Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: On the media
Next Post: Congressional stuff *** Updated x1 - Oberweis won’t get NRCC help ***
Posted in:
* My Sun-Times column this week is about race. One always has to tread carefully on this topic, but whoever did the art for the Sun-Times did me no favors by using a photo of the late Rep. Lou Jones instead of Louanner Peters. Oy. My phone started ringing about the screwup at 7:30 this morning.
For the record, I have no control over the Sun-Times page layout.
* Anyway, on to the column, which compares Gov. Blagojevich’s reaction to the stories about how he gave two African-American women pardons/expungements to Barack Obama’s reaction to Geraldine Ferraro’s goofy comments.
First up, Blagojevich…
The Sun-Times story on [Sharon] Latiker never mentioned her race, and no photo was included. But that didn’t stop the governor from sending out one of his top aides to play the race card.
Deputy Gov. Louanner Peters was former Congressman Gus Savage’s chief of staff for 10 years. Savage was the guy who blamed his 1992 Democratic primary loss on the “white racist press and the racist, reactionary Jewish misleaders.”
Anyway, Peters held a news conference last Friday and invited several African-American leaders to attend. She told reporters that the Sun-Times story on Latiker was either ginned up by Madigan or represented a media “focus on African-American women. It has to be one or the other.” The Sun-Times developed the story without Madigan’s input, so that left just race.
* Now, Obama…
Instead of surrounding himself with African-American leaders, as Peters did, Obama scheduled a news conference to announce an endorsement by several retired military leaders. The backdrop to his event was a group of older, (mostly) white men. Obama refused to characterize Ferraro’s remarks as racist. Instead, he said they were “ridiculous.” Which they were.
* Conclusion…
Blagojevich is a fading politician facing the possibility of indictment and is therefore desperate to hold onto the one voting bloc that has yet to completely turn against him. Claiming reporters have racist motives is a tried-and-true and often supremely cynical formula for cranking up the base, but its success may be diminishing in the “Obama Age.” Still, it’s all Blagojevich has left, so he used it.
Obama has a different task. Check out this quote of a 63-yearold Ohio woman from a recent Bloomberg story: “If Obama gets in, it’s going to be a black thing, and it’s going to be all blacks for blacks.”
America obviously still has more than its share of racists. Obama has to show that he’s “post-racial” to allay the fears of people like that Ohio woman. He took another step in that direction this week.
Ferraro may have done “Sen. Lucky” a favor. Peters only reinforced the governor’s image of desperation.
* Meanwhile, “Where there’s smoke there’s fire” is the assumption that most political reporters go on these days. That’s not always the case. For instance, check out this AP story posted yesterday afternoon about Barack Obama’s Illinois “pork” projects and whether he was hiding something…
Public records reveal some of the projects he sponsored as a state senator, from literacy programs and park improvements to drill team uniforms and jazz-appreciation events. They add up to more than $6 million.
But that covers just two of Obama’s nearly eight years in the Illinois Senate. State records don’t detail his projects from other years, and his presidential campaign has not responded to repeated requests from The Associated Press for information.
* The Obama campaign was stupid for not responding. When they did, it blew a huge hole in the AP’s conspiracy theory. Here’s the updated AP story…
After repeated requests from The Associated Press for that information, Obama’s presidential campaign said Thursday night that he made no other extra spending requests during the rest of his legislative career. What’s shown in the public record is the only spending he added to the budget, the campaign said.
Along the way, the Chicago Democrat stopped inserting pet projects into the Illinois budget because he felt the system was getting out of hand.
* Obama’s campaign seems to have a real problem communicating with the Illinois AP. Here’s a completely screwed up story posted by the IL AP earlier this week…
Sen. Barack Obama was among eight state officials and others consulted about who should be appointed to a state board that later became involved in what prosecutors describe as a fraud scheme, according to a memo discussed Monday at Antoin “Tony” Rezko’s trial.
