Meta-Blog

SEARCH QandO

Email:
Jon Henke
Bruce "McQ" McQuain
Dale Franks
Bryan Pick
Billy Hollis
Lance Paddock
MichaelW

BLOGROLL QandO

 
 
Recent Posts
The Ayers Resurrection Tour
Special Friends Get Special Breaks
One Hour
The Hope and Change Express - stalled in the slow lane
Michael Steele New RNC Chairman
Things that make you go "hmmmm"...
Oh yeah, that "rule of law" thing ...
Putting Dollar Signs in Front Of The AGW Hoax
Moving toward a 60 vote majority?
Do As I Say ....
 
 
QandO Newsroom

Newsroom Home Page

US News

US National News
Politics
Business
Science
Technology
Health
Entertainment
Sports
Opinion/Editorial

International News

Top World New
Iraq News
Mideast Conflict

Blogging

Blogpulse Daily Highlights
Daypop Top 40 Links

Regional

Regional News

Publications

News Publications

 
"He says what he has to say as a politician"
Posted by: McQ on Thursday, April 24, 2008

Jeremiah Wright points out that the politician Obama will say whatever he has to say to get where he wants to go:


Now, you may interpret his words differently, but I'm not sure how you do so.

(HT: Stop the ACLU)
 
TrackBacks
Return to Main Blog Page
 
 

Previous Comments to this Post 

Comments
Let me see - the reverend says ’he;s a politician and says what he has to say’, and in the last post, we have this quote from Rockefeller - "We all know there is not enough money to do all this stuff," said Sen. Jay Rockefeller (D-W.Va.), a Finance Committee member and an Obama supporter, referring to the presidential candidates’ healthcare plans. "What they are doing is . laying out their ambitions."

So is anyone out there actually speaking to the world and situations we live in?
 
Written By: meagain
URL: http://
Geez. I was expecting something trickier. Well, I do give Wright credit for honesty in what he says about Obama and America and James Cone. I guess Wright feels the truth is on his side, however damning it may sound to other Americans.
 
Written By: huxley
URL: http://
Jeremiah Wright points out that the politician Obama will say whatever he has to say to get where he wants to go...
And supporters of politician Obama don’t care. They want the hopiness and changitude, G_D damn the consequences.
 
Written By: bains
URL: http://
Wow!
A politician saying whatever he has to say to get where he wants to go. Holy crap!

What a stunning revelation.
Interesting tactic this whole "say whatever you have to say" thingie. I wonder if it will work. Has it ever worked before?
 
Written By: PogueMahone
URL: http://
well, there’s soemthing else going on here, too.
Obama’s backtracking, and is clearly in defensive mode. He’s decided rather than to keep a cap on Wright, that the only way out of this box is to cast him, and by extension, Obama, as a VICTIM.

Add to that that the flag pin showed up on his lapel again the other day, and clearly theyr’e reacting to the charges of Obama being anti-American. Of course there are problems...

Wright for one.
Ayers for another.
Obama funding sources. "Kindhearts", that offshoot of the Holy Land Foundation, for one.
And Obama himself.
 
Written By: Bithead
URL: http://bitsblog.florack.us
Wow!
A politician saying whatever he has to say to get where he wants to go. Holy crap!

What a stunning revelation.
Hey, he’s the guy out there telling everyone he’s the "new" politician. He’s the one who presented himself as the politician not doing what Wright is saying he’s doing.

When you place yourself in such a lofty place, you have to do the requisite stuff to earn the right to stay up there. Wright’s disclaimer pretty much does that in (as does the NAFTA gaffe, Iraq war waffle and various other little slips).

And the expected spin/reaction from his defender? Well you’ve done an adequate job of presenting it.

 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.QandO.net
McQ:
Hey, he’s the guy out there telling everyone he’s the "new" politician. He’s the one who presented himself as the politician not doing what Wright is saying he’s doing.
Yeah, but McQ, no one was supposed to, you know, actually believe that.

It was only about the big mesmerizing speeches. The "new" politician stuff was just the swinging pocket watch used to bring on the trance.

Come on, man, Obama has always been just a politician and the trance was a buzz, man. And now you’re tryin’ to kill the buzz, buzzkill.
 
Written By: Martin McPhillips
URL: http://mcphillips.blogspot.com/
Does Wright think he’s helping Obama?
 
Written By: Bandit
URL: http://
Does Wright think he’s helping Obama?
That’s what I wonder. Is Wright a loose cannon or is this part of a miscalculation from the Obama campaign?

