Obama and Wright: Who They Were Is Not Who They Are
Beset by scandal, Barack Obama and his pastor are trying to deflect criticism by highlighting their more humble and patriotic youths. Irrelevant! People change — and it's who we are today that really counts.
There is nothing the Democratic Party and their advocates in the media desire more than for society to forget all about Reverend Jeremiah Wright. Many suggest that the time has come to “move on.” Michelle Obama urges the public to return its focus to “issues like the economy and health care.” Soon we may hear that the whole matter “is so April 2008.” Yet the relationship between Wright and Senator Barack Obama remains pertinent for several reasons, one of which is the misleading attempt on both of their parts to sanitize history.
In Wright’s case, he claims that his military service somehow inoculates him from charges of anti-Americanism. When asked during an appearance at the National Press Club about his feelings for his country, he said: “I feel that those citizens who say that have never heard my sermons, nor do they know me. They are unfair accusations taken from sound bites and that which is looped over and over again on certain channels. I served six years in the military. Does that make me patriotic? How many years did Cheney serve?”
This won him applause from a highly partisan audience, which is not surprising as the media regularly accepts fallacious arguments for gospel. However, his response was nothing more than a false analogy based on the deceptive pretense that past is present. Wright’s words assume that the would-be Sherpa — who dubbed our nation “the U.S. of KKK-A” and further denounced the land that made him rich and famous with statements like “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” — is the same young man who volunteered to defend our shores nearly fifty years ago.
Of course, the Reverend Wright of today bears no more relation to the lad who affixed his name to Uncle Sam’s contract than he does Donald Rumsfeld. His hostility towards our nation is so evident that even the artful omitters and dodgers of the commentariat have desisted in their attempts to rationalize his diatribes. In my view, the reverend’s record of lambasting America for crimes committed, crimes exaggerated, and crimes entirely imagined takes precedence over any youthful flirtations he had with patriotism.
To fantasize that one’s essence and psyche remain static throughout the lifespan is patently absurd. Such an explanation is disproved by historical events and personal experience. That Wright has any appreciation for America — a nation hallowed by the world’s poor and oppressed — has long since been dispelled. Senator Obama’s spiritual mentor now assesses our past through the eyes of Howard Zinn, and darkness is flamboyantly stroked over light at every opportunity.
In 2008, minority groups are totally free from state-sponsored oppression and the only type of permissible discrimination is that practiced against white and Asian males — “social justice” by “affirmative action” — but this eventuality is immaterial to Reverend Wright. The Tinley Park millionaire can only acknowledge the reality of sin, whereas a present featuring a parishioner as president is but an illusion.
To racialist advocates, Bull Connor and his dogs lie waiting forever round every corner. Jim Crow is long dead but you would never know it from their utterances. Moreover, that segregation occurred in only a small subsection of America and was opposed by the general population is but a meaningless footnote to them.
The appropriate question to ask in regards to Wright is not, “Did he once serve his country?” Rather, it is, “Would he do it again if given the chance?” Clearly, to pose the question is to answer it. One who posits that “racism is how this country was founded and how this country is still run” would never lift a finger to defend it.
That time alters all things including outlook and personality is likewise suggested by Senator Obama. Last month he made use of the same fallacy as a means to combat allegations of elitism. Recall his infamous “bitter” comments in San Francisco. There, with a countenance reminiscent of an anthropologist describing the Yanomano, he explained to well-heeled donors why members of small industrial Midwestern towns cling to religion, guns, and a disdain for diverse peoples as if they were opiates.
Upon being rebuked for doing so he shrugged off insinuations that he was an upper-class elitist via the issuing of a false analogy: “I wasn’t born into a lot of money. I didn’t have a trust fund. I wasn’t born into fame and fortune. I was raised by a single mother with the help of my grandparents. My mother had to use food stamps at one point.”
Although factually accurate, his justification is entirely superfluous. Some adults may be trapped by the circumstances of their birth, but assuredly Barack Obama is not one of them. Just as with Wright, the rich man we see ubiquitously on news loops has evolved (or devolved) significantly since his early days. Senator Obama is more Hyde Park, Columbia, and Harvard than Kansas.
As an adult he chose the Leviathan, and the unions and lobbyists who swim alongside it like remoras, against the common man. Senator Obama may boast of “Change We Can Believe In,” but his brand of statism will make a dour economic forecast infinitely worse.
“Together We Can” is not an empty platitude. It promises salvation which is about as new as Karl Marx. The only “change” will be if Obama succeeds in convincing citizens to stop worrying and finally learn to love an ever-expanding government. “Together with Barack” amounts to forging the kind of reform championed by clerks at the Post Office and Department of Commerce.
Who but a new millennium elite would examine a three-trillion-dollar federal budget and conclude that raising taxes was the best way to finance it? Out of five thousand federal programs, Senator Obama is so far removed from daily struggle that he cannot identify a single initiative worthy of “sunsetting.” If he himself ever had to wait in lines or traverse acres of red tape, then he would be (at least slightly) inclined to declare war on pork and slash wasteful programs.
Clearly, Senator Obama’s past is not his present, and neither is mine. Albeit painful to admit, in 1988 I cast a ballot in the Michigan Democratic Party primary for Jerry Brown and voted for Michael Dukakis in the general election. Nobody tricked or coerced me into doing so. My decision stemmed from free will and family tradition.
My father came of age during World War II and believed in Franklin Delano Roosevelt more strongly than he did God. He instructed his only son that “Democrats care about the poor but Republicans care only about the rich.” I took him for his word. Armed with this providential wisdom — and an 18-year-old’s self-absorption — I told all who would listen that I was a Democrat.
