Obama/Wright is Kennedy/Pope

[RainDog]

Whites in this nation were scared of Kennedy because he might be influenced by the Catholic Church and have to answer to the Pope. Kennedy had to address this in his campaign because, at his time - and now too among the more rabid - southern baptists and others of their ilk were sure that the Catholic Church was the Whore of Babylon from the book of Revelations. Not only that, Catholics could drink and dance without going to hell, according to their doctrine. Kennedy was painted as a scary man who threatened white protestant America... endangered it because of his "radical" religious background.

(Those extremist views of catholicism, on the other hand, weren't radical at all... and, no, they weren't. They were standard hateful views by southern protestanism.)

Of course, Kennedy was not in any way beholden to the Catholic Church or the Pope. Kennedy's campaign message was a call for the Democratic Party of FDR.

From the Kennedy Library

http://www.jfklibrary.org/Historical+Resources/JFK+in+History/Campaign+of+1960.htm

John Fitzgerald Kennedy captured the Democratic nomination by winning a series of state primaries despite his youth (he was only 43), charges by his opponents that he lacked experience in foreign affairs, and his Catholic faith. He had to overcome the traditional assumption that a winning candidate must have the support of entrenched party leaders from states with large blocs of electoral votes. A solid victory in overwhelmingly Protestant West Virginia launched him toward a first ballot victory at the Democratic Convention in Los Angeles--although he did not reach the 761 votes required for the nomination until the final state in the roll call (Wyoming).

MLK was feared in the south among whites who thought he was radical for proclaiming equal rights and for noting establishment America's continued failure to honor the Constitution's reason for being: the dedication to equality under the law. MLK was trying to go "too fast." Whites weren't ready for full black equality under the law (this was, in fact, an argument of the time, more or less.) Yet -

When Martin Luther King, Jr. was arrested in Georgia for leading civil rights protests, Kennedy, against the advice of several key campaign strategists, called Mrs. King on October 26 to offer help in securing her husband's safe release. Kennedy was subsequently endorsed by the Rev. Martin Luther King, Sr., father of the civil rights leader. The black vote went heavily for Kennedy across the nation, providing the winning margin in several major states.

Kennedy provided hope to Americans who were hiding under desks during atomic bomb drills. He offered a vision of America that works for all, not just the captains of a gilded age.

Kennedy tried to identify himself with the liberal reform tradition of the Democratic party of Franklin Roosevelt and Harry Truman, promising a new surge of legislative innovation in the 1960s. JFK hoped to pull together key elements of the Roosevelt coalition of the 1930s (urban minorities, ethnic voting blocs and organized labor), to win back the conservative Catholics who had deserted the Democrats to vote for Eisenhower in 1952 and 1956, and to at least hold his own in the pre-civil rights movement's "Solid South."

(this reminds me of Dean's strategy, rather than the DLC's. )

Using Kennedy's "scary Catholicism" was a political hack's tool. Just like using the Rev. Wright is a political hack's tool. The Catholic church isn't an institution whose ideas I love and embrace. Neither is Wright, in some of his opinions. Neither is Bob Jones University. Neither is the Southern Baptist Convention. All hold opinions that would be considered radical and extremist.

Obama, like Kennedy, is a liberal who wants to change the destructive course of this nation. Those who prefer the status quo will fight to stop this. That's politics. Those democrats who try to paint Obama as the new "scary catholic whore of babylon" are no better than the race baiters and haters in 1960s America.

[HereSince1628]

1. That's not a comparison that works very well

Although it's true the protestant vs catholic thing was a game that was played for a short time. Pope John hadn't made statements that can be said to equate with the statements of Wright.

[TheDoorbellRang]

2. It didn't make any difference that the Pope hadn't said anything

Having a Catholic in the White House was an irrational fear by many Americans back then. Just as there is an irrational fear of Rev Wright today.

Actual facts have little impact on fear.

[knixphan]

7. true true true

[RainDog]

3. The issue is the same

the issue is all about an attempt to create fear.

If statements made by religious figures who were in some way connected to a politician make that politician unelectable, explain how all Republicans since Reagan have kowtowed to Bob Jones' racist anti-segregation worldview with absolutely no repercussions amongst establishment media outlets.

This is simply about creating a political smear that in no way is about who Obama is as a person or a candidate.

[HereSince1628]

5. It's the same if you want to see it as the same.

Having witnessed the Kennedy is a Catholic (gasp!) thing first hand it really wasn't like this. The pope wasn't going around making speeches that raised the anxiety of white guys. He was actually getting started with organizing reform.

[RainDog]

12. If you were there

then you were aware of the Kennedy hatred in the south that corresponded to the hatred of MLK/segregationists in the south. again, this is the point. I grew up in the south and I can tell you that in the 1970s I heard anti-catholic bias even then. It's not what the Pope was or wasn't doing. Do you really think fundie protestants thought the Pope was doing any good thing? In the 1970s, Hal Hartley's fundie best seller, The Late Great Planet Earth, after modernization, thought unequivocally that the Catholic Church was the Whore of Babylon that represented the corruption of the church and the world.

again, it's the hope of pandering to fear.

[WinkyDink]

4. "Whites in this nation were scared of Kennedy...." "WHITES"?? WHITES??!!

WHAT THE HELL?
Oh, that's right; Irish-Catholics aren't, you know, WHITE.

