Oh, my - with all this Jeremiah Wright flapping, it looks like Obama will have to disown his grandmother any day now.
WLS produces a howler tracking the progression of Andrew Sullivan's thoughts as Wright Day unfolded.
And Sully delivers a brilliant punchline:
We need a speech or statement from Obama in which he utterly repudiates this poison, however personally difficult that may be, however damaging the impact will be. The statement today will not do it. This is no longer about cynics trying to associate one man's politics with another. It is now about Wright attempting to associate himself and some of his noxious, stupid, rancid views with the likely Democratic nominee. Wright has given Obama no choice - and he has also given him another opportunity. He needs to seize it.
Here's your newsflash - Obama has already given a speech on Wright. Now he's supposed to give another one? Saying what - "Gee, when I didn't disown Wright in March for saying "God DAMN America", it was because I didn't realize then that he meant it"? What has changed? Andrew seems to think that this is a different Jeremiah Wright from the man made famous by his soundbites in March, the man about whom Obama said "I can no more disown him than I can disown the black community. I can no more disown him than I can my white grandmother".
Or is Obama going to try and pretend that, unlike everyone in the world except Andrew Sullivan, he had no idea until late April that Wright was hateful?
Some Wright coverage:
Wright transcript, National Press Club
Dana Milbank, Wright's Voice Could Spell Doom For Obama
The NY Times John Holusha tosses flowers and shields their readers from any unpleasantness. His lead:
Attacks on him are really attacks on the black church, the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. said in a speech to the National Press Club in Washington on Monday, in which he mounted a spirited defense of views and sermons that have become an issue in the presidential campaign because Senator Barack Obama attended his church for many years.
People who rely on the Paper of Record will wonder what the fuss was about; here, for example, is their Farrakhan coverage:
He rejected suggestions that his willingness to associate with Louis Farrakhan, the head of the Nation of Islam, meant that he was anti-Semitic. He said Mr. Farrakhan was “not my enemy” and was too important a black leader to be ignored. When Mr. Farrakhan speaks, he said, “all black America listens — whether they agree with him or not, they listen.”
Times readers avert your eyes; here is the transcript (my emphasis):
MODERATOR: What is your relationship with Louis Farrakhan? Do you agree with and respect his views, including his most racially divisive views?
REVEREND WRIGHT: As I said on the Bill Moyers' show, one of our news channels keeps playing a news clip from 20 years ago when Louis said 20 years ago that Zionism, not Judaism, was a gutter religion.
And he was talking about the same thing United Nations resolutions say, the same thing now that President Carter is being vilified for, and Bishop Tutu is being vilified for. And everybody wants to paint me as if I'm anti-Semitic because of what Louis Farrakhan said 20 years ago.
I believe that people of all faiths have to work together in this country if we're going to build a future for our children, whether those people are -- just as Michelle and Barack don't agree on everything, Raymond (ph) and I don't agree on everything, Louis and I don't agree on everything, most of you all don't agree -- you get two people in the same room, you've got three opinions.
So what I think about him, as I've said on Bill Moyers and it got edited out, how many other African-Americans or European-Americans do you know that can get one million people together on the mall? He is one of the most important voices in the 20th and 21st century. That's what I think about him.
I've said, as I said on Bill Moyers, when Louis Farrakhan speaks, it's like E.F. Hutton speaks, all black America listens. Whether they agree with him or not, they listen.
Now, I am not going to put down Louis Farrakhan anymore than Mandela would put down Fidel Castro. Do you remember that Ted Koppel show, where Ted wanted Mandela to put down Castro because Castro was our enemy? And he said, "You don't tell me who my enemies are. You don't tell me who my friends are."
Louis Farrakhan is not my enemy. He did not put me in chains. He did not put me in slavery. And he didn't make me this color.
That bit about Mandela putting down Castro must have baffled lefties - isn't Castro a hero?
By way of comparison, the WaPo conveys a sense of controversy; their lead:
Sen. Barack Obama again sought to distance himself from the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. yesterday after his former pastor capped a weekend media offensive with an appearance in Washington in which he revisited many of his most controversial comments.
Here is the WaPo on Farrakhan:
Wright also restated the idea that HIV was invented as a weapon against minority communities, had kind words for Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan and railed against American imperialism.
This next bit is either funny or pathetic - let's compare the Times and WaPo in their treatment of the initial Wright controversies. The Times, third paragraph, reveals nothing:
Snippets from his sermons have been used in Republican commercials seeking to depict Senator Obama as unpatriotic, and the Democratic presidential candidate has given a carefully calibrated speech seeking to distance himself from Mr. Wright’s more inflammatory statements.
And the WaPo, fourth paragraph:
Wright, the former pastor at Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago who officiated at Obama's wedding and baptized his two daughters, became the center of controversy after clips from some of his most inflammatory sermons hit the airwaves earlier this year. In one sermon, delivered the Sunday after the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, Wright said that "America's chickens are coming home to roost" for its own acts of "terrorism." In another, he said blacks should sing "God damn America" instead of "God Bless America" to protest centuries of mistreatment.
Finally, the WaPo includes the news that Wright dissed Obama's distancing:
"He had to distance himself, because he's a politician, from what the media was saying I had said, which was anti-American. He said I didn't offer any words of hope. How would he know? He never heard the rest of the sermon. You never heard it," Wright said.
The NY Times had nothing on that. Actually, I am curious to see the Dead Tree edition of the Tuesday Times - this story is so weak, I bet it will be rewritten. And this Alessandra Stanley piece describes the theatrics but not the controversies.
