What Did Obama Know about Wright and When Did He Know It?
Many observers saw Hillary Clinton’s 9-point defeat of Barack Obama in Tuesday’s Democratic presidential primary in Pennsylvania as evidence that the Illinois Senator has, among other things, not satisfactorily answered questions that have been raised about his 20-year relationship with the Reverend Jeremiah A. Wright and his Trinity United Church of Christ (TUCC).
The latest evidence that Obama and his campaign still consider the candidate’s 20-year pastor and “sounding board” a problem with voters is Wright’s appearance this coming Monday at the National Press Club. Lynn Sweet of the Chicago Sun-Times described this event as a “press offensive.” Another part of that offensive is a previously announced Wright interview with PBS’s Bill Moyers that will be broadcast on Friday evening.
Wright has been the pastor at TUCC on Chicago’s South Side since 1972. The pastor and his church became a nationally visible campaign issue on March 13, when ABC News aired “Obama’s Pastor: God Damn America, U.S. to Blame for 9/11.”
Here is the essence of what ABC reported:
Rev. Wright married Obama and his wife Michelle, baptized their two daughters and is credited by Obama for the title of his book, “The Audacity of Hope.”
An ABC News review of dozens of Rev. Wright’s sermons, offered for sale by the church, found repeated denunciations of the U.S. based on what he described as his reading of the Gospels and the treatment of black Americans.
“The government gives them (African-Americans) the drugs, builds bigger prisons, passes a three-strike law and then wants us to sing ‘God Bless America.’ No, no, no, God damn America, that’s in the Bible for killing innocent people,” he said in a 2003 sermon. “God damn America for treating our citizens as less than human. God damn America for as long as she acts like she is God and she is supreme.”
“We bombed Hiroshima, we bombed Nagasaki, and we nuked far more than the thousands in New York and the Pentagon, and we never batted an eye,” Rev. Wright said in a sermon on Sept. 16, 2001.
“We have supported state terrorism against the Palestinians and black South Africans, and now we are indignant because the stuff we have done overseas is now brought right back to our own front yards. America’s chickens are coming home to roost,” he told his congregation.
Some other sermon content (here and here) includes Wright calling the United States “The US KKK of A,” and claiming that the AIDS virus was developed by the government “as a means of genocide against people of color.”
Wright’s Current TUCC Status Vague
Descriptions of Wright’s current status at TUCC have varied.
In that March 13 ABC story, Brian Ross and Rehab El-Buri reported that Wright “announced his retirement last month.” But over a year earlier, a January 21, 2007 story in the Chicago Tribune indicated that Wright had just announced “plans to retire in May 2008.”
On March 14, Obama, in an entry at the Huffington Post (“On My Faith and My Church”), wrote that Wright “recently preached his last sermon and is in the process of retiring.” That same day, he told Major Garrett of Fox News that Wright was “on the brink of retirement,” had “preached his last sermon,” and had “taken a sabbatical.”
But on March 18, in his “More Perfect Union” speech, Obama described Wright as “my former pastor.” On March 21, in an e-mail reported as received by JTA Jewish and Israeli News, Obama said that Wright “retired this year.”
According to the press release announcing Wright’s Monday National Press Club speech, Wright “will retire from Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago in June.”
As of last Wednesday evening, TUCC’s web site gave no indication as to whether or when the Rev. Wright will retire at its “Pastor” or “Pastoral Staff” links.
Of course, inconsistencies in the details surrounding the minister’s retirement are not the most important Wright-related matters weighing on the Obama campaign, whose candidate has now lost three big-state primaries in a row (Texas, Ohio, and Pennsylvania).
The campaign’s biggest concerns are over the controversial content of the pastor’s sermons, similar and additional content in TUCC’s weekly church bulletins, and the degree to which Obama knew about, or should have known about, what he now says he “vehemently condemn(s).”
The concerns remain relevant because Obama has stated that he and his family will continue to attend TUCC. This is the case, even though the church’s new pastor, Otis Moss III, has given no public indication that he intends to vary significantly from the Black Liberation Theology (described here by Margaret Tavel of McClatchy Newspapers) that forms much of the foundation of TUCC’s belief system, including its “Black Values System.” That theology appears to have been an important influence that informed Wright’s more controversial statements.
The Sermons
The ABC story reports that in early March, Obama stated that “I don’t think my church is actually particularly controversial,” and that Rev. Wright is “like an old uncle who says things I don’t always agree with.”
After the ABC story broke, Obama insisted that he was not aware of the content of any of the problematic sermons, stating in his Huffington Post entry that:
The statements that Rev. Wright made that are the cause of this controversy were not statements I personally heard him preach while I sat in the pews of Trinity or heard him utter in private conversation.
He further told Fox’s Garrett that if he had heard Wright’s controversial statements in person, “I would have quit.”
It appears that no one has been able to determine or to find someone who will disclose whether or not Obama was present or absent on the Sundays when Wright made his most controversial remarks. Though he answered “Yes” to Garrett in response to a question about whether he donated frequently when he attended, no one has come forward to show that Obama did or did not make donations on any of the controversial Sundays in question.
As to Obama’s knowledge of Wright’s most contentious beliefs, it is not known whether the Illinois senator has ever purchased, or has been given, any of the Wright sermon videotapes that TUCC offered for sale. These videos are where ABC and later others found the controversial content from Wright’s sermons.
Finally, there is the question of whether Obama might have become aware of any of Wright’s controversial statements or beliefs by any other available means. An April 30, 2007 article in the New York Times (“A Candidate, His Minister and the Search for Faith”) noted that:
When Mr. Obama arrived at Harvard Law School later that year (1988), where he fortified himself with recordings of Mr. Wright’s sermons, he was delivering stirring speeches as a student leader in the classic oratorical style of the black church.
