Friday, April 25, 2008

Jeremiah Wright is "REV"VED-UP


The Reverend went on PBS to discuss the controversy surrounding him and Presidential hopeful Barack Obama. In case you hadn't heard. He claims that his "G** Damn America" sermon was taken out of context. OK, then why did Obama "distance" himself and then "denounce" the sermon? Well listen for yourself and then you can decide what part was "out of context". Whatever that means.
Wright Sermon video on this page

38 comments:

GrEaT sAtAn'S gIrLfRiEnD said...

This cat is like kryptonite. The "dog gone America" thing ain't going away any time soon.

CHATTI PATTI said...

It's so much fun kicking a dead dog isn't it?

DB said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Nikki said...

It isn't so fun to kick a dead dog but is fun to beat a dead horse..haha :)N

DB said...

Damn, I meant to say:

Apparently it isn't dead if:
1. Nikki can write on it
2. Get you to comment on it

Little mistake changes the whole meaning lol. Ooops

Nikki said...

I did think there was a littl typo there DB...LOL :)N

Karen said...

It's amazing how calm Wright is with Moyers. I thought they were going to kiss each other. He keeps saying it's out of context, just soundbites. Maybe he thinks like the Clintons do - if you say something enough times it'll be the truth.

Mike said...

Nikki, Obama denounced reverend Wright because he (Obama) is a gutless turd, just like 98% of all politicians.

I watched the first 3 of the Wright videos. I really don't see the big deal. So he said God damn America, so what? He's not saying that America sucks or that America should be destroyed. He's saying that the government has mistreated pretty much everyone other than white males since its birth.

The only reason that his comments have created a stir is that the GOP has created an atmosphere of ultra-jingoistic nationalism where anyone who doesn't sing "God Bless America" at the top of their lungs and get all weepy while doing it is obviously a traitor and should be kicked out of the country. It's curious that insulting the Bush administration means you hate America, but insulting Clinton is mandatory. Questioning the Iraq war means you love Al Qaeda, but questioning Clinton's wars is everyone's patriotic duty. It's to the point that someone like Karen can say "Maybe he thinks like the Clintons do - if you say something enough times it'll be the truth." even though the Bush administration has told more lies than the Bible's got psalms.

My point is that the Wright hullabaloo is nothing more than the latest manifestation of right wing hypocrisy. Remember how Kerry got "swift boated" for not being heroic enough of a soldier, while Bush, who had daddy pull some strings to get him out of the draft and then didn't even serve his full time, got a free pass?

Dang, where's the liberal media when you need them?

Nikki said...

Mike...boy did someone put a nickle in you tonight!lol...very passionate love it. Conservatives have every right to look at things the way we do just like you do. I agree that it isn't fair to call someone unpatriotic because of disagreement but don't act like the left isn't over the top sometimes as well. Criticizing is one thing deranged hatred is another. Why shouldn't white people question the content of this sermon? Obama is the one trying to be the "uniter" and the bridge builder. He is the one running on these claims. White people who are or were going to vote for Obama have every right to question his sincerity. I do believe in patriotism. America is not always wrong nor are they always right. But there are those who choose to see things through a blame america first philosophy. American has made mistakes but I wouldn't live anywhere else in the world. I am sorry but G** Damn america is offensive to me. As a religious person and as a white person I do see it as a big deal. Maybe it is hypocritical but that is politics. If Obama can't stand it then wait until he is called the big hitler like Bush is and see how he can take it. I think you are a patriot I just disagree with you on most things. And at least Bush didn't take off to Canada to avoid the war...just had to throw that in. The only reason I bring up Clinton is not to say he sucked as a President, I really don't think he did, my point is to illustrate a double standard with criticism. He is not held to the fire like Bush is. And by the way I get weepy at God Bless America, The Star Spangled Banner and Welcome to the Jungle! :)N

Nikki said...

Karen, Love the practically kissing line!! LOL :)N

CHATTI PATTI said...

The G-damn horse has risen from the dead! In the picture it looks more like a kangaroo....a white kangaroo....hippity hop, hippity hop..bouncing around like a bowl-legged clown!

