Ignorance is Amazing

In my mind, and a lot of other peoples', the Wright issue is an absolute non-issue.

I was just reading some comments on CNN.com in the political section, and someone from Texas posted that "Obama should shut his mouth..." and then spewed about the Wright nonsense.

And this got me to thinking - how stupid is this woman? How stupid is ANYONE who honestly thinks that a single thing Wright said reflects at all on Obama?

What mindset does someone need to have to even think this way? It absolutely boggles my mind. It's like I'm standing in a gaggle of children sometimes when I read these sorts of comments.

Do these comments come from people in some sort of spiritual thrall of their own pastors, hence they think that phenomena is universal?

Do they come from people who are just racist?

Do they come from people who just parrot whatever the MSM tells them?

Can someone explain to me, in rational terms, why this Wright bullshit even matters?

It's like Carlin said: "Garbage in, garbage out." It's no wonder our politics are so fucked up when morons get the vote...

In overheard conversations, in blogs, news reports, radio call-ins. Even more important than the problems with what Wright said and says is the near universal opinion that Obama repeatedly lied about it. The initial videos of Wright and Obama's attempt at damage control had voters here saying things like "Does Obama think we're fools? There is no way he could have gone to that church for 20 years and never heard any of this until now."

Since then, nearly everyone has been paying close attention to this; with each bit of "clarification" by Obama further eroded his credibility. People started re-examining everything about Obama. When we after PA that NC would actually matter this year, it has been dominating discussions in NC. Once people start worrying that Obama might be another smooth talker trying to put one over on them then He has a really big problem. Voters become more likely to believe various attacks on him whether true or not. Once the seeds of doubt are there, things can change really rapidly. All that is needed is a triggering event.

Wrights three appearances this past week was such an event and opened the floodgates of doubt and worry. Because this issue involves religion and what is normal in churches. mearly everyone here has many reference points for comparison with Obama's church. NC has a lot of variety in its many Christian churches and among the growing non-Christian population. Almost everyone has attended services outside their own faith, maybe with family and friends or at least for weddings, funerals, and such. That includes whites attending predominately black churches. Nearly everyone knows mixed-faith and no-faith families and everthing in between, often in our immediate families.

Obama's church and Rev. Wright seem outside the norm. Blacks seem almost as surprised and puzzled by this as do whites. Trinity does not look or sound like the local A.M.E. church. I noticed in the latest polls a small move from Obama to undecided among blacks in NC.

The issues of Obama and Islam have gained a lot of traction and it is not because everyone here is stupid, racist, and believes Obama attended a madrassa in Indonesia. It is because Obama has made a lot of misleading statements with respect to his and his families religions. For example, he describes his mother from Kansas being raised Christian (Baptist/Methodist parents) but not religious as an adult and his father as an atheist who was raised as a Muslim. Obama omits that when she was in middle and high school, his mother and her family attended the UUA church in Bellevue, WA. He really avoids discussing the couple of hours a week of Islamic instruction he received in public school in Indonesia, even to the point of omitting his Muslim step-father completely, framing his time in Indonesia as being while his mother was teaching there. (He received Christian instruction the previous years at the Catholic school.)

All of these things open up the obvious questions: when did he become a Christian? When and where and by whom was he baptized? Is he trying to hide something? If he never prayed in a mosque with his step-father, what about at the Islamic center? And on it goes.

If another issue surfaces (maybe Robert Blackwell) or Wright flares up again, Obama could rapidly drop in the polls.


It is less about religion or race and more about truthiness.

Out of the three candidates, Obama is the least deceptive and - more importantly - least dangerous, okay?

The people want 100% truthiness? Resurrect Jesus cuz you won't find it in any politician so why the hell expect that of them?

Look at all of their records and see what's the most damaging to US, to the American people.

War votes KILLED over 4000 insultingly low-paid American troops unnecessarily, and permanently maimed over 25,000 more for life. Pushing twice as hard to get NAFTA through than her health-care reform bill, caused an eradication of American jobs here but empowered and strengthened China to the point that the only country that still believes America is THE super power, is America!

Yet Obama having a righteously angry minister makes him wrong? Obama having had a few hours of Muslim lessons hurts us how? Obama having "omitted" his stepfather is Muslim is the cause of higher gas prices, how?

Compare the lies and deceits and the lack of "truthiness" between the three candidates now and see which ones are the most dangerous to you and yours, and the American people and our country.

Somehow, Obama's record of not having "truthiness" according to YOUR standard looks like an elementary school volcano science project to Hillary's and McInSane's rabid warmongering nuclear bomb.

Earth calling unc70, come in please.

It's all about not having the black man win or worse! Having a presidential candidate win that's going to change Washington DC and prevent corporate leaches from sucking down all our taxdollars who is black to boot!

Obama is a "Nightmare on Whities Wall Street" and they aim to take him down any which way they can.

