Rev Irene Monroe

Obama's Chickens Have Come Home to Roost

Filed By Rev Irene Monroe | April 29, 2008 11:31 AM | comments

Filed in: Living, Politics
Tags: Barack Obama, Chicago, Democrat primaries, election 2008, Jeremiah Wright, race, religion, Trinity Church

Religion plays too important of a role in today's theater of American politics. Given the collapsing of church and state since Bush came into office, how and where and why a presidential candidate worships or not, unfortunately, speaks to his or her electability - which brings us back again to Obama and his pastor.

While Obama has denounced Rev. Jeremiah Wrights' incendiary remarks, suspicion, nonetheless, still surfaces about not only his professed faith as a Christian, but now also his electabilty as president.

The Black Church is a central, powerful and revered institution in the African-American community. While as a community organizer working with local churches on the South Side of Chicago, the Black Church captivated Obama's attention. Obama says he came to understand "the power of the African-American religious tradition to spur social change." However, suspicion now abounds questioning how much Obama really covets the power of the Black Church for his own political aggrandizement rather than for its religion.

"When Obama picked a 'church home,' he chose one that helped him with another weak spot in his biography. Before Obama joined Trinity United, Rev. Wright warned Obama that the church was viewed as 'too radical ... Our emphasis on African history, on scholarship...' But Obama joined anyway. With that act, he had become significantly blacker -- and more like local voters.," wrote Edward McClelland.

"Part of the cultural divide between the half-Kenyan Hawaiian and his Chicago neighbors, most of them products of the Deep South's black diaspora, was bridged. Look, for better or worse, the reality is that politicians and aspiring politicians sometimes appear to make choices about religion based at least in part on political expediency."

Obama knew to pander to his base.

But unbeknownst to Obama's plans to ride Wright's back long enough to get the needed Christian stamp of approval to win religious voters, his misguided calculations are now like chickens coming home to roost.

Rev. Jeremiah Wright is one of this nation's most revered African American ministers. He is an iconic image not only of the black civil right's era, but he is also the iconic image of the black church, black liberation theology, and of today's afrocentric churches whose pride is captured in Trinity's motto: Unashamedly Black and Unapologetically Christian.

Trinity's Statement of Faith says:

Our roots in the Black religious experience and tradition are deep, lasting and permanent. We are an African people, and remain "true to our native land," the mother continent, the cradle of civilization. God has superintended our pilgrimage through the days of slavery, the days of segregation, and the long night of racism. It is God who gives us the strength and courage to continuously address injustice as a people, and as a congregation. We constantly affirm our trust in God through cultural expression of a Black worship service and ministries which address the Black Community.

However, positioning himself as the post-racial candidate, Obama's candidacy has done nothing but collide with this nation's old nagging paradigms and practices of race and racism in America.

Some in the Generation X era, whom Obama has successfully wooed, would depict Rev. Jeremiah Wright and his civil rights cohorts as old school negroes. And Obama's address on race in Philadelphia would even suggest that.

The profound mistake of Reverend Wright's sermons is not that he spoke about racism in our society. It's that he spoke as if our society was static; as if no progress has been made; as if this country - a country that has made it possible for one of his own members to run for the highest office in the land and build a coalition of white and black; Latino and Asian, rich and poor, young and old -- is still irrevocably bound to a tragic past. But what we know -- what we have seen - is that America can change. That is true genius of this nation. What we have already achieved gives us hope - the audacity to hope - for what we can and must achieve tomorrow.

While things have shifted a tad for those of us still on the margins of society, the benefits of the change have befallen only to those who come from or have ascended to the upper tiers of society's socioeconomic ladder. While race still matters as Cornel West's bestseller of the same title waxes eloquently about, the daily bite and sting of racism, however, is cushioned by class and social upward mobility that gives the illusion to some that we are now in a post-racial era, especially in light of presidential hopeful Barack Obama.

Peter Boyer's article in the February 4, 2008 issue of The New Yorker titled "The Color of Politics: A Mayor of the Post-Racial Generation" wrote the following explaining this "post-racial" generation of African Americans that includes Barack Obama, Harold Ford, Cory Booker, and my governor, Deval Patrick:

Their deeper kinship resides in their identities as breakthrough figures - Africa American politicians whose appeal transcends race. Men reared in the post-Selma era and schooled at elite institutions, developed a political style of conciliation rather than confrontation, which complemented their natural gifts and , as it happens, nicely served their ambitions.