As a college sophomore, some activists gave my friend Grange and me a couple of Dukakis/Ferraro signs. We traveled to nearby Shaker Heights and stood on a Saturday afternoon informing passersby that we “liked Mike.” Our knowing nothing about the candidate or never seriously contemplating affairs of state proved no barrier to pretension. “Feel, don’t think” was our unspoken motto and Michelle Obama would have been proud. Two decades later I ascertained that my father — while a very learned man — possessed knowledge about a plethora of subjects, but politics was not one of them.
Thus, is it fair to say that who I am today is who I was in 1988? Of course not. Those familiar with my work would scoff at such a notion because it would imply that I remain a leftist. As with Reverend Wright, the views I had as a youth do not correlate with those of the present. The decisions of my adolescence probably embarrass me in the same fashion that his do. Just as with Barack Obama and his humble origins, our situations reveal that the child is not always the father of the man.
Bernard Chapin wrote Women: Theory and Practice and Escape from Gangsta Island, along with a series of videos called Chapin’s Inferno. You can contact him at veritaseducation@gmail.com.
 |
 |
 |
Podcasts |  PJM Home |
Pajamas Media appreciates your comments that abide by the following guidelines:
1. Avoid profanities or foul language unless it is contained in a necessary quote or is relevant to the comment.
2. Stay on topic.
3. Disagree, but avoid ad hominem attacks.
4. Threats are treated seriously and reported to law enforcement.
5. Spam and advertising are not permitted in the comments area.
The clause regarding "hate speech" has been deleted because readers criticized it as being too loosely defined. We agreed.
These guidelines are very general and cannot cover every possible situation. Please don't assume that Pajamas Media management agrees with or otherwise endorses any particular comment. We reserve the right to filter or delete comments or to deny posting privileges entirely at our discretion. If you feel your comment was filtered inappropriately, please email us at story@pajamasmedia.com.
54 Comments
1. Ardeshir Dolat:Absolutely Bernard!
May 22, 2008 - 1:28 am 2. jw:I used to support the democrats but I am alright now!
I don’t think that Geraldine Ferraro was the Vice-Presidential candidate on the Democratic ticket with Michael Dukakis, but the Vice-Presidential candidate on the ticket with Fritz Mondale.
May 22, 2008 - 2:45 am 3. Marsouin:Irrelevant! People change — and it’s who we are today that really counts.
Couldn’t the same be true of McCain? “What have you done for us lately”?
May 22, 2008 - 5:39 am 4. politicalreacharound:So would it be fair to say that John McCain is no longer the centrist maverick he protrayed himself in 2000 because he is now a boot-licking Bush war hawk?
May 22, 2008 - 5:45 am 5. Barry Pryor:Do we really know this man that is about to take the helm of the most powerful country in the world, that so many have worked hard, fought and died to build and defend. I think we should see Obama or anyone else in the spotlight for a number of years and know his every prefercnce before giving him the key to the Golden Goose…
May 22, 2008 - 5:47 am 6. John:There is an old adage that says; “tell a lie often enough, and loud enough, and soon people will begin to believe it”. Teachers and Preachers should know better than to voice an opinion.
Now, I just need for the Obama machine, and Rev. Wright was most certainly a part of that machine, to infer to me, or about me, or rail from the pulpit once again that I’m a white racist. For as sure as God made little green apples, I will indeed become one. The fact that Obama has now thrown Wright out of his political game as being an expendable non-asset doesn’t fool me in the least. The fact remains, they were pals and cronies for over 20 years, they think alike and share the same opinions.
I think it was Ben Franklin who said it: “Tell me who your friends are, and I will tell you who you are.” Someone else said something about “Birds of a feather,,,,,,,”
All of which seems to mean something me.
May 22, 2008 - 6:32 am 7. politicalreacharound:Do you know what else is irrelevant? The opinion of conservative republicans on why they won’t vote for Obama. You made McCain your default vote. Don’t pretend that you would vote for someone with a D in front of their name regardless of position on issues or past history. And no Lieberman does not count for obvious reasons (please take him! We will take Hagel in exchange). Obama has never appealed to you hence all the lies about his character i.e. he is a Muslim (the Marxist label is the most laughable as no one besides nutty bloggers are buying into it). I understand that you are all trying to somehow rationalize the argument against Obama being president but in the end “that dog don’t hunt” and you will be severely disappointed come November.
May 22, 2008 - 7:51 am 8. David Wynn:“”The appropriate question to ask in regards to Wright is not, “Did he once serve his country?” Rather, it is, “Would he do it again if given the chance?” Clearly, to pose the question is to answer it. One who posits that “racism is how this country was founded and how this country is still run” would never lift a finger to defend it.”"
Might it be better to try and ascertain this answer than simply presume the response to be favorable to your position? I think you do a disservice to those in uniform by presuming they all think alike and never criticize America, via hyperbole or otherwise. Just because you and Wright disagree, why do you then think he won’t defend to the death the right to do so? Isn’t that what America’s really about?
May 22, 2008 - 8:11 am 9. baldilocks:“Moreover, that segregation occurred in only a small subsection of America and was opposed by the general population is but a meaningless footnote to them.”
Northeast cities like Chicago and Boston were just as segregated as the Old South.
But other than the above assertion, this is an excellent op-ed.
May 22, 2008 - 8:27 am 10. cfbleachers:The Marxist label is hardly laughable. And sophmoric insults won’t make a lifelong flirtation with Marxism disappear, nor will it make it a “distraction”.
Keep insulting everyone who doesn’t agree with leftist echo chamber screeds and what you will have left…is yet another 8 years of domination by Republicans.
What hard leftists don’t seem to comprehend, is that the reason the deadwood media is losing favor, the reason that Fox News dominates cable TV reporting, the reason that Air America can’t come within sniffing distance of conservative talk radio…is them.
They are obnoxious, usually uninformed, they all clang the same one-note screech from the same leftist hymnal. They are lemmings incapable of thinking for themselves and they are essentially braindead. They have no capacity to think critically, nor to think at all for themselves. They are told what to think by the national media and political “handlers”.
