1. Skip to navigation
  2. Skip to content
  3. Skip to secondary-content




We Have A Dream

By: Phil Tajitsu Nash, Mar 24, 2008
Tags: National, Washington Journal |

Barack Obama’s presidential campaign has been historic from the start.  Building on the candidacies of Jesse Jackson and other African American candidates, he has gone further than any previous non-white campaigner. 

As someone who has been involved in both political campaigns and Asian American studies for many years, I had always believed that an Asian Pacific American would be the first minority to win the White House. The black-white polarization that has damaged racial discourse in this country cannot be easily debunked, unless someone has standing to speak with knowledge and compassion about both the white and black positions on race.

APAs, who benefit from a “model minority” stereotype and labor under a “perpetual foreigner” stereotype, occupy that middle space between back and white. As a multiracial person, however, Sen. Obama also occupies that middle space, and is able to reflect upon his life in the white, black and APA communities as well (he grew up in Asia and Hawai‘i).

Because of his multiracial and multicultural background, the media does a disservice to Obama and to our racial discourse by referring to him as a “black candidate.”  While anyone with one drop of non-European blood was historically categorized as “non-white” in this country, I can attest that the world of the multiracial is very different from the world of someone whose parents are both from one racial background.

For example, I have fond memories of growing up with Nash relatives who have blue eyes and reddish-blond hair. I also have fond memories of growing up with Tajitsu relatives who looked Japanese American.

When I helped to organize the first Third World Law Student conference at Columbia Law School in 1981, I was called aside by two African American students who wondered why a middle-aged white man in a business suit was sitting in the front row as the opening plenary session was about to begin. Was he a troublemaker?

No, I said, it was my dad, who had marched with Dr. King and who had been a big supporter of civil rights all his life.

Whether or not we support Sen. Obama in his bid for the White House, all APAs owe him an enormous debt of gratitude for his courageous decision to go beyond salvaging his own candidacy and raising issues of race that have plagued our nation since its founding. Instead of distancing himself from his pastor and the black community, he courageously fought back against a corporate media that demands that minorities denounce other minorities for racist statements, while never attacking the unfair white privilege that continues to pervade this society.

Even when, as in this case, the statements made by Obama’s pastor did, indeed, deserve to be denounced, Obama denounced the statements, but then made it clear that both whites and blacks have grievances that deserve to be aired.

The unanimous verdict of all of the APA law professors and historians I queried was that Sen. Obama, himself a former professor of race and the law at the University of Chicago Law School, had brought a more nuanced history and context to our national discourse on race than any speaker in recent memory. Indeed, Obama’s speech on March 18 (the full text and video are on the Obama site: my.barackobama.com/page/content/hisownwords) brought comparisons to speeches by Dr. King, Lincoln and other historic figures.

Sen. Obama’s speech was unique for its willingness to show that each of us is struggling with racism, sexism, homophobia and other forms of prejudice that shaped our lives in this imperfect culture. Each of us has gotten wet swimming in this ocean of –isms, but each of us is deserving of compassion as we struggle to reduce the fear and hatred that infects each of us and the world that surrounds us.

Our union is not perfect, but can be perfected. Obama reminded us that his world had been shaped as much by the segregation suffered by his pastor in the 1950s, as the fear of black men felt by Obama’s own beloved white grandmother.

Sen. Obama has stated repeatedly throughout the campaign that electing one person will not change things, but encouraging people all across the country to stand up and take charge of their own lives will, indeed, make a substantive change.

While Dr. King inspired us in 1963 by saying, “I have a dream,” Barack Obama has taken us to the next mountaintop by promoting a new, shared vision: We all have a dream.

Comments

  1. Anyone who is contemplating voting for or supporting Barack Obama has a duty to check out this web site.

    http://obamatruth.org/

    –JanetP on Mar 24, 2008

  2. Instead of distancing himself from his pastor and the black community, he courageously fought back against a corporate media that demands that minorities denounce other minorities for racist statements, while never attacking the unfair white privilege that continues to pervade this society.

    Mr. Nash: I find it rather hypocritical of you that you should complain about Obama having to repudiate Farakahn, when you yourself expect McCain to repudiate what others have viscously said about Obama (talk show host).
    Mr. Nash are you saying that Obama should not have to denouce anti-Semitism??????

    Please respond to this

    –reader on Mar 24, 2008

  3. Oh, Mr. Nash: while were at it; please explain to everyone why Obama did so much better among whites than Asian-Americans in the California and New Jersey Primary?
    Thanks

    –reader on Mar 24, 2008

  4. Dear Reader,

    Thank you for your comment. Anti-semitism, like all forms of bigotry, must be denounced whenever it arises. What I object to is the hypocrisy of white media elites demanding that minority leaders denounce other minority leaders for statements, when anti-semitic and racist statements made by white candidates and politicians receives no comparable treatment.

    Indeed, it was a rare event when Sen. Trent Lott was repudiated for celebrating the racist heritage of Sen. Strom Thurman.

    Thanks again for your comment.

    Phil

    –Phil Nash on Mar 24, 2008

  5. The cat is out of the bag, and we are now seeing the real soul of Obama being revealed by the Rev. Jeremiah Wright who, by the way, would have likely ended up in the Obama cabinet at the White House were Obama to be elected.

    –Ashila on Mar 24, 2008

  6. Phil, you should realize anyone who accepts Obama’s non-apology accepts that the next president of the United States had his beliefs formed by the theory of Black Liberation Theology, which completely explains and justifies Wright’s wrantings, and that he will continue to worship according to these beliefs as president. This is far scarier than if Obama had simply continued his childhood faith of his fathers as an orthodox muslim, and far more divisive than any current Mormon policy. Such support is even more remarkable than the unity of black support for OJ’s innocence, Obama has united Asians and whites into believing it is acceptable to attend a church that is based on the bedrock belief that rich whites (and some Asians) hate poor blacks (and some Asians). This is simply disgusting, and will soon reflect just as badly on his supporters as on Obama himself. In the eyes of Afrocentrism, Asians alternative between victims of Hiroshima, and oppressors such as corner grocers. We Asians need to be free of this crazy model of dividing humanity into “good” races and “bad races” or we’ll get fire from both sides.

    –ArthurHu on Mar 24, 2008

  7. Dear reader, Ashila and Arthur,

    Thanks for your comments. I am sorry that you all continue to miss the point about Obama’s speech. I am a reporter, and not advocating for any one candidate, but I and every APA history and law scholar I queried can see the historic importance of Obama’s speech. The questions you all are posing about APA votes in California and potential members of an Obama cabinet are comparable to people questioning Dr. King’s ties to various supporters after he has finished his “I have a Dream” speech.

    As for Arthur’s complete misunderstanding of Obama’s speech and perpetuation of misleading statements and outright distortions, I will leave it to fair-minded readers to go to the Obama website and read about Obama’s history and positions directly.

    Thank you all for your comments.

