In the weeks since revelations about Sen. Obama’s relationship with Rev. Wright became known, I was wondering when we’d hear from the National Jewish Democratic Council. Well we’ve finally heard from them on the controversy.
That’s right.
Silence.
(Note: I’m referring to the NJDC’s blog. Maybe individual members have commented on the controversy or issued public statements. Usually those would be linked to on the blog. Certainly if a Republican candidate had a similar relationship with a racist we’d have seen something on the blog.)
No condemnation of Sen. Obama’s ties to a racist and antisemite. No expression of regret that the junior senator from Illinois didn’t condemn Rev. Wright until the issue became an embarrassment.
The NJDC, though, is quite happy about the prospect of having so many Jewish super-delegates to the Democratic convention.
According to a Gallup Poll published yesterday, Jewish voters are split roughly down the middle. 48% prefer Senator Clinton, and 43% prefer Senator Obama; this 5-point lead for Senator Clinton is within the margin of error. With the race as close as it is, these Jewish superdelegates could play a pivotal role in determining the Democratic presidential nominee.
So Jews could play a role in handing the Democratic nomination to a white woman instead of a fellow who attends a church whose former pastor considers “Israel” a dirty word. That isn’t exactly something I’d be excited about.
Perhaps a group of Jewish Pennsylvania politicians understand that too. The Caucus reports: Pa. Jewish Leaders Praise Obama in Letter
The letter, which can be found online here at the Jewish news service JTA, praises Senator Obama at length for his recent speech on race and argues that he shouldn’t be held accountable for incendiary remarks made by his former pastor, Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. While we are profoundly disturbed by the unpatriotic, bigoted and anti-Semitic comments of the retired pastor of Senator Obama’s church, we are moved that Barack stood up at the National Constitution Center in Philadelphia earlier this month, and “condemned in unequivocal terms the statements of Reverend Wright†and expressed his own views on issues near and dear to the heart and soul of the Jewish community.
Specifically, in repudiating the remarks of his former pastor, Senator Obama said Reverend Wright “expressed a profoundly distorted view of this country…a view that sees the conflicts in the Middle East as rooted primarily in the actions of stalwart allies like Israel, instead of emanating from the perverse and hateful ideologies of radical Islam.â€
“We respectfully ask that you stand with Senator Barack Obama and vote for him on April 22,†the letter ends.
Sen. Obama’s speech, to my mind, contained too much equivocation to be viewed in such a positive light. It was less a “repudiation” than asking others to understand where Rev. Wright was coming from.
The Caucus item concludes:
Henri Barkey, chairman of the international relations program at Lehigh University in Bethlehem, Pa., is an unpaid foreign policy adviser to the Obama campaign who affixed his signature to the letter. Senator Obama has been “misrepresented†by his association with Reverend Wright, Mr. Barkey said, and Jewish people should hear the truth about Mr. Obama’s pro-Israel policies from fellow Jewish people.“This is how American politics can get — very dirty and personal,†Mr. Barkey said. “My sense in this day and age is you don’t let anything fester. You set the record straight, and perhaps that should have been done earlier. When you don’t respond quicker, people assume it’s true.â€
Dirty? Personal? Sen. Obama’s ties with Rev. Wright really go to the heart of his character. The most charitable explanation is that Sen. Obama didn’t accept what he was hearing or was even appalled by it, but he attended the church because it was politically expedient for him to do so. Of course that makes him as cynical as we’ve come to expect politicians to be. Nothing messianic about that. It’s politics as usual, with an unusually articulate salesman making the deal.
Israel Matzav critiques the Jewish Pennsylvania politicians:
Not every ‘liberal cause’ is reconcilable with Judaism. But it’s clear that these ‘leaders’ have decided to replace the Jewish version of social justice with their own.
Still other aspects of Sen. Obama’s ties to the church are hard to explain away. How does Sen. Obama pose as a supporter of Israel when his church’s newsletter published the manifesto of Hamas without, apparently, eliciting any sort of objection from the senator? (h/t Colossus of Rhodey.Hube) And how does he stand by his church’s support for Minister Farrakhan? He may have denounced Farrakhan, but he did march in the million man march. What’s expedient? Sen. Obama’s flirtation with Farrakhan or his disavowal of said relationship? The same can be asked of his ties to Rev. Wright.
The NJDC considers talks of Sen. Obama’s ties with Farrakhan to be smears. As mentioned above, Sen. Obama’s ties to Farrakhan aren’t unfair game. They speak against his “post-racial” appeal. They also suggest that Sen. Obama’s is good deal more cynical than his supporters would acknowledge. This isn’t American idol we’re talking about. We’re talking about a campaign to see who will lead the free world.
