For what will it profit a man if he gains the whole world and forfeits his soul? Or what will a man give in exchange for his soul? — Matthew 16:26
Unless you have been under a rock, you know that Rev. Jeremiah Wright is back in the news, first in an interview with Bill Moyers and then in an appearance before the National Press Club. It was the latter which prompted presidential hopeful Barack Obama to denounce his former pastor:
I’ve known Rev. Wright for almost 20 years. The person I saw yesterday was not the person that I met 20 years ago. His comments were not only divisive and destructive, but I believe that they end up giving comfort to those who prey on hate and I believe that they do not portray accurately the perspective of the black church. They certainly don’t portray accurately my values and beliefs and if Rev Wright thinks that’s political posturing, as he put it, then he doesn’t know me very well and based on his remarks yesterday, well I may not know him as well as I thought either.
Finally Obama says what I’ve been saying all along: Wright’s comments are not typical fare in black churches. From my original post:
I can say without hesitation that I’ve heard black pastors say things that would make white people uncomfortable. Heck, I’ve heard black pastors say things that make me uncomfortable. (As a matter of fact, the pastor at the church that I grew up in, the one that I was baptized in, the one that my father was ordained in, said something that has kept me away for a number of years.) But the language of Wright? Never.
Since that time, I’ve continued to question folks and no one I’ve talked to has ever heard the type of comments that Wright made. Yet the meme – put out there by Donna Brazile when this story broke in the MSM – was that his behavior was typical of black churches. (If I recall correctly, Brazile actually called Wright’s comments “tame.”)
Throughout the last six weeks, the black church has been unfairly maligned. I have cringed every time someone asked me if these comments were normal. I’ve had to reassure folks that Wright is an aberration. What I want to know is why?
Why did black folk allow the media to portray our churches this way? Why didn’t the black ministers stand up and say something? Why didn’t other black leaders stand up and say something? Was everyone so afraid that saying something would hurt Obama? Is one man worth the desecration of our churches?
Even the person who started this mess – Donna Brazile – ate her words last Sunday. I suspect, though, that her comments had less to do with doing what’s right than doing what is politically expedient.
The fact that black folk weren’t up in arms about this mischaracterization of an institution that has been the bedrock of our community truly saddens me. Are we truly willing to give up our souls in order to nominate a black man?
And to what end? By allowing this to happen, the wounds of racial division in our country have been ripped wide open. We don’t talk about issues anymore, we talk about what percentage of the black vote Obama is getting and look for racism under every rock. Everything has racial overtones. Health care, the economy, the war in Iraq – none of these are important anymore.
Because no one had the guts to stand up and say ENOUGH ALREADY.
VIVIAN J. PAIGE | All Politics is Local 
Excellent post Vivian.
I will say, even in the Catholic (white) church that I attend, I have had a pastor (who is now a Monsignor) say some WAYYYY off base stuff that I didn’t agree with. I stayed at that church because I felt that the parish was more than just the pastor. This Monsignor was the one that confirmed me and also married many in my family. He never went as far as Rev. Wright but made some very offensive comments both publically and privately. I’m also pretty offended about comments that John Hagee has made- granted that McCain doesn’t go to his church but he didn’t have a relationship with him.
As for Wright, I also spoke with a friend in Chicago, she told me that there were two prominent black churches and that was one of them. When she was new in town she was encouraged to attend and said that he didn’t make crazy statements like that very often. It still doesn’t make it right though.
And you are correct, the news cycle is now on the 24/7 and ignoring everything else.
Senator Webb had a rally for the revised GI bill and that was ignored.
I am still a staunch supporter of Obama but I think that this criticism is fair and you made an excellent point.
Sorry for the typo on Hagee, I’ve now learned that posting while on a conference call can lead to many typos 🙂
I meant to say that while McCain didn’t have a close relationship with him, he still accepted his endorsement. What Hagee has said about New Orleans, Catholics and his comments on Hitler is some of the least “Christian” things I have heard out of a so-called-pastor in some time.
