Obama—an American Tragedy
The Obama Implosion
In a nutshell, Obama just doesn’t get it. The more he keeps hedging and huffing about the demagogic (“God damn America”) Wright, while simultaneously preaching about ethics, tolerance, and healing, and the more his own prior sermons are juxtaposed to Wright’s venom, so the more Obama appears an Elmer Gantry-like figure.
He obviously either doesn’t fully grasp the degree to which his intimate relationship with a peddler of hatred offends Americans; or he feels that the Wright narratives are merely a wink-and-nod part of the local Chicago African-American landscape, and thus not that big a deal; or he finds some sort of psychological fix in listening to a surrogate provide a vitriolic, vicarious payback; or he is so indebted to Wright for providing him the requisite racial fides to start his career that he simply cannot say, “I was wrong to have been a part of Rev. Wright’s church; it is divisive and at odds with what I have tried to achieve in this campaign, and I’ve resigned from it.”
I pass on the fifth option that someone like Obama really believes the Wright lunacy.
Hard to Believe
Given Obama’s past sanctimonious dismissal of the Christian right (“The so-called leaders of the Christian right, who’ve been all too eager to exploit what divides us.”), he now is in danger of not just playing the hypocrite, but the fool as well. Referring to Wright as a “respectable biblical scholar” et al, is laughable—given that almost everything Wright seems to assert, whether about the Roman Empire or the origins of AIDs, is buffoonery.
The notion that Obama never heard any such nonsense is, well, nonsense—given that he frequented the church for 20 years, laughed off some of the Wright hyperbole in his own memoirs, and has a wife whose invective about America as not worthy of her pride, mean, etc dovetails with his pastor’s sermons. Moreover, his own past interviews belie his most recent assertion that Wright was merely his pastor, rather than a political advisor. And we learn that during those tough years in which Michelle Obama was whining about having to budget money to pay back those government-guaranteed student loans to Harvard Law School, the Obamas were giving thousands of dollars each year to subsidize the Wright hatred. Messiahs are supposed to tell the whole truth, and nothing but the truth—and all the time.
This is hope and change and the new transparency?
The Dean Syndrome
What we have here is a bright, eloquent, and utterly insular candidate, incredibly naïve, with terrible judgment who is absolutely clueless about America. He seems an improved model of Howard Dean—opinionated, snazzy, faddish, riding on popular insanity—and then in one fell swoop (“Yeaaahhhhhhh”) ridiculous. It may well be that the old guard Democratic elite, as nervous now at the popular Obama hysteria as they were over the flash-in-the-pan Deanomaniacs, may have to impose a buyer’s remorse “Kerry solution” and step in as super-delegates to stop the hysteria nonsense and get behind the plodding Hillary workhorse. But unlike the Dean implosion, the Obama crack-up is much later in the game.
You see, the problem is that the Obamas have had two only audiences in their lives, both narrow and, worse, fawning: one, apparently a highly politicized and often angry Chicago African-American constituency that believes in AIDs conspiracies and the pathological role of the United States, and, two, a guilt-ridden elite white audience in the Ivy League and the media who does not object to, or in fact enjoys, being told why America is the sort of awful place Rev. Wright depicts.
Harvard Square and the Chicago Hood are not necessarily America
But leave that womb? Very shortly you enter the majority world of downtown Los Angeles, Toledo, Upper Michigan, West Texas, upstate New York, the Salt Lake City suburbs, northern Florida, East Fresno, or Reno. When those driving to work in those environs hear on the radio each morning the crudity and coarseness of Rev Wright’s snippets—and that they are directed at themselves no less and have a creepy quality when listened to rather than read—they more or less explode.
If Obama keeps talking about his new politics of hope and change while contextualizing Rev. Wright’s hatred, soon in the middle of one of Obama’s inspirational speeches, someone is going to stand up and shout, “Depart, I say; and let us be done with you. In the name of God, go!”