    Phil

    –Phil Nash on Mar 24, 2008

  8. Folks:
    Even though both Phil and his dad are ethically and morally above this dirty fray, and may be guilty only of earnestness, I urge all hands to check, besides “reader’s” links, some eyebrow-raising, mind-blowing?, nah, online pieces today, to wit:
    1: Jeffrey St. Clair’s Counterpunch piece that proclaims Billary has successfully torpedoed Obama in favor of McCain as a 2012 sitting-duck opponent for the Oval Office of blue-dress repute.
    2: Paul Craig Douglases’ Info Clearing House piece on “the next 9-11″ vis-a-vis the Litvinenko murder that involved Plutonium-210?
    3: Another ICH item that harks back to the admitted CIA-masterminded ‘59 Tibetan “uprising” for today’s reprise.
    Maybe Art Hu “knows” something or someone along the lines of Nguyen Cao-ky links and relationships.
    But us poor long-time-Californee coolies are still plodding along without a clue as to the “real” realities of hardball politics and hardnosed practitioners.
    As a self-professed and near lifelong, too long you say?, halfhearted cynic who hoped for and rooted for “the good guys,” are there any out there?, I would also like to lay out the claim and belief that:
    1: an anti-theoneocon and anti-Bushitters is PRO-America;
    2: anti-neo-Zionism and anti-AIPAC is NOT anti-Semitism.
    3: being pro-”human rights” in Tibet or anywhere else should also include the rights of Palestinians.
    And, finally, whereas all this yakking about bloc votes and ingroups and outgroups of subgroups rules the laughing and laughable airwaves of this continent, it is moot, in the sense that it is pointless.
    The “bad guys” continue their balkanizing efforts, with too much success in my view, and the balkanized continue to buy the rotted goods, like “cheap” and “tainted” and even “poisoned” goods, including today’s Latin canteloupes. Could it be, rather, the local groundwaters our infrastructures fail to police?
    So, whomsoever is (s)elected come November, we should each and every one of us beware the underlying facts and implications.
    Who’s getting paid? Who’s paying (not a single=payer healthcare module?), and WHY?
    Is the world the private playground and fiefdom of the scions of the Club of Rome? The Bilderbergans? Or, lawsy, massa, “the Rockefellers”?
    Frank Eng
    P.S.: Nancy, why zre you in Dhar(a)msala when you should be in D.C. gavelling the full-House hearings on long-overdue impeachment(s)? Hmmm? And watch out for that Sheehan gal, she’s a survivor.

    –Frank Eng on Mar 24, 2008

  9. Obama’s speech is one of the coldest political exploitation I have ever heard: attacking his own grandmother by comparing her private fear of black men to his pastor (Wright)’s public anti-american, racism vitriol. This guy would say anything to get ahead.

    –Mike Ip on Mar 25, 2008

  10. You know a person by the company he/she keeps. Obama has kept this anti-American, racist for 20 years as his pastor and “inspirational mentor” (Obama’s own word)

    –Julie Wong on Mar 25, 2008

  11. “For all the wonderful rhetoric and tantalizing promise of Obama and his speech, there’s not much that is actually new here. Obama’s speech was largely a restatement of Jeremiah Wright’s indictment of America, delivered in University of Chicago parlance instead of South Side Chicago diatribe”.

    –Barb Nagakawa on Mar 25, 2008

  12. Phil, my Wright column is in the pipeline. In the meantime, Obama’s website is flat out misleading when it states he was never muslim and never prayed as his dad told his schools he was muslim, and took him to the mosque to pray. Maybe Obama was just sleeping through the complete sermons, they’re up on YouTube posted by the Trinity Church, and if you cut out the anti-white, anti-American and all-oppression-all-the-time stuff, there is some generic christian stuff you could sleep to from Wright, but I challenge you look up James Cone and Dwight Hopkins and state that you fully approve of black liberation theology as the religion of a person you would seriously consider voting for president, because I have no qualms stating that’s definitely a deal-breaker for me, where I would not mind either an orthodox muslim or a mormon or a creationist. What scares me is that nearly half the country doesn’t mind and believes that Obama doesn’t believe in, or they agree with black theology.

    –ArthurHu on Mar 25, 2008

  13. Obama can condemn Wright all he wants. If he sticks with the church that Wright built on the theory of James Cone, then Obama and his supporters are sticking with this:

    The black racist God of Black Liberation Theology
    http://www.amnation.com/vfr/archives/010141.html

    James Cone, the pioneer of black liberation theology, is a much-admired figure at Trinity. Cone told me that when he’s asked where his theology is institutionally embodied, he always mentions Trinity

    Black theology refuses to accept a God who is not identified totally with the goals of the black community. If God is not for us and against white people, then he is a murderer, and we had better kill him. The task of black theology is to kill Gods who do not belong to the black community … Black theology will accept only the love of God which participates in the destruction of the white enemy. What we need is the divine love as expressed in Black Power, which is the power of black people to destroy their oppressors here and now by any means at their disposal. Unless God is participating in this holy activity, we must reject his love.
    (Quoted in William R Jones, “Divine Racism: The Unacknowledged Threshold Issue for Black Theology”, in African-American Religious Thought: An Anthology, ed Cornel West and Eddie Glaube.)

    –ArthurHu on Mar 25, 2008

  14. Obama’s speech did little to address his strange tolerance for the anti-Americanism of his spiritual mentor

    –DongFang on Mar 25, 2008

  15. Obama attempted to explain Wright’s anger as typical of the civil rights generation, with its “memories of humiliation and doubt and fear.” But Wright’s problem is exactly the opposite: He ignored the message of Martin Luther King Jr. and introduced a new generation to the politics of hatred.

    –Natasha on Mar 25, 2008

  16. Obama tried to explain and give excuses to the anti-american vitriol (God Damn America???) of his pastor of 20 years. I can tell you: there is no excuse whatsoever to this type of remarks!!!

    –KatieHsie on Mar 25, 2008

  17. If Hillary’s pastor had made the kind of comments about America or about African Americans that Obama’s pastor made about America and whites, her campaign would be doomed even if she left that church and totally disavowed that pastor. I do not understand the double standard. Obama has neither left his church nor totally disavowed his pastor.

    –Mary Ann Greenberg on Mar 25, 2008

  18. It’s NOT the colour people object to, it’s what Obama does, chosing to be member of a separatist “blacks only” church, being inspired by a racist biggoted pastor for example. HOW CAN ANYOONE VOTE FOR SUCH A PERSON TO BE PRESIDENT OF A MULTICULTURAL, MULTIRACIAL AMERIA?

    Give us any time COLIN POWELL, or BILL COSBY for example… wonderful talented people, with dignity and pride, people who are not racists, and are proud Americans, people who salute the flag.

    –Patrick on Mar 25, 2008

  19. It’s not just the racism, it’s the unpatriotic words that a future Commander in Chief shouldn’t tolerate from his pastor: God Damn America! How can he expect his troop’s respect when his preacher and wife (“For the first time in my adult lifetime, I am really proud of my country”) are espousing the opposite. Talk about being a hypocrite!

    –4truth on Mar 25, 2008

  20. If Obama did NOT support his “former pastor’s” words, why in the world would he indoctrinate his children by exposing them to this venemous,racist rhetoric spewed forth on any given Sunday?!

    –Obamania on Mar 25, 2008

  21. The Obama Crash and Burn: If he acts as if the Wright controversy is behind him, it’s over for Obama.

    –JeanWu on Mar 25, 2008

  22. I’m pretty shocked by the comments here. I share your dream, Phil. I was deeply moved by Senator Obama’s words and thought his speech showed profound leadership in a moment of crisis. While it might not be evidenced by the comments above, I have seen in the past week an invitation to honest discussion about race in other forums.

    To condemn the sin and not the sinner is a basic Christian teaching.

    We miss an opportunity to really consider what lies at the root of the anger and division that rises up when race is discussed, when we choose simply to tune out and point fingers.

    Thank you, Phil, for joining your voice in this discussion. Thank you, Senator Obama, for showing us a way forward.

    –Angelica Jongco on Mar 25, 2008

  23. Hey, Art:
    Did you dig up all that “black theology” stuff on your own? Or are your ghostwriters back?
    By the way. beyond p0liticking, can there be a calm, logical, reasoned “discussion” herein?
    Short answer: NO.
    And please remember that malingerer presidents, and veeps?, who constantly invoke “the Flag,” are worthy of salutes with our “third fingers.”
    So, the Swiftboaters are out in force and in their “patriotic” glory.
    Cherchez the money, honey.
    Frank Eng
    P.S.: Did either Bush OR Cheney ever post THEIR financial records?
    And this isn’t about religion or race, it’s about “power,” naked and ruthless, domestically as well as abroad.

