The media is just now starting to peel away the layers of the onion that is Barack Obama. And it’s about time. Make no mistake, electing Hillary would do a huge disservice to this country for all of the reasons so well-documented in projects like “Hillary: The Movie”. But what do we know about Barack? He may not be the unethical political beast that is Hillary, but is he really the Savior as depicted by the mainstream media?
Over the weekend, Mark Steyn published a piece titled, “Obama’s Pastor Disaster” wherein he offers a glimpse into the views of Obama’s pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright. While I agree with Steyn that guilt by association can be very tricky business in the political arena, a close look at Obama’s relationship with his pastor should be examined. Perhaps such an examination will offer glimpse into the core values that drive Obama and begin to remove some of the excess varnish built up during his political honeymoon.
Key excerpts from Steyn’s article:
The Rev. Jeremiah Wright thinks that, given their treatment by white
America, black Americans have no reason to sing “God Bless America.”
“The government gives them the drugs, builds bigger prisons, passes a
three-strike law and then wants us to sing ‘God Bless America.’ No, no,
no, God damn America,” he told his congregation. “God damn America for
treating our citizens as less than human.”
And how about this:
The Rev. Wright is like “an old uncle who says things I don’t always
agree with.” So did he agree with goofy old Uncle Jeremiah on Sept. 16,
2001? That Sunday morning, Uncle told his congregation that the United
States brought the death and destruction of 9/11 on itself. “We nuked
far more than the thousands in New York and the Pentagon, and we never
batted an eye,” said the Rev. Wright. “We have supported state
terrorism against the Palestinians and black South Africans, and now we
are indignant because the stuff we have done overseas is now brought
right back to our own front yards.”
With statements like these, the Obama camp is scrambling to distant themselves from the controversial (read: unAmerican and racist) Rev. Wright. But should Americans accept some sort of nonsensical, focus-group-tested, Barbara Walters-esque mea culpa from Obama? No.
How does he distance himself from a pastor from whom he sought guidance for 20 years, who married him and Michelle, who baptized his children, and to whom he dedicated his bestselling book? The answer is, you don’t.
If you haven’t already seen some of the video of the Rev. Wright, take a gander…
March 17th, 2008 at 5:23 pm
Ladies & Gentlemen
We have Willie Horton!
No swiftboat necessary, the media should do our work on this one.
Just whatever you do, don’t interrupt them while they grill him like cheap steak.
Mmmmmmmmm yummy :-P
March 17th, 2008 at 5:27 pm
So let me get this straight Scott. We should not vote for Obama because of something his pastor said?
John McCain has had a couple of controversial connections with wacky pastors himself. He was endorsed by John Hagee who wrote a book called “Jerusalem Countdown: A Prelude To war.” Hagee has stated that Jews brought the Holocaust upon themselves by rebelling against God and that the Holocaust was God’s way of forcing Jews to move to Israel where, Hagee predicts according to his interpretation of Biblical scripture, they will be mostly killed in the apocalyptic Mideast conflict Hagee’s new lobbying group seems to be working to provoke and which John Hagee believes to be a necessary precondition for the “Rapture” that will lift Christians, but not Jews, bodily into Heaven to enjoy physical immortality amidst paradise.
Over the past year, frequent and generally favorable media coverage of a new US national political lobbying group, “Christians United For Israel”, and its outspoken founder Texas megachurch pastor John Hagee has helped cement Hagee’s brand recognition as a steadfast friend to Israel and has cast a favorable light on his new CUFI lobbying group that is designed to flex the political muscles of tens of millions of American evangelicals, ostensibly on Israel’s behalf.
McCain also hailed as a spiritual adviser an Ohio megachurch pastor who has called upon Christians to wage a “war” against the “false religion” of Islam with the aim of destroying it.
