Or, call the Congressional switchboard at (202) 225-3121 to get contact information for your federal legislators.
Support & contribute to Progressive, Democratic candidates in '12 and beyond. Help increase Democratic margins in Congress, which we need to help Obama implement his policies. We can, we must, we will - "despair and defeat" is not an option.
Speak your liberal/progressive values with your wallet.
Once you've subscribed using the box above (thanks!), to make sure you receive the feed via e-mail, add rj photo 71 at gee mail dot com (all together & one word) to your safe list.
32,000,000The number of people who will now be covered by healthcare by PRIVATE insurance companies if the new healthcare bill passes the House.
Wow - that's some socialist takeover of our healthcare system!
QUOTES OF THE WEEK
"If ObamaCare passes, that free insurance card that's in people's pockets is gonna be as worthless as a Confederate dollar after the War Between The States — the Great War of Yankee Aggression."--Congressman Paul Broun (R-GA) on March 19.
Another moron Republican from the south, demonstration once again the coherence and intelligent alternatives to President Obama's healthcare proposals.
*****
Facts & Quotes are updated weekly, or as close as I can get.
LAWYERLY LINGO
Fair Use Disclaimer:
17 U.S.C. § 107 states, "Notwithstanding the provisions of sections 106 and 106A, the fair use of a copyrighted work, including such use by reproduction in copies or phonorecords or by any other means specified by that section, for purposes such as criticism, comment, news reporting, teaching (including multiple copies for classroom use), scholarship, or research, is not an infringement of copyright." This site is strictly noncommercial in nature. Any work reproduced is done in an attempt to encourage scholarly public debate, an allowable use under the fair use doctrine.
It amazes me that the media just doesn't get it - America doesn't care about William Ayers, and certainly the election a week-and-a-half ago is all the evidence one should need.
Yet, this morning, Good Morning America hosted William Ayers to ask about his past and present association with President-Elect Barack Obama. No matter how many different ways Ayers gave a full accounting of his alleged "friendship" with Obama, Chris Cuomo kept asking the question in five or six subtly different ways. This is such a non-story.
On another note, I plan on reading Ayers' book, Fugitive Days, which is now being reintroduced with a new forward and afterward.
I also think it's highly hypocritical for people to criticize someone for trying to make a difference during an unjust, illegal war where over 58,000 Americans and hundreds of thousands of Vietnamese died. Yes, violence shouldn't be the answer, but the media painted Ayers as someone who killed innocent people (he didn't), while our government was responsible for and trying to justify the deaths of thousands of people. (Much like today, actually.) Revolution was in the air, and Ayers was hardly the only one with those feelings.
The man has renounced his violent ways, yet the media persists.
What's more, I decided to go back and do a little checking for his comments in the New York Times when he said "we didn't do enough" in regard to the Weatherman Underground's bombings and terrorist activities, and I found it - it was published on Sept. 11, 2001, which means the interview was conducted days or weeks prior to the 9-11 attacks.
However, this truth doesn't fit into the media's meme of painting Ayers as a man who, after the Sept. 11 attacks, said "we didn't do enough." Oops! I guess their characterization was off by a day. Again, a fact ignored by those on the right who were trying to smear Obama.
I admire Ayers' past and previous activism (sans the bombings), and I'm not going to try and judge a man who tried to make a difference to end a war that was killing countless innocent people. I look forward to reading his book.
(And I'll probably type the above an infinite number of times between now and the middle of 2009, at the earliest)
Sorry for all of the recent inactivity on here - I've had one of the busiest and exhausting weeks in recent memory. Anyway, back to politics...
It seems that there's at least one journalist over at Fersatz News who has a shred of credibility, and his name is Sheppard Smith. Check out the exchange in the video above between Smith and Nick DiPaolo:
DiPaolo:...the MSM being so in the tank for Obama...
Smith: Oh, please. That's preposterous. The MSM reflected what was happening in this nation. It did not drive it. The blogs didn't drive this movement, the media didn't drive this movement. Barack Obama did not lose this election. It was his to lose. It was not John McCain's to win. The Republicans had no shot unless the Democrats gave it to them and they didn't and to blame the media is a cop out and ridiculous....
DiPaolo The MSM has been liberal since its inception. It's years and years of pounding...
Smith: How did George Bush win twice?
DiPaolo: I don't know. Karl Rove is a genius.
DiPaolo misses two key points: 1. Both elections were stolen, and 2. If Karl Rove is such a genius, then why didn't McCain's Swiftboating of Obama prove feckless? The answer is simple - America wasn't falling for it this time.
Maybe, just maybe, the GOP meme of blaming the media for all bad news and events that are unfavorable to Repubes will die with Obama's victory. Okay, now I am dreaming, but this strategy has been in play since the days of President Nixon, who so hated and despised the media.
