foreign policy or local policy or a position that talks about god?

If you been going to a church for a certain amount of time, then when you get big and you have a spot where a preacher is placed in, will you pass over the preacher whose been preaching with the church you belong too? It disagrees with wrights political views. Do you get that political =/= religious views

What the hell are you talking about man, lmao. Wright said obama hasnt disavow him. Have you heard yet where obama has done that? Yea obama is a politician and this can be seen in the simple fact that, if he wasnt
1. we wouldnt even be talking about this
2. you wouldnt be asking obama these questions, you would be asking wright these questions of why he does what he does.

I see clearly your taking your talking points from sean hannity. "michelle obama said she has never been proud of america"

hell of a turn from when she said "first time im "really" proud of america because i see hope in people eyes"

[Vern58]

Since you seem to be able to copy and paste, so can i
For the same reason i have chosen my own church for the past 10 years. The political philosophy of the Rector of the parish (far to the right of mine)has little or no effect on my willingness to stay there. My focus in staying in my Parish has to do with the means of grace, and how they are presented, not with the political philosophy of it's Priest. BTW, he has gone into semi-retirement over what he percieves as the left wing leaning of the Parishoners.
The involvement of the parishoners of Trinity Church in their own community could be a clue to this connundrum you seem so fixated on. The congregation does a whole lot of good for the local community in South Chicago, this is undisputed truth. Maybe like many of us, Obama has seen the difference in the message and the messenger. I have come to terms with the same thing.
There are so many factors in choosing to stay with a religious organization that have little to nothing to do with the Politics of it's leader. When you can see that maybe you might understand this and stop sawing continuosly on J. Wright.
BTW, i have actually attended services at Trinity UCC in Chicago, twice. I have heard Wright speak.What i heard was the love of Jesus and how we can best mirror that.

[NCMan]

Obama joined that church and stayed in that church for 20 years out of political opportunism. It was a great place for Obama to gain his street cred as a community organizer. It was a great place for him to network with high profile Chicago people in order to promote his political career in Illinois.

[bossjimgettys]

Thousands of American Catholics do not support the Church's position on abortion and/or birth control, but they still go to church every week. I think it has something to do with believing the words of Jesus Christ over those spoken from the pulpit by sombody who is, in the end, a glorified administrator.

[stell]

Mr. Zengotita I profoundly disagree. White Supremacy never ended, it has just become more refined both here and abroad. For example apartheid in South Africa is supposed to have ended years ago, but South Africa's businesses are still 90% white owned. They have actually had to start their own affirmative action program. Some of the names of the cities are African sounding and you have some black buffers, but look at the shape whites are in and the shape blacks are largely in. Here nobody calls you the n-word, they just dominate black people in education,economics,politics, religion, etc. The white supremacists who are responsible for the current arrangement we find ourselves living in, could have made black people genuises, yet instead, dating all the way back to slavery, they took raw material and turned in into functional inferior child-like beings. The difference between Barack Obama and Rev. Dr. Jeremiah Wright Jr. is that one Barack Obama gives the white collective the benefit of the doubt, and is betting on the fact that they will not be distracted by all of the extraneous nonsense that is going on that isn't related to his capacity to serve as president. Rev. Dr. Jeremiah Wright is rightly speaking to the refined system of racism that still exists across the globe, and his speeches are confirmation that their are different points of view that deserve to be heard, regardless of how uncomfortable they make people feel.

[syrupcore]

He is his own man. He and his church were being made a mockery of over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over again. WTF shouldn't he stand up and say something? Are the author and commenters here suggesting that he should just hold his tongue until after the election? Then what, after the presidency? I don't agree with plenty of things the reverend has to say but to hell with a system that can't handle a man speaking up for himself.

Enough! War, environment, jobs, loss of constitutional rights, home foreclosures, fuel dependency, teen age parents, drug addiction, declining dollar, sexism, trade deficit with china, social security, health care, education, digital divide, immigration, middle east peace... ... COME ON LEFT, WE NEED TO GET A FUCKING GRIP.