[okasha]

6. Italian Catholics aren't white, either--

according to Rev. Wright, they're "garlic noses."

Anybody recall Pope John humping the altar?

[RainDog]

13. no, it's only bishops humping little boys

but that's nothing to bring up in relation to who Kennedy was as a candidate either. I'll amend my OP to note a significant group of white protestants. that's for the literal minded. Or the political hacks who want to distract from the point of fear and smear tactics.

[newmajority]

17. Today's whore media would have done exactly that though.

Sean Hannity would have nightly screeds about how "Senator Kennedy defends pedophiles" (despite the fact that he's Catholic himself).

[RainDog]

19. Yes. Today's media would have made Kennedy out to be pro-pedophile

and his political opponents on both sides of the aisle would have wasted enormous amounts of time discussing the issue.

[RainDog]

9. If you've never read a stupider post

then you must not spend much time in gd-p.

"whites" is shorthand for a voting bloc in which a majority of those considered a part of this bloc are white and protestant. however, yes, if you want to look at Irish-Catholics... Kennedy attempted to bring conservative Catholics back into the democratic party because they voted for Eisenhower, so they were part of the white reactionary vote at the time. In the racist history of this nation, Irish Catholics weren't considered "white" - as in part of white est. politics - until Kennedy.

I'm a white person, fwiw, and while I didn't break down every demographic to discuss this issue, it is fairly simple to understand the gist of this post. If you choose to purposefully misunderstand, knock yourself out. Waste your time.

The point remains. This whole issue is a political smear, pure and simple. This is the one thing Republicans now see as a way to smear Obama and create fear. Muslim didn't work, except among the mouth-breathers of the apocalypse. So, it's back to scary black preacher time. Just as Bill Clinton tried to create a meme that Obama = Jesse Jackson.

[RainDog]

14. Or, in Bill Clinton's words

Three days after Obama made his landmark speech on race, Bill Clinton said of a potential match-up between Hillary Clinton and McCain: “I think it would be a great thing if we had an election year where you had two people who loved this country and were devoted to the interest of this country. And people could actually ask themselves who is right on these issues, instead of all this other stuff that always seems to intrude itself on our politics.” The implication was that Obama doesn’t love his country and all this “racial” stuff is just getting in the way.

(from this source- http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/04/28/8579/ )

[ShortnFiery]

10. Hey, you don't know some flavors of wacky Protestants, do ya?

Rev. Hagee didn't call our beloved faith (Catholicism) "The Great Whore" because he was seeking reconciliation.

That "Inquisition" gave us a bad rep and we've had some "less than stellar" Priests (and Popes) over the years. :blush: :shrug:

Let's not forget to have an "Opus Dei."

Yet somehow I CLING to my liberal Catholic Parish for "the community" NOT some of our more wacky Priests who find it "aces" to censor and condemn teenage girls for pregnancy or abortion but remain SILENT on the issue of "state sponsored executions" in the form of our God Almighty Death Penalty.

IMO, we all should be cautious of "organized religion." Not damn it outright because it does provide comfort and community to many.

However, as our Founding Fathers emphasized for our benefit: Separation of Church and State ... Perhaps if it were "the law" back then, Jesus would not have suffered such a terrible fate?

BTW I just listened to MSNBC ... Why Tameron did not tell Pat Buchanan to "STFU you racist bastard" is beyond me? :(

WHY DOES OUR M$M tolerate right wing "supremacists" the VENUE to spew their racist lies and fears is a true tragedy ... it's vile.

Hey TUCKER, BUCHANAN and SCARBOROUGH? You sick-minded HATE of "the other" based on fears about a culture you willfully choose to NOT understand ... well it's just vile. :puke:

IMO, it's not close to believable for these sick-minded men to voice FEAR of ONE angry Black Pastor from a Christian Church doing "good works" on the south side of Chicago. No, I believe they think THEIR race superior ... I believe they hate and that's NOT CHRISTIAN. :thumbsdown:

[NashVegas]

8. "Truly, You Have a Dizzying Intellect"

[RainDog]

11. so which cup is it for you, Crisco?

both have the kool-aid.

[BobbyVan]

15. This is an insulting comparison.

Rev. Wright is a cheap demagogic hustler who made his living off of stoking racial resentment.

[RainDog]

16. Maybe you're insulted because it's true.

How about this one as a comparison? The catholic church is a pedophile-enabling organization that made its fortune by colluding with aristrocrats who claimed a divine right to rule and paid the church for its help in establishing totalitarianism. sort of like the House of Saud and the Wahabbists now. ... and that has what to do with any catholic who might campaign for president? -- or, tell me how your statement is any more or less true than mine?

Again, the ability to ignore the core of this post is astonishing. The issue is about trying to smear a candidate because of a fear of some sort of religious "other."

[ClassWarrior]

18. Exactly.

NGU.

[RainDog]

20. what does ngu mean?

[4_Legs_Good]

21. You know, I was thinking it was more Jimmy/Billy

The way Billy kept showing up and kinda screwing things up.

I could really use a Billy Beer right now, though.

David

[RainDog]

22. if only

the only soundbites the media could propaganda remix would be looooong buuuurrrrps.

Wright's rhetoric is a little more complicated and sometimes confrontational. The more I hear about the context of the sound bites, the more I see what a slime that was. The Farrakan (or however you spell his name) issue is one I cannot agree with.

[bhikkhu]

23. Good point.