The Atlantic - Latest Comments in Wright Clarifies

Re: Wright Clarifies

YM — Tue, 16 Jun 2009 19:47:33 -0000

No matter whether its President Obama, President Bush, or even President Truman, those who oppose US policy concerning Israel will blame everyone and anyone but the President himself, whoever he is. After all, it was AIPAC, or the Neo-Cons. NOOOO! The President is the one who chooses his advisors and he is responsible for his foreign policy; him, and no one else.

Bronx Bomber: There is a Zionist element in this country which pretty much controls the debate on Israel-US politics. This is just undeniable. These are the same folks who require every Presidential candidate to genuflect at their altar each election cycle(AIPAC). You skip that speech and kiss your Presidential ambitions goodbye. You say anything even remotely criticizing Israel or questioning whether the alliance should continue and you might as well spit on the Star of David.

YM: And you say you are not an anti-semite. Aside from the fact that this comment has nothing to do with Rev. Wright.

To all the people who say there is a difference between "Jews" and "Zionists" - usually the Jews who say they are not Zionists are not big followers of the Jewish religion either. It is their discomfort with their religion that makes them wish they could just be "like everybody else" Sorry, you can't.

Re: Wright Clarifies

Juba — Mon, 15 Jun 2009 16:30:14 -0000

Main problem with this, it absolves Wright of responsibility for the showboating he did at the Press Club, a direct slap in the face to Obama.

Anytime someone absolves themselves of responsibility and points the finger directly at a scapegoat, it damages any effort one might want to make to honor their take as a credible one. IOW why should I take the man seriously if he blames Zionist Jews for harming his relationship to his "son" before addressing his own behavior? Now Cipher, god! (lol)

Re: Wright Clarifies

Liza — Sat, 13 Jun 2009 10:48:07 -0000

I suspect that what happened between Obama and Wright is extremely painful for both men, and both will be haunted by it until they leave the earth.

Re: Wright Clarifies

Ta-Nehisi Coates — Sat, 13 Jun 2009 09:06:06 -0000

Right. And those are the people keeping Obama from talking to Wright, yes? If it were up to Obama he'd have Wright over for fish and grits every Sunday. But its AIPAC--not Obama--that's keeping this from happening, right? I don't know if you've been following the headlines, but AIPAC and Obama aren't really friends right now.

Re: Wright Clarifies

JonathanU — Sat, 13 Jun 2009 00:44:29 -0000

Reverand Wright said Jew, but claims he meant Zionist. Seems he's conflating the two.

Often it's hard to know if someone is really prejudiced, or just making a poor word choice. For me, this is a single data point, but I don't like the direction it's pointing in.

Re: Wright Clarifies

Bronx Bomber — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 21:15:28 -0000

This is just nonsense and TNC, I feel you're falling into the trap of throwing this guy under the bus due to the predictable uproar over his comments.

There is a Zionist element in this country which pretty much controls the debate on Israel-US politics. This is just undeniable. These are the same folks who require every Presidential candidate to genuflect at their altar each election cycle(AIPAC). You skip that speech and kiss your Presidential ambitions goodbye. You say anything even remotely criticizing Israel or questioning whether the alliance should continue and you might as well spit on the Star of David.

Wright is simply stating what everyone knows deep down but no politician can state openly. I don't think he meant it in the sense that Jewish handlers are telling Obama what to do, I think he meant it in the sense that Obama is smart enough to realize what would happen if he were to speak to Wright or reach out in some way. Politically incorrect maybe, but true nevertheless.

Re: Wright Clarifies

Juba — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 14:32:57 -0000

Well-played! (Applause)

Re: Wright Clarifies

Juba — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 14:31:41 -0000

Hey man, family is family. In-laws and babies count too.

I guess my point is Michelle's very presence wards off a lot of the "he aint REALLY Black" arrows shot his way. No Black leader with an ounce of political instinct would take on such a celebrated figure among African-American women if he or she had a desire to stay relevant.

Re: Wright Clarifies

irishpirate — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 14:13:31 -0000

Juba,

I should have stated no black American relatives except the one he married and the two they created.

Perhaps it had to be that the first black President would have such an unusual background.

To paraphrase Peggy Noonan regarding JFK "the first Irish Catholic President was a Boston Protestant who went to Harvard". Now I happen to disagree a bit with Peggy and I think JFK's Irishness and Catholicism did play a small role in who he was, but the concept is amusing.

