It’s clear that John McCain thinks Jeremiah Wright is Barack Obama’s equivalent of a Swift Boat:
On Friday, Senator John McCain’s campaign forwarded to reporters an article in The Wall Street Journal…
And the Wall Street Journal is only too obliging to start the ball rolling with this disgusting article. First, can anyone tell me why Barack Obama has to explain or defend what his pastor says? I belong to a synagogue, don’t attend every Shabbat, and frankly don’t know most of the time what our rabbi preaches. If I ran for president why should I have to explain or defend her words?
It is true that Obama has a close relationship with Wright and named his book after the title of a Wright sermon. But how does that make Obama responsible or answerable in any way for Wright’s beliefs? Where I come from Jews are taught to think for themselves. We could have views different from our rabbi. We could even tell him or her so. In fact, I’ve heard probably hundreds of rabbinic sermons with which I disagreed, some violently so. So why would anyone think that what Wright preaches is what Obama believes?
Now that you’re wondering what the hell was so bad about what Wright said let’s quote the damn WSJ piece of shit story:
The Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr., pastor of Mr. Obama’s Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago, gave the sermon at the school’s Andrew Rankin Memorial Chapel in Washington on Jan. 15, 2006.
“We’ve got more black men in prison than there are in college,” he began. “Racism is alive and well. Racism is how this country was founded and how this country is still run. No black man will ever be considered for president, no matter how hard you run Jesse [Jackson] and no black woman can ever be considered for anything outside what she can give with her body.”
Mr. Wright thundered on: “America is still the No. 1 killer in the world. . . . We are deeply involved in the importing of drugs, the exporting of guns, and the training of professional killers . . . We bombed Cambodia, Iraq and Nicaragua, killing women and children while trying to get public opinion turned against Castro and Ghadhafi . . . We put [Nelson] Mandela in prison and supported apartheid the whole 27 years he was there. We believe in white supremacy and black inferiority and believe it more than we believe in God.”
His voice rising, Mr. Wright said, “We supported Zionism shamelessly while ignoring the Palestinians and branding anybody who spoke out against it as being anti-Semitic. . . . We care nothing about human life if the end justifies the means. . . .”
Concluding, Mr. Wright said: “We started the AIDS virus . . . We are only able to maintain our level of living by making sure that Third World people live in grinding poverty. . . .”
If you review these comments it’s clear that this is a man who is trying to be provocative. A man who speaks boldly, grandly even overstating his case. A man who probably wants you to argue with him. A man who doesn’t feel that he has the last word or the sole truth.
If the WSJ has its way, then it will help ensure that a black man STILL cannot get elected president of the United States, which will, in turn, prove Wright to be correct on that score.
While “we” certainly didn’t put Mandela in prison we did support apartheid until the bitter end as Wright contends. I can remember Ronald Reagan denouncing the divestment campaign and arguing that the U.S. had no leverage to influence the white regime there.
Wright certainly gets carried away in denouncing U.S. support for “Zionism,” again using it as if it were a dirty word. This is a characteristic of certain elements of the American left. But Obama has made clear his views about Israel and they are nowhere near Wright’s. So what does the former have to explain?
Returning to Wright: in truth we HAVE ignored the Palestinians and DO brand many who speak out against Israeli policy as anti-Semitic. Nothing wrong with what he said there. The comments about the U.S. “starting AIDS” seem bizarre. And given that they are followed by an ellipsis (the entire larger quoted passage is filled with multiple ellipses, a danger sign in any right-wing political tract as this one is), one would want to know what followed this statement.
In a way, it’s sad that Obama has to respond at all to the partisan ranting of a Ronald Kessler, a neocon journalist hoping to make his mark during this election campaign by being one of Obama’s chief baiters. But I suppose if Obama didn’t speak out as he has and denounce Wright’s remarks, then the Rev. Wright might turn into Obama’s version of the Swift Boat campaign. John McCain will certainly do his best to make it so.
If anyone has any doubt about how smarmy and dishonest Ronald Kessler is get a load of this posing:
Much as most of us would appreciate the symbolism of a black man ascending to the presidency, what we have in Barack Obama is a politician whose closeness to Mr. Wright underscores his radical record.
The media have largely ignored Mr. Obama’s close association with Mr. Wright.
What does it mean to say you would “appreciate the symbolism of a black man” becoming president?? Does it mean that you have no objections to the idea of a theoretical black man rising to the highest office in the land? It’s just any real live black man who might actually become president with whom you have problems.
