0
   

Why did Obama stay in Rev. Wright's church?

 
 
Roxxxanne
 
  1  
Reply Mon 28 Apr, 2008 08:27 am
I started to watch last night but I fell asleep. (Not that it was boring, I was just sleepy) It is available on Comcast ON DEMAND BTW.


But I have watched a lot of Wright's sermons on youtube and I consider him a respectable (and respected) mainstream black preacher already.
0 Replies
 
FreeDuck
 
  1  
Reply Mon 28 Apr, 2008 08:45 am
DontTreadOnMe wrote:

i don't think it's fair to say that dems had no ideas. in any case, following the socalled republican revolution, the dems had not a chance of passing much of anything.


I don't think that's what he was saying. I think he was saying that the Democrats had ceded the realm of ideas to the Republicans. That they had allowed the Republicans to be the "party of ideas" by failing to challenge them. But that's just my interpretation, of course. This is the sense I get from him -- that he thinks that Democrats far to often play on the Republican playing field and let the Republicans define the game, even influence the selection of their candidates, or believe that the way to beat Republicans was by being Republican-lite.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Mon 28 Apr, 2008 09:16 am
I saw the Moyers interview - twice - and for me it was a lot of church-speak with a couple of carefully targeted controversial subjects briefly touched on and then quickly passed by. Most were not addressed including the USA of AKKK line and/or his assertion that the US govenrment invented AIDs to kill black people among other things.

Jeremiah Wright sees himself as the victim and is obviously unapologetic about anything he has said. This interview, however, was designed to show him as a normal, calm, thoughtful, spiritual person 180 degrees from the man shouting anti-American and anti-white sermons from the pulpit.

Moyers is also a member of the United Church of Christ which is in full blown damage control mode right now. This is a fairly small denomination that is not eager to lose a lot of existing members or potential new members due to negative publicity, but neither does it want to offend the members of TUCC by criticizing Pastor Wright. TUCC is the single largest congregation in the UCC.

It's sister denomination - The Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) had to deal with the Jim Jones scandal in the late 1970's as The People's Temple was affiliated with that denomination. The Disciples, however, made no attempt to defend or gloss over Rev. Jones or make any excuses of any kind for his behavior or his unacceptable theology once the ugly truth began to surface. They adamently, without qualification, denounced the activities and theology of Jim Jones and they suffered relatively little damage as a denomination.

(I am in no way comparing Jeremiah Wright to Jim Jones. These were totally unrelated situations with no comparison other than that they were problematic for their respective denominatons.)

Just my opinion speaking as a member active at the local, regional, and national levels of the Christian Church (Disciples of Christ.)
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Mon 28 Apr, 2008 06:44 pm
Foxfyre wrote:
My media background I've probably mentioned elsewhere: I majored in journalism in college and worked mostly as a reporter for newspapers and television prior to going to work for private organizations doing, among other things, communications and public relations. Those jobs required writing and editing local and regional publications, hosting a weekly radio program, among other things, and some of that required frequent contact with area media sources, so I kept my hand in.

OK, I'm sorry. I was totally off-base, then. My apologies for misrepresenting and belittling your media experience.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Mon 28 Apr, 2008 06:45 pm
DontTreadOnMe wrote:
also, my bad. he didn't say "good" ideas;

Quote:
...he tapped into what people were already feeling, which is we want clarity, we want optimism, we want a return to that sense of dynamism and you know, entrepreneurship that had been missing, alright?

don't know where he got that notion at all.

...And the Republican approach, I think, has played itself out. I mean, there's - I think it's fair to say that the Republicans were the party of ideas for a pretty long chunk of time there over the last 10-15 years in the sense that they were challenging conventional wisdom.


i don't think it's fair to say that dems had no ideas. in any case, following the socalled republican revolution, the dems had not a chance of passing much of anything.

Good catch: I had Googled his Reagan quote, but the original source is a half-hour video, so instead I went on a couple of webpages that quoted what he said. But neither included this second paragraph.

Yes, I really dont think this was necessary, for him to say I mean. For sure, he still didnt actually say that the Republicans had good ideas, just that they were the ones with new ideas and challenging conventional wisdom: no agreement is implied. But it's all very admiring, and conveniently ignores that, a) like you say, there were enough Democrats with new ideas of their own, they just didnt have the opportunity to push 'em through; and b) those Republican ideas were often not so much "new" as just reactionary. Sure they wanted to change the status quo - they wanted to change it back to pre-New Deal values.

I'm in little mood to defend Obama on this now anyway, since he gone did it in his Fox interview last weekend again. I'll go post on the Obama thread about that if it hasnt already been covered.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Mon 28 Apr, 2008 06:48 pm
Foxfyre wrote:
Nor did I say or infer that it was the media that caused Bush's poll rating to drop. (Do liberals drink a special brand of water or something that makes them see things that aren't there in what people write?)


