Barack Obama’s campaign seemed to have hit a pothole when it was revealed that his pastor, the Reverend Jeremiah Wright, had delivered some fire and brimstone sermon on race relations in the US. Wright had suggested that the US had brought the 911 attacks on itself and that in regards to race relations, instead of god bless America, it should be god damn America.
That is some pretty heady sermonizing. I mean, you’d never hear a good ole boy saying that the US brought the 911 attacks on itself. Would you?
Of course, Obama was asked to denounce the sentiments of Reverend Wright. Which he did Tuesday in a speech in Philadelphia (transcript).
I have already condemned, in unequivocal terms, the statements of Reverend Wright that have caused such controversy. For some, nagging questions remain. Did I know him to be an occasionally fierce critic of American domestic and foreign policy? Of course. Did I ever hear him make remarks that could be considered controversial while I sat in church? Yes. Did I strongly disagree with many of his political views? Absolutely - just as I’m sure many of you have heard remarks from your pastors, priests, or rabbis with which you strongly disagreed.
Then something strange happened as Obama continued his speech. He willingly gave way to the forces of nuance and sensitivity. Not only did he frame the Reverend Wright’s comments in the context of lingering black anger over racism, he also outlined the anger and resentment felt by whites in American society. It was, to paraphrase Jon Stewart on tonight’s The Daily Show, as if Obama had decided to talk about race as if his audience were adults.
We know await McCain’s denouncement of John Hagee in the same, eloquent, unequivocal terms.
I think Obama has just demonstrated perfectly how you can flip a bad news cycle to your advantage. He’s been hammered by the press since he failed to win Ohio and I think this speech has turned the tide.
Shaun and All:
What fire-and-brimstone racism? This preacher’s talk was mild compared with some of the conversations I was in with a whole tentful of Black soldiers way back in the Viet-Nam War. They were angry - and they had good cause to be. [Luckily, being a foreign soldier, most of their anger was not directed at me personally].
As Obama said, such things are said but usually in private or in a barber-shop. It’s not the done thing to have them splashed all over the TV though.
Yes, Obama handled it all pretty well.
Wright is a sleazy turd. Obama sat in that church for 20 years, donated money and otherwise supported him and it is to his eternal shame. “could be considered controversial”? The fuck you say!
Saying McCain’s just as guilty (and I don’t think he is) doesn’t wash that away. While his speech is playing well in the leftysphere choir, much like Ricky Pym’s, it won’t convince many others. I don’t think the country’s ready to elect the Inverse George Wallace.
Ooooohhh Craig Mc. Did you ever sit in that church? And what was it that he exactly said wrong to make him a “Sleazy turd.”?
Given US history, it seemed a quite reasonable comment to me.
Maybe you should just return to the eternal racist cul-de-sac of A Weasel Heart. You know, along with your pathetic fellow nutcases…
CK: So if you’re an Obama supporter you’re misogynist, but if you’re a Clinton supporter you’re a racist. Good to see you have the mindless victimology thing all sewn up there.
controversial much? Just another Sunday outing.
Ohio - following that round the delegate fallout was such that another victory like that and Hills done for. ( Shes already done for but lets all humor the lunatics)
Also this famous Clinton ‘victory’ was won with a bums rush of freeping radio goopers. This Wright business imho was not an electoral road hump but a corporate media created road hump…and the man just flattened it. The only thing that can stop him now is rule 303.
Shaun and Everyone:
Let’s see if I’ve got this right. American politics is all about whose trousers fell down behind closed doors and about whose supporters come out with the most outrageous statements, right?
Well, I think we do mind it when its a white guy too. Falwell got slammed from all sides for that, and continues to be so.
But even after his remarks, Falwell was still feted by Bush et al. This article from Huffington today that reveals that presidents do seem to be fond of crazy white preachers.
The issue is why isn’t the press going after McCain and Hagee with the same gusto as they have gone after Obama and Wright? Hagee has made anti-catholic and anti-semitic remarks as well as stated that 911 was the fault of the US. Why is this overlooked?
I have no time for Falwell and Robertson who are a waste of space, but their venom was directed at the usual sinners-gays, abortionists, people who use contraceptives, Jews, anyone who disagrees with Falwell and Robertson, blah, blah, blah! They claim that God punished America and will continue to do so for disobeying his laws, not because of its foreign policies or being racial bigots.
I’m sure they are racial bigots, who most likely welcome Klan members into their fold and that even if they don’t vocalise it, they’re sure that having black skin is the MARK OF CAIN forgetting, like most of their ilk, that the bible never specifies what the mark is!