LATE NOTE: The Times front-paged the Stanley Gossip Girls piece which also failed to provide any background on the Wright controversies.
Great summary and commentary, Mr. Maguire.
Posted by: hrtshpdbox | April 29, 2008 at 02:21 AM
When I was growing up in Dayton, Ohio the local Soul station's call letters were WDAO which stood for "White Days Are Over". It scared me then. It really scares me now.
Posted by: ParseThis | April 29, 2008 at 02:53 AM
I agree. Nice post, Tom.
I believe that what we have seen and heard from Wright the last two days represents what Obama actually heard in church for 20 years that he now denies hearing or heard but disagreed with.
I get the feeling that Wright has Obama by the you-know-whats. Obama strayed from the plantation by disowning some of Wright's statements. Wright knows that the some of poisonous views he preached were performed with the Obama family in church (a good pastor knows how to take attendance as he or she is preaching).
I agree with some of the other pundits who think Wright is sabotaging Obama. He and his good friend Louis benefit greatly by keeping the victimhood hope alive. There is no other way to explain the insanity.
Posted by: Elroy Jetson | April 29, 2008 at 02:53 AM
I loved how Sen. Clinton reached out for the black vote yesterday:
"I regret the efforts by the Republicans to politicize this matter."
Posted by: PaulL | April 29, 2008 at 03:27 AM
NYT:
That's the way Obama's been playing it since the Wright stuff garnered widespread attention. I would say that the NYT is aiding and abetting him in the politics of elision:
Further detail from a Chicago Tribune story:
Thanks to Porchlight for the detective work.
Posted by: Elliott | April 29, 2008 at 03:41 AM
I've been in favor of gay marriage since long before I ever heard of Andrew Sullivan, so it's with more sorrow than jollity that I note he can't be doing that cause much good by falling so quickly, publicly, deeply, and frequently out of love.
You know, black people were indeed enslaved for a long time, and suffered terribly. Wright has suggested a new perspective on that experience for me:
Under the "chickens home to roost" theory, what unspeakable crimes has Africa committed for the past 500 years that led to the continent being colonized and subjugated as it was?
Posted by: bgates | April 29, 2008 at 03:48 AM
Under the "chickens home to roost" theory, what unspeakable crimes has Africa committed for the past 500 years that led to the continent being colonized and subjugated as it was?
Or the crimes the Jews committed that led to their long streak of defeat? Better yet, what crimes are the Jews committing now and will that lead to the day the Jews must choose to accept Jesus or burn in Hell? Is Pastor Hagee's endorsement of John McCain telling us we need to get right with the Lord? Was American Idol's Carly Smithson's selection of Jesus Christ Superstar a sign?
Posted by: ParseThis | April 29, 2008 at 04:32 AM
Wright has maneuvered Obama into a corner. Because of Obama's hesitation in throwing his pastor and mentor under the bus, Wright rewarded him by claiming Barack agrees with him and only appeared to distance himself because he is a politician.
Obama has no good options that I can see.
If Obama denounces/renounces Wright
-Obama looks disloyal
-rift opens up in the Black community over Wright
-Some will view the denunciation as only political expediency
If Obama says little or nothing
-some will take that to mean Obama agrees with Wright
-some will view his passivity as weakness
If Rev. Wright can do this to Barack, think what Ahmadinejad could do.
PREDICTION
Obama will drop out of the race in a couple of weeks.
Posted by: Syl | April 29, 2008 at 04:42 AM
If Rev. Wright can do this to Barack, think what Ahmadinejad could do.
If the Religious Right can get John McCain to go from calling them "agents of intolerance" to announcing how proud he is of their endorsements, think what Ahmadinejad could do.
Why do you guys insist on being silly?
Posted by: ParseThis | April 29, 2008 at 05:37 AM
Well, well, well, I see this is another Reverend Wright kind of day. Pouring rain, cold and unspring like. I guess the Messiah's return will be delayed.
Good Morning everyone. Go forth and prosper!
Posted by: Jane | April 29, 2008 at 07:25 AM
I don't see Obama dropping out. I think Dean should stay out of Ft Marcy Park though.
It will be interesting to see how well the Dem church does without Jews, Asians, Italians and Catholics. I'm sure a coalition of children, nutty professors and Blacks will pull the party to victory.
Posted by: clarice | April 29, 2008 at 07:59 AM
With his statement that recent attacks and criticisms of him are really attacks on the Black church, Rev. Wright has now put the race issue front and center in a way that even the Clintons could not.
We must now ask ourselves and members of the "Black church" this question:
Is Wright correct? Is this true?
Are all of you as filled with anti-Americanism, racism, hate and anti-Semitism as is Rev. Wright, Trinity Church, Louis Farrakhan, and the Nation of Islam?
If not, then the "Black church" and the Black community needs to stand up and disown Rev. Wright and his actions, not just Obama.
For if they don't, this issue will continue to fester and divide us. It will not merely impact the Democratic Party.
It will continue to stifle Dr. King's dream of an America where his children "will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character."
Posted by: fdcol63 | April 29, 2008 at 08:31 AM
So who did make him 'this color'?
=====================
Posted by: kim | April 29, 2008 at 08:45 AM
Obama's one way out of this is to explain why this guy is his pastor and what he has taken from him and what he has ignored. Obama, on a personal level, has got to feel like he as been well and truly used, as Wright uses him to become the next Al Sharpton. If he has some anger, deploying it openly might be the only way out of his mess. Obama almost has to get emotional -- cool won't cut it for this variety of crisis.
Interesting. Obama really wanted his campaign not to be about race. Too bad his preacher won't let him.