Fox, this was what I responded to - seems fairly straightforward:

Foxfyre wrote:
[Hillary] is no longer the media darling of the day and cannot count on that kind of media support. Even George W. Bush once briefly had the nod in the high approval ratings following 9/11. They faded quickly since he is after all a REBUBLICAN and therefore the ideological enemy.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Mon 28 Apr, 2008 06:52 pm
Mame wrote:
I'd have to agree with you, Freeduck. Unfortunately, I only saw excerpts but from what I did see, he appeared as a rational, reasoned, thinking human being, and I liked how he presented himself and his views. It leads me to conclude that the original comments were taken out of context and blown up, obviously deliberately. A rather transparent smear campaign.

Hey Mame, that's interesting. We dont hear from you all that often on the Politics forum, and I'm really kind of reassured to read this take of yours.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Reply Mon 28 Apr, 2008 10:06 pm
nimh wrote:
Foxfyre wrote:
Nor did I say or infer that it was the media that caused Bush's poll rating to drop. (Do liberals drink a special brand of water or something that makes them see things that aren't there in what people write?)


Fox, this was what I responded to - seems fairly straightforward:

Foxfyre wrote:
[Hillary] is no longer the media darling of the day and cannot count on that kind of media support. Even George W. Bush once briefly had the nod in the high approval ratings following 9/11. They faded quickly since he is after all a REBUBLICAN and therefore the ideological enemy.


Okay I can see how you took it the way you did but within the context we were speaking of media approval. My intent was that once Bush's approval ratings begin to fall, he also lost a brief window of favorable media treatment. It was not that the media caused the poll ratings to fall but rather responded to that (probably gleefully.)
0 Replies
 
Roxxxanne
 
  1  
Reply Mon 28 Apr, 2008 10:10 pm
FF has spent hours upon hours attacking Wright yet she won't devote a few minutes to watch even one of his complete sermons. Amazing! The audacity of willful ignorance!
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Mon 28 Apr, 2008 10:20 pm
nimh wrote:
Foxfyre wrote:
My media background I've probably mentioned elsewhere: I majored in journalism in college and worked mostly as a reporter for newspapers and television prior to going to work for private organizations doing, among other things, communications and public relations. Those jobs required writing and editing local and regional publications, hosting a weekly radio program, among other things, and some of that required frequent contact with area media sources, so I kept my hand in.

OK, I'm sorry. I was totally off-base, then. My apologies for misrepresenting and belittling your media experience.


If so, then try much harder to avoid repeating your sin as you are so often wont to do.
0 Replies
 
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Mon 28 Apr, 2008 10:21 pm
Ooops, was that "snobbish?"
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Apr, 2008 04:52 am
Finn dAbuzz wrote:
Ooops, was that "snobbish?"

Not more so than your are usually "wont to be"...

Warn me if you ever apologise for anything you (mis)say though.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Apr, 2008 04:56 am
Foxfyre wrote:
My intent was that once Bush's approval ratings begin to fall, he also lost a brief window of favorable media treatment. It was not that the media caused the poll ratings to fall but rather responded to that (probably gleefully.)

OK, fair enough.

I dont think that's a partisan thing though. I think the media will "gleefully" respond to any president's downfall: it's action, it's sensation, it's something to breathlessly report about. Thats what they do, it's good for the ratings, and you need something to fill up those 24/7 news broadcasts with.
0 Replies
 
Brand X
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Apr, 2008 05:42 am
http://d.yimg.com/us.yimg.com/p/uc/20080428/lpo080428.gif
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Apr, 2008 06:10 am
That was such a funny cartoon, brandx, so original I wonder how long it took them to think it up?

I hate this kind of politics when people get drowned (or ate up by crocodiles) for reasons that have nothing to do with issues which will actually effect us like the economy or the effect the Iraq war is having on the economy and our readiness to respond in all other parts of the world, health care...
0 Replies
 
teenyboone
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Apr, 2008 07:16 am
nimh wrote:
Ron Sommerville, associate professor of the History of Global Christianity at Christian Theological Seminary in Indianapolis, chooses a more indirect way to explain what would have attracted Obama to this church, and to staying at it throughout the years, despite the occasional rant from the pulpit.

In a letter to the Indianapolis Star, he argues that in order to understand how that worked, we need to understand something about the nature of African-American churches in general. Hence the excursion into history first:

Quote:
Black church nurtured Obama's vision

April 3, 2008

<snip>

The reality that the color line has followed us into the 21st century and that religious institutions in the United States are largely organized according to race and ethnicity is a difficult pill for some to accept. [..] One consequence of this now preferential racial segregation is our virtual ignorance of each other's religious histories, beliefs and practices [..].

Obama's speech seeks to demystify this glaring ignorance of the African-American Christian tradition in general, and the particular African-American congregation and pastor that nurtured and guided him spiritually, morally, theologically and politically. The earliest roots of these churches can be traced back to the biracial churches of the enslavement era, where enslaved and freed persons were forced to worship with white Christians. Their protests against racial dehumanization and segregation eventually led to the formation of separate African-American churches in both the North and South in the 1700s.

