Rev Wright just....

[Sheherezade]

Re: Rev Wright just....

Thanks Jenn. I read it. (Long! My attention span has withered so in this modern age! ) I don't think it is "nutjob" worthy. Maybe I know too many nutjobs. I think he doesn't speak well off the cuff. The Q and A gave lots of material for clips and sound bytes. He isn't a careful speaker, but then neither am I. I've heard several of his comments made in jest repeated as serious today by people that are anti-Obama. In particular, the whole VP bit. I had a neighbor telling me how Obama was going to make Wright his VP. J-O-K-E. Oy Vey.

The other bit that disturbed some round these parts was that Wright was in the basement on the night that Obama announced for presidency. Apparently, that's suspicious. They are up to something.

Thanks again for the transcript. I couldn't pull it up with Google.

[GrayMatterWife]

Re: Rev Wright just....

I just read the transcript for the NAACP speech here and it doesn't upset me at all. :huh:

http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/04/...f=rss_politics

I must be a nutcase, too. Different is not deficient. I don't buy his science about the right brain left brain studies....but I don't believe most of the "science" studies quoted by politicians or public figure (or scientists for that matter ). I'm assuming it is the press corp speech today that set off the alarm bells? I'll look for that transcript next. Anyone got the link?

MOST people will hear his tone, and the clips, and assume he's a nutjob . . .

Actually--I know this might sound surprising, coming from me, but--I don't think he's nuts. Nuts implies that he is insane--incapable of thinking logically and rationally.

I think his arguments are completely logic and rational--if you subscribe to liberation theology. I don't agree with the tenents of liberation theology, but I give him credit for being intellectually consistent with his beliefs. His arguments and positions sound absurdly extreme to most people, because liberation theology is not a widely accepted worldview. But if one accepts its as the correct paradigm for understanding the black experience in American/Western society, then his positions make more sense and stop sounding like the rantings of a paranoid schizo. And it explains why he feels absolutely no obligation to "tone down" his rhetoric in order to promote Obama up through the institutionalized power structure.

Of course, if one posits that merely subscribing to liberation theology makes you insane, then there's an argument that he's a nut. But I am not sure that such a sweeping assumption is correct. Liberation theology is an alternate understanding of the power relationships in society not an escape from them (as in a psychotic break).

[Sheherezade]

Re: Rev Wright just....

I think in the second speech (Press Club) he did sound angry at the press and politicians. He "attacked" Obama by dismissing him as a political animal that would do or say what he had to to get elected. That also implies that he would "denounce" Wright even when he actually supports him so if you like to think that Obama and Wright are similar, these statements support your case. He is dismissive and snide to questioners when they haven't read/heard his entire statements; not good politics, but I kinda/sorta agree with him. I'm annoyed with that in our press as well. (I wouldn't say it at a podium if I was trying to support someone's run for President though! I'd STFU. Not brave.....but savvy. ) I think he called out the press and politicians as hypocrites - particularly about their basic knowledge of religion and actual events. Again, agreed.

He only sounded wacky to me when he went off on the US needing to make a public apology for slavery - but that's because I think those moves by governments are lame. (JMHO) I also thought he sounded a bit paranoid in sections, but no more so than many of the people I speak with around these parts once they've loosened up a bit. He wasn't very controlled - but he wasn't abnormal. Conspiracy theories live in us all.

I did like his response on the Nation of Islam bit. (Jesus also said "I have sheep that are not of this fold..." or something like that) and I could appreciate his position on Farrakhan. He is a powerful player in the black community - you can't just ignore him if you are working to change that community. The Million Man March was an impressive gathering to accomplish. I think both of those bits will play poorly in the press because they are not at all PC.

Re: Rev Wright just....

He is dismissive and snide to questioners when they haven't read/heard his entire statements; not good politics, but I kinda/sorta agree with him. I'm annoyed with that in our press as well. (I wouldn't say it at a podium if I was trying to support someone's run for President though! I'd STFU. Not brave.....but savvy. ) I think he called out the press and politicians as hypocrites - particularly about their basic knowledge of religion and actual events. Again, agreed.

He only sounded wacky to me when he went off on the US needing to make a public apology for slavery - but that's because I think those moves by governments are lame. (JMHO) I also thought he sounded a bit paranoid in sections, but no more so than many of the people I speak with around these parts once they've loosened up a bit. He wasn't very controlled - but he wasn't abnormal. Conspiracy theories live in us all.