And I guess that DiPaolo must have been asleep while the media raked Obama over the coals about these topics:
1. The bogus madrassa story (endlessly pimped by Fersatz News until debunked by CNN and some other networks) 2. William Ayers 3. ACORN (porn for Republicans) 4. His alleged ties to anti-Israel radicals 5. Insinuations that he isn't a US-born citizen 6. "Lipstick on a Pig" and the associated accoutrements shouted about by McCain and his enablers 7. Jeremiah Wright (for eight straight days on Fox, MSNBC, CNN and just about every other major news network when the story first went "national" after weeks and weeks of pimping by Fox, Limbaugh and Hannity) 8. The smear about Obama's aunt the weekend before the election 9. Then there's Rashid Khalidi - another phony guilt by association story that failed to stick just days before the election 10. One of my favorites (these are in no particular order) - McCain huffed that Obama hadn't been to Iraq and that he hadn't been to Afghanistan in years; once Obama went, then McCain and conservatives whined about Obama's press coverage, saying lamely that Obama was taking a "victory lap" 11. And who in the hell can forget Joe the Plumber, the Kato Kaelin of the 2008 campaign. I'll have much more on Joe a bit later.
###
What's more, up until a few years ago, McCain used to joke that the media was "his base." I guess I'd feel that way, too if the press ran up the flagpole whatever I decided to call myself without questioning it, i.e. - Maverick, Straight Talker, etc.
I have to agree with Sheppard here - the media wasn't necessarily rooting for Obama - it was merely reporting just how inept the McCain campaign was. When Sarah Palin wasn't even able to answer basic foreign policy questions, while asserting that being able "to see Russia from Alaska" gave her foreign policy expertise, then McCain and Palin merely got the coverage they deserved.
What's more, there was plenty that the media failed to explore - Sarah Palin's known links to the independent Alaska movement, McCain's many flip flops on a variety of issues, etc.
But, hey, whatever - who's whining? Not me - McCain got whupped. But, that's not going to stop the right from whimpering like babies for weeks (months? years?) on end. I'm getting a particular kick out of listening to Hannity, O'Lielly, Rush, Drudge and the rest all scrambling to discredit Obama, because for the next four years (and hopefully eight), they will have nothing better to do. They don't have ideas of their own - they merely want to tear Obama down. I hope the president-elect and his team will be prepared for it.
I know I am and will be.
As I've told countless friends and acquaintances since election night - our work is not over - it's just beginning.
Seriously, I don't know whether to be extremely happy or frightened that Sarah Palin is widely considered the "new face of the Republican Party" by many. She's proven over the last few months that there really isn't much that is out of bounds and that she won't say. Check out her comments at a campaign even earlier today - in it, she asserts that Democrats think that terrorists "are the good guys."
I've written it before, and I'll no doubt rewrite it over the next few days - McCain and Palin will do and say (and have done and said) just about anything to get elected over the last few months - reality and truth be damned. Yet, this is the woman that John McCain picked to be his running mate, while at the same time proclaiming of having the ability to "reach across party lines" and be bipartisan to get things done. Yes, I realize that this is the heat of a presidential campaign, but some bells simply cannot be un-rung.
We all need to remember comments like these in '12 (and beyond), when Palin undoubtedly makes a run for the U.S. Senate, or possibly even president. Because, most people won't remember 2008, when she made mindlessly partisan and hateful attacks against Obama, and when both her and McCain tried all they could do to divide America in order to win an election.
Sure, Obama has thrown some mud, too, but only to respond in kind to the attacks that he's endured. He had two choices - he could either take the "high road" completely, a la John Kerry in '04, or he could respond selectively as he did. I think, no matter what happens tomorrow, Obama took the wise course - responding to the more serious charges, and ignoring the more scurrilous ones. I think his strategy is about to pay off, big time.
This one was predictable times 10. The only thing surprising is that the GOP (Read: McCain) decided to run this ad so late. But, desperate times call for desperate measures. I've been seeing this ad multiple times during the last few days all over Philadelphia media outlets.
My guess? It will resonate about as well as Bill Ayers, Rashid Khalidi, the Madrassa Story, countless stories about the Obamas' patriotism, etc. In the end, I don't think it will mean anything, because none of it has anything to do with Barack Obama's PATRIOTISM or his ability to lead this country. We'll know very, very soon.
If you possibly had any doubt that the McCain campaign and its GOP enablers would throw every piece of garbage they can possibly dig up against Obama, let me disabuse you of that notion right now (and I've got some Enron stock to sell you, too).
At a campaign appearance this weekend, this is what the formerly honorable Sen. John McCain had to say about Barack Obama at a campaign appearance regarding Obama's patriotism:
"This has been a long campaign but recently we've learned more and more about Senator Obama. He said the other day that his primary victory 'vindicated' his faith in America. My country has never had to prove anything to me, my friends. I've always had faith in it and I've been humbled and honored to serve it."