I agree with bgates on Sullivan. Sullivan's schoolboy crushes on politicians make his blog frequently embarassing. Combine it wth his schoolboy hatreds and you have something that is often toxic. (It annoys me than I am more likely than not likely to agree with him on policy.)
Posted by: Appalled | April 29, 2008 at 08:48 AM
Sully isn't looking for another speech an actual answer, he's just looking for a fig leaf so he can go back to his man-crush on the Black Stallion.
Posted by: Charlie (Colorado) | April 29, 2008 at 08:51 AM
Well, Obama did have the "Audacity of Hope" going for him. Hope that Rev. Wright would stay sequestered in his humble Chicago estate, Hope that wife Michelle would develop laryngitis, and Hope that the racist MSM would continue to cover his Affirmative Action campaign with a tingle down their leg. With proper vetting Obama would have flamed-out long ago. Of course with proper vetting neither Al Gore nor John Kerry would have been contenders either so, in the end, the "Audacity of Hope" is really the "Certainty of Failure". It's a shame Obama never learned that hard work always beats hope.
Posted by: Curly Smith | April 29, 2008 at 08:51 AM
I submit a radical proposition, and that is that, because Obama, and Wright, and so many others, have the need to be stuck in victimhood so central to their identity, that the cry for hope and change is real, and very personal to these 'perpetual victims'. All they need to hate is the hate itself. A key insight came when Wright spoke of who made his skin black as his enemy. These people have a powerful need for empowerment not using pity, worse, self-pity, as its fundament. This goes for guilt-ridden liberals, too; this pathology doesn't care for color of skin deep.
=============================
Posted by: kim | April 29, 2008 at 08:56 AM
The unmasking of Rev. Wright has damaged the Trinity Church of Racism, Hate, and Politics,in Chicago. It has also unmasked every adult member of that church who tolerated the Reverend's nasty mouth lunacies.
I find myself hoping that Eugene Robinson is right when he claims that Trinity Church is not representative of the Black Religious Experience.
Posted by: MikeS | April 29, 2008 at 08:58 AM
Long ago and faraway, black people were enslaved in this country by their white masters.
Today, many are choosing to remain enslaved by their black pastors, community leaders, and politicos.
Wright and his brethren remind me of the Imam's and Madrassas.
Posted by: centralcal | April 29, 2008 at 09:01 AM
Yesterday on NPR's Morning Edition they reported that Wright was controversial "because he claims the U.S. government is racist." It makes the NYT's coverage look thorough.
Posted by: henryO | April 29, 2008 at 09:15 AM
I’d say it’s safe to say that Wright is a bona fide racist, but that would miss the real point. Don’t send your time thinking racist, when you should be thinking huckster.
You have to realize that pastors of black churches often think of their congregants in a niggardly or “less than” terms, its part of the huckster role that demands “no noise” or “paper-only” in the basket. Meanwhile in order to maintain the “cash cow,” they preach a doctrine that keeps blacks from moving to a better place, with ideas like the anti-middleclassness, until he eventually retires to a 10,000 sq ft mansion in a gated community of more than 90% white neighbors. His form of racism is a tool of a black pastor to keep blacks down using whites to triangulate while he plays a Moses who has no intention of getting them to the promise land.
When you finally realize that Obama’s 20 year apprentice in hucksterism at Trinity Church was to gain “street cred” and train his skills at manipulating, starting with the black community, it becomes clear why he spend 20 years there becoming a modern day carpetbagger. The only real major difference between Wright and Obama is that Wright thinks within the confines of a pastor, while Obama is trying to expand to a whole country.
But the current discussion seems to poise Rev. Wright for a eventual "Sister Soulja" moment for Obama, when the entire huckster discussion is lost with the fallen racist.
Posted by: Neo | April 29, 2008 at 09:33 AM
So, how many decades has the Obama campaign now set back race relations in the country? Not exactly the "unifying" message he started with. Very sad, really.
Posted by: bio mom | April 29, 2008 at 09:35 AM
Does anyone else wonder if Rev. Wright is deliberately trying to keep the MSM's attention on his relationship with Obama in order to keep them from noticing Obama's relationship with Tony Rezko (and the ongoing trial whom of)?
... Or am I too cynical?...
Posted by: Challeron | April 29, 2008 at 09:45 AM
"He had to distance himself, because he's a politician, from what the media was saying I had said, which was anti-American. He said I didn't offer any words of hope. How would he know? He never heard the rest of the sermon. You never heard it," Wright said.
What I'm wondering is just how much time Obama actually spent in this church? Did Obama use the right Rev. Wright to lay to rest the rumor he was a Muslim only to have it come back and bite him in the ass? Maybe Obama didn't spend many Sundays in the right Rev. Wright's church.
Posted by: Sue | April 29, 2008 at 09:52 AM
"If not, then the "Black church" and the Black community needs to stand up and disown Rev. Wright and his actions, not just Obama."
There is no "black church". UCC won't repudiate Wright, he fits into the left side of their social gospel schema, you know the one which has cut their membership down by 50% over the past thirty years.
Wright should be shunned by all people, not repudiated by only blacks. He does not speak for any but the deranged and the deficient.
The focus is on watching BHO scratch all those flea bites. He was rather incautious about the company he lay down with, wasn't he?
Posted by: Rick Ballard | April 29, 2008 at 09:54 AM
So who did make him 'this color'?
Hmmm...the very God he invokes to damn America.
Posted by: Sue | April 29, 2008 at 09:56 AM
John McCain has a quarter plus century record of public service that shows he is his own man and not a pawn, willingly or not, of the Religious Right or any other group in America.