It appears that no one has asked the candidate or otherwise looked into whether those sermon recordings contained any of the content leading to the current controversy.
The Bulletins
It may be that the weekly church bulletins TUCC distributes to attendees before services begin will prove more difficult for Obama to convincingly disavow.
I have obtained roughly 100 church bulletins, in PDF format, that were, and perhaps still are, available at TUCC’s web site. These bulletins represent roughly 60% of those that I expect were published between December 2004 and March 2008.
While bulletins at many churches are 2-4 page publications that provide only basic information about service schedules, group activities, prayer intentions, and the like, TUCC’s bulletins are typically 30-plus page productions.
Almost every week at TUCC, at least two of those pages are devoted to “Pastor’s Pages,” where Wright and his pastoral assistants hold forth on various topics. What has been revealed thus far about the content of these “Pastor’s Pages” has been seen by many of those familiar with it as being at least as controversial as what is in the more widely-known sermons.
Among the most controversial bulletin items disclosed thus far are these:
- Two pages in the July 22, 2007 bulletin (pictured here) were given over to reprinting an op-ed column that originally appeared in the Los Angeles Times by Hamas political director Mousa Abu Marzook. The US government considers Marzook a terrorist. (Reported at BizzyBlog on March 17)
- In an introduction to an article on “Progressive Muslims” by an Omid Safi, Wright wrote this:
Wright’s quotation marks around “War on Terror” and the “state of Israel” have given rise to objections that Wright doesn’t take the war on terror seriously, and that he does not support Israel’s right to exist. (Reported at BizzyBlog on March 17)
- TUCC’s June 10, 2007 bulletin gave space to Ali Baghdadi, a self-described “Arab-American activist, writer, (and) columnist.” Baghdadi made the following claim (his full article is at graphics here and here) (Reported by Sweetness & Light on March 24)
- On April 12, Wright delivered a eulogy at TUCC for a local judge. The eulogy included an assertion, found in an audio file at the Chicago Sun-Times and reported by Fox News, that Thomas Jefferson “had babies by a 15 year-old slave girl. (I) think the judges call that pedophilia.” Wright also made that claim in the November 6, 2005 TUCC bulletin (relevant pages pictured here). In that same bulletin, he also called Jefferson a rapist, and claimed that George Washington fathered a slave’s child. (Reported at BizzyBlog on April 15)
Thus far, Barack Obama and his campaign have only specifically condemned the inclusion of the Palestinian terrorist’s op-ed. I am not aware of any condemnation of the other three items noted above.
It would appear that if Obama wishes to put the Wright controversy behind him, he needs to convince the voting public that, as he claims is the case with Wright’s sermons, he was not aware of any church bulletin content that would, if he had known about it, have caused him to leave TUCC.
A March 19, 2007 article in the New Republic by Ryan Lizza would seem to cast doubt on such a claim.
I called TUCC late last week, and asked to speak to a person involved with the weekly bulletin. That person I spoke to after being transferred confirmed that the bulletins are indeed given to each attendee before services begin. (In the process, I also learned that TUCC has stopped posting new bulletins to its web site indefinitely.)
Each bulletin I have seen contains a half- to full-page section called “Sermon Notes” – that is nothing but blank lines. These “Sermon Notes” are usually just before or just after the “Pastor’s Pages” discussed earlier.
Lizza’s New Republic piece shows that, at least on one Sunday, Barack Obama was taking notes during a Wright sermon:
On this particular Sunday, the sea of black worshippers is dotted with a few white folks up in the balcony, clutching copies of The Audacity of Hope they’ve brought for Obama’s book-signing later. Obama, sitting in the third row with his wife and two daughters, Malia and Natasha, stands, claps, prays, and sways along with the rest of the congregation. During the sermon, he watches the preacher carefully and writes notes.
But where was Obama recording his notes? If it was in that week’s bulletin, it would confirm that, at least this one time, he was one turn of the page away from the “Pastor’s Pages.” However, where Obama actually took his notes is not known. Two voicemail messages left for Lizza, who now works for The New Yorker, went unreturned.
* * * * *
It appears, based on the facts known, that the Obama campaign still lacks what it needs to get past the Jeremiah Wright controversy behind it. As other possible bulletin revelations loom, Tuesday’s results in Pennsylvania indicate that a continued failure to do so may seriously harm the Illinois Senator’s candidacy.
Tom Blumer owns a training and development company based in Mason, Ohio, outside of Cincinnati. He presents personal finance-related workshops and speeches at companies, and runs BizzyBlog.com.
You think our savior Obama is not telling us the whole truth? No way a stand up friend of Bill Ayers, Rev Wright and the all mighty Rev Louis Farrahkan world ever tell a lie!!
Trying to find a “smoking gun”, or an eyewitness to Obama’s presence at a controversial sermon is a bit silly and beside the point. He can deny and make excuses all he wants, but 20 YEARS under this racist, anti-Israel, muslim-coddling, Hamas-sympathizing, conspiracy-spreading, anti-American teaching and preaching is EASILY enough to disqualify him as President in my book.
Barack Hussein Obama is done. He will only be a footnote in the history of the USA. Thank God!
Whoever votes for Obama is showing they agree with Rev Wright’s hate speech sermons. Birds of a feather flock — you get it. You’re known by the company you keep. All part of the long list of clichés, told to kids by the people who care about them. Must be they keep getting reused over time because they’re true.
BO is starting to tank but the dems are stuck with him no matter what. there will be more and more revelations right up to November.
Nice to see mainstream media’s headlock on a narrow-minded society of sheeple. I would sooner attend the sermons of Rev. Wright over any of the pastors who quote scriptures on Sunday morning, then molest alter boys that afternoon. It cracks me up to still see so many self-righteous fist-raising right-wingers carry on with Rev. Wright’s remarks when so many past Presidents have had their share of questionable religious advisors. This is par for the course. You’re kicking a dead horse.