It’s easy to do Pogue’s DK-style counter-snark no matter what happens, but in the real world of swing/independent voters who will ultimately elect the president, having Obama’s family friend and spiritual mentor declaring Obama to be just another political hack after all of O’s "hope and change" talk is more damage to an already wounded campaign.

Sure Obama is a politician, but this is plain bad politics no matter how you slice it.

It’s taking longer than it did in the McGovern campaign, but Wright is looking more and more like Obama’s version of Eagleton—the Missouri senator McGovern selected for VP. When it came out that Eagleton had been hospitalized and given shock treatments for mental problems, McGovern at first said that he backed Eagleton "1000%" but eventually had to drop Eagleton from the ticket. From there the McGovern campaign unraveled and McGovern was wiped out in the general election against an unlikeable president fighting an unpopular war.
 
Written By: huxley
URL: http://
This reminds me of the wrap-up to Jodi Kantor’s NYT article in April, 2007:
Mr. Wright, who has long prided himself on criticizing the establishment, said he knew that he may not play well in Mr. Obama’s audition for the ultimate establishment job.

“If Barack gets past the primary, he might have to publicly distance himself from me,” Mr. Wright said with a shrug. “I said it to Barack personally, and he said yeah, that might have to happen.”
Obama’s steps away from Wright are preplanned, mutually agreed on, and, as Wright makes plain again in the Moyer’s interview, as insincere as anything a candidate does solely out of political necessity.

It’s interesting to me that Moyers, in setting up his question to Wright, clearly signals the understanding that Obama wasn’t speaking from the heart when he said those "hard things" about Wright in his most famous speech to date:
[Moyers:] You were for 20 years his spiritual counselor. He has said that. And yet he in that speech at Philadelphia had to say some hard things about you. [Emphasis mine.]
Obama had to say something to distance himself at least from those incendiary outbursts of Wright’s that had come to light. But Wright magnanimously forgives Obama, underscoring once again that it’s all about playing the political game:
[H]e does what politicians do, so that what happened in Philadelphia where he had to respond to the sound bites he responded as a politician. [Wright’s emphasis.]
Bandit:
Does Wright think he’s helping Obama?
I don’t think so.
 
Written By: Linda Morgan
URL: http://
Interesting tactic this whole "say whatever you have to say" thingie. I wonder if it will work. Has it ever worked before?
Interesting tactic, this whole ’change’ thing. I wonder what that word could possibly mean ...
 
Written By: Achillea
URL: http://
Linda — But Obama’s presidency may be at stake here. Is Wright unaware or uncaring of that? Is Wright cynically calculating that an Obama loss plays better with the narrative of the evil white enemy oppressing blacks?
 
Written By: huxley
URL: http://
I’ve come to think that Wright has more influence with Obama and that Obama is more beholden to Wright than even the "bad for Obama" take on this acknowledges.

That’s the "what’s inside" answer to the "I say what I have to say, he says what he has to say" response by Wright to Moyers.

This is not an uncle-nephew relationship. It goes more seriously along the lines of a father-son relationship.

Joining that Church was not simply an act of Southside Chicago political expediency, otherwise a guy with a presidential candidacy on his mind as early as a decade and a half ago would have opted out of Trinity for a milder, more traditional church even before he ran for the Senate.

This was a commitment in soldiarity with the racist teaching of the Church, something that the slick dude in Obama was confident he could finesse if anyone would be so politically incorrect as to question it.

I also think that Obama’s achilles heel is that he is so immersed, as is Wright, in the Lefty take on "what is acceptable" that he and Wright believed that no one would dare point a finger at the Church. And they were right, for the first year of Obama’s candidacy. Even when the CDs of Wright’s "God Damn America" sermons were proudly on sale from the Church itself. So much for the dogged investigative posturings of Ameican journalism.

So it would turn out that by the time Obama won the nomination, only those poor deluded right-wing extremists would have the politically incorrect gall to say "wait a minute, what’s this presidential candidate doing in this lunatic black power church?"

And it almost worked. Almost.
 
Written By: Martin McPhillips
URL: http://mcphillips.blogspot.com/
huxley:
Is Wright cynically calculating that an Obama loss plays better with the narrative of the evil white enemy oppressing blacks?
No, not that. I think that Wright seethes with vindictive desire to see Obama elected, and I think that he would wield great influence with Obama.

But if it looks like Obama is going to lose, then Obama’s grievance value goes way up. And so the story will be constructed on the Left and in the black power faction that is now becoming apparent within the Left, that mean racist sentiment undid the Obama messiahship. Just as surely as the 200 or so decent veterans of swift boats, rejecting one of their own as a presidential candidate, are now characterized as smear merchants — with all those vets becoming "liars" by daring to say what they knew about and how they regarded John Kerry.