What a disgusting, despicable liar McCain is - I can't think of no other way to describe it. It's a blatantly deceptive and dishonest twisting of Obama's words. I can't speak for Obama, but I'm guessing that what he meant was that he felt a vindication about winning the nomination after having his name (literally) and his reputation being dragged through the mud for over six months (and since winning the nomination, it has continued unabated).
"It's pathetic that John McCain would take a statement Barack Obama has been making for a year about his faith in the American people and distort it to attack his patriotism," spokesman Bill Burton said in response to McCain's attack Saturday. "Sadly, this is what we've come to expect from a desperate, dishonorable campaign that will say anything in a failed attempt to win this election."
Spot on, Burton, spot on. What was that statement that McCain said - something about how he would "rather lose an election than run a dishonorable campaign"? That statement, just like his campaign, is circling the bowl, faster and faster...
In my mind, the only way that McCain can possibly pull this out is if there is wholesale election theft, and it's not a given that the GOP won't successfully pull that off. I'll have plenty about that tomorrow, including a voting day To-Do list of things to keep in mind before you head to the polls, as well as resources for you to use if you run into any problems while there.
So, it's come down to this -- what can the McCain camp and its backers possibly call Obama that he hasn't been called already?
Muslim? Check. Terrorist Sympathizer? Check. Anti-American? Check. Most liberal member of the Senate? Check. Enemy of Israel? Check. Halfrican-American? Check.
Unfortunately and most sickeningly, there are a few more items on the hate checklist. The latest? That Obama is an Anti-Semite. But, not shockingly, the rhetoric and lies are high in supply, while the proof is... zero.
On Thursday, McCain flak Michael Goldfarb was interviewed on CNN by Rick Sanchez. It didn't take long for Goldfarb to begin smearing Obama for allegedly "hanging out" with Anti-Semites. Sanchez tried to get some specifics out of Goldfarb, but (surprise) to no avail.
Goldfarb: Look, you're missing the point again, Rick. The point is that Barack Obama has a long track record of being around anti-Semitic, anti-Israel, and anti-American rhetoric.
Sanchez: Can you name one other person besides Khalidi who he hangs around with who is Anti-Semitic?
Goldfarb: He pals around with William Ayers who is a domestic terrorist.
Sanchez: No, no. The question I asked you is, Can you name one other person that he hangs around with who is Anti-Semitic? Because that's what you said.
Goldfarb: Look, we all know that there are people who Barack Obama has been in hot water ...
Sanchez: Michael, I asked you to name one person. One.
Goldfarb: [Smiles smugly]
Sanchez: You said he hangs around with people who are Anti-Semitic. OK, we got Khalidi on the table. Give me number two. Who's the other anti-Semitic person that he hangs around with that we, quote, all know about.
Goldfarb: Rick, we both know who number two is. [Silence]
Sanchez: Who?
Goldfarb: [Smiles, says nothing]
Sanchez: Would you tell us?
Goldfarb: No, Rick, I think we all know who we're talking about here.
Sanchez: Somebody who's anti-Semitic who he hangs around with?
Goldfarb: Absolutely.
Sanchez: Well, say it!
Goldfarb: I think we know who we're talking about, Rick.
No, you lying scumbag, we don't know who you're talking about, so why don't you tell us? The only number two we get in this hit piece is the crap Goldfarb is shoveling. All you have to do is look at Goldfarb and it's pretty plain to see that he's lying, just from his non-verbal language.
The hilarity and tragedy from the above video is indicative of how slanderous, dishonorable and pathetic the McCain campaign has conducted itself since the first day Obama locked up the Democratic Nomination. It's no overstatement that McCain is directly responsible for this rhetoric. While he cannot control what every campaign representative says during every interview, he certainly can react and apologize for such smears, which he's been unwilling to do. Since vowing to run a "clean campaign," he's done nothing but throw mud and hurl unsubstantiated, untrue accusations toward Obama at every available opportunity, usually through subordinates. When Obama replies, as he appropriately should, McCain simply shrugs, smirks, and does that creepy smile while uttering, "There has been plenty of mud thrown by both sides."
Coming soon to a network news channel near you - Obama is a filthy [N-Word]. It's about the only thing the McCain campaign hasn't called him, but they've stopped just short of that.
I firmly believe that more voters than not will be repulsed by this repugnant, transparent attempt to smear an honorable, well-intentioned politician who wants to serve his country and try to improve it. We'll hopefully know in three days how much traction these slanders and smears have worked, barring another disastrous replay of 2000, which is not out of the question. Barring another stolen election, all signs point to a significant victory for Obama.