Shelby Steele depicts the political style these men employ best in his recent book A BOUND MAN: Why We are Excited about Obama and Why He Can't Win. Steele states that, in the African American community, there two types of people - the "bargainer" and the "challenger."

What is a "bargainer" or a "challenger?"

According to Steele, a bargainer strikes a bargain with white America in which they say "I will not rub America's ugly history of racism in our face if you will not hold my race against me."

A challenger, on the other hand, does the opposite of a bargainer. A challenger charges white people with inherent racism and then demands they prove themselves innocent by supporting black friendly polices like affirmative action and diversity.

So why did Obama give his speech on race?

Was his speech on race to bargain with American voters by assuaging white fear? Did Obama want to tell white America that he is not too black identified for them not to elect him, especially now knowing of his twenty year association with Rev. Wright and Trinity Church?

Or was Obama's speech on race also to challenge black Americans to vote for him albeit his racial mix, background and ideology is different, because his black presence is enough. In other words, is Obama so post-racial that he will not speak out candidly about this country's legacy and present-day perpetuation of racism that Rev. Wright preaches about.

The term "post-racial," unlike its lived reality, is gaining cultural currency in today's American lexicon with a younger generation of people of color who, some say, are more adept at being "bargainers" than "challengers" because they are the progenies of a post-black civil rights era.

However, in trying to save his political career, Obama's post-racial platform has come back to bite him. Rev. Wright is like a bad penny that keeps rolling back into Obama's life and he can't get rid of Wright.

By exploiting Wright, the media has used Obama's religious narrative - real and imagined - to capture the public's attention. The media's spin on his pastor is more about this country's uncritical patriotism predicated more on espousing a rhetoric that all is good with and in America than addressing its unjust foreign and domestic polices.

When news got out about Wright fiery sermons, Obama first said he never heard them, then he recanted by saying he denounced only those objectionable ones. But Wright has now spoken up. At the National Press Club Wright explained Obama's Orwellian remarks.

"We both know that if Senator Obama did not say what he said, he would never get elected. Politicians say what they say and do what they do based on electability, based on sound bites, based on polls -- Huffington, whoever's doing the polls. Preachers say what they say because they are pastors. They have a different person to whom they're accountable. As I said, whether he gets elected or not, I'm still going to have to be answerable to God, November 5th and January 21st. That's what I mean. I do what pastors do. He does what politicians do."

Where Obama ran afoul is that he didn't think his involvement with Rev. Wright would collide with his carefully crafted post-racial electable message

But maybe there's a bigger lesson here that Obama is now learning. And it's this: whether he dons the face of a Christian and/or the face of a politician in this bid for the White House - no lie lives forever. Like chickens, they eventually come home to roost.

Recent Entries Filed under Politics:

Leave a comment

We want to know your opinion on this issue! While arguing about an opinion or idea is encouraged, personal attacks will not be tolerated. Please be respectful of others.

The editorial team will delete a comment that is off-topic, abusive, exceptionally incoherent, includes a slur or is soliciting and/or advertising. Repeated violations of the policy will result in revocation of your user account. Please keep in mind that this is our online home; ill-mannered house guests will be shown the door.

I am a white Generation Xer transwoman. The more I hear about Rev Wright, the more I like him.

People forget that Martin Luther King had a lot of critical things to say about America, and in his time he was attacked for being divisive, confrontational, anti-American, communist. Jeremiah Wright is saying the same kinds of things that Martin Luther King said. I find it gross that the media is playing to people's fears by taking things out of context and I hope that Americans mature to the point where we can see through the media's superficiality and ignorance.

I wonder if we spent half as much energy analyzing John McCain's relationship to religion (remember how he switched churches from Episcopalian to Baptist early in the primary season?) what we'd find out about that.

Either way, I'm feeling like Vivian, the more I hear about him, the more I like him. Why do we have to pretend like there's no relationship between America's foreign policy and 9/11? Are we still supposed to believe that they were "jealous of our freedom"? Or are we just supposed to hush up and not question why it happened and try to prevent another one from happening?