Apparently Obama’s saving grace so far has been the protective mainstream media that is teary-eyed and lip-biting over these disclosures, and, more importantly, the dramatic news breaking around Obama’s own tawdry mess—the Wall Street earthquakes, the Fallon resignation, the dollar, gold, gas, etc—which reminds us that while we fiddle over Rev. Wright, our world seems to be burning up.
We could end up with Al Gore as a second ballot “White Knight”, if I may be excused for using what might be taken as racist and/or sexist imagery.
“Harvard Square and the Chicago Hood are not necessarily America” but they are indispensable for victory
This is a systemic problem for black Democratic candidates for national office. To advance far enough in their party to get the nomination, they have to not merely refrain from denouncing, but willingly and openly associate with, hate-mongering creeps like pastor Rev. Wright of Senator Obama’s Chicago Church. But such associations are fatal in the general election.
I pay attention to Democratic campaign advertising on black urban radio stations. It spews the same kind of hate-filled fantasies. This is pretty good evidence that a significant proportion of black voters believe this crap. So it is political suicide for urban black Democratic candidates to openly refute it. Hence Barack Obama turning at least a blind eye to it, and Michelle Obama spouting some of it.
But this is poison in the general election for a Presidental nominee or even a vice-presidential nominee, i.e., the whole ticket would then go down.
In my opinion, the first black President can only be someone who has no possible association with such hate. This almost certainly means a black Republican former general like Colin Powell.
Professor:
IMO, you are speaking to those that will not hear. To the self-haters, who hate the US, and to the grievance mongers, It is an agenda, intended to bring down this country, and unknowing by them, themselves. Awkward construction, perhaps, but the truth is never facile.
I have always felt that the downward trend started its spiral when President Ford granted amnesty to the draft evaders. Better that they should contaminate the Canadians, rather than pollute us here. Oh, well.
The good Senator’s mother was, I’ve read, as virulent opponent of American culture as the right Reverend Wright. I believe she was a cultural anthropologist who earned her doctorate in the late 1960’s. She eschewed a life in Hawaii for Sauareto’s Indonesian workers paradise where the future senator began his journey with her and her fellow travelers. I fear his naivety to be the type practiced by the ‘Pied-Piper’.
Very well said. It is just an affirmation that we hope to defeat Hillary now and get Obama nominated on his cult of personality. Once he is the nominee, it will become clear americans will not actually elect him. He cant win the general so that is why Hillary wont quit. Lets hope he holds on and is the nominee so McCain can win.
How is it possible that this disclosure and the resultant reaction were not foreseen? It is hard to not come to the conclusion that the Obamas really don’t see much wrong with Wright and don’t understand why anyone else would.
interesting. trouble is if obambi falls, then we get she who must not be named. And I can’t listen to her for a minute, let alone eight long, miserable years.
You neglect the possibility that Obama knows exactly what he’s doing. He may be more than willing to peddle an acceptable message in order to gain power and attempt to remake America into Pastor Wright’s image of Utopia.
This little peek inside the Obama revivalist campaign tent is certainly instructive. Reverend Wright, who apparently brought Obama to Jesus and has been his spiritual advisor for two decades, is a patently bigoted purveyor of the Blame America First view of contemporary history. Furthermore he is unabashedly a racist. I do not, however, think this will be the undoing of Senator Obama’s campaign. Never underestimate the damage done to a whole generation of Americans who received similar teachings, in less obvious form, during their K-12 education as well as in college (whether Ivy League or public). This generation of Americans, the least likely to have a solid understanding of Western History, may determine our next president.
i think we might safely intuit where michelle’s anger originates. apparenty she has been paying attention to preacher wright’s “sermons”. suddenly her confrontational attitude makes sense.
i was pleased to hear juan williams, on fox news today, call for obama to leave this odd church. will that be enough to appease startled non blacks? i hope not.
Wright Man for the Job?