Um, no. That’s not what the memo says at all. The memo just says that Obama was a co-sponsor of the bill which rewrote the law that was set to expire at the end of June, 2003. There is no way you can read that memo and conclude what the AP reported. Zero.
posted by Rich Miller
Friday, Mar 14, 08 @ 9:55 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: On the media
Next Post: Congressional stuff *** Updated x1 - Oberweis won’t get NRCC help ***
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
It will be intriguing to see how Obama (if he is the Dem nominee) distances himself or not from Reverend Wright’s comments in the general election.
Comment by Ravenswood Right Winger Friday, Mar 14, 08 @ 10:02 am
You must be mistaken about the AP stories. You must taken something out of context or something. According to your GOPUSA blogger over at Illinoize, AP is part of the Combine that conspired to get Obama elected to the Senate in the first place. The AP could not possibibly be going after him now.
Comment by Skeeter Friday, Mar 14, 08 @ 10:06 am
LOL
Comment by Rich Miller Friday, Mar 14, 08 @ 10:08 am
RRW, Wright has retired. So, it’s less of an issue. But you’re correct that Obama needs to do something about this.
Comment by Rich Miller Friday, Mar 14, 08 @ 10:08 am
Obama has been steadfast in his desire to avoid extended discussions on race during this campaign. It has been his goal to first establish himself as a viable candidate by appealing to voters in Iowa, which is over 90% white. You don’t do that by constantly reminding people that you are black or by wrapping yourself up in the civil rights flag. When the election moved on toward Super Tuesday, the race talk increased, because the Clinton campaign stoked the fire. By this time, Obama had established himself as a quality politician whose ethnicity didn’t present an electoral problem. He had begun to prove that he was “black enough” (an absurdity in itself) to the black community even though he wanted to essentially transcend race.
The black community doesn’t want a black candidate to transcend race; it wants a black candidate to start preaching about fixing the injustices inflicted on their race in this country. And the black community is obviously super sensitive about any comments that could be deemed racially insensitive. So the Clintons made sure that race came to the forefront so that people could start making silly comments and the Obama campaign would start whining about racism. More than Bill Clinton’s comments in South Carolina, this tactic would make the whites who are itchy about electing a black man more committed to derailing his prospects.
So now we have all of this chatter about racism and the tenor will turn to another bout of blather about political correctness, overly sensitive blacks and the like. And Barack Obama will suddenly shrink and start looking like he’s merely a black candidate instead of the transcendent figure that he could be. The Clinton Way is working its evil magic once again.
Comment by chiatty Friday, Mar 14, 08 @ 10:09 am
===The black community doesn’t want a black candidate to transcend race; it wants a black candidate to start preaching about fixing the injustices inflicted on their race in this country.===
If that was the case, then Obama would’ve lost Mississippi.
Comment by Rich Miller Friday, Mar 14, 08 @ 10:10 am
“Also Thursday, Duffy confirmed that then-Gov. Jim Edgar tried to appoint Rezko to the health board in 1998. But the Senate rejected his and other appointments so those posts could be filled by incoming Gov. George Ryan, the Associated Press reported.”
No, there is no Combine in Illinois.
Comment by True Observer Friday, Mar 14, 08 @ 10:16 am
Most of the media bungled the memo story impart because the defense flashed the memo on a screen, mischaracteized it and the media rushed to their blogs…The AP, which is like a dino-blog, made the same mistake Perhaps all hands should actually read the documents, before smearing people.
Comment by Reddbyrd Friday, Mar 14, 08 @ 10:17 am
Part of? You mean the AP isn’t the combine?
Any reporters ask the Gov when he is going to file suit to get the million back? If they can sue madigan they should have time to collect back this money.
Obama overall I think demonstrates great judgment and leadership in how he responds to various issues. I thought he handled the Ferraro comments brilliantly. Overall he has done an amazing job of not running on race or injecting his race into the contest as a reason to vote for him. Interestingly enough, HRC or her husband and other surrogtaes have frequtnly interjected her gender as a reason to support her (or the fear attack of if you don’t support her your sexist) as-well-as bringing up race trying to get support based upon her support for black issues, latino issues etc.
