For those who are still attacking Obama for "not walking out of that church" . . .

[EffieBlack]

The notion that Obama should have snatched up his family and stormed out the minute Obama heard something he didn't agree is a rather bizarre one from people who have had to put up with the Bush/Cheney "my way or the highway" approach to politics for the past 7 1/2 years.

One of the things that is so appealing about Obama is his ability and willingness to hear views that don't comport with his. You don't have to agree with someone to listen to them. You don't have to share their beliefs to try to understand those beliefs. You can't do a damned thing to change anyone's mind or heart if you don't have a clue what they think or feel, or walk away from them as soon as they say something you don't like.

Yesterday on Hardball, Joe Madison asked, "What are you people so afraid of?" I ask the same question. What is so frightening about Jeremiah Wright that even listening to what he has to say is somehow so bad, evil and fraught with danger that Obama should have covered his ears, close his eyes, clutched his family close to his chest and run like hell out of that church to safety?

Barack Obama lived in and represented the South Side of Chicago. He represented many of the 8,000 members of the Trinity congregation. It makes perfect sense that he would be interested in what they thought, felt, and believed. By all accounts, most of Jeremiah Wright's sermons were uplifting, interesting and inspirational - notwithstanding the constant diet of 15-second soundbytes from 3 of the thousands of sermons Wright gave over the years. But even when they weren't, why would any open-minded person jump up and march out of the church the minute Rev. Wright said something with which they may disagree - especially when it was clear that a good portion of the congregation felt the same way? One does not have to agree with a person to listen to what he has to say.

Why are so many of the same people who bitch and moan about the Rovian "I don't give a damn WHAT you think, we're doing it my way" style of political process and discourse are so worked up because Obama presents a different model? He is someone who is willing to listen to all views, even the most disagreeable. Isn't this a positive quality in a leader?

I find it ironic that some of the same people who insist that Obama is not "electable in the GE" because they claim he won't attract Independents for some reason think that the way to attract Independents is to prove you won't listen to or tolerate or even consider the views of someone with whom you disagree. Have we been so conditioned by our current political process to hold our hands over our ears and yell "I'm not listening, I can't hear you, I'm not listening, I can't hear you" whenever someone says something we don't like? Is this what we want to take away from our 7 1/2 year nightmare - to behave the way these people do?

We have heard ad nauseum over the past few years that Democrats had better figure out how to attract the "angry white man" if they want to build a stronger political base. I hear talk show hosts lecturing about how the party ignores the views of this demographic at our peril. I personally find much of what the "angry white man" has to say very offensive, but I listen so that I can better understand, find common ground - and, most important, figure out how to sway them over to my side. Why is it, though, that an entire demographic of "angry white men" is seen as important, in fact, critical, but one "angry black man" is a terrifying force who must be shunned, dismissed and kept as far away as possible?

I don't buy it and refuse to go there. I'm not going to trash aanyone for listening to what another person has to say. I'm intelligent, mature and sophisticated enough to understand that the fact that he is listening to them and not shouting them down or storming out does not mean that he shares the views he is hearing. And I would hope that, as a party, we would recognize that there is a value in hearing ALL perspectives, no matter how distasteful they may seem to us. Listening to and understanding the views, perspectives and attitudes of other people is the essential first step in convincing them to see things OUR way. And this is the ONLY way we can once again become a majority party.

[Oleladylib]

1. Okay, but there is a pattern to the pastor's rhetoric that was tolerated.

That just doesn't make sense in these days of church shopping..It may be true in politics, neighborhoods, jobs that we don't have to "agree" ..but churches are different...we CAN find people who are philosophically Christian and Wright is not one of them..Obama is intelligent enough to have perceived that.

[Ninga]

3. Please go back, and read the speech. You will find the answer, if in fact, you are looking for an

answer and not just reveling in your not understanding.

[EFerrari]

5. How many sermons have you read?

Do you usually make such harsh judgments based on soundbites from Fox News?

Amazing.

[Oleladylib]

7. Never...and I have read quite a few...don't subscribe to FOX...sorry...

fill me in ...you seem to be aware.