I know this might sound a little corny, but I'm proud of the Obama supporters who confronted Charles David Ficken, the jackass in the video above who carried a sign at an Obama campaign event imploring people to "wake up" and blubbering about how Obama's a "Muslim." As one of the confronting Obama supporters so sagely put it, "What difference does it make if he is a Muslim?" to which Ficken replied, "If that was true, I would campaign twice as hard." I really got a kick out of his contradicting himself.
This one absolutely speaks for itself - it's beyond imagination what the McCain campaign has done and said about Barack Obama. McCain has dishonored himself, his party, and his country.
This one is one of Tom Tomorrow's better comics - the insanely stupid Obama bashing that's taking place not only by the McCain campaign, but more importantly, by the right-wing media that's so omnipresent in our "media."
I have to admit, it's pretty hard to listen to the audio (above) from two of the world's biggest liars and not become pretty enraged. But, that's how they play - when the truth doesn't fit their paradigm and ideology (and it often doesn't), then just lie, lie, lie. They must say to themselves, "Hey, if McCain can't get elected on his record (which he can't, in all likelihood, but we'll never find out with jackasses like these two around, among others), then we'll just make shit up, and if we repeat it over and over and over again, then people will soon believe it to be true! Hey, cool!" (See the lie about Al Gore saying he "invented the Internet" for a Hall of Fame reference.)
The right's been doing this for the better part of '08 about Obama - the madrassa smear, the Pledge of Allegiance myth, you name it - the litany of lies keeps coming and coming. It's like Hannity and Limbaugh are two addicts, and lies are their crack. (Oops - sorry Rush, I swear I wasn't referring to your OxyContin addiction, really! Am I the only one who thinks it's funny that a drug addict who used to put down other drug addicts before he got caught is named Rush?!? Just wondering.)
From the July 29 edition of Fox News' Hannity & Colmes:
HANNITY: So how did Senator Barack Obama's oversea trip resonate with voters? A brand-new USA Today/Gallup poll shows that only Democrats were impressed, with 53 percent calling the trip positive. Republicans overwhelmingly reject -- overwhelmingly rejected the trip, while 41 percent of independents held no opinion at all. The poll also reveals voters are twice as likely to classify media coverage of Obama as unfairly positive rather than unfairly negative, and in the case of McCain, the opposite is the truth, with many more seeing coverage of him as negative.
Joining us now, nationally syndicated radio talk show host Mike Gallagher, former [House Minority Leader Dick] Gephardt [D-MO] campaign manager Steve Elmendorf, and Washington Times columnist Tony Blankley.
Mike, you and I talk about this often on the radio. No big surprises here, especially in light of him, you know, abandoning the troop visit because the cameras weren't around -- allowed and the campaign wasn't allowed. I think this is a net negative for him in the end. Your thoughts?
GALLAGHER: Oh, it has to be. I mean, it's -- it's stunning that he's not -- doesn't have a commanding lead right now in the polls. But even with the fawning media coverage, the kernels of truth slip out.
From the July 29 edition of MSNBC's Morning Joe:
SCARBOROUGH: You say that he's stunned by the truth. What is the truth as you see it? Why -- are -- are you suggesting that Barack Obama does not value the service of our men and women in uniform?
DAVIS: No, I'm sure he does. And I'm sure that the men and women in our uniform would've valued the -- the visit that he had indicated early on that he was gonna make, you know, when he -- when he arrived in Landstuhl. I don't know what the truth is, because out of the Obama campaign themselves and Mr. Gibbs in particular, there have been probably 11 separate excuses for why they didn't visit the troops. Now, if they don't know why they didn't visit the troops, I'm sure as heck not gonna figure it out.
Above is video from a recent Hannity & Colmes, with Hannity repeating on camera the same lies he said on his radio show.
Where's the proof, you say? How about NBC's Andrea Mitchell, a reporter who historically hasn't always been very friendly to Obama - she was there, with Obama, unlike Limbaugh and Hannity.
Mitchell's take: "There was any intention, let me make this absolutely clear, the press was never going to go on the trip [to visit the troops in Landstuhl Regional Medical Center].
Oops! I certainly hope people remember this, two months from now, when McCain (or, more likely, 527s and other surrogates who are backing McCain, begin repeating the accusation over and over and over, as if it's a fact that Obama wouldn't visit the troops because cameras couldn't come.) It's not a fact, never has been, and never will be.
But, in a way, the McCain camp (with the help of State TV, Faux News) have scored a small victory, because of course this is all that the press is talking about now, not the very successful trip that Obama had overseas.
It's okay though, because McCain is looking more and more desperate as the days wear on.
Again, Media Matters has much more on this latest Obama smear that's patently absurd, and worst of all, completely false.
After initially being unsure about how to react to this week's New Yorker cover (at right), which depicts all of the insane, asinine, blatant falsehoods and stereotypes about Barack and Michelle Obama, I have to say that much of the reaction is bordering on overreaction.
