The media is having a field day. I read this today: "While Obama has attempted to distance himself from the pastor's views, the row shows little signs of dying down. Wright was accused of upping the ante earlier this week, telling a press conference that media attacks on him were also an attack on African-American church culture and warning Obama, 'I'm coming after you.' "
I don't think Wright is playing games. Wright doesn't preach "politics." He is a minister in the tradition of the Rev. King. He is also a respected scholar. Obama owes his best ideas and values to his mentor. Obama's books and speeches make this clear.
The message Wright has delivered in his sermons and written in his books are Obama's prime source. Liberation, transformation and reconciliation , as Wright said in Washington are the key ideas of his church.
Liberation means more than opposing oppression in all its forms. It also encompasses freeing oneself from any feelings of inferiority or superiority and recognizing that "being different does not mean one is deficient."
Transformation means radical change: "Changed lives, changed minds, changed laws, changed social orders and changed hearts in a changed world."
Reconciliation, "means we embrace our individual rich histories, all of them. We retain who we are as persons of different cultures, while acknowledging that those of other cultures are not superior or inferior to us. They are just different from us."
Wright is perhaps the most powerful public orator in America since Martin Luther King, and he is as radical as King was (which most Americans have forgot or don't know). Wright gave his basic sermon in DC to the National Press Club and 95 per cent of it is right : it is the Real America, not the politicians' pandering picture . But Wright later went too far in his comments to the press. He was angry at the way he had been portrayed in the media and that his church had been bothered by the media's presence.
Obama gave an excellent speech on race in Philadelphia and he made his position clear. But he did not deny his debt to his mentor. Obama is trying to straddle two different worlds and speak to a wider audience. Thus the conflict and what makes the dialogue difficult. Many African Americans voted for Obama because they want to get past the us versus them rhetoric .
Perhaps Wright's prideful and angry comments actually may help Obama politiically . I am disappointed in Obama's reaction, personally attacking his teacher. He had already said what was necessary .
recommend this
email
print
link to this page
Comments: 21
The media, and particularly the Republican right wing, is trying to link Wright's views to Obama. If the American voters buy that, they are even dumber than I though...which is saying quite a lot.
Do you really think people are as stupid as you make them out to be? Obama clearly subscribes to the same beliefs as does Wright or he would have left the church years ago. To quote the song "dream on, dream on.
" Obama is done, somebody stick him with a fork.
And to quote the right righteous reverend Wright "The chickens have come home to roost". LMAO.
You obvdously haven't a clue what Wright or Obama think.
The Democrats true to form on on course to lose another election...so another four years of Bush policies.
He's a lot like Bill Clinton in this race... foot in mouth syndrome.. someone is always having to watch their backs with these two (Bill and Jeremiah) megalomaniacs.
He should have left well enough alone. He's a retired pastor.. Obama is a politician.
When I first heard the Rev. Wright comment about the 'damning' of America I immediately tried to vanquish my immediate emotional response and tried hard to get at the ' main driver' in his passionate speech. I really ended up thinking there were two such:
>> Wright's historical assessment that governmental groups of almost any stripe now and in the past (monarchies, religious hierarchies, dictatorships, federated states, republics, democracies (and private corportate goups too)) had made significant incorrect assessments in policy and consequent actions that variously -- and negatively -- impacted large human groups -- THROUGH THE AGES. I have read enough history to attest to that assessment.
>> That ubiquitous 'lack of objectivity' was a result of human finitenesses when any group, or individual, turned to 'fact gathering' assesments in order to test theories or to gain perspectives on any complex situation. The failures of human FINITE minds and hearts to 'see TRUTHS easily'. The WORLD and any 'my' WORLD is a hard one to know and that includes churchmen and politicians most certainly. TRENDS through historical time -- as I see the trends -- show ever growing COMPLEXITY and INTERDEPENDENCE. Wright seemed not to recognize this important reality.
