Barack Obama and the Audacity of Racism

Don’t be fooled by the rhetoric of Obama’s alleged lack of experience. He would be ridiculously inexperienced and dangerously naive in the capacity as leader of this nation from a domestic position and malignantly worse in foreign policy. But as far as the practical application of politics–he is a seasoned politician. He cut his teeth on the dirty, backroom, and underhanded politics of Chicago. He has demonstrated great political skills, but that has yet to manifest into anything of substance.

There have been great men who were good politicians but rarely have great politicians been great men.

When faced with a political scandal, politicians will generally take one of three methodical actions in defense of said scandal. At times, a crossbred hybrid of the actions is employed if the potential damage commands it. The three political defense mechanisms that follow are the options available to politicians:

Option-1) Lie. Nothing fancy or baroque, just a plain straightforward lie. Lie about any knowledge of the scandal and deny having any involvement in it. The next step is to wait and judge the fallout.

Option-2) Excuses. Contrive a plausible excuse as to why it happened along with an underlying reason of its happening. Expound the fact that it was not your fault it happened. At some point during the excuse stage the employ of a fall guy may be necessary for the achievement of salvaging a political career.

Option-3) The Nuclear Option. When backed into a corner and said politician’s knees are buckling from the weight of irrefutable evidence of said scandal, one may have to apply the Nuclear Option–which can be the unraveling of a politician’s career–be honest and tell the truth. The truth is incontestably a politician’s last resort for salvation.

Thus presents Obama’s potential waterloo in regards to Rev. Jeremiah Wright and the Trinity Church of Christ.

The dubiously esteemed Rev. Jeremiah Wright is a certified racism provocateur. He is a historically and substantially well documented racist, anti-Semite, and anti-American, and is currently an albatross around Obama’s neck that is beginning to have the prospect of removing Obama’s head along with its extraction.

The ensuing is a very brief discourse, for the benefit of the uninformed reader, of the hate speech that has disgorged from the mouth of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright over the course his career:

• Wright told his congregation to insert the phrase “God damn America” in the stead of “God bless America” in the song of the same name, since that is what the Bible says for killing innocent people.
• He accused the U.S. government of providing drugs, building bigger prisons and passing the three-strike law for the sole purpose of Blacks.
• He condemned the U.S. as a racist society and again said God Damn America. He also, in the same statement, referred to the U.S. as the “U.S. of KKK-A.”
• The Trinity United Church awarded its highest social achievement award to Louis Farrakhan. Wright also, in 1984, visited Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi with Louis Farrakhan.
• Rev. Jeremiah Wright said during a sermon on the first Sunday after 9/11 on Sept 16, 2001 that the United States brought the attacks from al Qaeda on itself for its own terrorism. He later amended this statement to say that America was attacked as retribution for racism.
• He has classified Zionism as racism and compared Israel to South Africa during apartheid because of their occupation of Palestinian territories. He accused the U.S. of inventing the AIDS virus and distributing it worldwide to keep third world nations in poverty.

While these are just a few highlights of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s decades of promoting racism, anti-Semitism, and anti- Americanism, they are manifold enough to produce an unclouded gauge of his character or the character of his apologists.

Obama’s conundrum is that every one of these incendiary statements by Wright are tattooed on his forehead because of his predilection for Wright and the Trinity Church of Christ. Obama has spent 20 plus years of being mentored by Wright, financially supporting the Trinity Church of Christ and never, until being politically motivated, did he attempt to distance himself from the savage viewpoints of Wright and the Trinity Church of Christ–and then he only tried to remove himself from certain statements by Wright rather than a denunciation of the source.

Lies: When these statements from Obama’s pastor, mentor, and church manifested themselves in the press, his natural political instinct was to use Option 1 and lie. And lie he did. He went on record, for years, and stated that he has never been exposed to any of the inflammatory words from Rev. Wright nor any of the oratorical offenses since being a regular member of the Trinity Church of Christ since 1988. The fall out was too great and potentially too damaging because the lie was too implausible, so he methodically moved from Option 1, to Option 2.

