Newsweek - National News, World News, Health, Technology, Entertainment and more... | Newsweek.com
Full Post
Posted Friday, March 14, 2008 6:32 PM

Regarding Wright

Andrew Romano

 

Pop quiz. Who said the following?

1. The United States brought on the 9/11 attacks with its own "terrorism."
A: Sen. Barack Obama
B: Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Jr., his pastor

2. "‘God Bless America.' No, no, no, God damn America."
A: Obama
B: Wright

3. "Bill did us, just like he did Monica Lewinsky. He was riding dirty."
A: Obama
B: Wright

4. "[America] started the AIDS virus."
A: Obama
B: Wright

5. "Hillary ain't never been called a n****r!"
A: Obama
B: Wright

Pencils down. In case you're wondering, the correct answers are B, B, B, B and B. I imagine that everyone scored pretty well--even those of you haven't switched on CNN, MSNBC or FOX News (which first broadcast the video above) in the past 48 hours to watch the talking heads pontificate endlessly about how Wright is hampering Obama's presidential hopes. Because even though Wright was, until his retirement last month, Obama's pastor at Trinity United Church of Christ on the South Side of Chicago; even though Obama has described Mr. Wright as his "sounding board"; even though Obama borrowed the title of his bestseller "The Audacity of Hope" from one of Wright's sermons; and even though Wright married Obama and wife and baptized his children, only an irrational person could possibly imagine Obama uttering, believing or condoning any of these inflammatory, often offensive, statements.

Which is why Wright poses a problem for Obama. Irrational people, of course, will simply allow Wright's remarks to confirm, by association, whatever biases they already held toward Obama--that he's a "foreigner," or an "anti-American," or an "angry black man." But rational people will react as well, wondering, I think, why the Illinois senator has spent nearly 20 years of his life choosing to attend a church where stuff like this--stuff that seems to contradict his core values of unity and healing, and that Obama himself has repeatedly rejected--was sometimes said. I don't put Wright's frequent remarks on institutional racism and black struggles into this category; while they might make some folks uncomfortable, they remain firmly within the black theological tradition. But the comments above (and any others like them)? Absolutely. "Like many people, I wouldn't sit through one of these sermons, let alone come back for more," writes the Atlantic's Andrew Sullivan, one of Obama's smartest and staunchest supporters. "It would be helpful, to say the very least, if Obama told us more candidly why he did and does."  

I'd prefer not to dwell on the irrational side of the equation; there's really no closing that can of worms once it's opened (and it was open long before Wright). But the rational question--why keep attending Trinity?--is an important one. In a statement published Friday afternoon on the Huffington Post, Obama writes, as expected, that he "strongly condemn[s]," "outright rejects," "categorically denounce[s]" and "vehemently disagree[s]" with Wright's "inflammatory and appalling" remarks, adding that "these particular statements by Rev. Wright are... contrary to my own life and beliefs." Which, of course, only makes Sullivan's question--which Obama calls "legitimate"--all the more relevant. He gives a two part answer. First, the senator says that "the statements that Rev. Wright made that are the cause of this controversy were not statements I personally heard him preach while I sat in the pews of Trinity or heard him utter in private conversation." There's no reason to doubt that this is true in a narrow sense, but still--it isn't particularly convincing. After nearly two decades, Obama was surely aware of Wright's more controversial tendencies. Thankfully, the second half of the senator's explanation--that Wright's remarks don't represent the real spirit of his church--is considerably more compelling:

[Wright] led a diverse congregation that was and still is a pillar of the South Side and the entire city of Chicago. It's a congregation that does not merely preach social justice but acts it out each day, through ministries ranging from housing the homeless to reaching out to those with HIV/AIDS. The sermons I heard him preach always related to our obligation to love God and one another, to work on behalf of the poor, and to seek justice at every turn.

This, I think, gets at Obama's larger reason for sticking with Trinity. Raised by his secular white mother in Hawaii and Indonesia, a post-collegiate Obama arrived in Chicago desperate for a sense of community and eager to establish his identity, after years of self-doubt, as a black American. He found both in the church. Describing his first experience at Trinity in 1995's "Dreams from My Father", Obama writes that "at the foot of that cross, inside the thousands of churches across the city, I imagined the stories of ordinary black people merging with the stories of David and Goliath, Moses and Pharaoh, the Christians in the lion's den, Ezekiel's field of dry bones. Those stories--of survival, and freedom, and hope--became our story, my story... Our trials and triumphs became at once unique and universal, black and more than black." It wasn't that he accepted everything Wright said, or everything the church stood for--much like most religious Americans. (Consider how Jerry Falwell's outrageous views, for example, have colored perceptions of evangelical Christians as a whole.)  In fact, Obama admitted from the start that "part of me continued to feel that this Sunday communion sometimes simplified our condition, that it could sometimes disguise or suppress the very real conflicts among us." But to him the good far outweighed the bad.

Advertisement

I guess the voters now get to decide whether or not they agree.

UPDATE, 7:30 p.m.: The Obama campaign sends word that "Rev. Wright is no longer serving on the African American Religious Leadership Committee," severing his only formal tie to the campaign--a la Samantha Power and Geraldine Ferraro.