I do agree with both the McCain and Obama camps that it's in very poor taste. It is. However, it's a satirical cartoon, and satirical cartoons often are just that. However, what rankles me most about the cover is that it's so outrageous, it's missing the mark by taking away from the piece on Obama that appears inside the issue. What's more, it only seeks to reinforce the stereotypes and lies spread about Obama.
For instance, conservative convict G. Gordon Liddy of Watergate fame, stated earlier today that the New Yorker "finally got it right" with this week's cover. Like just about everything in his life, "G. Gordon" (who calls himself G. Gordon, anyway?!?) gets it wrong. By attempting to satirize the ridiculous and absurd coverage and whispering campaigns that the Obamas have had to endure, the New Yorker is merely adding to the problem.
However, having said all that, is anyone honestly going to look at the magazine cover and not vote for Barack Obama? If that's the type of criteria that voters are using to make up their minds in the voting booth, then there's really no hope for us whatsoever.
By the way, the New Yorker didn't even get a tasteless cartoon right - missing from the image is Sean Hannity, Rush Limbaugh, Michael Wiener and Ann Coulter throwing the flag into the fireplace while pointing at Barack. That would have completed the point the magazine was trying to make.
Quick debunk via Rachel Maddow: Obama's fist bump refusal
Let's stop this one before it even gets started - the other day, Barack Obama supposedly refusing to give a child a fist bump. (Like it's hard to imagine the likes of Sean Hannity or Rush Limbaugh alleging that from the video above.)
Anyway, if you listen to the audio, the truth about what happened is plainly evident - Obama refused to autograph the kid's fist as he held it out.
By the way, I find it excruciatingly annoying that media personalities keep repeating the Fox News line "terrorist fist jab"; it just gives it more life (no doubt exactly what Fox News was going after), and adds fuel to a moronic fire that never should have been started in the first place.
Faux News Channel's in-depth analysis on the Obamas' fist bump
It's comments like the video above that makes me insane with outrage at our nation's most ridiculous and biased news "outlet" - Fox News. You only have to watch the first few seconds to get the mindlessly stupid line - "A fist bump, a pound, a terrorist fist jab?..." Seriously, what in the world is wrong with these people?
I'm sick and tired of Fox News defenders laughing and saying, "It was just a joke." This is a media outlet that bills itself as a serious news organization. At this point, it's blatantly apparent that its on-air personalities, at the behest of the stooges that run the network, will do or say just about anything to keep the Republicans in power.
The only thing missing from the above footage is, "Barack HUSSEIN Obama!"
In short, I was pretty blown away with his speech - I really was. I'd be lying if I didn't admit that as I was driving in my car yesterday, I had a few twinges of doubt about whether Obama was going to survive this pseudo-scandal and I was listening to Bill Press on Sirius Satellite Radio. I have never personally believed Reverend Wright's highly offensive words to be any real reflection on Obama the man, but for a time, I felt that point of view was the minority opinion.
Quite frankly, this is one of the greatest political speeches I've heard, ever, and certainly the best one on race in my lifetime. I sincerely doubt that it will placate the right-wing nuts, and that's fine; nothing he says will ever satisfy them anyway. But, I'm thinking it will help him move beyond this controversy.
Since the presidential primaries began at the beginning of this year, it's nothing short of remarkable (and outrageous) about the press treatment that both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have received. From my chair, it seems that the press vilified and slammed Hillary at every turn with overt misogyny by treating unfavorable opinions of her as fact, and also by bringing up every "scandal" ever associated with the Clintons, true or not. Clinton's early front runner status even presented the vapid Gennifer Flowers with another business opportunity to profit off the Clintons' public service.
And now, the press is all Obama, all the time, and not in a good way. And many of the negative stories are the result of a concerted effort by two of the most dominant and popular media outlets - Faux News and The Drudge Report. I've already written a great deal about this - Click Here. It still amazes me that major media networks and outlets report what they see and read on Drudge as if it is fact. This has happened so frequently in the past few years that it receives little if any attention, but it should. This right wing hack and provocateur has been doing the bidding of the Republican Party leadership for years, not to mention the numerous times he's taken stuff down from his Website that proved to be either false or riddled with half-truths. And apologies? Forget it - this guy apologizes less than my uncouth stepfather.
Here are some excerpts that I found particularly poignant and powerful, with my highlighted comments:
Talk show hosts and conservative commentators built entire careers unmasking bogus claims of racism while dismissing legitimate discussions of racial injustice and inequality as mere political correctness or reverse racism. [Bill O'Lielly, Michael Savage, Rush Limbaugh or Ann Coulter, anyone?]