On February 26, McCain appeared at a campaign rally in Cincinnati with the Reverend Rod Parsley of the World Harvest Church of Columbus, a supersize Pentecostal institution that features a 5,200-seat sanctuary, a television studio (where Parsley tapes a weekly show), and a 122,000-square-foot Ministry Activity Center. That day, a week before the Ohio primary, Parsley praised the Republican presidential front-runner as a “strong, true, consistent conservative.”… McCain, with Parsley by his side at the Cincinnati rally, called the evangelical minister a “spiritual guide.”
The leader of a 12,000-member congregation, Parsley has written several books outlining his fundamentalist religious outlook, including the 2005 Silent No More. In this work, Parsley decries the “spiritual desperation” of the United States, and he blasts away at the usual suspects: activist judges, civil libertarians who advocate the separation of church and state, the homosexual “culture” (”homosexuals are anything but happy and carefree”), the “abortion industry,” and the crass and profane entertainment industry. And Parsley targets another profound threat to the United States: the religion of Islam.
I guess this means Hillary is the only one not connected to some whackjob pastor, so we should vote for her, right?
March 18th, 2008 at 12:12 am
Hey Dan, as usual you get ahead of your lefty self.
Big difference between “was endorsed by”/”appeared at a campaign rally with” and listening to someone’s anti-American sermon for twenty plus years.
The American people are smarter than that and the worst part is that you know it. Nice try though.
March 18th, 2008 at 8:17 am
D’anc — Riiigghhhtt; there was a “hate America” sermon every Sunday for 20 years. Let me ask you an honest question: can you control what your pastor says? Have you ever taken issue with something he or she said? How did you resolve it? Oh and McCain sought those endorsements.
March 18th, 2008 at 7:00 pm
Focus Dan.
This issue has nothing to do with McCain or the Republicans. The post talks Obama’s obvious political problem related to his intimate association with Rev. Wright. There is absolutely no way for Obama to distance himself from Wright. Had there been a way to distance, disavow, or disassociate with him, we would have seen it before the political damage had been done.
Reverend Wright and Barack Obama are now joined at the hip and will have to live with it for better or worse. Ironically, the Democrats have not officially said “I do” to an Obama nomination, but have waited so long to do the requisite due diligence, it may already be too late to abort. On second thought, for Democrats, it’s never too late to abort. But I digress…
The facts are simple and that’s why this story has traction. As smart, Harvard educated adults, Michelle and Barack CHOSE to associate themselves with Rev. Wright, his church, and his message… FOR 20 YEARS! That’s more than 1,000 Sunday services. As I also mentioned, Obama dedicated his book to Wright, had his children baptized by Wright, and was married by Wright.
Imagine for a moment that Wright had just won a Nobel Prize and 60 Minutes was doing a story on him. The story would include a “character witness” to offer a glimpse inside the man who just won the Nobel Prize. Can you think of a more qualified person on the planet to provide such testimonial than Senator Obama? Of course not. AND, it would be implied that Obama was wise in choosing as a mentor twenty years earlier, a man who turned out to be Nobel Prize worthy.
Well guess what? He is not worthy of the Nobel Prize. Rev. Wright is instead an America-hating racist and as such implies Obama was rather unwise for more than twenty years.
The question for the Democrats will be to determine whether two decades of poor judgment should disqualify Obama from being the Democratic nominee. When and if they give him a pass on the matter, then it will be up to America-loving voters to make the final call.
Dan, I don’t know you beyond your lunatic rantings and illogical arguments. And while I enjoy them immensely, just once would I like to see you make an argument based on reason, logic, and facts… just once.
March 18th, 2008 at 7:27 pm
Barack Obama’s address on Race today in Philadelphia was a desperate bid to save his presidential prospects in the light of release of videotapes of his pastor, Jeremiah Wright’s sermons. While much of the mainstream media has tried to downplay the story, Obama had obviously come to the conclusion that it was major news-and it was threatening to kill his campaign. While reactions to the speech are still playing out, I would like to comment on my reaction at this time.
