Obama's Chickens Come Home to Roost That’s what Obama gets for his support and defense of the Rev Wright. Obama stated in his speech“Wright is like an uncle you love and respect” As imperfect as he may be, he has been family to me for so many years, I can no more disown him than I can disown the black community” Obama is now declaring himself shocked and disappointed at Wright's unrepentantly racist and anti-American views? Obamas obviously support his feelings of anti-America and white hatred that the church endoreses to stay for 20 years also why would a parent continue to raise their young daughters in that atmosphere .Obama can no longer plausibly claim innocence in this matter, because he is the one who has encouraged Wright by trying to excuse and explain his views. All of this is why it is no use for Obama to backpedal from his association with Reverend Wright, or to denounce him now, six weeks too late. It was Obama who sought to provide the Reverend Wright with immunity from criticism--and he can't complain when the reverend tries to take full advantage of that immunity. This is the final collapse of the noble promise of the Obama campaign. The man who had once put himself forward as the candidate who would transcend racial politics once and for all has ended up legitimizing a Christian equivalent of Louis Farrakhan--and injecting him into the American political debate. Wright “Calls for Justice and Repair,” followed a statement in which he declared that “The Biblical principle of true repentance is that the offended party is given compensation to make up for that which has been stolen from them, the losses that have been inflicted upon them and their families.” A reparations plan for blacks could extract several trillion dollars from American taxpayers’ pockets. THERES ABSOLUTLY NO CHANGE WITH OBAMA

Obama was right when he said that Wright's speeches gave comfort to people who hate...I see you took a lot of comfort in them.

While I do feel bad for Obama, part of me wonders if we haven't all been played.

Remember the Wright quote from the NYT interview a year ago where he said Obama knew there would come a time when he would have to distance himself? They both knew this was coming.

In the end though, you're absolutely right, rozz. My daughter asked me last night how Wright had changed from before this weekend. I had to answer, he didn't.

That's true enough. Wright hasn't changed. His remarks now are no more inflammatory than they were a month ago when Barrack was trying to mitigate them by claiming they were taken out of context. It was pure hate and racism then, and it's hate and racism now. The only difference is we now have Obama's hypocrisy in trying to chuck Wright under the bus to stem the bleeding. It's a bit too late now.

It seems to me that Obama did the Christian thing, the right thing, the positive thing all along. He has responded to whatever current question was there by giving HIS OWN sense of the issue and his own thoughtful measured response to it. THAT is a very good way for a President to act. He neither attacked nor lied nor did he pretend that he had nothing to do with it. He took responsibility for HIS OWN part and outlined a way to move forward.

Continued attacks from supporters of HRC, from the GOP and the media are focusing on Wright, Wright, Wright. A private American citizen who is not running, and who is certainly free to say whatever he likes, and is getting a bit of a charge from his own celebrity.

The real issues in this insanity (if there are real issues) is that Obama has stated his belief in a Christian theology, and in God and Jesus Christ. He has even gotten to this belief through an amazingly odd route of Rev. Wright. However bigotted and hate-filled the Pastor becomes it doesn't change the fact that it is GOD whom Obama worships - not Wright.

And based on his actions, it seems to me that Obama is behaving in a far more Christian manner than his oppononent OR his pastor.

Obama's responses and his behavior seems to shocking the American public because we see far too little truly Christian behavior in our religious and political leaders.

Obama '08

That's a very fair and thoughtful post, artandsoul. Thank your for giving me a more positive light to view it in!

The only thing I would point out is that it was not HRC, GOP nor even the media who focused this latest attention. Obama handled it with much praise in Philadelphia, but the issue was brought back by Rev. Wright himself...for whatever reason god only knows.

I find most sermons to be tedious and pretentious. I am not a practicing Catholic, but have attended church over the years and heard a number of sermons that I found to be fairly annoying or even insulting. I don't expect that I'll be held responsible for any of them.

I forced myself to listen to Wright's sermon about "chickens coming home to roost" and discovered that he actually was quoting a US ambassador from an interview on Fox news.

Listen to the whole context...

<link>

I keep hearing people prattle about Wright's racism. A lot of what Wright has been quoted as saying over the past few weeks has been silly, and some of it has been outright whacko; but I haven't heard him say anything racist. Can anybody provide an example?

"Rich White People Own America" - Reverend Jeremiah Wright

Patently false. One does not own anything in America by virtue of one's skin colour. Feel free to stroll through any trailer park in America and this simple fact will become readily apparent.