I think I tossed around the "nutjob" label too liberally. I don't, by any means, think he's actually crazy. I think he's showing very poor judgement by allowing himself to speak so ... off the cuff. Yes, the press will jump on anything - but then he should measure his words so as not to serve up a whole steaming plate of something for them to nosh on! It goes back to what his goal is. The whole thing about pastor vs. politics and not thinking one plays into the other. That's been long proven to not be the case (whether it should be or not).

[GrayMatterWife]

Re: Rev Wright just....

I did like his response on the Nation of Islam bit. (Jesus also said "I have sheep that are not of this fold..." or something like that). . .

Yeah, it was a smooth, clever citation of scripture to the question that related to what Wright's position is on the validity of other faiths than Christianity. Made for a good soundbite, definitely. The only problem is that it is not a contextually correct application of the quote. Out of context, the quotation sounds great: it sounds like even Christ acknowledged that people who are not his followers are among the Chosen People of God. However, Wright's application is completely inconsistent with what the speaker (Jesus) meant, when the entirety of the passage is reviewed. John 10 (and specifically, John 10:16, from which the quote comes) is about welcoming Gentiles who follow Christ (not any and all Gentiles, regardless of their faith) into the fold of God's Chosen People (in Christ's time, God's Chosen People were only of the Jews). So, pretty much, the quotation has a meaning that is the exact opposite of the one implied by Wright.

[GrayMatterWife]

Re: Rev Wright just....

I think I tossed around the "nutjob" label too liberally. I don't, by any means, think he's actually crazy.

Man!! Sorry, Jane! I am SO not on your wavelength today. Second time I overread your comments...Sorry...hazard of my dayjob, at times, I guess...!

Re: Rev Wright just....

You? Over-read? Nah ..........

No worries. It's a hazard of the format we communicate in.

[Sheherezade]

Re: Rev Wright just....

In the interest of not just printing the soundbyte myself

MS. LEINWAND: Jesus said, "I am the way, the truth and the life. No man cometh unto the Father but through me." Do you believe this?

And do you think Islam is a way to salvation?

REV. WRIGHT: Jesus also said, "Other sheep have I who are not of this fold." (Cheers, applause.)

AUDIENCE MEMBER: Yeah!

MS. LEINWAND: Do you think people of other races would feel welcome at your church?

AUDIENCE MEMBER: Yeah!

AUDIENCE MEMBER: No!

REV. WRIGHT: Yes. We have members of other races in our church. We have Hispanics. We have Caribbean. We have South Americans. We have whites. The conference minister -- please understand, United Church of Christ is a predominantly white denomination of, again -- some of you do not know United Church of Christ, just found out about liberation theology, just found out about the United Church of Christ. The conference minister, Dr. Jane Fisler Hoffman, a white woman, and her husband not only are members of the congregation, but on her last Sunday before taking the......

That's the segment on the "sheep" business. I don't see that it is a terrible misrepresentation. I think you can still say he thinks Muslims can find salvation. I don't see him as a supportor of Islam - but as a man against one faith vilifying another. The NAACP speech actually stated that implicitly. Please don't interpret my own mini edit as "Wright supports Nation of Islam". He never said anything like that in my reading of the speech.

I also think it is fair play to answer a soundbyte from the Bible with another soundbyte. I enjoy a deep theological discussion, but this was not "deep" on either end of the exchange. :huh:

[GrayMatterWife]

Re: Rev Wright just....

In the interest of not just printing the soundbyte myself

MS. LEINWAND: Jesus said, "I am the way, the truth and the life. No man cometh unto the Father but through me." Do you believe this?

And do you think Islam is a way to salvation?

REV. WRIGHT: Jesus also said, "Other sheep have I who are not of this fold." (Cheers, applause.)

AUDIENCE MEMBER: Yeah!

MS. LEINWAND: Do you think people of other races would feel welcome at your church?

AUDIENCE MEMBER: Yeah!

AUDIENCE MEMBER: No!

REV. WRIGHT: Yes. We have members of other races in our church. We have Hispanics. We have Caribbean. We have South Americans. We have whites. The conference minister -- please understand, United Church of Christ is a predominantly white denomination of, again -- some of you do not know United Church of Christ, just found out about liberation theology, just found out about the United Church of Christ. The conference minister, Dr. Jane Fisler Hoffman, a white woman, and her husband not only are members of the congregation, but on her last Sunday before taking the......

That's the segment on the "sheep" business. I don't see that it is a terrible misrepresentation. I think you can still say he thinks Muslims can find salvation. I don't see him as a supportor of Islam - but as a man against one faith vilifying another. The NAACP speech actually stated that implicitly. Please don't interpret my own mini edit as "Wright supports Nation of Islam". He never said anything like that in my reading of the speech.