Without repeating the various lines in his speech, suffice to say that, like most of his speeches, Obama’s prepared remarks today were typically eloquent-especially in contrast to when he is answering questions on uncomfortable topics-as he was this week on the TV news circuit. The problem with the speech was, as I see it, that he tried to appeal to everyone, and, in the process, may have alienated everyone with the obvious exception of those who choose to believe and accept whatever he says because he is their guy.
Obama, while condemning Wright’s remarks, stated that he could no longer disown the pastor any more than he could disown the black community. Personally, I am not sure the two are linked. I sure hope not although Wright’s parishioners have spoken out loud and clear in their support of him. Is Obama the only member of the church who rejects Wright’s sentiments?
Obama also reiterated the racial grievances of black Americans and made the usual calls for racial healing. Obama obviously felt he had to give something to his black listeners and speak of injustice. No question, Obama is walking a very thin tightrope here, trying to hold on to wavering white voters while not alienating black voters who may conclude he is an “Uncle Tom” (a ugly term also used by Wright in some of his sermons).
Obama spoke of Wright’s good works and good qualities, stating that he will not turn his back on him. He also referred to his white grandmother, who allegedly referred to her fears of encountering black men on the street. He also acknowledged that he had, indeed, been in the pews on occasions when Wright made “controversial” statements. This is an apparent contradiction from statements he had been making just in the past few days to the effect that he had not been present during these particular diatribes. (Is it possible Obama realized that there may be some video out there showing him in the audience on these occasions-perhaps doing what everyone else was apparently doing-standing, clapping and cheering?)
It appears that Obama’s theme is that, yes, he disagrees with Wright’s statements about whites and America, but that he will not turn away from his spiritual mentor and his church. America must deal with black historical grievances and present-day “real anger”, but he wants to bring about racial conciliation. In other words, Obama’s speech had something in it for everyone, just what a politician’s speech is supposed to be.
I still am left with serious questions about Mr Obama:
First, how could you sit there in that church for two decades and listen to this rhetoric and racial diatribes. Senator Obama, when Minister Wright was railing about white people, he was talking about your mother-and grandmother. Did you never take offense at that?
You talk about your love of this country. Yet, you sat there and listened to the worst things being said about your country by Wright. I don’t know about you, sir, but I would have gotten up and walked out of my church and never gone back if the pastor talked like that about America-or about other ethnic groups not my own. But you, sir, are a sitting US Senator. If nothing else, as a US Senator and aspiring presidential candidate, what kind of judgement does this show? The same kind of judgement that allowed you to do business with a character like Tony Rezko?
Already, many news commentators sympathetic to Obama are raving about the eloquence of his speech. It is spin. The fact of the matter is that in attempting to please all sides, in my view, Obama has hurt his cause only more. As I acknowledged above, Obama is caught squarely in the middle of the racial divide in this country. He doesn’t want to be regarded as simply the “Black Candidate”, rather one who cuts across racial barriers. Sadly, that is going by the wayside very quickly. I don’t know how the senator is going to reconcile these issues. Certainly many white voters who are wavering wanted Obama to cut his ties to Wright and the church in strong and forceful terms. To do so, however, would have alienated many black voters. So he tried to cut it both ways. I don’t think it will work.
I don’t know if Obama secretely sympathizes with Wright’s views; I am willing to give him the benefit of the doubt. His continued membership in such a church and association with Wright would make any reasonable person suspicious. What is really sad and ironic is that the candidate and the campaign that held out hope of advancing black-white relations in America to so many, even among his opponents, is now turning into something that, in the end, may only set relations back.
All of the above, of course, is written from the perspective of a white male in his 60s who probably doesn’t understand what goes on in black churches and has possibly deluded himself into thinking that over the course of his life, he had seen dramatic racial progress. All I can say is that if Jeremiah Wright is typical, then we have made very little progress. If there is actually someone out there who can bring Americans together, that person is not going to come out of the Trinity United Church of Christ of Chicago.