They are “for” what they are told to be “for” and they are against…well, everything else.
They are fed their opinions like little baby birds and they chirp incessantly at anyone who dares to oppose their pre-masticated drivel.
Here’s a clue. You aren’t convincing anyone, you are simply showing yourselves to be mindless lemmings. Obama has a lifelong flirtation with hard leftist worldviews and very hostile belief systems. It needs vetting. Get over it. That has NOTHING to do with McCain or any other candidate. It stands as an issue on its own.
Live with this fact…the majority of the people in this country wouldn’t vote for a hard leftist…you have to shroud him…to get him elected. In a phrase…hard leftism…sucks.
May 22, 2008 - 8:41 am 11. Justin:@ David Wynn:
Because he has made it clear in no uncertain terms that he despises America and given the way he talks he implies that Black people do not have any rights at all in America? Because he is an utter loon who pretends that slavery just ended last week and black people are being lynched daily with the full blessings of the USA government and white people everywhere?
May 22, 2008 - 9:23 am 12. anne:Dukakis Bentsen
May 22, 2008 - 9:54 am 13. huxley:Lee Harvey Oswald also served his country as a Marine — before he defected to the Soviet Union, then returned to America and assassinated President Kennedy.
No, military service is not a lifetime pass for loving one’s country.
May 22, 2008 - 9:59 am 14. politicalreacharound:cfbleachers: Your little rant was cute. I am not sure where you were getting insulted but since you insist you were I won’t disappoint. No maybe I won’t insult you but I will refute some of your comments before I tuck you into bed for the night. First the Marxist label of Obama does not stick (really no one believes it outside the righty blogs), he isn’t a Marxist and we aren’t going to be on a path to socialism when he gets elected, you are just scared of things you are unsure of which is common of small people confronted with the big world outside. The reason why Fox news is #1 is because a)the sensationalize the news, which Americans seem to love b)they stack big breasted blonds on all shows c)liberals and dems tend to get their news from a variety of sources to get a varied look at world events so they don’t get a singular view of what is going on. They watch CNN, MSNBC, CBS, Foxnews (to see the spin), NPR, BBC, PBS. Unlike conservative republicans who only watch FoxNews in order to prevent against their heads exploding when they see whats really going on with the world. As for thinking for themselves you aren’t going to sell that statement considering half of you still believe Saddam caused 9/11, WMDs are in Iraq and duct tape will save you from a terrorist attack. Again it is cute when you get angry and I can’t wait to see how angry you will be this fall. And for all you hardcore conservatives and Neocons who hate Obama and are shaking at the prospects of him becoming president just know this. You are the ones who created Obama and have given him the inside track to be president. If you hadn’t backed such ineffective, corrupt leaders you never would have had to worry about a black guy with a funny name selling change.
May 22, 2008 - 10:02 am 15. David Wynn:@Justin:
“he has made it clear in no uncertain terms that he despises America”
Actually, he’s criticized America, but the only uncertain terms he’s said is that he loves America. Check out the Bill Moyers interview to be crystal clear.
“given the way he talks he implies that Black people do not have any rights at all in America”
Talking about the modern incarnation of racism isn’t to say blacks don’t have rights in today’s society, only that there still exist discrepancies in the ideal of equality for all.
“Because he is an utter loon who pretends that slavery just ended last week and black people are being lynched daily with the full blessings of the USA government and white people everywhere”
May 22, 2008 - 10:15 am 16. Believer:If you could find that quote I would give you that point, but until then I think you’re misrepresenting Wright’s position, which while still extreme, isn’t as patently absurd as that statement.
Yes, I would imagine the majority of conservatives were far more liberal in their youth. As was I.
And I imagine it’s a far less frequent phenomenon to abandon conservative values for liberal ones as we age. What does this say about the man who does so? I’d be interested to know what generates that evolution.
In regard to favoring small government vs. big government, it seems obvious to me which is the more mature position. One outgrows the desire for “daddy” to take care of him. He wants to be self-sufficient, independent and free. He’s aware that others need to grow up as well; too much help will cripple a man, leaving him infantile.
Wright, for whatever reason, chose to serve his country – defend her – in the military. His words and writings now reflect a hatred of her such that it’s hard to believe he would defend her now. Rather, he might share the belief of Ayers and Dohrn that she needs to be overthrown.
Wright, as a pastor, is well-schooled in scripture. His father was also one. Whatever knowledge and love of God he might have had in his youth, he teaches a far different theology today. He incites anger and resentment in the hearts of those who hear his message. The antithesis of Christ.
While Wright deceives and stunts the spiritual growth of his parishoners, Obama deceives as well, pursuing a course that stifles growth toward independence and self-sufficiency. This is a deadly pairing at work in a most unfortunate community.
It is a tragedy anywhere – I wish it could be excised from existence – South Chicago deserves better. As does all America.
May 22, 2008 - 10:18 am 17. tanstaafl:In my view, the reverend’s record of lambasting America for crimes committed, crimes exaggerated, and crimes entirely imagined takes precedence over any youthful flirtations he had with patriotism.
Speaking of crimes entirely imagined, one of the Reverend’s (lesser publicized) claims was that thousands of women and children were killed in Bill Clinton’s bombing of the pharmaceutical plant in Sudan. As it so happens, the raid happened at night and injuries were sustained by a small number of people, 12 comes to mind.
Reminiscent of JWright intentionally misinforming the congregation about AIDS or Sudan or any number of topics, Barry Obama has apparently borrowed a techniquefrom the good pastor’s page in misinforming his own devoted…congregation.
From Michelle Malkin
Last May, (Obama) claimed that tornadoes in Kansas killed a whopping 10,000 people: “In case you missed it, this week, there was a tragedy in Kansas. Ten thousand people died — an entire town destroyed.” The actual death toll: 12.