Will the revelations regarding Senator Obama’s spiritual advisor sink his presidential bid? The man Obama says “brought me to Jesus” is a bigoted purveyor of Blame America First ideology. As demonstrated by his videotaped sermons, he is unabashedly racist, preaching to a flock of true believers who hang on his every word. The rhetorical flourishes are by now familiar to Obama watchers. But what about the rhetorical content? Perhaps we are getting a peek inside the revivalist tent that constitutes the true Obama campaign. What we need now is an honest Come to Jesus moment from Senator Obama about his affinity for the teachings of Reverend Wright.
by his own repeated admission,preacher wright is a purveyor of “black liberation theology”. let us not forget that black liberation theology is a subset of marxist oppressor-oppressed polemics. daniel ortega used a version of it in Nicaragua in the 80′s. the oppressed (always a people of color) can never, never be accused of evil – no matter how unabatedly inflammatory their speech is or how dangerous their actions are. this is more problematic for a presidential nominee’s campaign than a “blame america first” strategy. it has definite communist leanings.
I think this is very well stated but that you may be wrong about the fifth option, as you call it. There is a considerable amount of dirt on Obama that has yet to really get some air time. He has been linked, through Rezko, to an Iraqi billionaire and former Saddam collaborator. There are rumors of disgusting drug/sex scandals. I think he is a phony, and his duplicity is going to be outed over the next few months.
Be all that as it may — or not — and it is a quite selective overview of the American political landscape, here is what will happen.
Barack Obama will probably go on to win the Democratic presidential nomination.
And then will run a close race with John McCain — who I supported in 2000, mind you, as a member of Veterans for McCain, appearing on a few dozen radio shows on his behalf.
Who himself has an issue with close association with various religious figures who have variously claimed that America was founded to destroy Islam, Catholics are whores, and America deserved 9/11 because of its wickedness.
I found very interesting the conversation that Bill O’Reilly had with two black ladies on his program who defended Mr. Wright and Mr. Obama. Those from outside of the black community, they stated, didn’t and couldn’t understand where those two men were coming from; and the clips of Mr. Wright’s sermons where taken out of context. I thought it was revealing that the two educated ladies would believe that after over 40 years of concerted effort to better the racial landscape of America and having suffered the only civil war fought in large part over the injustice of slavery, such anti-American rants given today could be blamed on the past injustices in America. Especially by those who most likely never lived much of their life under those Jim Crow practices.
Mr and Mrs. Obama, and most likely Mr. Wright, seemly have lived the life of the privileged elite in our country. It is most interesting to me that this story takes place in Chicago, not Birmingham, Alabama which was located in the heart of our Jim Crow past; the place where the civil, gracious, intelligent and elegant Condoleezza Rice was raised by her Presbyterian minister father and teacher mother. Ms Rice experienced overt discrimination and racism and the death of her school mate who was killed in the bombing of the primarily black Sixteenth Street Baptist Church by white supremacists in 1963. Yet she went beyond the hate that could have consumed her to become 4th in line for the presidency should Mr. Bush die in office. She makes Pastor Wright look so small. She, unlike Mr. Wright, is thankful to have been born in the most just, while yet imperfect, country in the world.
To summarize, Barack is a dreamy, idealistic little nerd ill-suited for managing a contentious nation of 300 million souls who value independence; nor is he suited to control their conflicting interests in the push, shove and fist in your face international world. But that seemed obvious to many of us here from the first.
What is still surprizing is that our supposed tough, skeptical, and worldly media didn’t understand this…well, anymore than Barack “understood” the true Rev. Wright.
More likely, the media, like Barack, supplanted basic good judgement to push their own holier than thou agenda.
Makes me, virtually, want to vomit.
Let’s compare this to people on the right:
JERRY FALWELL: [W]hat we saw on Tuesday [11 September], as terrible as it is, could be miniscule if, in fact — if, in fact — God continues to lift the curtain and allow the enemies of America to give us probably what we deserve…
I really believe that the pagans, and the abortionists, and the feminists, and the gays and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle, the ACLU, People For the American Way — all of them who have tried to secularize America — I point the finger in their face and say “you helped this happen.”
