Thursday, May 01, 2008
God Forsaken
Via Andrew Sullivan, Mike Huckabee has an interesting take on the Rev. Wright insanity:
Wright arose this week to, in effect, say to Obama, "Not so fast, boy, you're not going to advance in the way you want without giving due obeisance to the black church -- the historic foundation of our community."
It's not surprising that Wright would say that "Louis Farrakhan is not my enemy." Because, he's not. He is an ally -- not necessarily in the racist, paranoiac view of America (though, clearly, there is some crossover there) -- but in their shared belief that religion must be the controlling power within the black community. The corollary to this, of course, is that religious leaders must be the first among equals in the black power structure.
Barack Obama is a mortal threat to that notion and he is paying the price for it.
Over at National Review, Lisa Schiffren quotes two e-mailers who assert that Obama isn't "mature" enough to be president. One e-mailer says, "He's not yet a full adult." I disagree. I think Obama has been far more straightforward as to who he is and where he comes from -- flaws and all -- than just about any other presidential candidate (with the possible exception of five-books-written John McCain). No, if anyone or anything needs to have the "not yet a full adult" charge sent in that direction, it may be Jeremiah Wright -- by extension -- the black community.
It is one thing for the community to place all of its political eggs in one basket by overwhelmingly supporting the Democratic Party. It is something far different to allow a black "leader" to sabotage the efforts of the most mainstream black figure to rise out of that party -- just because he chooses not to sufficiently, ahem, "worship" at the feet of leaders of the foremost community insitution of the previous two centuries. Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. took the community very far by daring to dream. But subsequent leaders haven't moved the ball much further. Obama had -- and still has -- an amazing opportunity to take that next great step. And who goes out of his way to destroy that dream? If a black minister still has that much power, then the black community must assess its own political maturity that it has permitted a member of the social institution that led it for so long to destroy perhaps its greatest political hope.
How ironic that, after so many predictions last year that the religious right would create chaos for Republican presidential candidates, it has been a figure from the religious black left that has seemingly blown up the Democratic nomination process?
|
"His (Obama's) campaign is not being derailed by his race, it's being derailed by a person who doesn't want him to prove that we have made great advances in this country," Huckabee told reporters.Huckabee's almost gets it. I would go even further. This isn't just about how far race relations have progressed in America. This is also about what form -- and what institutions -- black progress will take and use in the years again. As my colleague Fred Dicker reported in Wednesday's paper, there appears to be real enmity -- not just from Jeremiah Wright, but from others associated with the Trinity church -- that Obama hasn't sufficiently "boosted" the church's role in the black community:
"Jeremiah Wright needs for Obama to lose so he can justify his anger, his hostile bitterness against the United States of America," Huckabee said.
The Post has learned. "After 20 years of loving Barack like he was a member of his own family, for Jeremiah to see Barack saying over and over that he didn't know about Jeremiah's views during those years, that he wasn't familiar with what Jeremiah had said, that he may have missed church on this day or that and didn't hear what Jeremiah said, this is seen by Jeremiah as nonsense and betrayal," said the source, who has deep roots in Wright's Chicago community and is familiar with his thinking on the matter.In other words, Obama by omission or otherwise, has somehow "dissed" the black church. The church, of course, has been a major institution within the black community for centuries. While Obama has been a member of the Trinity congregation, it is clear that he represents a new generation of black politician. He is not Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton. And, by that, I don't mean that he is not some race "confidence man" or agitator. I mean, Obama is a secular, professional, polished, mainstream politician. He is a secular elected official.
"Jeremiah is trying to defend his congregation and the work of his ministry by saying what he is saying now," the source added.
"Jeremiah doesn't care if he derails Obama's candidacy or not . . . He knows what he's doing. Obviously, he's not a dumb man. He knows he's not helping."
The source spoke yesterday about Wright's motivation for thrusting himself back into the news, the day after the pastor appeared at the National Press Club on Monday and embarrassed Obama by accusing the United States of terrorism.