[DudeOhio]

I don't think we are saying hold your tongue. I think the point we are trying to make is that now that Wright has the national spot light he should pick the words he uses more carefully so that they represent his church and not just himself. I personally think Wright is being selfish with this whole thing and needs to look at a bigger picture that his words not only affect him, but his church and the one opportunity this country has to change the direction we have been heading. I may be wrong here as I haven't thoroughly read through what's he's been saying, but what I have read leads me to this opinion.

[HawkDiesel1906]

I find it interesting that there is more outrage over Rev. Wright than the FDLS compound in Texas where all of those young Teenage Girls are either Pregnant or getting ready to have a baby.

[LeeScho]

At some point soon, Rev. Jeremiah Wright will take to a podium or a pew, and express the collective and abiding outrage of African Americans at the acquittal of three New York City police officers who fired 50 unanswered shots in the killing of a young, unarmed African American male who had committed no crime.

Barack Obama never will.

As a Black minister, Rev. Wright can and should do this at his prerogative.

As a politician, Barack Obama never should and never can.

Most of the African Americans who loved Dr. King also loved Malcolm X. They each represented a vital aspect of our humanity, our experience, and our conflicted emotions about America. It is not surprising that at the time of each of their assassinations ( 3 years apart, each 39 years of age), they were moving remarkably closer to the social positions, the temperament and the tonal styles of the other. The case has been made that such movement is what contributed heavily to their vulnerability and their murders.

I am closer to Wright’s age than to Obama’s by half as many years. Whenever white folks (or their dark reflections, i.e., Roy and Roger Wilkins) start telling me what Black folks I should disown, denounce or distance myself from, my learned instinct is to draw those Black folks closer to me than I ever might have done without the admonition. I have yet to be proven wrong in my action.

[Bertha40869]

He did speak out on the Bell case. In fact, he is the only presidential candidate who has.

[StillIRise]

Thank you for this post. I am especially grateful for your comments about Malcolm X. I have read several posts on this blogsite in which Malcolm X and Minister Farrakhan are characterized as "boogey-men." I am probably close to your age, and though I didn't agree with everything Malcolm or Farrakhan have said in the past nor share their views on all issues. I recognize that each of these men nonetheless represent to the African American community more than that with which I disagree, and I also realize that many white Americans will never understand the complicated relationships that African Americans have with certain people they view as repulsive. The same is true of our relationship, and perhaps Senator Obama's relationship, with Reverend Wright. It's a complicated relationship, and cannot be simplified to the "love 'em or leave 'em" metric by which our relationships with these men are often judged by those who do not share our experience.

Some are asking Senator Obama to "distance" himself further from Wright, further than denouncing his offensive remarks. What do they want Senator Obama to do? Do they want him to stand on a podium and declare hatred for the man? Did any of our presidents distance themselves from Billy Graham? Has Senator McCain distanced himself from Hagee? Has anyone even discussed the theology that is taught at Senator Clinton's church and asked her to distance herself from it? They hypocrisy and double standards have become too blatant to ignore.

[LeeScho]

Well, thank you, StillIRise.

Your citing of a protracted double standard about this distancing from and disowning of people is well taken. African Americans come from a history of having husbands and wives, sons and daughters routinely and randomly torn from each other in the economic interests of the slave-trader and slave-holder with tragic results for the African American families. White folks come from the same history as the "disowners" of those very human beings. Thus, "disowning" may come far more easily to them than to us.

[ghop]

I was upset and angry watching the Wright coverage, then I realized that this was inevitable. Both Dem candidates have baggage that they will have to deal with, as does John McCain. Obama has Wright, Hillary has Bill, and McCain has his stance on the issues. I think it is important for Dems to realize that either nominee is going to be hit by the smear machine. The difference this year is that the public is a little less scared and a little more savvy to Repug tactics. Obama made his speech on race last month, which seems like so long ago. In another month, this will seem like ancient history. This too shall pass.

[orifox]

Amen. Rev. Wright is old school. And he deserves a measure of respect, as the old school always does. But he's seriously flunking out of the New School. In fact, he should be expelled. Everyone who clings to identity politics will be passed over for something new.

It's true, these horribly unjust divides still exist, there is no doubt in my mind that if Sean Bell had not been black he would be alive today. But racial divisiveness is not the way forward. The way forward is Barack Obama. His message IS who he is. I am not a black man. I am not a white man. I am not as divided as my race(s) suggest. I am new thing. And so much of this globalized world is in fact made up of that new thing.