So is there a secret side to Mr Obama that he has tried to hide from the public? I don’t know, but one thing is becoming more obvious every day.
Barack Obama is just another politician.
gary fouse
fousesquawk
March 19th, 2008 at 12:18 am
I love it, the Democrats are going to tear each other apart on the issue of race.
March 19th, 2008 at 9:00 am
Actually, his speech is being hailed as a Profile in Courage by the NY Times; its being compared to Lincoln’s “a House Divided” speech. It was brilliant.
And Scott, at least Obama and his wife go to church; Reagan never did.
March 19th, 2008 at 9:36 am
Hey Dan:
“Let me ask you an honest question: can you control what your pastor says?”
No but I can definitely control whether or not my family chooses to SIT THROUGH HIS SERMONS.
“Actually, his speech is being hailed as a Profile in Courage by the NY Times; its being compared to Lincoln’s “a House Divided” speech. It was brilliant.”
Wow, hailed by the NY Times. What a surprise. I’m actually one to think that his speech WAS good, but you know what? It’s not even CLOSE to enough to calm the uproar over his pastor’s divisive, racist, anti-American comments.
Scott is right. You Democrats are in real trouble over this. Democrat staffers that I am friends with are freaking out over the fact that this dirt didn’t come out earlier while Hillary still had a chance to take the nomination without pissing off half of the party.
Nothing short of brilliant entertainment in my opinion. Keep fighting among yourselves while our guy walks the streets of Baghdad and shakes hand with international leaders.
March 19th, 2008 at 10:08 am
As a college senior and a Republican, I have been highly skeptical and critical of Obama since he began his thrust in this election. The reason I have been a skeptic of this man is not by the fact that I am a Republican, but rather by the fact that this individual is a mystery. The media adores him, students across the nation cannot get enough of him, and we have people fainting when he speaks and it seems that this man is God’s gift of excellence. However, who is he?
Obama has little experience in politics (especially compared to those currently running for office), has a dark background which is shrouded in unanswered questions (and no one seems to be asking him), and surrounds himself by individuals that are anything but American. To get to the point, Barack Obama scares me. I know in my heart that if this man is elected President, the United States of America will be changed for the worse. This man has radical thoughts and a radical agenda that hides under his biblical ability to sway the crowd and Barack’s hidden agenda is being revealed through the sayings of his pastor.
One does not except the friendship of an individual like his pastor for 20 years, if one does not agree and follow the teachings of such an individual.
March 19th, 2008 at 11:20 am
Your guy in Bagdhad who mistakingly siad three times that Iran was training Al Qaeda; yeah, he certainly has a grasp of what’s going on when Joe Lieberman needs to correct him publicly by whispering in his ear. And McCain’s grasp of Iraq is a strength of his> Hmmm. weak.
Since we’re on a thread about bats&^t pastors and outraegeous quotes, please defend these pro-Republican pastor statements:
Here’s Jerry Falwell on 9/11:
10. “The idea that religion and politics don’t mix was invented by the Devil to keep Christians from running their own country.”
9. “The ACLU is to Christians what the American Nazi party is to Jews.”
8. “I hope I live to see the day when, as in the early days of our country, we won’t have any public schools. The churches will have taken them over again and Christians will be running them. What a happy day that will be!”
7. “AIDS is the wrath of a just God against homosexuals. To oppose it would be like an Israelite jumping in the Red Sea to save one of Pharaoh’s charioteers … AIDS is not just God’s punishment for homosexuals; it is God’s punishment for the society that tolerates homosexuals.”
6. “Nothing will motivate conservative evangelical Christians to vote Republican in the 2008 presidential election more than a Democratic nominee named Hillary Rodham Clinton – not even a run by the devil himself … I certainly hope that Hillary is the candidate. She has $300 million so far. But I hope she’s the candidate. Because nothing will energize my [constituency] like Hillary Clinton. If Lucifer ran, he wouldn’t.” –at a “Values Voter Summit”
5. “Grown men should not be having sex with prostitutes unless they are married to them.”