Imagine telling someone twenty years ago that we would have a black President in 2009. He would be 1/2 white, raised in Hawaii, and his dad was born a Muslim............SURE, what drugs are you taking?

Symposia,

I need a drink right now. Then I'll fall down. Gotta keep that stereotype going.

Re: Wright Clarifies

gillian — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 13:57:43 -0000

Well since you brought up Einstein and Zionism in the same sentence, I get to share some Einstein quotes:

"Before we can effectively combat anti-Semitism, we must first of all educate ourselves out of it and out of the slave mentality which it betokens. We must have more dignity, more independence, in our own ranks. Only when we have the courage to regard ourselves as a nation, only when we respect ourselves, can we win the respect of others; or rather, the respect of others will then come of itself. "

from About Zionism: Speeches and Lectures by Professor Albert Einstein, a compilation published in 1931. There's more at the link.

Re: Wright Clarifies

Liza — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 13:46:54 -0000

We will have to invent new words to describe people like the guy who shot the guard at the Holocaust Museum in DC or the vigilantes who patrol the Arizona/Mexico border or even all those people in the videos we saw during presidential election used racial slurs when referring to Obama.

Re: Wright Clarifies

BreakerBaker — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 13:29:30 -0000

Don't be naive Juba, everybody knows that Relativity is a Zionist lie created by the Jew Einstein who discovered time travel in the 1920s.

Re: Wright Clarifies

Juba — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 13:29:01 -0000

(For the record I am not suggesting that God allowed a good man to die in order to put the Rev in his place. I just think there is a spiritual message in the timing to be considered by a man who claims spiritual high ground)

Re: Wright Clarifies

Juba — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 13:15:45 -0000

Or maybe "Great timing there, God."

As a man of God, Dr. Wright should really ask himself why his comments hit the news cycle the same day Von Brunn's murder did.

Hint: even them Jews dont have that kind of power over space and time.

Re: Wright Clarifies

Juba — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 13:10:07 -0000

Obama DOES have Black American relatives though.

Wright should know, he married him to one and baptized several more.

Re: Wright Clarifies

Juba — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 13:07:55 -0000

I agree with Craig and Josh. When you have Zionism as a stand-in for Zionist Occupational Government, the perennial bad-guy of the William Cooper crowd and White Supremacists (not exactly the same thing but some crossover), or in other words people like James Von Brunn, is it really worth it to fight to reclaim that word? Furthermore, again, Wright is smart and informed enough to know how loaded that word is, and is riding for it anyway.

Maybe he thinks he is sending messages to Obama via the media.

Maybe its an implied extortion. Who knows.

Re: Wright Clarifies

Juba — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 13:02:08 -0000

Excellent comparison Soral.

As Ta Nehesi said, Obama is his own man, not a puppet for Jews.

Im sure he's been catching "You're a Puppet for Jews" flack since his days in the Senate, and Wright good and well knows that. Preachers know rhetoric and its emotional effects better than most. So I cant do anything but attribute venom and hostility to that statement.

Is he making a statement against ALL Jews? No. But thats like white folks who blast one Black girl as a "Black b****" then turn to their Black girlfriend and say, "Not you of course, you're not like her."

Racist? Yep. No way around it.

The leap is in excusing away his language, I think.

Re: Wright Clarifies

Juba — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 12:56:54 -0000

Exactly. If anything that apology drew Wright deeper into the Protocols of Zion type thinking and rhetoric. Poor choice of words followed by more poorly chosen words, which suggests to me what Rikyrah is saying: intentional.

Re: Wright Clarifies

Juba — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 12:53:09 -0000

Well given Wright's relationship to the Southside Hyde Park crowd (many of them Liberal Jews) if I had to guess, Id say 'probably not.'

My guess is as good as yours right?

Re: Wright Clarifies

Craig — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 12:23:32 -0000

@ Persia

No, I do sort of think it's unfair, but it's definitely in the back of my mind. In all the years that the Obamas went to his church, did he give an anti-Semitic sermon? Because that's a lot different from his personal views, that makes it the de facto view of the church itself. If he did that, and the Obamas stayed, then yes, that makes me question them. Not their "friends of Jews" bonafides, to me that's not in doubt, but their moral courage. But since I have no reason to believe that he did give such a sermon, then I can't really draw any conclusions. I am acting under the assumption that this Wright has indeed become a different person from the one that they knew for all those years.