PAT ROBERTSON: Well, I totally concur…
Jerry Falwell thought the US deserved 9/11. He’s an influential figure in the Republican party. Obama’s priest is not influential in the Democratic party. For every obscure figure on the left saying something stupid, there’s some one more powerful saying something worse on the right.
George Bush Jr started his campaign at Bob Jones University, where they forbade interracial dating. Ronald Reagan started his campaign supporting “states rights” in an utterly obscure Mississippi town known only for the right-wing assassination of civil rights activists. That’s why the black community supports the left so solidly. That’s also why we on the left think that the Republican party is racist and shameful.
(PS Mike Manges might want to check his history and spelling. Suharto was a US ally and never even close to the Soviet camp.)
As Tom Holsinger mentions above, this type of thought is unfortunately quite prevalent in the black community, and as our host alludes to, it is necessary for any black politician to be around it and comfortable with it, in my opinion, should they wish to be popular in and supported by the greater black community. It also keeps the same politicians from being able to mainstream, which then allows the same black Americans to feel marginalized and allows for the continued popularity of people like Wright- a vicious and self-made circle.
Since the 60′s there has been a tremendous growth in the black middle class (and upper), but at the same time a shrinking of the aesthetics and, perhaps, world view of the same folks with the same type of radical polluting of thought as has occurred with many white Americans as the new Left ideas became widely accepted by white baby boomers. Duke Ellington was upper class (as was Miles Davis), but there are no current black artists articulating quite the same kind of nuance and sophistication despite a significantly larger black middle and upper class representation than ever before; instead, you have a lot of middle class hip hop artists pretending to be street thugs (obviously some are really “street”, but less than white people think- it’s a great sales job and it has sold a lot of records). The last popular non-street aesthetic r&b musician was Babyface in the 90′s. I would argue that the political ideas have seen a similar downward slide, but obviously rife with hypocrisy given the huge success of so many black Americans like Michelle Obama in the post Civil Rghts period.
In short, Obama has to be part of that world to get where he is- he has to accept it (and I think agrees with many of the ideas in general). Many white liberals think the same stuff (maybe not the far out AIDS stuff, but… the general US = bad). However, it won’t work in the general (at least I hope not!). I’ve heard the same types of ideas and conspiracy theories when I lived in black neighborhoods in Oakland, Brooklyn, and New Orleans, and also with mostly middle class black kids at UC Berkeley when I was a student- it’s not localized to Chicago. These ideas are the normal belief to varying degrees for a lot of black folks, but other Americans are not exposed to them because they have so little contact with black America. Now they have some exposure to some of these ideas, and may think twice about Obama.
Church is a uniquely personal environment, it is one place that I go, that what is spoken as teaching and instruction, is the most important reason for attending. School would be another place where words that are spoken as instruction are of the highest importance. This is a very important point in my opinion. I choose to go to a church that delivers a message from the pulpit that fits with my concept of faith. I would not choose “Black (or white) Liberation Theology” as the sound track for my spiritual life, not for 20 weeks, 20 months and certainly not for 20 years, but I would defend Mr. Obama’s right to do as he chooses. But once he chooses, he must stand behind that choice and defend it.
Thankfully, we (including Mr. and Mrs. Obama) have free will when it comes to choosing our place of spiritual and social instruction. I listen very intently to what my pastor is saying each and every time I attend. My pastor is my friend and after 16 years in my church I know who he is and what he believes. I fellowship with those who attend my church, both at church and away from church, and we continually discuss the fundamentals of our shared belief. With this in mind, I can only draw one conclusion when Mr. Obama says, after 20 years, he has no knowledge of his pastor’s fundamental belief (or speeches for sale on his church’s web site) on the doctrine of “Black Liberation Theology,” Mr. Obama is not being honest. This is profoundly different than John McCain being endorsed by Mr. Hagee or Mr. Parsley or George Bush speaking at Bob Jones University although each of these needed to be and were addressed.
