Posted by Damozel | So anyway, Obama's done what everyone said he must and 'denounced' the Rev. Wright. Like John Cole, I'm sick of the expression 'throw him under the bus,' which isn't really accurate anyway. Instead, he did what I guess in light of our looney media he ought to have done at the start: disavowed any connection between Wright's opinions on racial issues and his own and moved on. Though a Hillary supporter, I think the whole discussion is ridiculous and pointless and based on an essentially racist fear that Obama might secretly hate white people or America or intend to promote a black revolution or some other nonsense I can't be bothered to analyze further. There are plenty of real reasons to prefer Hillary.
Here's what Obama said in an interview (in my old hometown, Winston-Salem, North Carolina):
"I have spent my entire adult life trying to bridge the gap between different kinds of people. That’s in my DNA, trying to promote mutual understanding to insist that we all share common hopes and common dreams as Americans and as human beings. That’s who I am, that’s what I believe, and that’s what this campaign has been about," Obama said.
"I am outraged by the comments that were made and saddened by the spectacle that we saw yesterday," he said.
Obama also distanced himself from the man in a way he has been reluctant to in the past.
"The person that I saw yesterday was not the person that I met 20 years ago," he said. "His comments were not only divisive and destructive, but I believe that they end up giving comfort to those who prey on hate, and I believe that they do not portray accurately the perspective of the black church."
"They certainly don’t portray accurately my values and beliefs," he said.
"If Reverend Wright thinks that’s political posturing, as he put it, then he doesn’t know me very well and based on his remarks yesterday, I may not know him as well as I thought either."
"I gave him the benefit of the doubt in my speech in Philadelphia, explaining that he has done enormous good in the church," he said. "But when he states and then amplifies such ridiculous propositions as the U.S. government somehow being involved in AIDS; when he suggests that Minister Farrakhan somehow represents one of the greatest voices of the 20th and 21st century; when he equates the U.S. wartime efforts with terrorism – then there are no exuses. They offend me. They rightly offend all Americans. And they should be denounced, and that’s what I’m doing very clearly and unequivocally here today.""It is antithetical to my campaign. It is antithetical to what I’m about. It is not what I think America stands for," he said. (The Politico)
As I've explained, I feel a little sorry for the Rev. Wright, but the fact is, he did seem to be implying that Obama agrees with him in principle. I never believed this for a minute, but a lot of Obama's opponents, both Democrat and Republican, have been pretending to, and the media has done its best to whip up as much hysteria as it can.
Earl Ofari Hutchinson is upset with Obama for the denunciation, not out of sympathy for Wright but because he feels that Obama's further statement is simply feeding the media's appetite for more stupid non-substantive controversy. He suggested that Obama's handling of the Wright problem might be grounds for taking a second look at Obama.
Whoever on Team Obama keeps feeding into Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama's seeming compulsive need to speak out on the Reverend Jeremiah Wright should get the swift boot. When Wright went on his latest public and media tear, Obama should have simply issued a statement saying this: Wright is no longer my pastor. And as I have said repeatedly, his views do not reflect mine, and then move on.
But no, Obama's Wright compulsion drove him to deliver a defensive and apologetic so-called race speech in which Wright was the centerpiece....
Now he holds a halting, stumbling, anguished voice press conference to denounce Wright again. Here's the effect of all this. He's given a slew of gossipy, media talking heads more salacious grist for the gossip and rumor mill about Wright, the church and Obama's long term relationship with both.
He's elevated Wright from a relatively obscure, local preacher to a nationally known polarizing figure. He's deepened the suspicions of those who all along felt that he was a closet radical and race panderer. This hurt him with white voters in Ohio and Pennsylvania, and almost certainly it will hurt him in Indiana. It has pecked away at the razor thin lead he had over Clinton among Democrats, and dropped him behind McCain in the general election. (Hillary beats McCain by ten points)....
Obama...must understand two things. Wright isn't going away. His ego and a press insatiable for any inflammatory Wright quip will insure that. If that's so then Obama should button it up on Wright. Anything else he says on him will further insure that Obama not Wright is Obama's worst enemy. (HuffPost)
I can think of a dozen reasons for taking a second look at Obama's candidacy, not one of which involves any aspect of his association with Wright, including anything at all that Obama has said, or could ever conceivably say about Wright or his association with him. Wright is exactly the wrong reason for taking a second look at Obama, since the only reason anyone could possibly be concerned about his association with Wright is if he or she believes that Obama was somehow infected by association with black revolutionary zeal and secret hatred for white people. What abject nonsense.