The “media have ignored” Obama’s relationship with Wright? What planet is this guy living on? It’s been droned about endlessly on Fox News, Rush Limbaugh and all the other far-right media sites not to mention scores of mainstream media outlets as well. What Kessler means to say is that if he has anything to do with it, it will be bored into our skulls until we’re so exhausted by it that we wouldn’t vote for Obama if he were running for dogcatcher.
Dan Sniderman says
Why is it that only Obama has to speak for the words of his pastor? Has any attention been given to the spiritual leaders of the Clintons, Bush, McCain let alone Huckabee? I wouldn’t be surprised if you could find provacitive sermons from some of them…
Bill Pearlman says
Hey Rich, I don’t like a sermon or the politics of the rabbi I go down the street. ( probably easier to do in NY than Seattle I know ) Obama was a member of this church for 20 yrs. He baptized his kids and he married him and his wife. This guy, Wright, is evidently a close personal friend and spiritual mentor to Obama. Or let me put it another way, Obama obviously likes the guy and had no problem with his sermons and political outlook. And that is a reasonable issue to bring up. On another note why is he so sensitive about his middle name. Hussein is his middle name, is it not. Why is using it some sort of insult.
I would argue that if the WSJ is going to simply shrug off America’s large black male prison population, the U.S. government’s one-time support of South African apartheid, Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians, etc., then it is very much proving Wright correct: that YES, the American establishment does indeed have a callous and triumphalistic attitude towards anyone who is not part of its clique.
Richard Silverstein says
My family belonged to a shul for years & didn’t agree with the rabbi’s politics but had to suffer through it. I couldn’t just go down the street. If you live in many places there is only 1 or perhaps 2 shuls in town & you can’t just shul shop. Don’t confuse NYC w. the rest of the Jewish America.
Do you agree w. everything yr rabbi says? If you disagreed w. things he said should you have to explain your remaining in the shul despite those disagreements? Obama has said repeatedly that he doesn’t agree w. everything his pastor says. That’s good enough for me & should be for you or anyone else. The fact that it isn’t indicates that you’ve got a problem w. his candidacy & are looking for things to hate about him.
Regarding his middle name: what was Jimmy Carter’s middle name? What was Walter Mondale’s middle name? What was Ronald Reagan’s middle name? If you know all of them either you’re the world’s greatest presidential trivia buff or else their middle names had absolutely no significance to anyone except their mothers when they named them as babies. If you don’t understand why harping on “HUSSEIN” is racist then I’m not gonna begin to make you understand.
Bill Pearlman says
Nice obfuscation but it doesn’t wash. There are more than a few black churches on the south side of Chicago. Obama counted this guy has a personal friend and spiritual mentor, and is looking to be president. It’s a little contradictory that a guy who is running an almost messianic campaign attends a church with a minister who is a cut below Louis Farrakhan and if this doesn’t bother you it should.
Ronald Wilson Reagan, James Earl Carter, Hillary Rodham Clinton, Franklin Delano Rooselvelt, John Fitzgerald Kennedy. Maybe your not has liberal has you think you are and have a problem with Hussein yourself.
Dan Sniderman says
Come on about the Hussein thing. Clearly the right-wing is trying to use this to associate him with Saddam Hussein and Moslem extremism. Pearlman brought it up – Richard was simply trying to put in in context. Hussein is a common name and not necessarily overly religious (like Muhamed or Hussein). Can we put this thing to rest?
And let’s put the Wright thing into context. I was born in Chicago and lived in the metro area for most of life (parents moved around a lbut when I was small and went to University downstate for 4 years). Trinity United is one of the most prominent AND LIBERAL church’s on the South Side. Wright hasn’t really been considered a contraversial figure in Chicago religious circles until this election cycle, Much of the contraversy has come from taking his quotes out of context.
The reality in Chicago is that we know Obama and like him. I’m speaking not just Democrats but the Jewish community as well. He entered politics as a State Senator from the Hyde Park area. This is home of the University of Chicago. Hyde Park is a very diverse area and historically once the upper-class Jewish enclave (read the history of the Leopold and Loeb affair). There is still a significant middle-class Jewish component. Obama could never have been elected from there if he was anti-Jewish or anti-Israeli in any form. He would never have been elected if he was friendly to Farakhan or anyone similar.
