Revvum Wright's "I'll show you" tour

4. The reason for the recent Wright behavior perhaps has to do with the possibility of a forthcoming multi-million dollar book deal.

cash faith hope love joy peace to all...
Forgive God...

It is rare that I feel sorry for the Democrats and even rarer for Obama but this must be their worst nightmare coming true.

The Dems may figure that if they run Obama and lose, they are rid of him once and for all and have a good shot at 2012, while maintaining their control of Congress. Besides, being the good New Agers that they are, they would want the world to end in December of 2012 under a Republican than have a Democrat blamed for it.

7) You can fool all the people some of the time, some of the people all of the time, but not all of the people all of the time. Obama, despite his strong rhetorical skills and inspiring autobiography, is not yet an accomplished legislator, let alone seasoned enough for the Presidency.

Darn, I watched Rev Wright's speech twice the other night on CNN. And I thought he nailed it with the comparison of Kennedy's accent and that of African Americans.

What I see is those who weren't going to vote for Obama in the first place attempting to show their position isn't about their racism but the racism of his pastor.

The best thing about this is we're talking about race and it isn't just one side doing all the talking. This is going to be a good thing when viewed through the rearview mirror. We'll be better and stronger for it. Wright might very well be the next King and the blogosphere might capture the moment.

Imagine for a minute, the blogosphere alive in 1968. Wouldn't it be great for anyone to be able to go back and see exactly what was said and by whom? This might be blogosphere's greatest moment and we're here to live it.

Harvey L: "Wright might very well be the next King and the blogosphere might capture the moment."

Wow. Just wow.

Last night I saw echoes of Elijah Muhammad, who also turned on his star pupil, Malcolm X, after he'd clearly outgrown his teacher.

This must be very sad for Obama, whether you support him or not politically. No one should ever have a "spiritual father" if you will turn on them like that.

The media hype and spin on Rev. Wright is just rich.

I'm not defending the most outlandish things he's said about HIV and Farrakahn, but context is still important for interpreting them. The Tukseegee experiments weigh heavy in the memory of Black Americans, so perhaps even though its demonstrably false that HIV was created in a lab, deep seeded suspicion is hard to overcome.

Now the media is so desperate to keep this thing going they're going to misrepresent a classic lecture Wright gives as "mocking JFK and LBJ". I've heard Wright give this talk a number of years before. He is not mocking regional dialects, he's trying to point out the double standard that dominant culture has imposed on Black Americans because of the way Black Americans talk. Its a powerful point, but don't think for a moment that the media wants to actually pass on any lessons about racism in America. No, they want to feed the white fear that a black man in power is gonna give whitey what's coming to him.

Again, I'm not defending everything Wright said, but this attempt to swift boat Obama represents the still powerful racism that exists in the hearts of Americans.

I say you're grasping at straws, John. And you don't know what you're talking about. Hagee is not accused of anti-Semitism; he is accused of hyper-philosemitism. As for his anti-Catholicism, that's unfortunate, but it's not racist, and anyway, John McCain has not been a member of John Hagee's congregation for 20 years, and has not claimed him as a spiritual mentor.

You're simply not going to be able to blame the Wright thing on the "right-wing spin machine," or whatever. Certainly not after Obama said on Fox News Sunday that Wright is a "legitimate" political issue. Don't ask what the conservative blogosphere is saying. Go read what Andrew Sullivan is saying. Andrew has been perhaps the highest profile blog backer of Obama. He's ripping Wright hard on this. Bob Herbert, the liberal black NYT columnist, is accusing Wright of trying to sabotage Obama's candidacy, which he certainly is doing. Please stop your knee from jerking, John, and keep up with this story. This is not a conservative blogosphere story.

"Now the media is so desperate to keep this thing going they're going to misrepresent a classic lecture Wright gives as "mocking JFK and LBJ".....Its a powerful point, but don't think for a moment that the media wants to actually pass on any lessons about racism in America. No, they want to feed the white fear that a black man in power is gonna give whitey what's coming to him."

Bob Herbert did this? Bob Herbert?!
http://topics.nytimes.com/top/opinion/editorialsandoped/oped/columnists/bobherbert/

Now the media is so desperate to keep this thing going

Wow, such denial. The media are so desperate to keep this thing going that they dragged Jerry Wright kicking and screaming to the National Press Club, and forced him to give that crazypants performance. Why won't they leave that poor monk alone?! (Mmmph!)

I don't understand why people keep linking McCain to Hagee as if the two had the same kind of relationship as Obama and Wright. Nothing could be further from the truth. Someone needs to tell the mainstream media pundits (note how it almost rhymes with "idiots") to put a sock in it the next time they mention the two in the same breath. If America is a stupider nation than it was 20 years ago, it's because the news media isn't interested in news or facts, just controversy, whether legitimate or contrived (and a Hagee-McCain connection is about as contrived a contrivance as one could possibly contrive).

Name 5 specific and detailed and non-ordinary things that the Obama-Wright relationship has in common with the McCain-Hagee "relationship" that make them the same thing.

My point is that nobody is actually engaging the main point of Wright's message--that racism remains America's greatest sin and greatest struggle.

No, I don't pretend that Wright isn't self-important. But Obama's former pastor takes up so much of our media conversation while fuel and food prices skyrocket, enviornmental crisis looms, crime begins to climb, and the situation in Iraq looks as tenuous as ever again.