    –Frank Eng on Mar 26, 2008

  24. Dear Readers,

    Thanks for your comments. While I am not supporting any candidate, I would like to clear up some misperceptions I am reading in your comments:

    * Mike – I believe you have misread the comment about his grandmother. Please listen to or read the entire speech at http://my.barackobama.com/page/content/hisownwords to hear the context. It is not an exploitation of his grandmother to note that she, like all of us, has been raised in a culture where unfair white privilege is taken as a norm, unless we consciously fight back against it in our thoughts and actions.

    * Julie – Obama is a complex person, with many friends and influences on his life (as with any of us). His speech is historic because it calls for nuance and understanding. Single-issue politics and focusing on single influences on his life do not help our discourse on the presidential campaign or any other issue, in my opinion. Here is an interesting article that explores how politicians have discussed race over the last few decades: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/23/weekinreview/23scott.html?_r=1&pagewanted=print&oref=slogin

    * Barb – You are entitled to your opinion, but none of the Asian American Studies professors I queried would agree with you. Here is an interesting opinion by Republican commentator John Dean - http://www.commondreams.org/archive/2008/03/21/7814/

    * Arthur – Black Liberation Theology is complex, and I am not an expert on it. However, I and many scholars would disagree with the way you have characterized it. For more information, I encourage you and other readers to see sources such as http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_theology . Note also that “Some scholars of black theology have noted that these quotes do not neccesarily represent black theology as it is currently practiced or the views of people like Wright who practice it. Cone has responded to the controversy by noting that he was generally writing about white churches that did nothing to oppose slavery and segregation and not about white people as individuals.” http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Cone_%28theologian%29

    * DongFang – I would disagree with your sentiment that Obama’s speech did little to address Pastor Wright. But you are entitled to your opinion.

    * Natasha – Obama has repudiated part of Wright’s message but not repudiated the man. In the process, he has not thrown a man, a church and a movement under the bus, which many less courageous and visionary politicians would have done (Bill Clinton’s distancing himself from his Yale Law School classmate and Justice Department appointee Lani Guinier in the face of right wing assaults comes to mind as a bad example of this; see http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lani_Guinier). Obama reminds us that each of us is flawed and shaped by our world, and each of us can be an agent to change it. That is what I find so refreshing about his message.

    KatieHsie – You are entitled to your opinion, but I did not see excuse-making in this speech. Also, part of his message is that we must get away from the fixation on guilt by association and look to more nuanced discussions of important issues such as the war and the economy. Here is an interesting take on the politics of denouncing and renouncing: http://fish.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/03/23/denouncing-and-renouncing/index.html

    Mary Ann – I disagree with your comment about Hillary’s church connections. In fact, reports have surfaced about the nature of her religious connections, and she is still is a candidate. See, for example, http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080331/ehrenreich

    Patrick – Your characterization of Obama’s church as “Blacks only” reminded me about that quote that Sunday morning is indeed the most segregated time in America. The white churches have perpetuated segregation, and some have even benefitted from slavery (see James Forman’s speech to the Riverside Church at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Forman. Blacks and other minorities sometimes have retreated to their churches as safe havens from the racism they have to endure every day in a society that privileges whites. A good starting place for further research into the African American church can be found at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_church

    4truth – “God damn America” in the context of the Black church can be read as “God damn the intolerance that America perpetuates against Black people every day.” Denouncing the reality of white suprematism is different from hating white people or denouncing a country that African Americans have fought and died for all out of proportion to their numbers in this society. No one, including myself, wants a president who does not love America, but let’s be a little more nuanced in our ideas of what is “patriotism” and why certain words are being amplified in the media and not others.

    Obamania – the African American church, like the Japanese American church my family attended in New York and many other minority churches, is a cultural center, refuge, and extended family that is more than a place to listen to any one pastor. Exposing his children to those influences would probably be part of the calculus.

    JeanWu – I hope that the Wright controversy is behind us and that we can return to discussions of the war, the economy and other issues that affect all of us every day. This type of hyper focus on any one issue (including “wedge” issues deliberately designed to inflame the passions and stop critical thinking, such as gay marriage), and the horse race aspect of politics, make it harder to focus on issues that transcend the candidacy of Obama or any other candidate anywhere on the ticket.

    Angelica – thanks for your comment.

    Thanks again, everyone, for participating in this dialogue. By sharing your thoughts, and participating in the public sphere in this critical election, you are the true heroes of democracy. Now get out there and do some work for whichever candidates you support!

    Phil

    –Phil Nash on Mar 26, 2008

  25. Phil, take another look at the wikipedia article because you missed the updated I added yesterday. Cone has wacko beliefs that I certainly deplore. Hopefully you are honest enough to deplore mixing Marx with Jesus and to retool Christianity against the “white enemy”. Google “cone wright trinity” and you’ll find that Cone cites Wright’s Trinity church as the first example of his warped belief system in practice. Wright built that church largely by himself with Cone’s ideology as its bedrock foundation, and that’s Barack’s faith. I just hear Hugh Hewitt broadcast Barack’s first book where he first hear’s Wright insprirational “audacity” speech. Starts ok, then goes into… Hiroshima and more black people in Sharpesville being victimized by whites. Obama has the nerve to say he’s never heard Wright hate whites, but he’s Wright spout about whites hating blacks that sounds like last week’s YouTube clips from day one. You can only dwell so much on white hatred without inflaming black hatred. When Obama backs the church and Wright, it comes from Cone and black theology. It’s certainly his right to preach and belief such stuff, but don’t expect us to support him as president, and I expect YOU and other Obama “supporters” to hold him accountable by rejecting such radical beliefs as NOT ACCEPTABLE IN PUBLIC DISCOURSE. You can’t say “why I hate xyz race on Asian Week, and you shouldn’t do so in church either. Phil, are you willing to take such a stand by condemning rather than lionizing Obama’s sorry mess of a speech that would make Lincoln and MLK roll their eyes in disgust? What has motivated me and still does is the concept that it is not only wrong to hate and hurt black people because of their race, but it is ALSO wrong to hurt and hate ANY people for the same reason. This is where Wright is Wrong.

    … Black Liberation Theology is complex, and I am not an expert on it. However, I and many scholars would disagree with the way you have characterized it. For more information, I encourage you and other readers to see sources such as http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_theology . ….do not neccesarily represent black theology as it is currently practiced or the views of people like Wright who practice it.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Cone_%28theologian%29

    –ArthurHu on Mar 26, 2008

  26. Carrie Smith Black US citizen. Age: 61. It is so good to hear the words of someone else on the goodness or not of the Very Rev. Wright. Please I employ you to listen to the sermon. It is on the web. After listening to the sermon -all of it.
    After listening, if you are a thinking, breathing human, you will learn that the words you saw on tv, by themselves were mean and cold, were not so. I’m sure if I visited your church, you would all be “nice” to me…

    –Carrie Smith on Mar 26, 2008

  27. Dear Arthur,

    Thanks for your thoughtful reply. Unfortunately, I think we still have some disagreements here. Black churches, from what I understand, provide a place where African Americans can attack white racism, without being against whites as people. People who are treated as inferior by a white supremacist society have to have a safety valve to let out the rage they feel, because they cannot take it out on the whites they see every day as co-workers, employers, and clients. While we should never accept intolerance addressed against any group, I believe that we should work together across group divides to address the systemic issues that create and perpetuate unfairness.

    The best place to start, on a micro level, would be for every reader to look at his or her own place of work and worship and see if there are barriers to entry or advancement that are holding back minorities, women or others because of an unfair privileging of any group. Yes, I agree that we should reject Wright when he demonizes or creates intolerance, but we should not reject the many good things that he and his church and Black churches in general have done to keep the African American community going in the face of centuries of unfair white privilege (which I define as any presumption in favor of someone, whether explicit or implicit, that does not flow in a similar fashion to non-whites).

