« Well said Senator Obama! | loki's Blog | A Kinder, Gentler Take on Rev. Wright's Insanity. »

Jeremiah Wright is Full of Shit!


First let's get one thing out of the way... always be skeptical when someone starts their post/sermon with words like "It's time for some truth!"  Oh yeah...that's good, I'm listening.  Please brother!  Tell me some Truth!  Ayyymaayen!! 

Hey truth giver... screw you and your "truth."

So now, it's time for some...wait for it...opinion! That's right folks, I'm about to opinionate all over you!  Can I get a "right on!?"  RIGHT ON!!!!  Thank you, thank you very much.

Alrighty then...On to The right Reverend Asshole Jeremiah Wright.  Some well meaning folks with far too much unecessary feelings of guilt in here want to jump on the Amen Reverend Train.  He may be abrasive they say, but let's admit it everything he said was true!  Um...no.  Wrong.  Wright is a charlatan, full of fire and brimstone, piss and vinegar...and not a small amount of shit.

Just to tick off a few things:

Jesus Christ (if the man existed at all and wasn't the myth I genuinely suspect he was) was not a poor "black" man. Certainly not in the sense that most reasonable people use these kinds of terms.  He was not that blue-eyed goateed northern European looking dude either, for sure.  However, to say he was black clearly is just a bullshit feel-good notion for the congregation.  Anthropologically speaking people in this region of the world are slightly darker than people from let's say England but not nearly as dark as people from Kenya (to use two random countries.)  Generally speaking we tend to call the Brit "white" and the Ethiopian "black" even though in actuality, they both are just a different shade of brown.  Jesus most likely resembled Yassir Arafat, not Gordon Brown or Mwai Kibaki.

Idiot Wright also said Barack Obama wasn't rich.  Really?   How many poor folks you know buy million dollar homes?  That he isn't priviledged.  OK.  He's not Paris Hilton's sibling, but I guarantee that as an experienced, successful lawyer and sitting U.S. Senator he has more priviledge than most Americans.

Hillary Clinton "ain't never been called a nigger!"  Fair enough.  But given where she and Bill spent all their adult lives and the good works they pushed for the truly less than priviledged, often minorties, given the people they hung out with, I suspect she has been called, on more than one occassion, a "nigger lover."  Not the same thing, of course, but still.  And to this day the words "bitch" and "cunt" can sadly still be heard in reference to her.  But hey, she ain't never been called a nigger.  Touche!

"Never had her people defined as Nonperson."  Hmmm...OK, technically maybe so, but someone might want to take a turn at some suffragette or feminist literature to get a feel for what Hillary's "people" have been "defined" as. 

She's never had to work twice as hard to succeed or get passing grades?  See above.

And that's before we get into the absurd comments, then saying that it's in the bible.  Really?  Where's Godamn America in the New Testament dude? 

And finally, HIV was invented by the government as a means of genocide of people of color?  WTF?

Wright is full of shit.  If he happens to stumble upon the occassional bit of truth because he learned a little American history over his years...well, doesn't make him any less full of crap.

I think Wright is a charlatan.  I think he takes money from his congregants to make himself rich.  Just like too many other preachers.  He preys upon their emotional weaknesses and essentially steals from them.  How's that for some "truth?"

Barack Obama did the right thing the other day.  He did it, I hope, because he genuinely believes it.  Not because of political expediency.  He did it because in his heart of hearts he knows Wright is not "right."  Wouldn't you agree?

Right on! 


18 Comments

| Leave a comment

"Idiot Wright also said Barack Obama wasn't rich. Really? How many poor folks you know buy million dollar homes? That he isn't priviledged. OK. He's not Paris Hilton's sibling, but I guarantee that as an experienced, successful lawyer and sitting U.S. Senator he has more priviledge than most Americans."

Um lets not confused priviledged with earned. There's a difference between working your way through school and higher-education and obtaining a law degree versus being the aire to a billion dollar hotel company and gaining fame from that connection.

Also I doubt Barack Obama's home cost 1 million dollars, and I doubt he did not go for a downpayment of the home.

You are correct. It wasn't a million dollar house. It was a 1.65 million dollar house.

user-pic

Privileged? Yes, in a manner of speaking, he was. He got that scholarship to that private school in Hawaii because of his white grandfather.

That is not to say that he didn't make the most of it. I believe he himself has said similar things. His resolve in this matter is laudable for sure.

To pretend he was a poor innercity, single-parented child of oppression is a little silly, however.

Um lets not confused priviledged with earned.

And let's not forget that Obama was raised by whites. That's automatic privilege, according to Rev. Wright's own argument. Obama didn't "earn" the opportunity to grow up in a white American home, he didn't "work for it."

user-pic

You made some nice counterpoints here, but I doubt anyone will read it.

I don't know much about Rev. Wright, and frankly, I don't care much about what he says. Perhaps if I was black and lived in Southside Chicago, I would.

I think his mistake is concentrating on how far there is to go, rather on how far we've come, and like Ferarro, tends to live in the past.

It isn't 1968 anymore. Nor is it 1984.

Elections aren't so much about where we've been, but where we're going. Obama gets that. Pity his staunchest supporters, don't or won't.

They may lose us all the election.

user-pic

Dial it back a bit, OK?

Shall we compare who on the two sides is full of shit? Ferraro? Maybe Mark Penn? Or shall we stick to the candidates and their accomplishments?