Let's empower this new era here in America today.

If not, America goes the way of the Dodo.

Islamic fundamentalists, evangelical christians, racist cops, good ol' boys, disconnected Bubbas, Soccer Moms, ALL OF THEM (us?) have their identity politics too. We must evolve.

The msm is clinging to their last rites too. Let's usher them out and their last gasping bursts of rabble rousing ratings-mongering talking idiocy. The space between commercials will not be revolutionized. Time to turn off the box.

Seriously people, in the words of James Brown, "We got to GET OVER, before we GO UNDER!"

Obama 08.
Obama RIGHT NOW.

[WAstateliberal]

Identity politics also describes the Clinton phenomenon. The angry boomer women who come to caucuses and conventions screeching about how they have been waiting their whole lives to vote for a woman are an example of this. This isn't advocacy for your candidate. This persuades no one but other like minded angry Second Wave feminists.

And it also applies to the Bill Clinton voters (white men over 45). They make condescending comments about how young Barack is, how change "takes time," and how electing a Democrat, any Democrat (even if he and his puppet wife are actually mostly Republican), is more important than standing for something.

I said back in January, this race will be more about generation v. generation than black v. white or man v. woman. (Of course, the reason this race is not about man v. woman is because Hillary is not the candidate, Bill is. She is the mechanism for practical circumvention of the 22nd Amendment and nothing else).

[mnnice]

Its working Is'nt it. This is exactly what they want.BE STRONG IN THE FACE OF ADVERSITY.

[jimmyjones22]

I think your confusing life in the 1960s with life in the 2000s. The world is a very different place, to recent generations, race plays a much smaller role than in past generations. the adversity that old folks like reverend wright had to face no longer exists in such a dark, looming, intimidating monster that it did in the years past.

Bottom line is the world has changed and the old people have stayed the same. No real surprise there.

[Lemeritus]

"...the old people have stayed the same..."

That's a little presumptive, don't you think, jimmy? I'm seeing quite a number of older people at Obama rallies and a goodly number of young people in Clinton's crowds.

[IntrepidReader]

As I read the endless fighting over which candidate can win in November, I feel more and more that the correct answer is neither of them.

By choosing to be historic and trendy with a black man and a white woman as the only two official choices, the Democrats jettisoned other candidates who could have won handily. Yes, I'm thinking of John Edwards, but he's not the only one. My mouth fell open in a comical display of disbelief when I realized that the Democrats were going to take a sure thing like defeating the party of George W Bush and turn it into a circus act that probably will go down in defeat.

Ask yourselves honestly, in the heady aftermath of the events of November, 2006, did you possibly imagine that the Democrats would have found a way to destroy what should have been unstoppable momentum? It's as if the party leaders were so sure anyone could win against a Republican in 2008 that they had no problem with taking a chance on asking Americans to do something they had never done before and elect a woman or a minority candidate. I think it was not the right election year to take such a risk and as events unfurl, I believe I am being proven right.

[chasanne]

Sadly, I have to believe that IntrepidReader may be correct in his/her observations. On the one hand, how is Obama going to survive the train wreck of the egomaniacal Rev Wright interjecting himself, however uninvited, back into the Obama campaign. On the other, how is Clinton going to win without the support of the African-American vote that she and her husband have now so intensely alienated. One can only hope that the Bush backlash is so severe that any Democrat can win.

[WAstateliberal]

Do you have evidence to support your contention that Edwards would have won when he couldn't even garner the support of an even remotely significant number of Democrats? How would he have done with Generation Jones, or the Millenials, or against McCain with the Greatest Generation? Not well, I submit. I do not dislike Senator Edwards. He is a great man. But I strongly disagree with those who suggest he would have had a snowball's chance in hell against a "war hero" (MSM unshakable theme) who doesn't get $400 haircuts and is a "maverick" (more bullshit) and not an evil trial lawyer (sarcasm).

[POINT84]

I genuinely felt sad reading what you just wrote. At the end of the day thats all they are in this country; women and blacks..'a risk'

As much as I dislike Hillary (well, more of her campaign) even I know shes a far superior candidate to Gore, Edwards or Kerry -on their best day. Frankly she has more balls than all of them combined, and from watching people post on here I;m starting to understand why Democrats keep getting labeled 'weak' 'soft' and core less ..some of you would sell your ideals and all you care about just so you can feel a false sense of comfort.