Comment by Ghost Friday, Mar 14, 08 @ 10:18 am
Rich,
The black community is now squarely behind Obama, much in the way that it used to monolithically back candidates like Jesse Jackson. That’s all well and good for Obama, because he needs all the votes he can get, but Hillary’s people are cynical and craven and they understand that they can win this election without really getting any votes in the black community. It will come with a price, of course, but winning at all costs is what they are all about. My comment about what the black community “wants” relates to the single issue of civil rights. Obama doesn’t want to focus on civil rights because it would have the effect of marginalizing him. Reverend Wright and others would like it if Obama got all fiery about the idignities inflicted upon the black community, but every time this campaign starts focusing on race, Obama will start to suffer. In Ohio, the Clintons worked hard to get the “rube” vote, that big chunk of undereducated white rednecks who easily get into a lather about blacks. These are the people who do believe that Obama is a Muslim. These are the people who are probably talking about getting into the KKK if he wins. These are the people that the Clintons are happy to have in their corner, as long as they’re sober enough to get to the polls. Let’s face it, the Clintons are craven enough to have Hillary on an apology tour now in the black community for the single purpose of having this campaign stick to the topic of race. If it stays on this issue, Obama will lose Pennsylvannia by 15 points and Hillary will move closer to her goal of stealing this in Denver.
Comment by chiatty Friday, Mar 14, 08 @ 10:24 am
TO, the planning board is a bipartisan board by law. Relax.
Comment by Rich Miller Friday, Mar 14, 08 @ 10:27 am
Lynn Sweet has an interesting column today on Obama and federal earmarks in particular and political expediency in general.
http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2008/
03/sweet_column_obamas_politicall.html
Obama seems to let issues linger longer than they should, responding in halting and piecemeal fashion. Rezko, Wright, and earmarks are examples. Also, it took him days to quash the Clintons talk about the Dream Ticket, and their implication you could Vote for Hillary and get Barack, too.
He should be using the primaries to clear the decks of lingering issues before the general election. In general, he needs to respond to questions more quickly and forcefully.
Comment by wordslinger Friday, Mar 14, 08 @ 10:31 am
Rich,
Speaking of the intersection of the Sun-Times and the AP: Do you know who is responsible for the headlines over AP stories appearing in the Sun-Times?
Today’s header over the AP story about the Democratic presidential candidates voting against extending Bush’s tax cuts for the rich — “Obama, Clinton vote to hike taxes” — is mindbogglingly misleading and could have been composed by a McCain staffer.
– SCAM
so-called “Austin Mayor”
http://austinmayor.blogspot.com
Comment by so-called "Austin Mayor" Friday, Mar 14, 08 @ 10:43 am
I think the problem isn’t that the media brought up this expungement because they are racist.
The problem is that they don’t understand that pardons, and other initiatives for successful ex-offenders are a HUGE issue in the black community. As a bunch of old, white men, why would they?
The reaction should have been expected. And it came before, and will stay long after, some press conference.
To me personally, though, I think it is a bigger problem that Michael Madigan decided to attack a staffer over it. Saying she had gotten “hit over the head.”
That’s not just tsk tsk. That’s ridiculous. And that will resonate all on its own without anyone else’s help.
Comment by problem Friday, Mar 14, 08 @ 10:54 am
Here’s my spin on Obama’s lack of candor concerning race in the Primary season…he has glossed over race in America to shore up white support while earning black support and trust especially among black politicians…witness John Lewis’ endorsement of him while previously endorsing HIilary…when it became apparent he was not a bombastic and angry candidate like Jackson Sr. his cache grew with political bigwigs of both races…his black supporters may demand more from him as this race goes on, including a frank discussion of how blacks have been treated in the past and how he will bring them into the political process and address their socio-economic needs…it is a huge task, and one that could prove to be impossible to deliver on in a short period of time if he is elected…I would hate to see buyers remorse in his supporters, especially in Black America…
Comment by Loop Lady Friday, Mar 14, 08 @ 11:27 am
Problem,
The media is a “bunch of old, white men.” Right. Would that be the media that includes women and minority reporters too innumerable to mention? The issue isn’t even minorities or pardons, frankly, however much Rod Co. wants to make it so. The issue is to what ends Rod misuses the powers of his office.