See Malkin’s column for a litany of other gaffes, some of which seem to have been used for dramatic effect, damn the facts. Barry claiming Selma inspired his Kenyan dad and Wichita KS mom to make him is too good. It’s like Hillary claiming to be named after Sir Edmund Hillary, when she was born some number of years before he even gained notoriety for the ascent of Mt. Everest. We won’t mention Bosniagate in the context of the free and happy use of hyperbole to sway the rubes. Will we ?
May 22, 2008 - 10:48 am 18. ElliotNC:It is valid to say that military service from years ago does not establish present frame of mind.
Let’s not forget that Terry Nichols and Timothy McVeigh were decorated Army veterans.
May 22, 2008 - 11:03 am 19. tanstaafl:I’d be interested to know what generates that evolution.
In his interview with Bill Moyers, Wright relates an incident when he was serving as a medic in the Marine Corps.
He assisted at some procedure on Lyndon Baines Johnson. (a picture was shown of him standing behind a prone, anesthetized Johnson)
At some point, he left the room to get coffee. As he relates the incident, when he returned he was tackled by secret service agents shouting “there he is”, spilling coffee everywhere.
It’s tough to believe JWright on anything, but even a modicum of truth to this story might provide a clue to his “turn”.
May 22, 2008 - 11:12 am 20. cfbleachers:“cfbleachers: Your little rant was cute. I am not sure where you were getting insulted but since you insist you were I won’t disappoint.”
From what I’ve seen of you so far, it’s always short on content and long on insults. Puerile, uninformed, mostly leftist talking points. You are about to get schooled..so strap yourself in, the ride could get a little bumpy.
No maybe I won’t insult you but I will refute some of your comments before I tuck you into bed for the night. First the Marxist label of Obama does not stick (really no one believes it outside the righty blogs), he isn’t a Marxist and we aren’t going to be on a path to socialism when he gets elected, you are just scared of things you are unsure of which is common of small people confronted with the big world outside.
Sorry to disappoint you, but his entire lifelong history seems to suggest otherwise. Unless you know him up close and personally (or I suppose, been successful at a political reacharound with him), and no…unlike you and other hard leftists…I don’t tremble at opposing political parties and create bogeymen out of Presidents and their advisors.
I also don’t march in lockstep like a braindead zombie. I decide issues based upon digging for facts. I don’t get a tingle up my leg (I don’t engage in reacharound’s for Obama, so that may explain it), I don’t swoon, faint or drool when he speaks.
As for your smug, pedantic, elitist tone…I suspect most here would dwarf you in accomplishment, degree, intellect, …you know…virtually every measure of success. Your arrogance is only surpassed by your lack of substance for earning it.
I don’t like Socialism, I’m not a fan of Communism, I think Maoism is a failure and I think Marxism is an utter waste of time. I think Black Separatism and Louis Farrakhan’s Nation of Islam are destructive voices in this country. I think Jeremiah Wright’s version of black liberation theo-politics are equally destructive.
How about Sen. Obama and HIS attraction, attachment, lifelong mentoring and SEEKING out of those worldviews and belief systems? Scared to discuss them? Frightened to death of exposing them? Trembling at the thought of digging into them? I bet the whole south forty you are. Terrified. Because it pulls the mask off the Lone Ranger a bit, if we connect those dots. And you need desperately to “cling” to the revisionist charade that they not only don’t matter…but that they didn’t exist in the first place.
The reason why Fox news is #1 is because a)the sensationalize the news, which Americans seem to love b)they stack big breasted blonds on all shows c)liberals and dems tend to get their news from a variety of sources to get a varied look at world events so they don’t get a singular view of what is going on. They watch CNN, MSNBC, CBS, Foxnews (to see the spin), NPR, BBC, PBS.
Hysterically funny, if intended as broad farce. First, you can keep whistling past the graveyard all you like…Fox News is #1…because all the other deadwood ghost towns you mentioned sing from the same hymnal.
Second, it is so ridiculously funny that you suggest that “dems and liberals” watch Fox to see the “spin”. They wanted to commit suicide when any candidate even appeared on the network.
Here’s a fact that will be rough as a cob for you….you leftists stole the information stream for four decades and raped it. Your fun is over. Your forged documents, fauxtography, faked stories, one-sided slants…over. Your rape of our information stream…now gets fisked…daily. Sucks to be you.
Unlike conservative republicans who only watch FoxNews in order to prevent against their heads exploding when they see whats really going on with the world. As for thinking for themselves you aren’t going to sell that statement considering half of you still believe Saddam caused 9/11, WMDs are in Iraq and duct tape will save you from a terrorist attack.
Nobody believes Saddam “caused” 9-11, but only a fool believes he wouldn’t assist global terrorism. In fact, it was the CLINTON administration that said so…you wouldn’t know that…it’s not in your hymnal. How’s that corn ethanol working out for you, though?
Again it is cute when you get angry and I can’t wait to see how angry you will be this fall. And for all you hardcore conservatives and Neocons who hate Obama and are shaking at the prospects of him becoming president just know this. You are the ones who created Obama and have given him the inside track to be president. If you hadn’t backed such ineffective, corrupt leaders you never would have had to worry about a black guy with a funny name selling change.
I’m a centrist…a true one…not a leftist posing as one. I was once a liberal and stopped being braindead a while ago. Obama is a creation of hard leftism. And don’t look now…but the Republican leaders have been dominating national elections for decades.
As for corruption…I don’t think you want to go toe to toe with the seedy Democrats as your corner men.
I don’t hate Sen. Obama. I don’t hate Bernie Sanders. One of them admits to being a Socialist. The other is peddling change.
May 22, 2008 - 11:26 am 21. Frank Logan:politicalreacharound
“you are just scared of things you are unsure of which is common of small people confronted with the big world outside.”
