RSS Feed
Advice for Senator Obama
Standing on a tarmac yesterday a rather tense Barack Obama said of Jeremiah Wright: “He does not speak for me. He does not speak for the campaign.”
True enough. But how exactly should the Senator speak in the aftermath of the Reverend’s recent attempts to McGovernize and Mondaleize his candidacy? Permit me to rehearse some possible responses to the existential threat posed by Wright. But please recall that none of the forthcoming proposals is particularly good. Like America's foreign policy options in Iran, the Senator’s alternatives in this crisis can be described as “bad” and “worse”:
Response One: Tactical, Lawyerly Silence: One course of action suggests that Obama, cognizant of his still substantial lead, ignore the Reverend and his orations. Ergo, he does not dignify with a response. In so doing, he assumes that his connection to Wright has already cost him dearly with white Blue-Collar voters and independents. Trying to salvage what he can, the Senator devotes all efforts to articulating clear, concrete, policy initiatives that will win over voters less appalled by symbolic pyrotechnics.
The downside: It strains credulity to think that the McCain camp won’t rehash old YouTube clips of Reverend Wright speaking truth to power. In fact, it strains credulity to think that the McCain campaign won’t have a lot of new YouTube clips of Reverend Wright speaking truth to power on hand. Those will require anything but tactical, lawyerly silence.
Response Two: Give the Good Reverend a Tutorial on Politics: In his interview with Bill Moyers (who has developed an allergy to asking probing follow-up questions) Wright lingered on a distinction that he would repeat for days: he was a pastor, but Obama was a (mere) politician.
The Senator should concede the point. Then he should explain why politicians who seek High Office cannot and should not act like Pastor Wright. Politics is about building coalitions. Politics is about compromise. Politics is about picking your battles carefully. Politics is about us, not you.
Taking a page from Hillary Clinton he might explain the difference between fighting the Power and being the Power—with especial emphasis on how being the Power correlates with bettering the lives of one’s constituents. In short, Obama should explain why a “Vice President Wright” is an utter impossibility.
The downside: In this race Obama has so aggressively entwined his politics with his faith and his faith with his pastor, that it may be hard to convincingly disentangle it all. So maybe he should . . . .
Response Three: Go Secular: Have an epiphany. Acknowledge that while your faith sustains you and this nation, religion’s role in public life can be divisive and destructive. Claim that the whole Reverend Wright flap made you “Come to the Constitution” and that you are reconsidering how you should talk about religion in politics.
The downside: Aside from the fact that going secular will look like flipfloppery, “secular” is still a taboo word in the American political lexicon. Too, it is not in the least bit clear--in fact, it seems unlikely--that a coalition of believing and non-believing secularists is sufficiently organized for mass electoral mobilization.
Response Four: Reclaim the Black Church: Reverend’s Wright attempt to associate his plight with that of the Black Church in its entirety stood as one of his most memorable and vainglorious initiatives.
Obama should vigorously challenge the legitimacy of this assertion. He must point to the diversity of the African-American religious heritage. He must demonstrate that the mere politician who gave that sophisticated, thoughtful and un-hateful speech about race in Philadelphia better embodies its complex spirit than the pastor who grandstanded at the National Press Club.
He should repeat like a mantra: “He does not speak for me. He does not speak for the campaign.” And to this Obama must add: “and he does not speak for the Black Church either!”
(For more information about religion and the candidates check out Faith 2008 by the Berkley Center for Religion, Peace & World Affairs.)
By Jacques Berlinerblau |
April 28, 2008; 11:36 PM ET
Share: Email a Friend | 
Technorati
| Del.icio.us | Digg | Facebook
Previous: Shariah and Minority Rights |
Next: Hillary Clinton's Dream Week
Posted by: Joyce | April 30, 2008 10:27 AM
Report Offensive Comment
I don't know why the press has fixated on Obama's religion. First he was "Muslim" o-o-o-o-scary! Then he belongs to a "racist" black Christian church. Why the relentless scrutiny of Obama's beliefs? Religion is a personal thing that doesn't belong in political arena. But, if you in the media are going to delve into one candidate's faith, it's only fair to investigate the other candidates.
I hear very little about McCain's elusive religious affiliations. And why aren't you delving into Hillary's spiritual advisor, Doug Coe and The Fellowship. Now, THAT would be interesting. How about some YouTube soundbites from Doug Coe praising the leadership abilities of Hitler, Goebbels, Chairman Mao, etc. (Or is it scary to go up against this group which is also known as the Christian Mafia?)