“You’re kicking a dead horse.”
I suppose the 55% of Pennsylvanians who voted against Obama on Tuesday were ‘fist-raising right-wingers”, eh?
So I tell you what, you go right on ahead telling working class white Democrats and Independents that having a problem with a candidate who makes excuses for having CLOSE relations with a “get whitey” anti-Semitic racist reverend makes them narrow-minded sheeple.
You go right on ahead, sweetie, then wait and see what happens in November ….
I think what Obama’s pastor said was his opinion. This has nothing to do with Obama personally!
So I guess the sitting Prez and Vice prez who are contributers and endorsers of Bob Jones U are exempt from this feeble ideology of guilt by religious association ? Nor has anyone ever questioned the racist doctrines of the mormon church when speaking to Romney . So Falwell , Robertson and Hagee all get a pass on their anti gay , jewish racist rhetoric . As well as the prez’s and congressman who are tied to them and their churches .
Get real
re Catalonia:
That’s self-righteous fist-raising right winger to you.
I was willing to give Obama a pass for Rev. Wright. I chalked it up to his desire for “street creds” among the Chicago constituency he was trying to court. Not too admirable, but hey, he’s a politician. What do you expect? I refused to believe he actually bought into the jive the rev was talking.
But then, from his own mouth came the phrase “typical white person”, directed at his own grandmother. It was then that I knew, that after 20 years some of the bigotry propagated by the rev had taken root in Obama’s brain. A shame, since I did have hope for him.
First time I read the comments here. Sure easy to tell who suffers from the mental disorder of liberalism. You fish who are suckers for Obama, I have some property just off the coast of Florida I want to sell. You can buy as much as you wish, $100 per acre. You must drain the water to get at it. Obama is an inexperienced, say anything to get elected, Chicago politician who hangs out with race baiters and domestic terrorists. He seems not to respect our flag and is at least a pacifist with pro Muslim proclivities. Not this time folks. This man will not be President of the United States. We do not need a communist leader.
“I think what Obama’s pastor said was his opinion. This has nothing to do with Obama personally!”
Other than the $26,000 in donations and making his daughters sit through that bilge. Nothing.
Frankly, I was surprised when the whole hullabaloo about Rev. Wright hit the airwaves. The sound bites presented by the MSM certainly seemed alarming. I was ever so glad when access to the entire sermons in question were posted on YouTube. I always find it helpful to listen to comments in their context of the whole message in which they are included.
As I listened and watched, I thought, gee, this could be bad for Obama. I myself felt threatened or intimidated by the Reverend’s words. Though, I surely did find them harsh, over the edge, alarming and unlike any other sermons I’d had the opportunity to see and hear in some of the Black Churches I’ve attended. Rather, I was reminded more of the rhetoric spouted by some of the Black Liberation radicals of yesteryear. I realize that Reverend Wright’s rhetoric does have some powerful roots in a culture whose experiences and dynamics I as a white woman can never fully understand. However, I always hope that as a woman of great compassion and empathy I can at least listen and not pass judgement when I am faced with the sometimes harsh rhetoric from those whose experiences I haven’t had and will never be able to truly share.
But not passing judgement does not mean that I agree, embrace or am not concerned by such views. I think Reverend Wright’s comments, even in the context of his sermons might be bad for Obama because not everyone can sit back and try to take an objective look at what the Reverend was saying while parsing out the good elements from the off the wall and possibly bigoted, anti-semitic and perhaps even paranoid ideation.
I can tell you that listening to the Reverend’s sermons in their entirety caused me grave concern about Obama. Prompted me to do some research of my own. I have yet to find any indication that Obama embraces those more wild of the Reverend’s point of view. I haven’t found it in his books, in his speeches, in interviews he’s given, legislation he’s sponsored, or raised as a concern by anyone who knows him and has worked with him.
While some white folks are offended by Obama’s comments about his grandmother’s comments being those of a “typical white person”, I’m not. I know that statement to have some truth. You know what? I’m a white middle aged woman and in my life I have observed exactly what Obama was talking about.
One thing I learned from my research on Obama is that there were so many times that he wasn’t home in Chicago, so his claim to have not heard the particular sermons the media has jumped on are probably true. Also, it is clear that when he went to work doing community organizing in Chicago, he was somewhat a fish out of water as his life experience were so vastly different than the experiences of those he was attempting to reach in his work.
Night Owl you commented that you were willing to give Obama a pass for Rev. Wright because you, ” chalked it up to his desire for “street creds” among the Chicago constituency he was trying to court”. I tend to agree with you to a large extent. Except I do not chalk it up to him being a politician because when he got involved with the TUCC, he wasn’t yet a politician. My sense from reading his books, etc. is that he really needed to find a way to fit in with the community of the South Side of Chicago for multiple and complex reasons. Certainly the appeal of the church’s outreach programs were part of the attraction.
So, Mr. Blumer, while you do raise some interesting concerns about REverend Wright and Obama’s association with him, I find a definite lack of balance and true research in your post.
In fact, I must ask you this… If you are so concerned about potential negative and ” un-American” influence by a pastor over a presidential candidate, why aren’t you poking your stick at McCain or Clinton?
