I don't know if it helps. The idea that "Zionists" are keeping Obama from talking to Wright strikes me as, well, false. I'm willing to bet Valarie Jarrett doesn't want them talking either. I'm willing to bet more that Michelle Obama doesn't want them talking. And, for what it's worth, Obama's a man. If he hasn't called, that's on him. Not on Axelrod.
I don't want to pile on here. And I don't want to be opportunistic. But I've never understood the impulse to defend yourself when you make a blatant mistake. I didn't understand it in Bush, and I don't understand it here. Some of you will argue that it wasn't a "mistake." Fair enough.
But the question I'm asking is, assuming that folks are sincere, what really is so hard about saying, "I am sorry. I didn't mean to say it. It's not what's in my heart. But it was wrong and I am sorry." Why the invocation of Hillary? Why does her (presumed) lack of candidness give you the right to be equally obtuse? Why the dodging? Why the inability to just man up and admit the error?
Again, I wonder if it's the result of having been hardened. I wonder if its about feeling like you're constantly besieged, and to apologize is to surrender something. So, instead, you become more aggressive. The crazy thing is that the aggression only feeds the cycle. It only makes it for more controversy, and more headlines. Why not just kill it? Say "I was wrong" and then stop talking to reporters. Just stop.
This makes me think about Obama's response to Sotomayor's "wise Latina" comment. When he came out and said, "Well, I think she'd agree that was poor phrasing," people were wondering if his admission gave ammo to his adversaries. In fact, it just stole their oxygen. He recognized that it wasn't a point worth defending. Why fight it? What do you gain?
Same thing here. What is Jeremiah Wright trying to achieve?
The Beautiful Struggle: A Father, Two Sons, and an Unlikely Road to Manhood 
Copyright © 2010 by The Atlantic Monthly Group. All rights reserved.
"What is Jeremiah Wright trying to achieve?"
I'd guess publicity for himself and food for his ego. I'm sure it feels good for him to have reporters calling and his name splashed across papers and websites again. The spotlight warms the skin.
I think that assuming that his apology is sincere is probably giving the man more credit than he deserves. I'll admit I'm a cynic though.
That's why they call running away the better part of valor. Kenny Rogers comes to mind in his song the gambler.
You've got to know when to hold em, know when to fold em, know when to walk away, and know when to run.
Or from my favorite Richard Pryor Skit "So then the police showed up so I left, because they had magnums too."
Deleted. Come on man.
Sorry man, not trying to start trouble. This Wright stuff bothers me, probably because it suggests to me that maybe ass-face Sean Hannity was on to something, that the Obamas could very well have heard some really unpleasant things in his church and never got up and walked away, and that makes me want to crawl in a hole and die. It's unfair to them, because there's no real evidence for it, but it still nags at me.
i don't think he was preaching anti-semitism when the president was a member. remember how squeaky clean b. had to be to make it through the news cycles? it would have been a big issue if reporters had turned up antisemitic content during the election, especially during the primaries when hillary first brought wright up.
We don't know what Wright may have said when the cameras weren't on him.
Craig, do you vet and approve of every statement your friends/pastor/family members made? It may be that Wright sometimes said some crazy things but they just brushed it off as his eccentricity. The pressure Wright felt may also have pushed him to a new level of crazy.
(Cololamala also has a very good point.)
@ Persia
No, I do sort of think it's unfair, but it's definitely in the back of my mind. In all the years that the Obamas went to his church, did he give an anti-Semitic sermon? Because that's a lot different from his personal views, that makes it the de facto view of the church itself. If he did that, and the Obamas stayed, then yes, that makes me question them. Not their "friends of Jews" bonafides, to me that's not in doubt, but their moral courage. But since I have no reason to believe that he did give such a sermon, then I can't really draw any conclusions. I am acting under the assumption that this Wright has indeed become a different person from the one that they knew for all those years.
Well given Wright's relationship to the Southside Hyde Park crowd (many of them Liberal Jews) if I had to guess, Id say 'probably not.'
My guess is as good as yours right?
In the same week we see von Brunn declare that the Jews made Obama and Wright claim that the Jews are keeping Obama from speaking the truth. Man, those Jews sure get their claws in deep, don't they?
Jokes aside, if Wright knew anything about the history of Zionism he would see a pretty clear conflict between the original Zionists and the settlers. For all the problems with Zionism and the impossible demographics of Palestine/Israel, cats like Theodor Herzl would have had no truck with the settlers.
As for what Wright is up to, everybody knows that Obama can't always speak unvarnished truth about Israeli policy—he can't speak the unvarnished truth about nearly anything because he's the President, fercrissakes. So why would Wright say what everyone knows in such an impolitic, borderline racist manner? I think Chappelle would call it another case of "Keepin it real goes wrong." If we want to be psychoanalytic about it, it seems to me like he's looking for a scapegoat on whom to blame his distance from the Obama power center.
In 1895, Herzl, the founder of Zionism, wrote in his diary:
sounds to me like they'd get along just fine
English is my primary language. I don't ' misinterpret' English.
He's got too many degrees to not know what he was saying when he said it.
Period.
You know rik, I'm just starting think you're right, and that's it. I may just be overthinking it. As I'm wont to.
Meh. I'm tired of the Jeremiah Wright show. Its unfortunate, because I think there is much to admire about his life and his work, but he's decided to be a sideshow on Politico, and that's his own fault.
That whole speech was so full of obfuscation and shadow-puppets that there was barely any there there. Shame on Mark Thompson for not pressing Wright: WHAT Zionists? What is these Zionists' purpose in keeping Obama from talking to Wright?
To use an old but appropriate expression: don't piss on my leg and tell me it's raining.