Please explain what makes you such a risk taker. From your writings, it’s apparent that you’re not one. The cloud of smug you have your head in is indicative of a know-it-all, who never test his ideas in the market place, where there are consequences for being wrong.
May 22, 2008 - 11:40 am 22. politicalreacharound:Its easy to be smug when you are running up against opponents who have been gravely wrong for the past 8 years and are still too blind to realize it. Plus my candidate the “black national marxist muslim” (your words) is going to wipe his feet on the casket of your candidate. Your time is over, your numbers are down, the brand is dying and this November will be the pillow to the face that should have happened 4 years ago. But your websites are cute, really you guys are funny when you’re mad.
May 22, 2008 - 11:54 am 23. huxley:This has been one of the strangest, most unexpected election years since WWII. I think it’s foolish for anyone to be smug about what they think will happen in November.
May 22, 2008 - 1:20 pm 24. Frank Logan:political reacharound: If Obama doesn’t win Florida and Ohio, he has the same chance of winning the presidency as you do. He’s behind in both.
May 22, 2008 - 2:25 pm 25. tanstaafl:Nobody believes Saddam “caused” 9-11, but only a fool believes he wouldn’t assist global terrorism. In fact, it was the CLINTON administration that said so…
It was also the CLINTON administration that signed into law the Iraq Liberation Act in 1998, officially making it the policy of the United States to remove Saddam from power.
Iraq Liberation Act
There is a sad relationship between the zealotry of (many) Obamamaniacs and the decline in public education over several decades now in the United States.
May 22, 2008 - 2:38 pm 26. Steve:political reacharound
One only needs to read your posts to see the smug and condescening additude of the left and that’s why Obama will not have the walk to the White House that he expects.
I also love it how the left goes deaf when people bring up Clintons support for regime change in Iraq. In fact didn’t Clinton do more then that? Ordering Operation Desert Fox, the bombing of Iraq to destroy guess what? WMD!
May 22, 2008 - 3:24 pm 27. John:@tanstaafl:
“In his interview with Bill Moyers, Wright relates an incident when he was serving as a medic in the Marine Corps.”
I missed that one. As far as I knew, all Marine medics back then were US Navy Hospital Corpsmen, not Marines. Someone can clarify that for me, but if the Rev. is claiming to have been a Marine medic, something is not quite right here.
Help me out here…
May 22, 2008 - 7:20 pm 28. Believer:Thanks, Tanstaafl,
I’ve been happy to read your contributions on other threads. This is an interesting bit of information. There may be truth in this, but as you say, it’s hard to know what one can believe.
I’m looking at this from the perspective of the Christian, whose faith – and ability to forgive – is sometimes tested. It would seem he could not live up to the high calling of his faith. None of us can. And that’s when we turn to God to be for us what we cannot be: as forgiving as we would want others to be toward us.
Instead, it appears he chose to nurse this wound and hang on to his anger. He now teaches others to do the same. I’ve said on another thread, I hope he returns like the prodigal son. Many fall away only to return with greater faith.
It would be wonderful if he were to return to TUCC with the Truth. They need to hear what will save them, not enslave them.
May 22, 2008 - 7:21 pm 29. Justin:What politicalreacharound, and other liberals, don’t realize is that it is this very attitude, at least in part, that has become part of the leftist culture that has lost them so many elections and is what is going to cost Obama the White House in November. They are, simply put, the most obnoxious people on the planet. We get insinuations that if we don’t vote for Obama we are racists. Hell, they will probably still think we are racists even if we do. They need someone to feel superior to after all. We get smugged to the third degree, but very little in the way of explanation, if we ask why did he hang out with terrorists, people with clear socialist leanings, and what Obama’s wife meant when she said “People in this country are ready for change and hungry for a different kind of politics and … for the first time in my adult life I am proud of my country because it feels like hope is finally making a comeback”.
What the left thinks when they spit on us when we question any of these things is that they have somehow won us over with venom and arrogance they put into there words. My theory on why they think that is because that is how they were won over to the left, at least in part. They are weak people and when they see confidence, assholes in other words, they flock to it in order to share in it. In other words its grade school all over again with them. What they can’t realize, which may be for the best since it defeats the hardcores often, is that healthy people who have a disagreement with the left are usually repulsed by people like politicalreacharound.
Take the difference between Kerry and Dean last election. People who got calls from Kerry’s people but remained undecided or disagreed with them were treated respectfully. Dean gathered a far more rabid crowd and when they called people or talked to them they got obnoxious when they didn’t fall all over themselves in regards to Dean. Kerry lost the last election by a nudge. Dean, on the other hand, would have lost it by a land slide. Why? Because while Dean could energize the base, everyone who wasn’t a committed Democrat despised him.
What we are seeing in this election is a Howard Dean campaign, not a Kerry campaign. We have politicalreacharound who has happily insinuated to us that we are scared of a black man in office (as if there was a guy here who wouldn’t give his right arm to see Colin Powell run and win).
politicalreacharound is reminiscent of the Dean campaign and the people who ran it. To them Dean was the only acceptable choice and you were slime as far as his supporters were concerned you weren’t another one of his Zombies. I remember chatting with one once and it was… interesting. And I heard from friends about others. Kerry’s people by contrast were somewhat more respectful. They must have all evaporated somehow, because when I look and turn on my television politicalreacharound and his ilk seem to be all that is left of the Democratic party.
May 22, 2008 - 8:47 pm 30. huxley:Believer — I can’t help but feel that Obama failed an important test when he didn’t rise to the occasion of challenging the Rev. Wright’s excesses and help lead that congregation to a better place.
If Obama genuinely thought that Rev. Wright was misleading his church, it was on Obama to make that right. Yet he did nothing. I can’t tell if Obama agreed with Wright or was spineless or cynically using Trinity church for his own political purposes. In any of those three cases, Obama showed that he isn’t ready to lead America and the free world in 2008.