    We need more, not less, public discourse about race and racism in this society, and when Wright or Obama say there is a problem then they should not be shut down for saying that. We cannot end unfair white privilege unless we acknowledge that it exists and is helping whites get ahead of minorities every day of their lives until we change the system. The line that cannot be crossed, which Pastor Wright did, is to unfairly demonize people for characteristics they cannot change. We can hate a system of racial privileging and not hate those who benefit from it.

    Thanks again, Arthur, for participating in this dialog.

    Phil

    –Phil Nash on Mar 26, 2008

  28. The biggest comedy is that Obama DEMANDED Don Imus be fired on the spot for ONE racist comment.

    –WeiBay on Mar 26, 2008

  29. Barack Obama had been a presidential candidate for more than a year before he outright repudiated his long-time pastor for racially charged, anti-U.S. sermons. But when talk show host Don Imus was in hot water 11 months ago for racially insensitive comments, Obama was the first candidate to call for his firing.

    –Lisa on Mar 26, 2008

  30. Actions speak louder than words! He may denounce Rev. White’s comments yet he chose to go to that same church for 20 years, the church that prides itself on Mainly Black and proud of it on its sign outside. He spoke that sunday is the most segregated Day of the week and yet he made a choice to segregate himself. The man is a great speaker who will say anything to get elected.

    –Bob on Mar 26, 2008

  31. If a white candidate attended a church where anti-black statements were uttered, he’d be crucified.

    A black candidate attends a church where anti-semitic comments and a notorious anti-semitic black leader are honored and cheered, and he gets to be called “brave” and “honest.”

    Well, I guess there still is a double standard, and in this case, it favors Obama.

    –Mike Kansas on Mar 26, 2008

  32. would you sit in a church for 20 years and disagree with what your pastor preached? I think not.His church breeds hate.No different than the terrorist we fight.We wont need to fight them in another country,we will only have to look to the oval office.

    –Samantha on Mar 26, 2008

  33. Ironically, he makes statements that conflict with his book! Where is the real Obama? He also demonstrates a total lack of understanding how competitive business operates based on his comments regarding closed mills. We are expected to assume that a twenty year association with Reverend Wright doesn’t give tacit approval to the Reverend’s essentially racist comments.

    –Rosie on Mar 26, 2008

  34. You know how in real estate its …… location, location, location? Well in politics its….judgment, judgment, judgment. Mr. Obama get a big fat “F” for a failure in judgment for sitting, year after year, under his Pastor’s venomous racial hatred, bigotry and unpatriotic trashing our country. No amount of distancing from words will ever redeem a failure in judgment.

    –Kim on Mar 26, 2008

  35. The problem isn’t merely “white resentment,” as Obama sees it. He failed to address the VERY REAL problem of “black racism” — exemplified by his minister. By Obama’s logic, we should forgive black racists who are otherwise good people. So I guess he also believes we should forgive white racists who are otherwise good people? I didn’t buy that argument about Jesse Helms, so I also don’t buy it for Obama’s minister! Obama still has a lot of thinking to do about how HE feels about racial divisions in this country if he doesn’t see black racists and white racists in the same way.

    –LuoWei on Mar 26, 2008

  36. Time for Obama to step down. Hillary is now the only chance the Democrats have to win in November.

    –Catherine on Mar 26, 2008

  37. In a country where racism is now the worst sin possible, it would be better to have caught Obama in a porn movie then to catch him with the hateful Rev. Jeremiah Wright. A liberal who hates America in any color skin is still a liberal that HATES America.

    –Willie on Mar 26, 2008

  38. Your either part of the solution or part of the problem. To sit and listen to such hate and false statement for 20 years, while the congregation soaks it up, shows poor judgement. Mr Obama, you are part of the problem.

    –HydePark1 on Mar 26, 2008

  39. Condemn Wright and his supporters! Obama can’t have both ways after 20 years of association with Wright.

    We may as well welcome anyone who attended OBL’s hate speech.

    Why extend a double standard to Obama?

    –SoCa123 on Mar 26, 2008

  40. Barak is not the agent of racial progress and change like he says, he is the product of it. Oprah Winfrey attended the same church years ago and walked out after she heard the reverands hate speech. Thats called good judgement. Barak endorsed the hate by staying for 20 years. His wife’s comments only confirm the contempt the Obamas have for this great country.

    –JunutaW on Mar 26, 2008

  41. What ever happens, Obama is a lost ticket now. More the scrutiny, more trouble in fall.
    Comment by Jon - March 25, 2008 at 8:08 am

    –Jon on Mar 26, 2008

  42. The fact that liberals support these kind of people shows how completely lost they really are. They wander in a haze of their own gasses.

    –Lost on Mar 26, 2008

  43. With this black cloud of the Rev.Wright/20 year close relationship (almost like an uncle) mentor and spiritual advisor to Obama and the lack of his denounciation of this anti-American racist fanatic leads me to believe that they (obama & Wright) are of one mind. If Nancy Pelosi persuade the superdelegates to back Obama, who unelectable, she would be giving the presidentcy to McCain. I was born an American before I was a democrate. If you want to vote anti-American vote for Barack Obama and thats the bottom line.

    –Geri on Mar 26, 2008

  44. Why is Obama continuing to get a free ride from media scrutiny? Why is the media not touching Obama’s link with Blackwater via John Brennan? Surely people don’t really believe there’s nothing going on behind closed doors with that hook up?

    –Future on Mar 26, 2008

  45. How has Obama “united” anyone? How does his association with Wright and his comments about “typical white person” unite anyone? About the only uniting it has done is unite black churches into spreading more of the “down with the white man” sermons. That is uniting people??? Claiming whites just don’t understand the black community is uniting?? Obama made race an issue. If Obama is going to claim there is a large divide between the black and white communities, how is he explaining the whites who have voted for him so far? Is Obama claiming that just those whites who are sympathetic to the plight of the black man are voting for him? If Obama is the uniter as he claims he is, why are there so many blacks still willing and wanting to vote for Hillary? Obama’s rhetoric makes a nice soundbite, but it appears to lack in substance.

    –Typical White Person on Mar 26, 2008

  46. THE real Name Of OBAMA’S Church Is,…AFROCENTRIC TRINITY–UNITED CURCH OF CHRIST,…And is “MOTTO” is: UNASHAMEDLY “BLACK”…AND UNAPOLOGETICALLY–CHRISTIAN,..Does THAT,… TELLS YOU ANITHYNG,!!!!!!!!!

    –cubano on Mar 26, 2008

  47. As a United States Senator, Obama did the Renzko house deal, while in office (huge red flag), lied about the amount of contributions from Renzko (red flag). What else don’t we know about Renzko? He lied on the Friday after the Wright story broke (huge red flag), never addressed the lie or the hate and only used race when he needed it because he risked black ministers alienating the black vote if he didn’t save Wright. Way too many red flags. I do not want someone for president that thinks it is acceptable for a minister to say “G** D*** America”!!! I can assure the Democratic Party that if this man is the nominee, we loose. If American people knew then what we found out about Obama after Texas and Ohio….he would not be where he is!!