4. “Billy Graham is the chief servant of Satan in America.”
3. “He is purple — the gay-pride color, and his antenna is shaped like a triangle — the gay pride symbol.” –from a “Parents Alert” issued in Jerry Falwell’s National Liberty Journal, warning that “Tinky Winky,” a character on the popular PBS children’s show, “Teletubbies,” may be gay
2. “You’ve got to kill the terrorists before the killing stops. And I’m for the president to chase them all over the world. If it takes 10 years, blow them all away in the name of the Lord.”
And number 1:
“…throwing God out of the public square, out of the schools, the abortionists have got to bear some burden for this because God will not be mocked and when we destroy 40 million little innocent babies, we make God mad…I really believe that the pagans and the abortionists and the feminists and the gays and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle, the ACLU, People for the American Way, all of them who try to secularize America…I point the thing in their face and say you helped this happen.””
And Pat Robertson quotes….
The 10 Stupidest Things Pat Robertson Ever Said
10) “Over 100 years, I think the gradual erosion of the consensus that’s held our country together is probably more serious than a few bearded terrorists who fly into buildings.” –Pat Robertson, on the dangers of judicial activism
9) “Lord, give us righteous judges who will not try to legislate and dominate this society. Take control, Lord! We ask for additional vacancies on the court.” –Pat Robertson
8) “Just like what Nazi Germany did to the Jews, so liberal America is now doing to the evangelical Christians. It’s no different. It is the same thing. It is happening all over again. It is the Democratic Congress, the liberal-based media and the homosexuals who want to destroy the Christians. Wholesale abuse and discrimination and the worst bigotry directed toward any group in America today. More terrible than anything suffered by any minority in history.” –Pat Robertson
7) “I would warn Orlando that you’re right in the way of some serious hurricanes, and I don’t think I’d be waving those flags in God’s face if I were you, This is not a message of hate — this is a message of redemption. But a condition like this will bring about the destruction of your nation. It’ll bring about terrorist bombs; it’ll bring earthquakes, tornadoes, and possibly a meteor.” –Pat Robertson, on “gay days” at Disneyworld
6) “(T)he feminist agenda is not about equal rights for women. It is about a socialist, anti-family political movement that encourages women to leave their husbands, kill their children, practice witchcraft, destroy capitalism and become lesbians.” –Pat Robertson
5) “I know this is painful for the ladies to hear, but if you get married, you have accepted the headship of a man, your husband. Christ is the head of the household and the husband is the head of the wife, and that’s the way it is, period.” –Pat Robertson
4) “I’d like to say to the good citizens of Dover: If there is a disaster in your area, don’t turn to God, you just rejected him from your city. And don’t wonder why he hasn’t helped you when problems begin, if they begin. I’m not saying they will, but if they do, just remember, you just voted God out of your city. And if that’s the case, don’t ask for his help because he might not be there.” –Pat Robertson, after the city of Dover, Pennsylvania voted to boot the current school board, which instituted an intelligent design policy that led to a federal trial
3) “God considers this land to be his. You read the Bible and he says ‘This is my land,’ and for any prime minister of Israel who decides he is going to carve it up and give it away, God says, ‘No, this is mine.’ … He was dividing God’s land. And I would say, ‘Woe unto any prime minister of Israel who takes a similar course to appease the E.U., the United Nations, or the United States of America.’ God says, ‘This land belongs to me. You better leave it alone.’” –Pat Robertson, on why Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon suffered a massive stroke
2) “Maybe we need a very small nuke thrown off on Foggy Bottom to shake things up” –Pat Robertson, on nuking the State Department
1) “You know, I don’t know about this doctrine of assassination, but if he thinks we’re trying to assassinate him, I think that we really ought to go ahead and do it. It’s a whole lot cheaper than starting a war … We have the ability to take him out, and I think the time has come that we exercise that ability. We don’t need another $200 billion war to get rid of one, you know, strong-arm dictator. It’s a whole lot easier to have some of the covert operatives do the job and then get it over with.” –Pat Robertson, calling for the assassination of Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez
Bonus Quote:
“Wait a minute, I didn’t say ‘assassination.’ I said our special forces should ‘take him out,’ and ‘take him out’ can be a number of things, including kidnapping.” –Pat Robertson, clarifying his call to assassinate Hugo Chavez
March 19th, 2008 at 11:55 am
I believe in separation of church & state. So did the aristocratic slave-owning white males who didn’t want to pay taxes—the guys who formed our country.