Viv, I swear, you’re sounding a lot like a libertarian these days. If you keep talking like this outside of private circles of liberal friends, somebody is going to take your liberal card from you. 🙂
I’m actually not exaggerating much, here. Many years ago, I was a liberal Democrat. In Massachusetts I fit right in. In 1989, I was invited to speak at a local Democratic Party meeting, as part of a young Democrats Club. Whatever topic I was going to speak about initially, I changed my mind less than a week before, because I was opposed to the platform of someone who had just announced his candidacy for a local office. He wanted to impose even greater restrictions on homeschooling than what the state had. Massachusetts has never been a homeschool friendly state to begin with. In my speech, I gave numerous reasons for easing those restrictions. I related my own poor experiences with public school systems in Florida and California.
Finally, I really blasphemed. I gave the NEA a hard time. At that point, I was shouted down, and I was told that only religious extremists ever homeschooled their kids. Which in Massachusetts may very well have been true, because the existing laws made it so that only the very most determined would even attempt it.
After that speech, I was Persona Non Grata. Even people I had previously discussed this very topic with treated me worse than If I had insulted their religion. I was told by one person that it was one thing to grouse about the NEA with other Dems, but to speak about it in a meeting that was open to the public was unacceptable.
There seems to be some of this among the black community. Consider the treatment Bill Cosby got for things he’s said, versus the silence over Rev. Wright. I’m just speculating, of course, but this has the feel of what happened to me, when I violated the Mass Dems orthodoxy.
Liberal and libertarian share the same root so it’s really no surprise that I sometimes sound libertarian. Bill Cosby took the wrong path with his words, and he was properly chastised for it. There are some voices out there who have chastised Wright. Unfortunately, they aren’t the ones the MSM looks to for quotes.
Vivian,
Thank you for the above piece. Blewsdawg says you risk having your liberal card taken away from you. I am going to state you also risk being described as an Uncle Tom or something.
I certainly have nothing against a black person serving as President of the United States. I just have some reluctance for Barack Obama to be the first – there have now been at least a couple blunders in the Barack campaign that would have ended his run if he did not receive (in my opinion) an unhealthy, completely accepting, forgiving support from an overwhelming percentage of black voters.
Would an Obama presidency be a disaster for America? I do not think so. It is just my opinion that the other two choices have proven track records of being willing to compromise to get things done in government. I see no reason for casting a vote for taking a chance on Barack.
Hillary is my first choice, but John McCain comes in second. I doubt that Barack winning the Democratic nomination would result in your shifting your support to John since you seem to be a fairly loyal Democrat (perhaps this is unfair – but then it is my unfair opinion). However some of us are going to find John an acceptable second choice if we are denied our first choice, Hillary Clinton.
I have a question – is the “Black Church” as monolithic as all the descriptions that I read about it make it sound? I mean you have congregations that are Catholic, Methodist, Baptist, Pentecostal, UCC and so on. I imagine that an awful lot of differences are being elided.
Or rather, if you keep listening, instead of leaning on the caricatures of liberals that you’ve created in your mind, you may well find out that there’s no such thing as a liberal card.
~
And Brian, you don’t really have a question. Of course it’s not.
MB,
I used to be a liberal. I started calling myself that at age 11, when I first became conscious of politics. I was living in the San Francisco Bay area then. I spent ten years in the Democratic party, from 1984, to 1994. Two of those years, 1988 and 1989, I was in Boston. The other eight, here in Virginia. A liberal Democrat here is a conservative Republican in Boston and San Francisco. And I was among the most progressive and vocal liberals that I knew, even in those places. It wouldn’t be unfair to say that I was a socialist at the time, although I didn’t know it.
I became disillusioned with the Dems after I read “Atlas Shrugged” and recognized those “second handers” and “Wesley Mooch” in very real people I knew in real life. Not the least of which was myself. I became a libertarian two years later, after I was invited to a dinner with Harry Browne and Jim Babka. I’ve, to this very day, never voted for a Republican for President, other than Ron Paul in this most recent primary.
