You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name
Your e-mail (optional)
Website (optional)
My Original Nic        Pic-a-Nic        Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Bold Italic Underline Strike Bullet Blockquote Small Big Link Squish Foto Photo
Home Front: Politix
Did Wright's latest remarks sink Obama?
2008-04-29
Jim Geraghty, National Review's "Campaign Spot"

The Obama campaign is off the rails.

The entire tone of the race changed the moment we saw the first fiery Wright sermon. The sight of those sermons triggered a question in a lot of voters' minds: How do you get the moderate-sounding, pleasant, agreeable student Barack Obama from an angry, divisive, radical, way-out-of-the-mainstream teacher like Jeremiah Wright? The sermons weren't quite a deal-breaker, but many Obama supporters, leaners, and undecideds were asking... how did Obama choose this man as a mentor? How could he possibly not know that his mentor had these attitudes? And does Obama agree with any of Wright's inflammatory statements?

In response, Obama gave a very eloquent speech about race relations in America. But it never quite answered the question, and in fact tried to blur the distinction between family we are born into and those we choose to turn to for guidance. Hillary jabbed at this in the debate, and Obama never quite had an appropriate response. He even said he disowned Wright, then backtracked and said he disowned his controversial statements.

And since then, it's gotten worse, even with a Bill Moyers interview that wasn't softball so much as it was Nerf Tee-Ball. We've heard Wright compare the Roman Legions who punished Jesus to the U.S. Marines, we've heard him argue that the U.S. and al-Qaeda are doing the same acts under different flags, etc.

Now we hear Wright analyzing the differences between white and black brains (!) and that the criticism of him for his comments was "an attack on the black church." He didn't retract his assertion that the U.S. government created the AIDS virus. He didn't retract his accusation that the United States had committed terrorism. He raved about Louis Farrakhan.

And again, we're left with that question... presuming Obama strongly disagrees with all of Wright's statements in these areas... how did he end up selecting this pastor? This church? (I know we get the story in Obama's autobiography. But did Obama once agree with all of the crazy conspiracy theories? Does he still agree, late at night, when the microphones and television cameras are far away?)

Obama is saying he should be president, instead of two much more experienced rivals, because of his superior judgment. But what kind of judgment is needed to select Wright as a surrogate father figure?

- - - - - - - - - - - - - -

This morning's Wall Street Journal house editorial:

Anyone raised amid the wisdom of mothers knows well the dictum that "some people just talk too much." Meet the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr.

At the moment, Rev. Wright is out in public saying whatever happens to be on his mind. It is not a coincidence that at least some of what is on Rev. Wright's mind and tongue may be pushing Barack Obama's presidential candidacy into a ditch. . . .

The last time around this track, Barack Obama responded with a long speech meditating on the status of race in America. It was both an interesting speech and an attempt to get the Wright mess behind him. Now just yesterday Rev. Wright said that Senator Obama has neither denounced him nor distanced himself from the pastor but instead "did what politicians do."

Meanwhile, more inflammatory remarks by Rev. Wright from past sermons are coming to light, and he has taken to explaining away everything as "soundbites" taken out of context. Past some point that doesn't fly, and we are past that point. On Sunday, John McCain said Rev. Wright's commentary is likely to be "a political issue." The Obama campaign cracked back that Mr. McCain had broken his word to run a "respectful campaign."

This won't wash. The one fact that Senator Obama can't undo is that he was a member of Rev. Wright's church for 20 years. Jeremiah Wright is insisting on making this long relationship an issue in the 2008 presidential campaign, and many voters understandably want clarity on the subject from candidate Obama.

