The Dish

One African-American supporter of Obama has had it with Jeremiah Wright:

To break it down, here’s what Wright is doing:  he’s spitting in the face of the man who defended him, who said he was "like family" and did so without any undertones of private anger or resentment. He did so unconditionally. Now Wright is using his newfound notoriety to become the next racial demagogue, and who cares if it’s at the expense of Obama?  If CNN, MSNBC and Fox News are booking me as the Black Pat Buchanan in a few years, then it’s all worth it!

Obama extended his hand to help Wright above the fray.  Instead, Wright has pulled him back down into the barrel, making it even more difficult for the most talented politician we’ve seen in years to escape the politics of race, resentment and self-victimization that continue to condemn us all.

One response to all this is to despair. We’re seeing many of the worst aspects of America’s culture war come back to target the one politician who had the chance to get us beyond it. It is no accident to me that Wright is of the Vietnam generation that bequeathed us these divides; and it is no accident that the Clintons will eagerly pivot off it; or that the far right will exploit it; or that Obama’s tolerance for a man like this for so many years will hurt him. And yet I refuse to believe that we have to remain captive to this syndrome; I refuse to believe that racial discourse has to be framed by Pat Buchanan and Jeremiah Wright; I refuse to abandon the hope I felt only a few months ago.

This moment is far too important to surrender to the forces that want to return us to the divisions and obsessions of the past. The only way past this, perhaps, is through it. Obama needs to repudiate Wright’s grandstanding and reiterate in clear terms the rationale of his candidacy: that the past is over, and we have to move forward in ending this war in Iraq, restoring America’s standing in the world, repairing the massive and mounting debt, bringing America back to the forefront of human rights, and bringing the best aspects of America to the foreground again.

The world is watching. And we still can.

It’s early in the day, I know, but it feels like that kind of week. Colbert had Feist on last night and I’d never heard of her. Shows what I know. The video is wonderful:

Fallows opines:

The obvious complaint, easily dismissed by reporters, is that press coverage is biased against or "too tough on" this or that candidate. Reporters tell themselves: Hey, we’re tough on everybody. You’re not strong enough to take it, maybe you should find a different line of work.

The more heartfelt and bitter complaint is about the way press coverage seems biased not against any particular candidate but against the entire process of politics, in the sense that politics includes the public effort to resolve difficult issues. (Medical care, climate change, banking crises, military priorities, etc.) For twenty years I have heard this from frustrated politicians — Gary Hart, Newt Gingrich, Jimmy Carter, Dick Gephardt, Bill Clinton, they may not share a lot of views but they are as one in this frustration. What galls all of them is the way that the incentives created by most coverage bring out the very worst in most politicians, and discourage them from even bothering to try the harder, more "responsible" path. No one says that press incentives turn potential Abraham Lincolns into real-world Tom DeLays. But the incentives push in that direction rather than the reverse.

Reihan lays out a strategy for McCain to win – by copying the Clinton campaign’s attacks on Obama. But Reihan is intellectually honest enough also to show how hard this will be. I’m not convinced that throwing more government money at the bitter, white working classes with kids is a panacea for the Republicans. But it may be worth a try.

McAuliffe promises that it will all be over by then. Heh.

A reader writes:

For those of us in the run up to the 2004 election who already knew something about the hints of skewed intel, extraordinary rendition, blatant administrative incompetency in Iraq, possible torture, the politicizing of our government, the rise of Christianism, the suppression of science, this is old news.  The MSM not covering the issues?  Faux elitism and wedge issues overtaking all sane discourse? A small, highly disciplined political group controlling the tempo of a scorched-earth campaign? 

Look, I don’t think Kerry was the greatest candidate for the time, or ever, and I know you did endorse him as opposed to Bush in ’04 for similar reasons to those I’ve listed above, but is anyone really shocked at what is going on?  Depressed maybe.  Shocked no.  Watching this unfold – again – is as if Stephen King had written the movie Groundhog Day and we are forced to watch it in slow motion. It’s excruciating!!

By the way,  would you like swiss on your Phillie cheese steak?

I prefer feta on my arugula, thank you. And that is how our election will be decided if the MSM get their way.

Larison argues that the right’s zealous use of Wright has more to do with anti-Americanism than race. As usual, a fresh take on the race from one of the more reflective parts of the traditional right. Yes: Obama is too Americanist for Larison.

Keyes loses the Constitution Party bid. The Indecision 2008 staff must be crushed. Keyes should set up his own party. And run for his own vote.

In Alabama, it prompts a call to 911.

A reader offers an interesting point:

I am a late 40’s "white guy" from the Philadelphia area. Starting in the early 70’s I began listening to the black preachers on the high UHF channels at odd hours of the night. There was something about the way they ALL spoke that I found intriguing – even before I knew the meaning of the word. There was always a high level of defiant bravado with outlandish accusations thrown in for good measure. This was expected by the followers — as if by getting away with "the talk"  was synonymous with some kind of mystic power. For me it was like chewing aluminum foil when you have a tooth ache – you kind of liked it … But why?

As I got older other hobbies took over from my late night listening — but I would always pause for a few minutes when I clicked past a station carrying some preacher.

All of this homework was not lost on me later in life when I glimpsed Reverend Al, Jessie, or even Julian Bond on C-span  — good old Reverend Ike would come to mind.  As a progressive gay white man I cringe when I  hear some of these preachers and "leaders" — it even happened a few weeks ago listening to a Tavis Smiley forum.

Andrew, the problem is that this kind of speech is so common in parts of the black community that it does not shock the followers.

I was talking to two friends when the Wright story surfaced a few weeks ago — one white, one black —  one for Hillary, one for Obama. I made the point that maybe this will bring to the front this hateful speech so we can stamp it out – exposing it for what it is. My white friend had no idea what I was talking about — he never listened to the old UHF or to be honest current black radio. My black friend dismissed it as just "the way some speak in the black church."

The idiom is different; and the standards of evidence are different; and the context is different. Obama has lived in both worlds, which makes him different as well. Somehow, he has to bridge those worlds right now. God knows how. But that’s what he has taken on with this candidacy; and we’ll see if he has it in him. I think he does; I think we all do. But Jeremiah Wright just made it all a lot more difficult.