[EffieBlack]

10. How can you claim there was a "pattern to his rhetoric" if you haven't read his sermons?

[EFerrari]

12. I mean sermons by Rev. Wright.

We have been fed an image by Fox News that is simply untrue. You might google around and see if you can find more of his work. Fox didn't chose that clip at random. :)

[EffieBlack]

6. What was the "pattern?"

But listening to someone speak is not the same as "tolerating" what they say.

I see some of the most disagreeable, disgusting and hateful speech right here on DU. But I don't refuse to read them. I haven't cancelled my membership in a snit because DU allows hateful speech to be posted on its site. That doesn't mean I'm "tolerating" the speech I see here. I read it. Sometimes I learn from it. Sometimes I engage them and try to get them to change their views. Sometimes I don't say a word because I know that nothing I say to some of these people will make a difference to them, but hope that through other means and in other posts, I can help others see a different way of looking at things.

[democrattotheend]

22. How do you know if Wright said anything that inflammatory when Obama was "church shopping"

The first sermon Obama heard, "The Audacity to Hope", was nothing like the stuff we've heard on the news. I have heard from people who attend that church that the inflammatory clips being played on TV are not typical of Wright's sermons. The media picked the most inflammatory snippets of all of his speeches in order to make the story more dramatic.

[The Backlash Cometh]

23. Jesus Christ. I'm damn glad there's a Democrat who got pissed off

at all the right-wing hate rhetoric we've had to tolerate over the last ten years and actually said the things that were on everybody's mind. Maybe if we make this an issue and explain that Wright's talk is all backlash, maybe then we'll get people to actually understand just how painful it is to have to hear right-wing radio (which is also repeated in their churches, not just one Wright, but many) everywhere you go. At least with Wright, you didn't have to listen to it, unless you went to his sermon.

Fair is fair, people. You are trying to censor black people's normal reaction to all the political hate talk they've had to tolerate. If you expect them to tune it out, then you should tune out Wright's talk too.

[Hugabear]

40. How many of his sermons have you PERSONALLY attended?

That's what I thought.

If you don't attend that church, then how can you possibly know about a "pattern"? If you read the OP, and if you listen to people who have actually attended that church, most of Rev. Wright's sermons are positive. The media has latched on to a small handful of sermons and is trying to make these look like his average Sunday fare, when by all accounts it's quite the opposite.

[Ninga]

2. Wonderful writing and meaningful as well. I read in wonder at the lack of persona

growth and maturing among posters here. People love to "hit and run" and pretend to be concerned, while degrading the process.

His speech wasn't for them, it was for the people who are like him, willing to listen.

The most exhilarating pain, is that of personal growth. When one acknowledges that they were wrong, it is painful to face, but fleeting. And the new growth is worth the process.

[niceypoo]

4. Is the notion of walking away really that 'bizarre?'

My grandparents left their church because of their preacher preaching bigotry and intolerance and telling them how to vote, and there was nothing bizarre about it whatsoever, they were offended period. If he was offended by the guy he would have left, stop making excuses for him. Personally I found nothing offensive about what the guy said, so I really dont understand what the whole mess is about anyway.

[EffieBlack]

8. He wasn't "offended by the guy" - he disagreed with some of things he had to say

big difference.

[Oleladylib]

9. have done the same...

[EffieBlack]

14. That was your choice

But I don't condemn someone for making a different choice - especially someone as intellectually curious and open-minded as Obama.

I don't WANT a president like this one - who is so intellectually incurious he can't be bothered ever to hear views that don't comport with his own.

[Oleladylib]

30. this has nothing to do with intellect...this has to do with exposing

himself and HIS FAMILY..to biased rhetoric..His children may not have the same sense of what is being said as an adult male/female..and may come away with a completely different impression...sorry no vote on this.

[cali]

13. Then why doesn't HIllary walk away from The Fellowship

and Coe. He's certainly said far worse things than Wright, and the Fellowship is actually danger and into full fascism.

[Orsino]

20. When the pastor in question is *right*...

...even in most (all?) of his most controversial sound bites, walking out may not be appropriate, and might even be called cowardly.

