Obama HAS to Hate America or Lose 'Black Vote'

Publius' Forum ^ | 3/28/08 | Warner Todd Huston

[Mobile Vulgus]

On Friday, March 28th, Barack Obama made his latest stab at explaining away why he spent 20 years as a comfortable member of the volatile and racist Trinity United Church of Christ on the south side of Chicago. This was the church where Reverend Jeremiah Wright, Jr. bellowed sermons filled with hate for whites and the United States of America as well as a church that published anti-Jew, pro Hamas terrorist articles in church newsletters. And, like all Obama's other "explanations on this matter" this one leaves a lot to be desired.

This time, Obama tried his best to make us believe that he would have quit the church over Rev. Wright's racist, hate filled rants if the good Rev. hadn't retired first – even though it was only a year ago. In an excerpt from an upcoming interview CNN reports that Obama earnestly hoped to assure America that Wright's rhetoric was "outrageously wrong" and that his brand of “religion” would have caused Barack to quit the church had it continued.

The problem is, when you look at what Barack really said, it does not assure us that he would have left the church over Wright's obscenities any more than a child caught with his hand in a cookie jar could be believed should he say that it was the last time he intended to steal a cookie. It's easy to claim what you would have done after being caught at something. But the proof is in the pudding as history shows what was really done. Barack didn't leave the church over Wright or anything else. He sat in that congregation with his wife and children nodding his head and saying "Amen" to Wright's 20 some years of railing against the United States.

Barack talked about the controversy on ABC's "The View" and tried to sound as if he was somehow disturbed by Wright's long history of anti-Americanism and racist diatribes.

"Had the reverend not retired and had he not acknowledged that what he had said had deeply offended people and were inappropriate and mischaracterized what I believe is the greatness of this country, for all its flaws, then I wouldn't have felt comfortable staying there at the church," the senator said.

To ferret out the real truth here, let's break Obama's claim down line for line, let's Fisk the rhetoric, if you will. (Barack’s words follow in bold)

Had the reverend not retired...

Barack says this as if Wright's retirement solved anything or as if the retirement was in response to outrage expressed by members of the church, an outrage that would have chastened Rev. Wright for his hate-speak. Here Barack is making believe that Wright’s retirement is consequential. However, it is none of these things, including consequential. See, the only reason Wright retired was to give Barack cover. The members of the church never saw anything wrong with Wright's rhetoric just as Barack and his family saw nothing wrong for nearly 20 years. Then came Barack's presidential campaign and the political calculation that Wright should retire was made to give Barack cover. In other words, this retirement was not in response to anything Wright ever said, only in calculation for Barack's viability on election day. Wright being “retired” was better so as to make Barack seem to have been rid of a potential embarrassment.

... and had he not acknowledged that what he had said had deeply offended people and were inappropriate and mischaracterized what I believe is the greatness of this country...

It would be news, indeed, if Rev. Wright had ever made such an admission. However, Barack's claim here that Wright has "acknowledged" his rhetoric is wrong simply is untrue. Wright has never repudiated his past rhetoric. Never. Not one time.

...for all its flaws...

Why is it we have to point out the fact that there are "flaws" in America? We all know there are flaws. Nothing is perfect after all. In fact, this little line was but a paean to those on his side that do think the USA is a bad, inherently flawed place. This little line was a tip of the Obama hat to those like Rev. Wright, haters of the USA.

...then I wouldn't have felt comfortable staying there at the church.

Now, notice the coda to his claims. He says he "wouldn't have felt comfortable staying there," right? But, notice that this is NOT saying he would have felt compelled to leave the church. Also, notice how this last bit seems predicated on the fact that Wright retired making his ultimate leaving of the church moot and unnecessary.

Obama does his best to deflect from the fact that Wright preached his hate for 20 years and Barack seemed to have felt perfectly comfortable staying at the Trinity United Church of Christ during that long amount of time. He never did leave the church and if 20 years of Wright's racist rhetoric wasn't enough to make him leave, just how much hate speak would Obama have had to listen to before he became uncomfortable enough to leave? And, why did that discomfort only arise after 20 years and conveniently enough just as he began to campaign for president?

