« Remember when the Clinton campaign swore they weren't gonna try to flip Obama's pledged delegates? Well, guess what? | professordarkheart's Blog | race/gender/godwin »
Jeremiah Wright: extended mix
If anyone else is as hungry as I had been to see some of the contexts from which the MSM's Jeremiah Wright clips had been lifted, here and here are a couple of much longer excerpts from the sermons in which "America's chickens" and "God damn America" occur. In the second case especially the soundbite version gets it wrong (and Bill Clinton is labeled an "intelligent friend" of civil rights).
Advertisement
http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2008/03/21/the-full-story-behind-rev-jeremiah-wrights-911-sermon/
Roland Martin, CNN
>>I have now actually listened to the sermon Rev. Wright gave after September 11 titled, “The Day of Jerusalem’s Fall.” It was delivered on Sept. 16, 2001.
>>>One of the most controversial statements in this sermon was when he mentioned “chickens coming home to roost.” He was actually quoting Edward Peck, former U.S. Ambassador to Iraq and deputy director of President Reagan’s terrorism task force, who was speaking on FOX News. That’s what he told the congregation.
I can't do audio on this computer and thus can't confirm.
March 21, 2008 2:55 PM | Reply | Permalink
It's true. On the other hand, though it's factually incorrect to attribute the words to Wright without mentioning that he was quoting someone else, the quote was in keeping with the point that Wright was making himself that violence begets violence.
That's why I think it's a more significant misrepresentation that in the case of "God damn America," not only has the phrase been misread in its Biblical import (it's a direct translation of a Hebrew term that's often translated as "woe unto," but that scholars say is actually much stronger and better translated as "curse" or "damn"), but he also said it in the midst of a sermon about how constantly governments change, and how the positive changes of civil rights and the Clinton administration had given way to this administration's failures, which were the sole focus of the "damning" or condemnation. So to portray it as a sentiment "about America" is just plain wrong.
March 21, 2008 3:07 PM | Reply | Permalink
I get your point, prof ---- quoting someone else is still conveying the message. My concern is with the reporting of these statements. Is it within journalistic ethics for ABC's Brian Ross to omit that Wright was quoting a former US Ambassador's public statement? And what about Fox News when the quote was apparently taken from one of their own broadcasts???? Especially with them - if it's something they allowed to be said on air, then where do they get off being hysterical that Wright repeated it from a pulpit?
I don't blame the press for reporting on Wright and his extreme statements - that's a legitimate story, but to cherry-pick the "hottest" lines and then fail to mention that one of them was a quote from someone else?? We all know that HOW something is presented shapes the message.... If what is reported on CNN is true, then I think that ABC and Fox should explain their role and their choices .... and all the media that jumped all over this should at least clarify the record.
Hopefully SOMONE in the press - or on Obama's staff - or on one of the blogs will take each of those earlier controversial statements and explain their context (and source). At least I'd have something to hand my co-workers who were totally blown away by the clips and have given up all thought of voting for him if his connections are that strange and weird and awful. ---- The July and December sermons from which clips were taken seem to be different and I think are less important -- if this minister went that far over the top only in the last few months before his retirement ..... let it go.
March 21, 2008 4:02 PM | Reply | Permalink
"And what about Fox News when the quote was apparently taken from one of their own broadcasts???? Especially with them - if it's something they allowed to be said on air, then where do they get off being hysterical that Wright repeated it from a pulpit?"
That's a good point...it does make it seem extra sleazy. And I don't think it's at all legitimate not to mention that he's quoting; it does seem to me to be a real misrepresentation of the facts (just not as big a misrepresentation of the message).
On the other hand, his point about Ambassador Peck was more or less "This was a white diplomat saying this, not some crazy black preacher!" So to use the clip to convey: "Look what the crazy black preacher said!" is pretty twisted. I'm getting less inclined to make allowances for any of this...
March 21, 2008 4:20 PM | Reply | Permalink