For example, McCain has sought and obtained endorsements by two Christian evangelical ministers known for their harsh and even hateful rhetoric about other religions and cultural groups. http://www.outsidethebeltway.com/archives/2008/03/mccains_spiritual_guide_wants_a_war_with_islam/, http://www.cjr.org/campaign_desk/rod_parsleys_free_pass_1.php , http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/03/hagee_wright_parsley_fallwell.php
http://www.religionandspirituality.com/view/post/12087965468688/John_McCain_and_Rod_Parsley_Sacrificing_Peace_for_Ohios_Delegates/
How about Clinton and her association with “the Fellowship”? http://thecurrent.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/03/clinton-fellowship.php, http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080331/ehrenreich, http://www.blackvoices.com/blogs/2008/03/28/clinton-bashes-rev-wright-worships-with-nazis/
So, Mr. Blumer, what’s the deal? Have you no concern about the above candidates religious affiliations? Could it be that because they are white and even though affiliated with some rather extremist religious groups, themselves, the groups are white also and the other religions and cultural groups they diss are more acceptable to target at least by the rule of the dominant culture in the US?
Are you racist yourself Mr. Blumer is that why you have singled out Obama and Reverend Wright? Although, if you are it does seem that you have lots of company.
Let me restate, I am a white woman. I am also a Jewish woman. I do find many of Reverend Wright’s words and ideas to be alarming. However, I do not find them any more alarming than I do the words of the ministers with whom McCain and Clinton associate.
Rev. Wright is the tip of the iceberg. His farewell tour has started through the deadwood media, the phony journalism of the leftist alphabet news rooms, next will be a Hollywood exaltation of his “good works” and then academia will begin to publish his apologia papers.
Here’s the nuts and bolts of it: Sen Obama could not, would not, did not completely miss the very cellular fiber of Jeremiah Wright for two complete decades. One can legitimately deduce that if a Harvard graduate researches for a book that is named after a speech by his “spiritual advisor”…then, he did so not based upon one speech, or one phrase, but upon the deeper knowledge of the man behind the sermon.
Black Liberation Theology is a Marxist inspired, angry, hostile, cocktail of racial/class polarization. Anyone who believes that it was an accident of fate that Sen. Obama became attached to this particular worldview, isn’t paying attention.
Sam Graham Felsen, Sen. Obama’s chief blogger holds the same Marxist views, http://newsbusters.org/blogs/warner-todd-huston/2008/04/24/media-missing-another-unsavory-obama-associate-official-blogger-perhaps stronger than Wright. Certainly consistent with Ayers and Dorhn. Probably consistent with “Frank” Marshall Davis, young Barack’s mentor and CPUSA member.
The reason that Sen. Obama has the furthest left voting record, left of Bernie Sanders, Ted Kennedy, seems to be consistent with an undeniable attraction to anti-American, anti-capitalism, anti-Jewish sentiments. (his friendship with Rashid Khalidi being just one element)http://www.latimes.com/news/nationworld/world/la-na-obamamideast10apr10,1,2127459,full.story
Wanna bet this will come to pass? In time to impact the IN/NC vote, Sen. Obama (D-Titanic) will formally renounce the good Rev. Wright and say he has given up his church membership. MSNBC will pronounce it a brilliant “Sister Souljah” moment, the HuffPos will claim they broke the news first, er, last, while most of us will see it as nothing more that the opportunistic, pandering effort it is. Her Hillaryness will sweep Indiana by 11 pts., lose North Carolina by only 2 pts. and Dr. Dubious Dean will demand that the Supers make a decision “…by midnight tonight!”
Republicans will look around and say, hey, we’re gonna win with this guy.
I also, want to know. What does he know about LARRY SINCLAIR AND HIS ALLEGATIONS?????????????????????????
Obama the christ of all rock stars…. is now done forever. Well he actually had no chance.
http://www.strongerthandeath.net/2008/02/obama-christ-of-all-rock-stars-or.html
Rock and Roll hype gets you nowhere.
I wonder what kind of idiot would take his children to see a guy like Wright. Certainly not one who is serious about changing how race affects the next generation.
I sense a GOP ad on that subject.
I am tired of being told that I am not ready for a African-American president, when the truth is I am not ready for this African-American to become my president.
I am no Obama or Dem supporter, but the Right has gone overboard on this Reverend Wright stuff. It is old material now, can’t you see how you are working it to death? As far as Obama holding some negative views of whites, most whites, me included, have reverse feelings about blacks in general too. Though badmouthing the relatives that raised you after your black daddy did the usual flight thing is a little ungrateful.
I would happily vote for Colin Powell if he was running for president. It is not Obama’s color it his intellectual flimsiness and the fact that he was even remotely involved with the screwball Wright.
And, of course, his cynical snide asides pandering to the leftist intelligentsia
—So I guess the sitting Prez and Vice prez who are contributers and endorsers of Bob Jones U are exempt from this feeble ideology of guilt by religious association ….. As well as the prez’s and congressman who are tied to them and their churches …. Get real—
My liberal-speak translator is on the fritz. Could somebody please tell me what this poor demented gentleman is talking about?
Obama is not an African American. He is 50% White, 44% Arab and 6% African. What is going on here? Won’t he even tell us who he is.
I love it. One speech at Bob Jones University and now McCain & Bush are CONTRIBUTORS! Say what? And bringing in the Catholic pedophilia scandal makes no sense. Nobody is staying with a particular PRIEST who admits he’s a pedophile, or calling that particular pedophile priest his MENTOR!
Obamabots weak and pathetic attempts to make this go away, or try goofy comparisons amuses me to no end.
damon, you are a wonder. Please, do tell, where did you get the info about Obama being 44% Arab and 6% African. Gee, I never knew that there was a racial category for Arab.
What haters you all are.
Have any of you taken the time to watch Bill Moyers interview of the Reverend Wright done on 4/26/08? Or is something like that too intellectually challenging for you?
None of what the Reverend said sounded Marxist to me. Sure did sound Biblical, though. Marx was an atheist, so nothing he said was Biblical.