"If God is not for us and against white people, then he is a murderer, and we had better kill him. [...] Black theology will accept only the love of God which participates in the destruction of the white enemy. " - James Cone

James Cone, the founder of Black Liberation Theology, describing the church's position (and god's position) regarding white people.

Include maybe a dozen examples of "differences" between blacks and whites that are simply false. There is no co-relation between dominant rhythm patterns and skin colour. Black children and white children do not think with different sides of their brains. He goes on to say...

"Now, what is true in the field of education, linguistics, ethnomusicology, marching bands, psychology and culture is also true in the field of homiletics, hermeneutics, biblical studies, black sacred music and black worship. We just do it different and some of our haters can't get their heads around that." - Jeremiah Wright

So, when Jeremiah Wright says that the world is divided into "two hemispheres" consisting of one white and one black, and that everything that's done wrong is represented by the white hemisphere, and everything that is good is represented by the black hemisphere; he's just being "different"?

This is classic racist rhetoric. Go to any neo-nazi web site. They say the same kind of stuff. They claim the world is embroiled in a "racial stalemate", and the races are just "different", and so should live in their own areas, with their own kind, and so on, and so on... The examples of racist statements from Wright are many.

Here's a choice one from the church's newsletter:

"Black Africans do not control the economic systems, the military or have control over the resources (the diamonds, the oil and the natural resources that were stolen by the whites who took over South Africa), and until that changes, white supremacy will still be in charge!" - Jeremiah Wright 2006

So, black Africans need to "control the economic system", the "military", and the "resources"? This doesn't sound like racial supremacy?

The problem with Wright, and other racist movements, is that they just can't get it into their heads that races do not have hive-minds. In Wright's world, when a white person somewhere, anywhere, anytime, does something wrong, all white people for all time are responsible for it. However, he doesn't assume the reverse. Reverend Wright does not thank white people for running the underground railroad into Canada, for inventing multiculturism (which he probably hates anyway), founding the international movement to end slavery,
inventing scientific method (which he probably also hates), fighting for civil rights, drafting international structures to enforce human rights, and a long long list of pretty good things. Simultaneously, he absolves the "black community" from any wrong doing ever (he really doesn't like to observe that most blacks were sold into slavery BY blacks in places where slavery is still pretty common today), and grants people of black skin a special "civilization" who's accomplishments rival any other... because we apparently draw the borders between civilizations along lines of skin colour.

This is all very delusional, rooted deeply in the logic of collective punishment, racial primacy, and ignorance.

Typical religious garbage.

Here's a choice one from the church's newsletter:

"Black Africans do not control the economic systems, the military or have control over the resources (the diamonds, the oil and the natural resources that were stolen by the whites who took over South Africa), and until that changes, white supremacy will still be in charge!" - Jeremiah Wright 2006

So, black Africans need to "control the economic system", the "military", and the "resources"? This doesn't sound like racial supremacy?

Point of information - he is discussing the Continent of Africa and the various countries there where the Black majority is not in positions of power or control over natural resources and self-government. I don't think there is any argument about that contention - I believe the imperialistic conquest of Africa by European governments and ruled by white men for generations is historically correct.

You see, on the continent of Africa, all people who live there refer to themselves as "African." Isn't that funny? We all know that Africans are black. Right? I mean, "African-American" means a black person, right?

The ideas we here in America hold about the rest of the world are full of these kinds of "short cuts" and it leads to many misunderstandings whenever people here in America try to talk about the rest of the world.

Look - I'm not defending Wright or Black Liberation Theology. Nor do I subscribe to White Supremist Theology either. In fact, I spend VERY little time declaring "this is what God believes" -- mostly because I have so little knowledge of what God thinks!

I do doubt that He hates fags as one white Baptist church believes so strongly that THAT is their website name! /insert eyeroll

I'm just saying that Rev. Wright does not corner the market on oddball religious sentiment.

And we, the American people, who live in a country based on FREEDOMS (including the freedom of religion) do not have to be afraid of someone organizing their relgious worhsip in any particular way.

Flitt:

That's a very fair and thoughtful post, artandsoul. Thank your for giving me a more positive light to view it in!

The only thing I would point out is that it was not HRC, GOP nor even the media who focused this latest attention. Obama handled it with much praise in Philadelphia, but the issue was brought back by Rev. Wright himself...for whatever reason god only knows.

Thanks Flitt.

I was only drawing my conclusion about the National Press deal that Barbara Reynolds organized for Rev. Wright. That is where the HRC connection came in because the Rev. Ms. Reynolds (she is a preacher too) is an avid and vocal HRC supporter.