Cf. The four-decade-long elevation of Alger Hiss and the diminishment of his accuser Whittaker Chambers (in some arcane alleyways of the Left this continues even after the disclosure of the Venona decrypts). This peculiar force of denial on the Left also explains how Obama stands triumphant at the annual meeting of an organization founded by a racist eugenicist to solve the "negro problem": Planned Parenthood.
 
Written By: Martin McPhillips
URL: http://mcphillips.blogspot.com/
One is a politician (yes McQ Obama supporters know he’s a politician) apealling for votes, the other is a pastor calling souls to repentence. Seems pretty straightforward.
 
Written By: Retief
URL: http://
Actually, Retief, the "black theology" behind Wright’s (Obama’s) church is more political than it is theological. The Church is saturated with black nationalist, indeed black supremacist "theology," and is maximally politicized.

If one had only God’s glory on one’s mind, the burning crosses at a Klan rally could be mistaken as "calling souls to repentance" too. But let’s not sleight the Klan here on their "community outreach," which I’m sure would measure up to the fine work done by Wright’s church.
 
Written By: Martin McPhillips
URL: http://mcphillips.blogspot.com/
One is a politician (yes McQ Obama supporters know he’s a politician) apealling for votes, the other is a pastor calling souls to repentence. Seems pretty straightforward.
Funny how your filter doesn’t allow you to see nuance when there actually is some and does allow you to find it where there is none.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.QandO.net
Obama supporters know he’s a politician
Retief — There’s being a politician and being a politician, i.e. a hack who will say whatever he needs to in order to be elected.

Are you saying that Obama’s supporters understand that Obama is just another hack practicing the usual okey-doke? Not to mention hoodwinking and bamboozling...
 
Written By: huxley
URL: http://
No, not that. I think that Wright seethes with vindictive desire to see Obama elected, and I think that he would wield great influence with Obama.
Martin — I think so too, but I still don’t understand why Wright would say on television that, essentially, Obama is just another politician saying what he needs to say to get elected.

Doesn’t Wright realize that what he said can hurt Obama?

 
Written By: huxley
URL: http://
And the expected spin/reaction from his defender? Well you’ve done an adequate job of presenting it.


So, I call Obama a politician and suggest that he is saying whatever he has to say to get elected and somehow I’m defending him!?

Well I guess that makes you an Obama defender as well then,McQ.

Also,
Wright’s disclaimer pretty much does that in (as does the NAFTA gaffe, Iraq war waffle and various other little slips).
I don’t know how Wright’s statements are Obama’s disclaimers. Is Wright speaking on Obama’s behalf in some official capacity? You might argue that Wright has more of an experienced position to offer an opinion about Obama, but other than that, it seems to be just that... an opinion.

Pretty similar to yours.

Cheers.
 
Written By: PogueMahone
URL: http://
So, I call Obama a politician and suggest that he is saying whatever he has to say to get elected and somehow I’m defending him!?
Context, Pogue ... this is a pretty miserable attempt to change the subject.

And this?
Well I guess that makes you an Obama defender as well then,McQ.
Yeesh.

Cheers!
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.QandO.net
huxley:
Martin — I think so too, but I still don’t understand why Wright would say on television that, essentially, Obama is just another politician saying what he needs to say to get elected.

Doesn’t Wright realize that what he said can hurt Obama?
You know, I’m willing to take the "black theology" at the core of Wright’s (Obama’s) church at face value.

There have been a lot of comments about Obama’s messianic message.

Well, suppose we stop for just a moment and see the "black theology" as the driver and Obama and Wright believing that Obama is indeed a messiah.

In other words, Wright sees Obama as the black God’s will for [h]is chosen people, to become their leader and their salvation.

So he doesn’t think that he can hurt Obama.

Now that can be pooh-poohed, easily enough, because it sounds like something that would happen within a cult. But what is Trinity Church if not a cult?

And then there’s an objection that this could never get past the common sense test for the electorate, but the common sense test is based on an expectation that others will have common sense, and that no such candidate would be passed onto them without being stamped as outside the boundaries of common sense.

The power of political cults that are in effect political religions (German National Socialism, Italian Fascists, Russian Bolshevism) is that they are sometimes capable of gaining a lot of traction. With elements of all three of the political religions cited imbedded in "black theology," why shouldn’t it be taken at face value?

This is where I think the reporting on this, and the debate about it, has faltered.
 