Someone who has built his career by tolerating the intolerant needs to explain that tolerance. Sen. Obama’s reassessment ought to have come before Rev. Wright or Minister Farrakhan became liabilities. That it didn’t raises questions about Sen. Obama’s sincerity in repudiating them.
Crossposted on Soccer Dad.
When McCain is raked over the coals for befriending anti-semites and bigots like Hagee, Falwell and Robertson this past year, I’ll get upset with Obama about Wright. As others have said, why the f*** do I even know the name of Obama’s preacher. I do not know the name of any other preacher of any other past or present presidential candidate and I’m sure some have said some bad things about a whole host of various groups of citizens.
The difference is that Wright was called a mentor by Sen. Obama and that Obama attended the church for 20 years hearing all of this hatred.
And it isn’t a matter that this was the church that Sen. Obama grew up in; he chose it as an adult. Clearly the ideology didn’t bother him or not enough to stay away.
I agree with Soccerdad. This was Obama’s mentor. The Falwell’s etc. are only supporters which McCain doesn’t have a personal relationship with. Anyway the evangelical community has never been one of McCain’s political bases. In fact he has ticked them off in the past.
Fine. Who were Clinton’s and McCain’s mentors and can we analyze everything they ever wrote or said. The fact is that Sen Obama’s church is a very mainstream church in the African-American community and is associated with the mostly white United Church of Christ. Also, right and left wing church leaders (including Huckabee) are aghast that Wright is being called out for a few sermons without looking at context and his overall body of work, including his service to our country.
If Obama’s church is a very mainstream church in the African -American Community, then that what does that say about that community. I don’t think that is the case, but an excusing of this bigots comments. And BTW the United Church of Christ is one of the most Anti-Israel “mainline” Protestant churches out there. If Clinton and McCain’s mentors said anything like Wright, they would be out of the race overnight. There is a hypocrisy in this country when it comes to race. It is good that reasonable people are now starting to see that.
The difference is we do not know who Clinton’s and McCain’s mentors are or even who Obama’s other mentors are, only his black preacher. I am sure there were some influential professor’s at Harvard and even U of Chicago, where Obama taught, that influenced his policy positions on the basis that they were mentors. Shouldn’t we be able to analyze all of their writings to see if there were any ideas they should denounce and reject in the name of not being hypocritical.
I do not always agree with my Rabbi’s sermons; but, I also do not begin to think a few sermons are the gist of his being. The everyday actions towards me and my family make up a much larger part of my opinion of both of the Rabbis at my synagogue than anything they have ever said during a sermon. Their actions I remember; their words, not so much.
Also, I guess you’ll tell all your friends and loved ones to stop watching Oprah, a member of that church, and basically dealing with most upper-middle class African-Americans in Chicago.
As an aside, don’t you think an African-American who grew up during Jim Crow and has seen the ravages of the drug war on the inner city he lives in and supports has a reason to be a little upset with the US government. Especially an ex-marine who volunteered to fight for his country.
If you think I am defending Wright, I am not. I just don’t think this can all be understood in a 30 second sound bite and I don’t hold individuals responsible for the actions or words of another, especially words they have rejected.
Oh, phooey. This is not a question of a some phrases cherry picked from a few sermons. This is a consistently expressed viewpoint, both in sermons and church bulletins and other fora, over a couple of decades. And in his speech Obama didn’t even assert that at any time he drew the good reverend aside to whisper politely that maybe Israel isn’t a dirty word and AIDS is not a plot by the US government to kill blacks.
If Obama didn’t have ties to this church and Rev. Wright announced an endorsement, there’d be no issue. People can endorse whoever they like and a simple statement, “I didn’t seek that endorsement” would be enough.
And Jeff, lets assume for the sake of argument that Rev. Wright’s opinions are a result of the undoubted long history of racism in America–OK, but where did the anti-semitism come from? What history of oppression by Jews has led Wright, and for that matter a substantial part of the black community, to adopt openly anti-semitic attitudes?
I never said Wright did not have looney ideas. What I am saying is, I look at the actions of people that affect me and the issues that I am concerned with and Wright has nothing to do with either. Obama on the other hand, while he has less of a pro-Israel reputation than McCain or Lieberman, has a stellar voting record according to AIPAC and would probably make more headway in the middle east then John “Bomb, Bomb Iran” McCain.
Would he fix all the problems or even get Hamas to lay down their weapons and recognize Israel, not in a million years. However, I believe he will change the way things are done. Whether it is for the better, I am not sure. However, I do not see him throwing Israel under the proverbial bus.