If the Left's response to the Wright flap is to try and divert attention and show how associations between McCain and others are indicative of how he'll govern or what his character is made of, they'll have a bad Tuesday in November.
Go ahead, make my day.
As to the Wright stuff, it seems to me that the good Rev. is throwing Obama under the church bus because he views the Senator as not being faithful to the black cause. I'm sympathetic to Obama as I view him as being trapped by his own poor decisions and not by his own worldview. He's not a radical black nationalist and he's not an America hater.
But his choices in life to go along to get along (as well as advance his career) have come back to haunt him. Sadly.
He's a good man who made some bad decisions.
As Tom points out, you can do your Sister Souljah moment one time. Too late for a return engagement.
Posted by: SteveMG | April 29, 2008 at 10:00 AM
You can't be TOO cynical. I was joking yesterday when I suggested that Clinton was behind Wright's magical media tour but this morning Politico reports:
"Obama's campaign has disavowed Wright's media tour, and a correspondent notes an interesting detail: Wright was invited to the National Press Club by a journalist and minister who supports Clinton. The Tribune reports that Wright was invited by Barbara Reynolds, a former USA Today editorial board member who has written on personal blog of her support for Clinton"
Posted by: clarice | April 29, 2008 at 10:01 AM
watching BHO scratch all those flea bites.
Flea bites? Look like small open sores to me. My daddy did not warn me about fleas, it was something else ( I forget now ) that had to do with laying down with rather unfamiliar company...
Posted by: Gmax | April 29, 2008 at 10:09 AM
Obama needs to do the same thing for each one of his controversies.
He needs to have a wonderful speech about this great nation of ours. Not just point back to the marvelous words of that great patriot, Obama 2004. He needs to do it again.
Wright is a bigger problem than just anti-Americanism, but that's part of it. Ayers, the pin, and Michelle are all, at the bottom of it, controversies because people aren't sure how Obama feels about this country.
I think he's one of those people that thought America's sins brought about 9/11, the flag isn't something you would actively display, we shouldn't hold ourselves above other countries, and this country has many flaws.
Those people are out there in droves, and most of them support Obama. Will he throw them under the bus? Cause that's what he needs to do.
Posted by: MayBee | April 29, 2008 at 10:10 AM
I think there's no way in hell Obama drops out. Absolutely no way.
What does seem possible, but extremely unlikely, is that over the next six weeks this flap--and whatever remains to be revealed--makes it crystal clear that he simply can't be elected in November. If that were to happen, and Obama were to realize it, it might be possible to cut a deal in which Hillary is the nominee and he is the number two. He could even claim to be delighted with it all, and perhaps the Dems would be energized anew by the dream ticket. But I sure don't see that happening.
And if, as still seems certain, Obama is the nominee, Hillary would surprise the hell out of me if she accepted number two. The prospect of running against McCain in 2012 is just too inviting for her.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | April 29, 2008 at 10:13 AM
Not to indulge too deeply in the popular conspiracy of the 90s; (it even made it in
some way to the movie; The Net)But the thing that ties, Foster, Admiral Boorda
(who as the late Tom Lantos, instructed a
wayward Clinton staffer 'committedsuicide'; which made him wonder, was this the way out?)and James Forrestal, was a sense of shame.Neither Dean, nor Obama, or Hillary suffer from that affliction.
The short answer to the previous rhetorical question; is a failure to think beyond their extended family, clan, or tribe. Which made them vulnerable to Arab traders since the 7th century; when they became the
'zanj' in places like Beirut, then the European traders, and continue to do so in
places like Mali, the Sudan; and tragically
accounts for the daily body counts from cities all over the United States, where
claims, over guns, drugs, & other property,
become 'questions of honor'. By the way;
Mr. Yglesias jibe at McCain's family finances; remind me where the Good Reverend
thinks US bioweapons come from; the Umbrella
Corporation.
Posted by: narciso | April 29, 2008 at 10:14 AM
Clarice,
It does start to look like a very carefully constructed "pivot point" by the Clintons. Add to the press club invitation the NAACP invitation that was rumored to have been suggested by pro-Clinton people. Then Hil herself coming out and saying, just as all this is happening, that she "laments that Republicans are making Rev. Wright a political issue." All vintage Clinton once you connect all the dots.
Posted by: Ranger | April 29, 2008 at 10:15 AM
I agree with the huckster label. He's selling death, despair and racism to poor blacks, while they fund his $10 million dollar house on the golf course in a lily white gated community. Reverend Ike at least told his flock they can be rich like him, and exhorted them to try harder. Wright is more like a heroin dealer. Be dependent on me and be poor, degraded and addicted.
Posted by: Michael | April 29, 2008 at 10:17 AM
SteveMG gave me an idea for a political cartoon.
A picture of Obama on his front porch stomping on a flaming sack of Wright Stuff.
Posted by: MikeS | April 29, 2008 at 10:20 AM
From that magficent, transcent speech in which the national conversation on race was begun:
"We can dismiss Reverend Wright as a crank or a demagogue, just as some have dismissed Geraldine Ferraro, in the aftermath of her recent statements, as harboring some deep-seated racial bias."
Yessirree--Jeremiah and Geraldine, just two peas in a pod.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | April 29, 2008 at 10:30 AM
No one seems to be considering that Obama simply believes all the Wright stuff, and is as baffled by the response to it as he was by the response to his bitter/clingy statements. If you believe the basics that Wright preaches, you will have a hard time renouncing him, and the renouncing you actually do will sound tepid. Sounds like Obama's response, no?