CHATTI PATTI said...

PS. Mike....awesome response! :-)

DB said...

The G-damn horse has risen from the dead! In the picture it looks more like a kangaroo....a white kangaroo....hippity hop, hippity hop..bouncing around like a bowl-legged clown!

This is the kind of belligerent discourse that pollutes blogs and it is simply masked trolling. Perhaps it annoys me most because it is the most unproductive crap in my inbox that is impossible for the spam filter to catch, thus requiring a drawn out response by me to said spammer/troll. I would rather read the other spam in my box as it is more entertaining. Bring something to the table in form of an argument or point, or stay at the kiddie table.

/rant off

ba and the boys said...

i think the rev wright keeps bringing this up because he is really a clinton supporter. because the whole 'gd america' was just quieting down and then he comes back to the media and has to make a statement.

CHATTI PATTI said...

sorry, db. i was just in a giddy mood! didn't mean to offend you.

Political Realm said...

I do think Wright is treated differently than others who have offered similar messages because of the language he used.

As an example--both Jerry Falwell and Pat Robertson essentially said 9/11 happened because God disapproved of our lifestyle, because of gay marriage, etc. While that may not be "God Damn America" the message isn't too far off.

Sure, there was some backlash against them, but neither became the clear outcast that Wright is to many across the country--Robertson has his own tv network!

Obviously the circumstances aren't entirely the same and that comparison doesn't or shouldn't let Obama off the hook, but it does illustrate how political leanings and motivations can affect a reaction to a situation.

Mike said...

Nikki, perhaps what Wright meant when he said that his comments were taken out of context is that they were made within the course of a church sermon. You argued not too long ago that misogyny in the Catholic church is just church doctrine and shouldn't be construed as reflecting Catholics' views of society. OK, so then the reverend's comments should be seen as his church's doctrine and shouldn't be taken as a reflection of his followers' views of society.

What happens in the pulpit stays in the pulpit, is what it comes down to.

If we're going to start judging candidates by the things that their church leaders say, we're opening up a really unpleasant can of worms. According to the Southern Baptist Convention, of which McCain's church is a part, "A wife is to submit herself graciously to the servant leadership of her husband." Does this mean that McCain automatically endorses that view? Should he be asked to defend that statement or denounce his church? Should all women who view marriage as an equal partnership vote for a Democrat? The SBC also says, "Jesus Christ will return personally and visibly…the dead will be raised." Should we insist that McCain publicly agree with that or denounce his church?

My point is that every religion is offensive. The Constitution forbids a religious test for public office. We, as a nation, have bigger things to worry about than what some preacher said. What will the candidates do about the economy, or health care, or the war, or foreign policy, or education, etc. Isn't that what Romney was trying to say when he was still a candidate?

Welcome to the jungle? If you had said Sweet Child O' Mine, I would have believed you. :)

Nikki said...

Hey Mike, I did argue the point that you have brought up. But the point was to say that Obama should not distance himself now making himself look politically motivated...which he was and is. Reverend Wright should also stand by his sermon and say yeah I said it and that is what I think. To state that his sermon was misunderstood is insulting to my intelligence. He thinks it, Obama may or may not agree. But for a lot of people Obama did transcend race, I even thought that he did and now I question his authenticity. I also think there is a difference in religion vs. attending a church. A religion is a culture much like Mormonism is a culture and a life style. Some attend churches on Sunday and it ends there. This does not take away from the faith of the individual but it does affirm in my mind Obama's stance with regard to the Rev... He now can divorce him because he was simply just attending a church...and the rev should stand behind what he said and not hide behind the "out of context" curtain.
I also agree with the separation of religion in government. Islam is the best example of this dangerous position. There are more countries run on extremist theocracies in the Muslim world than any other. Its a great point.

November Rain would make me weep far more than Sweet Child O'Mine...it sounds so "whose yer daddy" hehe :)N

CHATTI PATTI said...

Should McCain denounce his mother for her comments regarding Mormons? Are all Catholics pedophiles because many priest are?

Nikki said...