That was neither an apology nor an excuse. And he seemed to want to use the Holocaust Museum shooting to downplay the numbers of Jews killed--gee, sorry, Hitler didn't get enough of us to make it seem worth grieving for ya!
Sheesh. Personally, I think he's just sticking his foot farther in every time he opens his mouth now.
Here's an excellent explanation of Zionism by a black man which I think would make the heads of haters of many different varieties explode.
A soap box the likes of Bill Cosby and the ear of the black elite comes to mind for Reverend Wright's wish list.
Reading between the lines, he longs to be seen as one of those black intellectual figures leading people to some promised land of thought.
Reverend Wright is confusing newsworthiness with real substance though and he'll never even manage to be a two-bit Cornell West. He has popularity, and a large following, but he missed the mark of DuBois and has settled on Sharpton instead.
The whole affair is sad. The day of the black preacher leader is waning. I, for one, don't need to mix the gospel with my common sense. Straight and no chaser has always been appealing to me, despite my love of God.
Cornel is spelled with one "L" not two. I am a stickler for spelling; sorry.
Wright came to Memphis to speak recently, and he has many interesting things to say when given a chance, many of which have nothing to do with Obama. But that is all that gets the spotlight.
While I am not a psychologist, and can't know what is in the man's head, having heard him talk for probably more than an hour - I think there are several things going on here - 1) I think he is a brilliant, gifted man who had an accomplished life before Obama was in the spotlight, and now his public life is overshadowed by this Obama situation and he resents it; 2) he is a provocateur - in the tradition of preachers who believe it is their duty to speak truth to power and get people to think - and he seems like he has a bit of a temper; and 3) the rift with Obama has wounded him deeply.
But I agree with TNC - what is wrong with saying "I said something stupid - I am sorry"? On the other hand, listening to his explanation - he said "Jews" and he meant "Zionist"???????? I don't think he was trying to apologize at all.
I think we can all agree that whenever anyone, anywhere, at any time, says something about "Zionists" they really mean "Jews." When people say the "Zionists" control the media, or the Iraq war was a "Zionist" plot, or the "Zionists" control who the President is allowed to talk to - all they are doing substituting "Zionist" for "Jew" because they think its more socially acceptable. This is a "code" that is so ridiculously transparent I can't believe anyone takes it seriously for two seconds.
Don't get me wrong - there is a principled distinction to be made between Jews and people who believe in Zionism. But that's not what Wright is talking about, and that's not what anyone is talking about when they say crazy stuff about Zionists. Its just not. Never ever.
Exactly. If anything that apology drew Wright deeper into the Protocols of Zion type thinking and rhetoric. Poor choice of words followed by more poorly chosen words, which suggests to me what Rikyrah is saying: intentional.
Again, I wonder if it's the result of having been hardened. I wonder if its about feeling like you're constantly besieged, and to apologize is to surrender something. So, instead, you become more aggressive. The crazy thing is that the aggression only feeds the cycle. It only makes it for more controversy, and more headlines. Why not just kill it? Say "I was wrong" and then stop talking to reporters. Just stop.
This graf got me thinking about the Palin-Letterman scuffle, specifically her last response. (In advance, please note that the analogy is not a perfect fit, please don't make inferences). Letterman's apology for his off-color jokes about Sarah and Bristol, such as it was, hammered on the point that his jokes were about Bristol, and not Bristol's younger sister. Palin's initial posture was entirely based on the premise that Letterman was having a joke at the expense of a non-media-exposed 14-year old girl. Letterman clarified his position, and though the Palins were under no obligation to accept or dignify the apology, they chose to respond in an obtuse and aggressive fashion to the apology, making Dave out to be a pervert who likes to chase 14-year-old tail.
The Palins had a moment that they could have used to defuse, to "just stop". There were probably a dozen different ways that they could have responded that would have preserved their dignity and not acquiesced to 'making nice'. Instead, they chose to keep the controversy spinning, ironically ratifying the motion to bring Willow Palin fully into the spotlight.
TNC, your phrase "equally obtuse" could be the crux of the biscuit. The right feels that we've entered an age of willful stupidity on the things they choose to see as stupid (the election of Obama, gay marriage, closing Guantanamo, the stimulus, etc). Therefore, they feel they have the right to pretend that rock-solid arguments against them, evidence of contradiction and illogic, hypocrisy, and even high irony (like the clip of Reagan declaring himself a citizen of the world) are merely trade-offs with the left, who are clearly the stupidheads (and why don't more good americans just see that?)
Reverand Wright has just not effectively made the transition from Trinity Church to a national audience. The Trinity congregation would have either agreed with him and supported him and those who ever disagreed with him would not have made an issue of it.
Wright never really had time to prepare for a national audience and his introduction that weekend in March was fairly brutal. He still does not seem to understand the importance of engaging the filter between one's mind and one's mouth when you are speaking to those who want to sensationalize what you say for 15 seconds of air time.
It's sad because Wright is definitely capable of insightful commentary, he is just not capable of the level of restraint required of public figures.
I didn't think that his "them Jews" comment indicated anti-semitism and far too much has been made of it. It seems to be "poor phrasing" at the worst. If he had said, "The Jewish people who are close to Obama will not let me speak to him," would anyone have considered that to be anti-semitic?
We are really getting to a place where there is a very broad interpretation of what is a slur.
Besides, what is Reverand Wright's history with respect to anti-semitism? I don't know for certain but I would put money down that there is no history.
"If he had said, "The Jewish people who are close to Obama will not let me speak to him," would anyone have considered that to be anti-semitic?"
Seriously? Ummm...yes. Very obviously. Identifying them as "Jews" is unnecessary unless you're making some sort of point about it. It wouldn't be anti-semitic if he said, "Obama's staff won't let him talk to me." But he wasn't saying that. He was saying something about Jews.