Posted by: Buford Gooch | April 29, 2008 at 10:34 AM
Of course Obama believes it. He just can't say it now. His whole life has been a pursuit of a radical, race-based heritage because he just can't accept the person he is in reality. He's a person of mixed race, with decidedly upper middle class tastes who was raised by white, middle Americans. Nope, Daddy the Deserter is so much more romantic. The Dreams of his Mother made him the success he is today, but he continues to chase the phantom dad. That's why he can't disown his daddy surrogate, the not so good Reverend Wright.
Posted by: Michael | April 29, 2008 at 10:40 AM
The fact is, nobody really knows very much about what Obama believes--we know what he says, but that's not quite the same.
We know, or can sure as hell reasonably infer, that in twenty years in Wirght's parish Obama didn't tumble to his pastor's core, passionately-held beliefs. Somewhat troubling, no? Or maybe he was fully aware of those beliefs, but associated with him because he shared the beliefs, or because it suited his political purposes. Either way, a caution to say the least.
Let's face it, it's Barack Obama who made sure that this would be a campaign about race. He did so twenty years ago when he sought to pad his political street cred by joining Wright's church, and then consorting with a group of virulently anti-American types on the leftward fringe of Chicago politics.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | April 29, 2008 at 10:45 AM
Here we go, a nest of racist vipers
Posted by: david duke | April 29, 2008 at 10:47 AM
It's not just Clinton. The whole race pimp industry is threatened by Obama. Jackson, Sharpton, Farrahan, Rangel, Waters, Conyers, Lee, et al are threatened by what BHO's candidacy means in terms of lost revenue. After all, if a black can be the candidate of a major party, then why is it necessary to continue to dump a disproportionate share of the budget into the "black community"?
Posted by: Rick Ballard | April 29, 2008 at 10:50 AM
"Collectivize. Hate America. Hate Capitalism. Hate the 'other.'"
This is Obama's, Wright's and the neo-tribalists' message to Americans. It is also Al Qaida's message to the West.
Why is this congruency not more obvious to the Democrats? Shouldn't true Liberals fret more about this clear convergence?
Why isn't Andy Sullivan 'gob-smacked' by this?
Posted by: steveaz | April 29, 2008 at 10:51 AM
Yup, we're all racists for daring to treat Mr. Obama like an adult. What utter trash. The dialog on race begins with people like the poster above preaching to us all, and we just say amen. Like treating black people like children, david? I guess so.
Posted by: Michael | April 29, 2008 at 10:52 AM
It's hard to peg the best part:
(a) Obama's Audacity of Hope giving this fruitcake a prominent role in his life;
(b)His refusal to disown him and mealy mouther unclear refutation of Wright's sayings;
(c)Wright's screaming his words were taken out of context and then repeating them ever more clearly proving there was no contextual problem;
(d) The msm's defense of Wright and fluffing over his more outrageous statements only to have Wright pull the rug out from under those defenses.
It's all good.
Posted by: clarice | April 29, 2008 at 10:53 AM
david duke, you have so much more in common with your namesake than you can imagine.
Posted by: Michael | April 29, 2008 at 10:54 AM
Sue,
"Maybe Obama didn't spend many Sundays in the right Rev. Wright's church."
You may be correct. But I don't think Michelle O missed too many Sundays.
BO is in a box, and it's shrinking daily. There may be no possibility of extricating himself without doing too much damage to one or various parts of his narrative.
Anyone enjoy watching the CNN rapid reaction force try to put Humpty back together? Amazing!
Posted by: Chris | April 29, 2008 at 11:01 AM
Wright is a dangerous man who can lead USA into a great depression and another war with Russia. let us spend all our time on every word he utters.
BTW, when will the hardworking media get us information on where Wright completed his elementary education?
Posted by: jojn | April 29, 2008 at 11:02 AM
A question that should be asked of Obama is: You've described your grandmother as a 'typical white person', is your pastor a typical black person?
Posted by: Patrick R. Sullivan | April 29, 2008 at 11:03 AM
Come November, what percentage of the over-40 white vote do you expect Obama to carry?
Posted by: Danube of Thought | April 29, 2008 at 11:04 AM
The front wheels are off and the axel is kicking up dirt. Watch out. Actually, just keep watching.
Posted by: MarkO | April 29, 2008 at 11:05 AM
I see that Jojn would simply like to move on. Not gonna happen; deal with it.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | April 29, 2008 at 11:06 AM
Here's a stanza from a Dylanesque song parody I recently wrote:
Embarrassing your grandma
Won’t get you very far
Now that you’ve gone and thrown her
Beneath a trolley car
Seems you can’t tell the difference
Although it’s getting late
Between grandma’s being fearful
And Pastor’s preaching hate
- The Obama Pastorale, http://www.goodies2choose.com/?p=4
Posted by: Mr. Goodbar | April 29, 2008 at 11:06 AM
Biter vipers, david.
============
Posted by: kim | April 29, 2008 at 11:09 AM
Now is the time to switch gears and make certain that Obama gets the nomination. Hillary liiks down right electable next to him.
Posted by: Jane | April 29, 2008 at 11:15 AM
Of course reverend wright looks bad for barack, but do you folks really think that's going to matter? If the best you can do to bring down a candidate is to say he has a crazy pastor, i have to say, he must be doing pretty well. if you wanted to bring down a white candidate, you'd have to find him in bed with either a dead girl or a living boy. but since this candidate is a black man, you think association with a bombast and a demagogue is all it takes to knock him over. you might be right. but i have to say, if BHO gets a chance to run against Grandpa, (who can't tell the sunni from the shiia unless he's had his chocolate donut with chocolate sprinkles,) i would be willing to bet you'll find otherwise. beating the clintons will make BHO so tough, (if he can do it) that gramps will snap like a twig.