Excuses: Obama went into excuse mode in defense of his mentor and church. He implored why his mentor and church should be excused for their vitriolic discourse. His reasoning was because Wright is Black and the church is a Black Church—the latter holds true if Obama’s statement, that all Black churches are the same, is taken at face value–which is incomprehensible. Obama would also be a benefactor of this excuse by receiving a passport of dissociation by proxy and race. He enlightened the White Community on the fact that Black churches are different from White churches, even though they worship the same God and do so with the same operating manual. Obama’s church, and according to Obama, most Black churches, teach a racially exclusive theology with a theological modus operandi that would, at the least, make a White parishioner uncomfortable. Obama never explained how this antithetical Christian ideology could be reconciled with the teachings of Christ nor the teachings of the New Testament. One could suppose that, according to Obama, Blacks also have a pass with their Creator.

Obama’s deployment of Option 2 pales in comparison to Bill Clinton’s execution of Option 2. Clinton performed, with Oscar worthy aplomb, his now infamous “it depends on what the meaning of “is” is. Clinton’s excuse is he did not have sexual relations with Monica Lewinsky because their congress was not technically sex, so he answered under oath accordingly. Obama believes that Wright’s speech and his 20 plus years of support are not technically racism and anti-Americanism because it was spoken by Blacks and as you know, Blacks have a history….

Truth: Obama completely botched Option 3. He never mentioned his lies nor apologized for them or his support of Wright and his church. He never addressed his pattern of lying about Rev. Wright–a complete violation of Option 3. He only denounced certain statements by Wright, rather than Wright the racist. Obama disingenuously kept himself out of the racist loop. Obama gave the great racial uniting speech after Option 1 and Option 2 weren’t selling. Unfortunately his speech did nothing but spotlight his years of lying about his knowledge of Rev. Wright’s hateful rhetoric during this, at best, milquetoast model of media vetting. Obama’s speech failed to extract him from his contradictions.

His speech can be encapsulated into three sentences: 1) I know I said one thing for years, but this is what I am saying now, sort of. 2) If White America will overlook Black America’s continuing with its racist dialog, anti-Semitism, and anti-American rhetoric, things will come together. 3) If White America will address and fund a laundry list of grievances from Black America, the country can, if all three recommendations are followed, and I am elected President, achieve a more perfect union. Obama, and his camp, would be well advised to come to terms with the fact that his oratory prowess may have, up to this point, blanketed his lack of substance, but it cannot cover his lies and burgeoning racism.

Since the racist disposition of Rev. Wright and the Trinity Church of Christ has been brought to light in the press, the church issued the following statement “Nearly three weeks before the 40th commemorative anniversary of the murder of the Reverend Dr. Martin Luther King Jr., the Reverend Dr. Jeremiah A. Wright’s character is being assassinated in the public sphere because he has preached a social gospel on behalf of oppressed women, children and men in America and around the globe.”

Two questions arise from the church’s statement that should be addressed: Why the omission of the subject matter at the heart of the controversy? If one mixes the lethal elixir, drinks it, then spews the poison from one’s mouth–then sells the tapes in the church’s lobby–is the resulting disclosure by the media character assassination or is the press matter-of-factly reporting character suicide?

The heart of Obama’s speech is his being able to “form a more perfect union” for this country. This “a more perfect union” idea is very attractive and rapidly attainable. But, contrarily so, his speech was nothing less than an apologetic screed for the defense of racist like Wright et al. Obama gave them a pass because of the discrimination they may have suffered in their past or present, rather than trying to distance himself from their brand of racism with his speech. The caveat he proposed, to achieve “a more perfect union”, to White America, is that White America should atone for its past sins against Black America by understanding and be willing to tolerate the continued racist attitudes of Black churches and leaders, and be willing to address their needs, as a class, rather than the needs of a nation as a whole. Obama believes the Black leaders and churches, who continue to espouse racist dialog, should be given a pass because they cannot break free from the metaphorical shackles of the past because of America’s racist history.

To give further insight into Obama’s ever emerging racist credo, while discussing racism in America during a radio interview a few days after his speech, Obama said of his White grandmother: The point I was making was not that my grandmother harbors any racial animosity. But she is a typical white person. If she sees somebody on the street that she doesn’t know, there’s a reaction in her that doesn’t go away and it comes out in the wrong way.

Obama wants to lead this nation out of the perceived racism, that in his mind, would rival the Jim Crow era, but, since he has had absolutely no impact on the racist views of his mentor and pastor, and his church for the past 20 years, how does he honestly propose to change the racist views of a nation in four years?

Posted to Politics,Racism | Comments (1) | Email This Post | Tags: Barack Obama, Racism