Posted by: Jelaine | April 30, 2008 10:08 AM
Report Offensive Comment
I also vote for door number three. Obama's "God talk" has made a lot of people who would otherwise vote for him uncomfortable. If he comes out and says, "My allegiance is to the Constitution of the United States, not to any one pastor, religion, or racial viewpoint" it would go a long way towards putting this controversy to bed. It would also tell Rev. Wright to STFU and stop trying to extend his fifteen minutes of fame.
Posted by: Athena | April 30, 2008 9:41 AM
Report Offensive Comment
A CLINTON ADMIRER:
KAT:
the two of you are a real piece of work !
you need to crawl back under that rock you came from Hillary will not and can not win anything
Hillary was indict and she will be in court
before the primary is over why do you think
Hillary will do anything lie, steal, and she is If she is in the white house she will do the same thing Bush and Chaney had done attorney general Alberto Gonzales will protect them and
put them above the law and the new attorney general will do the same for her Hillary will use the white house to protect her from her wrong doings
Posted by: dvdpt | April 30, 2008 12:37 AM
Report Offensive Comment
I hope and pray that obama does not win, even if he did Sen. Mccain will defeat him at the end.
I was raised a muslem, in an arabic country before being reborned again the U.S.A 6 years ago, i know an islamist when he speech, i know how they define things, and how they think and i have known for long, long before finding out what his middle name is,i have known in heart that he is a muslim.
if there is one percent of chance that Sen. Obama is muslim why risk america for that ?
Posted by: tyra | April 30, 2008 12:16 AM
Report Offensive Comment
Elinor:
Haven't you heard? The GOP is trying to dump the evangelicals off onto the Democrats. Has nothing to do with the Bible being a proved hoax. It's the abortion we get for government when abortion is the only issue discussed by the candidates.
"Right to life" is now being applied to the Republican party. Which party of the new two party system of all Democrats are you going to join, liberal or conservative?
Posted by: BGone | April 29, 2008 10:20 PM
Report Offensive Comment
The so-called "values" voters have been a big problem for Democrats for some time. The fact that Senator Obama and Senator Clinton for that matter have been able to speak to these voters has made the Democrats competitive in a number of areas which have been considered out of bounds. One of the problems for Senator Obama as he seeks to transcend race is that he keeps getting pulled back into racial arguments, particularly old racial arguments which may be part of the civil rights struggle. The peculiar dynamic between Rev. Wright and Sen. Obama should not obscure the importance of faith in this election. This has been the Republican terrain for a long time. Now it is a bi-partisan issue.
Posted by: Elinor | April 29, 2008 10:03 PM
Report Offensive Comment
HILLARY CLINTON WINNING ALL INDIANA POLLS>!! YES!!!!!!!!NOT GOD D--- AMERICA IN THE WRIGHT HOUSE>>>GOD BLESS AMERICA WITH THE CLINTONS IN THE WHITE HOUSE!!!!!!!!YA!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!THANKS AMERICA FOR SEEING THE LIGHT!!
Posted by: Kat | April 29, 2008 9:44 PM
Report Offensive Comment
he already was secular. wasn't any preaching about sin going on in wrights church. it was just like congress,one big sermon on how to redistribute the wealth.
Posted by: gary | April 29, 2008 9:39 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Response Five:
Explain that Reverend Wright is fighting to keep his own world view of white America keeping black America down, and that a black man winning the presidency would demolish that view.
This is classic human behavior, irrespective of race. If you identify yourself as being of the 'bottoms', then you do not want any of those who you identify as being of your bottoms group moving out of it.
So the reaction is to do what is necessary to pull them back.
Wright is trying to do this to Obama. Obama's success challenges Wright's view of the world.
Unfortunately, if he wins, all of us lose, once more held back from our gradual march to racial reconciliation.
Posted by: seahawkdad | April 29, 2008 8:46 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Obama has No Choice but to Hand Over the Reins to Hillary.
The 'Hand Writing' sais, "It's Not Your Tome Borack Husain Obama."
Posted by: A Clinton Admirer | April 29, 2008 8:11 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Hello Professor Berlinerblau:
Check the evening news. "Obama renounced his pastor at this point." A little late but nevertheless necessary -- only if he wants to get elected president.
Let's see if I can answer, "Perhaps you can define "religion"?"
Religion defines sin. Sin defines religion.
It's kinda like, adios is bon voyage in Spanish. Define von voyage. Bon voyage is adios in French.