Patti you are missing the point...Obama did denounce the Rev. Perhaps he shouldn't have. But that doesn't mean we can't argue the content of Jeremiah's sermon. "Own it" like Dr. Phil says. Obama denounced it, the reverend ran from it and too bad it is what it is and ,yes we can criticize it...I don't really care what McCain's 90+ year old mother said and no catolics aren't pedophiles. :)N

Khaki Elephant said...

Too many of the the comparisons to the Rev. Wright that I read are amazingly off target. The reason Wright is treated differently than Falwell or Robertson is because no candidate with a chance to be nominated has attended their churches for over 20 years. The reason McCain's grandmother isn't relevant is because he didn't appoint her as a campaign advisor on religious matters. The reason McCain's church has not been an issue is because the man he specifically identified as his spiritual mentor didn't claim that white people invented AIDs to kill blacks. (Oh, and a side note about Baptists: They are governed by the local church. Their organizations (like the SBC) are simple associations to pool resources and any democratic vote or resulting statement from their conventions have no binding authority over a local church or congregation. In fact, some Southern Baptist Churches ordain women).

Where was I? Oh, yes. We all know the story. Wright baptised Obama's kids, performed his marriage and served as his spiritual advisor for two decades and the man is a nut. Of course, to hear Obama explain it he really wasn't aware of how wacky his pastor is, which in my book means that he's too stupid to be president.

Khaki Elephant said...

Ooooh, I hate to write this because I find myself defending somebody that I didn't care for . . . Jerry Falwell. But as I posted that last comment I realized how silly it is to claim that Falwell wasn't constantly attacked by the press.

Case in point, the claim that he said Tinky Winky of Teletubby fame was gay. I still hear this. I was watching MSNBC during that controversy when Falwell explained that he never said that, it was in an editorial written by a student at Liberty University (where Falwell was Prez). In fact, Falwell explained that he'd never actually seen the Teletubbies. The next day on the news I saw a reporter say that, "after claiming that Tinky Winky is gay, Falwell admits that he's never seen the show."

Unbelievable . . . that Falwell was such a target and we're acting like Wright is a victim.

Unbelievable . . . that I find myself defending Falwell.

I'm going to go and brush my teeth now.

DB said...

Too many of the the comparisons to the Rev. Wright that I read are amazingly off target.

Khaki, I disagree. Wright is in the same "crazy-religious nutbag" category as the rest of them. It's sad people dwell on the words these clowns say (both sides of the aisle).

Wright is, afterall, just one nutjob, and would be ardently defended if he was a conservative. Falwell, Robertson, Parsley, etc each spew more hatred to a wider audience than Wright ever has. Those fellas have been in the public spot light for years. We never heard of Wright until Obama decides to run for President.

Wait. No it sounds like I am defending Wright. I'll stop now to go brush my teeth too ;-)

Khaki Elephant said...

DB, you are right in that they are all nutjobs. The difference for me is that a Presidential candidate who will most likely win his party's nomination chose one of those nutjobs to be his spiritual mentor. That is a significant distinction to consider during a campaign.

DB said...

At least we got the nut jobs part agreed on!

But McCain chose Parsley as his spiritual adviser. So Obama actually has a real adviser while McCain is using his for political gain. Same result in my book.

Khaki Elephant said...

McCain called Parsley a spiritual guide while campaigning in Ohio, a battleground state. Distasteful, but politically strategic in a way every candidate will unfortunatly manuever. He did not attend Parsley's church for 20 years or have him officiate the most holy spiritual sacraments with his family . . . something most people would share with a mentor with common values and world view.

I guess we'll have to agree to disagree because I see a big difference in the two.

DB said...

/agreed (to disagree)

:-)

Mike said...

khaki, you bring up an interesting point. Obama decided to join Wright's church and stick with it, even though the man in charge spewed nonsense. Therefore, we can question Obama's judgment, since he took advice from someone who said things that were patently false.