A commenter over of FreeRepublic made an interesting observation: that given her rhetoric, the attraction to Rev. Wright may be Michelle Obama’s and that her husband went along, and is still going along as much as he can, for the sake of peace in the house.
If Barack Obama doesn’t believe in Black Liberation Theology, then why did he go to that church for 20 years and give them so much money? If Barack Obama does believe in Black Liberation Theology, then why does he deny his beliefs? Even if you leave Reverend Wright’s most controversial statements out of this narrative, Obama still looks bad here. I would really like to know if Barack Obama is just another politician or not. That’s the issue. If Barack Obama is just another lying politician then all his inspirational words and fine promises mean nothing.
Nana-J, you’re really winning a lot of votes for Barry by insulting people’s intelligence that you don’t agree with, although maybe the prospect of McGovern 2 has some strange positive aspects to you; I know it does for me. Bill Moyers and “intellectually challenging” should never be used in the same sentence without the word antonym.
Nana-J- I sincerely respect your willingness to be open-minded about Obama’s “typical white person” remark. I will admit to perhaps being overly sensitive to racial stereotyping due to my own experiences growing up as a “mixed” child- Puerto-Rican/Native American/Irish/English. But I would never make a statement declaring my mother or grandmother a typical Puerto Rican, especially in a derogatory way. Similarly I would never refer to my late father as a typical Irish man, or a typical white man.
Growing up surrounded by people of many hues and multiple languages taught me to judge people on their words and deeds, not something as arbitrary as pigmentation, or the lack thereof. Therefore when I hear someone use the word “typical” applied to any racial or ethnic sub-group, that throws up a red flag to me that the person is either a lazy, sloppy thinker, or a genuine bigot. I do not use broad-sweeping generalizations based on race or ethnicity; and I expect no less from someone wanting my vote.
BTW- I also think that purposely exposing young children to hate-speak amounts to child abuse- unless one actually takes the time to explain to the children why some people feel the way a Rev. Wright does, and how that kind of negative thinking can be damaging to a person. Being exposed to racial animosity at a young age is not a positive experience (I can personally attest to that). To willingly do it to your own kids is thoughtless, at the very least.
I’d like to think that the majority of Rev. Wright’s sermons were not like the snippets we’ve heard. But how do I know? Obama left himself open to these types of questions about his own beliefs, and his judgment in exposing his children to this ideology, by choosing to remain in such a controversial church for so long.
Listen to Chris Wallace, of Fox News, on this “typical white person” comment:
http://www.thecarpetbaggerreport.com/archives/14965.html#more-14965
Did you watch the God Dam*ed Wright interview last night?
Many of your stupid questions would have been answered if you had..
This is a non-freakin’ issue that has been made an issue by do nothings like you.
Some of you idiots try to pry a person apart and find little things, mostly irrelevant, to destroy the person.. Ahhhh, the American media.
Sick MF’ers… Wright is a good guy.. I watched the PBS interview.. Wonderful man with some extreme opinions but his heart is in the right place.. Very successful in everything that he has ever done.. He was the Operating Tech during Pres Johnsons surgery. He truly cares about justice and truth and has done many unbeleivable things for Chicago in that church.. He is truly a leader of the Black community.
I agree with most everything he says.. I have a little probelm with planted drugs, I wouldn’t rule it out, and OJ glove.. Aids was planted… I might agree with that too.. It is a incredible virus that is recent and it started in Africa…
His GD America speech is right on.. Out govenment has done some really bad things to many people and is dishonest.. Wright said ALL governments are.. Governments lie… God does not.. Don’t look to government look to God.
In accordance with the Bible, we will pay for our wrongs.. 09/11 was a sort of retribution for our governments sorriness.. Lies, murders, created wars and international Nation building against peoples will.. Teh US was founded in the killing of over 1,000,000 indians..
Wright is rough around the edges but is bright and genuine..
Very patriotic..
Great man with some fringe views… The most successful black church in America..
The real question is why didn’t Hillary leave her sorry ass, pedofile lieing husband??
That is even more strange.
When did the catholics know about the pedophilia behavior of their priests? They continue to ignore this, and go to MASS.. It’s okay for these hypocrits to go and confess to a child MOLESTER..SICKOS…
Guilt by association seems to be the staple of most of the humorless dimwit posters here. Please spare me your pathetic outrage over this Wright. So what, he’s not running for election!
I can tell you what I think is important here.
Wright and other pastors are not teaching their parishoners the True Gospel. Too many are preaching what will make them popular with their flock, and we see evidence of it in the enormous churches throughout America.
If they were to preach the Cross, and all it requires of us as Christians, there might be fewer attendees. Christ poured out Himself in order that we might receive Him. And be changed because of Him.
This change requires of the Christian to look deep into his own heart. Something not many (if any) of us are eager to do.
But God in His goodness will take us there if we trust Him. And lovingly, He will reveal to us our sin – as in The Revelation – and at that very moment, it is taken from us, leaving our hearts filled with His Holy Spirit.
Wright has cheated Mr. Obama and all his parishoners of that journey. But he is not alone. Most Christian parishes, of all denominations, probably do the same.
The enthusiasm for Obama reminds me of a novel by Pierre Boulle “La planète des singes” (“Planet of the Apes” o “Monkey Planet”). One can remember also the film “Planet of the Apes” (1968) based on Boulle’s novel with the magnificent Charlton Heston. The humans become like animals without intelligence and the apes are transformed in intelligent beings like humans once. I don’t want to make any comparison, but I can’t liberate me from the sensation that my white fellows have lost any ability of reasoning in their exaltation for this marionette with sweet smile and hypnotizing look. They seem like the stupid monkeys from “The Jungle Book” by Rudyard Kipling who kidnapped Mowgli and were eaten by the enormous snake Rev. Kaa Wright afterwards.