    –kcjc on Mar 26, 2008

  48. Er, stutter stop here.
    Billary AND Nancy, apparently, both prefer to beard the bilious cadres in their bullyings of “Tibetans” rather than confront the “elephant” in their own dressing rooms, namely, and to wit, Bush and the duck hunter whose response to his betters is “So . . . ?”
    Enfin, “in the end”?, come November, we shall see what we shall see.
    Will the fearful and the hateful, literally, “win”?
    Or will the Joe Blows amongst us finally decipher the deception that is the raison-d’etre of the ruling oligarchs of this plundered and proselytized land?
    Let the political piranha, yeah, you, Art Hu, swarm.
    Let the unshrived and the unwashed gather.
    Let the promulgaters, the prevaricaters, the proselyters of the UNtruth assemble.
    They canNOT alter the facts of life AND politics, which is to say, the commonplace, everyday, “working” (hu)man knows in his/her heart and gut the obvious:
    life and living are NOT “fair” or remotely “just,” but, at the very least, “we” can toss the “lie” right back into their faces, the “truth” to what is perceived as “power,” poor fools.
    The petit piranha and the swaggering Swiftboaters alike are misinformed about their opponents/prey. The meek may never “inherit,” but neither shall the self-anointed, the “chosen,” AND the “movers-and-shakers.”
    Frank Eng

    –Frank Eng on Mar 26, 2008

  49. Oy vey’st mir.
    Again and yet.
    The cart cometh before ye horse, nag that it was and is.
    But, the first half ot THE above rant had to do with today’s McCain acknowledgment that hegemonistic Yankee (AIPAC?) hubris may well need allies.
    Plus the Wall St. Journal’s poll that had Billary/Obama neck-and-neck amongst “Democrats,” even as Obama trumps Billary vis-a-vis McCain.
    The proliferation herein and hereunder of Obamanators would appear to be concerns about how the APA minority will vote come November.
    Well, conservative as most Asians are, eager for profit as well as position, just like their opposites in every race and creed and “color,” mayhap “most” will perceive and understand the obvious: the Establishment will never accept what Phil Nash correctly identifies as the perennial and millennial “alien,” those of “color,” including “black,” “brown,” “red,” AND, pardon the pejorative inherent, “yellow.”
    I judge the odds according to THEIR fears and injunctions.
    Wow! A mixed-race President who doesn’t play golf?
    Frank Eng

    –Frank Eng on Mar 26, 2008

  50. Words From Pastor Wright’s Mentor, Rev. Martin E. Marty

    Here are a few words from a white minister who has known Rev. Wright since his school days at the University of Chicago Divinity School and who has actually worshipped at Trinity. You can find this article, and others by supporters of Trinity and Rev. Wright, at http://truthabouttrinity.blogspot.com/

    Through the decades, the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. has called me teacher, reminding me of the years when he earned a master’s degree in theology and ministry at the University of Chicago ­ and friend. My wife and I and our guests have worshiped at Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago, where he recently completed a 36-year ministry.

    Images of Wright’s strident sermons, and his anger at the treatment of black people in the United States, appear constantly on the Internet and cable television, part of the latest controversy in our political-campaign season. His critics call Wright anti-American. Critics of his critics charge that the clips we hear and see have been taken out of context. But it is not the context of particular sermons that the public needs, as that of Trinity church, and, above all, its pastor.

    In the early 1960s, at a time when many young people were being radicalized by the Vietnam War, Wright left college and volunteered to join the United States Marine Corps. After three years as a marine, he chose to serve three more as a naval medical technician, during which time he received several White House commendations. He came to Chicago to study not long after Martin Luther King Jr.’s murder in 1968, the U.S. bombing campaign in Cambodia in 1969, and the shooting of students at Kent State University in 1970.

    Wright, like the gifted cohort of his fellow black students, was not content to blend into the academic woodwork. Then the associate dean of the Divinity School, I was informally delegated to talk to the black caucus. We learned that what Wright and his peers wanted was the intense academic and practical preparation for vocations that would make a difference, whether they chose to pursue a Ph.D. or the pastorate. Chicago’s Divinity School focuses on what it calls “public ministry,” which includes both conventional pastoral roles and carrying the message and work of the church to the public arena. Wright has since picked up numerous honorary doctorates, and served as an adjunct faculty member at several seminaries. But after divinity school, he accepted a call to serve then-struggling Trinity.

    Trinity focuses on biblical teaching and preaching. It is a church where music stuns and uplifts, a church given to hospitality and promoting physical and spiritual healing, devoted to education, active in Chicago life, and one that keeps the world church in mind, with a special accent on African Christianity. The four S’s charged against Wright ­ segregation, separatism, sectarianism, and superiority ­ don’t stand up, as countless visitors can attest. I wish those whose vision has been distorted by sermon clips could have experienced what we and our white guests did when we worshiped there: feeling instantly at home.

    Yes, while Trinity is “unapologetically Christian,” as the second clause in its motto affirms, it is also, as the other clause announces, “unashamedly black.” From its beginning, the church has made strenuous efforts to help black Christians overcome the shame they had so long been conditioned to experience. That its members and pastor are, in their own term, “Africentric” should not be more offensive than that synagogues should be “Judeocentric” or that Chicago’s Irish parishes be “Celtic-centric.” Wright and colleagues insist that no hierarchy of races is involved. People do not leave Trinity ready to beat up on white people; they are charged to make peace.

    To the 10,000 members of Trinity, Jeremiah Wright was, until just a few months ago, “Pastor Wright.” Metaphorically, pastor means shepherd. Like members of all congregations, the Trinity flock welcomes strong leadership for organization, prayer, and preaching. One-on-one ministry is not easy with thousands in the flock and when the pastor has national responsibilities, but the forms of worship make each participant feel recognized. Responding to the pastoral call to stand and be honored on Mother’s Day, for instance, grandmothers, single mothers, stepmothers, foster mothers, gay-and-lesbian couples, all mothers stood when we visited. Wright asked how many believed that they were alive because of the church’s health fairs. The members of the large pastoral staff know many hundreds of names, while hundreds of lay people share the ministry.

    Now, for the hard business: the sermons, which have been mercilessly chipped into for wearying television clips. While Wright’s sermons were pastoral ­ my wife and I have always been awed to hear the Christian Gospel parsed for our personal lives ­ they were also prophetic. At the university, we used to remark, half lightheartedly, that this Jeremiah was trying to live up to his namesake, the seventh-century B.C. prophet. Though Jeremiah of old did not “curse” his people of Israel, Wright, as a biblical scholar, could point out that the prophets Hosea and Micah did. But the Book of Jeremiah, written by numbers of authors, is so full of blasts and quasi curses ­ what biblical scholars call “imprecatory topoi” ­ that New England preachers invented a sermonic form called “the jeremiad,” a style revived in some Wrightian shouts.

    In the end, however, Jeremiah was the prophet of hope, and that note of hope is what attracts the multiclass membership at Trinity and significant television audiences. Both Jeremiahs gave the people work to do: to advance the missions of social justice and mercy that improve the lot of the suffering. For a sample, read Jeremiah 29, where the prophet’s letter to the exiles in Babylon exhorts them to settle down and “seek the peace and prosperity of the city to which I have carried you into exile.” Or listen to many a Jeremiah Wright sermon.

    One may properly ask whether or how Jeremiah Wright ­ or anyone else ­ experiences a prophetic call. Back when American radicals wanted to be called prophets, I heard Saul Bellow say (and, I think, later saw it in writing): “Being a prophet is nice work if you can get it, but sooner or later you have to mention God.” Wright mentioned God sooner. My wife and I recall but a single overtly political pitch. Wright wanted 2,000 letters of protest sent to the Chicago mayor’s office about a public-library policy. Of course, if we had gone more often, in times of profound tumult, we would have heard much more. The United Church of Christ is a denomination that has taken raps for being liberal ­ for example for its 50th anniversary “God is still speaking” campaign and its pledge to be open and affirming to all, including gay people. In its lineage are Jonathan Edwards and Reinhold and Richard Niebuhr, America’s three most-noted theologians; the Rev. King was much at home there.

    Friendship develops through many gestures and shared delights (in the Marty case, stops for sinfully rich barbecue after evening services), and people across the economic spectrum can attest to the generosity of the Wright family.

    It would be unfair to Wright to gloss over his abrasive ­ to say the least ­ edges, so, in the “Nobody’s Perfect” column, I’ll register some criticisms. To me, Trinity’s honoring of Minister Louis Farrakhan was abhorrent and indefensible, and Wright’s fantasies about the U.S. government’s role in spreading AIDS distracting and harmful. He, himself, is also aware of the now-standard charge by some African-American clergy who say he is a victim of cultural lag, overinfluenced by the terrible racial situation when he was formed.