Obama Repudiates Wright

"I have spent my entire adult life trying to bridge the gap between different kinds of people. That's in my DNA, trying to promote mutual understanding to insist that we all share common hopes and common dreams as Americans and as human beings. That's who I am, that's what I believe, and that's what this campaign has been about," Obama said.

"The person that I saw yesterday was not the person that I met 20 years ago," he said. "His comments were not only divisive and destructive, but I believe that they end up giving comfort to those who prey on hate, and I believe that they do not portray accurately the perspective of the black church."

It frosts me that Rev. Wright can't get his facts straight about HIV/AIDS. Yes, the gov't sponsored the Tuskegee syphilis experiment - which is now the most commonly mentioned example in the ethics lectures given to medical students at every school in the USA. No, the US gov't didn't make the HIV/AIDS virus to infect blacks - or anyone else. No one is going to convince me that the bozos at Ft. Detrick (germ warfare research) could engineer a virus when no-one else in the world had the technology to cut-and-paste DNA.

Now, if Wright wants to say that the US gov't has ignored health needs of blacks, and ignored the AIDS crisis until Reagan's buddy Rock Hudson died of it, that's truth. And if Wright wants to blame the US gov't for not financing comprehensive sex ed and free condoms, and needle exchange for addicts, well, that's truth too. True also that the US has generally ignored Africa until resources are to be exploited. And if Wright wants to blame himself and other black pastors and elders from dodging the subjects of HIV/AIDS prevention and of the black same-gender-loving community - I'd respect him for waking up and smelling the coffee earlier than most of his colleagues.

As for the rest - he's a preacher - hyperbole and jeremiads are part of the tradition in most traditionally black denominations, S. Baptists, pentecostal churches. It's the job of the preacher to be oppositional sometimes. So? And sometimes the audience and rest of world would do well to listen.

I'd join his church. I like him. He may be off base on some things, but we all are occasionally. For the most part, he's dead on when he cuts through the bullshit to the heart of the matter.

Hi Rev. Irene - another great post. And given what I heard Obama say in NPR this morning about Rev. Wright (Rev. Wright called America a terrorist nation - and Obama basically disowned him after he told us last month that he couldn't do that), I think you were spot on with your articles last month in response to Obama's race speech. At the time, I didn't think those speeches were "throwing Rev. Wright under the bus." But after today, I seriously doubt that Obama is the sincere do-gooder he purports to be.

The Rev Wright situation is an excellent example of damned if you do, damned if you don't. Bruce posted his anti-Obama piece yesterday saying that it is "too little, too late" for Obama to repudiate Wright. Now the comment from Serena that yesterday's remarks by Obama amount to Obama throwing Wright "under the bus".

I am a great admirer of Rev Wright. He is a pillar in my denomination - the United Church of Christ. He has preached at my church in Washington, D.C. and I had the opportunity to speak with him. I own two of his books. I have friends who are longterm members of Trinity UCC - a church which is a true beacon of LGBT inclusion among prominent mainline African-American churches. I have been outraged by the ways Rev Wright has been characterized and judged by the media and tried and convicted based on snippets and soundbites from his sermons .

But some of what he has said before and some of what he said this week is not helpful in building the Beloved Community. More than this, his comments were severely damaging Senator Obama's campaign for president. I believe Obama did the correct thing in distancing himself from Wright and being very clear that certain of Wright's statements are unacceptable. Obama's viability as a candidate would not survive his silence about, let alone affirmation of Wright this week.

Rev Wright understands this. He said in the NY Times over a year ago that at some future point Obama would need to distance himself from Wright in order to succeed in his quest to be President.

A few bloggers have even speculated that this week's events were a set up between Obama and Wright and that Wright was actually providing Obama the opportunity to separate himself from Wright - as he HAD TO to remain a viable candidate.

Wright's behavior this week and Obama's firm repudiation of him will make it much more difficult for the Republicans to effectively use Wright against him in the general election - a tactic previewed in the ads featuring Wright that the North Carolina Republican Party insists on running over McCain's feigned objections.

As she so often does on a wide range of topics, blogger Pam Spaulding offers some very clear-eyed reflections on Rev Wright :;jsessionid=985E43179B693F544E985BAF948AB23B?diaryId=5223