If a white guy said, "those Black people won't let me talk to Obama" - he'd be saying something about their Blackness. Its not a great analogy because all tied up in anti-semitism is this belief that Jews control the Government and exert their will over world leaders, etc. ... but you get the idea.
I disagree. It is just too far of a leap. Wright certainly could have said "certain members of Obama's staff" but the fact that he identified them as Jews does not make that a slur. Jewish people can be identified as Jews, Hispanic people as Mexicans, Cubans, Latin Americans and so forth. African American people can be identified as black or African American without that being a slur. Caucasians can be identified as white. You can argue context but it just isn't there in this case.
A better gauge of what Wright really was saying would be his tone of voice, but the words alone do not indicate prejudice, in my opinion.
I'm honestly reading your post for hints of intended irony. I can't tell if it's there or not. Are you being serious? Acting under the possibility that you are, one doesn't need to hear the tone of voice to recognize the tone of what he's saying. For fun rather than saying Them Jews say it this way:
"The Jews Emanuel and Axelrod aren't going to let him talk to me."
Does that really sound okay to you?
Yeah, I'm not gonna let this fly either. Remember in "Do the Right Thing", near the end when the pizza shop owner gets mad and yells at radio raheem, referring to him as, "you black cocksucker"? That was the clincher for me: the point where he most clearly showed his biases because he didn't have to say "black". If it were about raheem the individual, there'd be no need for that. i see the same here. there was no need to identify the advisors "keeping" obama from him as jewish. and by referencing their jewish identity, his remark becomes about jews, and betrays his negative feelings thereof.
No, actually, I am quite serious.
Wright is not known for saying things in a manner that pass public scrutiny and he certainly could benefit from the services of a communications consultant if he wants to have a voice on the national stage.
However, that is all I get out of that comment.
I wouldn't call anyone a racist or prejudiced or anti-semitic based on a comment like the one Wright made. I would have to see a pattern or a history and I do not believe that Wright has that. If he did, we would certainly know it by now.
In fact, what we are seeing in the media are these accusations of "racism" and "anti-semitism" being slung around too freely to the point where the terms are going to become meaningless after everyone has been accused. We shouldn't let that happen.
Personally, I am not calling him an anti-Semite or a racist, nor do I really care whether he is one or not. What I am saying is that the things he’s saying, the things he has said, go beyond the realm of being simply impolitic. I’m saying that referring to specific people as “Them (fill in the ethnic/racial signifier)” is almost always inappropriate. That it’s precisely the kind of thing people have every right to find offensive. That if I were either Rahm Emanuel or David Axelrod and I was reduced by a non-Jew as “That Jew” in anything remotely similar to this context, I think it’s fair to say that I might be offended. Even if the words were uttered by a clown the likes of Rev. Wright. I’m saying that there’s a very clear and derogatory tone that--regardless of what it would or would not say about what’s in Wright’s heart--seeks to denigrate the individual he’s speaking about as being no more than a faceless member and representative of an ethnic group. Add to that the fact that what he’s actually saying is Them Jews (be they Emanuel, Axelrod, or some cadre of Zionists) are controlling the president of the United States and seeking to marginalize Wright’s voice on the “ethnic cleansing of the Zionist” and on other subjects “anti-Israel,” I’d say there’s a few other ways Emanuel or Axelrod (or Jews, in general) could justify taking offense. I mean, look at it this way:
The Jews Emanuel and Axelrod will not let the president talk to me because I speak the truth about the ethnic cleansing of the Zionist, and them Jews won’t let him talk to me because that’s anti-Israel.
Does it still sound okay to you? I mean, it reads like an anti-Semite manifesto.
Excellent comparison Soral.
As Ta Nehesi said, Obama is his own man, not a puppet for Jews.
Im sure he's been catching "You're a Puppet for Jews" flack since his days in the Senate, and Wright good and well knows that. Preachers know rhetoric and its emotional effects better than most. So I cant do anything but attribute venom and hostility to that statement.
Is he making a statement against ALL Jews? No. But thats like white folks who blast one Black girl as a "Black b****" then turn to their Black girlfriend and say, "Not you of course, you're not like her."
Racist? Yep. No way around it.
The leap is in excusing away his language, I think.
We will have to invent new words to describe people like the guy who shot the guard at the Holocaust Museum in DC or the vigilantes who patrol the Arizona/Mexico border or even all those people in the videos we saw during presidential election used racial slurs when referring to Obama.
To answer your question -- why can't he just man up and say I'm sorry -- it's because he isn't sorry. He meant what he said, and as Rikyah, accurately pointed out, the man is no dummy. He has plenty of degrees -- he did not "misspeak." I think he truly believes that "the jews" will not let Obama talk to him. Forgetting for a second that I have never met or spoke to Wright, his whole argument reveals an extreme lack of self-awareness. I mean, he literally showed his ass at the press club, insinuated that Obama was double talking to the American public because he was "just a politician" and almost costs him the presidential nomination. Why on God's green earth would Obama want to talk to him? It doesn't take mysterious/anonymous "jews" to advise Obama not to reach out to him again --he has no reason to (at least not in my mind). If Wolffe's book is accurate -- Obama tried to reach out to him, and advise him of inflaming the situation even more before he spoke at the press club, and then Wright spoke out at the press club. What more can be done.