May 22, 2008 - 9:33 pm 31. Believer:Hi Huxley:
Yes, Obama failed my tests of character and judgment early on. I didn’t even like the way he eliminated his competition in his early political races.
My best guess is he joined Trinity to further his political ambitions. It offered him a large voting block and gave him the credibility he was told he needed in the black community. I’ve been most vocal about my disgust for a man who would place his two young children in the pews of that church. And I’m sorry I’ve been so judgmental. Because I don’t think he knows better.
The man is sadly, in my opinion, a lost soul. I don’t think he knows what to believe. Or even who he is. I’m assuming you know his history. When I remind myself of it, it helps me regard him more charitably. But still, we all should grow up at some point.
Both he and Wright might very well be the narcissists phychologists would claim are incurable. I don’t want to believe that. I always hold out hope that man can change.
If it were to happen at all, it would probably be Wright – I even heard him say during the Bill Moyers interview something about “self-examination” and quickly followed it with, “that’s why I talk about Black culture.” I almost jumped out of my chair. To me, it was God at work in him (though he was rejecting it) telling him to look into his heart to see the error of his ways.
I’ll continue to pray for them both and for the lives they touch. But you’re right, Obama is not ready to lead us.
May 23, 2008 - 1:02 am 32. tanstaafl:John, “medic” was my word, possibly not the right one.
You can watch/read the whole interview HERE
BILL MOYERS: He (Wright) served six years in the military: two as a marine, and four in the Navy as a cardiopulmonary technician. That’s where our paths crossed for the only time.
That’s Jeremiah Wright, behind the I.V. pole, monitoring President Lyndon Johnson’s heart as he was recovering from gall bladder surgery at Bethesda Naval Hospital. And right behind him is a very young me. I was the President’s Press Secretary.
May 23, 2008 - 6:31 am 33. Believer:So glad you gave that link, Tanstaaf,
I’ve been wanting to listen again – to see if it was wishful thinking what I thought I heard from Wright. It wouldn’t be the firs time!
May 23, 2008 - 8:47 am 34. Chris Jones:cfbleachers:
I have to hand it to you, that was one of the most beautiful intellectual beat downs I’ve ever been fortunate enough to witness.
You had “reacharound” running out of here carrying his clothes.
Your analysis of far-left ideology was so good that it caused a tingling sensation to run up my leg and appears to be spreading to the other leg even as I type this.
May 23, 2008 - 9:33 am 35. Justin:@ cfbleachers:
Good intellectual smack down. I enjoyed reading your response.
May 23, 2008 - 10:09 am 36. Believer:Oh, boy, I just started reading that Moyers’ transcript.
Wright saying, “You can’t be what you ain’t seen.” Referring to his desire to help young people realize their dreams of being doctors or lawyers.
He doesn’t realize it’s not his job to do that. He – and Obama – can offer all the opportunity to blacks that they want: to have as much of the “world” as they (foolishly) dream of.
But what they fail to understand is those things are worthless if one’s heart isn’t in the right place.
And those kids “ain’t seen” that from that pulpit.
We don’t have far to look to see the foolishness of having a tremendous education with economic security rather than a loving, forgiving and grateful heart:
Exhibit A: Michelle Obama
May 23, 2008 - 10:16 am 37. tanstaafl:I agree, Believer, that JWright exhibits some contradictory impulses.
At more than a few points in that (fawning, softball)interview, you’d be scratching your head to try to figure out where he might be going.
It occurs to me that JWright is torn between the notoriety and wealth he has garnered in Southside Chicago* politics and some kind of inkling that what he does in the name of personal prestige (like praise Louis Farrakhan) doesn’t exactly square with the less “worldly” side of things.
JWright might rail against whitey, but has built his own huge retirement home in a largely white (2% black) gated golf community near Chicago, Henley Park.
*You know, where gang members have recently been slaughtering each other with alacrity ?
May 23, 2008 - 10:33 am 38. Just Say no to FOX:@ tanstaafl Michelle Malkin is a FOX lady who writes gossip politics who said “its ok for people to vote for the better looking candidate”. She has her own agenda. Web hits. She doesn’t report news she reports her opinions. And I respect you and your vote. No matter who its for. But is it hate of America to point out some things that were decisions made by elected officials that resulted in the things Rev Wright lambasted? The Majority of the things he said are true. The 2 pastors McCain is associated with are way worse. But the hypocrites will say different. Wright(colorfully) just mentioned the things that previous administrations and officials did. That is not hate of America or Whites. Its anger of the Actions. And you are not in that group unless you support U.S. imperialism or black oppression. And as far as Aids. The U.S. govt sponsored the TUSKEEGEE experiment on black men(intentionally infected black men with syphilis)its a rational debate if they can do that Along with other Jim Crow ideals and atrocities.On top of the proof of engineering biological weapons by the U.S. And because you and I may want the best for Africas poor along with the charities. Our Govt policies don’t reflect that by far.So it would be irresponsible not to question HIV/AIDS….. Patriotism is support of ones homeland and a just Government and soldiers abroad. We are not obligated to support our Govt. tyranny.If that were the case we would still be a colony of England.I am not taking any sides. But the history is there if you want to make a informed opinion. And why is it Obama is the elitist? All the other candidates have much much more personal wealth than him. Please give me a break. Thats all about a black man having more than you, being intelligent, and not being a actor or athlete. The same people who think Obama is a elitist hated the “Cosby Show”.
May 23, 2008 - 11:49 am 39. Night Owl:Justin said:
“They must have all evaporated somehow, because when I look and turn on my television politicalreacharound and his ilk seem to be all that is left of the Democratic party.”
I get the feeling that many Democrats believe their failure in 2004 was because they did not go left enough. How else to explain the choice of Obama over Clinton, or any other more centrist Dem.