Note: people without religion cannot sin just like people who don't speak French don't know what adios means. Now we'll find out if Jeremiah Wright speaks French. Barak clearly said adios to him just today.
Posted by: BGone | April 29, 2008 7:04 PM
Report Offensive Comment
TJFRMLA:
Why do you blame it on "religion" rather than how politics work?
I agree with you that Obama is the one who seems to carry some spirituality underneath the rhetoric (although one can never know...), and that spirituality is a plus, not a minus.
Perhaps you can define "religion"?
Posted by: Hello Professor Berlinerblau | April 29, 2008 6:15 PM
Report Offensive Comment
As usual religion once again causes nothing but pain and agony. I don't care what people say the end NEVER justifies the means when it comes to all thie mumbo-jumbo. For the past month, with all this talk about religion...Barack Obama is the ONLY person who has given a Hint of a spiritual person beneath the retoric. What a waste of time and energy this has been.We'd do more for our country if the time was spent volunteering at a food bank or child care facility.
Posted by: TJFRMLA | April 29, 2008 4:50 PM
Report Offensive Comment
I concur with option 2. Give Wright a lesson in politics, especially the part about how it isn't about you, it's about us, Even Republicans see his press blitz as an unbelievably selfish act that only someone with an equal measure of narcissism and vengeful envy could carry out.
Posted by: Jane Blevins | April 29, 2008 4:43 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Or Route 5:Repent and surrender his political aspirations.
I vote for this one, not because I don't like Obama, but because I do think he could lead a better life with a nobler purpose. The population never really knows what to think or what to look for. I would be a little disappointed if Obama renounced his pastor at this point. It's a trial by fire, and he has to make a conscientious decision and leave the results of this election to God. This might be a turning point for him, personally.
But then, since it is hard to turn back now --- my second vote goes to #1.
Posted by: Hello Professor Berlinerblau | April 29, 2008 4:39 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Religion is irrelevant here.
Very simply, it does not matter which Democrat is elected President. All the effort prior to the election should be increasing the strength of Democrats to the point where they have a clear mandate to move the US in a different direction. Strength may crucially depend on Democrats ability to counter the crude and unethical tactics of Republicans. The sparring we see between Democrats is probably to warn Republicans of what they can expect when they go negative on their opponents in the last months after the Democratic nominee is chosen. Both Hillary and Barack have to sharpen their weapons for the real offensive, but they need to do so in a way that does not increase the ability of the enemy to defend itself. It’s going to get nasty.
Posted by: L.Kurt Engelhart | April 29, 2008 4:36 PM
Report Offensive Comment
I vote for an easing into Response Three and a decided choice to adopt Response Four, if anyone cares with this recovered-catholic, agnostic Obama supporter thinks!
Posted by: Micki | April 29, 2008 3:02 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Jesus remained silent when He was accused. Being a Christian nation we must elect only the Jesus like to high office. Option number one is Biblical. Of course it will be necessary to inform everyone that he's doing that so silence is impossible.
Posted by: BGone | April 29, 2008 1:00 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Ditto Janet Arnett.
No one person can speak for "the Black Church."
It's loose and diverse.
Maybe Obama could say that -- but best that he stay away from defining churches.
Maybe if Wright has any positive effect, it will be to allow Obama to actively define what he is NOT about. It's certainly not unusual to outgrow a mentor. In fact, it frequently happens. This is not throwing someone under the bus -- It's called learning and moving on.
Hopefully some of Wrights trusted colleagues within the religious community can reign him in
Posted by: E favorite | April 29, 2008 12:39 PM
Report Offensive Comment
Obama should not presume to speak for the Black Church, so I can't support your last statement; otherwise I concur with your observations.
Posted by: Janet Arnett | April 29, 2008 10:16 AM
Report Offensive Comment
The comments to this entry are closed.
seahawkdad...
I think you might have a point about Rev. Wright being a captive of victimhood. It's either that, or Wright has one gigantic ego. When I first started watching him on Bill Moyers, I thought...good, we'll see a side of him that deserves to be seen. But, then it started going downhill and hit bottom at the NPC. I see no logical explanation why Rev. Wright would come forward now in the distructive manner he did. Maybe he's a Republican? or a Clinton supporter?
I know women who have been victims of physical abuse who are more frightened of leaving, than they are of staying with an abusive husband. For that matter, just look at Hillary Clinton - staying with a husband who humiliated her in such a publicly, sleazey manner, not just once, but many times. Who knows what motivates people to make the choices they do!