[doc1400]

I think this post very inciteful. I am currently an Obama backer, but I can only conclude that Obama errored grevously by remaining a member in a church with an idiot, egomaniacal pastor. And then was so ill advised as to have this person preside over his marriage and the baptism of his children.
That said, I wil never vote for the monster Clinton. She is a pig.
At least I know what I will be voting for in John McCain. Congress will shut off the war regardless of what McCain wants.

[dawn2dusk]

IMO Wright crossed the line at the press conference. I sensed arrogance unbecoming a pastor. I understand why the church fired him, I can only imagine how long they were trying to get him to retire.

I am AA , go to church 1x a month, maybe less. I am saved. Like liberation theology as a concept but not totally comfortable with the "bluntness" or "bombastic" manner in which it is sometimes delivered. I think for the most part tho, it addresses AA pain and frustrations and then the sermons always end with hope...Jesus.

As an MBA, CFA, entreprenuer, millionare from a lower middle class broken family: I am living the american dream. How can I hate America? How I can I not be convinced that no matter your color, education and hard work yields reward, always? Those that came before me have made it so. I am a beneficiary.

I can relate to the pain, am intrigued by the "spectacle" (in a good way), am moved by the Holy Spirit, but I never quite buy into the person at the pulpit. I just go to pray and worship, not to join a congregation.

IMO Obama went to that 8000 member church to connect with a constituency, and while there he found Jesus. Grateful to the church for such a glorious gift, and was married there, had his children blessed there.

Rev. Wright is descriptive, but he is also a product of the past.

[devadasi]

dawn2dusk Thank you for your thoughtful comments. I especially appreciated your comment about Obama's desire to connect with his church consitutency. BINGO!

Participating in a church or spiritual group for me is all about 'community'. Usually the guru or pastor is irrelevant to me after a while. I once joined a church, where the pastor was such a megalomaniac and I disagreed with at least half of what he had to preach. On the other hand, the other half of what he had preach was immensely inspiring, but more importantly the community that was created was the real fulfillment, and I stuck around for ll years in spite of the pastor.

[WAstateliberal]

Yeah, this "why did he stick around?" nonsense is so offensive. How many Catholics have been called to the carpet for failing to leave the church because of the child rape/child rape cover-up epidemic?

[PPatt]

Did you even listen to the complete address?

How does what you are or the degree to which you've been saved or not have anything to do with the veracity of Wrights remarks?

It is not enough to say one does not like his tone...what is that? a euphemism for being "uppity"?

He laid down more than enough substance for his remarks to be assessed on their merits or lack thereof. So what about his assertions that those criticizing him for a sound bite have little understanding of what he really said?

Most of the questions asked after his address were so laden with misconceptions, ignorance and mistaken assumptions that I must marvel at the man's patience in answering them.

Perhaps you did not like or agree with his interpretation that recent attacks anbd criticism directed at him were really not about him but about the black church. Unless you were part of that experience how would you know whether it was true or not?

[WAstateliberal]

Excellent post.

[antworks]

I respect your opinion but I also support every word Rev. Wright said yesterday at the Press Club. The attacks upon him IS really an attack upon the Black Church as an institution in this country. There are so many Black people in this country that desperately want to see Obama (or any Black person for that matter) in the whitehouse, that they are not really facing political (electorial) facts. America is not ready for a Black man to sit in that office. I have seen the anger amongst some of the Blacks backing Obama go up an up each time he is attacked with deceptive and unfair ads (lies, really). And, I keep asking myself this question about their anger. What did you expect? In the history of this great country of ours, how often have you seen America play "fair" when it comes to Black people and our attempts to get some measure of economic and maybe political clout? Personally, as an African American, I dont' know what these Black people are thinking! But, one thing is for sure, in my opinion, they're using more wishful thinking and emotion than calm, cool analysis about this race for the democratic nomination. I back Senator Clinton because she is capable and it's time a woman gets a chance. Also, I back her because she is the only one that can defeat these damnable Republicans in November. And yea folks, even she's going to have her hands full doing that!