The delightful Reverend Wright however, claimed that it’s America’s foreign policies and the treatment of blacks that did it. While I don’t disagree with that opinion, because of his position in the Obama camp he should have shut his yap!
Our friend the good Rev also doesn’t let the gays, Jews and assorted other RWDB fundie whipping boys off the hook, either and gave them a comprehensive spray.
Quite frankly, IMHO, he’s no different from Falwell, Robertson and the other fundie nutcases who whip themselves up a very lucrative ministry based on a twisted version of old testament fire and brimstone s@#t and feeding it to the gullible! Close your eyes and it could be any one of those loonies whipping up the amen crowd!
IMO, I don’t think Obama is any better than he should be. There’s just something about him I can’t take to and he confirmed it with the beat-up re Bill Clinton’s alleged racist comments, which it turned out were nothing of the sort, but Obama couldn’t help sinking the slipper, no doubt holding his spiritual advisor’s hand as he did so.
Obama’s speech was brilliant and confirms for me why I would like to see him win the nomination.
I think Brown, Rudd and Obama are all good signs for wider shifts in Anglosphere political culture. There really is something basically more sophisticated, nuanced about their approaches to both policy, and politics. ‘Adult’ is a good word - the manichean nonsense of the last ten years has been extremely puerile.
Howard was among the worst - his lines against action on climate change were the sort of self-centred “Why should I hafta clean up my own mess” screeds that would almost embarrass my 4 year old.
The problem for the Obama campaign is that he can’t spin it effectively. His speech about the issue was reasoned, measured and erudite. He is a tremendous public speaker, and he was right about this issue.
And it doesn’t matter.
All most Americans are going to hear is this black preacher, wearing what would not be described as “traditional Christian preacher clothing”, saying “God Damn America”. And it spins itself.
Most Americans are very proud of being Americans, and to hear anyone saying those three words in almost any context isn’t going to wash. They are going to hear how this man preached to Obama for 20 years, married him and baptised his children. And it will be difficult for most Americans to divorce the two.
The longer this election goes on, the more we are hurtling towards President John McCain.
And isn’t that just scary..
‘The longer this election goes on, the more we are hurtling towards President John McCain.’
The fact that this preacher’s contraversial speech is a major talking point in politics in USA at the moment says something about politics over there. Obama strongly criticised those contraversial statements. He didn’t make them. End of story.
The fact that John McCain could be the next President of the USA says even more about politics over there. War, war and more war anyone? Massive loss of life, conflict, suffering, achieving more conflict and more of the same. To say that McCain’s foreign policy is totally sh@t would be a massive understatement.
Alaistair, it goes to the nature of religion in American politics - it’s not just the pastor or the priest at the church you happen to attend - American pols have leached onto particular clergymen as sort of spiritual doubles - eg Reagan with Billy Graham. Even Clinton very pointedly got Jesse Jackson in to give him “counselling” after Monica. It’s really a different culture.
It resonates particularly because Obama went to so much trouble to talk up his links with this church - partly because initially he wasn’t seen as properly embedded in African-American culture because of his origins, and then because he wanted to put to bed the “Hussein middle name = Muslim” slur (which is huge).
It was a great speech, but the Obama campaign should have seen this time bomb ticking.
Just a quick note - there is a growing movement in the states that is challenging traditional assumptions that american evangelical = republican.
The influence of this demographic on Obama’s candidature is quite interesting, as is the way the older democrat support base is reacting to the new Democrat identifying evangelicals.
Its a fascinating trend that can be subtley seen here too to some extent, though not as markedly, with the ‘advent’ of xian kevin.
I heard some speculation on Radio National last night (from some electoral “profiler” guy) that Family First was essentially a dead party walking because xian kevin had hoovered up all their support base in the last election.
There was some discussion about that on the religion report on Radio National last night, sc.
Oh i’ll have to have a listen.
Btw Kim, Tony Campolo was Clintons spiritual advisor.
(Met Campolo a long time ago in Brisbane - have a funny anecdote, but thats for another time).
Campolo is closely aligned with Jim Wallis as one of the high profile “red Letter Christians’.
Jim Wallis (founder of sojourners’)is a long term friend of Obama.
Thanks for that, sc.
Hey kim i think we’re both right. Did a quick search and it appears Clintons spiritual advisors included TOny Campolo, Jesse Jackson, Billy Graham and Bill Hybels at differing times.
Wiki link about red letter xians btw
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Red-Letter_Christianfor those who havent heard the term before...
I heard some speculation on Radio National last night (from some electoral “profiler” guy) that Family First was essentially a dead party walking because xian kevin had hoovered up all their support base in the last election.