I guess even the Rev. Wright cannot resist the lure of celebrity. I just hope he doesn't start hanging out with Paris Hilton and that ilk! Then we'll never get him to go home!

middleview:

I find most sermons to be tedious and pretentious. I am not a practicing Catholic, but have attended church over the years and heard a number of sermons that I found to be fairly annoying or even insulting. I don't expect that I'll be held responsible for any of them.

I forced myself to listen to Wright's sermon about "chickens coming home to roost" and discovered that he actually was quoting a US ambassador from an interview on Fox news.

Listen to the whole context...

<link>

Good of you to post the whole thing! So much taking out of context and manipulating sound bytes just dissolves in relationship between the media-issue and the thing itself.

I wonder if one of the good things that will come out of all this is that many American will have trained ourselves to expand our attentions spans from 20 seconds to a full 10 minutes!

Just think of what we, as a nation, could do if we could focus on something for an hour. Study something in its fullness. Without fear or judgment. Without holidng tightly onto our own, pre-conceived notion.

Just imagine.

What would the Gettysburg address be like if cut for a 30 second spot?

Think about the fact that so many people were convinced, based on the "voted for it before I voted against it" that Kerry couldn't make up his mind. The really scary thing is that they didn't stop for a minute to think about how a bill gets voted on more than once.....

"Point of information - he is discussing the Continent of Africa and the various countries there where the Black majority is not in positions of power or control over natural resources and self-government." - artandsoul

Sorry if the quote wasn't clear. He isn't talking about Africa. The context of the quote is that he is comparing America and Africa. America, says Wright, like Africa, is a place ruled under apartheid, specifically "white supremacists".

"I don't think there is any argument about that contention - I believe the imperialistic conquest of Africa by European governments and ruled by white men for generations is historically correct." - artandsoul

Wright isn't talking about the past. He's talking about today. But even if he was just talking about Africa, he's still historically inaccurate. Africa has been ruled by lots of people - many of whom were tyrants to one degree or another (Mugabe comes to mind). White rule in Africa is actually a fairly short portion of the continent's history, primarily differing from other periods of foreign rule by the strange habit European rulers have of granting independence to conquered peoples.

A far more "historically accurate" description of Africa's relationship with foreign powers is best described, not through a racial lens, but through a religious one. Africa, for the last 1500 years, can best be described as a battlefield between Islam and Christianity. This reality is evidenced daily in African headlines.

Curiously, so-called "white-racism" seems hardly out of place in Africa. Where white people don't live, or have left, other brands of racism are quick to assert themselves, often in ways far more virulent than Europeans ever dared.

What's most important though was that the skin colour of Europeans played absolutely no part in the role or nature of imperialism - European or otherwise. Often, race and it's arbitrary equivalents are seized upon by imperialists, but no people of any specific skin colour have been magically immune from these strategies. Black, white, red, and yellow, have all been slavers and conquerers at some point. Drawing special attention to the skin colour of Europeans is as historically correct as drawing special attention to the colour of their shoes.

"I'm just saying that Rev. Wright does not corner the market on oddball religious sentiment." - artandsoul

Someone said he did? The problem is that it's suddenly become acceptable. The next time Pat Robertson announces that homosexuals are subhuman, will I see artandsoul saying "come on, a lot of preachers are a little oddball". Will vast swaths of Democrats rushing to defend him because, it's not that there's anything wrong with what he's saying, he's just "different".

If you can't stand up and say that Jeremiah Right is a deluded racist, really, who can you say it about?

What we're witnessing is the end of racism. Not that there wont be racism, just that it wont be considered "bad" anymore.

"I do doubt that He hates fags as one white Baptist church believes [...]" - artandsoul

I'm sure the list of things Jeremiah Wright doesn't hate is quite long. The length of that list offers no defense for the hate he does preach.

Jams -

You quoted me and said:

"I do doubt that He hates fags as one white Baptist church believes [...]" - artandsoul

I'm sure the list of things Jeremiah Wright doesn't hate is quite long. The length of that list offers no defense for the hate he does preach.

Within the context of my post you'll find that the "He" in the above sentence was referring to God, not to Rev. Wright. The Baptist church I was referring to has, as their website www. godhatesfags . org and what I was saying is that I doubt He (GOD) hates fags.

You know, you don't have to convince me that Rev. Wright is wrong about a lot of his facts, about most of his theories and many of his decisions. I'll grant you that all day long.

What I'm saying is that we don't have to be afraid of his erroneous beliefs, and we certainly don't have to villify him for saying them. It's neither Christian nor democratic.