You must be a registered user to comment.  Click here to register.  Already a user?  Click here to login.

Member Comments

Posted By: orion12 (March 17, 2008 at 7:14 PM)

How can people criticize Rev. Wright? The man has not uttered any racist comment. He does not agree with America, he says Clinton is not a ***.... Objectively is he saying what others are not saying. I feel this whole hype is the fault of the press being so hungry for causing sensation. He has the right to make his point. Many Americans are damning Bush for everything he does, even though they are times not justified. How is Wright different? I guess because he is black?

Clinton can make so much noise about being a woman. She wore green the just a couple of days ago to show she has Irish background. But I do not hear any noise about this. Barak Obama wore the outfit of his father's people..... Ha ha!!! He is called a muslim terrorist. Why is'nt Clinton called an Irish IRA terrorist?  Am I making sense here? Oh if Obama says "I am black" he becomes a racist. Clinton does not become a feminist for saying she is a woman!! This is very lopsided.

Every time a black man stands up to make a point he is labeled an angry man. Some have written Wright is an angry man and full of hate. Where is the hate? He is making a point. And a legitimate one too. Many of those who will not vote for Obama because he is black are full of what? Whiteness? I think that people are either trying to make Wright's comment into a mountain or they are just seeing themselves as they really are: they do not like a black person to talk about these things because they feel uncomfortable. But this is America... racism is here and we have to face it.

What bothers me is the media and people trying to blame Obama for what Wright said. To go to the extent to even suggest Obama leaves the church is beyond me. Is this a state run by some wierd ideology, whch states that one has to be controlled and he must conform to some code of political correctness? Does he not have a choice where he worships? How many of you would leave your church because the pastor or priest makes a bold comment? Are catholics leaving their churches due to scandals about homosexuality? (I must make it clear that I am not equating Pastor Wright's comments to any perceived immoral action). If some of us, cannot stand a black man being so strong as Obama is, then that is a problem. I can understant that. But let us not get silly and try to blame him for belonging to a church where the respected pastor makes comments that make people uncomfortable.

I ask the media to go and look for some sensible story. Seems that they are getting short of news. I guess if Obama snores that may be a good headline. Wow!! Wake up guys bring us news and analysis not pushing forward your pet problems and biasis. Be professional.


Posted By: HolyRoller (March 16, 2008 at 11:29 PM)

Hussein Obama's CHICKENS HAVE COME HOME TO ROOST.

Smells like a few of his swine are wallowing in the mud with him and his buddies, also.

He is no longer a viable candidate, and the real nasty stuff isn't even public knowledge yet. This is going to be real entertainment.

NOBAMA!!!


Posted By: FtGreeneNY (March 16, 2008 at 11:02 PM)

Yes, actually this is a dust-up; dust-up - slang: a row or angry dispute...

I'm actually trying to figure out the racist bit of Wright's comments...some folks are saying they're racist, but I don't get it.

As best as I can paraphrasing the clips:

America has done some awful things around the world - not racist

America should take care to treat all of its citizens equallly and fairly - not racist

Hillary's never been called a n****r - not racist

So, in trying to understand Nedudgi, should I believe that something's racist because someone doesn't want to hear it?  

BTW, I don't have to wonder about HRC's pastor, but can look at what's come out of her campaign otherwise from WJC on down to Ferraro.  She can run her campaign anyway she wants to, and I as a Democratic voter and her Senate constituent can make a decision about how to act accorndingly.

Also, Colin Powell and Condi Rice (for Pete's dake) are evidence of a nation's now being run inclusively??!  Wow, after 400 years, we have arrived!  Two people (well, down to one) in a lame administration and I'm sure we're lousy with black and brown CEOs and on and on as well.

Still being angry for slavery?  Of course people are still angry about slavery, and Jim Crow, and lynching, redlining, unequal pay, police misconduct, and yes, unequal treatement under the law (not blaming whites for black crime - at least not all of it, but yes, wanting equal treatement, which often does not occur, particularly if you are unfortunate enough to be poor and/or black or brown).  The larger point is that because so much is still yet to be done, America, not just blacks have yet to truly recover from slavery and all that happened after emancipation.  Just 30 years ago when I was nine, my mother took me on a march in Decatur, AL because they were prosecuting a mentally-disabled black man for raping a white woman.  It was my first encounter with the Klan (they had done a counter-march before ours).  As it turned out after railroading the man and sentencing him to death, it was later found that not only did he not commit the rape, but he was physically incapable of having done it.  

As for policies created to mitigate discrimination, of course they exist.  And yes, I'm sure that since I couldn't be given favorable treatment because I was from a foreign country, or a legacy, or a rural area, I got  some because I was black...but I also got it because I was smart, did well on the SAT, worked hard, and had been an honors student at one of the best boarding schools in the country, i.e. had the same qualifications as just about every other undergraduate applicant.  

It seems incredibly easy for far too many to imagine that save for the bad behavior of some blacks, everything's just hunky-dory with respect to race today.  It reminds me of having a conversation with a (white) classmate in high school about racism when another friend came along, heard what we were talking about and said, "why are you talking about that? didn't we write it out of the constitution?"