At the same time, I am glad Obama spoke out because I am extremely uncomfortable with, and saddened by, the nasty unspoken implications of all the pearl-clutching and hand-wringing over Wright. What he thinks or says ought to be a non-issue compared to all the other reasons for choosing Hillary over Obama.
Anyway, Former Republican and Obama-supporter John Cole had this to say about Obama's denunciation of Wright's views, in his trademark mordant style. I would like to associate myself with the sentiments he expresses though not, of course, with his support for Obama.
I am not sure why [the denunciation] was necessary, as it was pretty clear to me when listening to Wright the past few days that he was not speaking for Obama, but such is the guilt-by-association bullshit of the media.....
Is [Wright] a jerk?... His ego tour the past few days was all about him, but so what? I blame the media as much as I blame him. Is it an offensive notion that the government created AIDS? Absolutely, but I refuse to get all bent out of shape about it, because the government that tortures people and ran the Tuskegee experiment and wiretapped MLK for years opens itself up to crazy accusations like that.
So Jeremiah Wright has acted like a jackass the past few days, and he may have acted supremely selfishly by hurting Obama’s electoral chances. Regardless, he may be a flawed man, but that does not undo all the good he has done over the years.
I don’t know of any bloggers with thirty years of service to the poor and the indigent. Get back to me when Chris Matthews feeds hungry people for three decades.....[M]aybe I just refuse to spend any more time and energy getting worked up over and denouncing, distancing, and rejecting the wrong people- people who really don’t matter in the big scheme of things. If you have a memo from Jeremiah Wright to John Yoo showing how we should become a rogue nation, let me know. If you have pictures of Jeremiah Wright voting against the GI Bill, send it to me. If you have evidence of Jeremiah Wright training junior soldiers on the finer aspects of stacking and torturing naked Iraqi captives, pass them on.
Amen.
Will Obama's denunciation do any good? Well, it's obviously not going to stop the amateur psychologists in the media and in the blogosphere from amateur psychologizing. Ambinder notes: "ALREADY THOUGH, the cable news coverage of Obama's speech is off on a
different tangent: psychological pornography. They're scrutinizing the
thoughts behind the thinking; whether Wright felt Obama was an
ungrateful upstart; whether Obama felt betrayed by Wright; whether
Obama is more embarrassed than ashamed." Just what we need from our USELESS media: more pitiless reality-show style coverage of this campaign.
RELATED BN-POLITICS POSTINGS
Obama Helped Donor Get State Grant
ABC Ignores Obama's Misleading Message about Lobbyists' Money
Olbermann's Hillary Derangement Syndrome Takes Him Over the Top and Right Across the Line (Updated)
Well said. We've gone off the deep end, and no Democrat ever wins in these kinds of discussions. The only person winning this election right now is John McCain. We need that to stop.
Posted by: slag | April 29, 2008 at 11:50 PM
Speaking as an unrepentant Obama supporter, count me as very happy to see that we can agree on the ridiculousness of this whole affair. Good god, do I wish that we could get back to talking about substance.
I briefly entertained the hope after the last so-called "debate" that Obama and Clinton, both of whom were clearly put off by the whole thing, would remind one another afterwards that this circus is what they're really fighting against, not each other.
Today I had a similar thought -- whether it would occur to Obama that his clearly-increasing frustration with Hillary in many ways parallels how his relationship with his pastor of 20 years. In both cases, it's the dog-and-pony show of the national media cycle that's gotten between them.
The tit-for-tat of the primary is hurting them both; the punditocracy gins up false controversy over something meaningless, asking "is this an issue?" over and over until it actually *becomes* an issue for some voters, then someone in one campaign mentions it offhandedly (because it's an issue now!), the other gets (rightfully) angry about it (because it's actually nonsense) and hits back, and so forth.
A few months ago, they were both being more cautious about saying, "No, that's really not a real issue," but it keeps piling up and getting more and more personal and there's no opportunity to ratchet things back -- it's death by a thousand paper cuts. It's really sad. They're both better than this.
Posted by: Adam | April 30, 2008 at 12:03 AM
For the record, that was a different "Adam", as oppose to me, the Adam that's been posting here. That said, I pretty much agree. Damozel, and John Cole, have both summed this up pretty well.
The Hutchinson piece is completely ridiculous for a wide variety of reasons, so I'll just pick two:
1) Obama's actions did not elevate Wright to a national figure. The media's actions did that. Now he's seizing on the opportunity to become another Al Sharpton. Obama sees this, which is why he's angry at him.
2) Hillary beats McCain by 10 points? Where, in New York? The Gallup poll has them in a virtual dead-heat (47-45). Cherry-picked polls to not bolster an argument, they just make the argument look desperate.
Posted by: Adam | April 30, 2008 at 10:24 AM