Just as black anger often proved counterproductive, so have these white resentments distracted attention from the real culprits of the middle class squeeze - a corporate culture rife with inside dealing, questionable accounting practices, and short-term greed; a Washington dominated by lobbyists and special interests; economic policies that favor the few over the many. And yet, to wish away the resentments of white Americans, to label them as misguided or even racist, without recognizing they are grounded in legitimate concerns - this too widens the racial divide, and blocks the path to understanding.
This is where we are right now. It’s a racial stalemate we’ve been stuck in for years. Contrary to the claims of some of my critics, black and white, I have never been so naïve as to believe that we can get beyond our racial divisions in a single election cycle, or with a single candidacy - particularly a candidacy as imperfect as my own.[Sorry, Fox News - looks like Obama is humble and human after all. I can almost hear Roger Ailes screaming, "How dare he be humble! He wants humble? Get me more dirt on this Barack bin Laden and I'll show him humble!]
But I have asserted a firm conviction - a conviction rooted in my faith in God and my faith in the American people - that working together we can move beyond some of our old racial wounds, and that in fact we have no choice is we are to continue on the path of a more perfect union.
[...]
Given my background, my politics, and my professed values and ideals, there will no doubt be those for whom my statements of condemnation are not enough. Why associate myself with Reverend Wright in the first place, they may ask? Why not join another church? And I confess that if all that I knew of Reverend Wright were the snippets of those sermons that have run in an endless loop on the television and YouTube, or if Trinity United Church of Christ conformed to the caricatures being peddled by some commentators, there is no doubt that I would react in much the same way. [You mean there is possibly more to Reverend Wright than those 30-second YouTube clips? What a no doubt disappointing thought for the likes of Sean Hannity, Michael Wiener, O'Lielly and Limbaugh, but I'm sure this won't deter the throng of "the Obamas hate America" crowd.]
But the truth is, that isn't all that I know of the man. The man I met more than twenty years ago is a man who helped introduce me to my Christian faith, a man who spoke to me about our obligations to love one another; to care for the sick and lift up the poor. He is a man who served his country as a U.S. Marine; who has studied and lectured at some of the finest universities and seminaries in the country, and who for over thirty years led a church that serves the community by doing God's work here on Earth - by housing the homeless, ministering to the needy, providing day care services and scholarships and prison ministries, and reaching out to those suffering from HIV/AIDS.
[...]
Like other predominantly black churches across the country, Trinity embodies the black community in its entirety - the doctor and the welfare mom, the model student and the former gang-banger. Like other black churches, Trinity's services are full of raucous laughter and sometimes bawdy humor. They are full of dancing, clapping, screaming and shouting that may seem jarring to the untrained ear. The church contains in full the kindness and cruelty, the fierce intelligence and the shocking ignorance, the struggles and successes, the love and yes, the bitterness and bias that make up the black experience in America.
And this helps explain, perhaps, my relationship with Reverend Wright. As imperfect as he may be, he has been like family to me. He strengthened my faith, officiated my wedding, and baptized my children. Not once in my conversations with him have I heard him talk about any ethnic group in derogatory terms, or treat whites with whom he interacted with anything but courtesy and respect. He contains within him the contradictions - the good and the bad - of the community that he has served diligently for so many years.
I can no more disown him than I can disown the black community. I can no more disown him than I can my white grandmother - a woman who helped raise me, a woman who sacrificed again and again for me, a woman who loves me as much as she loves anything in this world, but a woman who once confessed her fear of black men who passed by her on the street, and who on more than one occasion has uttered racial or ethnic stereotypes that made me cringe. [Good - Obama is sticking by him, which shows guts and political courage - it would have been quick and expedient for Obama to throw him to the wolves, but he didn't do it.]
Some will see this as an attempt to justify or excuse comments that are simply inexcusable. I can assure you it is not. I suppose the politically safe thing would be to move on from this episode and just hope that it fades into the woodwork. We can dismiss Reverend Wright as a crank or a demagogue, just as some have dismissed Geraldine Ferraro, in the aftermath of her recent statements, as harboring some deep-seated racial bias.
But race is an issue that I believe this nation cannot afford to ignore right now. We would be making the same mistake that Reverend Wright made in his offending sermons about America - to simplify and stereotype and amplify the negative to the point that it distorts reality.
The fact is that the comments that have been made and the issues that have surfaced over the last few weeks reflect the complexities of race in this country that we've never really worked through - a part of our union that we have yet to perfect. And if we walk away now, if we simply retreat into our respective corners, we will never be able to come together and solve challenges like health care, or education, or the need to find good jobs for every American. [Sustained Applause]
[...]
A lack of economic opportunity among black men, and the shame and frustration that came from not being able to provide for one's family, contributed to the erosion of black families - a problem that welfare policies for many years may have worsened. And the lack of basic services in so many urban black neighborhoods - parks for kids to play in, police walking the beat, regular garbage pick-up and building code enforcement - all helped create a cycle of violence, blight and neglect that continue to haunt us.
