So far I’ve restrained myself from commenting on the controversy surrounding Barack Obama and his long-time pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright. But the discussion continues as it should.
Yesterday’s entry was a column by Martin Peretz of the New Republic. (Hat tip to titusonenine.) I think well of the New Republic though they are considerably to my left on the political spectrum. I find their offerings usually well reasoned. But this column falls short. Peretz distracts more from the real issues here rather than addressing them (e. g. What the hey does Zbigniew Brzezinski have to do with this?).
As for me, I could point out that Obama’s attempts to distance himself from Wright don’t hold water in light of their past close ties and the influence Wright has been on Obama. From Rolling Stone, yes, a very friendly source, over a year ago:
Wright is not an incidental figure in Obama's life, or his politics. The senator "affirmed" his Christian faith in this church; he uses Wright as a "sounding board" to "make sure I'm not losing myself in the hype and hoopla." Both the title of Obama's second book, The Audacity of Hope, and the theme for his keynote address at the Democratic National Convention in 2004 come from Wright's sermons. "If you want to understand where Barack gets his feeling and rhetoric from," says the Rev. Jim Wallis, a leader of the religious left, "just look at Jeremiah Wright."
I could point out that Obama wasn’t born in this church, he chose it.
I could point out that Obama’s recent claims not to be aware of the *ahem* tenor of certain of Wright’s sermons are slightly specious given that any number of those sermons are anti-American, anti-White rants (not to mention a bit loony).
But instead I’ll merely ask a simple but clarifying question.
Would it be acceptable for a Republican presidential candidate to attend and support a church that preaches hate against Blacks?