Like I’ve said before, I believe the Dems failures in the recently past Presidential races have been because they have allowed themselves to be hijacked by radical lefties and their elitist supporters.* These people are indeed repellent to any American who is not a rabid America-hating ideologue. Just as repellent as racists and haters on the extreme right, who we don’t hear as much from, since the Repubs appear to be wise enough to distance themselves from those people. More sensible than the Dems, who openly embrace and court their loonies, seemingly because they aren’t even aware how loony they are. Then the Dem enabling media foolishly gives the radicals every opportunity to expose their silliness in the media, with little or no rebuke.
As for Obama’s chances, as Huxley said it is too early to make a prediction. My gut says he will lose, (as it said of Kerry in 2004) for the reasons I stated above. But I won’t put money on it. The traditional attitudes and mores of this country may have changed more than I am aware. And the so-called negatives of the Republican brand (which will be defined in greater detail by the Dem enablers of the media in the coming months) may outweigh the negatives of the Democratic “elect the party made up of people that are better than you, you racist, sexist hick” brand.
*In light of the topic of this article, I consider if it is possible that the Dem party has always been this way, and it is I who have become more conservative as I’ve matured. Could be. I leave that to the political historians. The above is just my view as a middle-aged, college educated, blue-state born and residing, registered independent, non-ideologue.
May 23, 2008 - 12:13 pm 40. Believer:Could not agree with you more,Tanstaafl,
And it makes you wonder if any of them is at all aware of the hypocrisy. Or if they care…
Just came from “Communists for Obama” – another good read. Will head back now to the transcript.
May 23, 2008 - 12:32 pm 41. Truth:Yes the dems wanna raise taxes responsibly. And the repubs want to cut taxes. but what most people don’t understand is when taxes are cut we just borrow from the FED bank(which is not federal it is a private bank for profit) or from other countries like China. And most of the tax cuts are for the corporations and wealthy. Not the middle and working class. WE ARE MAXXED OUT. So the dems are honest. We will be leaving a debt for the next generation that keeps getting bigger making us less independent and a weaker nation along with a declining dollar. That means more war and more foreign influence. Do you really think we are gonna put real pressure on China to clean up their act. No we won’t they own us. You wanna continue running the country the way most Americans manage their money. With a Visa. I don’t.
Just because the writer is using Wright for his political agenda. Instead of showing genuine contempt.I had to remind people of the real issues.
May 23, 2008 - 1:39 pm 42. Shane:Hey Truth;
May 23, 2008 - 3:10 pm 43. Believer:Here is a novel approach to taxes. Lower the spending. If we are so maxxed out, why is the democrat party trying so hard to bail out lenders? Why do they want to nationalize health care? Why do the democrats always vote in favor of shipping US dollars over seas instead of drilling our own oil? As far as tax cuts for the corportions, just a reality check genius, if we raise corporate taxes — aren’t they going to raise the prices of goods and services to pay those taxes? So really the democrat party lies to the citizens. Instead of telling the truth, “the democrats want to raise taxes on all citizens poor and rich” they cloak it in corporate taxes.
Night Owl:
“…openly embrace and court their loonies…”
Remember, Night Owl, they don’t care who votes for them; they’ve been known to embrace and court dead people…
May 23, 2008 - 4:11 pm 44. tanstaafl:The U.S. govt sponsored the TUSKEEGEE experiment on black men(intentionally infected black men with syphilis)…
Is that what they told you ? Sounds a lot like the Reverend JWright’s AIDS claim.
In the Tuskegee experiment, antibiotics were withheld from black men who had (already) contracted syphilis in order to “experiment” and see the results of a withholding of treatment. However, no one was “intentionally infected” with syphilis.
That said, there is no way to rationalize that it was a disgraceful chapter in America’s history,
I think Michelle Malkin is smart and very incisive.
And why is it Obama is the elitist?
It’s a conclusion I’ve drawn, having watched the man and listened closely. The remarks (he thought private) before the rich audiences in San Francisco were merely the final tipping of his hand.
An élitist attitude isn’t always (or even necessarily) a function of personal wealth, although the Obamas are very well off these days.
May 23, 2008 - 4:51 pm 45. tanstaafl:The same people who think Obama is a elitist hated the “Cosby Show”.
Eh wot ? I thought the Cosby show was very funny, tho’ I didn’t watch it regularly.
I also think Bill Cosby is hugely admirable today for the message he propagates, especially to black youth. I cheer every I hear him speak to reality instead of (Jesse Jackson’s, JWright’s et al) continual appeal to and reinforcement of victimhood.
May 23, 2008 - 4:59 pm 46. Justin:The same people who think Obama is a elitist hated the “Cosby Show”.
I loved the Cosby Show and watched it every day religously when I was young.
May 23, 2008 - 8:25 pm 47. Justin:I have a question: why is there such a pathological need for the Democrats to believe that everyone who stands in there way on any issue defaults as a racist. We aren’t going to vote for Obama, though I confess originally, back when he was The Man With No Past, I actually got suckered into his hype and was going to vote for him so America would have its first black president, and so we are now all racists because we can see through the hype and look at the man on the other side of it all.
The left thinks we are all a bunch of stereotypes. They, on the other hand, ARE a bunch of stereotypes. Calling your oponnents racists for disagreeing with a black man or not wanting to vote for him is the standard stereotype of the left. And they are practically all living that cookie cutter mold.
Seriously, we are racists because the radical far left liberal we are voting against is black? Has any one on this forum head any liberal commentators on the news, or politicians, or grass roots people, or just anyone on the left who have flat out said that people who are voting against Obama aren’t doing it because of his Race? It makes no sense to me that they can’t see this about themselves and realize how screwed up in the head they are.