    Having said that, and reserving the right to offer more criticisms, I’ve been too impressed by the way Wright preaches the Christian Gospel to break with him. Those who were part of his ministry for years ­ school superintendents, nurses, legislators, teachers, laborers, the unemployed, the previously shunned and shamed, the anxious ­ are not going to turn their backs on their pastor and prophet.

    ———————-
    Martin E. Marty is a professor emeritus at the University of Chicago Divinity School and a panelist for On Faith, of Washingtonpost.com. His most recent book is The Christian World: A Global History (Modern Library, 2008).

    –Phil Nash on Mar 28, 2008

  51. Marty looks like the brains behind the U Chicago which hired Dwight Hopkins, who appears to be the biggest mainstream promoter of black liberation theology today. The Divinity school held a forum on BLT in 2005 with Wright, Cone and Hopkins. And if you read that passage, Marty also condemns Wright’s kookiest statements as well. Americans have a right to go to a church like that, but will make a man who sticks with such a church president of the free world.

    Cone says Wright is an excellent example of his theory, and Obama seems to be a product of it too.

    A Paradoxical Feeling Fortune Cone Obama

    http://www.forbes.com/2008/03/24/obama-black-liberation-theology-oped-cx_hra_0324cone.html
    Are Wright or Obama examples of these theories?

    I think Rev. Wright is a perfect example and expression of black liberation theology. He’s part of a progressive black ministerial community. …

    I’m not sure how much Barack Obama knows about the subject of black liberation theology. … I wouldn’t expect him to have read as widely as Rev. Wright. I’ve read both of Barack Obama’s books, and I heard the speech. I don’t see anything in the books or in the speech that contradicts black liberation theology. If he had it explained to him, I think he would [understand it].

    –arthurhu on Mar 28, 2008

  52. I watched a Wright sermon in full. During the sermon, Wright starting talking about Bill Clinton’s adultery with Monica. Wright then starts acting out the adultery by performing pelvic thrusts and making sex noises!! Yes, in the pulpit of a church, he started doing pelvic thrusts - and the congregants were hoopin and hollering like it was Def Comedy jam. I don’t think I’ve ever been so disgusted in my life.

    –WordsCount on Mar 28, 2008

  53. Wait a minute! It wasn’t free speech when Imus called the black girls nappy headed ho’s! Do you call what Wright said in his church free speech?
    We will never-ever unite with this hate speech. I don’t care to understand why Wright spoke such hatred towards whites or Americans. I certainly don’t respect him. Heck, he needs to leave the USA if this is truly how he feel about it.

    –marizpan22 on Mar 28, 2008

  54. Anyone saying that they agree with Rev.Wrights message, and Barrock Obama, you can bet that they have been brainwashed by this Black Liberation Theology crap……

    –Robert on Mar 28, 2008

  55. Obama and Wright is oppressing himself and other black people by teaching his hatred towards the white community. This hate speech keeps the bitterness alive and well and he can’t get past it.

    –Julie Ma on Mar 28, 2008

  56. Living in Chicago for 40 years I can attest that there are hundereds of churches Obama could choose to attend. The fact he took his young children to a racist, anti-American church on a weekly basis speaks volumes about his character. The racist quotes from his own book, his wife’s hostility to America give pause as well. Throw in his disdain for his own white grandmother, and his adoration for a black father who abandoned him. This man has no clue as to what he is or what he believes in.

    –blackevilolive on Mar 28, 2008

  57. Obama released his donation records. He donated because he supports the views of that pastor and has said as much in refusing to refute his comments. Don’t care if you don’t like Sen. Clinton. I don’t care for everything she does, but her family is not saying they are ashamed of the US. I am not spewing judgements. No one can be condemned for Barack’s short comings, but Barack. He lacks moral fiber. Unlike many, I will not get into personal attacks against other posters.

    –terieaston on Mar 28, 2008

  58. Racist’s passages from Obama’s book: “DREAMS OF MY FATHER” (Obama=Rev.Wright)

    “I ceased to advertise my mother’s race at the age of 12 or 13″

    “I found a solace in .. a sense of grievance and animosity against my mother’s race”

    “The other race (WHITE) would always remain just that: menacing, alien and apart”

    “It was unto my father’s image, the black man, the son of Africa, that I’d packed all the attributes I sought in myself”

    “That hate hasn’t gone away, blaming white people”

    –GAUGINN on Mar 28, 2008

  59. This is good Gauginn! I wonder why this is just now coming to the surface! I dont think McCAIN & the Rebulicans are sweating (Worried about Obama winning). They are laying low knowing all this will come out in the wash!

    –montydriver on Mar 28, 2008

  60. Wright is inspire by James Cone’s book “Blk Theology & Blk Power”of which is the source of his sermons. Cone said “Either God is 4 blk people in their fight 4 liberation & against the white oppressors, or he is not.” Cone note in BO’s rhetoric ‘the fierce urgency of now come from Wright’s church’,& view BO is a prophetic figure whom embody the wish 4 “a society without racial conflict & racial oppression.” BO/MO sat 20Yrs taking in message of racism/divide. ‘CHANGE’?

    –Andrew Liu on Mar 28, 2008

  61. If you look at the documentary film made by Geert Wilders, you will get scared. Look at it on live leak dot com. If we are not careful, our western civilization will be gone before we know it. Don’t let these kind of people brainwash you, and watch out for these pastors who are invoking negativity and hate into our lives and those of our childrens. Remain vigilant and lets protect what is ours. Our country, our children, and our Christian faith that is written in the Holy Bible.

    –Albert Kim on Mar 28, 2008

  62. Imus is a radio host. Wright was a pastor of a church. Can anyone see the difference? Now it makes sense why Obama won’t salute the flag during the anthem, won’t wear a flag pin lapel, and why Michelle says that she has never been proud of this country. 20 years of Wright’s hate speech. Just read Michelle’s collge thesis. Scary.

    –bennyh12345 on Mar 28, 2008

  63. Obama is a fraud. When Obama called for Imus to be fired, he was still attending Wright’s church. If those racist videos never surfaced, Obama would still be attending that church and Wright would still be an advisor. For a year Obama said he never was present for those hate speeches. Then last week, Obama during his race speech, he admitted he was present during many of those speeches, but he disagrees. What a fraud and a liar.

    –ibexr88 on Mar 28, 2008

  64. Two points:
    What”s “God” (whose “God?”) got to do with this?
    What’s division and fear and hate?
    Folks, this is an “election” issue, with scant due and reference to the “spiritual,” which is what “God” is supposed to be “about.”
    Martin E. Marty’s lengthy contrib is well worth the effort of reading, but few if any of the above obamanators will bother.
    Even as Phil Nash is absolutely on the mark in his prior observation on the “perpetual” “alien,” us yaller types.
    Still, yet, it would appear that Obama is still leading in delegate counts, otherwise, why all the screaming?
    And, on this website, they have to be trolling for every single APA vote come November.
    Frank Eng
    P.S.: Hey, Art Hu, who’s your ghostwriter(s) AND your copyreaders. First-class, almost as good as the storied and legendary six-steps of fact-checking and copyreading on ye olde New Yorker of yore. Your sponsors must be well-heeled, accent on the “heel.”

    –Frank Eng on Mar 28, 2008

  65. Arthur, are you just trying to disturb sh*t? To say that because this Wright guy was influenced by someone else, hence Obama must be a racist, doesn’t even make sense.

    Also, the quotes that you’re pulling up from James Cone were written decades ago, when many whites considered blacks to be less than human. Do you think that may have influenced his point of view? Do you think he might have been just a tad angry about being spat on, called “n*gger” to his face, etc.?

    I can’t believe you spent so much time writing such crap here.

    –Yang on Mar 30, 2008

  66. I can’t believe that Asian people are talking such trash about the one candidate that we should be able to best identify with.