[citizen snips]

31. 92% of the general public thought his comments were offensive.

[flor de jasmim]

11. And WHITE people have stayed in the Church as well --

The world is a complex place - as Obama said on his interview with A. Cooper, the pastor also said some rather fiery things about infidelity - and other issues, I'm sure.

Obama seems to have developed a finely tuned ability to...ahem... THINK FOR HIMSELF, weed through material to figure out what to keep and what to discard. He may even have viewed it as an intellectual exercise to challenge his own thinking. Some of his former students have made comments on another blog that he always challenged them to consider all sides of an issue before attempting to argue their own position (in his Constitutional Law course). I find it completely believable for him to do the same in other arenas of his life, and to judge that, on balance, the good outweighed the "bad," that RHETORIC is rhetoric, etc. etc.

[EffieBlack]

15. I guess we need to remember that much of this debate is being fueled within

a bizarro, echo-chamber world in which we seek out and listen only to views that are consistent with our own, which, while comforting, does not offer much room for intellectual growth.

[flor de jasmim]

17. Yep -

[asjr]

16. A pastor does not make a church. Mr. Obama and

family went to church because that is who they are. Churchgoers. If I went to church just to hear my pastor I would fall asleep. This business of castigating Obama because of the pastor makes me realize we have become little more than savages. It has been a boon for pundits and "journalists" because it keeps them in business. The simple way Obama handled it should make those who dislike him feel and look like idiots.

[Oleladylib]

18. couldn't disagree more...no people, no money, NO PASTOR!

[CatsDogsBabies]

19. Why don't white people walk out of white churches

where the rhetoric doesn't need to be "spoken"? I can guarantee that most people don't.

I am pro-Obama and an independent, and white, etc. I have no doubt that Obama is more electable than CLinton, and I agree with the original poster, "What really are people so afraid of?" What fear underlies this incessant harping on Rev. Wright? People need to start being honest with themselves.

[LWolf]

21. There is a big difference between

getting up and storming out in the middle of a sermon, and thinking critically about what you are hearing, investigating further, and making a reasoned choice to worship elsewhere.

That said, I don't have a problem with Wright's style or point of view. If Obama agreed with him, why leave? If he didn't, why stay? Why stay, and then publicly disagree with him? That smacks of hypocrisy and insincerity to me, which weighs more heavily than most of Wright's words.

As far as Wright's words, at least those I've heard and read, I don't disagree with him. I do disagree with him campaigning from the pulpit. Point out social issues? Fine. Point out political corruption and hypocrisy? Fine. Get in the middle of a campaign, criticizing one candidate and extolling the other? That crosses the line.

I want a deep, wide separation between church and state.

I don't necessarily disagree with his words about Clinton, either; I just don't want them coming from the pulpit. I do disagree with his statements about Obama, but that's okay. I don't have a problem with him because of that disagreement. The problem, from where I sit, is about using his authority as a spiritual leader to campaign.

[EffieBlack]

24. You are assuming that Obama disagreed with everything or even most of what Wright said

He did not and he has said as much. As far as anyone can tell, on a couple of occasions, Wright said something that Obama disagreed with. That is a drop in the bucket compared with the many, many, many other things that Wright had said and done in the course of his life and in the course of his relationship with Obama.

Obama obviously did just as you suggest. He listened to Wright, thought about what he said and, weighed it and even though he disagreed with some of it, decided that the good in the man far outweight the bad.

I understand how you feel about Wright's comments about Clinton from the pulpit. But he did not cross a line - at least not the legal one. A minister is well within the law to praise one candidate or criticize another. They simply cannot tell their parishoners "go vote for Candidate X" or "Don't vote for Candidate Y." Some people don't like it, but thems the rules and Wright followed them.

And he's not the only one who does this. For example, Rev. Calvin Butts of Abyssinian Baptist Church in Harlem, who endorsed Hillary Clinton, invited her to speak at his church and praised her to the skies from the pulpit. But he did not endorse her from the pulpit, so he was within the bounds of the law.