Even though I disagree with Wright's views, especially this "Jew/Zionist" crap, during the campaign last year I had sympathy for him because he reminded me so much of my grandfather. He is from a different generation and experienced things as a Black man that I will never understand -- to tell people like him, and my grandfather for that matter, to just get over it, not be bitter, forget what they know and how they grew up-- was too much for me to swallow. But Wright has obviously allowed that bitterness to consume him. And as you pointed out yesterday, because he feels that he has been diminished/attacked, he is lashing out even more. It's just an endless cycle. He's so focused on the past, he can't look to the future.
Excellent. One small thing. We all know people who had power in the past, then gracefully relinquished to the younger generation. Reverend Wright's life had more moments of power, more high points, more moments of respect, than the life of many others who experienced bitter years. I wish for him that he understood that it is these latter days that are defining him today for most of the American public, and most probably for defining his role in American history. I don't know him. I have heard sermons. He seems intelligent, and was wise. The blinding self-destruction is stunning to me.
Is he Lear?
There's tragedy. But he's been stuck early in the first act for what, 16 months now? No inkling of renewed self-understanding so far.
I agree. I feel weird about this whole episode. I guess I just expected more of him because of his legacy -- from what I have read (not from what I know) -- and because of his past deeds. He has accomplished a lot in his lifetime, and for him to diminish himself in this manner is truly sad. He seems so out of place for what is going on right now -- a relic of the past. I mean, just this past week, his former parishioner made waves with his foreign policy speech in cairo. And what does Wright do? He blames "the Jews", ...I mean the "zionists" for not being able to talk to Obama? Are you serious? I just can't wrap my mind around it -- his argument is so tone deaf and ridiculous all I can do is shake my head in shame.
At first read, I thought, There's no reason for you to feel shame. You have done nothing wrong. Took me some minutes to understand. There is a national shame, to have a leader say these things. Now I'm spinning - sad, angry, apologetic, confused, joining you in shaking my head.
I obviously don't know this as fact, but watching this guy, it seems pretty clear to me that Wright is and probably always has been a narcissist? That he absolutely resents the success of Barack Obama. That he probably always saw Obama--and many of the good deeds he's credited for doing in his life--through the lense of his own narcissitic opportunism. He seems to have wanted what all narcissists want: to be known and respected and loved on as large a scale as possible. Short of being loved and respected, being known is still pretty good too, so he seems to have decided to embrace his own notoriety. Really, it's all the same to this guy. Attention is attention. A microphone is a microphone. It doesn't matter what you say, as long as people pay attention.
Jeremiah Wright is like the love child of Jimmy the Greek and Professor Griff. That so-called apology just made it worse. Somebody in his family needs to stage an intervention and get the man away from the mic. Just a walking disaster.
I said it would be worse if he tried to walk it back...he's actually dug it deeper. It was kinda/sorta less offensive when I thought it was just a crude, intemperate reference to Rahm and Axelrod.
Then there's this above: " I think we can all agree that whenever anyone, anywhere, at any time, says something about 'Zionists' they really mean 'Jews.'"
Uh...no! That's like saying whenever anyone, anywhere, at any time says something about Black Nationalists they reall mean "Blacks." This is a cheap dodge against any analysis of Israel and Zionism that isn't ass-kissing.
No, it's not. "Zionist" means "Jew", and it's not even a particularly well-disguised dog whistle. People who use the term "Zionist" aren't looking for a reasoned discussion on the merits of Israeli governmental policy, they're looking to blame Jews for something without saying the word "Jews." As if Reverend Wright has any fucking idea about Obama's Jewish advisors' view on Israeli politics.
I basically get what you're saying. I just think it's really sad that Zionism and Judaism are so intrinsically tied. I've mentioned before I think, that as an agnostic, it really bothers me when people claim a divine right to a land. Does that mean I believe in the destruction of Israel? Of course not. Does it bother me that further settlements, and even a lot of current ones, are good things? Yeah, it does, and I think even a lot of Jewish people would agree with me, as appears to be the case in our current foreign policy.
That being said, yeah, it's pretty obvious that even after "clarifying" it's still a very thinly veiled anti-Semitic comment. And it just makes dealing with reality worse.
"Zionist" means "Jew"
Only in the lexicon of rightwing Zionist extremists intent on shutting down debate... and anti-Semites.
Reverand Wright said Jew, but claims he meant Zionist. Seems he's conflating the two.
Often it's hard to know if someone is really prejudiced, or just making a poor word choice. For me, this is a single data point, but I don't like the direction it's pointing in.
@Craig T, I think I understand the point you're trying to make--that when people throw around the word Zionist it's a way for them to say Jew. But, as a Jew, I'm here to tell you that in the objective world, "Zionist" does NOT mean "Jew." @brucds's analogy is an apt one.
I am a Jew--I am proud to be a Jew--but I am not a particularly ardent Zionist. Israel's actions in the past couple of decades have only embarrassed me. I don't believe that Jews need a homeland in order for Judaism to survive--we did perfectly well keeping our traditions going for millennia without our own nation.
But I digress. The point is--in the dictionary sense, Zionist does not mean Jew. It means a person who believes in the necessity of a Jewish homeland in the place where Israel now stands.
BIG difference.
taken from a dictionary definition "states rights" was never a synonym for segregation. But in the language of politics, it was a dog whistle for just that. Just like "Zionist" is code for Jews.
I'm sorry if you don't recognize coded language being pointed at you, but it is being pointed at you, and denying it won't stop it.
@Josh Jasper
Coded language sucks and all, but then how do you distinguish Judaism from Zionism? In this case, yes, Wright certainly uses it as a code word. And I don't deny that other people do this all the time. However, there is a very real difference between, say, Zionist policies and Jewish policies, Zionist values and Jewish values.
Honestly, I think it's defeatism to not continue to try to draw the distinction more clearly. Either that, or its an attempt to make any critique of Israel anti-Semitic in nature. Which is really, really not cool.