This is the reality in which Reverend Wright and other African-Americans of his generation grew up. They came of age in the late fifties and early sixties, a time when segregation was still the law of the land and opportunity was systematically constricted. What's remarkable is not how many failed in the face of discrimination, but rather how many men and women overcame the odds; how many were able to make a way out of no way for those like me who would come after them.
But for all those who scratched and clawed their way to get a piece of the American Dream, there were many who didn't make it - those who were ultimately defeated, in one way or another, by discrimination. That legacy of defeat was passed on to future generations - those young men and increasingly young women who we see standing on street corners or languishing in our prisons, without hope or prospects for the future. Even for those blacks who did make it, questions of race, and racism, continue to define their world view in fundamental ways. For the men and women of Reverend Wright's generation, the memories of humiliation and doubt and fear have not gone away; nor has the anger and the bitterness of those years. That anger may not get expressed in public, in front of white co-workers or white friends. But it does find voice in the barbershop or around the kitchen table. At times, that anger is exploited by politicians, to gin up votes along racial lines, or to make up for a politician's own failings.
And occasionally it finds voice in the church on Sunday morning, in the pulpit and in the pews. The fact that so many people are surprised to hear that anger in some of Reverend Wright's sermons simply reminds us of the old truism that the most segregated hour in American life occurs on Sunday morning. That anger is not always productive; indeed, all too often it distracts attention from solving real problems; it keeps us from squarely facing our own complicity in our condition, and prevents the African-American community from forging the alliances it needs to bring about real change. But the anger is real; it is powerful; and to simply wish it away, to condemn it without understanding its roots, only serves to widen the chasm of misunderstanding that exists between the races.
In fact, a similar anger exists within segments of the white community. Most working- and middle-class white Americans don't feel that they have been particularly privileged by their race. Their experience is the immigrant experience - as far as they're concerned, no one's handed them anything, they've built it from scratch. They've worked hard all their lives, many times only to see their jobs shipped overseas or their pension dumped after a lifetime of labor. They are anxious about their futures, and feel their dreams slipping away; in an era of stagnant wages and global competition, opportunity comes to be seen as a zero sum game, in which your dreams come at my expense. So when they are told to bus their children to a school across town; when they hear that an African American is getting an advantage in landing a good job or a spot in a good college because of an injustice that they themselves never committed; when they're told that their fears about crime in urban neighborhoods are somehow prejudiced, resentment builds over time.
Like the anger within the black community, these resentments aren't always expressed in polite company. But they have helped shape the political landscape for at least a generation. Anger over welfare and affirmative action helped forge the Reagan Coalition. Politicians routinely exploited fears of crime for their own electoral ends. Talk show hosts and conservative commentators built entire careers unmasking bogus claims of racism while dismissing legitimate discussions of racial injustice and inequality as mere political correctness or reverse racism.
[...]
Just as black anger often proved counterproductive, so have these white resentments distracted attention from the real culprits of the middle class squeeze - a corporate culture rife with inside dealing, questionable accounting practices, and short-term greed; a Washington dominated by lobbyists and special interests; economic policies that favor the few over the many. And yet, to wish away the resentments of white Americans, to label them as misguided or even racist, without recognizing they are grounded in legitimate concerns - this too widens the racial divide, and blocks the path to understanding.
This is where we are right now. It's a racial stalemate we've been stuck in for years. Contrary to the claims of some of my critics, black and white, I have never been so naïve as to believe that we can get beyond our racial divisions in a single election cycle, or with a single candidacy - particularly a candidacy as imperfect as my own.
But I have asserted a firm conviction - a conviction rooted in my faith in God and my faith in the American people - that working together we can move beyond some of our old racial wounds, and that in fact we have no choice is we are to continue on the path of a more perfect union.
For the African-American community, that path means embracing the burdens of our past without becoming victims of our past. It means continuing to insist on a full measure of justice in every aspect of American life. But it also means binding our particular grievances - for better health care, and better schools, and better jobs - to the larger aspirations of all Americans -- the white woman struggling to break the glass ceiling, the white man whose been laid off, the immigrant trying to feed his family. And it means taking full responsibility for own lives - by demanding more from our fathers, and spending more time with our children, and reading to them, and teaching them that while they may face challenges and discrimination in their own lives, they must never succumb to despair or cynicism; [Applause] they must always believe that they can write their own destiny.
[...]
The profound mistake of Reverend Wright's sermons is not that he spoke about racism in our society. It's that he spoke as if our society was static; as if no progress has been made; as if this country - a country that has made it possible for one of his own members to run for the highest office in the land and build a coalition of white and black; Latino and Asian, rich and poor, young and old -- is still irrevocably bound to a tragic past. But what we know -- what we have seen - is that America can change. That is true genius of this nation. What we have already achieved gives us hope - the audacity to hope - for what we can and must achieve tomorrow.