    Are you going to believe FOX “News” and their 30-second clips that are taken totally out of context? For example, when Wright said that “America’s chickens are coming home to roost,” he was quoting SOMEONE ELSE. A white guy, who was ambassador to Iraq. And if you listen to that portion of his sermon, it’s much deeper, and much more Christian than that one phrase that’s looped on TV.

    As an Asian person, it shocks me how people so often judge me solely on my appearance. How people see me as “Asian” before they see me as a human being. And how that affects how people treat me. Not only can Obama identify with this, but electing him will have a tremendous impact on race relations in the USA, and hopefully around the world.

    –Yang on Mar 30, 2008

  67. Isn’t it great we are talking and passionate? That we are not Asian Americans with our heads buried in the sand or slogging along just below the radar - not part of the political process? If you went on an African American website and read some of the emails being posted in this string about Asians - would it seem racist to you? Many of my relatives from my parents generation are not open minded about race and sexual orientation. That was then, they still believe it, but we don’t disown them. You can condemn peoples beliefs, but not the people themselves. Obama may be the one person in our lifetime to address race as it’s never been done before, for better or worse. At least it is out.

    –Susan on Apr 02, 2008

  68. Dear Susan
    and Yang:
    It is most gratifying and reassuring to an old, old poot to read your above input.
    You too represent “change” AND “hope.”
    And in the murk and mire that, on the surface, seems to represent and BE the “media” of the times, may I suggest you log on to both the Information Clearing House AND Counterpunch, online, for both informtion and opinion, thought as well.
    There’s always stuff worth reading and pondering, including the likes ot today’s ICH piece on “the Zionist Lobby,” with a few references to Obama’s candidacy.
    I, for one, who loves “Jewishness,” literally, was more than gratified to have my betters uppoint the distinction between neo-Zionisn, read “Likudism”? and both “Jews” AND Israel.
    Through such insights and knowledge, the way may yet be found to “peace” in the “Holy Land.”
    And if that is possible, could one even venture the hope that the neocon end-game can similarly be met and disarmed?
    Frank Eng
    P.S.: Of course, first, we have to face and outfox the Swiftboaters and their swamrs of political piranha, even on this little ol’ website yet. And dig today’s truth-teller in these comments columns about the Vietnamese-American “reality,” but, then, I may be adding to the divide-and-conquer ploy. What’s in a “name”?

    –Frank Eng on Apr 02, 2008

  69. Amazing how Obamanites find all kinds of reasons or non-reasons to defend Obama over any issue including the Rev Wright issue. Are they so intoxicated or brain-washed already ?
    Americans can be easily stirred up emotionally, they can enthusiastic (passionate ?) but they can be very shallow and naive, in this fast culture. Everything is skin deep, no time for profound thoughts of anything.
    Voting for a future president is not like choosing your favorite singer. His empty rhetorics and his cool attitude does not mean he is the best possible choice for the job in the White House. Remember Bush ? What did he achieve for us so far ? Iraq mess, huge deficits, bad economy, paranoia, fear and anger all over.
    Obama would be better ? How can you be sure ? A guy with a rather mysterious upbringing, politicking in the black community, without much depth in almost anything in connection to national importance, you will choose to skipper this ship of USA to sail through the heavy storm which we are facing now ? His “experiment” could be your worst nightmare, if things go wrong.

    Nobody knows for sure what does he think inside. his “promise of hope” is so vague that nobody knows what it exactly means. Hope for the blacks only and empty hopes for the rest ? Many years of sermons by Rev Wright did not make any impact on this half-white, half-black new Messiah ?
    Besides, why he sticks to this all-black church which is known for its radicalism in the balck community ? Why he did not choose a more diverse, more integrated church with more liberal and enlightened outlook ?pure “political” considerations ?

    –Bagasama on Apr 02, 2008

  70. Bagasama:
    Aside from your affected “pidgin,” you appear to be fixated on the “color” of “black.”
    On that fear, or point, may I recomend, if you can find it, Lee Mun Wah’s video, “The Color of Fear.” Which, of course, is the precursor of the color of hate.
    Beyond that, your comparison of Obama to Bush is hilarious, like likening genius to idiocy, literally.
    And the bottom line here appears to be more than simple, to wit:
    McCain is Bush redux.
    Billary is Lieberman Lite.
    And Obama may well be our “last ‘white’ hope.”
    Frank Eng

    –Frank Eng on Apr 02, 2008

  71. To yang: Arthur, are you just trying to disturb sh*t? To say that because this Wright guy was influenced by someone else, hence Obama must be a racist, doesn’t even make sense.

    - Obama is sticking with the church that was built by Wright on the foundation of the writings of Cone, who points to TUCC as the shining example of where to find his theology put into practice. So to dig into the foundations of Obama’s faith, you will indeed find a theology based on repainting Jesus black to fight a white “enemy”. And you unite the races with a guy that Cone himself says that Obama is a the logical end of a line that starts with King, through Cone and Wright? The left would vote for Obama even if he WAS the antichrist, but he won’t sell if the other half of the nation is scared to death of Obama and what he stands for. The Wright is SOOOOO bad, the parent UCC church took out a full page ad in the New York Times saying they’re not all as wacked out as Wright’s church, but they’re liberal enough that they won’t condemn Wrights Wrantings either. The rich white guy president of the church is on YouTube giving Wright a wonderful tribute and high-five. If Obama had any guts, he would stand behind Wright as are many African American advocates.

    Also, the quotes that you’re pulling up from James Cone were written decades ago, when many whites considered blacks to be less than human. Do you think that may have influenced his point of view? Do you think he might have been just a tad angry about being spat on, called “n*gger” to his face, etc.?

    I can’t believe you spent so much time writing such crap here.

    –Yang on Mar 30, 2008

    –arthurhu on Apr 03, 2008

  72. Clinton’s misstatement about coming under fire in Bosnia — whether a memory lapse or a tall tale — was lamentable. But the stampede to portray her as a consummate liar, as opposed to everyone else on the campaign trail, was an extraordinary media pile-up.

    No one made a big deal when Obama, eager to portray himself as an adopted Kennedy, said that his father had come to the United States thanks to Kennedy largesse. In fact, the clan had nothing to do with it. Obama also claimed to have played a big part in crafting the immigration legislation, which even his ally Dodd said was not so.

    –JinLuo on Apr 03, 2008

  73. Interesting how Phil Nash jumps up and down at any perceived anti-Asian racism, and yet chooses to conveniently ignore the many strands of racism and ethnocentrism that, judging from posts on this very website, permeate Asian American communities in this city, a supposed bastion of progressivism. Based upon my own personal experiences over nearly 30 years of living in San Francisco, I’ve concluded that while Asians are frequently the target of expressions of racism and discrimination, they frequently themselves harbor racist attitudes about both whites and others peoples of color. During the debacle over school assignments a couple years back, Chinese-American parents and community “activists” publicly expressed their fears that their children would metamorphosize from well-behaved, respectful and dilligent students into drug-addled, violent hooligans if they were forced to study alongside Black and Latino kids. I was astonished by the degree to which they had uncritically consumed and absorbed the most racist stereotypes of other peoples of color, even as they projected themselves as targets of racism by the “white power structure,” then-school administrator Arlene Ackerman and other real or imagined enemies. And I won’t even start on the fact that Asian Week published several racist diatribes penned by self-described “asian supremecist” Kenneth Eng that were worthy of Adolph Hitler. Concerted efforts must likewise be launched to combat the anti-Asian racism that permeates other communities in San Francisco and elsewhere. All of us must resist the racist poison that permeates this society, and from which none of us–including those who have suffered at its hands–are seemingly exempt.

    –Christian on Apr 03, 2008

  74. Hi Christian,

    Your points are well taken. If you read my other columns, you will know that I do my best to protest any form of bigotry, whether directed at Asian Americans or perpetrated by them. We are all swimming in a sea of “isms” and we all are wet. We all are trying to do our best to un-learn the many biases embedded our society as we struggle to make the world a better place.