Wright has said the reason he has begun granting interviews and making public appearances now is that he wants to defend black churches.
Wright arose this week to, in effect, say to Obama, "Not so fast, boy, you're not going to advance in the way you want without giving due obeisance to the black church -- the historic foundation of our community."
It's not surprising that Wright would say that "Louis Farrakhan is not my enemy." Because, he's not. He is an ally -- not necessarily in the racist, paranoiac view of America (though, clearly, there is some crossover there) -- but in their shared belief that religion must be the controlling power within the black community. The corollary to this, of course, is that religious leaders must be the first among equals in the black power structure.
Barack Obama is a mortal threat to that notion and he is paying the price for it.
Over at National Review, Lisa Schiffren quotes two e-mailers who assert that Obama isn't "mature" enough to be president. One e-mailer says, "He's not yet a full adult." I disagree. I think Obama has been far more straightforward as to who he is and where he comes from -- flaws and all -- than just about any other presidential candidate (with the possible exception of five-books-written John McCain). No, if anyone or anything needs to have the "not yet a full adult" charge sent in that direction, it may be Jeremiah Wright -- by extension -- the black community.
It is one thing for the community to place all of its political eggs in one basket by overwhelmingly supporting the Democratic Party. It is something far different to allow a black "leader" to sabotage the efforts of the most mainstream black figure to rise out of that party -- just because he chooses not to sufficiently, ahem, "worship" at the feet of leaders of the foremost community insitution of the previous two centuries. Rev. Martin Luther King Jr. took the community very far by daring to dream. But subsequent leaders haven't moved the ball much further. Obama had -- and still has -- an amazing opportunity to take that next great step. And who goes out of his way to destroy that dream? If a black minister still has that much power, then the black community must assess its own political maturity that it has permitted a member of the social institution that led it for so long to destroy perhaps its greatest political hope.
How ironic that, after so many predictions last year that the religious right would create chaos for Republican presidential candidates, it has been a figure from the religious black left that has seemingly blown up the Democratic nomination process?
Labels: Barack Obama, Dem 2008 Presidential, Jeremiah Wright, race, Religion and Politics
Friday, December 07, 2007
Taking The Mitts Off
I don't know whether Mitt Romney hit a "home run" with his speech on faith. In fact, trying to use a baseball metaphor on a political speech about faith seems to me just wrong.
However, there are a few things that jump out.
1) It's interesting that "Catholic," "Christian," "Jew" and "Muslim" all appear more times than "Mormon" (which appears exactly once). Given the speech build-up, will that imbalance unwittingly draw more attention to the religious issue than away from it? Time will tell.
2) When an ardent social conservative like Ramesh Ponnuru observes: "It would have been nice if Romney, while making room for people of all faiths in this country, could have also made some room for people with none," that may foretell some problems down the road.
3) Given that the speech is a plea to ask voters to not to impose a religious -- and implicitly see his religion as being part of the broad faiths practiced by other Americans -- did Romney leave himself vulnerable with this line:
On the whole, however, I have to give Romney major credit for both the trappings of the speech (doing it at the George H.W. Bush Presidential Library) and, more importantly, its broad substance. Over the last couple of weeks, there have been a number of moments on both sides where the campaign has veered into "silly season" territory. The Hillary-Obama "kindergarten" story is the most obvious example on the Democratic side and the how-low-can-you-dance go against illegal immigrants among Republicans.
For one day, the main discussion is on an a significant thoughtful speech by one of the contenders. People will differ about parts of the speech -- or whether he should have given it. But, the reality of the speech is that it has elevated the tone of the campaign -- and for one day at least, put Romney on a slightly higher plane than his competition.
That's not a bad thing.
UPDATE: Romney won over Pat Buchanan.
UPDATE II: This helps take a bit of bloom off the rose. Apparently, the non-mention of non-believers was not unintentional.
|
However, there are a few things that jump out.