If you don’t like Obama, fine. And if you disagree with Richard on Zionism or anything else he blogs about, fine. But as far as this subject he is right on. This issue is pure, manufactured Bovine Fertilizer…
Bill Pearlman says
Dan, I was in Chicago for 20 yrs, but that was in West Rogers Park, and if you remember Obama was no sure thing for the senate. If Ryan didn’t get into that scandal all might be different now. The problem with your premise is that Jews in the Hyde Park area are liberals first, Jews second. Second, this minister was a big part of Obama’s life, ( btw for him to say that he never heard any of these statements is a little bit of a stretch don’t you think ) And mayu I remind you of one Gus Savage, who was a big Farrakhan guy and was the congressman from that district for many years.
Full Disclosure – I am a very big fan of Barack Obama. I think he will make a tremendous POTUS and I have donated to his campaign and voted for him in my state’s primary. I am not a Hilary hater and think she would also be a marked improvement over what we’ve had for the last 8 years.
I attended the University of Chicago and know the Hyde Park area fairly well. Mr. Pearlman is correct that there are many liberal jews who live there who are not orthodox and don’t base their entire extistence on the Tanakh. And god bless them – those are my type of jews, just as modernized and moderate muslims are my type of muslims, non-fundamentalist christians are my types of christians, and self-doubting atheists are my type of non-believer.
Gus Savage was an awful congressman and well, an awful human being. Savage, Steve Cokely, and Louis Farrakhan were all big players in South Side Chicago politics and genuine jew-baiting anti-semites. Compared to them Jerimiah Wright seems sane, tame, and inclusive. I can imagine that in the world that Obama was working in it seemed that way to him as well. One has to wonder what Wright is thinking, delivering sermons he has to know full well will come back to haunt Obama and allowing his daughter’s church affiliate magazine to honor Farrakhan during Obama’s election, but that’s another story.
I do think it is fair game for the press to investigate Wright and require an explanation from Obama. I am glad this is occuring now instead of in the general election when it could condemn the country to continued leadership by the Republicans. I do think Obama has responded to the charges sufficiently. I have no fears that Obama isn’t the unifier he says he is. The one thing I fear he may be susceptible on as a result of this Wright fiasco is having his judgement regarding others questioned. If it turns out that there is a large body of controversial sermons by Wright that Obama believes cross his own red lines and he disowns, Obama will look weak at accurately reading the people around him. I hope this is not the case. I have no doubt that there are staff at Clinton and McCain’s campaigns poring over Wright’s sermons as I write this, so we will soon find out. While I have no doubt that there is much in Wright’s sermons that I would personally agree with, it will not likely play out well in central PA, and right now that is critical for Obama.
Question to Bill Pearlman – why do you always use “has” when you means “as”? Is there a significance to that which I am missing?
Richard Silverstein says
Bill, that’s idiotic. Jeremiah Wright is far different fr. Farrakhan & the fact that you either lie about alleged simiilarities between them or else are ignorant of the differences is pretty pathetic.
As far as I’m concerned Barack Obama has the right to belong to whatever church he wants & doesn’t have to explain anything to me, you, John McCain, Hillary Clinton or anyone else. And btw, I’m gonna start blogging like crazy about the prince of a jackass evangelical minister John Hagee, who’s just endorsed McCain. Let’s ask McCain to explain why he accepts an endorsement fr. someone who claims that 2/3 of the world’s Jews will die before the End Times.
BTW, you never provided Walter Mondale’s middle name. And how about Michael Dukakis? The point is that hardly any Americans know the middle names of presidential candidates. The fact that the extreme right wants to emphasize Obama’s middle name is a telling part of the smear campaign. The fact that you ignore this indicates where yr sympathies lie.
here’s something more to ponder while we are on the subject of Obama. came across this link
Apparently, over 110,000 republicans voted for Clinton in Texas. Some confessed outright their intention to help the republican party by sowing confusion and lengthening the race, just as Limbaugh suggested. And here’s the rub – Clinton won by a mere 101,000 votes. Since it is very difficult to imagine that any Texas republican would vote for Hillary for real, the conclusion is inescapable: Obama would have won Texas were it not for this deliberate sabotage. Which would correspond to a tee with the close polls just a day before.
In Ohio, it was 100,000 again republicans voting for Hillary. This would explain the decline in support received by Obama from whites, and especially whiter men, whose vote he has been winning up to march 4. BTW, taking this out halves Hillary’s win – again – taking it to the 5% difference predicted by the polls.
Then there’s Mississipi where 38,000 republicans suddenly decided to support the one they hate most in the world. yes, that’s Hillary again. This means Obama lost a few delegates, but worse – this totally tipped the scales of the white vote in Texas (are there any black republicans there? anywhere?).