Persons of 'good will' and reasonable 'breadth' are always 'able' to miscalculate and make erroneous statements that may shape policies -- church-persons and politicians -- and then when the PRESS picks up, the 'errors' sometimes become seen as 'lies' and 'very, very, arguable because of the faulty 'interpretation lacks' in those institutions too. Any scientist knows how difficult (and perhaps it is impossible) it is to become reasonably objective. The PRESS (not ALL of it) frequently gets caught up in the very damaging 'mind-set' problem that comes from too much NON-professionalism, and too much commercialism.
The good pastor Wright was both a perpetrator and a victim of his own guessed at 'world view' of politicians. without sensing (perhaps) his own inadequacies. The same was (and is) likely true of Senator Obama too (but I think he tends to be properly LESS emotional than most 'politicians as he addresses deep issues)(See my last paragraph here.). OBJECTIVITY is made far more difficult these days by the ease with which alternative views can enter any debate. Rev Wright was a (universal?) perpetrator of discord by the passion in his presentation, but he was NOT basically wrong -- and wouldn't have SEEMED wrong -- if his passionate 'damning' had been more discreet (and focused on ERROR-MAKING and COMPLEXITY), because he had major points to make about the inadequacies of 'proper conduct by governments' relating to wrongly conceived wars, hunger, terrors ( by far too narrow a definition of 'what 'terrorism' is -- like NOT including loss of homes, jobs, means of survival, hunger -- now and in the past) AND, of course SLAVERY. Should Rev WRIGHT have used more moderate language? I suggest the answer here is "YES". He should honor the minds of persons and not encourage 'bias' by overstatement when he preaches. ALL of us are 'children of God'. And endowed by our creator to SOLVE PROBLEMS honorably.
The good Reverend was carried away by his own passionately (and disruptive to many, many persons) displayed words. His appearances 'on-stage' made him a victim of himself (as I saw the performances), and might have created great anxieties in many groups that he did not understand when he said what he did say in words and body language. In these aspects he was as non-objective using his mode of talk as he implied that Sen Obama was using his 'political talk' because he was a politician. Our WORLD needs balanced discourses that always seeks out the hidden WISDOMS in the TRUTHS we are seeking. It is hard to be OBJECTIVE and fair in discussions.
Progress in human relations depends on logical, and fact based information and compassionately understood when DIFFICULT and COMPLEX issues are discussed publicly. NARROW PERSPECTIVES that seem to be 'the whole truth' (absolutisms) are to be avoided. THE 'whole truth' in major situations may be impossible to KNOW, and existential COMPLEXITY will -- in all of our futures -- continue to dominate discourse precisely because COMMUNICATIONS are becoming aware of what Alfred North Whitehead had in mind when he inferred that 'massive complex interdependencies and connectivities' were at the (scientific) heart of the deepest UNDERSTANDINGS (and needs in theorizing) . A sort of rule: there is no simple RIGHT or WRONG in complex situations. The WEIGHT of evidence, presented through time, may or may not resolve fundamental pragmatic or theoretical issues. There may be no satisfactory answers to some seemingly important questions.
First I must note that my political inclinations are to be an INDEPENDENT. I look for the best THINKING and FEELING person.
As a 'policy problem' example, I am presently anxious to see how the 'GASOLINE TAX HOLIDAY' issue' works out in public discourse and in our multi-faceted PRESS (mags, newspapers, TV, radio, e-mail, internet, etc)in days and weeks ahead. . My present assessment is that the Sens Clinton and McCain suggestions are nearly absurd based on the facts and the likelihoods (as I see them). Yet here are two of our three presidential candidates thinking (or saying for 'political gain'?) that these are good ideas. Maybe I'll change my mind when I hear what Senators Clinton, McCain and Obama have to say!
BUT what do the POLICY suggestions say about the present candidates and future White House solutions for truly important and not frivolous) solutions to seemingly silly UNIMPORTANT ideas? What will the next Presidency do to bring PEACE and PROSPERITY and HAPPINESS to the WORLD and to our precious USA?