Hmmm, I remember a certain party led by one Pauline Hanson whose support base was hoovered up very cleverly by one John Howard.
Rudd = Religion, Howard = anti-immigration
Parallels, anyone?
Not quite. Without having anything to go on but anecdote and converations amongst the people i know across the spectrum, Howard continued to have a large traditional xian vote from conservatives and older xians.
Rudd picked up his vote from progressive xians ie tim costello’s ilk, the younger hillsongers , and the ‘emerging church’ demographics that have a growing (renewed) sense of the centrality of social justice to xian faith.
I know a heap of xian green voters btw.
Yep, I thought Clinton might have been cosying up to Billy Graham too, sc, but I also thought my memory might have been playing tricks.
Sorry, but Obama’s speech was ridiculous, as is the situation he’s put himself into (and btw, it’s not at all a recent or acute issue, it’s chronic, a plenty long time a-brewin’, which is basically why it’s of significance). The only things funnier than Obama’s new stature are Wright’s hilarious pronouncements and mannerisms (someone get this guy a gig in Vegas, he’s a scream), and the odious contortions of the MSM Left as they try to excuse or ignore this nonsense. Oscar Wilde comes close here, with his remark about the unspeakable in pursuit of the uneatable. Too bad guys, but it turns out your messiah’s not even a villain, he’s just a twit.
As to this being a nuanced or “adult” discussion of race or of anything else, it is to laugh. To be fair to Obama though, it’s pretty hard to have that sort of intelligent discussion about such a slippery, weird topic in the context of a defensive one-way speech in such peculiar circumstances as an overheated presidential bid.
Obama could probably write a series of quite interesting books on the whole topic, and maybe that’s what he should do. Or perhaps he should continue on in the Senate, where he will doubtless make valuable contributions and be an interesting and considerable voice advocating an arguable if somewhat marginal position. Maybe he could take a Cabinet post, to help him mature into a political presence of more genuine substance. One thing he’s made abundantly clear he really shouldn’t be doing, though, is trying to be the president of his country. (Who knows, maybe he’ll still even win, but after all this I’ll certainly never take him seriously, no matter what.)
If, as I believe, the three remaining candidates are essentially the Three Stooges, then this whole blowup has caused Obama to be demoted from Moe to Larry. Hillary is now promoted to Moe, and McCain stays steady with Curly status. Maybe Ron Paul can be Shemp, or perhaps Huckabee is. Either way, who really cares about Shemp. George Bush, of course, is so contemptible he’s not even allowed to be in this metaphor; he’ll have to be Mister Ed or something.
I’ve seen a bit of interesting Sci-Fi-ish sort of speculation that this idiocy might actually clear the way for a viable Gore candidacy; the thinking being, Moe-Bama and Hillary will be deadlocked at the convention, Barack with a slight edge in delegates but a poison pill among swing voters, and Hillary without enough street cred to edge him out. In which case Gore comes riding to the rescue, promising the two of them juicy positions as incentive to step aside, while he takes over as, quite literally, the Man Who Needs No Introduction. And given the poor quality of what’s on offer, I think both parties would happily embrace him. I’m not a huge Gore fan, but he’s got some cred and at least he’s kind of a pro, and pretty much anything would be better than the circus clowns we’re watching now.
Please, Al, fix this mess so we can all just go home. As I’ve argued before, what the US needs most is a President Bore; and Gore sounds close enough for me.
I think that Wright would make a better president than any of the current offerings.
From Obama’s speech:
But the problem is that he has been running hard for president for about two years and he has never addressed this issue before. If Rev Wright hadn’t lurched into the public limelight, would Obama be talking about this now?
Yet can it be denied that this question has loomed over the election since the first day Obama emerged as a serious candidate? If it hadn’t ben Rev Wright, it would have been something else.
There is no denying that much anger and resentment seethes through Afro-American society. Many folks, mostly white, would like to believe that if no one talks about it, then it’ll just fade away. Well, lots of folks have been waiting a long time for that to happen. And it hasn’t happened yet. Will many Black leaders come out and repudiate Rev Wright outright? I don’t think that will happen. Maybe Obama also believed that he could skate through the election with his aspirational nostrums, thus avoid this big issue. If he did, he has been proven terribly wrong.
Obama is absolutely right. but it’s too late for him. He will never get an opportunity to perfect the American Union, because for a Black man to mention this imperfection is an act of political suicide.
Obama can’t walk away now. This is now the biggest thing in his public life. And it must be confronted for its own sake. Health and education are second order of magnitude issues besides this one.
Obama is twisting, twisting, twisting. But there’s no wriggling off this hook for him.