[...]
For we have a choice in this country. We can accept a politics that breeds division, and conflict, and cynicism. We can tackle race only as spectacle - as we did in the OJ trial - or in the wake of tragedy, as we did in the aftermath of Katrina - or as fodder for the nightly news. We can play Reverend Wright's sermons on every channel, every day and talk about them from now until the election, and make the only question in this campaign whether or not the American people think that I somehow believe or sympathize with his most offensive words. We can pounce on some gaffe by a Hillary supporter as evidence that she's playing the race card, or we can speculate on whether white men will all flock to John McCain in the general election regardless of his policies.
We can do that.
But if we do, I can tell you that in the next election, we'll be talking about some other distraction. And then another one. And then another one. And nothing will change. [Yes! This is a theme that Democrats need to hammer over and over again - when the press spends time on someone a candidate is associated with a long time ago, we aren't spending time talking about the real issues that are affecting us: the wars, the deficit, lack of health care, etc. and this is just how Repubes want it. In '04, gay marriage was the big wedge issue. This year, it looks like it's race and (surprise) the Clinton scandals.]
That is one option. Or, at this moment, in this election, we can come together and say, "Not this time."[Emphasis Mine] This time we want to talk about the crumbling schools that are stealing the future of black children and white children and Asian children and Hispanic children and Native American children. This time we want to reject the cynicism that tells us that these kids can't learn; that those kids who don't look like us are somebody else's problem. The children of America are not those kids, they are our kids, and we will not let them fall behind in a 21st century economy. Not this time. [Emphasis Mine]
This time we want to talk about how the lines in the Emergency Room are filled with whites and blacks and Hispanics who do not have health care; who don't have the power on their own to overcome the special interests in Washington, but who can take them on if we do it together.
This time we want to talk about the shuttered mills that once provided a decent life for men and women of every race, and the homes for sale that once belonged to Americans from every religion, every region, every walk of life. This time we want to talk about the fact that the real problem is not that someone who doesn't look like you might take your job; it's that the corporation you work for will ship it overseas for nothing more than a profit.
I can't even think of much to add to this speech, other than to say I think it hit just the right note, and now hopefully Obama can get started on putting this behind him. There's little doubt it will continue to get flogged on Drudge, Fox News and the like, but I believe that once people begin making reasoned, thought-out opinions on whether they should vote for Obama because of what his Reverend has said, he should be fine. I still believe he has too many delegates to not get the nomination.
I began poking around on Huff Po and YouTube for reactions to his speech, and to my surprise just about all of them were very encouraged by his speech and were generally positive. That alone qualifies as a "Wow," because those comment and message board areas can be fertile ground for cranks and intolerant rubes. Here's one of my favorite comments that I found: It's sad that a lot of these posters are cynical, angry, resentful and don't understand the history of America and the country and they want to sooooo much be proud in the superficial way, that they hate anybody that says anything bad about it.
Hmm - sound familiar? Michelle Obama, anyone? How dare she say that she hasn't been proud of her country in a long time?!? The NERVE!
I just read this from Marc Ambinder's blog over at The Atlantic Monthly: Bill Kristol, another conservative genius who obviously does lots of research before recurring bouts of political diarrhea that he spreads via print and broadcast appearances, has got one of his "facts" wrong in the Obama dust-up over Jeremiah Wright.
But Ronald Kessler, a journalist who has written about Wright's ministry, claims that Obama was in fact in the pews at Trinity last July 22. That's when Wright blamed the "arrogance" of the "United States of White America" for much of the world's suffering, especially the oppression of blacks. In any case, given the apparent frequency of such statements in Wright's preaching and their centrality to his worldview, the pretense that over all these years Obama had no idea that Wright was saying such things is hard to sustain.
Oops. I guess Kristol doesn't know to fact check his sources. I would think that a graduate of Harvard would know the importance of doing just that, especially when it's a political smear. But, I guess since it's a Democrat, the truth takes a backseat to a good 'ole fashioned hit piece.
Oh, and Kressler? His original piece, Obama Attended Hate America Sermon, reads that Obama "nodded" his head while Wright preached these lines:
Addressing the Iraq war, Wright thundered, "Young African-American men" were "dying for nothing." The "illegal war," he shouted, was "based on Bush's lies" and is being "fought for oil money."
Both articles now have corrections. Here's Kristol's:
In this column, I cite a report that Sen. Obama had attended services at Trinity Church on July 22, 2007. The Obama campaign has provided information showing that Sen. Obama did not attend Trinity that day. I regret the error.
Yea, I bet you do, Bill.
As the saying goes, the damage is done. I wonder how many people will go right on believing that Obama was at that ceremony. It's a safe bet that more than a few Fox News viewers, will.