There’s a reason for the separation, we need to get all the wackos of religion out of our government before they insist on a theocracy.
In the case of Obamba, oh boy, he’s got a problem. No matter what the media does with this, the mantra should be, “…America, do you really want to relive the 1960s?”
I think that it’s best for this party to remove religion from it’s core since only the wackjobs seem to be supporting it.
President is the executive Branch of our government and not the dictator of our personal lives. Heck, the Pres isn’t in control of the economy as some believe, he’s just a facilitator of the federal government. That’s it. Nothing more.
Keep playing the race & religion card and Hillary will have her vetoproof majority.
March 19th, 2008 at 12:34 pm
Dan – I have never read someone so utterly incapable of staying on point. This post is about Barack Obama’s relationship with his very controversial pastor, Rev. Wright. It has absolutely nothing to do with Jerry Fawell or Pat Robertson; both of which have said foolish things in the past.
If you would like to debate those issues, let us know. In the meantime, give some thought to the following before typing another lunatic rant about Reagan, McCain, Fawell, Robertson, Lucifer, the evil Republicans and all the rest.
1. How would you characterize Rev. Wright?
2. What impact do you think Wright will have on the Obama campaign?
3. Should voters be concerned?
4. How might Hillary respond?
5. Should the media and primary voters done a better job vetting Obama before lavishing so much praise?
6. What impact will Obama’s reaction speech have on the issue?
7. Does this help or hurt the issue of black/white relations?
You get my point. On second thought…
March 19th, 2008 at 3:30 pm
And Scott, you’re being obtuse. How many times must Obama denounce his pastor’s comments. He did once on HuffPo and another time in a speech covered widely by the MSM. Why isn’t that good enough for you?
I’d be more concerned that John McCain doesn’t seem to know who the enemy is in Iraq.
March 19th, 2008 at 4:29 pm
At least you make me laugh…
First, your choice of the word “obstuse” reminds me of the Shawshank Redemption, one of the finest movies of all time.
Second, I wrote the post over the weekend before Obama gave his, er “House Divided” speech. Obama can address the issue anyway he likes, or not at all. My interest is how the issue affects the national political landscape. I truly have nothing against the man because I know very little about him beyond a general understanding that his politics are roughly 180 degrees apart from mine.
Third, you wrote only 5 short sentences and could not muster the courage to stay on point. I beg you to try to discuss a topic without dragging in a bunch of irrelevant nonsense.
March 20th, 2008 at 10:22 am
Scott-
I’ve tried getting Dan to stay on point several times. It’s just not going to happen. I admire your effort though.
He is just incapable of actually answering a question or sticking to the issue at hand.
March 20th, 2008 at 4:08 pm
Gentlemen — I threw out the first question and neither of you answered. I’ve stuck to the issue just fine. Obama is being held accountabel fo what his pastor says by the Far Right yet you won’t hold McCain accountable for equally outraegous statements made by megachurch pastors who he sought endorsements from. One standard for Republicans and a different standard for everyone else.
And Scott….Shawshank, “one of the finest films of all time,” you don’t get out much do you?