That's all well and good, but people who use the term "Zionist" are generally not thinking of those sorts of nuances. "Zionist" is the term that people like David Duke and 9/11 anti-Semitic Truthers use. That may be unfortunate, you may be sorry that in normal political discourse there isn't a distinction being made between those who oppose Israeli policies and those who just hate Jews, but that's the reality of the situation. You're just going to have to take the word off the table and come up with something else, because that word has been burned by people who hate you no matter what you think about Israel.
For the record, I'm also a Jew, and I also have the same problems with Israeli policy that many liberals do, but I also believe in Israel and wish for it to co-exist with its neighbors. Does that make me a "Zionist"?
@ Craig T
I think it depends on why you believe in Israel. Do you believe that Israel is your divine birthright? Or is there another reason? Just to be clear, I do think there are other valid reasons.
@ Dan W
I believe in it for the same reason that people of Italian descent believe in Italy or people of Irish descent believe in Ireland - because it is a place where the Jewish culture can have its roots, an anchor that keeps it alive in perpetuity. This isn't a fringe position, is it? I mean, most people, Israelis, Americans, everyone, believes in a two-state solution where both a Jewish state and a Palestinian state exist side-by-side. I'm not going to apologize for the general concept of a Jewish state located in the Holy Land, and if that makes me the local Zionist then so be it.
@Craig
Look, I think it's a very reasonable position. And how you described it doesn't sound too Zionist to me. I don't really agree with that position as a concept (don't like any theocratic regimes first off, and I think the claim that Jews all around the world have a claim to Israel is tenuous. After all, I don't have a claim to the Vatican, or Ireland, or Germany). However, in practice, I basically agree with you. In general, I just wish that we (the world) could have a lot more nuance and realism on this issue. But that's asking a lot.
I also said:
"Don't get me wrong - there is a principled distinction to be made between Jews and people who believe in Zionism. But that's not what Wright is talking about, and that's not what anyone is talking about when they say crazy stuff about Zionists. Its just not. Never ever."
If you want to have high level discussion about what Zionism means, and how it relates to Israeli policy, that's one thing. If you want to say "Zionists control the banks" - that's something very different. Its anti-semitic, because you're just substiting one word for another.
Also - its nothing at all like saying that every time anyone says anything about Black Nationalists they really mean "Blacks." Because no one ever says, "those damn Black Nationalists just love to eat watermelon and chase after white women" when they are really saying something vile and racist about all Black people. But people will, and often do, use "Zionist" as a substitute for the word "Jew" to espouse classic, traditional, anti-semitic slurs.
The word "Zionist" has become a euphemism that people use to say things about all Jews when they want to say something negative. "Black Nationalist" has not been transformed into a euphemism in this way. I actually can't think of any other term that has been converted in this same way. Any suggestions?
I guess you could make an argument for the term "christian conservatives." I'm sure there are a lot of christians who happen to be conservative, but aren't "christian conservatives" or "christianists" as Sullivan would say.
You made an absolutely crazy statement about "anyone, anytime, anywhere." It's really that simple. Your statement was so offensive and absurdly reductionist that I didn't even bother to read the rest. That's your fault, not mine. Also, you're setting up straw men to rationalize your reductionism. It is simply NOT TRUE that "whenever anyone, anywhere, at any time, says something about 'Zionists' they really mean 'Jews.'" And to assert such is to occupy Jeremiah Wright territory - rationalizing paranoia and making conspiratorial accusations.
"people will, and often do" vs. "anyone, anytime, anywhere" - not the same thing. Not even close....
Well, please pardon my rhetorical excess, but you've admitted you didn't read the rest of what I wrote so I don't feel much need to respond further. I think everyone else got my point.
I agree with Craig and Josh. When you have Zionism as a stand-in for Zionist Occupational Government, the perennial bad-guy of the William Cooper crowd and White Supremacists (not exactly the same thing but some crossover), or in other words people like James Von Brunn, is it really worth it to fight to reclaim that word? Furthermore, again, Wright is smart and informed enough to know how loaded that word is, and is riding for it anyway.
Maybe he thinks he is sending messages to Obama via the media.
Maybe its an implied extortion. Who knows.
Don't underestimate the anti-semitism in the black community. I think Reverend Wright, who is brilliant in his own way, meant what he said. The man may be many things. He is not a fool.
I'm not a psychologist, but it seems that there is an element among some black "leaders" who just can't deal with the idea and reality that the President is black. To spend a good part of your life fighting racism and associated problems and then suddenly this 1/2 white, Hawaii raised, hyper articulate/brilliant black guy with no black American relatives becomes Prez...................sheeeeeeet. It has to be mind blowing.
My experience is that some blacks of Wright's generation harbor strong anti Semitic feelings based on former Jewish ownership of stores and real estate in black communities. My guess is today some of that animosity has been transferred to Arab or Asian store owners in current black communities.
Think of Jesse Jackson's "hymietown" comments. Prejudice is not limited to any one group. It exists in all groups. Well over twenty years ago I dated a black woman whose mother was not thrilled she was dating me. Not because I was white, but because of my Irish descent. She associated "irish" with political oppression in Chicago. I recall being told that mama would have been ok with it as long as I wasn't Irish or Jewish. Life can be amusing sometimes.
Wright may actually believe that Obama doesn't speak to him because of the "zionists". The reality is Obama doesn't speak to him because Wright is acting like a petulant child and is an embarrassment. I have little doubt that Wright tried to torpedo Obama's campaign last year with some of his stupid antics.
I guess Wright will have to retreat to the 1 million dollar house he had his congregation build for him in Tinley Park, Illinois. A lily white suburb. Make of that what you will.
"I'm not psychologist, but..." uh oh.