Written By: Martin McPhillips
URL: http://mcphillips.blogspot.com/
The only context of my first comment, McQ, is that a politician that says whatever he needs to say in order to get elected is nothing new.
Also, that it’s worked before, and it might just work again.

You may find it surprising, but I’m not that far from you on this.

I guess I should start drinking. And so should you.

Sláinte
 
Written By: PogueMahone
URL: http://
huxley:
Obama’s presidency may be at stake here. Is Wright unaware or uncaring of that? Is Wright cynically calculating that an Obama loss plays better with the narrative of the evil white enemy oppressing blacks?
In all honesty, I got nothing, no insight into Wright’s motives or rationale for making statements about Obama to the press that are decidely unhelpful to Obama’s candidacy. Except that I do regard Wright as savvy enough to understand that what he’s saying to Moyers now, like what he said to Kantor more than a year ago,* does Obama no favors.

Of a man — a friend and supporter and member of his church — campaigning for Change We Can Believe In, Wright says, eh, he’s a politician saying what he has to say the way politicians do, you know.

And way ahead of the campaign proper, Wright makes a point of telling the New York Times that he and Obama have already sorted out how political considerations could make it necessary for Obama to eventually downplay their relationship. Not that he’ll be very successful in doing so, seeing as Wright’s announcing the whole arrangement in (the sad remnants of) the Paper of Record.

Wow. Really, given the NYT thing, I just don’t know what to think — except that, surely, if Wright were actually trying to be helpful, he could do a bit better than all this.

*Although the Kantor piece I linked earlier was published on April 30, 2007, Amanda Carpenter’s Townhall article, in which she discusses an angry letter Wright wrote to Kantor, makes clear that Kantor interviewed Wright in early March of last year.
 
Written By: Linda Morgan
URL: http://
The only context of my first comment, McQ, is that a politician that says whatever he needs to say in order to get elected is nothing new.
So then, in fact, your comment was irrelevant cliche and really not directed toward the post or what it implied?

Ok, now that we have that cleared up, have a nice Friday eve.

Cheers.
 
Written By: McQ
URL: http://www.QandO.net
So then, in fact, your comment was irrelevant cliche and really not directed toward the post or what it implied?
What!?

This is the entirety of your post:
Jeremiah Wright points out that the politician Obama will say whatever he has to say to get where he wants to go:

Now, you may interpret his words differently, but I’m now sure how you do so.
I echoed that politicians say whatever they have to say and pointed out that it is nothing new, and it was “irrelevant cliché”!?

And here I thought I was just singing along. You know, sometimes I enjoy a nice choir tune.

Message received…
My mistake.

You enjoy your evening too, McQ.
 
Written By: PogueMahone
URL: http://

In other words, Wright sees Obama as the black God’s will for [h]is chosen people, to become their leader and their salvation.

So he doesn’t think that he can hurt Obama.
Martin — Maybe so. Up at that top I credited Wright with honesty and that perhaps he does feel the truth is on his side. Going farther, I imagine he does believe that God is on his side.

I’m not surprised when people don’t see things as I do, but when they clearly seem to be acting against their own self-interest, I take notice.
 
Written By: huxley
URL: http://
huxley:
Martin — Maybe so.
All that I’m saying is why not take this situation as it presents itself.

Now, there’s a direct, immediate, irrefutable line from Obama to Wright to Cone.

That’s got Obama in the church 20 years and counting. That’s got Wright telling us that if we want to understand his church to read Cone. That’s got Cone espousing a "black theology" that is fully politicized in its most immediate sense and that is black nationalist, black separatist, and black supremacist.

So it’s laid out exactly right there in front of us by the facts and deeds and words of these men.

Why shouldn’t it be taken at face value?

Not at the face value of the dissembling and brush-off tactics that Obama is now using to "get this behind" him, but in the fundamental appearances, the exact thing itself as it presents itself.

Where is there any room — considering what’s at stake — for even a good faith benefit of the doubt? What’s to doubt? That these men weren’t serious about themselves for all these years until this became an issue in Obama’s presidential campaign?

Is it the obligation of even a single American voter to come up with rationalizations to explain this mess to themselves?

I raise that last question because if and when Obama’s candidacy fails, the Left will immediately turn to charges of racism and up the ante of white guilt in order to deny the strangeness of this Obama-Wright-Cone lineage and the political religion it implies.
 
Written By: Martin McPhillips
URL: http://mcphillips.blogspot.com/
Linda — Thanks for the reply. I remain somewhat mystified myself.

Martin — As I say, I see merit in your argument. I’m mainly taken aback that Wright is incautious about playing his hand so openly.