Leaders who care the most for us "unwashed masses" are never popular with America's MSM, dumbass fascists and narrow-minded but diehard ninnies.

This f***ing team mentality America is infested with is what allows people like Schwarzenegger say "The people can not govern themselves. They don't have the education and brains of the elites with money who get the best. That's why they need to be ruled with an iron fist and told what to do. Only the elite, people with money and power should lead the simple people." {paraphrased and without a fat stogey between my teeth}.

I have been an activist since the 60's: civil rights, anti-war, economic justice, equal rights for all, ... In 1988, I voted for Jesse Jackson in the NC primary. I supported Edwards, had Clinton among my least favorite of our candidates, and was relatively positive but unimpressed with Obama.

I will readily vote for Obama or Clinton over McCain. I see growing problems for Obama and for all Dems if he is our nominee. Most the these problems arise from Obama's own actions and statements, but they could be big problems for all our candidates. For example, Trinity Church was a positive for Obama in state and local politics, but could be a problem on the national stage. Once the videos of Wright got everyone's attention, almost no one believed Obama's initial denials -- not after 20 years attending that church -- nor his revisions the next few days. While his religion speech mostly quieted the pundits, most people had not forgotten. Only now, they were less likely to believe him or to trust him and more open to negative attacks against him.

His unusual family background and his time in Indonesia as he described them in his books made an appealing first impression. As his life gets more coverage, its start looking considerable different in good and bad ways. In emphasizing his mythic African father, I think he dismissed and slighted the strong women in his life. His grandmother Madelyn Dunham is impressive, becoming a bank VP in WA in 1950's and in Hawaii in the 1960's; she paid for most of his private school with the help of a scholarship she got for him. His mother is the one with the PhD, not his father (has a masters from Harvard). She didn't grow up in Kansas and then go to college in Hawaii; her middle and high school years she lived near Seattle and apparently lived there later with an infant Barack the spring semester 1962. Even strong supporters are surprised by what they didn't know.

We all try to put a positive spin on our life stories and tend to gloss over painful or unflattering aspects; we even do it internally. What puzzles me is why does Obama leave out things like his mother going to high school in Mercer Island, WA. None of us would emphasize that our mother was still 17 when she became pregnant by our much older father, that they married several months later even though he still had a wife and two children elsewhere, or that he abandoned you soon after your birth. I understand trying to downplay his Muslim connections, although I think he has handled this very poorly for the long-run. But why Kansas but not also Washington?

But these are not where the big risks are found. Because I still expect that Obama will be our nominee and I will be voting for him and really don't want McCain to win, I have tried to avoid posting things I found unless and until I determine that these issues are already well-known by the RW. A couple of them seemed primed to hit the MSM any day with more impact than Wright had. They have been in clear view for months, do not involve race or religion, are not being pushed by the Clintons, and are starting to be discussed on the net by the RW, seemingly for use in the GE.

You know that some people can't handle the TRUTH!

That post reads almost word for word like one of the spam emails going around. I think you lifted it straight off of one.

Say, you know, there are these Nigerians out there who want to give you a lot of money and all you have to do is give them your bank account numbers. It looks like a really good investment. You should take them up on it.

I have not seen any email that looked like that post of mine, but I will certainly try to find it. Send me a copy or a link by PM if convenient.

I am so old I remember receiving those messages by regular mail and by telex. Also a couple of old friends from there I haven't spoken to lately and are in need of a call.

What rule do you think I have broken?

they think will hurt the opponent no matter how trivial.

And it does neither candidate any good at all. Someone will win the nomination in spite of the idiocy displayed by their supporters here.

my team is better", its not about choosing the right person for our children's future to some, its about wanting everyone to choose your favorite team at all costs.

If you read about Black Liberation Theology, it focuses heavily on the oppressors ("white people") and the oppressed ("black people").
For many of us, our dream since the civil rights movement of the 60s...our dream is a colorless society.
I'd hoped to see this in my lifetime; where children were not taught to see and judge based on the color of a person's skin.

BLT works in direct contradiction to that dream. Based on my readings recently, I think this is an old debate that dates back to garvey, cone, dubois and martin luther king. Even they didn't agree on this issue.

Bottom line: some people (of all races) are hurt and confused by a unifying leader who subscribes to the separatist teachings of Black Liberation Theology.

While the tenets of BLT can be expressed in a way that is racist and overall demeaning to the civil rights movement, it is largely for the most part about african american empowerment. If you can find one instance of Obama suggesting that the oppressed should overthrow or in some other way undercut the power of the oppressors, please let me know. If not you are just grasping for straws that have been so tantalizingly held in front of you by Hannity, Ingram and the like.

it's up to you.

When you teach children that white == oppressors (evil) and black == oppressed (victims),
you are destroying MLKs dream.