The ridiculousness is the suggestion that Madigan was behind the story. The story, to any impartial observer, was clearly the product of a reporter doing his job. Rod gives a pardon to Chandra Gill. Reporter thinks, “Gee, I wonder who else got a pardon.” Reporter does some research. Finds a name that seems familiar. Reporter looks at timeline and finds it sort of interesting. There. No conspiracy needed. The whole thing got rolling because Rod had to ride his white horse up to NIU to promise $40 million the state doesn’t have to knock down a perfectly good building. Plus, what’s the gain for Madigan in trying to peddle that story now, rather than before the primary? Madigan doesn’t need to generate bad press for Rod. Rod does it all by himself, just by the nature of his very existence.
Finally, let’s look at who got pardons. Gill, a woman in her late 20s who assaulted a police officer leading to that officer’s permanent disability. That wasn’t 25 years ago, that was in the relatively recent past. I recommend the New-Gazette story from yesterday for info on how Gill and the people she was with wrecked that officer’s life. Latiker was in her middle-later 30s when she got nailed for embezzling taxpayer money. So, Rod’s dishing out pardons not to some poor individual who got busted when he was in his teens for selling a dime bag or stealing a car. These pardons went to people who knew people for crimes committed when they were presumably old enough to know better. Wonder who else got pardons and what their stories are? Bet those reporters do, too.
Comment by Willie Stark Friday, Mar 14, 08 @ 11:38 am
Obama and I have white Kansan grandparents who showed through their lives and love a world that transcends race and fought racism. It is no accident. After the Civil War, Kansas was seen as the “promised land” for Freemen who came and settled many parts of the state. Kansas is that kind of state, due to its unique blend of abolitionist New England culture, Freemen culture and religions.
From there, Obama was raised in the most culturally diverse state in the country, Hawaii, where being different was the norm. Bette Midler, a red-headed, white Jewish girl raised in Hawaii, said that she was the one that was laughed at in classrooms growing up in Honolulu. Having worked in Hawaii for years, I saw an inclusive American culture, different from the rest of the US.
I was raised differently too. My Kansan grandparents started a church that was 40% black and Hispanic. Some of our church leaders were black and Hispanic. My most beloved Sunday School teacher was black. Some services were performed in Spanish. This was back in the 1960s-1970s and was considered uncommon. It stayed small because a lot of newcomers didn’t want to worship with minorities. But I didn’t know that until decades later. I didn’t know differently.
With these grandparents and in these environments, Obama and I were raised color-blind. But he is half-black, and I am not. And no matter how utopian our childhoods, this is a difference that cannot be ignored anymore than gender or age. Barak settled in Chicago, not far from where I was raised. From my rooftop I could see the high rises around Hyde Park, where he lived and the magnificent Chicago skyline. But the charismatic Hawaiian assimilated into a Chicago politician.
Would the Senator’s grandparents and mother, and my grandparents be welcomed in Barak Obama’s church? Would the people who showed us a non-racist life be welcomed by Reverend Wright? Would he recognize their evangelical church work to move beyond race, because of their skin color?
The Senator and I know better. I don’t know why Barak has embraced him for the past two decades. Pop psychologist want to talk about paternal longings, and Barak’s first book encourages this but I won’t try. It just is.
So Barak is not a challenger on race publically or politically. Like Oprah, Bill Cosby or Michael Jordan, this allows whites to transcend race and this makes whites very happy. But let’s stop pretending this isn’t about race. Obama’s supporters, like me, see his race as a plus. He can’t have it both ways. We wouldn’t support a candidate making these same claims of racial unity if he was white, would we?