    One other piece of the equation we must remember is that prejudices are ubiquitous, but not everyone has the power to enforce their prejudices via laws and social norms. Those with more power, in my opinion, have more of an obligation to help make things better in our society.

    Thanks for being constructively critical. Let’s all re-commit ourselves to working for a world where peace, justice and fairness are the norm.

    Phil

    –Phil Nash on Apr 03, 2008

  75. Welcome back, Christian.
    And, BRAVO.
    Agree almost totally, but for your opening stiffing of Phil Nash, who does NOT deserve same.
    Also, for the Kenneth Eng reference. Three “guest” “columns” by a “kid” who may be addlepated by the very same subject you address over the course of near tree decades publishing a weekly by, for, and of an otherwise unaddressed audience seems to me to be considerably less than the single instance of the august and influential MAINSTREAM NYTimeses’ pillorying of one Wen-ho Lee, an egregious and sustained act for which they have YET to acknowledge or apologize. And that doesn’t broach such matters as plagiarizing and politically-slanted coverage.
    For the rest, EACH of us stands guilty of SOME degrees and SOME charges, but, as Phil points out, SOME of us have little access to “justice” and too many of “YOU” hide behind the barricades of privilege AND patronization.
    Enough.
    We are ALL human, fallible and ambivalent.
    Maybe the answer may lie in co-operation rather than competition and one-upsmanship.
    Frank Eng

    –Frank Eng on Apr 03, 2008

  76. Obama doesn’t know how to tell the truth. He and his camp have been slinging mud at Senator Clinton since before last December. He continues to lie about everything from his parents, to his father’s connection with JFK, to Rezko, to the preacher and he continues to sling mud and then he claims the high road? This guy is a hypocrit and shouldn’t even be in the race.

    –ToniWong on Apr 04, 2008

  77. While the crowd was indeed diverse, some students at the event questioned the practices of Mrs. Obama’s event coordinators, who handpicked the crowd sitting behind Mrs. Obama.

    The Tartan’s correspondents observed one event coordinator say to another, “Get me more white people, we need more white people.” To an Asian girl sitting in the back row, one coordinator said, “We’re moving you, sorry. It’s going to look so pretty, though.”

    “I didn’t know they would say, ‘We need a white person here,’ ” said attendee and senior psychology major Shayna Watson, who sat in the crowd behind Mrs. Obama. “I understood they would want a show of diversity, but to pick up people and to reseat them, I didn’t know it would be so outright.”

    –yifang on Apr 09, 2008

  78. Hi Yifang,

    Every candidate who knows what they are doing creates a tableau behind themselves with the message they want to convey. A picture does tell a thousand words.

    Notice how Hillary had a black official behind her when she was talking on TV last night. This is messaging, and it is very effective if done right.

    I’m not saying it is comfortable for the person who is moved, but it is part of the game of political messaging.

    Thanks for writing.

    Phil

    –Phil Nash on Apr 10, 2008

  79. What do Barack Obama and Osama Bin Laden have in common? They both have friends who bombed the Pentagon

    –OMG on Apr 24, 2008

  80. I watched the ENTIRE wright speech and what I got out of it was this: Poor black people are always being picked on because high and mighty white people have not taken the time to learn it is all our faults that they are they way they are. There is going to be a CHANGE because he thinks Obama will win and make all the whiteys pay for all the horrible things they have done to the poor blacks. The mean ole whitey teachers did not allow the black kids to jump all over their desks and run rampant in the classroom knowing that is the best way they learn. What ever happened to when in Rome…??? Wright makes me sick and he is RACIST and gets away with much more than a white man ever would.

    –wrightOrwrong on Apr 28, 2008

  81. Dear wrightorwrong,

    Thank you for taking the time to watch the entire speech by Pastor Wright. If you don’t mind, please follow up by watching his interview on the Bill Moyers journal: http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/04252008/watch.html. There’s also a transcript you can print out.

    Thanks again for making the effort to bridge the racial divides in this country.

    Phil

    –Phil Nash on Apr 28, 2008

  82. Nash, Obama’s finally thrown Wright under the bus. When will you be ready to do the same? Obama’s going down in flames man. Affirmative action does not work at the ballot box.

    Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama severed ties Tuesday with Jeremiah Wright, decrying his longtime minister’s latest remarks as “a bunch of rants that aren’t grounded in the truth.”

    –awarthurhu on Apr 30, 2008

  83. Dear Arthur,

    The arc of history is long, but it bends toward justice. Obama, Wright, Clinton, McCain and even you and I are just making brief appearances on the earth. The key is to see the longterm perspective, which is to achieve justice, peace, equality and freedom for everyone. Let’s keep on working toward that goal, brother.

    Phil

    –Phil Nash on Apr 30, 2008

  84. Here’s another good one, when this is coming from Democrats, it’s over man. Obama finally managed to create somebody Republicans hate worse than either Hillary or McCain, andthat’s HISTORIC.

    Why doesn’t Obama just quit already??
    by MKyleM, Mon Apr 28, 2008 at 04:59:43 PM EST

    Why is Obama so bent on destroying the Democratic Party with his narcissistic push for the nomination?

    His brand of being a new kind of politician, though weakened recently, has today been completely destroyed by the breath and tongue of his “moral compass” and “mentor”.

    There really is no other way of looking at this: the good reverand took control of the bus and, going in circles, is running over his former pupil…over and over and over again.

    I predict Obama wins nothing else, except in NC, and that ‘victory’ will be by a much smaller margin than expected. Not only that, the exit polls will show that the ‘victory’ came down in a stark racial divide, rendering any possible psychological advantage or boost null and void.

    So, why, Obama? Why are you and your supporters hell bent on destroying our chances in Nov? You have no chance. Give up now.

    From Washington Post today:

    Should it become necessary in the months from now to identify the moment that doomed Obama’s presidential aspirations, attention is likely to focus on the hour between nine and ten this morning at the National Press Club. It was then that Wright, Obama’s longtime pastor, reignited a controversy about race from which Obama had only recently recovered - and added lighter fuel.

    Speaking before an audience that included Marion Barry, Cornel West, Malik Zulu Shabazz of the New Black Panther Party and Nation of Islam official Jamil Muhammad, Wright praised Louis Farrakhan, defended the view that Zionism is racism, accused the United States of terrorism, repeated his view that the government created the AIDS virus to cause the genocide of racial minorities, stood by other past remarks (”God damn America”) and held himself out as a spokesman for the black church in America.

    In front of 30 television cameras, Wright’s audience cheered him on as the minister mocked the media and, at one point, did a little victory dance on the podium. It seemed as if Wright, jokingly offering himself as Obama’s vice president, was actually trying to doom Obama; a member of the head table, American Urban Radio’s April Ryan, confirmed that Wright’s security was provided by bodyguards from Farrakhan’s Nation of Islam.

    Wright suggested that Obama was insincere in distancing himself from his pastor. “He didn’t distance himself,” Wright announced. “He had to distance himself, because he’s a politician, from what the media was saying I had said, which was anti-American.”

    Explaining further, Wright said friends had written to him and said, “We both know that if Senator Obama did not say what he said, he would never get elected.” The minister continued: “Politicians say what they say and do what they do based on electability, based on sound bites, based on polls.”

    http://blog.washingtonpost.com/roughsket ch/?hpid=artslot

    –awarthurhu on May 01, 2008

Post your comments.

Comments using inappropriate language will not be posted. AsianWeek reserves the right to re-publish comments, into "Letters to the Editor," in which case, we reserve the right to edit comments for length and style. If you would like to write a letter to our editor, please email: asianweek@asianweek.com.


© 2005-2008 AsianWeek. The information you receive on-line from AsianWeek is protected by the copyright laws of the United States. The copyright laws prohibit any copying, redistributing, retransmitting, or repurposing of any copyright protected material. Privacy Policy

Close
E-mail It