Obama is ready to engage the issues (with a lot of liberal ideas, yes), but the media is focused on a figure who is NOT running for office. This is probably the 15th time you've blogged about Rev. Wright, but you have still yet to really engage Obama's plan and vision (not even his "crunchy con" moments preaching to black audiences about personal responsibility).

not even his "crunchy con" moments preaching to black audiences about personal responsibility

Matt K -

Are you implying that the notion of personal responsibility is only important for the "crunchy con"? If so, what is the liberal take here?

Dale is right. It's too late for Obama to effectively denounce Wright now. His only hope is that Wright somehow stays completely out of the public eye between now and November.

I hadn't thought about Dale's "grenade," but it's a good point. Obama surely attended plenty of services where Wright said things most Americans would find appalling. Trying to denounce them now has real potential to blow up in the Senator's face.

Wright on Sunday:

whites have "left-brain cognitive, object-oriented learning style. Logical and analytical."

Blacks "learn not from an object but from a subject. They are right-brain, subject-oriented in their learning style. That means creative and intuitive. The two worlds have different ways of learning."

This is just really interesting. He's wrong based on the science as I understand it, but he is at least trying to explain how biological differences between peoples have a known social effect (albeit in layman's terms). Watch out Wright! Libs got Nobel winners Summers and Watson, and they will get you if it suits their fancy.

I'm starting to pay more attention to Wright. Here's a man who is really interested in a serious discussion of race. And he's telling it to the public who just doesn't want to know. Meanwhile, Obama and libs merely want to use race to benefit their agenda.

Even more interesting: now the media is trying to dismiss Wright as just some "crazy black man" instead of giving him the respect he deserves as a political thinker, to actually listen to what he says and agree or disagree on the merits and the facts. Very sad. Very racist.

"Anonymous, it's not the MSM that's doing this, but rather liberal bloggers desperate to draw a false equivalence to take the heat off of Obama. Political reporters understand that there's nothing significant about the McCain-Hagee relationship,"

But there is something significant about the longstanding, almost 40 year, relationship between the republican party and rev. moon. We see tony blankly, a washington times editor, all over the cable shows playing pundit without ever being disclosed who he works for.

The washington times is a very powerful republican paper which is run by reverand moon. Rev. moon is a huge donor to the republican party - is McCain running on any of his money laundered through the RNC?. And, Rev. moon's views are as disgusting as they come.

You're awful selective on which religious traditions you choose to criticize. reverand wright has nowhere near the influence on politics that reverand moon and the washington times has. that leaves us wondering why fundamentalist christians are so obseesed with him?

By the way, I don't give a damn about barack obama. I am here to support reverand wright and confront his hypocritical religious critics.

reverand wright doesn't have the power or finances that Rev. moon has. he is he speaks truth to power. his latest crime is he compared his military service to cheneys and compared the american empire to the roman empire on live tv. tough luck.

You're not going to get by sweeping Rev. moon under the rug. if this is a debate about the influence of religious pastors then rev. moon status with the republicans is on the table. his influence is longstanding and significant.

Which Republicans attend Rev. Moon's church?

But there is something significant about the longstanding, almost 40 year, relationship between the republican party and rev. moon. We see tony blankly, a washington times editor, all over the cable shows playing pundit without ever being disclosed who he works for.

Your thinking is about as precise as your spelling. Tony Blankley hasn't worked at TWT for a while. And he wasn't a Moon follower. I worked at TWT for three years in the early 1990s. Most people who work there aren't Moon followers, and wouldn't know basic Unification theology if it bit them on the nose. I certainly wouldn't. It simply never comes up there. You really are grasping at straws.

"I worked at TWT for three years in the early 1990s. Most people who work there aren't Moon followers, and wouldn't know basic Unification theology if it bit them on the nose."

Ok Rod, so most people who work at the washington times aren't rev. moon followers, so which ones are? the most important ones? who sets editorial policy? and you, a political and religious reporter and author, worked for one of the weirdest and richest christians on the planet for three years and never had any notion of where you're paycheck came from and the influence of your paper. It never crossed your mind while you cashed your paycheck that the washington times was a huge money loser. that's laughable. Where did the money for your paycheck come from, by the way?

and now you want to convince the world reverand wright is the boogy man and you know nothing of reverand moon. nice try.

I didn't say republicans attended his chuch. even they are not that stupid!

So your analogy is fatally flawed. None of the Republican field were Moonies for at least 20 years, so none are subject to

Moon is not a Christian in any meaningful sense of the word, either. Claiming you are the messiah will do that to your creedal bona fides.

So it's a bizarre comparison, unless you are alleging Wright isn't a Christian. Which would be marginally sillier than claiming that Moon *is*, but I digress.

Finally, the Washington Times has a subscription base somewhere south of 150K and is in the process of layoffs. If TWT and Moon are the great rightwing boogeymen agitating you, you have remarkably untroubled nights.

Basically, what you are saying is that Moon spends money in politics. Much more than Rev. Wright, even though Moon has no protege in the field (unlike Wright).

And? When you compare influence and raw dollars, Moon is a bit player in politics compared to Soros.

It looks like it wasn't only the white racists who weren't ready for an Obama candidacy, apparently the black racists weren't ready either.