But sadly, we have reached a point in this campaign where even mentioning his race is responded to negatively – out of fear. Even the first woman on a national ticket who knows why she was put on that national ticket is not allowed to discuss it without being called a racist. Is Geraldine Ferraro a racist? She has a lifetime of political work that says otherwise.
But there is a fear to even discuss this and that counters all the hard work we’ve been doing.
I will take my own advice now and stop. But the fact that I feel a need to stop would our Kansan grandparents sad. They expected more from us.
Comment by VanillaMan Friday, Mar 14, 08 @ 11:42 am
The Obama campaign has done a masterful job of trumpeting every possible slight as racial in nature. They’ve done it deliberately to mobilize the black community to rally around a candidate the community had been suspicious of.
Let’s not forget all those stories from last fall about how Barack doesn’t have the black vote behind him and isn’t that a huge problem. This isn’t accidental. It’s smart strategy, albeit cynical.
What really set this train in motion were two nonracial comments of Bill Clinton. First, he said Barack’s Iraq position was a fairy tale. This was translated and amplified to mean his whole campaign was a fairy tale (not remotely what he said). The Bill spoke about how Barack is a great “young” leader. Somehow calling him young was a racial attempt to diminish him as opposed to a classic conventional attempt to diminish him.
Unfortunately, the Clinton campaign played right into the hands of the Obama campaign with two idiotic comments. First, after the SC victory, Bill Clinton said oh, yeah, well Jesse Jackson won in SC too. And then in her 60 minutes interview when Hillary said Barack’s not a Muslim “as far as I know.” Then of course this Ferraro business has been quite unpleasant.
Long and the short of it, both campaigns have used race in an attempt to manipulate voters. If you’re a Democrat, that aspect of the campaign is sad, depressing and dangerous to our future success.
Comment by Chicago Cynic Friday, Mar 14, 08 @ 11:54 am
Oh, and Rich is absolutely right about the AP story on the memo. Give me a break. Just read the document before you write a defamatory story. The media uses words for a living. Just how hard is it to recognize that those words have consequences and maybe they should look before they leap.
Comment by Chicago Cynic Friday, Mar 14, 08 @ 11:58 am
Wright has retired. So, it’s less of an issue
I would think that how long Obama went to church there would be the real issue. How much judgement can you have if you spend a long time associating with questionable people?
Comment by Pat Collins Friday, Mar 14, 08 @ 12:04 pm
Wright’s church is exciting and exhilarating. I’ve also felt totally welcomed the times I was there even though I’m a white man. So I think this is probably overblown by people who don’t understand the hyperbole is just that.
That said, Wright’s endless praise of Farakhan (including his magazine’s man of the year award) strikes me as a much bigger concern. Barack never seemed to have a problem with that until he ran for President.
Comment by Chicago Cynic Friday, Mar 14, 08 @ 12:08 pm
Wright has retired. So, it’s less of an issue
He retired when he became an issue just weeks ago. It was a political move to get him off the radar. It is his church and the Obamas’ mother church for over twenty years. It is a problem.
Comment by VanillaMan Friday, Mar 14, 08 @ 12:21 pm
===It is a problem.===
I don’t get why somebody’s minister is a problem unless the issue is to paint obama as some secret black racist. then it’s baloney. what is the point here?
Comment by Rich Miller Friday, Mar 14, 08 @ 12:24 pm
Today’s wsj op-ed points out occasions in which Obama has taken counsel from the pastor. I’m confident that similar sessions between a gop candidate (or Hillary) and a white racist, anti-semitic pastor would make this attention look scant.
We’ve all figured out by now that with whom you associate is a major issue–in life and in politics.
Comment by Greg Friday, Mar 14, 08 @ 12:38 pm
=== with whom you associate is a major issue–in life and in politics.===
So, I suppose that McCain is now anti-Catholic because of that goofy minister who endorsed him? I still don’t get it.
Comment by Rich Miller Friday, Mar 14, 08 @ 12:42 pm
No, it doesn’t make him anti-Catholic. It’s a judgment question. The company you keep is a judgment issue. And people on the receiving end of a candidate’s company’s hate often become nervous about that candidate’s judgement, and the advice he receives.