Here are the repercussions: hillary could claim a win in texas which she didn’t even get if delegates are counted and including the caucus, and a boost in the popular vote. Not only that, but a loss in texas – even a small one would have probably been a huge negative for her campaig. On top of that, since the popular vote looms in importance, a difference of a couple of 100K is important (Obama is ahead now by about 700,000).
What I’m reading here – is that the Republicans – probably the most die-hard conservatives among them – are colluding with Hillary’s campaign to distort the results of the elections. I am posting this here because this must be advertised much more widely, and I’m sort of hoping that Richard may be kind enough to put something up about this. The numbers are available to be checked – perhaps by tomorrow it’ll circulate more widely.
I told you so.
Are you not embarrassed by the skeletons in the drawers of Obama’s spirituality ?
Oprah is also close to the Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago.
The next thing after Lybia, will be Iran on the Obama radar screen.
In the name of decency, Obama should be stripped of his security clearance, and recalled from the Senate by the voters of Illinois.
Obama and his wife were very smoothing for the weakminded, non-thinking, and blind citizens, but repulsive to the experienced viewers.
As far as I’m concerned Barack Obama has the right to belong to whatever church he wants & doesn’t have to explain anything to me, you, John McCain, Hillary Clinton or anyone else.
You are absolutely correct, he has the the right to belong to any church he wants. However, he doesn’t have any inherent RIGHT to be PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES (unlike what his wife seems to think) and he doesn’t have the RIGHT to any particular person’s vote. The voters also have the right to demand explanations about any darned thing they want about a candidate’s life and beliefs. I heard Wright’s rant and it was shocking. Obama has donated large amounts of money to him over the years and is closely associated with him, unlike McCain’s relationship with Hagee, which you have every right to be concerned about, so all the more so we can be upset with Obama.
Even if he gets the nomination, I don’t think he has any chance to be elected President.
Bill Pearlman says
Wright counts him has a friend and traveled with him to Libya. I hardly think that Louis Farrakhan would make a trip like this with anybody that wasn’t on board with his agenda. That’s number #1. Two, Obama actaully got up with a straight face and said that never hear these sermons or heard about them until now. A blatant false hood is it not. Lastly, why do you care what Hagee thinks. Are you that insecure in your beliefs that this worries you. Additionally, McCain didn’t attend his church, get married by him, or have his kids baptized by him. And for you to equate a Farrakhan disciple with a guy who is extrememly pro-Israel is a little obscene. Or let me put it another way. Every Jewish institution in Manhattan has security barriers, metal detectors, and other devices. And it’s not because of southern baptists.
Norman Weinstein says
At last the key to heaven, or equivalent nice place, as one might extrapolate from Mr. Pearlman’s sage words; namely, that if you’re extremely pro-Israel, then you must perforce be blessed. Well, curse Farrakhan if you will – no argument there – but spare us an apple-and-orange confusion, because if a rabid black bigot disturbs you more than a rabid white bigot, even one who adores Israel and all its potential End-of-Days Jewish tinder, you might want to consult a first-rate opthalmologist.
Bill Pearlman says
You see Norm it’s like this. For those of us who actually see the inside of a synagogue every now and then, no Hagee doesn’t bother me. But here is the thing. a rabid black bigot doesn’t seem to disturb you at all. Fine and dandy. But don’t try to pass off your knee jerk left wing crap has anything but what it is. An anti-American, anti-Israel agenda.
Norman Weinstein says
Only every “now and then” do you “actually see the inside of a synagogue”? Tsk…tsk! Perhaps if you let yourself become a bit more sanctified, you might be less inclined to ignore my “curse Farrakhan if you will – no argument there” and somewhat more likely to take a second look at your rather remarkable “Hagee doesn’t bother me” and thus your apparent acceptance of a dangerous religious maniac. Black I guess frightens you more, and as to my being “anti-America”, I am not and shall never be a “good American” in the sense of a “good German” as during the Nazi period. The mantra, “my country right or wrong“, I leave to fascists and shall always strive to right what I see as ethically wrong. Also, for your enlightenment, you might ponder Jefferson’s statement that the highest act of patriotism is dissent. Where does that leave you? Also, I’ve been a Boy Scout of some rank, a pilot searching for missing military planes with the Civil Air Patrol, a member of the Army Air Corps, and one who refused to sign a loyalty oath as a teacher during the McCarthy period. Also, I do not wear an American flag lapel pin, knowing how simple it is for faux patriots and malevolent fools, like our simian president and his smirking handler Cheney, to do so. And as to expressing an “anti-Israel agenda“, along with having read your commentaries here on Silverstein’s blogsite, I have had to arrive at the rather weird conclusion that you are the one who, most likely without meaning to be, I do confess, are more anti-Israel than I could ever be since you apparently would pour alcohol down an alcoholic’s throat, encourage Israel to continue to behave like a pariah nation in spite of the results, and confuse acceptance of Israel’s patent errors, even unto outrages, with true regard for her ultimate survival and prosperity. Sorry my “knee jerk left wing crap” disturbs you so. I’d suggest more frequent synagogue sessions as a proper antidote.