Nothing worse than people playing armchair psychiatrists. Without knowing much about Dr. Wright you go into a rather odd analysis of his thinking based on assumptions (which is not a diagnosis and is as relevant as a $3 bill). With no evidence but much by way of propositions you make the argument that Wright is "jealous" of President Obama. I am pretty sure he is not jealous of him anymore than a father is of a son. I do suspect, however, he is hurt that their friendship has been ruptured. Here, though, I agree with you that Wright sparked this by not keeping his mouth shut.
That said, I must take issue with your Freudian thesis.
"Them Jews" is not a sign of antisemitism. It is a sign of slang that is dated and should not be used. My grandparents still use slurs against gays. Now, as a young man myself, I do not like when Grandma say some slanderous things about gay people, but I would no more correct her than I would correct her broken English. As a Black woman from the Old South, she is a product of a different era. I would not presume this is all Black people or that it "translates" into hating other groups (which you implicitly stated with your Asians and Arabs comment), but as an example of someone who speaks with a carelessness our incessant PC age cannot tolerate.
With regard to Dr. Wright, he is respected by Blacks, Jews, and Whites, and is not a racist, or an anti-Semite. This I know not from "experiences" from a far off experience dating someone but because I have cousins who actually KNOW the man personally and because I had heard of Wright before I heard of the President (Wright would occasionally be profiled on BET when that network was worth watching back in the day). I could give a few examples I know, but this is a comments section, so I'll just keep it simple. My point is that Dr. Wright has done more for the Chicago community than most of us has done or will do, so keep your judgments to yourself unless you can back them up with suppositions.
I am always defensive when non-Blacks begin analyzing African-Americans as if they were anthropological experiments. Excuse me, but please back up your "analysis" of our so-called antisemitism with facts, statistics, and not from a girlfriend's momma. That sloppy research would not likely get you into Harvard, so why prop it anonymously on a blog? And a first rate blog at that?!?
Actually I know quite a bit about "Reverend or DR" Wright. If you read the Chicago media there have been stories about him for years----pre Obama. I recall reading about Barack Obama back in the early 90's when he moved back to Chicago after Harvard Law School. I lack many things. A good memory is not one of them.
Wright's done many good things and built up an impressive congregation that does many good things. That doesn't make him immune from criticism from my white devil ass or any other ass for that matter.
If "them Jews" is not a sign of anti-semitism then his "zionism" explanation certainly is. Wright has certainly spouted off some silly conspiracy theories in the past.
I suppose if one of my elderly relatives spouted off with "them coons" that would not be a sign of racism? I'm tempted to use a phrase TNC used to use on this blog, but I won't. It's not really appropriate for my white self to type that two word phrase even as a joke.
Now if I gave the impression, and I don't think I did, that I believe all blacks hate Arabs and Koreans then I need to correct that. I don't believe that. I do think there is a portion of the black community that harbors ill feelings toward those groups.
Now unless you believe that blacks are somehow immune from hating other groups, which would make blackness truly unique in the human experience, then I think you might admit that there may be a few or more than a few black folks out there with some prejudice against other groups.
Look up the name of the son of the deceased Black Panther Fred Hampton to get an idea of what I speak.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fred_Hampton,_Jr.
There are plenty of other examples out there to. Use "the google" and enlighten yourself. Watch some of the videos that came out of the LA riots.
Go to youtube and do a few searches or perhaps talk to a few actual black folks and you might here some things said about other groups that might make you uncomfortable.
As for Jeremiah Wright I have a right to criticize him as much as anyone else. My pasty skin doesn't mean I don't have the right to criticize a black man.
Just like your black skin doesn't mean you can't criticize me or former President Bush or anyone else for that matter.
I'm glad you actually have cousins who know the man. Wow, that's truly anecdotal there. If I said that you would mention the word "harvard" and studies.
You wrote Wright "is respected by Blacks, Jews, and Whites, and is not a racist, or an anti-Semite". I'm sure the first part is true of SOME blacks, Jews and whites, but if you read this "first rate blog" you will see some blacks, Jews, and whites don't have much use for the man.
Now the second part about him not being racist or an anti-semite I don't know. I'm tempted to say "if it quacks like a duck and walks like a duck...........it's a duck". That might be unfair to the man. He's done many good things, but like any human being he is flawed. At some level Reverend Wright is a first rate showman. His speeches and sermons that I've watched are generally impressive and amusing. I wasn't offended by his "god damn America" sermon, I understood the point he was trying to make and that he was referring to the Muslim world.
I tend to think we are all prejudiced to one degree or another and it's really just a question of whether we try to deal honestly with our shortcomings.
Remember what Stuart Smalley said on SNL "Denial is just not a river in Egypt."
I leave you with the wisdom of Mr Smalley and SNL:
# "That's just stinkin' thinkin!"
# "You're should-ing all over yourself."
# "Denial ain't just a river in Egypt!"
# "I'm good enough, I'm smart enough, and doggone it, people like me."
# "I am a worthy human being."
# "...and that's...okay."
Wow, you're combating me with an old Al Franken routine? How am I going to counter that?!? Did you have to bring that Chicago style to a brother from the ATL? You ain't right, but you're Irish, so I know not to mess with you.
Well, let me say that I agree with you, Blacks can be bigoted. That is without a doubt because I know 'em! But to presume as your comment implicitly--but I do not believe for an instant intentionally--applied that it is a common trait was troubling to me. But I have read your comments with amusement in the past, so I do not believe in any harm coming from you.
