So I curious about people's read on the latest salvo's between Rev. Wright at the Press Club vs. Obama's reaction. I'm still sorting it out. Its not that any of Wright's comments in the Q & A section were so terribly off (though they were clownish to the point of resembling a stand-up routine at points) but jeesh! "With friends like this who needs enemies" as they say.
First Wright's Q&A session:
Then Obama's response.
What an awkward position to be forced into, what awful timing.












Wright is Right On!
Thanks for posting this up.
I am really impressed by Wright, esp defending the "chickens coming home to roost" remark and "god damning America". He was great on Moyers' show when he talked about MLK and how when MLK opposed the Vietnam war and called for the abolition of capitalism, and how when MLK took a righteous stand against these 3 evils that all had to be abolished at once (racism, militarism, and capitalism/poverty/economic exploitation) he was condemned by Pres. Johnson, the NAACP and other mainstream civil rights leaders. This last year of King's life is definitely one of (if not the ONE) the most censored stories of our generation.
Of course, Wright's comments are too radical for Obama during the campaign, but it doesn't mean Wright isn't right. It is a shame that Obama must distance himself, and also Obama's statement about respecting the court ruling against Sean Bell was extremely disappointing.
"Chickens come home to
"Chickens come home to roost" and "God Damn America" were never the issue the right wanted to make them into. Wright does OK there.
Its in the defense of HIV as a government invented virus, rather than a case of a sometimes appalling mismanagement of the response (fueled at times no doubt racism and homophobia) that Wright crosses an regretable line. You aren't delivering God's message when you are feeding the national media disempowering and factually suspect medical advice. That is not "right on", thats telling lots and lots of young people that the government did it and they are therefore at a certain level "off the hook" for protecting themselves and their partners from a terrible disease. Not cool.
He also does seemingly intentional damage to Obama, not giving the candidate the independence of belief, pooh-poohing the instances where Obama cuts his own path as just being "political posturing". Its almost like he wants to bring down the candidate. On other forums more than few posters speculate that its almost like Wright is acting on Obama's political opponents behalf, perhaps out of spite. Wright at points wants to go the extra mile to defend Farrakahn and heap praise on the man's influence while pointing that he (Wright) does not necessarily agree with everything Farrkahn says but Wright does not give Obama credit as an independent thinker. Wright makes fun of politicians and yet he jokes about being vice president - and he's speaking at the National Press Club, for crissake. That is not someone focused on preaching the gospel, thats someone focused on making as big a splash for them selves in the media scrum as possible. And again and again he makes statements clearly his own and attempts to hide them behind "the black church" as if it was a monolith and he is its one true prophet.
I'm sorry but this is a monumentally self-centered act on Wright's part, even if many of the things he says are nowhere near the way the right wing and some of Clinton's more gleefully oportunistic supporters would portray Wright.
I look at the Obama clip and can't help but have "Et tu, Brutus" pop in my head. Its sad and shows a certain dignity and determination about Obama that makes me respect the man more.
-Sean
MrLuigi, my cat, actually only types half as badly as I do.
HIV, Iraq, and Chickens Coming Home
Hi Sean,
I think I see where you're coming from.
Did you see him on Bill Moyers? I thought he came off very well on there, esp because they showed the context of his sermon.
Somewhat similar to you, I have reservations about his HIV comments. However, when watching the actual clip in your post here where he is asked about HIV, he doesn't exactly say he believes it, but rather that he believes its possible because history has shown the US govt. has done so many other bad things, including Tuskegee and selling Iraq the chemical/biological weapons in the 80s before, during, and after he was using it against the Kurds and others... So, since he was pressed on it, I largely respect him for holding his ground.
However, that said, US govt complicity in HIV would not be something I'd personally focus on, because I believe there are so many documented instances (that don't require speculation at all) of US govt. malevolence, that to focus on things that require speculation is basically a distraction and can weaken the overall argument. As you pointed out, US govt NEGLECT of HIV treatment and education is a scandal in and of itself, right?
Where I would disagree with you on this is where you said it takes away people's accountability in preventing HIV transmission. I disagree because I don't think Wright takes away individual responsibility, because EVEN IF (note my qualification here) the govt did it, people should still resist that any way they can, and is a separate issue from personal responsibility.
Responding to another one of your points, I too think Wright got a bit "egotistical" and/or selfish with some grandstanding recently.... But, for me, the strength and merit of what he said (particularly defending the "chickens" and "God damn America" stuff, as you noted) overshadowed those personal flaws. I found it rather exciting to see someone on the mainstream media like Wright with his criticisms of US foreign policy and history of racism and genocide.
That said, I can concede how it is at some level detrimental to Obama, but... where do ya draw the line?
Best
Hans
ps, I thought this interview with Michael Eric Dyson was interesting:
http://uprisingradio.org/home/?p=2632