Posted by: r.u. kidding | April 29, 2008 at 11:15 AM
Mr. Goodbar,
please don't drag dylan down into the pit of your weak, sad, propagandizing. if you don't like the guy, fine. leave the lyrics to the lyricists.
Posted by: r.u. kidding | April 29, 2008 at 11:18 AM
"..gramps will snap like a twig."
Right. What the hell does John McCain know about pressure?
Posted by: Danube of Thought | April 29, 2008 at 11:20 AM
if you wanted to bring down a white candidate, you'd have to find him in bed with either a dead girl or a living boy.
Or attending a church pastored by David Duke.
Posted by: Sue | April 29, 2008 at 11:20 AM
This Wright subject can be a game for everyone to feel sorry for poor Obama.. the people in this country are treated like we have no brains..whatever you tell us. You can fool some of us, me it's a racial game and we are fools to buy it, 20 yrs. , they were listening, and every time we deal with a Black, dig up the past, look at your Black, t.v., money, sports, do you really think they don't have it made?
Posted by: jerrybarnett10 | April 29, 2008 at 11:23 AM
http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/columnists/louis/index.html
OK, fellow JOMers, I am really not giving in to Oliver Stone like conspiracy theories. I don't think that HRC is behind the "Right Rev. Wrong." But it is interesting to note that at least one HRC supporter facilitated the Rev's plunge back into the public's attention (see above link).
Posted by: Thomas Collins | April 29, 2008 at 11:25 AM
Since all the presidential material is Rosa Krebs,the Red Lizard and the Mauve Crusty,wouldn't it be better to skip the next elections?
Posted by: PeterUK | April 29, 2008 at 11:26 AM
Michael - You forgot to mention the Rev Wright's Porsche. "Daddy the Deserter is so much more romantic. The Dreams of his Mother and Grandmother he threw under the bus, made him the success he is today, but he continues to chase the phantom dad. That's why he can't disown his daddy surrogate, the not so good Reverend Wright." He's 46 years old and still going through an Identity Crisis. Psych 101 courtesy of Dr. Freud.
Posted by: Frankie | April 29, 2008 at 11:27 AM
"Right. What the hell does John McCain know about pressure? "
it won't be about pressure, it will be about who can stay awake on the campaign trail. i don't mean that metaphorically. i meant it literally. do you know anyone in their seventies? I do. pick your pony in an october debate, a guy who's 72 and is about as inspirational when he speaks as i am when i order breakfast, or a guy who's under fifty and actually a public speaker.
Johnny Mac can take the pressure, sure, but he better hope Al Sadr can keep the reigns on his legion of doom between now and october, or the only thing he's got going for him, a few small, but significant upticks in the war, will quickly fade away. And our hundred years in iraq won't seem like such a good plan anymore.
Posted by: r.u. kidding | April 29, 2008 at 11:27 AM
seeking to depict Senator Obama as unpatriotic
Huh ?
I can see out of touch .. in a different universe .. but unpatriotic .. I just don't see it.
I could no more call Obama unpatriotic than I could throw his grandmother under the bus.
Posted by: Neo | April 29, 2008 at 11:27 AM
"if you wanted to bring down a white candidate, you'd have to find him in bed with either a dead girl or a living boy.
Or attending a church pastored by David Duke. "
right, or say, seeking the nomination of John Hagee.
Posted by: r.u. kidding | April 29, 2008 at 11:29 AM
do you know anyone in their seventies? I do.
Uh, yeah. My mother. And she could kick your ass any day of the week and twice on Sundays. Now, right back at ya'. Do you know anyone in their 70s?
Posted by: Sue | April 29, 2008 at 11:31 AM
It might still be possible for Obama to claim he just has a high tolerance for kooky nonsense from blacks and whites. Even now the CW is that his personal point of view is nothing like Wright's (or Ayer's).
Now I wouldn't buy it completely but he could go on to say "Elect me and prove Wright wrong".
(There seems to be some kid here pretending to be a troll.)
Posted by: boris | April 29, 2008 at 11:32 AM
Look, r.u.kidding, we've already been through this public speaking thingy. And Bush won. Don't pin your hopes on Obama outperforming McCain in the public speeches department.
Posted by: Sue | April 29, 2008 at 11:33 AM
Who would want four years of this:
“. . . the Rev. Al Sharpton, [. . .] accused the presidential candidate of trying to "grandstand in front of white people,"
I guess we should all just keep to our own kind. Look behind the curtin.
Posted by: MarkO | April 29, 2008 at 11:38 AM
sue,
i really don't want to fight with your mom. and i'm sorry if you thought i was disparaging her. i'm quite certain she could whip us all with her mad kung foo skills. i was responding to the comment that mccain knows pressure. and the point is, that pressure won't matter in november. the man is going to look frail and confused next to obama if the two of them ever get the chance to debate. just like i would look frail and confused when you mom kicked my ass twice on sunday. i know plenty of people in their seventies, and i love them, and i'm sure some of them could kick my ass. but, you know, kicking my ass isn't really a great barometer of presidential accumen. if it were, we'd have more pro wrestlers in the race.
Posted by: r.u. kididng | April 29, 2008 at 11:38 AM
It's looking good for November. If Hagee and McCain's age are the best they can do, at least we'll have a potential veto when the democrats have super majorities in both houses. I say potential because I don't know if McCain will veto a democrat or not.
Posted by: Sue | April 29, 2008 at 11:39 AM
RUK,
"if you wanted to bring down a white [DEMOCRAT} candidate, you'd have to find him in bed with either a dead girl or a living boy."
