more on Wright

[novapsyche]

I find it interesting that so many people are apparently fine with calling the reverend a racist based on a few sound bites.

In contrast, when confronted with Mel Gibson spouting anti-Semitic crap or Michael Richards repeatedly saying clearly bigoted slurs, a great number of people want to give them the benefit of the doubt. ("Oh, so he said the N-word 13 times in a row. He was trying to be funny!")

Comments

[holyoutlaw.livejournal.com]

I saw another take on this subject (maybe linked to by supergee) that compared what McCain's pastor said about homosexuals, New Orleans, and Katrina (that Katrina was God's just punishment for homosexuals). No one's asking McCain to distance himself from his pastor.

[rmeidaking.livejournal.com]

"No one's asking McCain to distance himself from his pastor."

Actually, they are.

I personally think we should go check on what's said in the chosen congregation of all of our elected officials, but that's work. Most Christian, Jewish and Islamic sects view themselves as the One Chosen People - and everyone else Isn't. The level to which they segregate themselves varies from the Unitiarians (which mostly don't) to the Amish and certain Orthodox Jews, who don't speak to non-members. It's interesting that we have two Methodists (McCain and Clinton, same as GWB) and a United Church of Christ - all middle of the road sects - emerging from the melee.

[novapsyche.livejournal.com]

"No one's asking McCain to distance himself from his pastor."

Actually, they are.

But not to the same hyperbolic degree. This you must concede. Did the media needle McCain so acutely that he was forced to make a major speech wherein he denounced his pastor's views?

[rmeidaking.livejournal.com]

I haven't heard McCain make a major speech at all. He apparently can't put together more than about ten sentences on his own.

Part of the unspoken issue is the perception of the relationship between certain cultures and their espoused religion. Many, many white "Christians" go to church about four times a year and call it good. They probably can't tell you who their pastor *is*, let alone what he said on Sunday. McCain certainly seems to fall into that category. I kind of suspect McCain couldn't pick that minister out of a line-up.

The perception is that most black Christians *do* go to church on Sunday, and they *do* listen to what the guy says. For whatever reason, prominent black men tend to be ministers (Martin Luther King Jr, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, et. al.). So when a semi-prominent black minister, in fact the minister of Barack Obama's home church, comes out with this sort of diatribe, it matters more. Obama knows he has to confront the issue, and notably tell people that he disagrees, and he did.

Why: Because of that difference in perception between the spiritual connection of the various candidates.

It will go away when we get a good crop of prominent black men who aren't ministers, or who are loudly and pointedly secular. So far, we sadly get a Kwame Kilpatrick for every Barack Obama.

[pstscrpt.livejournal.com]

Better yet, we sadly get a Kwame Kilpatrick for every Dennis Archer.

[vrax.livejournal.com]

Because when most people say Racist they don't mean racist. They don't mean anything having to do with Race, as a concept, at all. They mean their own race. They mean he's a "THEM-sympathizer" he's "Anti-US".

That's why Obama actually inspires me. Something I never thought I'd feel about a politician. But it truly seems that for Obama, there is only US. And I love that. I love that about you too, ______. I put a blank there because I was about to call you by your real name when I realized that might be uncool, so I decided to leave it blank.

[novapsyche.livejournal.com]

You'd think a country going through a bout of nationalism (as was clearly obvious after 9/11) would be about unity. It is GWB's legacy that he has encouraged the dissolution of the social fabric.

[vrax.livejournal.com]

Yeah. *sigh* You'd think.

[rmeidaking.livejournal.com]

The thing is, people are seeming to say that the reverend is justified and has good reason for his beliefs. What's up with that? I don't think anyone has asserted that Mel Gibson is justified in his beliefs, just that Mel's an idiot.

The principle concern is that Obama could give this guy the same sort of respect and listening that other Presidents have given their spiritual advisors.

[novapsyche.livejournal.com]

Is it so farfetched (or racist) to say that the US is recouping the consequences of its misguided 20th-century foreign policy? I urge you to view the sermon for yourself.

