Reader Posts
« previous | TPM CAFÉ READER POSTS HOME | next »
Thomas Jefferson should be angry.
Thomas Jefferson should be angry.
If it weren't for Mr. Jefferson's "wall of separation" reference to the First Amendment, I could understand the impasse of today's media and my fellow kinsmen.
However, it has been plainly understood that we should observe a separation of church and state for our own good; for the good of our free nation.
I am dismayed that no one has picked up on this in more depth, even as the current situation we face is fueled by more and more publicity and fractious commentary.
Reverend Wright is a successful religious man, community activist and certified American, like it or not.
Certainly, he can be accurately described to be Senator Obama's pastor for 20 years. But to somehow suggest this long acquaintance as being a direct funneling of influence to Senator Obama is beyond base. For lack of a better story, Reverend Wright has been made to be the little bird on Senator Obama's shoulder. What evidence of Senator Obama's action over the 20 year period in question can we say Reverend Wright has had an influence to the point where Senator Obama's judgement has become Mr. Wrights own personal vision? We can't.
Not once in the hours upon hours and millions of dollars of on-air time has someone attempted to explained this, or refute it.
I have not spoken with Senator Obama personally, but it comes across as a bit obvious that he married into a family that was religious and active in the black church, which is fine by all means. He even took this new part of his life seriously--to discover what his loved ones were attracted to-- and decided to find more of God in himself (to paraphrase his own words). If one maintains his values and his or her own sensibility, isn't it fair to say that someone who is new to the concept of a Christian God can see a lot of good in how trusting the values and morality issues raised in the basics of Christianity can lead to the growth of his or her already existing values, regardless of the messenger?
I would categorize myself as someone in the same camp as Senator Obama. I had not been drawn to organized "religion" by nature, but hold myself to very high standards in regards to morality and service to others (as I matured, I saw these as inexplicably linked, for better or worse). If I were to meet and hear Reverend Wright (without all the national attention), I could certainly absorb a lot of what he has to say and compare it towards my own thoughts--and if anything--strengthen my core principals forever. This is how I could come to tolerate Mr Wright.
No matter who is saying it, or how/when/why, preaching the goodness of morality and happiness towards others is just that. Any sophisticated listener could parse through the personal injections that all speakers possess and find the fact and truth to what is being expressed, then mold it into their own life.
And once again, I think it is fair to say that Senator Obama has displayed an unusual sensitivity towards parsing through the thickness of culture and emerges from such situations with a hardened and steadfast resolve to continue improving himself and others around him as if they were truly his brothers and sisters.
This is why I am attracted to him. It is what I practice doing in my own life.
For all of the hard work and self discipline that it takes to even come close to where the Senator is in his life, it is nothing short of an insult to suggest that he is a wooden dummy on a stage with a dark puppeteer propping him up proper for the world to awe.
And while I would hope that more people would equate this to their own experiences, it seems that we have failed as a nation thus far in helping each other recognize these basic facts.
No matter how in depth the perception is, I still have belief that my fellow Americans can see through this. We have to. We will.
Yes. We. Can.
Comments (12)
Here we go again. Jeremiah Wright was in a very real sense a surrogate father to Obama. Obama chose Wright. Wright brought Obama to Jesus. Inspired him. Gave him his black identity. Was his spiritual adviser and guide. He married Barrack and Michelle. Baptized their children. Wright prayed with Obama immediately before he announced his run for the presidency. Obama intended to have Wright at his side when he announced, but changed his mind only hours earlier because of a very revealing story about Wright's controversial views in Rolling Stone Magazine. Wright was a member of the Obama campaign's religious advisory council until the video clips hit the media in March.
I realize that Obama supporters would rather that Wright never existed. But he does, and he was a seminal influence on Obama, and you can't minimize his importance any more than Obama can. That is why Obama has gone to all the trouble of trying to disassociate himself from Wright. Because they are connected. But if all this doesn't convince you that Wright and Obama are joined at the hip, then let Obama himself convince you:
"I can no more disown him than I can disown the black community. I can no more disown him than I can my white grandmother - a woman who helped raise me, a woman who sacrificed again and again for me, a woman who loves me as much as she loves anything in this world, but a woman who once confessed her fear of black men who passed by her on the street, and who on more than one occasion has uttered racial or ethnic stereotypes that made me cringe. These people are a part of me."
3/18/08 - Philadelphia
May 1, 2008 2:43 AM | Reply | Permalink
Troll. Ignore. What is the Clinton pay rate these days?
May 1, 2008 6:52 AM | Reply | Permalink
OBAMA ON WRIGHT:
"Dreams From My Father," 2004 edition: "It was this capacious talent of his — this ability to hold together, if not reconcile, the conflicting strains of black experience — upon which Trinity [United Church of Christ's] success had ultimately been built."