Bill Pearlman says
I don’t care if you were an eagle scout, made the schweinfurt raid with the 8th air force, or personally testified in front of huac. The fact is that you have taken the side of the enemies of the Jewish people and are blinded by your need to be a “good Jew” bleeding for everybody else but your own people so they love you in the “progressive” vineyards that you inhabit.
But let me ask you a serious question. I’ve read what you write also. Clearly in your mind Israel is the guilty party and the one that is obstructing the utopia that reigned there before the zionist jackboot reared itself. But I digress, put yourself in Olmerts place. Pretend your the PM of Israel. Surely you can wind this conflict up by the weekend. What’s your solution. I’m sure that its brilliant. Lay it out.
Richard Silverstein says
Steven: You’ve been commenting hear for a long time but as time goes by your comments are more & more hateful & I personally detest things like this that you write. As usual you provide no support for anything you say & therefore what you say isn’t worth paying any attention to whatsoever.
Bar Kochba: You clearly don’t belong to a shul because if you did you’d realize you generally don’t contribute to the rabbi. You contribute to the shul. Any funds that Obama has contributed have been for the Church & not the pastor, unless you can prove that Obama has funded the pastor’s work directly which I’d venture to say you can’t.
They went to Libya together. That is the only confirmed fact of all you wrote above. I don’t know that they are friends. I don’t know that Wright is “on board” Farrakhan’s agenda. Do you think that every pastor or politician who travels on a tour agrees with every other one on the same tour? You’re just traveling partners. It means you’re interested in the country you’re visiting. It would take someone like you to make more of it than that. Besides, who cares? It has no reflection on Obama at all.
I’m afraid you will have to prove that Obama heard Wright’s sermons during which he preached alleged hate against America. Asking us whether Obama is lying is the easy way out which you won’t get here.
Your utter hypocrisy takes the cake. I ask why do you care what Wright says and you ask me why I care what Hagee says. Personally, I think Hagee is a very dangerous person & incredibly harmful for Israel. That’s why Ic are what he thinks. The fact that McCain embraces him is grounds for deep alarm. But I tell you what–when you and Newsmax’s Kessler say you don’t care what Jeremiah Wright thinks is when I’ll admit I don’t care what John Hagee thinks. Fair enough?
It’s a goddamn lie, Bill. Say it again & you’re outa here. Wright is not a disciple of Farrakhan. This is smear tactics worthy of American Thinker & the Kahanist far-right. I don’t promote views of folks like that. So if that’s what your goal is go elsewhere.
You’re so full of crap Bill, I can’t begin to say. Obscene to compare Hagee with Wright? Actually, Wright is a man of principles & values. A man of peace. A man in favor of social and economic justice. A man whose views are a bit extreme and rough around the edges & who wouldn’t be my favorite person in the world. But still a man who cares for the underdog & who represents views that should be heard in this country. What does Hagee represent? A man who predicts most of the world’s Jews will die. A man who advocates the most extreme of settler political & theological views. A man who hates everything I stand for & wishes people like me dead essentially. A man who advocates regime change in Iran and a nuclear attack against it. No, you’re way off the mark here, Bill.
I have no idea what this means. Are you insinuating the Farrakhan’s followers are likely to attack Jewish institutions in Manhattan? I hope not because that will get you banned even quicker. And as for Hagee’s supposedly benign views of Jewish institutions I assure you Hagee has no use for Jewish institutions unless they advance his particularly odious End Times theology. If Jewish institutions announced such evangelical beliefs were anathema to them & Israel (as they should) then Hagee would become their enemy too.
I see the inside of a synagogue every week & Hagee disturbs the hell out of me. He disturbs the hell out of Eric Yoffie the head of the Union of Reform Judaism, the largest U.S. Jewish denomination. He sees the insides of synagogues every day.