These churches -- mostly Baptist, Methodist, Presbyterian -- formed the nucleus of African-American family, cultural, social, economic and political life in the post-emancipation era. Their preachers were respected for their charismatic leadership, biblical knowledge, oratorical ability and moral authority. Perhaps most importantly, they were expected to preach a gospel of liberation and hope that assured their listeners that they too were created in the image of God. As the leaders of their churches and communities many of these preachers became the first elected officials during the Reconstruction era. Like Obama three generations later, the majority of these African-American politicians honed their political and oratorical skills in socially conscious and politically active churches.

This prophetic black church tradition sustained the fight against the de jure and de facto segregation of the Jim Crow years and later formed the basis of the civil rights movement led by Martin Luther King Jr. and other black clergy. Like their enslaved and emancipated forebears these progressive clergy tapped into a tradition of social gospel preaching that, like the eighth-century Hebrew prophets, angrily denounced the sins of injustice and discrimination.

It is important to see Jeremiah Wright as a exemplary product of this black prophetic tradition, who in 36 years of ministry at Trinity UCC in Chicago was instrumental in transforming a struggling congregation of 12 families into an inner-city mega-church of 8,000 plus. From his appointment as pastor in 1972, Wright was committed to moving the congregation from it middle-class insularity to an empowering and liberating Christian presence in the community. Through his preaching and teaching, Wright challenged congregants not only share the gospel but to address political, social, and economic problems that plagued the community. [A commenter to this article added, "In UCC when you join you have to commit to volunteer-this church has done fantastic outreach in the community" - nimh]

We can possibly see how a young law school grad interested in community development might be attracted to a church like Trinity -- "a church that embodies that black community in its entirety -- the doctor and the welfare mom, the model student and the gang-banger." Part of this appeal was also Wright's pastoral ministry and spiritual mentorship; "He strengthened my faith, officiated at my wedding and baptized my children," said Obama. Hence we need to look beyond the sound bites of Wright's withering "jeremiads" to see the totality of the man, his ministry and message. Though flawed like the rest of us, he was a conduit for personal and social transformation.

It is absurd to imagine that a self-reflective and independent-minded leader as Sen. Obama would agree totally with every tenet of his former pastor's black liberation theology or his Afrocentric vision, especially when it conflicts with his own hopeful vision to form a more perfect union. I am grateful that Obama's vision was also nurtured in the womb of an African-American church.


I totally agree with what is said here. Please go to:

http://www.nbccongress.org/black-catholics/default.asp?linkref=footer

and find out that there are over 200 million Catholics of African descent, throughout the world, but in the US, Protestantism, is the predominant religion of African-Americans. In order for me to learn this, I was taking an advanced English Course in college and everything I thought I knew about my race, was corrected, in the course of this 1 semester course! I was absolutely floored about religion brought with the slaves and how slaves were forced to practice Christianity, as well as the American Indians, who were already here. Americas' indigenous people. That said:

Jeremiah Wright, does NOT begin to speak for Christians of African descent and should be careful who he claims to speak for! To clump us all with him, is in itself an abomination! We are multi-cultural, multi-faceted and have adapted to the environment of the areas, to which we find ourselves a part of, whether it be the North, South, East or Western Regions of this country, so I have no idea, what this particular man of color, is talking about! I am very upset that he would clump us all with him, as though we are in Hitler-like, lockstep! I myself, was born and raised in New Orleans, speak French, cook Creole, as opposed to Cajun, whatever that is, but have lived in the East for over 37 years!

My entire family, was/is Roman Catholic, all 7 generations of us. I am of the 5th generation, from slavery. Most of my people were never slaves but a few were! I can't imagine myself, being anything other than Roman Catholic, as Jews maintain their faith! I wonder what country I really am living in, due to all of the racial rhetoric churned up by the emergence of a quiet, educated, mixed-race young man, who seems to not have the baggage that so many politicians have! It's a shame, because we might have gone somewhere forward for a change instead of showing our TRUE colors! Rolling Eyes
0 Replies
 
Brand X
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Apr, 2008 07:43 am
It's funny how quick Wright became Obama's 'former pastor'.

Who is his current pastor...or who he claims it is???
0 Replies
 
joefromchicago
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Apr, 2008 07:48 am
Brand X wrote:
It's funny how quick Wright became Obama's 'former pastor'.

Wright became Obama's former pastor when he retired.

Come to think of it, that's not funny at all.
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Apr, 2008 07:49 am
Brand X wrote:
It's funny how quick Wright became Obama's 'former pastor'.

Who is his current pastor...or who he claims it is???


Perhaps you were not aware Wright retired?
0 Replies
 
Brand X
 
  1  
Reply Tue 29 Apr, 2008 07:50 am
joefromchicago wrote:
Brand X wrote:
It's funny how quick Wright became Obama's 'former pastor'.

Wright became Obama's former pastor when he retired.

Come to think of it, that's not funny at all.


No, he became his former pastor when Wright began mucking up his presidential bid. That is funny.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.03 seconds on 05/06/2024 at 07:06:48