Early in his campaign, Senator Obama earned support from many voters with the notion that he wanted to transcend racial politics. Rev. Wright is exacerbating them in a way not seen in recent years. Barack Obama cannot remain on both sides of this. He has to make a decision. He is not running for national Mediator. He is running for President. In time, that job brings tough decisions. He's there now.
Posted by:Mike

#9  T-Shirts for sale:

"Bitter, Clinging Disowner"
"Disowning, Bitter Clinger"
"Clinging Disowning Bitterly"

3 for the price of 2!
Posted by: Harcourt Jush7795   2008-04-29 21:34  

#8  I have voted for lots of Republicans, but it is the Democrat party that has let down America this go around. The choices the democrats brought forth this Spring should make us all sick to our stomachs.

And who cares who Bill Clinton dislikes personally. If Bill does not like him, perhaps he will not be groped. And I do not want to see pictures of Bill groping Obama.
Posted by: Whatadeal   2008-04-29 18:05  

#7  The ace, Obama can always drop out after a demand and failure of the Super-Delegates to push him over the top (ala Mitt Romney, or Rudy)! Being that Bill Clinton reportedly doesn't like Obama 'personally', and now the DNC wouldn't have a problem of either dropping out in June, I don't think Queen Hillary would even pick him for VP for his endorsement. The egg on the face of Iowa, New Hampshire and other 'white' states would be so embarrassing, another black wouldn't be promoted to run for another 1000 years!!
Posted by: smn   2008-04-29 16:53  

#6  Mike,
My whole theory is that lack of evidence is what I have come to believe from the Clintons.
"They are not involved here" is strike one for me.
I share your point that those DVD's from TUCC were most likely in HRC's opposition research arsenal. A slight nudge to a friendly reporter to go and buy the "boxed set", and Hillary doesn't even need to pay the expense report.
The second evidence of "lack of evidence" is that HRC didn't have an effective bomb to toss, even though she faced "inevitable" political irrelevance from the formerly adoring MSM more than once since then.
lack of "1" + lack of "1" = 2 Clintons IMHO
Posted by: Capsu78   2008-04-29 14:32  

#5  Capsu: I attribute much of this to Wright's ego. Wright was retiring this year, remember? He was about to go from center of attention to something less than the center of attention--a transition which the large-egoed often have trouble making. (See also, e.g., Clinton, William J.) Just as he's about to enter that long twilight of relative obscurity, his more controversial sermons escaped into the wild (with a helpful nudge from the Clinton war room, I have no doubt), and now all of a sudden he's the center of attention again! And don't think he's not enjoying it!

Never attribute to malice what can adequately be explained by lesser vices.
Posted by: Mike   2008-04-29 13:24  

#4  Back around Super Tuesday, I noted that something politically fatal would befall Obama, and you would KNOW it came from the Clintons because it "couldn't have anything to do with the Clintons".
Now that potentially fatal blow has arrived, and it can't be traced back to the Clintons.
My question- did Hillery "get to" the good reverand, like the mob used to "get to" the judge?
Could it be possible? I wish Vince Foster were here to comment.
Posted by: Capsu78   2008-04-29 13:05  

#3  Didn't the title from Obama's book, 'The Audacity of Hope' from from the lips of his good friend, mentor, and pastor of 20 years - Jeremiah Wright?
Posted by: CrazyFool   2008-04-29 10:43  

#2  Look for the “Battered wife Syndrome meets The Student becomes the Teacher” subterfuge. You know the drill. Wright canÂ’t possibly be as close to Obama, as some would suggest if he is willing to risk damage to ObamasÂ’ presidential aspirations to further his own selfish aggrandizement. Next step is to weave the Obama the Harvard cum laude altruistically becomes “community organizer turned public servant” to lead the next generation of the disadvantaged masses out of the old divisive dogma and into a new era of healing.
Of course, the down-shot is that many will then correctly recognize that Obama attended a church more as a political calculation rather then any spiritual enlightenment. And the real risk is to expose his narrative of “Hope and Change” as being grounded in the amalgamation of New left/Neo-Marxism philosophy and Chicago-style grievance politics.
Posted by: DepotGuy   2008-04-29 09:38  

#1  "I can no more disown him [Wright] than I can disown the black community." - guess who?
Posted by: Procopius2k   2008-04-29 09:26  

00:00