To that end, I would offer this: anyone who attends church regularly or professes a belief in a god should have their judgment questioned. How can we trust any candidate to make sound reasoned decisions on any topic when they believe in the most illogical of all things. In this one area, which most people say is the most important aspect of their life, they have latched on to a belief that defies all logic; that by definition requires an abandonment of logic and rational thought.

So whether it's Wright or Falwell or L. Ron Hubbard, they all spew nonsense and anyone who believes any of them is soaking in irrational BS. Of course, everyone has a right to believe what they want to and worship whoever/however/whatever they please. It shouldn't be a factor in an election, because any way you slice it, it's all baloney.

Khaki Elephant said...

Mike, whether you believe in the divine or not, whether you have faith or not, whether there is an inkling of truth to it or not, it does matter how you choose to worship and allow your spirituality to manifest itself.

Mother Theresa and Mohamed Atta were both driven by religion and are you trying to claim that they were equally nuts? That they both had the same effect on the human condition?

OK, for you let's move it out of the church. Let's just look at Wright as a trusted advisor to Obama who has been with him for 20 years, giving him advice on how he should live, spending time with his family and teaching his kids (not about religion, but about social issues). Now we just have Obama hand picking an advisor and teacher for his children who taught that white folk invented AIDs, that Louis Farrakhan deserves honors and that we are living in a damn country that has made no progress concerning race since the 60s.

There is no God. There is no church. And Obama and his family spent 20 years learning at the feet of a racist, anti-american nut job.

Mike said...

Khaki: "it does matter how you choose to worship and allow your spirituality to manifest itself."

That statement nullifies any criticism of Obama, with regard to Reverend Wright. Last time I checked, Obama wasn't spouting out about killing whitey or how white man created AIDS or even saying God damn America. So since Obama's spirituality has manifested itself in a more conventional way, anything that Wright said in the past is irrelevant.

"Obama and his family spent 20 years learning at the feet of a racist, anti-american nut job."

Last I checked, Obama's kids went to private school. I think your portrayal of Wright's influence on their family is exaggerated, to say the least. Maybe I'm wrong. If you'd like to point me to a source that will back up your claim, I'd be happy to check it out.

An aside: why do you call Wright anti-American? I haven't seen any evidence that he is working to overthrow the government. Is it just that anyone who speaks out is automatically a traitor?

There has been a lot of hot air blowing over the fact that Wright says things that are patently false. My point was that every religion spews things that are false.

Nikki said...

Mike, let me just butt in on your conversation with Khaki for a sec if I may...why is it that religious people are illogical and atheists are logical? That doesn't sound fair to me. If I am hearing you correctly we shouldn't criticize Wright because we all belong to crazy whacked out churches? Is this your logic? Can atheism in itself be considered a belief system and even though it differs from a religious belief based on faith why is this illogical? religon is defined as a personal set or institutionalized system of attitudes, beliefs, and practices. This sounds like atheism qualifies...:)N

Incognito said...

All the snippets of videos i watched of Reverend Wright sermons i found incredibly offensive. and of course obama had to disassociate himself... it's called political expediency. wright as much said that.

Mike said...

Nikki, Atheism is not a belief system. It doesn't address any of the issues that religions do --where did we come from, why are we here, what happens to us when we die? Atheism is simply the determination that there is no god (or gods).

The reason that I say religious people are illogical is that from my observations, it seems that religion is not something that is entered into through deductive reasoning. Most people learn of their religion by attending the church that their family attends. They get one side of the story --the one that supports their belief system.

I personally, and every Atheist I have known, have come to Atheism in the opposite way. I was raised by Methodists. When I was old enough, I started reading about other religions. Then I read about different philosophers / theologians and the various arguments for and against the existence of God. I read about different mythologies of the world and various religions that preceded Christianity. At some point along the way, it dawned on me. There is no god other than the one(s) created by humans. There is simply no other logical conclusion to all of the evidence I've seen.

That's why I say religious people are illogical. I don't mean it as an insult. From what I've observed, though, children are not taught in Sunday school that there are other religions and other mythologies and even arguments against the existence of their deity, and then allowed to decide for themselves which one to worship. They are taught that God is real, Jesus is real, Heaven is real, and anyone who doesn't believe is going to Hell. (For Christians, anyway, other religions teach their doctrine, of course, but it's essentially the same process.)