For instance, I’m certain that Bill Ayers believes the Weatherman mythos of America as the Beast and the Monster, but since he’s been flushed into the open he is trying to protect Obama with a lot of doubletalk about nuance, and good and bad decisions.

That is the sort of tapdancing I expected from Wright in the Moyers interview, and to some extent got when he protested about soundbites, but when it came to Obama, Wright, wittingly or not, knifed Obama in the back.
 
Written By: huxley
URL: http://
huxley:
I’m mainly taken aback that Wright is incautious about playing his hand so openly.
...
when it came to Obama, Wright, wittingly or not, knifed Obama in the back.
I don’t think that Wright, from what I’ve seen so far, was truly incautious in the Moyers interview. He’s probably just not educable by campaign toads on how to say absolutely nothing while coming off as a reasonable person.

No, when Wright was truly incautious was when he told Sean Hannity that Hannity needed to read James Cone to understand Trinity.

That was incautious, because with that Wright admitted to the racialist nature of the church. He essentially challenged us to go see it for ourselves in Cone’s racist diatribes dressed up as "theology."

Which leads me to the conclusion that Wright is submerged in the Leftworld, and that Obama has about one nostril above the surface, because, as I said, I think that they believed that these very things, that they proclaim themselves to be, are out of bounds. As if, "No, you can’t go there, that’s only for us. You’re a racist if you pay attention to our racism."

But Wright is certainly not the only loose cannon in the Obama campaign. Obama himself and his wife are also loose cannons.

Hell, if I were Obama I’d worry more about Michelle than I would about Wright. I think I’d try Mr. Rochester’s (Jane Eyre) strategy with a wife like that.
 
Written By: Martin McPhillips
URL: http://mcphillips.blogspot.com/
Agreed. To varying degrees, Wright, Obama, his wife and members of the campaign, are tone-deaf to how hard-left and anti-American they sound to Americans in the center and to the right.

I don’t believe the majority of Americans want to elect a president like Obama. So, for those opposed to Obama, the most straightforward path to victory is simply to expose Obama in his milieu an item at a time.

Obama and his supporters will continue to shriek that it’s not fair, that it’s guilt by association, and so forth. But Obama intentionally chose those association, persevered in them and at times unwittingly voices their beliefs.
 
Written By: huxley
URL: http://
I’ll add to that the unconscionable lack of scrutiny and vetting of Obama both within the Democratic Party and the national media and commentariat.

As a for instance, just look at how foolish the Kennedy’s were — people who would probably send a team of private investigators to look into their electrician if he got on their bad side — falling all over Obama and bestowing the crown of Camelot on him.

And that’s just at the fluff end of it.

Plus, you have the Clintons, who can’t very well go too far into anyone’s background (they in fact do have cheesy investigators but that’s to keep their own "mistakes" in line) being in the uncomfortable position of running against the weird culture of soutside Chicago.

The whole thing is a bad drama about political depravity.

No theatre-goer would find the plot plausible. That’s probably why people are still blinking at the whole thing in disbelief.
 
Written By: Martin McPhillips
URL: http://mcphillips.blogspot.com/
I think you guys are just overthinking it.

Maybe Wright, who is not a politician by his own admission, just values truth (or Truth, as he probably sees it) above anything that could be gained by lieing either directly or by omission. He could be just telling it like he sees it and letting the fallout land where it may because he feels G_d would want him to do that. Much stranger things have happened.

Also, you (and Obama, apparently) may be misinterpreting the statement Wright made in the earlier article about Obama distancing himself when you interpret it as approval or strategizing. Maybe it was a simple warning. That interpretation certainly fits into what little I know about Black Liberation Theology. After all, how could a black man possibly get ahead through the political process in an AmeriKKKa run by white devils dedicated to keeping him down without selling off part of his soul in the process? And the concept is certainly not unknown to Christianity ("I tell you the truth," Jesus answered, "this very night, before the rooster crows, you will disown me three times." Matthew 26:33-35).
 
Written By: Terry
URL: http://

 
Add Your Comment
  NOTICE: While we don't wish to censor your thoughts, we do blacklist certain terms of profanity or obscenity. This is not to muzzle you, but to ensure that the blog remains work-safe for our readers. If you wish to use profanity, simply insert asterisks (*) where the vowels usually go. Your meaning will still be clear, but our readers will be able to view the blog without worrying that content monitoring will get them in trouble when reading it.
Comments for this entry are closed.
Name:
Email:
URL:
HTML Tools:
Bold Italic Blockquote Hyperlink
Comment:
   
 
Vicious Capitalism

Divider

Buy Dale's Book!
Slackernomics by Dale Franks

Divider

Divider