You’re lying again, Bill. Norman clearly said he had no use for Farrakhan. Don’t lie. It should be one of the Ten Commandments but it’s not. But it’s one of my commandments here.
Bill, now you’ve violated not just my commandment about lying, but also the one about not calling anyone here “an enemy of the Jewish people.” You’re banned. I find you so goddamn tiresome, I can’t tell you.
Well, then ok, so basically one should vote for Obama just to prove his ‘racist’ crazy pastor in-correct… bcs that’s what’s important when voting.
Excuse me, but are you not the same person assassinating zionists, necons and various Repbublicans for their associations……. who now soft pedals Obama’s personal pastor?
It is entertaining to watch your gymnastics though as you contemplate the now increased chance that Obama would lose to McCain.
Besides if voting PC does a woman or a black man deserve the 1rst order of PCness?
I think white liberals would more pat themselves on the shoulder (ie.. you) via just voting and electing a black man, or in Obama’s case a mixed background, white and black.
So please do continue your preaching and gymnastics of circumventing and obfuscating…
WOW!! you sure have a lot of inside information and insite into this man! or is that just far left adjectives used to describe anyone who espouses their lines… “peace” “justice” etc…
Really the underdog? So when he refers to “black sellouts” – people you know who are severely ostracized by the black community for doing things such as – being a Republican – being on Fox News – disavowing anti-semitism in the black community (Niger Innis) – or prosecuting OJ Simpson – he’s lifting up the underdog?
I guess the same way the Evangelicals say accept the sinner but condemn the sin in regards to homosexuals…
You know but as a far left jewish lib of course you ostracize the slightest bit of name calling and demonization of those to the far left who criticize Israel or AIPAC etc… but on the other hand kind of understand when the black community assassinates anyone who differs with the “community”… You’re so full of your own sanctimonioius shit (citing your description of Bill)
Sorry, why does calling Zionism “Zionism” mean treating it like it’s a dirty word? Isn’t “Zionism” the word for the ideology that says Palestine and all its natural resources really ought to belong to the Ashkenazim and other Jews willing to identify as Zionists? At the expense the people who were living there before, who, due to their religion and ethnicity, no longer have any right to live there? Isn’t that clearly racist, unjust, genocidal ideology called “Zionism”? Does it have another name we on the angry, angry left ought to use instead? Thanks.
Richard Silverstein says
I have no idea what you’re talking about. It would help make you just the tiniest bit credible (which you’re not btw) if you provided even a single example of what you’re talking about so I could at least intelligently rebut whatever argument you’re trying to make. I don’t “assassinate” anyone btw. Perhaps you meant assassinate their character. And I’m a Zionist so why would I assassinate Zionists? If you mean that I impeach the arguments of Kahanists and other Israel First extremists, yes I do that. But I don’t do it because they’re Zionists. I do it because they’re racist & because their views are contrary to Israel’s real interests.
Innis isn’t the only person disavowing anti-Semitism in the Black community. In fact, Barack Obama is someone who does this himself. There ARE Black sellouts. Why shouldn’t Wright be able to denounce them?
You can’t spell. You can’t articulate an idea. And now you’ve managed a contradiction in terms. A “liberal” is not someone who is “far left.” I half think you’re somone trying to spoof a far right pt of view you’re doing such a bad job of it.
You’re right on the edge. Go on in this vein & you’re outa here.
MM: We’ve been over this issue time & again in this blog. There are many versions of Zionism. What you cite is an extremist version of Zionism which I don’t subscribe to. There is also a progressive Zionism which believes in sharing the land with its Palestinian inhabitants. Yes, what you’re describing has another name: Kahanism. That’s a betrayal of Zionism, not Zionism as I practice it.
I see, Richard. So modern day Israel is a Kahanist state?
The hypocrisy meter keeps clicking….
disavows “Israel first extremists” but calls “black first theology” anti-white attitude a man of “peace justice and for the underdog”…………….
Just more far left mealy mouthed code worded hypocrisy… where one defines who is the “goody goody” and the “underdog” and then patronize them and lift them up bcs that’s who one decides who is the underdog.
But in the same vein accuse Israel of stealing from orphans… but I suppose that’s Mr. Silverstein just being provocative sordove like your vision of yourself being kind of Reverend Wrightesque…
I really wish I could debate you for real in a forum… man would that be fun… you’d be easy pickings.
these horrible terrible “Israel first extremists” would include let’s see? –
Netanyahu, Wolfowitz, Benny Morris –
It’s all the big game of defining and adjectives that one has to buy into else you too be an “extremist” branded by the PC Far Left police… you see there is no other option you’re a “baddy” or a “goody”….