I would prefer that Mr. Obama defend his pastor (and mentor) and the entire “Black Liberation Theology” that he preaches instead of pretending to be shocked by these sermons and condemning them when pressed, just to save his political life. I could then disagree with him, but at least Mr. Obama would show continuity of thought and behavior which is a trademark of intellectual honesty. I wonder how Mr. Obama’s fellow church goers, that were shouting out in agreement at Mr. Wright’s hate filled sermons, feel about one of their own suddenly condemning their beloved pastor and the fundamental belief of their church. I would think they see him as being “two faced” and dishonest too. This wouldn’t be such a big deal in most cases, but Mr. Obama is asking us to make him President of the United States. I’m going to have to tell him, respectfully, NO!
Those two facts are related. I think that fundamentals notwithstanding, the markets are struggling because it’s finally dawned on investors inside and outside of the US that this crackpot has a serious chance of being POTUS in a year. The markets can tolerate Hillary, but an unknown with many connections to radicals is enough to cause many to shelter their money somewhere else.
He’ll probably go down in flames soon, and the markets will rebound.
Victor, Whether Obama ever gets it—and I doubt he will—let’s hope the majority of American voters get it about him and the people in his inner circle. How could we listen to a man, a first lady and an spiritual advisor with those kinds of chips on their shoulders for four years? I shudder to imagine.
Pieter,
The difference between Wright and Falwall and Robertson is that Wright exulted in 9/11. He sounded happy that it happened, because the “US of KKK” got what it deserved.
It’s not the historical reasoning – its the happiness that America was attacked.
The candidacy of this man is not a fluke. His views, policy positions, and his educational experience have been out there for some time. The slightly-left-of-center or centrist Democratic Party no longer exists. Yes, there are people who are at those locations on the spectrum and they will generally and faithfully support their party to the end, but the large base of their party is more to the Left than they are. Obama is to the Left of Hillary Clinton, and she is Left-of-Center. The kind of people who have been putting Obama over the top will not abandon him because of this controversy. Both candidates will win states, but in the end I think Obama will have just enough delegates to overcome any last minute super delegate attempt to stop the train wreck.
The very same people who rioted in Chicago in 1968 and who voted for McGovern in 1972 have played a large role in education, media, and law. These people have done a very good job of indoctrinating two generations of young Americans to hate their civilization and their country.
It’s time for a showdown with the Far Left in this country: up or down. One way, or the other, the Left is going down to defeat in failure, either in November or in the November four years hence. And if the latter, let us hope that the nation can endure it and recover.
Obama’s been using a style very similar to the one Jimmy Carter used in 1976. I see a lot of parallels between the two elections and where the country has shifted.
Who himself (McCain) has an issue with close association with various religious figures who have variously claimed that America was founded to destroy Islam, Catholics are whores, and America deserved 9/11 because of its wickedness.
Are you referring to Hagee ?This seems like some kind of oblique (or not so oblique) attempt to smear McCain.
Maybe you could be more specific.
As for the Reverend Jeremiah, it’s obvious he gets off on his own verbiage and capacity to whip up the crowd.
His self-serving egomania is almost independent of the ridiculous content of the monologues.
That Barack has continued an association for over 20 years with a pastor of such obvious egomania and self-serving (Black Liberation Theology) diatribes is an indication of very poor judgment.
I think Barack hung in there for the “identity” provided in southside Chicago politics.
Actually, it was known long time ago that Obama was an active member of a black supremacist church. I suppose this explains why Hillary was so upset at the press for not questionning Obambi more thoroughly. Of course, the MSM was unwilling and/or afraid to touch him. Of course, the progressives (Rush Limbaugh, Hannity, Fox news) did not want to go after him so early in the game. So, the DNC was hit with the worst of all worlds – it got pamelled by the media, but it happened too late. I don’t see how the DNC recover from fielding a weak candidate. The only way out would be to convince Obambi to join hands with Hillary and sing Kumbaya. Will it happen? I don’t know.