Re: Wright Clarifies

Symposia — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 12:19:51 -0000

Wow, you're combating me with an old Al Franken routine? How am I going to counter that?!? Did you have to bring that Chicago style to a brother from the ATL? You ain't right, but you're Irish, so I know not to mess with you.

Well, let me say that I agree with you, Blacks can be bigoted. That is without a doubt because I know 'em! But to presume as your comment implicitly--but I do not believe for an instant intentionally--applied that it is a common trait was troubling to me. But I have read your comments with amusement in the past, so I do not believe in any harm coming from you.

As for Wright, I wasn't really trying to defend him so much as to keep him isolated from being an example of the old Bill Cosby joke: "When a white drunk falls they say, 'Look at that drunk!' When a black drunk falls they say, 'Look! Another black drunk!'" Rev. Dr. Wright is one man, not the whole race. You don't need my permission to criticize him, but I just ask that you keep that from making a broad brush. Also, I think the press made him out to be a bad man when he is far more complicated than that. My opinion.

In any case, I won't waste your time with a long piece. To paraphrase the great philosopher Mr. Macky, "Bigotry is bad, mmmmkay?"

Re: Wright Clarifies

Craig — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 12:16:18 -0000

@ Dan W

I believe in it for the same reason that people of Italian descent believe in Italy or people of Irish descent believe in Ireland - because it is a place where the Jewish culture can have its roots, an anchor that keeps it alive in perpetuity. This isn't a fringe position, is it? I mean, most people, Israelis, Americans, everyone, believes in a two-state solution where both a Jewish state and a Palestinian state exist side-by-side. I'm not going to apologize for the general concept of a Jewish state located in the Holy Land, and if that makes me the local Zionist then so be it.

Re: Wright Clarifies

BreakerBaker — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 12:01:57 -0000

Personally, I am not calling him an anti-Semite or a racist, nor do I really care whether he is one or not. What I am saying is that the things he’s saying, the things he has said, go beyond the realm of being simply impolitic. I’m saying that referring to specific people as “Them (fill in the ethnic/racial signifier)” is almost always inappropriate. That it’s precisely the kind of thing people have every right to find offensive. That if I were either Rahm Emanuel or David Axelrod and I was reduced by a non-Jew as “That Jew” in anything remotely similar to this context, I think it’s fair to say that I might be offended. Even if the words were uttered by a clown the likes of Rev. Wright. I’m saying that there’s a very clear and derogatory tone that--regardless of what it would or would not say about what’s in Wright’s heart--seeks to denigrate the individual he’s speaking about as being no more than a faceless member and representative of an ethnic group. Add to that the fact that what he’s actually saying is Them Jews (be they Emanuel, Axelrod, or some cadre of Zionists) are controlling the president of the United States and seeking to marginalize Wright’s voice on the “ethnic cleansing of the Zionist” and on other subjects “anti-Israel,” I’d say there’s a few other ways Emanuel or Axelrod (or Jews, in general) could justify taking offense. I mean, look at it this way:

The Jews Emanuel and Axelrod will not let the president talk to me because I speak the truth about the ethnic cleansing of the Zionist, and them Jews won’t let him talk to me because that’s anti-Israel.

Does it still sound okay to you? I mean, it reads like an anti-Semite manifesto.

Re: Wright Clarifies

Randall — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 11:53:10 -0000

Well, please pardon my rhetorical excess, but you've admitted you didn't read the rest of what I wrote so I don't feel much need to respond further. I think everyone else got my point.

Re: Wright Clarifies

Craig — Fri, 12 Jun 2009 11:13:33 -0000

That's all well and good, but people who use the term "Zionist" are generally not thinking of those sorts of nuances. "Zionist" is the term that people like David Duke and 9/11 anti-Semitic Truthers use. That may be unfortunate, you may be sorry that in normal political discourse there isn't a distinction being made between those who oppose Israeli policies and those who just hate Jews, but that's the reality of the situation. You're just going to have to take the word off the table and come up with something else, because that word has been burned by people who hate you no matter what you think about Israel.

For the record, I'm also a Jew, and I also have the same problems with Israeli policy that many liberals do, but I also believe in Israel and wish for it to co-exist with its neighbors. Does that make me a "Zionist"?