I don't have any problem with a minister being an adviser to a campaign - remember, they're not "spiritural advisers" - they advise the campaigns regarding issues of concern to their communities and on outreach efforts. All of the campaigns have such advisers and, in my view, the religious community has just as much right to lend their voices to a campaign - as long as they comply with the tax laws, which Wright and Butts and others have done - as any other constituency.

[LWolf]

35. Your points are valid.

Obama's relationship with his pastor doesn't bother me; his participation and then distancing does. Wright's inflammatory words about America (at least the ones I've heard, lol...point to you,) don't bother me. The comments about candidates from the pulpit do. A man doesn't have to say "I endorse __________" to have achieved that endorsement, when he praises one and vilifies another.

I am one who does not agree with that interpretation of the rules. If that's technically within the bounds of the law, it violates the spirit of the law. From my perspective.

For what it's worth, I don't excuse Calvin Butts, either.

[democrattotheend]

25. Has it ever been proven that Obama was present for any hateful sermon?

He was asked about it on the news the other night, and he said that he had heard Wright say controversial things but nothing AS inflammatory as the clips that have been playing. I e-mailed the rabbi who did my Bat Mitzvah, who now lives in Chicago. He said that Wright is well-respected and his church is mainstream. I would be very surprised if the clips being played on the news are typical of Wright's sermons. The congregation has 8,000 members...it's not some fringe institution where hate speech is regularly preached.

[EffieBlack]

27. Wow - you actually made an independent inquiry of your own?

And didn't let the pundits decide for you who Jeremiah Wright is?

Nice!

I think the information your rabbi gave you is correct - Rev. Wright is very well-respected in Chicago and throughout the religious community. I am very disappointed that so many people who know this man have been so silent as he's been dragged through the mud in the last week. It's a damned shame.

[democrattotheend]

28. I'm thinking about writing a post about it

But want my rabbi's permission first.

[LWolf]

36. Of course, if you read carefully,

you'll see that I did not ever suggest that any sermon of Wright's was hateful.

[K Gardner]

26. Should the media, FBI, CIA, etc, gather the names of all these anti-American sympathizers and

potential domestic terrorists and put them all in Guantanamo for safety's sake? If not, the media and everyone else needs to shut the fuck up. This is a racially motivated attack on a preacher, a church, a congregation and a US Senator. It should not be tolerated in America, where we are supposed to have free speech.

[gravity]

29. I can't believe you have to explain this

Is the concept of recognizing the good in people even when you disagree them that hard to get?

[K Gardner]

32. Wright was scheduled to receive a lifetime achievement award in TX .. this

ceremony has now had to be moved due to objections from Texas Christian University.

http://www.themonitor.com/articles/wright_10005___article.html/school_obama.html

But Texas Christian University, the campus where Brite Divinity School is located, issued a statement Monday opposing that decision in light of video that shows Wright delivering racially tinged sermons and him railing against the United States.


In a related story, SC Troopers caught on tape trying to run blacks down with car. The tape is chilling to watch.

http://news.aol.com/story/_a/sc-troopers-used-cars-to-ram-suspects/n20080319204809990044

The suspects in both of the new videos are black. One of the troopers involved is white, and the other is black, Gaulden said.

The Post and Courier's report about the videos comes three weeks after Highway Patrol Col. Russell Roark and his boss, Public Safety Director James Schweitzer, submitted their resignations over their handling of an incident in which a white trooper used racial slur during a traffic stop.

"You better run," then-Lance Cpl. Daniel C. Campbell said, using a derogatory term for blacks, "because I'm fixin' to kill you."

[Window]

33. America is so FUCKED UP.

Disgusting.

[Skip Intro]

37. Sooo...anyone objecting to Wright's racism is in league with racist troopers?

the twisted logic that eminates from the O crowd never fails to leave me shaking my head

To hell with the racist preacher and the racist cops.

[meow mix]

34. "Birds of a Feather" They are Parroting Buchanon and Limbaugh. as Hillary supporters love to do.

they cant help it they are the same flock.

[Skip Intro]

38. At least I don't have a twenty year relationship with a racist spiritual advisor.

[EffieBlack]

39. Neither does Obama

so what's your point?