As for what makes a substantial part of the black community adopt openly anti-semitic attitudes, I have no idea. The same can be said of their views to the Asian and more recently Latin American communities. I do know there is some latent racism or just mistrust in some older Jewish people, some of it still festering since the riots in the 60’s.
Jeff, you tend to exaggerate what you perceive as conservative ideology, and underestimate all of the negative markers of your liberal candidate. You ignore the fact that Wright purposefully included a Hamas rant in his web page, does that not bother you in the least?
Obama belonged to this church for over twenty years and did not bother to comment on Wrights anti-American, anti-white, and anti-Israel sermons until this was exposed in the media.
Now they have a muzzle on Wright until the election, and if Obama should win, Wright will be invited to the inauguration.
Jeff, please start to look at things the way they really are, not the way you would like them to be.
“I never said Wright did not have looney ideas. What I am saying is, I look at the actions of people that affect me”
That is exactly the problem with Obama. He is a newcomer compared to McCain and Clinton, and has very few “actions” on which to judge his intentions, just a lot of vaguely uplifting talk about “hope and change”. Therefore his words and the words of his supporters *and mentors* take on more importance. As for comparing Wright to any pastors McCain and Clinton have associated with, McCain and Clinton have never lavished praise on anyone as their “spiritual mentor” as Obama has for Wright.
“[Obama] has a stellar voting record according to AIPAC …” He also has some of the most venomously anti-Israel members of the foreign policy establishment as his advisors, including Brzezinski, Malley, Powers (until she got canned), and that general whose name I forgot but who said “New York and Miami” have too much influence on foreign policy. There is a lot more reason to be suspicious of Obama than just Wright’s rantings.
“I do know there is some latent racism or just mistrust in some older Jewish people, some of it still festering since the riots in the 60’s.” So your argument is Wright is not really antisemitic, but some Jews are antiblack so that makes it OK? Pathetic.
Hold on here, let’s try this:
I love the earth! I wish to feed the homeless, and to give them clothes and shelter. Though it’s the dirty white Jews fault all this evil happens.
Now I don’t care how half asleep I am during one of my preachers more “crazy” off the wall sermons, but if I hear something like THAT, I’m going to stand up. RIGHT THEN, and ask for a clarification, ask if the deacons approved that “dirty white Jew” part.
And if they did, I would LEAVE and NEVER come back to that church again.
Over 20 years Obama NEVER heard what has been recorded MANY times being said by that man? AND he never came out and called all that speech patently evil?
Sorry, you better hope Clintler pulls a miracle out of her bum.
Because all Mccain has to do is play some of those tapes as adds in mostly white states and show Obama NOT condemning them and it’s OVER.
Sure, some older Jews–and some younger Jews, too–have attitudes towards blacks that are not praiseworthy. But an equivalent to Wright would be a well-known rabbi with a large congregation offering virulent anti-gentile and anti-black statements on a regular basis, giving awards to notorious racists, and promoting racist organizations regularly in the shul’s newsletter.
I have a few theories…actually, “speculations” is a better word…about black anti-semitism. However, that it exists, that it is widespread, and that many establishment blacks may not subscribe to it but don’t have a problem working with people who do, is sadly true.
Mr. Wright is David Duke in blackface. If any Republican politician called Duke his mentor and sat at his feet imbibing his racist attitudes for twenty years he’d be toast, and no RINO or conservative Republican would accept him. And Mr. Wright is not alone among Mr. Obama’s pals. He has also been close to those old 60s terrorists, the Weathermen, whose only regret is that they did not blow up more targets. He carefully chose all his contacts and friends from among the most anti-American, racist elements he could find at his prestigeous universities and in the black community of Chicago. This he tells us himself in his autobiography. As Alex says Mr. Obama has no real track record of achievement, so we must judge him by what he has said and what company he has kept. It turns out that those aren’t pretty sights when exposed to the disinfectant of sunlight.
As for Mr. Obama as President, his administration would be the Second Coming of Jimmy Carter’s, and not just because of the Carter retreads advising him. Listen to what Mr. Obama says and you will realize that his view of the world is delusional, admiring vicious tyrants and sneering at our allies and friends. He also proposes to violate international law, by the way, so all those who hysterically criticized the Bush Administration for imaginary violations should now be very wary of a man who proposes to violate solemnly ratified treaties, and attack states that are not fighting us but are, rather, helping us at least somewhat against our enemies.
Mr. Obama’s economic ideas are fatuous, but then so are Hillary’s and those of almost all Democrats.