I also think it is fair play to answer a soundbyte from the Bible with another soundbyte. I enjoy a deep theological discussion, but this was not "deep" on either end of the exchange. :huh:

You are completely correct--Wright is most definitely saying that he believes Muslims can find salvation, and he cites that passage from John in support.

I actually don't have a beef with that premise (whether non-believers can be saved is a different debate--one that's I'm not particularly interested in). So I'm not arguing that Wright's premise that Muslims can be saved is factually or theologically incorrect; I'm simply arguing that the passage he chose to support his premise is the wrong one because it doesn't actually say what he suggests it does. When you read the entire chapter, it is clear that the passage does not say that Muslims can find salvation without belief in Christ--NOT because non-believers in Christ are cut-off from salvation--but because the passage just has nothing to do with the salvation status of non-believers. It is about the sameness in terms of salvation status of believing Jews and believing Gentiles.

In that chapter of John, Jesus was delivering a message that rocked the Jewish world (it was completely unheard of): believing non-Jews can be part of the Chosen People. Non-believers are not even a factor in the discussion: the two groups being compared were Jews (bearing in mind that Jesus posited himself as the Jewish Messiah and had come to bring fulfillment of their Covenant with God--so he message was for them), and Gentile believers in Christ. And the message was radical one that ticked off a lot of faithful Jews who saw it as heretical.

Whether non-believers can receive salvation is a wholly different issue. Funny thing is, Wright's premise (that non-believers can be saved) isn't necessarily wrong (Christians vary on that issue). Parts of Romans suggest that non-believers may not be cut off from salvation. But Romans (and other Pauline writings) are very difficult and not nearly as easily quotable, and the issue of non-believer salvation is a complicated one. So it was easier, I guess, for him to pass off the John quotation as supportive of his point. It is just annoying, because nothing in that passage has anything to do with addressing the salvation status of non-believers.

[PrincessFiona]

Re: Rev Wright just....

ETA for Jenn P: I don't think he wants Obama to be president. I think he is not a supporter and they had a falling out over the last dust up. Just my crack pot theory -- but ITA agree with your analysis of Wright's effect on the campaign. I think he intended it.

It makes me feel sorry for Obama. I really think he did it intentionally...imagine having someone as your pastor for 20 years...someone you like and respect (but maybe don't always agree with) and then they stab you in the back like this. I think it's awful that he was treated like this.

I have seen the transcript, btw and it doesn't do Wright's performance justice. He really did come off as a wack job, he tried to speak for Obama in some instances and he really did imply very strongly that he thought hiv was a creation of white america....when someone in the press asked him if he really believed it not only did he say we were capable of it, but he started citing other instances of things the us govt. has done.

he's a freaking nutjob. I don't think his behavior should speak for Obama's...sadly, this is someone so close in his inner circle and he basically implied that Obama was lying about distancing himself from him for politics. I hope Obama comes out with the big guns and puts him in his place.

Wright's 15 minutes needs to end.

[Sheherezade]

Re: Rev Wright just....

I don't think he spoke for Obama on any occasion in these two speeches. If anything, he spoke against him repeatedly. He also said that he wasn't there to address the political process or the candidates - but to speak about the black church. Of course....he went on to talk for several paragraphs about Obama, his lack of church-going and his need to by PC because he's running for President.

Here's the part about HIV. I don't think it was very long myself.

MS. LEINWAND: In your sermon, you said the government lied about inventing the HIV virus as a means of genocide against people of color. So I ask you: Do you honestly believe your statement and those words?

REV. WRIGHT: Have you read Horowitz's book "Emerging Viruses: AIDS and Ebola"? Whoever wrote that question, have you read "Medical Apartheid"? You've read it?

AUDIENCE MEMBER: You are -- (off mike).

REV. WRIGHT: I --

AUDIENCE MEMBER: (Off mike.)

REV. WRIGHT: Oh, you -- is that one of the reporters?

MS. LEINWAND: Please, no questions from --

REV. WRIGHT: No questions from the floor.

I read different things. As I said to my members, if you haven't read things, then you can't -- and based on the Tuskegee experiment and based on what has happened to Africans in this country, I believe our government is capable of doing anything.

In fact, in fact, in fact, one of the -- one of the responses to what Saddam Hussein had in terms of biological warfare was a non- question, because all we had to do was check the sales record. We sold him those biological weapons that he was using against his own people.

So any time a government can put together biological warfare to kill people and then get angry when those people use what we sold them, yes, I believe we are capable.

That's it. It doesn't seem that wacky or contrary to things I've heard other opinionists say.

This part seems uncontrolled, poorly thought out and wacky to me - but maybe the more religious among us can assess the wackiness better. It just seems like he is rambling and angry.