It is possibble that when Rev. Wright commented that Obama was not rich it was true, since he earned money on his books but not until fairly recently. That he is worth something less than 1/10 of the Clintons make that a non-issue, I'd say, unless you want to pursue that line.

Chicago Tribune has an editorial today, addressing the Rezko stuff. Since you may have to live with his person as your candidate I wouldn't get too splenetic. I'm trying not to get pissed at Clinton, since I may have to vote for her, although that seems unlikely for now. However, if character attacks like yours stick, and Obama goes down, I'll swallow hard and join up.

Hope you'll pledge the same.

I did not and was not attacking Obama's character. I also was not bringing up the "Rezko stuff." Someone said he didn't think Obama had a million dollar house. I simply corrected him. I have stated time and again (please feel free to look it up) that I like Obama quite a lot. That I have every intention of voting for him. I feel no need to "pledge" to you anything. You aren't important enough. I will do what I will do...the right thing. If you're bothered by my attack on Jeremiah Wright, say so. Don't try to turn into something it isn't.

Oh and Wright saidf Obama was not rich in that speech noted recently in these pages. Which I believe was right after the NH primary. So yes it was fairly recently and by anybody's measure Obama is doing very well. He ain't in Soros, Gates or even Clinton's league...but it is not a stretch at all to say that he is rich. It is a lie to say he isn't rich. Which Wright did.

user-pic

Please, don't pretend you are attacking Wright with only Obama's best interests in mind. Even if he is an utter charlatan, a faker, an asshole, an idiot, etc. you only emphasize it for an obvious reason. If this was only informative you would not sound so exercised. And your preferences are known, so we assume that is the intent.

Point taken if the "rich" mention was after NH.

Perhaps I remembered wrong, but thought you had mentioned Rezko elsewhere.

I swear the only interest I had was making commentary regarding people who are trying to make Wright out to be something he is not. It is not to bash Obama.

And despite all the naughty words and exclamation points I used, I really am not that exercised. I was trying to be provocative, "colorful."

Sorry if it came out otherwise.

Hillary is 14 years older than Obama. Its not fair to compare their net worth. The obama's personal wealth is 1.3 million

http://nymag.com/news/politics/encyclopedia/personalwealth/

The Clinton's net worth in 1991 when she was 44 was 697,000.

http://thememlingindex.com/hillary_clinton_net_worth-wealth.html

Even adjusted for inflation I doubt there will be a significant difference between Obama and Clinton's wealth when they were the same age.

Shall we compare who on the two sides is full of shit? Ferraro? Maybe Mark Penn?

Um, no. We should stick 100 percent with talking about Wright when we are talking about Wright.

user-pic
Jesus Christ (if the man existed at all and wasn't the myth I genuinely suspect he was) was not a poor "black" man. ... Anthropologically speaking people in this region of the world are slightly darker than people from let's say England

Historically in this country, anyone with the slightest amount of color or even African features has been treated as black. I remember years ago when Vennessa Williams won the Miss America Pageant. My brother and I were watching when they declared her the first African-American to win and we both looked at each other and then got up real close to the screen and looked: She's black??? we said.

The French in their various colonies always made distinctions between various shades. America did not because we were enamoured of the notion of purity. So you were either pure white or you were not, and not coincidentally, this made things very easy for slaveholders because it assured that their slaves would not be freed simply because they might have some white ancestry.

So from that historical American view of blackness, Jesus was black.

Unless the good Rev has been known to call all Palestinians and Israelis and Syrians and Jordanians etc..."black," it's just pure B.S. for his congregation. And now that I think about it...it's B.S. even then.

user-pic

As for the rest of Wright's comments, I think they are false, but common beliefs in the African-American community, which as a people who were long oppressed by this country and only relatively recently acquired some degree of equal status, naturally have a certain paranoia about this country and its institutions.

Wright didn't say anything that Martin Luther King didn't say. Give it a break. Where do you get off judging this man?

Wrong. Next.

And I still hear that Obama supporters are out of control? LMAO!

Go Loco Reducks!

user-pic

Well, it seems you're taking more heat than you deserve. I'm an Obama supporter, but I'd generally agree with much of what you pointed out. Wright really was off with a number of his comments.

Having acknowledged that, I also think Wright's sermon is understandable if seen from his perspective. I've said a lot about this on an earlier blog:

http://tinyurl.com/2sexzh

The real issue here is what does Obama really believe in? For those of us who've read his books and done our research on him already, the Wright sermon is a non-issue. We understand who Obama is and what he stands for.

While Obama's response was pretty good, it may not be enough for those who's support for Obama is soft - especially for undecided voters. To simply say to just say "I'm not that" still leaves a lingering question: if not that, then what? Obama now needs to fill the void and tell those voters who don't know much him, not just what he doesn't stand for, but also contrast that with what he does stand for.

As I've said elsewhere, this is a real opportunity for Obama to elevate the dialogue and show real leadership. Denouncements are standard fare for politicians. He's met the bare minimum requirement. But he could do more. He could use his keen intellect and powerful oratory skills to build bridges of understanding and change the tone of the campaign. Dangerous waters to navigate, for sure, so I understand if his campaign wants to avoid it. But I think he could handle it, and the rewards could be huge, not only for his campaign, but for the country as well.

Leave a comment

loki

user-pic

Following:
Followers: 14

Posts
Comments & Recommends


Favorites

All Reader Posts
How to use myTPM

Advertise Liberally
Share
Close Social Web Email

"To" Email Address

Your Name

Your Email Address