Obama needs a Checkers speech

If he gives such a speech, he better be as open and transparent and specific as he is doing with respect to his earmarks versus Hillary's refusal to name hers.

If he gives such a speech, and it turns out that he shaded the truth or lied or made up stuff, he'll have done more damage than good.

Or, he could wait this out a bit and see if something pushes it off the front page or out of peoples' minds - e.g., a stock market in freefall. If Hillary doesn't bring it up, and it becomes an issue after he gets the nomination, he can address it then.

But if he loses Pennsylvania or other states BIG TIME and it can be attribute to Wright, then he'll have to do something, and do something quickly.

Here's his response, at least as of now:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/barack-obama/on-my-faith-and-my-church_b_91623.html

I'm not sure I see the connection. Nixon was accused of breaking the rules, and he said he didn't and convinced enough people he was telling the truth. There's no dispute about the facts with Obama. It's a fact that Wright has said things most voters associate with radicals like Farrakhan whom politicians normally avoid like poison. It's a fact that Obama chose Wright's church and attended it for 20 years, calls the man his spiritual mentor, and has sent considerable money his way.

None of that is in dispute; the question is what it means. Obama supporters want us to think it means nothing, that Obama doesn't believe any of Wright's radical notions, that he nodded off during those sermons or something. Fine, make that case if you can. Maybe he sat in that pew a thousand Sundays thinking, "Man, I love you, but I wish you wouldn't call my country those names when you get fired up." Great, let him say that, and explain why he stayed. I don't think it's an impossible case to make, just a difficult one.

Well Francois, what would you want Senator Obama to do, or is your mind made up that he believes every single thing that Reverend Wright says? Do you really think he's that much of a follower?

Mark- Thanks for the link. I read Larison most everyday and appreciate his way of thinking if not all his ideas. This guilt by association stuff is just pathetic when there is nothing in the candidates rhetoric or politics providing evidence that he really believes that kind of stuff. A little more than usual is riding on this election and we are debating what Obama's minister believes. There is plenty about Obama that should raise legitimate questions. I am a little tired of these media driven crises.

This will be effective in the fall I will concede. Ads flashing from Wright to Obama's picture will scare the heck out of a lot of folks.

Steve

"People who confuse politics/GOP with God might not understand how the two can be separate, but I can see how Obama could appreciate the Rev for his spiritual leadership while disagreeing with his political statements."

Well said, Watsy. I totally agree with you, and think that there may be something behind people find it so easy to be indignant with Senator Obama for something he didn't say, and already distanced himself from.

Thank you for your thoughts on this. I cannot agree more. If Obama was half the opportunist some say that he is, he'd have ditched his minister years ago. But the man is loyal, and he sees the good beyond the surface. After much thought, this flap doesn't concern me a whit.

Conservatives eager to make political hay out of Wright should be very, very careful. Go down this road, and all of the nutcase views of every good 'Christian' pastor of every Republican candidate will be fair game and in open season. .... McCain's having to deal with this regarding Hagee.

The Hagee comparison is grasping at straws. McCain doesn't even know John Hagee on a personal level, and nobody thinks Hagee's views have influenced McCain's.

Hagee is among the legion of conservative pastors and activists who have endorsed McCain as the GOP nominee. Standard stuff in any presidential campaign. The direct analog on the Democratic side is somebody like Al Sharpton, who will endorse the Democratic nominee and whose views are at least as offensive to the American public and Hagee's. No Democratic nominee will be hurt by Sharpton's endorsement, because nobody believes Sharpton would have any significant influence on the nominee's views or policies.

Wright's in an entirely different category because of his longstanding close association with Obama, and because of the fact that Obama's views aren't well known and he is largely undefined. Today's statement is an important step by the Obama Campaign away from Wright, hitting exactly the right tone. He'll need to keep at it though if he doesn't want this issue to cripple him for the fall election.

1. Obama will eventually have to get a bit more specific -- exactly which statements by Rev. Wright does he reject?

You really want to go down this road? Because we can get very specific about Hagee's views, or those of any other major religious right figure who supports him. Wright is nothing more than a leftwing nutcase version of the rightwing nutcase Pat Robertson, et al. Yet graduates of his "university" have been given jobs in the Bush White House.

2. Obama states he's never personally attended any of the sermons where Wright has made the offensive remarks, and never heard Wright make those remarks in his presence. Let's hope there's no video contradicting him on that point.

Oh, this will be fun. Then we can get video of McCain in some church where the pastor is rambling about the End Times, and how all Muslims and non-"saved" Jews, and pretty much every non-Christian, will die.

You guys just don't know when to quit. You're playing with a political weapon that you can't ensure doesn't point back at you.

Will a Checkers column do?

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/03/on_my_faith_and_my_church.html

Shawn: my guess is no.

What 'crisis'? This is ginned-up moral outrage. The man's a preacher for chrissake. Rhetorical overheating is his stock in trade.

Bright side report:

First we have the text response posted several places this afternoon -- not it appears that there will be multiple cable appearances this evening.

This will publicize the relationship of Obama and the retiring pastor of a United Church of Christ congregation.

Gee, the whole 'Obama as Muslim' meme just might be taking a big hit here!

Franklin,

I said Obama had been complicit in *enabling* Wright's sins, and precisely *by* being silent about them, both in Wright's presence and in the presence of other members of Wright's congregation.

Christians are called upon all throughout the New Testament not only to atone for their own sins but also to help others to do so as well -- both by acknowledging the sin to the sinner, and by doing so in a gracious and forgiving way that will allow the sinner to make that acknowledgement himself or herself too.