MS. LEINWAND: If not, do you think that America is still damned in the eyes of God?

REV. WRIGHT: The government of leaders, those -- as I said to Barack Obama, my member -- I'm a pastor; he's a member. I'm not a "spiritual mentor" -- hoodoo. I'm his pastor. And I said to Barack Obama last year, "If you get elected, November the 5th I'm coming after you, because you'll be representing a government whose policies grind under people." All right?

It's about policy, not the American people.

And if you saw the Bill Moyers show, I was talking about, although it got edited, I was -- do you know, that's biblical? God doesn't bless everything. God condemns something. And D-E-M-N, demn, is where we get the word damn. God damns some practices.

And there is no excuse for the things that the government, not the American people, have done. That doesn't make me not like America, or unpatriotic.

So when Jesus says, not only you brood of vipers, now he's playing the dozens because he's talking about their mamas. To say brood means your mother is an asp, A-S-P. (Laughter.) Should we put Jesus out of the congregation?

When Jesus says, you will be brought down to hell, that's not -- that's bombastic device of speech. Maybe we ought to take Jesus out of this Christian faith. No.

What I said about and what I think about and what -- again until I can't -- until racism and slavery are confessed and asked for -- we asked the Japanese to forgive us. We have never as a country -- in fact, Clinton almost got in trouble because he almost apologized at Goree Island.

We have never apologized as a country. Britain has apologized to Africans. But this country's leaders have refused to apologize. So until that apology comes, I'm not going to keep stepping on your foot and asking you, does this hurt do you forgive me for stepping on your foot, if I'm still stepping on your foot. Understand that? Capisce?

Maybe the Italian in me is just offended by the Capisce.

[Sheherezade]

Re: Rev Wright just....

My thoughts too. That's the section of the speech that seems off the rails to me. The rest I can understand. I may not agree with him....but he doesn't seem that out of the norm. (No more than Rush Limbaugh actually....less than Rush, for me!) Still, that section is odd. I'm not sure if it was a bad moment at the podium or if that's "the real Wright". To his credit, he didn't seem to be trying to make a good impression at this appearance, so maybe that's as bad as it gets.

Still, all and all, that's the only section that totally loses the thread. The rest of the stuff quoted on CNN was just jests or him being an idiot because he's angry at the world. Not dangerous or plotting.....just not someone I'd want representing me in a delicate matter. I fear the calculating careful politicos more.

Re: Rev Wright just....

I think Clinton's response to this sums up what his issue will be. I'm paraphrasing here but she basically said -- I would have changed churches, but that is just me and this shouldn't be a political issue. People will question why he stuck around in the church that long with Wright as his spiritual advisor.

(Which sounds to me a lot like: I would have changed churches but starting......now this shouldn't be a political issue. ).

[GrayMatterWife]

Re: Rev Wright just....

Hey, if anyone's interested, Obama is giving a live interview/response right now.

He's in a really difficult position, I think.

He can't say this because it might be construed to make him look hypocritcal, but the fact of the matter is Trinity Church is a very important and influential church in the black community in Chicago. It's the kind of place that a promising up-and-coming liberal black politician would want to attend--it gets you the right connections, etc. to rise in Chicago politics. I'm sure that's why he joined (I'm not denigrating his sincerity of Christian belief--I'm just saying that, if he wanted to be a practicing Christian, this was the "right" place for a man like him to do it in Chicago, given his liberal views and his race).

Now he's stuck, though. He's admitted that he doesn't know much about liberation theology and that he just went "to worship." That admission, though, makes him look like he was not particularly intellectually engaged in what the church is about, beyond the superficial.

He needs to STOP TALKING ABOUT THIS. He is not doing himself any good. Every time he opens his mouth on this issue, he reminds everyone about it.

[Sheherezade]

Re: Rev Wright just....

Just speaking as a political junkie and not a supporter....ITA with you. My game plan would be to leave it alone. It isn't getting that much play from anyone now (except us ) so why stir it back up and go through a second news cycle??

I definitely got the impression that the "problem" (the real problem) would be that he went to the church for the wrong reasons....not that he agreed with Wright. Wright all but said that he didn't buy in to the church or pay attention to him. His comments about talking to Obama in the White House sound like wishful thinking. Obama is not beholden to him. Now, he has to explain that.

Obama came out yesterday and said he went to the church because it was a way to build unity back in the day and move forward in politics....so I guess he's already covered that. I know some will find that offensive. It is kind of like the people around here (some, not the majority) who join a congregation for social connections regardless of the brand of Christianity. I understand it, but it is a hard position to defend to a "real" believer.