Further more, Obama cannot claim to have been too upset at his "spiritual mentor" because Rev. Wright had an official role in the Obama campaign until just a few weeks ago. Wight was Obama's adviser to the campaign for outreach to African-American communities. So, Obama cannot claim to have felt too distant from his long time pastor.

But, here is the thing: Barack cannot refute Rev. Wright's racist ranting nor can he be seen being outraged by his church. If he did he'd lose a large part of the black vote that would feel he has turned his back on them and he would certainly lose black leaders that he only recently accepted into his fold.

Barack has left the realm of the candidate who is transcending race to the candidate who is representing race.

Barack HAS to be understood to be winking at the black community and saying on the sly that he does agree that America is hateful, America is racist, and America is a danger to the world, for this is the narrative from the leadership of the black community. This is the pot stirring that black leaders use to keep their constituents in a constant state of turmoil and outrage so that they will stay on the correct side of the issue -- as far as those leaders are concerned, at least. This is the plantation of hate of which black leaders in America are malevolent masters.

Unfortunately, their mode of leadership prevents American blacks from thinking independently enough to question the authority that black leaders claim as their own. This sort of Us against Them system of control is a common top down tool used to keep people under the thumb of leaders who have little else to offer. By keeping the focus on outsiders, scrutiny for those on the inside is foresworn. And what could be better than substituting the ease of finger pointing at others for the hard work of improving from within?

Lastly, what we have here is a Barack Obama who has signed on whole-heartedly to the finger pointing style of rhetoric that black leaders are so prone. This certainly makes the lie to Barack's claims of finding a moderate, middle way of compromise and working together to solve America's problems. It absolutely shows us that Barack has no intentions whatever of trying to found a new nirvana of bipartisanship.

This Wright incident has revealed that Barack Obama is not above signing on to the sort of anti-American rhetoric as espoused by the Farrakhans and Rev. Wrights of this nation. In fact he is quite eager to do so.

The only change the candidate of change offers is that folks who disagree with him should just shut up, change their minds and forget about what they wanted before Barack descended down to us from on high.

Read more at Publius Forum

[budwiesest]

The media would not be making excuses for him. He would’ve been Trent Lotted all the way out of the race.

A perfect example of the extent of hatred that resides on the left- and just how pervasive it is to include, of all things, the entire media complex.

But, I predict a change coming soon. Denver in August may spark it when Hillary steals the nomination- but so what, there are a lot of 'typical' Americans who are fed-up with these God D*mn America types who've been pampered and coddled way too long.

My only hope is that Sharpton and Jackson will be there to receive a few well-deserved baton blows while inhaling tear gas. When Hate America meets Love America, it ought to be interesting.

[budwiesest]

Mrs. Clinton, like her husband before her, is in this ‘game’ for herself, for her personal gain, for all the trappings of political power that can swell her bank account.

There are two things I wouldn't want to be if Hillary gets elected: a cigar importer or a thong manufacturer.

[Maelstorm]

However he is at the same time alienating the rest of us and he can not win with liberals and blacks alone and in the end that is all he will have left. He is somewhat in a worse position than even Hillary. People are used to the Clinton’s telling lies and half truths. It is expected.

[Revolting cat!]

I’m thinking it’s time to look for another country. This land will never get over its white guilt and, out of it, such high tolerance for idiocy and hatred, why even worship of the most vulgar elements of the underclass sub-culture. Get out of here or else go slumming with ebryboddy else!

[Maelstorm]

I’m certain that they would not. A southern black church would probably be open to it but never in a Northern enclave of liberal blacks like Chicago or Philly. I’ve attended Black Baptist churches and they are very open and accepting. I don’t think I’ve ever received more hugs to welcome me to a church as I did at one of the local churches I went to. I’m pretty certain that aside from one mixed couple that my family was the only white one there but to be fair most churches tend to align themselves ethnically. I don’t think it happens by plan but more by natural inclinations of people to find comfort in the company of people that resemble themselves.