As for Wright, I wasn't really trying to defend him so much as to keep him isolated from being an example of the old Bill Cosby joke: "When a white drunk falls they say, 'Look at that drunk!' When a black drunk falls they say, 'Look! Another black drunk!'" Rev. Dr. Wright is one man, not the whole race. You don't need my permission to criticize him, but I just ask that you keep that from making a broad brush. Also, I think the press made him out to be a bad man when he is far more complicated than that. My opinion.
In any case, I won't waste your time with a long piece. To paraphrase the great philosopher Mr. Macky, "Bigotry is bad, mmmmkay?"
Obama DOES have Black American relatives though.
Wright should know, he married him to one and baptized several more.
Juba,
I should have stated no black American relatives except the one he married and the two they created.
Perhaps it had to be that the first black President would have such an unusual background.
To paraphrase Peggy Noonan regarding JFK "the first Irish Catholic President was a Boston Protestant who went to Harvard". Now I happen to disagree a bit with Peggy and I think JFK's Irishness and Catholicism did play a small role in who he was, but the concept is amusing.
Imagine telling someone twenty years ago that we would have a black President in 2009. He would be 1/2 white, raised in Hawaii, and his dad was born a Muslim............SURE, what drugs are you taking?
Symposia,
I need a drink right now. Then I'll fall down. Gotta keep that stereotype going.
Hey man, family is family. In-laws and babies count too.
I guess my point is Michelle's very presence wards off a lot of the "he aint REALLY Black" arrows shot his way. No Black leader with an ounce of political instinct would take on such a celebrated figure among African-American women if he or she had a desire to stay relevant.
Actually, saying it's the Zionists is worse.
One could have argued before that, well, Obama sure has a lot of Jews on his staff, and one can reasonably doubt that they have warm feelings for Rev. Wright. But saying something that sounds anti-Semitic and then blaming the Zionists is a very stale trope that we've been hearing for a long, long time. It fails the smell test, and it fails right away.
Yeah, I'm with MattF. Not only does this come straight out of the anti-semitic playbook, it makes even less sense than his original statement.
To be fair to Rev. Wright, but I feel like my Zionist overlords are always keeping me from seeing old friends. I can't count the times I've had to explain to this one particular guy, "Honestly, it's not that I've had to break up a bar fight the last three times I've seen you. Or that you're an angry drunk, and I'm too old and tired to put up with it any longer. Really, I want to see you. It's just these damn Zionists. They've really been on my case, lately."
I'm not even president. I can only imagine how closely them Jews watch that guy.
Really though, aside from all of the things I was talking about in the earlier thread, what's really clear to me is this: Wright really hates the president.
I don't believe Wright.
By clarifying using the term Zionists as opposed to say specific individuals in the Obama administration he is playing a dog whistle, the Fritz Fanon anti colonialist dog whistle. Sometimes mistaken as the far left, but more color conscious and inherently anti-Caucasian and antisemitic. Its members see themselves as anti western rebels who live in the west as "prisoners". Ha ha.
I am also starting to suspect that Wright subscribes to a demented form of liberation theology that emphasizes the conflict between Christianity and Judaism. In his theology blacks have replaced the Jews as Gods chosen people because jews rejected Christ. There is also some stuff about blacks being the original true men. This explains his affinity with Farrakhan in that the NOI holds similar views.
In short I think the guy is a nut and a heretic, from a mainstream Christian perspective. Although, based on the events of the last 2 weeks a would say that the crazy is out and about in American right now. Wright just adding to the mix, I mean why let all the Aryan nut jobs have all the fun.
Everything I know I learned from pop-culture...
Chris Rock said it: Ain't no one more prejudiced than an old black man, and just like any other prejudice, Wright's don't have to mean nothin. They're just there.
I've often said that the default hatred for things you can see and touch is black people. Damn negrahs raped my daughter! That's why she's preggo with a black baby!
On the other hand, the default hatred for things that happen out of your sight, that have to do with a power structure screwing up your life, that's what jews are for. Zionists keeping Barack from calling me, man. It's not that my fat mouth caused him enough trouble already. Couldn't be!
...that train is never late, is it?
Man did I punctuate that poorly...shoulda been like this:
Chris Rock said it: "Ain't no one more prejudiced than an old black man." Just like any other prejudice Wright's don't have to mean nothin. They're just there.
This is Rev. Wright's Mel Gibson moment, minus the spirits.
It's sad, though. You'd think he could work out that he'd only make the news by being shocking-yet-in-character, and refuse to play. Instead, he plays. Like Rikyrah, I think it's too early for this to be blamed on an old guy starting to lose his marbles.
I'm trying to think of a situation that I would make [I]better[/I] by comparing myself to Hillary at Tuzla, and failing.
The more I think about it, the more I think this guy is just another narcissist. He doesn't care what he says. The fact that he said it makes it defensible. The fact that he's said it makes it right. And he's got all of these people talking about how sad it is that this is what he's become. I have to say, I am being persuaded more and more to the idea that this is what he's always been. It may be unfair to listen to him today and draw these conclusions. It probably is unfair, but when I hear this guy talk I'm reminded of all of these other narcissists who do great works not for the sake of doing good works, but for the sake of inflating their own self-image.
When I hear people talk about the great work this guy or John Edwards or whomever have done, all I think about is Alec Baldwin in "Malice":
"I have an M.D. from Harvard, I am board certified in cardio-thoracic medicine and trauma surgery, I have been awarded citations from seven different medical boards in New England, and I am never, ever sick at sea. So I ask you; when someone goes into that chapel and they fall on their knees and they pray to God that their wife doesn't miscarry or that their daughter doesn't bleed to death or that their mother doesn't suffer acute neural trama from postoperative shock, who do you think they're praying to? Now, go ahead and read your Bible, Dennis, and you go to your church, and, with any luck, you might win the annual raffle, but if you're looking for God, he was in operating room number two on November 17, and he doesn't like to be second guessed. You ask me if I have a God complex. Let me tell you something: I am God."