How dare you. Don’t you know that discussing facts about Wright is racist! Asking questions is racist! Wondering about connections is racist! Thinking is racist! Anything but voting for Obama-the second coming and new messiah–is racist! Just ask ABC, NBC, CNN, MSNBC, The NY Times, The LA Times, CBS, the democratic party, the Obama campaign and of course, most importantly, John McCain. Now stop being so racist and go back to sleep.
@Javelin:
So what? So any white candidate who was friends with a pastor that taught race hatred to those who attended his church as Obama’s pastor did would be immediately disqualified when the video tapes were put forward. So Obama chose to sit down for 20 years and listen to a bunch of anti-white racism instead of the gospel. So if Obama doesn’t think along the lines of what Wright has been teaching for the past 20 years why did he continue to go to this church for the past two decades.
You don’t get it because you choose not to get it. If Obama were a white Republican who had a minister who caught on tape screaming curses about black people you wouldn’t be saying what you are now because you would understand that the people who we choose to be friends with say a lot about ourselves. You can’t choose your family but you can choose your friends. Obama chose his, and he knew to begin with that they were appalling racists. That says a lot about the man who would be our president. We Americans have an obligation to turn to Obama and ask him why did he associate with this man. And we have an obligation not to allow him to say that we are just being distracted during the election in which we choose which person we make our next president.
@ edna
The Catholic priests that do such things are a very, very tiny minority in the Church. You wouldn’t know it because of the way the media, overwhelmingly left dominated, are doing their best to attack another faith institution. If you have only gone to one or two or three Catholic churches, odds are you haven’t met one of those priests or even a priest who knows one that is doing any such thing. Also, they don’t ignore it, and are talking about it and demanding action.
But you know this already, don’t you? You aren’t angry at the church, you are angry that people are still attending it rather than renouncing their faith in God.
If the Catholics knew about a priest who had committed such an act they would renounce him. Thats called basic decency. Obama knew about a racist pastor, and instead of renouncing him, he went to his church for 20 years. IIRC, he even was married by him, and Obama says that this screaming racist is a good friend of his. Obama fails the basic decency test. Sorry.
I personally don’t care who Rev. Wright is or what he has to say. As I said earlier I was willing to give Obama a pass on this. But I can understand how people would have questions about Obama’s long-time association with such a controversial figure, and such controversial ideology. And question his choice to expose his children to this ideology. Those who cannot understand why this is a controversy should perhaps consider removing the blinders from their eyes and then take another look at the real world. The questions will not go away simply by watching a PR piece on PBS. Obama is stuck with them, fair or not.
Regarding Obama’s “typical white person” statement- perhaps Obama wasn’t saying all white people are bigots; but he certainly implied his grandmother was one, as he did in his race speech. Even if she is a bigot, it’s pretty low to drag her out into the public discussion in an attempt to mitigate the negativity surrounding his association with someone who, if he is not a bigot, gets paid to play one on occasion. Obama didn’t have to bring his grandmother into the public forum on race. He chose to, more than once. And he tarred her with the brush of bigotry. That told me all I needed to know about his character.
He tarred his grandmother, hates his flesh and blood for bigotry, but is good friends with a person whose life mission is in no small part converting others to race hatred? He is a racist and completely without character. Fortunately the mask spun for him by the media and the higher ups in the Democratic party is unraveling.
The thing is: Mr. Wright is not a born-again-Christian, so he cannot preach the true gospel. It seems he is more a social activist, and more of a secular person.
It seems the church is being used here, to further some kind of racial agenda.
I will probably vote for Allen Keys, if he is still on the ballot, in November; he will probably not win, of course, but I would feel better.
Obama seems like a candidate no one should vote for.
Those of you unconcerned about Wright or “not willing to pass judgement” or pointing out other religious leaders linked to candidates (none who were that candidate’s PASTOR for 20 years!) are all basically missing the point. And this goes along with the Ayers relationship, and Rezko, too…
It’s about JUDGEMENT and CHARACTER…(or the lack there of…)
Sure, if you want to look at ONLY what the man SAYS , and NOT who he associates with or what he has done (or more precisely NOT done!) then I suppose you will decide he seems pretty cool and has some appeal for change (whatever kind, does it matter?) and you may well vote for him…
But look behyond the words in his speeches and prepared remarks…and beyond the charisma and sheen of a “new” paradigm… and if you take a critical look at his CHARACTER AND JUDGEMENT…it doesn’t come up to what we need in a President.
ALL the candidates have weaknesses and shortcomings, but what Obama lacks can’t be learned on the job…or if it is, we’re ALL in for a bumby ride!
The funny thing about all of this Reverend Wrong discussion is how Obamites are trying to pin it on Republicans. No Republican has yet voted for or against Obama and won’t for months. His primary problem (no pun intended) is with several factions of the Democratic party who don’t like the Rev.’s rhetoric.
The Republicans are just amused observers waiting to send a message to Obama about how wrong he has been to passively endorse such talk regardless of whether it was for South Side credibility, fundraising contacts, or coaching on speechmaking.
To satisfy my ethnological curiosity I have discovered the blog “Your Black Gospel” (http://yourblackgospel.blogspot.com/2008/04/it-is-time-to-pray-and-march-for.html). In the main page you can see a photomontage with various images. The central image is that of smiling Obama putting the hand on the (also smiling) Rev. Wright’s shoulder. There are many other images that I could not single out (I’m not expert in the black political ethnology). For Obama, to disavow his intimate relation with Rev. Wright would mean to lost immediately the enormous quantity of followers that see in Rev. Wright, Jesse Jackson, Luis Farrakhan, Rev. Eric Lee and other black predicators their political guides. Martin Luther King gave positive direction to the black movement (Black Panthers and Muslim Nation point out another direction that would be disastrous). With the coming of St Obamus the black radicalism, full of hate for the white “establishment”, came out with violence from the underground to the surface of the American society. It is possible to say that is the “historical meaning” of Obama’s phenomenon, i.e. to make visible what many didn’t want to see. I don’t make the rhetoric questions “what do the black radicals want?” or “why do they hate the white who helped black people to have all civil rights and economic prosperity?”. Hate is irrational. All these big and little black messiahs (except the truly great Martin Luther King) were and are prophets of this irrational hate.