[rmeidaking.livejournal.com]

The problem is, that just like many others before him, Rev. Wright wasn't careful about what he was saying line by line, and he didn't realize he was talking to a larger audience than the one in front of him, and wound up saying things that can be very damaging. He's in the process of learning just how bad that can be, because he did say, repeatedly, "God Damn America." Guess what: those are words you Just Can't Say. You can make a list of them (I won't), but that's right up near the top.

It causes a visceral reaction in white Conservatives, the sort that gets them cleaning their guns. Maybe that's what he was going for; I don't know.

He has caused his message to be lost in what is essentially hyperbole. He was trying to stir a reaction - and he succeeded beyond his wildest dreams. I don't think that's a good thing.

Bahhhhhhhhh, says the sheep.

[timiathan.livejournal.com]

I'm sorry, but this comment really gets on my nerves. Listen to what Wright actually says before you drink the pundit's kool-aid.

Which of his "beliefs" do you think need justification? That we've supported fascist dictators in the past to serve our own economic interests? That we dropped the bomb on innocent civilians in Hiroshima and Nagasaki? That we interred the Japanese during WWII? That we supported slavery and segregation for three quarters of our national existence?

Those aren't beliefs, those are facts. All he talks about in his sermons is peace and love and disillusionment. "God damn America...if she continues to kill innocent civilians" -- you don't agree with that? To compare Rev. Wright to an anti-semite is beyond absurd if you open your ears.

[atdt1991.livejournal.com]

Are they they same people? Seriously, I have no problem with saying that all three of them said racist remarks, and if you want to say that makes them racist on the whole, well, I have no evidence to the contrary.

Of the people I know who spoke at all about the matters, I don't know anyone who wanted to give either Mel Gibson or Michael Richards the benefit of the doubt. Most people figured that getting drunk let Mel say what was really on his mind, for isntance, and found his apology to be BS.

[novapsyche.livejournal.com]

I have yet to find anything that Wright said that was flatly racist. Do you mind pointing me in that direction? I admit I'm coming to this story late.

[atdt1991.livejournal.com]

I was going by Obama's characterization. Obama didn't, that I recall, flatly call him a racist, though, now that I think of it.

[bonerici.livejournal.com]

well it's all about the story. If someone comes up with a story line that says "Britney Spears a slut!" everyone yawns. If you come up with a story line that says "Mel Gibson racist!" it doesn't have legs.

On the other hand a story that says "Presidential Contendor Secretly a gigantic racist" that has legs. Because it seems so contrary to everything Obama preaches. Also this story has use for republicans because they really hate liberals, and anytime they see a weakness they will bash and bash at it.

Who gains out of bashing Michael Richards for saying the n-word? The problem is where does the story go? You have to search for larger meaning there, like do all white people secretly want to say the n word, there is a secret racism that every single white person on earth have (plenty of people believe this) or is this just a single person who has done a racist thing. The story is a difficult one because you have to attach additional semantic meaning for the story to run.

On the other hand if Barack Obama secretly wants to kill whitey, then there is a direct result, he'll lose the election. The story is compelling and immediate, you must take a stand for or against. The Mel Gibson thing, the Michael Richards thing, you can just shrug your shoulders and say "meh I don't give a shit what those assholes say."

You have to remember that the media today is not driven by facts (if it ever was). Everything is driven by stories. Like the parables in the bible, every reporter is searching for the parable of the loaves and fishes that will have a resonance and become part of our national mythology. That is what breaks big news.

If Obama shows the slightest weakness this story will play nonstop in the fall. If on the other hand, this story washes on him like waves on the rock of Gibraltar, the story will die. It has to hurt him, he has to be seen to feel pain about the story. And what is more, he has shown that pain . .


"In some ways, this controversy has actually shaken me up a little bit and gotten me back into remembering that the odds of me getting elected have always been lower than some of the other conventional candidates."


He has been hurt by this criticism and he has shown is feelings about it. That's bad for him.

By the way, McCain and his relationship with the right wing religious homophobe antisemitics isn't as big of a deal, because that story doesn't have the legs this story about Obama has.

Obama will probably be elected president this fall. But the story has definitely hurt him.