Obama will carry the Democratic Black vote no matter what else is disclosed about his hypocrisy.
“Black Loyalty” is a factor that should not be ignored. I saw it in the O.J. verdict. Even though they knew he was guilty they celebrated the verdict. Had O.J. been white and Nicole black the jury would have rendered a “Guilty” verdict in fifteen minutes. Pastor Wright is an obvious “White people and America Hater.” Why does he continue to live in a Country he hates?
Open a “Whites Only” church and preach “Hate Blacks” and see if you can maintain a 30 year Pastorship?
American Christian Infidel
Michael Canzano
LaVerne , Ca.
Pieter, you are mistaken: Pastor Wright’s extremist views are far from uncommon in today’s Democratic Party.
Its a pity Obama choose to label his still living grandmother “who sacrificed so much for him” a a racist while he finds nothing that would make whites uncomfortable in his church. According to Cone who Wright brays about as the authority on black liberation theology, their God isn’t one of love or even related to Christianity. Its simply a race hustler’s vision of America.
To claim that Obama didn’t understand Wrights hatred is to ignore the 20 odd year association. Why did Obama tolerate such hatred? I believe most people can listen and connect the dots.
But to throw your granny under the bus and then urge us to understand the rage of blacks is beyond the pale. I wonder who many sane Americans will tolerate this man.
I hate to say it but in the past I couldn’t see any difference between the Hildabeast and Ovbama. But whatever Hillary is, I doubt she is a racist filled with hate.
..and have a creepy quality when listened to rather than read..
Yes. His exhorting that he “loves his enemies” in a hateful, resentful tone, for example.
So where is the candidate who represents us, the people born after 1980 who don’t see the “race” or skin color in every person we encounter? Obama in some ways is speaking to this group, whether you agree with what his religious affiliation says about him. But I am someone who wanted Mccain elected in 2000 and Obama speaks for how many Americans feel.
I don’t know about you, but it is fun to watch the unraveling Obama-drama. What was known to only the most attentive observers became painfully obvious to all. Obama ain’t no racial healer – but rather a slick snake oil salesman. He is very, very slick, I grant you that, but poor Obama had to square the circle – and this is cumbersome to do for even the smartest of the smart.
As you have heard, it was recently discovered by the astonished crowds that a presidential candidate with an untreatable messianic complex was an active member of a radical anti-American bigoted cult, which goes by the name of “Trinity United Church”. If I have to guess, the word “Trinity” refers to the group’s anti-Semitism, anti-Americanism and demand for government handouts. At least, they did not say it was a Holy Trinity. So now, the over-exposed Messiah is trying to reconcile his public image of a moderate high principled figure and the obvious truth. How exactly is he supposed to do so? Personally, I don’t exactly see any way for him to bamboozle the American electorate – because the issue is too clear-cut. For people who don’t get this simple truth I can only say that it’s amazing they can breath on their own, let alone why they are allowed to decide who will be the next president of the United States of America. This article is written for the rest of the public – and more specifically, the right-wing progressives who never had any illusions about Obambi.
I will start by stating the obvious – for 20 years Obama was an active member of an extremist church. Throughout the years he became very close with the pastor of the church – the very same guy who was screaming at the top of his lungs – “God Damn America”. I don’t know if the pastor was high on drugs or it was an acute case of indigestion – but his parishioners seemed to agree with his message. Moreover, Obama used this pastor as his political, spiritual, and no doubt sexual advisor. I suppose it is also necessary to add that Obama was not 5 years old when he joined this cult – he was a graduate of the Harvard Law School, a former editor of prestigious Harvard Law Review. In other words, he was a highly educated successful adult. Clearly, he made his decision willingly, and consciously. He knew exactly what he was doing, and he knew the guys he was befriending. There are two possible explanations for this – either he joined the cult because he believed in all the garbage that was spewed there, or he did it to advance his political career. Either of these explanations makes him unelectable. Why did he join this church and continued attending it for 20 years?