What about the Obama’s white supporters? Leftists, liberals, common criminals, usual politically correct idiots, all by-products of American society, all of them are gathered around Obama, found in him their authentic Guide.
The sane part of America that hasn’t lost common sense has gathered around John McCain, because one can agree o not with this man, but it is possible to discuss rationally with him. With his adversaries any discussion is inutile.
M.E. said:
‘It is possible to say that is the “historical meaning” of Obama’s phenomenon, i.e. to make visible what many didn’t want to see.’
I think you’re right- Obama’s candidacy is indeed an historic moment in race relations in America; but I suspect not in the way that Obama, and many of his initial supporters (myself included) was hoping.
I cannot believe that Obama hasn’t heard any of Wright’s rants before! Given the fact that Rev. Wright couldn’t contain himself this weekend or today seems to indicate that his “rants” are the norm. If that is true then there is NO WAY that Obama hasn’t heard crazy things coming from his pastors pulpit!
M.E. and Night Owl:
Thank you for pointing out that the phenomenon of Obama’s candidacy has brought to light what some have not wanted to see (or hoped was not so).
I needed to see the good in this. To be thankful instead of angry.
As sad as it is, and as evil as it appears to me, perhaps now that it has surfaced, we can do something about it.
Too many lives have been negatively affected by it.
Is Obama Guilty by Association?
Guilt by Association is false evidence when convicting someone of a crime. A person is not guilty because his father, brother, friend, or employee is guilty. The association may be reason for more investigation, but it alone is not evidence against that person.
Politics for a voter is about understanding, ideas, and truth. What is a politician’s understanding and bias about the world? What are his ideas? Is he telling the truth about his thoughts and conclusions, or is he merely saying what we want to hear?
It is obvious that people of similar beliefs associate. “Birds of a feather flock together” is obviously true about personal belief, if ideas matter at all to a person.
Mr. Obama presents himself as a man of ideas and belief. Shall we understand that he cares nothing about the history, ideas, and beliefs of his close associates? I do not think that he, Pastor Wright, self proclaimed bomber Bill Ayers, and terrorist fund-raiser Dr. Hatem El-Hady form a personal debating society where Mr. Obama argues one position and they argue the other side.
Would Mr. Obama say in private, “I disagreed with Pastor Wright about all that horrible slander against white people and society, but I sat there because I needed to convince my political base that I was one of them”? Either he agrees with Pastor Wright, or he cares nothing about his personal belief in politics, and he would represent anything to anyone to be elected.
Does Mr. Obama have so few friends in Chicago, that Bill Ayers is the convenient person to share play dates with his children? Was it really just chit-chat with the former bomber and current idealogue Bill Ayers? Did Mr. Obama find it relaxing to have disagreements with Bill Ayers about politics and policy while the kids played? Agreement is more likely.
Association does not assign guilt to Mr. Obama. Politics is not about guilt; politics is all about ideas, belief, and association. What could the explanation be for Mr. Obama’s associations? Possibly, he agrees with his associates. Possibly, he disagrees, but has maintained these long-time associations to attract his political base, fooling them about what he believes.
Either Mr. Obama believes things that are horrifying to me, or he is as expedient a politician as I have ever seen, without any belief that matters to him in public. I can’t see a third possibility, and I don’t like either of the first two.
To Believer and Night Owl:
As king Solomon says: “For in much wisdom is much grief: and he that increaseth knowledge increaseth sorrow” (Ecc. 1, 18). But I prefer the sorrow of truth instead the joy of lie, because the truth opens all doors, the lie closes every new life’s dimension. The problem of race must be confronted with honesty in all its aspects. But the actual insane agitation keeps from a tranquil and objective discussing. The worst is that the racial problem has become a vulgar political instrument.
So tragic that skygods and cherubs, sub-deities and heaven/hell is so important in choosing a leader in this country. We need to bring back witch trials, dunking and the crusades as well. Sigh. Hopeless. Simply, hopeless.
I cannot believe that Obama sat in the pews for 20 years and never heard anything objectionable or that these things were only said when he was not present. If you have known someone for that long even in private converation these view must have come up. His wife in the statement now I am proud to be an American shows those views. I am sure that after hearing these sermons every week his impressionable children have heard these views. His typical white grandmother statement is also this point of view. He may not have meant it that way but that is what he said. The fact is, everyone is allowed to have a different point of view that we do not have to agree with, but how is that point of view going to effect how he runs that nation? Being a leader means dealing with people from different walks of life and many different cultures from all over the world. Can he have that point of view and still run the nation?
natasha spelled in reverse is “ah satan”
Wow! The different interuptations you can get one any one issue. It all boils down to what side of the fence you are on. That is so-o-o-o
plain in reading these comments. Mine is, as my Daddy said, “A man is known by the company he keeps.” ‘Nuff said!’
I agree with lea. There has to some kind of influence from sitting in that church for 20 years. He has 2 daughters that have been influenced by this church their whole life. I think there is a whole lot more about Obama we don’t know about. I heard him called Mohamad Barack Obama bin Ladden today at school.
I love the people who said Wright was “biblical” on Bill Moyers show. I guess they didn’t see the National Press Club thing coming. Now what are they saying. He has a right to rant because Obama made him mad? Say goodbye to Obama, we hardly knew you (literally)!