May 23, 2008 - 9:24 pm 48. Truth:Shane I actually am A Genius Thanks:
May 24, 2008 - 6:26 am 49. Just Say no to FOX:Bear Sterns? Dems don’t wanna drill for oil because of the enviromental impact and they know its a band-aid and would Rather Develop energy alternatives(I Am A Oil Executive).And some things need more Gov’t. like the Healthcare System. If they spent less on lobbying Washington The Drug companies and Doctors will still live a better life than most. It works for the postal service and Railroads.As far as corporate taxes go you simply introduce legislation that prohibits Gouging. And if that doesn’t work you simply raise import or export taxes. How do you cut spending on programs who gets cut out who is less deserving? You might cancel your grandmothers knitting class she looks forward to.
I simply am saying it is not crazy for this to be a debatable issue (AIDS and The U.S Gov’t)when the Gov’t can do things such as this.
I apologize for not being 100% accurate but neither were you.
You can research more if you choose to be informed.
July 25, 2002 –Thirty years ago today, the Washington Evening Star newspaper ran this headline on its front page: “Syphilis Patients Died Untreated.” With those words, one of America’s most notorious medical studies, the Tuskegee Syphilis Study, became public.
“For 40 years, the U.S. Public Health Service has conducted a study in which human guinea pigs, not given proper treatment, have died of syphilis and its side effects,” Associated Press reporter Jean Heller wrote on July 25, 1972. “The study was conducted to determine from autopsies what the disease does to the human body.”
The next morning, every major U.S. newspaper was running Heller’s story. For Morning Edition, NPR’s Alex Chadwick reports on how the Tuskegee experiment was discovered after 40 years of silence.
The Public Health Service, working with the Tuskegee Institute, began the study in 1932. Nearly 400 poor black men with syphilis from Macon County, Ala., were enrolled in the study. They were never told they had syphilis, nor were they ever treated for it. According to the Centers for Disease Control, the men were told they were being treated for “bad blood,” a local term used to describe several illnesses, including syphilis, anemia and fatigue.
For participating in the study, the men were given free medical exams, free meals and free burial insurance.
At the start of the study, there was no proven treatment for syphilis. But even after penicillin became a standard cure for the disease in 1947, the medicine was withheld from the men. The Tuskegee scientists wanted to continue to study how the disease spreads and kills. The experiment lasted four decades, until public health workers leaked the story to the media.
By then, dozens of the men had died, and many wives and children had been infected. In 1973, the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People (NAACP) filed a class-action lawsuit. A $9 million settlement was divided among the study’s participants. Free health care was given to the men who were still living, and to infected wives, widows and children.
But it wasn’t until 1997 that the government formally apologized for the unethical study. President Clinton delivered the apology, saying what the government had done was deeply, profoundly and morally wrong:
“To the survivors, to the wives and family members, the children and the grandchildren, I say what you know: No power on Earth can give you back the lives lost, the pain suffered, the years of internal torment and anguish.
“What was done cannot be undone. But we can end the silence. We can stop turning our heads away. We can look at you in the eye and finally say, on behalf of the American people: what the United States government did was shameful.
“And I am sorry.”
When did slavery end?
May 24, 2008 - 7:10 am 50. Captain Hate:Not to excuse the Tuskegee study, but to this day the FDA still conducts studies on drugs in which a group of people suffering from a disease is given a placebo. It’s not quite the same thing and everybody should understand the need for a control group, but it’s probably of scant comfort to the members of the group. How are they not “human guinea pigs” and when do they get a presidential apology?
May 25, 2008 - 6:33 am 51. tanstaafl:I apologize for not being 100% accurate but neither were you…You can research more if you choose to be informed.
Where was I inaccurate, Just Say No ?
I stated basically what your “research” states, that antibiotics were withheld.
I corrected your rash and inaccurate statement, that the men were “intentionally infected” with syphilis.
It seems like you did your research after the fact, after automatically parroting what you’d seen written or said elsewhere without bothering to inform yourself first.
May 25, 2008 - 12:37 pm 52. just say no to FOX:First of all I made that reference to let naive Americans know this countrys officials are capable of the unthinkable that the colorful Rev. mentioned.
Second. When you conduct a study then during that time a cure or treatment is developed.Then you purposely withhold it. You intentionally infected men, women, children, and a community. No matter how you spin it. And what is it if its not intentional(unfortunate? Sorry this was criminal.). 25 years after the cure this was continued.
Not even including the stories of drunk men being coerced into sleeping with prostitutes suspected of being infected. Because that can’t be proven.
My point is proven. You can’t say a man is a racist or hates America Because he merely brings attention to things you don’t want to hear. And is rightfully suspicious of AIDS/HIV based on previous experience, actions, or inactions.
And look at captain hates message. So irrelevant its funny.Their argument is juvenile. But its typical of a denier. The issue is about the things this country can and will do and has done that most turn a blind eye to and then get angry when they get called on it. And pretend it’s imagined.
off topic——-Did anyone see where FOX Reported that Moorehouse University had its first valedictorian and he’s white…..which wasn’t a problem if it were true. The truth is its a mainly black college and had its first white valedictorian.
May 26, 2008 - 5:16 am 53. Pajamas Media » Why I Feel Absolutely No White Guilt:FOX constantly lies to its viewers. Then they bring that crap into the realworld. Like the responses here.
[...] Democratic frontrunner in an unsavory fashion. It also illuminates the way in which Obama’s past clashes resoundingly with who he claims to be. To our elites, forgiveness is the perpetual rule in [...]
Jul 11, 2008 - 8:40 am 54. Why I Feel Absolutely No White Guilt | Rob Chapman:[...] the Democratic frontrunner in an unsavory fashion. It also illuminates the way in which Obama’s past clashes resoundingly with who he claims to be. To our elites, forgiveness is the perpetual rule in [...]
Jul 14, 2008 - 12:19 am