Korean Job Discussion Forums

[stillnotking]

I'm speaking -- metaphorically, of course -- about Rev. Wright's remarks to the National Press Club today.

[Pligganease]

[Ya-ta Boy]

[Ya-ta Boy]

Obama has had to do 'it'.

Obama Tries to Dig Out

There was little nuance in Barack Obama's news conference Tuesday, as he pronounced himself saddened, angered and even outraged by the antics of his former pastor at the National Press Club a day earlier. "I find these comments appalling," he said. "It contradicts everything that I'm about and who I am." It was a far different tone from the finely tuned speech on race that he had given in Philadelphia in March, shortly after some of Jeremiah Wright's most inflammatory comments had first come to light. And it reflected the new political reality that Obama has confronted in what have been the rockiest weeks yet for his presidential campaign. http://news.yahoo.com/s/time/20080430/us_time/obamatriestodigout

It was only a matter of time given Wright's performance over the last few days. We can only hope that the thing is over now...but given the media's obsession with headlines, we have a few days (at least) of 'What do you think of that?" and then 'What do you think of what he said about that?' and then "What did you think about what he said about what you said?' Then maybe it will be over. Or not.

[Adventurer]

Frankly, there are people in the African American community who are conspiracy prone. It is quite common to see this among communities which has suffered from institutions, groups to have many of their people see conspiracies when they should not, and Wright is correct that it is not uncommon to see this kind of thing among some black people who go to church.

I am not saying that's the majority by any means, but many black people, in some form or another, believe the white man is out to get them. Again, I am not saying the majority, I am just saying I've seen this kind of thinking. Obama cannot afford a connection to this kind of pastor when there is somewhat of a misgiving among many white people when it comes to electing a black person. I know people think that America has come a long way, but I've argued before, and I still would that prejudice is still strong in America among all kinds of communities. I think Colin Powell might have a better shot than Obama. Hillary Clinton may beat Obama because of Wright.

I think Wright wants to defend himself. He does want to be part of the debate. His concern is not Obama, but defending the black man as he sees it, even if we think he is wrong.

[manlyboy]

[Kuros]

Here's the conservative commentator at the Atlantic:

[On the other hand]

[Gopher]

I cannot recall for certain without researching, and I am not going to do that today (for one thing: no one will challenge me on this, given this board's politics), but I believe when the born-again Guatemalan general who ruled Guatemala sometime in the 1980s used helicopter gunships to gun down fleeing Indians after scorching their villages in rural Guatemala in a desperate move to counter the insurgency there, Pat Robertson appeared on his news network and explained to this viewers that this general was "doing God's work."

So I agree that religious leaders, at least in the American political context, often embrace very whacked-out thinking and run with it.

[On the other hand]

[Gopher]

Left-wing, anti-American sensationalists berate "America." I spoke of "religious leaders, at least in the American context."

I do not read Counterpunch, On the Other Hand. But I do read the Journal of Latin American Studies. And an article in there that I once read but will not start digging for here does in fact cover this in detail. The Guatemalans pursued a genocidal-like policy re: Guatemalan Indian Peoples and Cultures in the 1980s. Many had long seen these people as backward, dirty, antimodern. In short, an impediment blocking Guatemala's modernization. Under R�os Montt, they simply moved to kill them. Some in America criticized this; some, like Robertson, defended it. And Robertson expressly defended R�os Montt and his policies by arguing that he was indeed "doing God's work."

Yes, I get the tone of your post (I think, but sometimes, who can really tell?). Mine is hardly a leftist position on this issue. If it were, again, I would not be discussing Robertson or R�os Montt but rather "America" or especially "American foreign policy" as if that were all that there was to know about this time in Guatemalan history -- thus studiously ignoring the five-hundred years of the Hispanic population's extremely virulent anti-Indian racism that culminated in this.

[Ya-ta Boy]

Maureen Dowd has an interesting piece on this topic. Here are the best parts:

Barack Obama has spent his life, and campaign, trying not to be the Angry Black Man.

Early on, he wrote in �Dreams From My Father,� he discerned the benefits of playing against the �60s stereotype of black militancy.

Obama and his aides often brag about his Zenlike serenity. �I�ve learned that I have what I believe is the right temperament for the presidency, which is I don�t get too high when I�m high and I don�t get too low when I�m low,� he told Chris Wallace on �Fox News Sunday.�

The next morning, he was hurtled into the worst political crisis of his life. On Tuesday, the Sort Of Angry Black Man appeared, reluctantly spurred into action by The Really Angry Black Man.

Speaking to reporters in the heart of tobacco country in Winston-Salem, N.C., the poor guy looked as if he were dying for a smoke. �When I say I find these comments appalling, I mean it,� Obama said. �It contradicts everything I am about and who I am.� He said that the riffs of the man he prayed with before his announcement speech give �comfort to those who prey on hate.�

He�s back on the tricky path he faced as a child, navigating between two racial cultures. At Trinity, he may have ignored what he should have heard because he was trying to assimilate to black culture. Now, he may be outraged by what he belatedly heard because he�s trying to relate to the white lunch-pail set.

Having been deserted at age 2 by his father, Obama has now been deserted by the father-figure in his church...

At the very moment when his fate hangs in the balance, when he is trying to persuade white working-class voters that he is not an exotic stranger with radical ties, the vainglorious Rev. Wright kicks him in the stomach. In a narcissistic explosion that would impress Bill Clinton, the preacher dragged Obama into the �60s maelstrom that he had pledged to be an antidote to. In two days worth of solipsistic rants, the man of faith committed at least four of the seven deadly sins � wrath, envy, pride and greed (book and lecture fees?) � while grandiosely claiming he was defending the black church.

Obama�s anger, an unused muscle, had to be stoked by his advisers, who pressed him with drooping poll numbers and the video of Wright at the National Press Club. He again heard the preacher turning Farrakhan into an American idol, and his flame-throwing assertions that the U.S. government had infected blacks with the AIDS virus and had brought terrorist attacks on itself by practicing terrorism abroad.

But in the end, it was Wright showing �disrespect� by implying that Obama was a phony that sparked the candidate�s slow-burning temper. �What I think particularly angered me,� he said, �was his suggestion somehow that my previous denunciation of his remarks was somehow political posturing.�

(The whole thing is here: Praying and Preying http://www.nytimes.com/2008/04/30/opinion/30dowd.html?_r=1&ref=opinion&oref=slogin )

I think Obama is going to have to take on the specific issues that Wright raises--the AIDS thing for one--and risk losing whatever portion of black America that believes that kind of stuff.