This is much ado about nothing. By the way, he didn’t sit in church for 20 yrs. It comes to less than 2+ yrs if you count all of the Sundays, of which I for one know he wasn’t there every week. You all may as well go join the pundits. They’re all shaking in their boots knowing we the people aren’t going to take it anymore, and trying their darndest to ‘scare’ us, just like McBush and the Clintonistas. From a middle aged white female agnostic working class in Hillary’s constituency state of NY. I’d sure like to know the company some of you keep.
How many years did white folks sit in the pews of their churches during all the years of slavery and Jim Crow? Did they get up and leave their churches? Why not? Did they not here the hateful things spoken by their pastors or the people they know in the church? Was it all, LOVE YOUR NEIGHBOR? See “Agent of Intolerance.” Is America a Christian nation? Why not get up and leave those pews? Some people act as if Obama and Rev. Wright are the only people who need to answer these questions.
Why did white christian folks believe they had a need to start all these private christian schools? Too choose who could attend or get away from those other folks? See “Agent of Intolerance.” We are on our way to healing a nation. Or are we beginning to show our TRUE COLORS?
In response to Perry:
Life is a learning experience. You reference a time in history long gone, when a ‘white’ church wouldn’t consider having people of color inside their church doors, let ALONE in their congregations. Are there still racially polarized churches in our country? Of course there are and they’re NOT all white congregations. But thankfully most of our society has actually learned from the past and has evolved past their racist upbringing. TRUE Christianity sees only a brother or sister in Christ, the color of that ‘relative in Christ’ not mattering one bit. We learn and go on learning….
But for you to take punches at ‘white folks’ for sending their kids to Christian schools I suggest you’ve been misinformed. My grandchildren (my daughter’s kids) attend a Christian school for reasons having NOTHING to do with race! The condition of our public schools has gone so far downhill that to send those children there would be to expose them to violence, ANTI-Christian ideas (from some. not all), and so many more problems that our public school kids face now days. And they’re doing this at SUBSTANTIAL cost and burden with none of it subsidized by any government program. WHY should their parents insist they be made victims to a failing, decaying system? I WISH my son and his wife could and would send their children to a similar school. And for your information their Christian school is open to ANY race, NOT just ‘white people’ (as is the church that operates the school). Do you KNOW of a Christian school that limits itself to only white children? I’ve personally never heard of one. So please don’t be so quick to condemn something JUST because you want to tag racism on it. Frankly YOU sound like that ‘Agent of Intolerance’ to me. And to answer your question “Or are we beginning to show our TRUE COLORS?” I’d say your post plainly shows yours.
Your reference to history long gone is the problem. That history long gone prevented some of the brightest people of color from attending colleges that would have, when the whites pulled away from the public schools (not because they were violence or ANTI-Christian), would have left highly qualified teachers to teach the people of color now left in that system. I know this first hand. The white principal at my high school told my mother (who has 8 children) that none of her children would receive any scholarships to college. Guess what, he was right, those scholarship offers came into the high school office and were buried.
We found out years later after we had left for the military that these offers had came in. Oops, too late. That’s right, out of eight children, five served in the military and three retired from the military. All these children are under the age of fifty-five. How long ago has this history been gone? This makes me wonder, if the history long gone had not occurred, what would these children have become? How many more have similar stories?
I am not taking punches at “white folks” for sending their children to a Christian school or private school to get “a good education.” God bless you for having the resources or making the sacrifice to do so. But, it is no doubt that a school system was left and the resources (money and knowledge) that were there when white children occupied those buildings are no longer there. Why?
I work for a Fortune 500 company and see so many of these children from the Christian schools or private schools leaving high school and competing for the same jobs the children from the public schools are competing for. Why spend all that money for a good education and not go on to college? Something else is there beside the desire for a good education. Most of these schools have the same books, get out of school the same time and schedule the days off the same as the public schools. Something else is going on.
What happen when a girl in these Christian schools or private schools get pregnant or those boys cause problems in the school? They send them to these public schools. Why, if it’s so bad?
I am a Christian who teaches the Men Sunday school Class at my church, retired from the U.S. Navy; work as an Information Technology Specialist and still in my forty. My family has a long history of Christian service through that “history long gone”. My grandfather, father, three brothers, over twenty relatives are ministers, with numerous teachers, singers and musicians in this family.
When Christians or so called Christians quit running away from the problems of this world, and believing that we are right because it benefits our family members, this world will indeed become a better place. We say we follow the teaching of Jesus, but could you imagine if Jesus had looked at the violence of this world and decided to return to heaven without dying on the cross. We keep forgetting what Jesus said about the “Least of These”. Yes, my children are in public school, not because I can’t afford a private education, but someone has to try to make a different in the public system.
I was taught as a Christian to stand for what is right, no matter the consequences. My mother and father cared for over sixty foster children, white and black. I sent money home to help with the care of these children and some never left. We call them brothers now. My COLOR is clear.
We have been duped!!!
We let the Republicans get away with their statement “life begins at conception”. Election after election and year after year we buy into that statement. If you think about what that mean and how the government currently handles this, we are totally duped.
Our tax code do not allow for any deductions for life at conception. Neither will an insurance company write you a life insurance policy for an unborn fetus.
Example: If you became pregnant in April and have your baby in January, it will be 21 months before you can claim that child and get a tax credit for that child. The baby has to be born before you can get a tax credit or a life insurance policy on that baby.
That doesn’t look or sound like life begins at conception. It is life begin when the child is born and that’s the way our government allow for deductions.
How many tax policies were introduced by the Republicans over the years to give a parent a tax credit when they became pregnant? I doubt any. We have been duped!!!