The most diverse Church I ever attended was in LA but it was a church were you had to have a strong idealogical foundation and a desire for teaching so it didn’t just appeal to people based upon kiddie activities and social gatherings like so many churches (even the best intentioned) ones do. I still like to attend church there when I’m in town. I don’t feel socially assaulted there and pressured to break out into hallelujahs. I can find comfort and joy in believing in Christ without the trimming.

I still like my local Baptist church but there are a lot of things I just don’t need to believe that it offers and that is ok. Those things are there and are good for those who need them. Fellowship is something that is important but what is fellowship for me resides not just within the church walls. We all have our roles and that is something we all could learn a little better. Each and every one of us should be striving to be more Christ-like. Sadly too often once we join organized religion we find what we are striving for is to make others just like us.

[Maelstorm]

Yes indeed. The difference is Lott was innocent and Imus was just an insensitive dolt like he always had been. There is one good thing that has come from the Rev. Wright fiasco and that the race police might do well to spend a little more time in black communities teaching their own (the way they seem to see it not I) about racial tolerance.

[Maelstorm]

The best thing that could happen to the black community is if this would end their loyalty to the democratic party. That loyalty has did more to corrupt the dream of King and others who fought and died for civil rights. Instead now the dream is argued in terms of handouts and social programs. Where is the strong individualism and honor of the black community of the past? It certainly isn’t reflected in the current Democrat party. (nor Republican for that matter)

[Mobile Vulgus]

I disagree with everything you replied with.

First of all, t is NOT axiomatic that he get all the black vote tied up just because he is the "only black Democrat" running for president. Not but a few months ago most blacks wouldn't vote for him because he was "not black enough." If Hillary had been able to keep that support, Barack would have been history. It was the white vote that brought him to this point, not the black vote that only recently went his way. So, saying he got the black vote JUST because he is black is not quite right.

Also you said this...

"Maybe, but the other possibility is that he's winking at the White establishment and saying on the sly that he doesn't believe that anymore than they do. "

This I also disagree with. He isn't winking at whites saying he doesn't really believe it. From statements about how they hate America from his Marxist wife, and his constant harping on how bad everything is -- even as he pretends to be positive and the agent of "change" -- it pretty much shows that he agrees 100% with the racist Jeremiah Wright.

If Barack become president we will have 4 years of scolding whites for how racist they are. It will be AL the Obama presidency will be about.

[x]

Not but a few months ago most blacks wouldn't vote for him because he was "not black enough." If Hillary had been able to keep that support, Barack would have been history. It was the white vote that brought him to this point, not the black vote that only recently went his way. So, saying he got the black vote JUST because he is black is not quite right.

Okay, I was wrong in saying that Obama's getting those votes because of his color. My point, though, was that Obama doesn't need this particular church or Wright's message to establish credibility with Blacks. And I stand by that. He's won those votes by now and they didn't go to him because Blacks knew that he went to Wright's church.

I'm not sure that your analysis is entirely right, either. If Hillary led early on among African-Americans, it's because she had name recognition. Once Obama became a more familiar face, Black votes came to him. It's not like he doesn't have great political skills. Obama's not going to repudiate Wright, but that has as much to do with reasons of his own.

He isn't winking at whites saying he doesn't really believe it. From statements about how they hate America from his Marxist wife, and his constant harping on how bad everything is -- even as he pretends to be positive and the agent of "change" -- it pretty much shows that he agrees 100% with the racist Jeremiah Wright.

I said it was a "possibility" that Obama was "winking" at the White establishment just as much as at disaffected or radical African-Americans.

Obama's not going to appoint Wright to his cabinet. His appointees won't be that different from Clinton's. They'll be drawn from the establishment of the Democratic Party.

In that sense, Obama may well be "winking" at the Democratic establishment, to let them know that he won't be as much of a departure as many fear.