Incognito: you should watch the clips that Nikki linked to in this post, so you can see a whole sermon instead of just snippets.

Incognito said...

Mike, I don't need to listen to the whole sermon to know that this man is divisive. But, I did, out of curiosity click on one of the full sermons and lasted a few minutes when he started ranting away. I find his tone of voice physically painful.. as I do any fire and brimstone preacher. And it's not just the G-Damn reference, it's everything else he says including that the US was responsible for the aids epidemic. Please.

Nikki said...

Hey Mike, thank you for your thoughtful response. Atheism is hard for me to understand I admit it. To me religion is very logical and makes a lot of sense, more sense than what science offers sometimes, like with creationism. A chance boom or a molecular organization happening on its own doesn't make a whole lot of sense to me. Evolution I think can be grasped easier because in my religion at least we believe in progression and I don't think it is a stretch to see the evolutionary transformation of species, even humans. We also don't believe in heaven or hell which is why Mormons aren't accepted by mainstream christians. I do think religion doesn't explain God in the way we can sometimes comprehend but in my religion we believe he is a tangible being and we were created and organized in his likeness, we believe that literally and not figuatively. My point is that it makes more sense to me than what science has to offer, which is nothing. I appreciate your candor and I will come and visit you in hell while I am in heaven...I am kidding, like I said we believe in salvation for all only differing degrees of it...I also think even evidence would not convince some that there is a God, which is why I changed my mind in the ID argument, faith requires more than seeing. thanks again. :)N

Khaki Elephant said...

Mike, keep in mind that the relationship between Wright and Obama is so strong that the latter named his book, The Audicity of Hope after a Wright sermon. Oh, and if you read the book you'll find that in that very sermon Wright declares that "White greed drives world need" . . . but aside from honoring him with the keystone publication of his historic presidential campaign, I'm sure Wright had no real influence on Obama and his family.

A significant element of this that you should investigate to wrap your arms around Wright's influece on the Obamas is looking into the role of the Church in the African American community. My congregation's sister church is 2nd Baptist in Detroit, which is a central cog in the life of its parishoners and community. I've attended many service there and gotten to know a number of the members and realized that white folk like me tend to go to their church while black folk tend to be their church. The dynamic is amazing.

As far as Obama's children going to a private school, rest assured that is not their only inflence. Trinity offers Children's Church every week along with a number of youth activities. What are the odds Obama's kids were involved with some of those as well as the regular service? Again, don't underestimate the influence of the church.

And I am with you that disagreement does not equate to being unamerican . . . if it did, I would be unamerican every day. However, blaming America for AIDs, 9/11, saying U.S. Marines are no different than the Roman soldiers who "slaughtered the saviour", chanting G-Damn America . . . and we could go on because we're no longer talking about a few soundbites, we're talking about core comments that grow exponentially with every sermon that goes public. This Guy makes King George III look like Uncle Sam.

Khaki Elephant said...

I would argue that deductive reasoning can lead to conceptualizing God, which is why so many of the greatest (and most logical) minds the world has ever known have believed in the divine. However, I would also argue that many religious fundamentalists tend to employ faith without reason and do so with a zealous fervor that is impossible to penetrate. It's fresh in my mind since yesterday I had a co-worker spend 10 impassioned minutes trying to convince me that the earth is only 10,000 years old.

DB said...

so many of the greatest (and most logical) minds the world has ever known have believed in the divine.

Yes, prior to Darwin you are absolutely correct. But in the 20th c. through today, the higher percentage of those great minds has been decidedly non-theist, or at most deist. But definitely not subscribers to an Abrahamic religion.

And I agree as my issue is generally with fundamentalists, not your everyday religious person who allows room for God and science. The fundamentalists are the one's turning people against science, logic, and reason. I went to church weekly until college and was never forced to decide on a literal interpretation of the Bible against evidence to the contrary. They knew how to separate faith and science and still be at peace with yourself.

Even as a liberal, I still maintain Wright is a douche though.