Jews who love to show how PC they are with the black community and then assassinate anyone in the Jewish community on the right or the equivalent of a Rev Wright – Meir Kahane…
You’ll see over and over and over and over on this blog Mr. Silverstein making denouncing references to that horrible person Meir Kahane… (an extremist for sure) but yet look how he refers to his equivalent – Reverend Wright…. a man of “justice, peace and for the underdog” both espoused only being for your community and preaching a solidarity with your community and a fear and loathing of the “other”….
Richard Silverstein says
MM: I’m not going to get into a knock down drag out fight about the nature of the Israeli state. Modern day Israel, like Zionism, is composed of diff. political currents some extreme right wing & some centrist & some left. Alas, there aren’t enough people sharing my views of the conflict but there is definitely a substantial minority who do. If it’s your intent to lump all of these Israelis together & say their entire national enterprise is genocidal & racist to its core–be my guest. That’s not my view & I really don’t have much to say to you since I have absolutely no sympathy for this perspective.
As for me, I wish to arrrive at a compromise solution to the conflict so I don’t denounce either side as unalterably evil. If you do, then you won’t be part of the solution to this problem. You’ll be able to rant along the sidelines about perfect justice & never have any influence on anyone but those who share yr ideological views (which won’t be too many).
Is my position 100% just toward both sides? No. Will both sides when there is peace come out on the short end of their dreams? Yes.
JC: What do you know about African Americans? Do tell us. Have you ever read a book about the Black experience in America? Have you ever read a book about slavery? Have you ever even watched a PBS documentary about Black history? Ever taken a college course on any such subject? I thought not. You’re an ignorant inarticulate wingnut wretch.
African Americans have a lot of problems with white Americans because they’re been treated like shit here for a few hundred years. Do I like the fact that there is tremendous animosity toward whites among some African Americans? No. Do I jump down their throats as you do simply because they don’t have the same civil attitudes toward me that other white people without these experiences of injustice might have? No.
Oh & btw if you know anything about Jewish history (which is doubtful) you’ll understand the tremendous level of ambivalence at best & animosity at worst toward Germans who caused us enormous suffering. Would you have the same problem w. a Jew articulating an “anti-German” view of the German state? I thought you wouldn’t. Perhaps because it’s YOU who’s the hypocrite.
Do tell us what constitutes Wright’s “black first” theology. Give us a single example.
Maybe after you learn how to string a sentence together we can enjoy that experience.
You said it. And Lieberman, and Kahane, and Rivlin, and Mort Klein, and Malcolm Hoenlein, and Jewish Task Force, and extremist settlers, etc.
Meir Kahane the same as Jeremiah Wright? YOu should be ashamed of yrself. You’re lower than the bone belly of a cur dog. Meir Kahane was a racist whose political movement was outlawed by the State of Israel and the U.S. government. His followers have murdered countless Palestinians. Who has Jeremiah Wright killed and which government has labelled his church as racist and terrorist???
You’ve had yr say & I’m sick & tired of yr vitriol. Do not post another comment in this thread. If you do I will ban you.
It is ironic that Bill Pearlman doesn’t realize that he is the essentially the equivalent of a Jeremiah Wright and that MM doesn’t realize that he is essentially the equivalent of a Bill Pearlman.
That’s your reply… to call me names and intimate things about me, my experience, friends and knowledge of which you surely know not a single iota. But that would be typical of the far left, for you assume, lest you feel you know in your heart of hearts that only you as an “enlightened” self-annointed expert can not only identify but tell people what black people as a group want, feel and know…. It’s so ridiculously laughable it’s cartoonesque.
Amazing…. simply amaing that you actually feel you can speak for “black people”…. and while you give your version of a defense you perch yourself high up in your own mind moral superiority… The presumptousness is astounding!
More petty insults and assumptions. You like to congratulate yourself after making a gratuitous insult and assumption and then showing everyone yet how “smart” you in fact are.
Just proving the point loud and clear.
Joseph Lieberman is not just the equivalent of Reverend Wright. no, he’s worse.. lol…
Wright is actually a man of “Justice and peace” while Lieberman, he’s the real racist monster.