Where Wright's theology departs from orthodox Christianity is that it only partakes of *one* part of that moral equation -- it calls upon (other) sinners to acknowledge their (own) sins; but it doesn't extend any grace or forgiveness toward them that would help them to do so -- it only reinforces the pride and the self-righteousness of the one who stands in judgement.

Granted, doing it the *right* way is a painful thing to do. That's part of what Christ's suffering on the Cross was all about. It would have been much easier to say (as Reverend Wright would have done) "goddamn" the Roman Empire, "goddamn" Israel, "goddamn" this, "goddamn" that, "goaddamn" everybody but me.

With that, I truly have tapped myself out on this particular subject.

The column posted by Mark in Houston is a half-measure. As Rod correctly pointed out, Sen. Obama needs to list his disagreements with Wright specifically instead dealing in generalities. If he doesn't do this, then just about every incident or new video that turns up on YouTube will recreate this exact same problem. It'll get even worse if Obama turns up on one of these videos.

Spiritual father?

Why should Obama, or anyone else, acknowledge the guy who happens to be the current preacher at his church as his "spiritual father"?

He's no more Obama's spiritual father than the guy at his local coffeeshop is his barista father.

The church I grew up in swapped out preachers every few years. No one seemed the wrose for it.

Eventually I figured out that I'm just as capable at figuring out God as anyone else has ever been.
God doesn't play favorites.

Sen. Obama needs to list his disagreements with Wright specifically instead dealing in generalities.

Politicians need to decide how much to pay attention to the media freak show. Giving legitimacy to crack-pottery from your critics is dangerous, because you are giving them credibility they don't deserve and haven't earned.

His best tactic is to stay above the fray and not get dragged down into the blogosphere freak show. This was the conservative blogosphere meme of the day. Over half of Rod's post's have been on this topic, NRO can talk about nothing else, even more philsophical people like Larison have been dragged into the freakshow. But that doesn't make it something worth responding to, since the last person you want to take advice from is someone like K-Lo who has the political instincts of a 12-year old girl or people whose instincts lead them to cheerlead the Bush war for three years.

His best tactic is to stay above the fray and not get dragged down into the blogosphere freak show.

Speaking as a Republican, I sure hope the Democratic nominee is listening to advice like yours come September. :)

Speaking as a Republican, I sure hope the Democratic nominee is listening to advice like yours come September.

Maybe you are right. Attacking Obama-the-nominee is going to be tough in September. All the racist Freeper-madness and blogosphere vitriol over his church is going to sound like so much ugly racism coming from the circles it will invariably come from.

If you think soccer moms are put off by Obama's preacher, just imagine how they will react when the conservative 523s and far-right blogosphere goes on the attack with the kind of ugliness that they can dish out. Soccer moms will be horrified, like there were when Pat Buchanan gave his culture war speech at the 1992 GOP convention. Conservative red meat about race will sound horrifying and appalling in 2008.

Conservatives are backed into a corner and they will attack whoever is the nominee. It's one thing to call John Kerry unpatriotic, it's another thing to unleash ugly rants against an African American man or a woman. I predict those soccer moms will be revolted by what they see and vote for Democrats all the way down the ballot.

The only one spewing hate here is Jeremiah Wright. His rants are available all over the web, so voters can and will make their own judgments about them.

No doubt, if the Wright issue keeps Obama out of the White House, Lefties will tell themselves the usual fairy tales about how the moronic American people were manipulated by the evil geniuses of the Right Wing Attack Machine. "What's the Matter with Kansas" and all that drivel. But to use your favorite term, Daniel, such nonsense talk is just a liberal meme.

Wanted to correct myself , Wright was in the Navy.

Simon- Here is my concern in trying to make a final decision on this. By all accounts that I can find it seems that Wright has lived the life of one who loves his country and God. He served his country in the military. He got an education. He preaches the gospel. His church does all the things that lots of megachurches only talk about. His actions dont seem to be those of a hate filled monster. His words are at variance with his actions.

At least some of his words. The guy has written 4 books. What does he say in them? What does he say in his sermons that dont make YouTube? If you are going to make him a proxy for Obama lets have some real facts.

Steve

With Wright it's more the style, especially the yelling, that turns me off. The message is canned. May the style become an obsolete bit of Americana. Obama is welcome to leave Wright behind him without being cruel to the man as far as I'm concerned. What I don't want to hear is the conventional full blown preacher style yelling and screaming, raucous and horse-throated, at the invocation in the convention, at the inaugural and thereafter.

Since nothing Wright says comes close to the rhetoric of Farrakhan or Duke, it's an absurd comparision.

It's downright Clintonian, innit?

I honestly don't think Obama believes much, if any, of the crazy stuff Wright preaches. But he is obviously not put off by it. That, plus the fact that he is, according to National Journal, the most liberal US senator, really causes me to re-evaluate what kind of president he'd likely be. A conservative friend told me a few months ago that he's going to vote Republican, but if Obama gets to be president, his response will be, "OK, let's see what happens" (versus his "Stop her! Stop her!" view of Hillary). I was pretty much where my friend was then. Looking more closely at Obama's record, and thinking about Wright's radicalism (and Michelle Obama's similar views), makes me more concerned about Obama than I once was.

Basil- You do know our government did medical experiments on blacks and let them die at least as recently as 1972. How long do you think it should take for blacks to get over this and trust the government? Im not really sure how this pertains to Obama anyway.

Steve