Fixed that one for you.
"if BHO gets a chance to run against Grandpa, (who can't tell the sunni from the shiia unless he's had his chocolate donut with chocolate sprinkles,)..."
You might want to take that issue up with the head of the Intel Committee, Silvestri Reyes (D-Clueless). He had a lot more trouble with that than Sen. McCain.
Posted by: Chris | April 29, 2008 at 11:40 AM
r.u.kidding,
No problem. We'll see how McCain holds up to the Obamessiah's oratory skills.
Posted by: Sue | April 29, 2008 at 11:41 AM
It took Americans...black and white, liberal and conservative...less than 4 days to figure out Rev. Jeremiah Wright was a hate-spewing, anti-American racist. Are we really supposed to believe that Barack Obama and his family didn't pick up on that after sitting in Wright's pews for 20 YEARS?C'mon!
Posted by: maureen rehg | April 29, 2008 at 11:41 AM
I know he can't win a debate against Hillary. I suspect he will not want to debate McCain too many times either. ::grin::
Posted by: Sue | April 29, 2008 at 11:42 AM
Oh dear, TM must have been linked again. I hate it when the mad hatters come out to play.
To echo DOT, Obama is toast.
Posted by: Jane | April 29, 2008 at 11:44 AM
"Look, r.u.kidding, we've already been through this public speaking thingy. And Bush won. Don't pin your hopes on Obama outperforming McCain in the public speeches department. "
Bush beat Gore because he was disingenuous and, at least during one debate, he was painted up like a cheap prostitute. He beat Kerry because Kerry could honestly not find a period to a sentence. and, (i can't believe i'm saying this) McCain isn't as good a debater at the doofus-in-chief. Even giving victory speeches on the stump the man is a snooze. He's a great politician, and he might even make a good president, but not if we all need a nudge in the ribs every time he finishes talking.
Posted by: r.u.kididng | April 29, 2008 at 11:44 AM
"Hillary looks down right electable next to him."
She always has. BHO's a prog phenom, like Howard Dean or Senator Lamont. There was never, ever anything to him or to his candidacy aside from hype and the ability of the Soros/Dean/Stern org's ability to game the caucuses. RW is a Caterpillar full scale D-9, BHO is the Tonka version.
I dont think she would be hurt much if BHO gets the well deserved boot. The core block of his supporters just don't carry sufficient weight in the battleground states for their absence to tip the scales.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | April 29, 2008 at 11:45 AM
BHO likely made the decision join Wright's church for political ends, namely to win the support of its congregants who could in turn influence others in the community to vote for him in Illinois. In some ways this is worse than believing what Wright says and has said in many of his sermons, certainly more calculating and cynical.
In the end, the problem for many Americans is that we simply don't know who BHO is and wonder whether he really knows himself. In a year when disappointment with the opposition is as high as it's ever been he may still get elected president but he will never be the candidate liberals held him out to be such a short time ago.
Posted by: Mike | April 29, 2008 at 11:47 AM
"pick your pony in an october debate, a guy who's 72 and is about as inspirational when he speaks as i am when i order breakfast, or a guy who's under fifty and actually a public speaker."
Did you actually watch the Pennsylvania debate?
Obama is "inspirational" while giving speeches. While being actively challenged on issues he, in your parlance "snaps like a twig."
Posted by: JB | April 29, 2008 at 11:51 AM
the man is going to look frail and confused next to obama if the two of them ever get the chance to debate.
Posted by: r.u. kididng | April 29, 2008 at 11:38 AM
I take it you missed the last debate?
This is the guy who said he would raise Capital Gains tax 100% even if it meant revinue would go down because of "fairness." He litterally said that he was willing to raise taxes on 100 milion Americans to 'get' 50 hedge fund managers who 'don't pay their fair share.'
If Obama is sooo very good at debates, then why is he ducking them for the rest of the primary season?
Posted by: Ranger | April 29, 2008 at 11:52 AM
Obama's previous statements made it absolutely clear, as was spelled out by the MSM with great glee. Now how could be he clearer ?
Posted by: Neo | April 29, 2008 at 11:55 AM
"Did you actually watch the Pennsylvania debate?
Obama is "inspirational" while giving speeches. While being actively challenged on issues he, in your parlance "snaps like a twig.""
no offense, really, but did _you_ watch the PA debate? i don't really remember anyone being "actively challenged on issues." there was a series of silly gotcha questions and a lot of "earnest" navel-gazing about how bad we should all feel because of our lack of tasteful lapel jewelry, but, no,i don't remember any issues, sorry.
speaking of snapping, did you see Johnny Mac when Stephanopolous asked him about Hagee. as i recall he disavowed "any comments that are anti-anything."
nice one.
Posted by: r.u. kidding | April 29, 2008 at 11:57 AM
"BHO likely made the decision join Wright's church for political ends,"
This is probably very true. Obama thought it would be an asset to belong to a church. Now its an albatross around his neck. But let's face it the reason he didn't object to Wright's doctrine is that he agreed with it. For political reasons he has to disown the church he joined for political reasons. The world comes around.
Posted by: ben | April 29, 2008 at 11:59 AM
"BHO likely made the decision join Wright's church for political ends,"
seriously. list off the politicians who do _anything_ that isn't for political ends.
Posted by: r.u. kidding | April 29, 2008 at 12:02 PM
r.u.k.:"as i recall he disavowed "any comments that are anti-anything."
You amy have confused his statement on Hagee with O's statement on Wright where he said in essence he disavoewed anything that bothered anyone without specifying.
It's been nice playing--now GO HOME!
