He would have denounced Amos, too

But I will send a fire upon Judah, and it shall devour the palaces of Jerusalem. Thus saith the LORD; For three transgressions of Israel, and for four, I will not turn away the punishment thereof; because they sold the righteous for silver, and the poor for a pair of shoes; That pant after the dust of the earth on the head of the poor, and turn aside the way of the meek: and a man and his father will go in unto the same maid, to profane my holy name: And they lay themselves down upon clothes laid to pledge by every altar, and they drink the wine of the condemned in the house of their god. — Amos 2:5-8

I’ve said before that I have no horse in the Democratic Party’s presidential nomination process, but I’m certainly disappointed in Barack Obama today. Yesterday I watched his long-time pastor, the Reverend Jeremiah Wright, speak before the national press club regarding the brouhaha that has been made of a sermon he gave shortly after September 11, 2001. The press has been bending itself backwards trying to keep Rev. Wright’s comments firmly out of their original context and put them in the frame that best serves their interest in selling newspapers and drawing the eyes of television audiences. Yesterday Rev. Wright fielded questions regarding his religious views, the prophetic liberation theology of the so-called black church, and the political fallout that has been dogging his former parishioner, Senator Barack Obama.

I watched the Bill Moyers interview with Rev. Wright, with the expanded-but-still-incomplete clip of the now-famous “God damn America” sermon. I watched the reverend speak to the national press club. As I watched, I grew firmer in my belief that the more of this man people actually heard the less radical he would sound to them. Naturally, people like Dan Abrams and Tucker Carlson on MSNBC couldn’t stand such a thought, and simplified the reverend’s comments into a fabricated pissing match between the pastor and the senator. This was unfair to the reverend, unfair to the senator, and unfair to the voting public.

It was also totally expected. The press reaction to Rev. Wright was, I thought, the primary reason that Sen. Obama had gently distanced himself from the reverend’s misrepresented comments. Today that changed. Senator Obama in a press conference today has now cut his own pastor (former pastor, whatever) loose having seen the reverend’s full remarks. Regardless of what the political pundits had been saying, Wright had not done anything deserving such. The proper reaction for Senator Obama to have given, upon having seen the video, heard the audio, or read the transcripts, would be something along the lines of “I feel that Reverend Jeremiah Wright has been badly misrepresented by my opponents and by the press in this matter, and while I understand that many in the public — who have not been exposed to these remarks in their original context — are offended, he is a good man, he has nothing to be ashamed of, and I am proud to have been a part of his congregation for all those years.”

TL;DR – Barack Obama showed reprehensible political cowardice today. He may yet make an excellent president, but rolling over on a good man like this is just not right.

  • Book of Amos (from a little-read religious document called the “Old Testament”)
  • Rev. Jeremiah Wright full sermon (September 16, 2001 audio)
  • Rev. Jeremiah Wright at the National Press Club (April 28, 2008 parts 1, 2, 3, 4, 5)
  • Sen. Barack Obama regarding Rev. Wright (April 29, 2008)

5 thoughts on “He would have denounced Amos, too”

  1. meesha.v

    I disagree. Rev knew exactly what he was doing and that his speech will be split into soundbites. He didn’t strike me as clueless.

  2. Burrowowl Post author

    Reverend Wright is somebody that has spent decades getting a full hour to get his point across. The presentations I’ve seen him give (including those linked above) aren’t in a sound-bite-friendly format. He certainly should have known that anything he did since this media assault started would be put under a microscope and twisted around, but that doesn’t make him an expert at producing the kinds of polished, sanitized, safe presentations that politicians produce these days. He made the grave political mistake of giving a serious and considered response without first passing it through the filter of “how can I say this without having any five-word phrase come out of my mouth that could be looped on the radio to make me sound bad?”

    There were a couple of questions he fielded (such as when asked about whether Muslims are eligible for salvation) that he had concise, quick answers for, but regarding the present political scandal the only mistake he has made is in acting like the public would be given his side of the story. I don’t make a habit of agreeing with George W. Bush in public, but there is a problem with the media filter in our political discourse. I wouldn’t have even put up this post if it weren’t for all the “too little, too late” nonsense I’ve been hearing about Obama cutting off his pastor. It wasn’t too little too late, it was wrong. It was politically convenient for Obama to step away from a man unfairly accused, just like it was politically convenient for Hillary Clinton to vote to authorize military force in Iraq. Easier to just do the wrong thing and try to get back on-message.

  3. meesha.v

    at this point obama represents people who voted for him and want him to be a president. this is something he had to do to even have a chance to get elected,which is not going to happen anyway. press runs this circus and you have to play by their rules. he could have gone with the principle and stuck up for the rev. but every mccain ad would have had the rev. in the background. he had to do it and you know it.

Comments are closed.