My problem with Obama, and this speech encapsulates it, is they he doesn’t seem to want to do anything much. His policies are somewhat to the right of Clinton’s,his Iraq line is (1) untruthful (2) designed only to appeal to a certain wig of the Democrats. There are a number of progressive blogs that I no longer read because of the groupthink they’ve adopted abut Obama over Iraq, especially when many of them, Matthew Iglesias and TPM’s Josh Marshal spring to mind, eagerly supported the war at the time Hillary was taking a more critical position.
I say Obama’s line is untruthful because in his own speeches he ducked and weaved on Iraq just as much as Hillary, and speeches in which he id this are prone to mysteriously disappear from his website. Example
Obama’s principled and unwavering opposition to the Iraq war is, like many of his positions, a matter of recent invention for political advantage. You can say that’s characters of all candidates. But not all candidates advance the audacity of hype as their main qualification for office.
My real problem with Obama is that Washington needs housecleaning. That’s not going to come from a Liebermann protégé who claims the poisonous atmosphere in Washington is a result of partisanship rather than the worst and most dishonest administration in recent history. Obama’s real pitch is that nothing much has to change, the US can somehow resume its previous position of leadership in the world, and US progressives can feel all warm and gooey inside..
Will many Black leaders come out and repudiate Rev Wright outright? I don’t think that will happen.
Ah - American Politics. Where EVERY fucking day is Condemn-athon day, and there’s more ritual denunciations demanded than a Stalinist Show Trial. It seems that Obama has diverged from the script.
Helen [23]:
Yes indeed. And weren’t Hanson and her followers well-and-truly screwed by Howard’s mob then further humiliated by the 457 visas and other back-door immigration schemes. Hope the government doesn’t reopen the detention centres to handle any pious priests, ministers, pastors, rabbis, imams, monks, nuns and preachers who don’t toe the line.
Everyone:
That episode of the largely-unknown The Religion Report will probably attain the cult status of the Four Corners “Moonlight State”
You have really missed the point j_p_z. Plenty of white preachers have made just as damning statements, suffer for a day or two and then continue on their merry way cozying with the guvmint.
Katherine at Obsidian Wings writes about the double standards at play:
Shaun — It’s not that I have “missed the point.” It’s that I simply don’t consider that particular point to be valid, or even a real “point” in any usable sense. Your attempt at comparison or equivalence in this matter is more or less without merit in my estimation. The quote from Obsidian Wings is neither interesting nor is it persuasive about anything substantive.
Im with JPZ. Bring in Gore!
A few questions from one with little detailed knowledge of US process:
a. Can this even happen at this late stage?
b. Is Obama genuinely toast now he’s discussing the r-word in public? Or is it more the association with Preacher X?
c. My sense is Hilary will straight up lose to McCain. Is this wrong? Or is she realistically the best bet now?
Bill Richardson has just endorsed Obama as a result of the speech. For those that haven’t been following this is huge news. Clinton has been publicly courting Richarson’s support and he has frequently been touted as a potential VP candidate for her.
I was arguing with someone yesterday that this wasn’t a speech for the masses but rather a speech aimed at winning over the super-delegates and the party faithful. I think he’s done a good job of that.
Can’t remember where I saw it, mick, but there was something pretty convincing on the net that said that endorsements were pretty meaningless - they made sense in the old days when pols could actually deliver real blocks of votes - ie Dick Daley and the Chicago machine, but now they’re just symbolic. I suppose it adds to Obama’s “momentum” but what does that mean? The only relevant audience for any of this stuff now surely are the Democratic bigwigs. How influential is Richardson there?
I’m with Lefty E - Go with Gore in 08!
No doubt, but it’ll be the masses who have to vote for him if he gets the nomination. I’m really a bit depressed about the spectre of massive Swiftboating in the general election. The Republicans won’t give any quarter in trying to win, and the Democratic nomination process has given them a lot of ammunition.
I suspect though, Mark, that a lot of Republicans won’t be too happy if their nominee gets up either. He’s a bit of a wild card for them and if Hillary gets the Democratic nomination I wouldn’t be surprised if, in all sincerity, he seeks to nominate Obama as his Vice Presidential partner.
GregM [38]:
Good idea. Back in a previous election, someone floated the idea of John McCain being in a Democrats government. One of the rare strengths of the American system is that such a thing is possible. Unfortunately, one of the serious weaknesses of their party system is that the obvious Clinton-Obama or Obama-Clinton ticket is only a dream - nor will we see the dynamic talented Edwards ever become Secretary for anything.
I liked Obama’s speech. But forget Wright! I don’t think he distanced himself enough from his Grandmother.
Until he takes a hard line on granny, I can’t be too sure he is not a racist himself.