Comment by Greg Friday, Mar 14, 08 @ 12:46 pm
So, then, it is an attempt to slyly make Obama look like a closet racist.
Comment by Rich Miller Friday, Mar 14, 08 @ 12:48 pm
I guess I’m not effectively communicating my point. I don’t think Obama is a racist. Not at all. But it makes me nervous that he keeps company (on several occasions) with people who are obviously problematic. And for him to dismiss Wright as like “an old uncle” is, I think, insufficient.
Comment by Greg Friday, Mar 14, 08 @ 12:51 pm
Greg is right and Rich is wrong on this (the Obama blinders are on, once again)
Mr. Wright is a long-time confidant of Sen. Obama. They have a relationship that goes back two decades. When Obama returned to Christianity, he chose this minister and church. When Michelle and Barack Obama walked down the aisle to be married, they chose Wright to officiate. He baptized their children. He provided the Senator with the title of his book.
Deciding what church to attend is a personal decision — no one forced Obama to pick this minister. It speaks volumes about his judgment that he not only picked this particular minister, but that he stuck with the choice for two decades.
It is relevant because it provides insight into Obama’s judgment. Judgment that is already under question by Obama’s long-time relationship with Tony Rezko (remember that Rezko was his very first campaign contributor and Obama turned to Rezko time and time again to raise money for his campaigns). Obama called on a campaign contributor who was under federal investigation to help him buy his home, toured the property with the man, came to an agreement to buy adjoining property and then later, in a private deal, bought a piece of land from him.
Let’s not forget that it is Senator Obama’s campaign that has worked tirelessly to make this election a referendum on personality, rather than on issues.
And, you ask, why is his judgement relevant?
Comment by Old Elephant Friday, Mar 14, 08 @ 12:59 pm
The pastor issue will fade away, only to be replaced by some other idiot who says something stupid, allowing the media to fill the vacuum left by the long gap in between primaries. We’re now deep into the silly season in this campaign.
Comment by chiatty Friday, Mar 14, 08 @ 1:10 pm
I’m still unclear about the theory that links politicians to crackpots. A goofy minister is a goofy minister. Politicians are out among the people.
If we linked every nut case to every politician — and condemned the politician instead of ignoring the nutcase — then we’d have a government largely vacant. I mean, all we’d hear is the crickets.
Or Rezko would step in.
Comment by Macbeth Friday, Mar 14, 08 @ 1:13 pm
Wright is an issue for Obama because he chose him. I don’t know if McCain knew about the other guy’s Catholic bigotry when he accepted his endorsement. If he did, it’s a huge issue for McCain and should be. If he didn’t, he needs to toss the guy overboard and bluntly make a statement about religious bigotry.
Wright has made statements from his pulpit regarding the United States that if they were said on the floor of the United Nation’s General Assembly would compel the U.S. delegation to walk out. Statements that if they were uttered by a foreign leader would compel a defense from the president of the United States. Obama has known the man for 20 years. He chose his church. It’s not unreasonable to ask why.
There’s raw meat on those sermon tapes. It can’t be fluffed off as just being “provocative” “or hyerbole” or your “crazy uncle” talking. He chose Wright and his church, and with them come the words. And like the man said, “don’t tell me words don’t matter.”
Comment by wordslinger Friday, Mar 14, 08 @ 1:16 pm
Of course, my comments don’t apply when nutcase ministers link up with nutcase politicians. Then the nuttiness is magnified and the spotlight is justified. When one goofy nut meets another — and money flows from nut to nut — then it’s sheer entertainment.
I’m thinking about Blagojevich here.
Comment by Macbeth Friday, Mar 14, 08 @ 1:16 pm
Once upon a time-
The main stream media owned it all and spoon fed the masses.
Drudge showed that the internet could make them be honest but it was still he said she said.
You Tube cut out the middle man.
You don’t need the main stream media or Drudge, you see it for yourself.