One can find an interesting angle on the situation by recalling the infamous “I have a scream” presidential candidate and the current head of the Democrat Party, Howard Dean. As you may remember, Howard left his church because he disagreed with its decision on the bike path. And just to drive the point even further, Howard is not a godless atheist – he is a self-professed biblical scholar, who takes religion very seriously. It would be very educational to watch his response when he is tracked by the ruthless journalists and asked about his view on Obambi’s enthusiastic participation in an anti-American cult. Is anti-American propaganda more damaging to a pastor than a refusal to build a bike path? Howard, tell us what you think…
Yesterday, Obama decided to deal with the issue head on. Long gone were the “I never heard him say any nasty things” denials. They did not ring true to anyone who has an IQ higher than the room temperature. So, the Messiah decided to talk to the nation, explain his position, clear up the air. Amazingly, Obama chose an interesting way of explaining his associations with the unseemly character – he lectured the American people on the race relationships. Which is equivalent to a robber, who stands up in court and explains the bewildered public that they need to earn their living and that stealing is immoral. Well, it’s all nice, but who the fuck are you to talk to us in this manner? Shouldn’t you clean up your act first? In the immortal words of Hippocrates, “heal yourself first, bitch”.
The speech was no doubt well constructed, and it clearly aimed to impress the people of lower intelligence. As one may have expected, Obama threw some white folks under the bus. What was not expected was that he would choose his own grandmother to sacrifice. According to Obama, she is a “typical white person” who is a racist and a bigot. I don’t exactly know why he did it – I suppose for one, he wanted to remind the white electors that he was also half white, so they should not take all the racist demagoguery from his pastor close to their hearts. Moreover, he obviously did not mind his grand-mother’s bigotry very seriously – which meant to say that racism is okay from all sides. In other words, Obama was ready to unite all racists and bigots in one big tent and then commandeer this crowd to bring the racial reconciliation to America. This is somewhat counter-intuitive to me, if you know what I mean. In the meantime, he also threw the blacks under the bus – according to Obama most blacks are racist, who hide their feelings from the white folks – but when they feel comfortable among their people – hell, they say really nasty things. And yes, they do believe in them. Notice a pathetic parade of black “leaders” on television asserting exactly same thing – yes, we are all like reverend Wright, he is one of us, we all talk like that, we all think like that. Well, if it is true (and I sure hope it is not), then how exactly are we supposed to get the racial reconciliation?! Heck, how can any voter trust any black politician? He may say nice things to us in public, but as you know that when he is with other blacks, you can see him wearing his black robe.
Of course, these are not the conclusions that Obama wanted us to make – but he was in a tight spot. Firstly, he could not completely disavow Wright because this would have raised even more questions on his authenticity. How can anyone trust him? For twenty years Obama is close buddies with bigots, Wright becomes his closest advisor, Obama regularly goes to his church – but when the shit hits the fan, Obama treats Wright as if he is radioactive. No doubt Obama looked at this perspective and decided to dance around the issue – but it’s not easy. In chess this situation is called “Zugzwang” – every move makes you weaker. In short, Obama was fucked from the start and no fancy talking could get him out of the hole.
The response to his speech was not surprising. The usual suspects thought that his speech was courageous, inspiring, and a huge risk to his political career as well as a revolutionary expose on race in America. A more sober analysis shows that Obama carefully constructed a “cover your ass” speech, which had been designed solely to save his political career. Can someone tell me – if the speech was so courageous – who exactly did Obama risk to alienate with this speech? How would any liberal change the speech and make it less “courageous”, and more politically beneficial to Obama? To ask these questions is to answer them. It’s all a game, nothing more. Obama is playing the public, playing the liberals, playing the media. I hope, only the last two are stupid enough to be caught in the game, and that the public is smart enough to know the truth. And the polls show that this is indeed the case. You can deceive liberals all the time, but it won’t work on the silent majority. After all, there is a good reason why America is the greatest country on Earth. If Americans were as stupid as some people think – it would not be so rich.