I think he doesn't stop, or say he was wrong because he thinks he's revealing some truth that "The Zionists" are covering up.
I feel stupid. I defended him against a lot of attacks online, though I'm sure he never knew about it. And now it turns out I was wrong. This taints so much of the good work he did (and I do believe it is still good) for me, because I'm Jewish. As a Jew who defended him, and was inspired by him, all of a sudden, I've got a sick feeling in my gut that he thinks there's a "Zionist conspiracy" that's keeping Obama from talking to him.
Wright's words are also timley when lined up against the alleged shooter at the Holocaust memorial, James von Brunn's rhetoric - "Obama was created by Jews. Obama does what his Jew owners tell him to do. Jews captured America's money. Jews control the mass media."
Sound familiar? Great timing there, Rev. Wright.
Yeah, I think the thing a lot of people here are feeling is more the shame for having given this guy a chance. For spending the energy during the campaign rationalizing some of his crap. That we were fair to him almost to a fault because we saw what was going on, especially with regard to how this guy's words were was used to project the image of the angry black man onto Obama.
I remember trying to explain to people that yes, there’s clearly a lot of hate there, but let’s try and understand where the hate is coming from. I remember the whole thing reminding me of the Chris Rock bit bakum mentions above. And to this day, I don’t regret trying to say that “yeah, this guy says some crazy shit, but look where it’s all coming from.” I think it’s an incredibly important to make that argument, in the name of empathy, I mean. But today I do have to say that I am done defending this particular guy. I’m done rationalizing his behavior. I’ll continue to make the effort to empathize, but I’m done awarding Jeremiah Wright my sympathies. He is either a shell of his former self, or he is his former self revealed. Personally, I don’t have enough invested in the guy to care which it is. So long as this is the guy he is today, or the person he wants people to think he is today, I’m not going to spend any more time giving the guy the benefit of the doubt.
Barack Obama is already president. To hell with Rev. Wright.
Or maybe "Great timing there, God."
As a man of God, Dr. Wright should really ask himself why his comments hit the news cycle the same day Von Brunn's murder did.
Hint: even them Jews dont have that kind of power over space and time.
(For the record I am not suggesting that God allowed a good man to die in order to put the Rev in his place. I just think there is a spiritual message in the timing to be considered by a man who claims spiritual high ground)
Don't be naive Juba, everybody knows that Relativity is a Zionist lie created by the Jew Einstein who discovered time travel in the 1920s.
Well since you brought up Einstein and Zionism in the same sentence, I get to share some Einstein quotes:
"Before we can effectively combat anti-Semitism, we must first of all educate ourselves out of it and out of the slave mentality which it betokens. We must have more dignity, more independence, in our own ranks. Only when we have the courage to regard ourselves as a nation, only when we respect ourselves, can we win the respect of others; or rather, the respect of others will then come of itself. "
from About Zionism: Speeches and Lectures by Professor Albert Einstein, a compilation published in 1931. There's more at the link.
Well-played! (Applause)
This is just nonsense and TNC, I feel you're falling into the trap of throwing this guy under the bus due to the predictable uproar over his comments.
There is a Zionist element in this country which pretty much controls the debate on Israel-US politics. This is just undeniable. These are the same folks who require every Presidential candidate to genuflect at their altar each election cycle(AIPAC). You skip that speech and kiss your Presidential ambitions goodbye. You say anything even remotely criticizing Israel or questioning whether the alliance should continue and you might as well spit on the Star of David.
Wright is simply stating what everyone knows deep down but no politician can state openly. I don't think he meant it in the sense that Jewish handlers are telling Obama what to do, I think he meant it in the sense that Obama is smart enough to realize what would happen if he were to speak to Wright or reach out in some way. Politically incorrect maybe, but true nevertheless.
Right. And those are the people keeping Obama from talking to Wright, yes? If it were up to Obama he'd have Wright over for fish and grits every Sunday. But its AIPAC--not Obama--that's keeping this from happening, right? I don't know if you've been following the headlines, but AIPAC and Obama aren't really friends right now.
I suspect that what happened between Obama and Wright is extremely painful for both men, and both will be haunted by it until they leave the earth.
Main problem with this, it absolves Wright of responsibility for the showboating he did at the Press Club, a direct slap in the face to Obama.
Anytime someone absolves themselves of responsibility and points the finger directly at a scapegoat, it damages any effort one might want to make to honor their take as a credible one. IOW why should I take the man seriously if he blames Zionist Jews for harming his relationship to his "son" before addressing his own behavior? Now Cipher, god! (lol)
No matter whether its President Obama, President Bush, or even President Truman, those who oppose US policy concerning Israel will blame everyone and anyone but the President himself, whoever he is. After all, it was AIPAC, or the Neo-Cons. NOOOO! The President is the one who chooses his advisors and he is responsible for his foreign policy; him, and no one else.
Bronx Bomber: There is a Zionist element in this country which pretty much controls the debate on Israel-US politics. This is just undeniable. These are the same folks who require every Presidential candidate to genuflect at their altar each election cycle(AIPAC). You skip that speech and kiss your Presidential ambitions goodbye. You say anything even remotely criticizing Israel or questioning whether the alliance should continue and you might as well spit on the Star of David.
YM: And you say you are not an anti-semite. Aside from the fact that this comment has nothing to do with Rev. Wright.
To all the people who say there is a difference between "Jews" and "Zionists" - usually the Jews who say they are not Zionists are not big followers of the Jewish religion either. It is their discomfort with their religion that makes them wish they could just be "like everybody else" Sorry, you can't.