My definition of what a liberal is, is not a caricature. It is first hand experience. Thicken your skin, friend.
Well, I suppose David Horowitz can say that, too. Would you have us believe that the ooga-booga liberals that he imagines are ruining the country exist outside of his imagination?
Your own explanation of the extremes from which you came belies what a ridiculous statement it is to say that anything Vivian said up there is inconsistent with “liberal” values in any normal use of the word.
It’s not a matter of thick skin. It’s a matter of calling out tilting at windmills for what it is . . .
blewsdawg,
You liked Ron Paul. Ghasp.
Ron Paul is in favor of legalized drugs, legalized prostitution, and destroying Social Security.
Thank God the Libertarian candidate won so little support.
LittleDavid – not sure why you’d think someone would call me an Uncle Tom over this. After all, I’m defending black churches here, not making excuses.
Brian – no, the “Black Church” is not monolithic. There’s nothing monolithic about the black community, although from reading the MSM, you’d never know that. (I often call it the mythical black community, because it’s a figment of the media’s imagination.)
No. I don’t think liberals are running the country. I think moderates are. Moderates who half-heartedly agree with me on half of the liberties that I would like to see protected. Problem is, none of them focus on the liberties they agree with. They’re all focused on the behaviors they’d like to control. Combine that lack of vigilance with a tiny handful of Hamiltonian Republicans and Trotskyite Democrats, who really are authoritarians of opposite stripes, and who’s left to watch our freedom? I think we all lose, the way things are heading, and libertarians are getting the shortest straw of all.
I make no claim that my philosophy today is consistent in any way with what I believed twenty-five years ago. Nor was my transformation completed overnight. I was sixteen years old when I joined the Democrat party, and I was in my early twenties when I got my first glimpse of how authoritarian some of my allies could really be. That’s what I thought was inconsistent with “liberal” values. I think that what VJP said was well within classical liberalism. Problem is, there’s a new breed of liberal, and they’ve declared themselves the final arbiters of liberal thought. Those are the people who shouted me down in Boston, for separating from their orthodoxy on one, and only one, issue.
I tilt at a lot of windmills, brother. I want to see parents have the freedom to choose their children’s schools, and not be penalized for that decision by paying twice. I’m in favor of making it easier, not harder, for immigrants to become legal. I favor ending prohibition on gambling, drugs and prostitution. Tilting at windmills is a favorite hobby of mine. Defining the ideology you claim for yourself is a windmill I can’t even see on my horizon.
He said “ruining the country,” not “running the country.”
Vivian,
I happened to catch the Rev Wright’s appearance before the National Press Club live and in its entirety via television (it was on both CNN and Fox, CNN’s audio feed was crisper). During his speech he actually used the term “Uncle Tom’s” to describe some of those who engaged in criticism of him.
Why should someone call you an Uncle Tom? Don’t ask me, ask the one who is doing it, and that would be the Reverend Wright.
blewsdawg,
I appreciate your libertarian streak, but your list of things that you support is also the reason that Ron Paul’s candidacy gained so little traction.
I once overheard a conversation between two Ron Paul supporters. They were questioning why Ron Paul was not gathering steam in the polls despite raising record amounts of money. They were rapidly coming to the agreed answer (between the two of them) that the reason was that people just didn’t know enough about him because the MSM was ignoring him. I couldn’t help myself and had to jump into the conversation. I blurted out something like “No, we’ve heard quite abit about him, we just do not like what we’ve been hearing.”
The utopian, endless liberties, society that Libertarians would subject us to just will not work in the real world due to the weaknesses of our species. Their needs to be limits set on our liberties or we’d end up with chaos. There are valid reasons for why recreational drug usage and prostitution are prohibited and these prohibitions should remain.
However I’d bet Ron Paul polls quite favorably amongst prostitutes. You can still see evidence of their support along Nevada’s highways with the letters E,V,O and L highlighted in pink in the theme “Ron Paul Revolution” to show they spell “Love” backwards.