1) It's interesting that "Catholic," "Christian," "Jew" and "Muslim" all appear more times than "Mormon" (which appears exactly once). Given the speech build-up, will that imbalance unwittingly draw more attention to the religious issue than away from it? Time will tell.
2) When an ardent social conservative like Ramesh Ponnuru observes: "It would have been nice if Romney, while making room for people of all faiths in this country, could have also made some room for people with none," that may foretell some problems down the road.
3) Given that the speech is a plea to ask voters to not to impose a religious -- and implicitly see his religion as being part of the broad faiths practiced by other Americans -- did Romney leave himself vulnerable with this line:
These American values, this great moral heritage, is shared and lived in my religion as it is in yours. I was taught in my home to honor God and love my neighbor. I saw my father march with Martin Luther King.While Romney's father may have had the "American values" and "moral heritage" to march with MLK, was his Morman faith instrumental in that -- the same faith that taught until 1978 that blacks were such a lesser race that they couldn't be ordained as priests? The statement says wonders about George Romney's values, but actually draws uncomfortable attention to one not-too-long-gone aspect of the religion's tenets.
On the whole, however, I have to give Romney major credit for both the trappings of the speech (doing it at the George H.W. Bush Presidential Library) and, more importantly, its broad substance. Over the last couple of weeks, there have been a number of moments on both sides where the campaign has veered into "silly season" territory. The Hillary-Obama "kindergarten" story is the most obvious example on the Democratic side and the how-low-can-you-dance go against illegal immigrants among Republicans.
For one day, the main discussion is on an a significant thoughtful speech by one of the contenders. People will differ about parts of the speech -- or whether he should have given it. But, the reality of the speech is that it has elevated the tone of the campaign -- and for one day at least, put Romney on a slightly higher plane than his competition.
That's not a bad thing.
UPDATE: Romney won over Pat Buchanan.
UPDATE II: This helps take a bit of bloom off the rose. Apparently, the non-mention of non-believers was not unintentional.
Labels: Mitt Romney, Mormon, Religion and Politics
Tuesday, March 27, 2007
Atlas Mugged
Madscribe:
Well, someone has finally come out of the closet. Or, since he's an atheist, maybe it would be more appropriate to say that he came out of the Confessional. Representative Pete Stark, of San Francisco naturally, has decided to let his Faithless Freak Flag Fly High as one of the country's first openly disbelieving politicos.
|
Well, someone has finally come out of the closet. Or, since he's an atheist, maybe it would be more appropriate to say that he came out of the Confessional. Representative Pete Stark, of San Francisco naturally, has decided to let his Faithless Freak Flag Fly High as one of the country's first openly disbelieving politicos.
Sadly, he is also an unabashed tax-and-spend statist liberal and race baiter, so he only gets the sound of one hand clapping from moi. After he burns down the conservative's church, he'll be round to visit all the rest of us to burn through our cash.
Of course, the Sexually Repressed Stepford Wives of America's Red States (by the way, is red the right color for Hannity America?) think that the Congressman is more dangerous to our National Culture than a special guest star on a Chris Hansen program. As they put it, "a Christian worldview is proper for a politican to have." We all know how well such softcore neo-Crusaderism is going over among the general populations of Iraq and Afghanistan. (Or, as The Clash sang in the song Overpowered By Funk, "Don't you loooooove our Western ways?")
For Christmas (which was deemed to be a secular holiday for legal purposes, all you naysayers), I will be sending the Esteemed Congressman a copy of Ayn Rand (repeat after me, Congressman, Godless CAPITALISM, Godless CAPITALISM, Godless CAPITALISM, not SOCIALISM ...). Yes, even though most libertarians consider her slightly nuts these days, a tax-and-grab leftie like Stark needs to begin his reprogramming somewhere. He will also receive a wonderful DVD set from my favorite libertarian, secular mythbusters.
Labels: Pete Stark, Religion and Politics