That *is* a major part of BLT. I've done my homework; have you?

If you tell a child he/she will never amount to anything because "whitey" will keep him down, you not only breed hatred, but you plant a seed in that child's head that will make him/her give up before they even begin. That was NOT MLK's intention. He wanted a multi-racial brotherhood.

My disagreement with your post is that I've not seen anything like that from Wright. The cherry picked, out of context sound bites don't accurately reflect on him, imho.

I read a couple of books by Cone (founder of BLT) as well as some Garvey and W.E.B Dubois

I'll try to dig up some info for you...that is if you are truly interested and your mind is open.
I honestly am looking for answers because I am quite confused by Obama's choice.

I'm in danger of losing my marbles:)


I think Rev. Wright is a non-issue, or should have remained one anyway. I agree with everything I've heard Wright say so far. I don't think this should have reflected negatively on Obama at all. I would really hate to be held accountable for everything my pastors ever said! I think he should have embraced their differences... no two people on Earth can agree on every single point. If they do, someone is lying.

I'm trying to catalogue a few of the very rare rational exchanges between camps on DU. There's much faith to be had.

Thanks for your thoughtful responses.

Maybe you'd like what I had to say;
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=132&topic_id=5776568&mesg_id=5776568

But didn't his church have white members? It's part of the same denomination (UCC) that my parents go to. Like you said, the sound bites were cherry picked. But I am probably sympathetic to liberation theology anyway.

But this lily white chick would sure love to hear him speak. :)

I honestly think those things were taken out of context, and when Obama spoke down to this, he somewhat confirmed the perceived racism. I would have rather seen him tell the truth... and embrace any differences he has with Wright.

Juniper,

The issue I'm talking about here is beyond Rev Wright and his comments.
It's bigger than that.

Here's James Cone's book on Black Liberation Theology. He created the theology during the
civil rights movement to help empower black Americans during a time of horrific inequality.

http://www.amazon.com/Black-Theology-Liberation-Ethics-Society/dp/0883446855

This is the most unbiased perspective since it is by the creator himself.
There are more subjective sources out there, and a good bit of debate as about this
controversial theology.

Bottom line: I was first attracted to "Obama" because I thought he was the one
to take us to the next level of evolution in terms of unity. But, when I did my own
research, I found this contradiction. This is not the mindset of a unifier.

My question to Senator Obama would be: How do you explain to your children each Sunday
that not all white people are oppressors and not all black folks are victims? How does
teaching a child to view the world in terms of black (victims) and white (evil oppressors)...
how does that prepare him for a desegregated world?

sorry if this is obvious and I misunderstood your question.

you're making zero sense right now

so I gave an honest answer.
It's not racism or ignorance.
It real concern that people have about the dream we thought we were fighting for since the 60s.

Getting po'd at me doesn't help me understand why a unifying leader chose BLT over the alternatives.
It just doesn't make sense to me; and that's the problem with it.

Welcome to DU.

:hi:

You seem rational so far. It's tricky, but keep it up.

if so, can you get me in? ;-)


noise to signal ratio is quite high out here!

That is all.

Probably because a lot of other people do it too. That doesn't make it right. Ignorance means you don't know something. Stupidity means you can't learn something (or lots of things). Right now, I don't know what the capital of Uzbekistan is, or the name of its President. I can look it up. If I was stupid, I would look it up and be unable to remember it. The thing is that everyone is ignorant of a tremendous amount of knowledge, and semi-smart people should be a little more humble about being aware of that.

There are people on DU who think that the Wright issue matters. Perhaps you could engage them, and it would be better to do so without assuming that they are total idiots. First, is the question "whether anything Wright says reflects on Obama" a factual question? Can it be PROVEN one way or another, or is it a question of mindset, values, or worldviews?

I am not gonna say that Wright does not matter. Or that he should not matter. Wright is like a character reference for a person you are hiring to be President. Relevant to Obama, because he is more of a national unknown. Hillary has been on the national stage for 16 years. McCain for 8, since his last run for the Presidency. Obama is less well known.

The problem to me is not that Wright is having an impact when he should not, it is that Wright has been caricatured and demonized based on a couple of statements or answers to questions. Based on those one or two statements, which the RWNM wants to make sure everybody hears, Wright is being pigeonholed or stereotyped. "What? He said that? Then he's one of THEM?" He's a militant black man! He's a conspiracy theorist! He's a hatemonger!

It's not like we are immune to the same thing. Take a statement by Ferraro - she's a racist. Take a statement by Randi - she's a sexist. Take a statement by Reggie White - he's a homophobe. It's goes from disagreement with what they said, to hatred or contempt or pity for the person saying it. Perhaps because the statement is about fundamental issues. Country, family, god, sexuality, and people do not tolerate what seem to be extreme deviations from the norm.

and I wonder if they are really paying attention or are they doing what they are told...