[MariaHopeful]

Rev Wright is not and never was an issue. He is a testament to the power of the media. His dominating the news cycle is nothing but the media flexing its collective muscle. See what we can do? People hold press conferences every day which the media totally ignore. There are a million issues that could have discussed today of all days. My supermarket sold a 20 lb bag of rice for 11.99 today. Last week it 8.99. A dozen eggs is for 2.19. Last week it was 1.79. The cost of gas. Hillary Clinton wanting to OBLITERATE Iran. Hillary court case being delayed until after the election. McCain's unethical use of his wife's jet. Iraq. Food shortage (especially rice) in Haiti. Tornadoes in Virgina. A myriad of issues but 90% of airtime today was taken up in covering Rev Wright. One CNN analyst said that Obama has to prove how tough he is with this issue. Obama has already shown how tough he is. In case you didn't know, he has taken on beaten the might Clinton machine. It is done! Over! So ask yourself: Why is the media trying to sabotage him?

[WAstateliberal]

MariaHopeful always gives me hope.

[DudeOhio]

Agree %100. I am so disgusted with the media as are many other people in this country. But what do we do about it? I have written many snail and emails to the MSM asking them to please be journalists again etc. I pose this as a serious question, how do we turn the MSM around? I don't think it's possible.

[antworks]

The media has slowly but steadily consolidated into the hands of a very few powerful moguls over the past 25 years. Back in the seventies, when I was in school at Michigan State University, we had a prof that predicted that the media was coming to this. I did not think the "intelligent people" in government responsible for oversight would allow this (considering the anti trust, monopoly laws i.e.). But, now it is fact. Such a small number of people control what we read, hear and see it that it's frightening. The result is a "controlled access to the news" and current events. Today's media doesn't report the news and facts. They report what powerful people (in media and government) WANT us to know. The consequences are things like this: Katrina destroys much of the gulf coast and instead of the federal government and Bush being held accountable for lack of action and resolve, it gets turned into a controversy between a democratic governor (of LA.) and the fed over turf war. The fact that people were dying on TV cameras did not matter it seems. You get WMD's that were never found and maybe never existed in the first place. Yet, new rationales for the war in Iraq continue to germinate. Bush and Cheney have never been held accountable for these lies by the media. That's just two examples. You'll never attack these media moguls and stop this. Their political contributions and connects run too deep.

[AJH]

Rev. Wright is clearly skilled at communicating in the language of his church and within his church the tone style and flow is understood. However the NAACP speech was directed to a different target audience he was speaking to the camera's but still speaking as he would before his congregation.

Communication is about not just what you say but how you say it so the target audience hears and understands what you are saying. Obama is a master at this as was the reverend King. Wright clearly is not or choose not to use that talent.

He spoke much of differences between peoples but he spoke to those differences not in a unified language understood by all but in a fiery rhetoric that was assured to offend some blurring them from the words to the tones and the words that seemed most outrageous.

In his words I believe he understands the difference it is unfortunate to make his point he decided to use the stage granted him solely by Barack's rise to speak in a tone that could only be heard by many as divisive not different.

He was true to himself and the manner of his church but I fear in so doing he was not true to the message he intended to convey. He should ask himself was the message or how he said the message more important. If he did he choose the wrong answer. .

[Independentjunkie]

this cracks me up... 6 weeks ago the very same Hufo Post bloggers had articles about how deep and brillant Wright was...

now , along with the obamabots- they are on full scale attack :)

[WAstateliberal]

I saw very few articles defending Wright. I saw lots of articles condemning the media, rightfully so.

[DudeOhio]

Just goes to show how opened minded the "Obamabots" truly are. We're not the sheeple that follow Clinton or Bush.

[kindofblue]

Relax.

Wright still is brilliant-when he's under control. But we've seen that he doesn't know how to use his energy in settings like the press club. In which case, what works brilliantly in a African American church sermon (so much more compelling that the Euro-American parallel), boomerangs in traditional speech environment.

You've never played jazz have you? How about the blues? If you did, you'd understand Wright completely. Doesn't mean you would want to follow him blindly, but in the same way you don't always want to share the bandstand with the same players all the time.

One more thing. If you show this much disdain for an incredibly successful African American urban church, how do you expect Hillary (assuming she's your girl) to carry that vote? She can't win without it, you know.