They were both motivated by fear and hatred which they excused due to the injustices from the “others” towards their “people”… Spewing hate speech whether or not I don’t think Wright is the equal to Kahane or not aside, is worthy of serious condemnation… You show your true colors by trying to excuse, pacify and patronize when it comes to his hate speech…
That’s funny, anyone reading this who sees your name calling, self answering arguments and insults is not viewing the vitriol from anyone other than yourself.
You can and will ban me, however, if you leave the comments up you’ll show you’re not nearly as petty and weak as your comments indicate.
Richard Silverstein says
I asked JC, after numerous comments published in this thread to stop commenting. You can see how respectful he is. It’s like someone who knocks on your door, barges into your house & after you ask him to take his shoes off the sofa says: “In a minute.”
I asked JC what particular knowledge he had about Black experience and tried to cast the net as wide as possible to allow him to tell us what he knew. You’ll notice he never replied which answers my question. ‘Nuff said.
JC accuses me of believing I know “what Black people want.” Besides unintentionally echoing Sigmund Freud’s offensive complaint “what do women want,” (a historical echo that will undoubtedly be lost on JC), I sure as hell know a lot better what Black people believe than JC does. Especially since I’ve tried to acquaint myself with the resources available like books, films and direct conversation w. African-Americans. Has JC done any of this? His silence speaks volumes.
No, I speak for myself. Not for Black people. These are MY views, not Black peoples’ views.
Since most of the names I raised were Israeli politicians I mistakenly assumed you’d understand I was referring to Avigdor Lieberman, not Joe Lieberman. But the latter too is an Israel Firster of the first order. Though Joe isn’t quite as racist as Avigdor.
I read most of the comments.
I do like Obama but am concerned about his relationship with Mr. Wright nonetheless. However, I will likely vote for him.
The fact that his Reverend apparently likes Mr. Farrakhan and Ghadaffi combined with his over the top rhetoric is cause
for concern at the least.
As far as Mr. Silverstein stating he understands the black community due to his reading and interviewing African American people, that sounds rather patriarchal and yes silly.
Richard Silverstein says
Marcus: I didn’t say that I “interviewed” African-Americans. I said I had conversations with them. And I do wish you’d look up the meaning of the word “patriarchal” before you misused it here. You prob. meant “presumptuous” but I wouldn’t really know.
And tell me, if you’re not African-American how DO you learn what African-Americans feel and believe if you don’t attempt to do research & talk to them. Are there some magical means of inter-ethnic communication you possess that you’d wish to pass on to the rest of us?
There’s no point in trying to reason with an Obama Kool-aid drinker. If someone produced a video of Obama beating a puppy, Obama supporters would start up community puppy beating clubs. There are so many reasons to reject Obama beyond the Wright association. For me it is his incessant lying about not taking money from lobbyists, pacs, and corporate interests. He just told that lie to a rally in Greensboro, NC. Funny, Congressional Quarterly reported that he’s taken more money from the top 10 subprime mortgage lenders than Clinton and McCain. It was well documented in the LA Times that his anti-lobbyist stance is a pose (a view shared by campaign finance think tankers). The man is a duplicitous fraud. As far as Wright goes, Obama knows Wright is a problem, which is why he lied about his association with the Reverend when the story broke; the same way he lied when his campaign got busted for sending Goolsbie to talk to the Canadians. His campaign then published a statement that the Clinton campaign called the Canadians to wink wink about her NAFTA statements (which the Canadian government vehemently denies). The same way he lied, and continues to lie about his association with Tony Rezko (when you buy land from someone who you know is trying to hide his assets from his creditors, and put it in the hands of his wife to keep that money hidden, it’s called collusion to commit fraud, or money laundering–take your pick). But Obama is the Golden god of Change so it’s okay for him to lie. It’s for your own good. Save me from yourselves.
Richard Silverstein says
Whew, we have a live one here. A real genuine Obama hater. Most people who don’t want him to be president at least try to be cool and laid back about it. Not this guy. And btw your comment quoted above is witless & dumb.
I notice that none of yr claims is supported by any links so how is anyone to verify any of yr charges. I detest unsupported arguments. Anyone can claim anything they want on the web. If you want anyone to believe you you’ll prove what you’re saying.
No, you’re the one who’s lying. Obama never “lied” about his association with Wright.
Another lie. Prove it.
What is the lie? You can’t spout slogans here.
You better pack a few bags in case Obama gets elected. You may want to move to a nice pure country where politicians are chaste and pure as the driven snow like Israel.
Thank you for so eloquently proving my point Rich. Kool-aid for everyone!