Posted by: clarice | April 29, 2008 at 12:02 PM
but, no,i don't remember any issues, sorry.
Posted by: r.u. kidding | April 29, 2008 at 11:57 AM
So tax policy isn't a serious issue? Well, I guess you don't pay taxes then.
Posted by: Ranger | April 29, 2008 at 12:02 PM
"but, no,i don't remember any issues, sorry/"
Actually, and I am not kidding, there were plenty of issues..and Obama bombed on all of them..especially on raising the capital gains tax when he couldn't answer the question: after he was told revenues increased when the capital gains tax decreased, so why raise them again, he looked like a deer caught in the headlights.
Posted by: ben | April 29, 2008 at 12:03 PM
Mark Steyn today:
Posted by: Patrick R. Sullivan | April 29, 2008 at 12:03 PM
I'm glad Rev. Wright is still out there talking loud. People need to see just how much of a fanatic he is. And Obama's very weak comments about Wright - keep 'em coming you're not fooling anyone.
Have there been any polls in the states that have already had their primaries? You know, something like polling White Obama voters and asking them "hey, would you have voted for Obama if you knew he blamed you for the complete failure of black society and for 17th, 18th, and 19th century slavery, etc."
Posted by: fromwembleypark.typepad.com | April 29, 2008 at 12:05 PM
the man is going to look frail and confused next to obama if the two of them ever get the chance to debate.
The shear ignorance of this statement is amazing. Check your demographics knucklehead.
McCain is going to look like what the majority of this country looks like: ideological moderate, over the age of 55. And he is going to crush Mr. HopeyChangey.
So please, by all means, keep ranting about how OOOOOOOOOLD he is and "do you know any 72-year olds?". See how that works out for ya in Novemeber.
OT, I got to see Gen. Colin Powell today. I will give details and analysis later.
Posted by: Soylent Red | April 29, 2008 at 12:06 PM
"...right, or say, seeking the nomination of John Hagee."
Eh? Is this fellow sane? When, exactly, did McCain seek the nomination of John Hagee? And how many years has McCain associated himself with Hagee? And what is the closest thing Hagee has said to "God damn America?"
I have vivid and blissful memories of the 73-year-old Ronald Reagan absolutely wiping the floor with the oaf Mondale.
Posted by: Danube of Thought | April 29, 2008 at 12:07 PM
I think it was Harold Ford Jr., head of the DLC, who said after PA that Obama had to win IN. Wright's tour would seem to make that less likely without another big "race speech" type moment. I bet Wright didn't play well in WV or KY either. So I expect Obama to do/say something important, but have no idea what would accomplish what he needs to accomplish - make blue collar whites and aggrieved blacks believe the disparate myths about himself.
Posted by: DebinNC | April 29, 2008 at 12:08 PM
"It's been nice playing--now GO HOME!"
it's time for me to go home because i disagree with you? gee, guys. i'm sorry. i didn't realize this forum was for everybody to just agree more and more vehemently with each other. i'm sorry. i'll try and do better. wait, i think i've got it now.
Obama's a total racist for going to church, except he probably only went to church for political reasons, unlike true believers like John McCain. And he should totally drop out of the race he's winning because he's so much scarier than hillary to all of us god-loving _real_ americans. and anyone who says otherwise is totally with the terrorists and emboldening our enemies and should just go home so we can be more comfortable in what we think!
there. how's that, better?
Posted by: r.u. kidding | April 29, 2008 at 12:09 PM
This Hagee-Wright comparison is a red herring the size of a blue whale.
McCain didn't sit in a pew for 20 years while Hagee spewed a doctrine of hate against America. Hagee was never McCain's spiritual and moral mentor and advisor. He didn't baptize McCain's kids or marry him.
Nice try, but that dog won't hunt.
Posted by: ben | April 29, 2008 at 12:09 PM
. . . who can't tell the sunni from the shiia unless he's had his chocolate donut . . .
Yeah, everybody knows those Shiites don't ever support al Qaeda. This in the news, yesterday:
Posted by: Cecil Turner | April 29, 2008 at 12:09 PM
"he looked like a deer caught in the headlights"
Sort of - I thought he looked more like a closet marxist who just realized that he had slipped up. 'Cause every marxist absolutely knows that gains from nasty, dirty evil capital are actually the spoils of theft from the masses, just like he knows that you can't say that right out in public.
Posted by: Rick Ballard | April 29, 2008 at 12:15 PM
Danube asks "Come November, what percentage of the over-40 white vote do you expect Obama to carry?"
Perhaps more troubling for Obama is the under-30 white vote. They've been exposed to the "diversity" movement their entire lives and know it's crap. They know that the high percentage of blacks in prison results from the high percentage of blacks committing crimes and not from slavery that ended 150 years ago or Jim Crow that ended 50 years ago. The young'uns might have been energized by "change" but they'll run away from the same old tired racist rants.
Posted by: Curly Smith | April 29, 2008 at 12:15 PM
No, RUK, your caricature may amuse you and your friends, but what is being said is that, once all of your "clever" arguments have been refuted, it's time to go back to places where people actually think you are clever. now, GO HOME.
Posted by: Buford Gooch | April 29, 2008 at 12:16 PM
"there. how's that, better?"
It depends what better is. If more asinine than before is the criteria, yes, better.
"Obama's a total racist for going to church,..for political reasons"
Exactly, he needed to fill in the blanks on his blank slate. But he picked a racist pastor, maybe it was just bad luck. He believed the message, forgot to object, and now he can't have it both ways. Such is life.
Posted by: ben | April 29, 2008 at 12:18 PM