Dick
Before Obama was in the running for president....they were best friends for years
NOW....Obama says he never heard one of Wright's sermons??? in 20 yrs??????????
I would also be upset if one of my good friends started doing what Obama did!!!
Obama has analysed the gas tax proposal in boring detail. It's a gimmick, and has many negatives, as he rightly concludes. Big deal. None of the three candidates have distinguished themselves in discussing the real issues and all have made impossible promises. Obama's Philadelphia speech on race was an exception: but that is a subsidiary issue (as was JFK's Catholicism).
The Rev. Wright said, "I am a pastor, not a politician." The historical narrative of black Americans is as valid an account of American history as is the white account. They are different. The black church has played a chief role . Liberation, Transformation and Reconciliation are powerful ideas that are rooted in the black experience. The Rev. Wright's ministry has expressed them in word and deed.
His interview on PBS with Bill Moyers was sober as was his speech to the National Press Club. His personal anger and hurt were evident in the question period following the speech.* It was unfortunate . The Rev. Wright took attacks on him as attacks on his church.
I can't help feeling Obama hurt his pastor's pride some months ago by cancelling a public prayer and changing it to a private one. Perhaps he could have repaired that before the media made an issue of Obama's relationship with his pastor, which, after all, Obama had written of at length in his best-selling books, years before. The Audacity of Hope , the title of one, was a credited quote from Wright.
The Hebrew prophets were not shy about criticizing their people. The pastor's rhetoric is not unpatriotic or rascist if understood and heard in context. I heard Andrew Young , who served as our UN Amassador , remark recently he had used some of the same extreme statements that one hears at times from Wright when he needed to win the cooperation of outraged blacks at times in Atlanta and elsewhere in order to prevent violence. Jimmy Carter knows the sermons in black churches: he has heard them many times. He has said he has heard the same narrative that Wright preaches and is not offended by it.
_______________________
* Right after 9-11-2001 , the former US Ambassador to Iraq, Mr. Peck said "The chickens have come to roost " on Fox News The next day the Rev.Wright referred to Peck in his Sunday sermon. Many of the questions from the media were from people who hadn't read or heard his sermons, which have been available for years on CD and DVD.
Obama is a candidate. Of course he a "politician." Have you read his books? He defined his own views and his views on the Rev Wright's message in his speech in Philadelphia. Have you read the sermons of Wright?
When his book comes out this fall, more light will likely be shed on his motives. They may end up being entirely altruistic even though many feel he has done a disservice to the democratic process.
Clarke asks, "Have you read the sermons of Wright?" I think this is good advice for those who spend time passing judgment.
The notion Wright cares about " 15 minutes of fame" doesn't fit for me. He feels he's been misrepresented.
As you suggest, a knowledge of Wright's sermons and writings can offer insight into understanding Wright's message.
The preacher doesn't govern my behavior.... God does!
Indeed the 18 sermons in those books don't have the kind of provocative comments in them shown in some YouTube clips. There are passages where he talks, sometimes bluntly, about the black race's unique burden in America, and America's cruel treatment of black people over history. And in general, the passages like this don't dwell on the history for its own sake, or for the purpose of bringing his audience to a hatred of America. The ill-treatment is usually stated as a given that the parishioners will know and agree with already. From there, he tends to move on to optimistic messages, urging his listeners to put their faith in Jesus and stay on course.
Unfortunately they are. Most people won't take the time to check out the truth. They find a pundit that says what they think and agree with it.
Excellent article and an interesting take on the Wright/Obama situation. Most of the comments denigrating either Wright or Obama out of this are simply persons who either don't like any democrat or persons who have a preconceived bias against Obama and is using this method to attempt to sway others. It won't necessarily work because we've all seen too much of this type of tired rhetoric and attendant character assassination. Most voters are very tired of it. It is used against both Democrat and Republican candidates all the time by small minded people.