Chicago Tribune, Jan. 21, 2007: "What I value most about Pastor Wright is not his day-to-day political advice. He's much more of a sounding board for me to make sure that I am speaking as truthfully about what I believe as possible and that I'm not losing myself in some of the hype and hoopla and stress that's involved in national politics."
Speech on race, March 18, 2008: "As imperfect as he may be, he has been like family to me. He strengthened my faith, officiated my wedding, and baptized my children. ... He contains within him the contradictions — the good and the bad — of the community that he has served diligently for so many years."
May 1, 2008 2:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
Not a single one of those quotes shows how Wright was supposedly his "surrogate father" or had some sort of mystical influence on Barack.
Wright's opinions are quite clearly those of a spiritual mentor and/or adviser. He was as close as most pastor are to their parishioners.
Troll alert.
May 1, 2008 6:54 AM | Reply | Permalink
Yeah! Why the hell isn't Jefferson speaking up? Just another chicken-shit politician, waiting until the voters decide for him...
May 1, 2008 3:06 AM | Reply | Permalink
I realize that Obama supporters would rather that Wright never existed. But he does, and he was a seminal influence on Obama, and you can't minimize his importance any more than Obama can.
First of all, I would be careful in saying that "Obama supporters would rather Wright never existed." This assumes that all Obama supporters feel or think so. Many may indeed have different reasons for supporting Obama which may not include Rev. Wright at all.
Personally, I think Wright has been a force in his community on the South Side of Chicago. I am willing to bet some of Wright's congregates appreciate that he is in their community providing shelter, food and health services just to name a few.
May 1, 2008 4:17 AM | Reply | Permalink
Obama has the right to agree. Or disagree. And we've no standing to question Obama's statements one way or the other.
Anything more or less makes a mockery of religious freedom in this country.
Are you going to hold me to account for the views of my Mormon parents? Can I respectfully disagree with them on personal matters - such as religion - without being called out on it by a bunch of soap-opera lovin' idiots? Who demand that I either validate or invalidate views that are none of their goddam business in the first place?
There would be no "Wright issue" in the first place if we understood the first thing about what religious freedom means and demanded that this principle be respected in our national discourse. Even during a hard-fought campaign - go figure - the principle still applies.
Wankers. The whole lot of y'all who think this discussion is anything other than a disgrace by mere dint that we're even talking about it. This is not about scoring points or defending Obama, this is about not making fools of ourselves.
Flame away. When was the last time we had a discussion of the "White Church" ? Didn't think so. And, honestly, any white believer who lays out what he thinks deserves to be taken at face value until and unless he's proven to be an unreliable witness on his own behalf. But, then again, isn't that what's being suggested? That Obama can't reliably tell us what he thinks because we somehow know better?
Get over yourselves.
May 1, 2008 6:03 AM | Reply | Permalink
TJ on religious freedom:
I never will, by any word or act, bow to the shrine of intolerance or admit a right of inquiry into the religious opinions of others.
TJ channels a certain reverend:
If God is just, I tremble for my country.
TJ agrees it's about more than "words":
It is in our lives and not our words that our religion must be read.
TJ wonders why we're hung up on disavowals:
I never considered a difference of opinion in politics, in religion, in philosophy, as cause for withdrawing from a friend.
TJ on the duties of the majority:
All, too, will bear in mind this sacred principle, that though the will of the majority is in all cases to prevail, that will to be rightful must be reasonable; that the minority possess their equal rights, which equal law must protect, and to violate would be oppression.
TJ on Iraq:
Conquest is not in our principles. It is inconsistent with our government.
The most successful war seldom pays for its losses.
War is an instrument entirely inefficient toward redressing wrong; and multiplies, instead of indemnifying losses.
TJ on low-information voters:
Dependence begets subservience and venality, suffocates the germ of virtue, and prepares fit tools for the designs of ambition.
May 1, 2008 6:45 AM | Reply | Permalink
All very good points and very apt quotes. Great comment, Chino!
May 1, 2008 7:39 AM | Reply | Permalink
All thanks to ineedabreak. I've been waiting for someone to bust out Thomas Jefferson for weeks now. Hope this post gets rec'd.
May 1, 2008 7:53 AM | Reply | Permalink
The issue has little to do with religion, really. And it has absolutely squat to do with Otto's ten-cent psychoanalysis. That's not why this is a story.
Why does this story have legs?
Obama is African-American. Wright is a complex figure, but it's not hard to reduce him to a symbol of the radical, resentful Blackness that a lot of white people fear is concealed inside Obama. Wright has become a durable story because he fits, and confirms, those racial fears.
In short, it's a story about race, not religion. And in Philadelphia, Obama fought it the right way -- by asking people to surmount their racial fears.
But it's going to be a long fight.
May 1, 2008 8:18 AM | Reply | Permalink
All of which may be a long way of saying that Thomas Jefferson is not exactly the hero of this story.
May 1, 2008 8:21 AM | Reply | Permalink
Post a Comment