Wednesday, May 07, 2008

The haunting

And they made fun of CNN for hiring Glenn Beck.

Roland Martin's column on reverend Wright is reminiscent of one of the fainting ladies in the crowd at a Barack campaign rally, overcome by emotion. His silly putty-like argument revolving around an equivalence between those condemning Reverend Wright's words against the words of any preacher to ever have known or endorsed McCain is a good try--and it might even work--but it's absurd, of course.

Let's just say he's clearly lost sight of the issue due to his blind support of Barack. For any thinking person the issue was never race nor Wright, it was the way Obama handled everything. However, Martin has tipped us off to the strategy that will likely be employed by Barack's supporters in the general, fueled by a sympathetic media who've been bending over backwards not to offend lest they be judged racist and anti-progress.

Maybe it never occurred to Martin that some Americans are still trying to ferret out the best candidate for this puny little post called president of the United States. One way to do that, aside from believing the 3 AM phone call commercials, is by evaluating a candidate's judgment, candor and calm under pressure in the real world.

To that end, who cares about Wright? He's free to frolic naked up and down the Chicago loop screaming for a new 9/11 investigation while damning America. The issue here is about Obama. We've still not received a good answer as to why he initially joined the church then stayed for 20 years despite the rhetoric, or why he subsequently stretched credulity by pretending he never knew yet couldn't disavow only to later disavow.

It's as if words have no meaning. Martin has already forgotten the many black pundits who were defending Wright when Obama was playing the middle, who then cheerfully said "yes we can" at the prospect of stuffing the reverend further up under the bus after Obama lowered the boom. Whatever. If anyone deserves a haunting here it might be Mr. Martin.

MORE 5/8/08

MacRanger and a few others are a little upset about this sermon from reverend Wright's successor at Trinity UCC, but I find very little wrong with this particular snippet other than his glorification of Tupac. "Thugology" is just his way of reaching the crowd, something all preachers try to do to keep the flock from falling asleep. The sins of men like Moses, David, Noah, etc, is a universal Biblical message no matter how the analogy is framed.

That doesn't take Wright off the hook because he went way beyond this type of populism in his rantings. And it doesn't take Barack off either because he sat there and listened to it. Speak of the devil, while listening to the local radio talking head this afternoon heard a parody song sung to the tune of Dr. John's "I've Been in the Right Place", with "reverend Wright's church" substituted. Mildly humorous, but it gets to the crux of the original question, one which is still yet to be answered. McCain won't ask it lest he be labeled the angry white man.

5 comments:

Mustang said...

" . . . few, if any, have said a word about conservative white pastors who have called for the overthrow of the government for not following Christian values (the late Francis Schaeffer, a little "g" God on the Religious Right), or who have called for the destruction of the Islamic religion of a number of Americans (Pastor Rod Parsley) and folks worldwide.”

He's not entirely wrong about white radical religionists, but I fail to understand how two wrongs justify the pro-Islamic, anti-Christian, Anti-White, and Anti-American rhetoric of Jeremiah Wright. If we are discussing what a miserable snake Uncle Jeremiah is, do we defeat the supposition by claiming, "Oh yeah? Well what about Hagee"?

This is the problem with polarized stupidity and the author has not demonstrated his intelligence or objectivity in his article. I'm not surprised.

A.C. McCloud said...

This is the problem with polarized stupidity and the author has not demonstrated his intelligence or objectivity in his article. I'm not surprised.

Yeah, it's obvious that words have no meaning for some people. They just say whatever they need to say to get whatever they want.

LASunsett said...

//If we are discussing what a miserable snake Uncle Jeremiah is, do we defeat the supposition by claiming, "Oh yeah? Well what about Hagee"?//

Not to defend Hagee or anything, but I think there is a stark difference in the two. Very few people with any kind of influence in the world really take much of what Hagee says, too seriously. On the other hand, there are many that take what Rev. Wrong says, directly to heart.

Case in point, when was the last time you saw Hagee get an audience at the National Press Club and an interview with Moyer?

Not only this, the snakes that hang out with the wrongful reverend, know this. But they choose to make an issue out of Hagee, only because they know there is no credible way of defending the offensive statements made by this hatemonger.

A.C. McCloud said...

Not only this, the snakes that hang out with the wrongful reverend, know this. But they choose to make an issue out of Hagee, only because they know there is no credible way of defending the offensive statements made by this hatemonger.

It's the oldest trick in the book- point to other "bad" behavior to justify your own. But their caterwauling serves another purpose--it takes the focus off Barack and puts it on Wright. This is really not about Wright, it's about Obama's judgment to be prez.

LASunsett said...

//But their caterwauling serves another purpose//

Caterwauling. You really should send that one to Bill O'Reilly. He loves getting suggestions for obscure vocabulary words to use at the end of the show.

;)