That’s why we can say goodbye to Obama.
Comment by True Observer Friday, Mar 14, 08 @ 2:02 pm
I am also concerned how Obama went to a city with a Black Mayor that has endorsed him and didn’t even acknowledge hi (Jay Williams of Yo., OH) when he was in the crowd. He basically ignored the guy when he was saying his thank yous.
Comment by Wumpus Friday, Mar 14, 08 @ 2:37 pm
Wright and Obama go back twenty years. His place in Obama’s life is undisputed. It is written in his books.
The fact is we don’t know Obama. He hasn’t been open about the issues Wright brings up. As I point out, I believe that Barak Obama was raised to be better than the rantings of his spiritual advisor. Why does he associate with Wright?
When Louis Farrakan gave a ringing endorsement of Obama, that was a “honor” not sought. Same with that goofy minister that the leftists in the media wish to paint McCain with. There is no reason to believe that either McCain or Obama wish to associate with these nutjobs.
But this cannot be said with Wright. We need to know why Obama has made this church his spiritual home because the minister that has been his friend and mentor for the past two decades holds and expresses views that are not a part of the message Obama has been peddling.
It is a problem.
Comment by VanillaMan Friday, Mar 14, 08 @ 2:50 pm
===There is no reason to believe that either McCain or Obama wish to associate with these nutjobs.===
McCain held a press conference with the guy, for crying out loud.
And, again, if you’re trying to say that Obama is a closet racist, then you’re practicing politics of the worst kind.
Comment by Rich Miller Friday, Mar 14, 08 @ 2:52 pm
Rich, you are the one trying to make this a racial issue.
It is about judgement. Obama has a 20-year close, personal relationship with a man who has filled his sermons with anti-American, paranoid, anti-semitic, divisive rants.
Obama had a relationship for nearly as long with a Chicago developer and even when it was common knowledge the guy was under federal investigation, he relied on the guy to make his home purchase feasible.
McCain may be guilty of being uninformed about the background of an endorser that he never had any kind of a personal relationship with. That’s a sign of poor staff work. Obama cannot claim to have been poorly informed about his minister’s rants, because he’s been going to the church for 20 years and listening to the sermons all that time.
It’s about judgement. McCain (or his campaign staff) gets two demerits (one for the minister and one for the shock-jock), but by any objective measure, Obama gets about 20 demerits — for decisions he and he alone has made.
Comment by Old Elephant Friday, Mar 14, 08 @ 3:24 pm
Judgement about what?
Comment by Rich Miller Friday, Mar 14, 08 @ 3:35 pm
Rich, if a Presidential candidate — white, black or checkered — had for years been a member of a club or association whose leadership had presented bigoted presentations and lectures, wouldn’t it be reasonable to ask why that candidate had continued to be a member of that club? Does it say something that they didn’t find the comments unacceptable before they were running for President?
No matter who the President might be, I’d like to think that if he or she were part of an association that seemed to give stock to bigoted or inappropriate comments, they would publicly correct the leaders of the association and if that didn’t work, walk away.
I seem to remember elected officials running for cover years ago because the were simply members of country clubs that didn’t allow female golfers.
Comment by Cogito Friday, Mar 14, 08 @ 3:39 pm
===Does it say something that they didn’t find the comments unacceptable before they were running for President?===
I’m not sure that’s true either.
===were simply members of country clubs that didn’t allow female golfers.===
The church doesn’t keep members out because of gender or race. So that’s not valid logic.
Look, I said above that he needs to deal with this - a statement that has been ignored by most here.
But I really believe this is a back-door attempt to make him out to be something he isn’t.
Comment by Rich Miller Friday, Mar 14, 08 @ 3:49 pm
Rich,
As to judgment: I would call the relationship, as well as Obama’s colloquial dismissal of him, something like “bone-headed.” Obviously Obama is not a racist; I’m not sure how to state that more clearly. But their relationship, which was apparently a substantive one, understandably makes those targeted by Wright’s rhetoric nervous.
And to think Powers and Ferraro were ostracized for their statements…that’s silly season. Wright is scarier. To find religious identity in a venue tainted by racism and anti-semitism reflects poor judgment. I think the Rezko issue is nearly meaningless in comparison.
Comment by Greg Friday, Mar 14, 08 @ 3:52 pm
===To find religious identity in a venue tainted by racism and anti-semitism reflects poor judgment.===
This is the pastor who brought Obama back to Jesus, so there is a natural affinity there. As to how this is worse than Ferraro, she was going on national news defending herself and repeating the attacks. Wright has not done so.
And if we want to get into a discussion about religion, I’m sure there are tenants of faith by many many denominations that greatly offend various segments of voters. Forget sermons, look at their rules. I just don’t like to go there.
Comment by Rich Miller Friday, Mar 14, 08 @ 4:02 pm
You have made up your mind about this haven’t you?
Reverend Wright is just one man. He has had a close relationship with Barak Obama for twenty years. But even after all this time, Reverend Wright still cannot soften his own public rhetoric or tone down his “sermons” regarding race in America. If Obama cannot get Wright to bridge that racial divide, why should we believe that Obama can move an entire nation? If, after twenty years a man with a close personal relationship cannot be moved, then what credibility does Obama have?
Reverend Wright is not just any guy. He isn’t just a politician’s minister. He is a man who has been given exposure because Barak Obama has raised him into view. Until his presidential aspirations forced him out of the spotlight, Wright was a VIP with intimate access to Obama for years and years. It can be easily proved that he is closer to Obama than Billy Graham ever was to any president.
This is not just another “guilt by association” charge. We have a duty to ask where this possible future president draws the line between himself and Wright’s incendiary racial tirades.
Sorry that doesn’t bother you.
Comment by VanillaMan Friday, Mar 14, 08 @ 4:07 pm
Latiker was the deputy under the imfamous Bamani Obadele in External Affairs at DCFS. As the Gov often says, WHat was he thinking” supporting this waste when in our coumminty there are some many that deserve a chance, but than again he gave Bamani Obadele a job and everyone knows what happen than
Comment by Southsider Friday, Mar 14, 08 @ 4:16 pm
I don'’t see Wright’s comments in question as being religious. They are secular and political. Questioning Obama’s relationship to him and them is not a backdoor to anything. I’ve voted for Obama; but I’d like to hear how he can associate himself with these secular and poltical points of view before he gets his ticket punched for the Oval Office.
Comment by wordslinger Friday, Mar 14, 08 @ 4:17 pm
VM, you are usually such a good speller. Barak?
===We have a duty to ask where this possible future president draws the line between himself and Wright’s incendiary racial tirades. ===
Obama responds
===The statements that Rev. Wright made that are the cause of this controversy were not statements I personally heard him preach while I sat in the pews of Trinity or heard him utter in private conversation. When these statements first came to my attention, it was at the beginning of my presidential campaign. I made it clear at the time that I strongly condemned his comments. But because Rev. Wright was on the verge of retirement, and because of my strong links to the Trinity faith community, where I married my wife and where my daughters were baptized, I did not think it appropriate to leave the church.
Let me repeat what I’ve said earlier. All of the statements that have been the subject of controversy are ones that I vehemently condemn. They in no way reflect my attitudes and directly contradict my profound love for this country.
With Rev. Wright’s retirement and the ascension of my new pastor, Rev. Otis Moss, III, Michelle and I look forward to continuing a relationship with a church that has done so much good. And while Rev. Wright’s statements have pained and angered me, I believe that Americans will judge me not on the basis of what someone else said, but on the basis of who I am and what I believe in; on my values, judgment and experience to be President of the United States.===
Much ado about little.
Comment by Rich Miller Friday, Mar 14, 08 @ 4:17 pm
Obama finally responds
Comment by VanillaMan Friday, Mar 14, 08 @ 4:17 pm
Try again
Comment by VanillaMan Friday, Mar 14, 08 @ 4:18 pm