There's a lot of faulty reasoning in your post above and it saddens me that you are so focused on what offends you about Rev. Wright, that you were unable to see the point at the core of Obama's speech. I honestly do not care if you vote for him - I do however care that you get this point, partly because from the news tonight - it hits me that a lot of people did not get it.
Obama's point was that no one is just one thing. Jeremiah Wright may be an anti-semite, but he is also a caring pastor, a good friend, who has helped the poor in his community and aided his people giving them hope. What Obama states - quite clearly - is that he can separate the two people, the preacher who has said these horrid things and the man he calls his friend. He can disagree with Wright, vehmently so - and I've seen no evidence that he doesn't vehmently disagree - just as I vehmently disagree with my former boss ( a wonderful woman) about her political views (she's a bit on the facist side of the fence), but by the same token love him.
And Obama has been sitting in his pews, absorbing this rhetoric, for 20 years."
What does this prove? My parents are Catholic - they go to church every Sunday, listen to a Priest preach about how homosexuality is a sin, that birth control is wrong, that you should not vote for anyone who is not pro-life or against abortion. They disagree with everything he says and the Pope says. They have brains and can think for themselves. That's what Obama said in his speech - he has a brain, he agrees with some of the things his pastor said and some he really doesn't agree with. Is someone who voted for George W. Bush and loves the guy, a homophobic? Most of us, I hate to tell you this, sleep in church. Few of us of pay attention to what a pastor says. And yes, it is possible to be best friends with, to adore and love someone that you vehementally disagree with.
his grandmother once hurt him to the core by being afraid to wait for a bus at a stop where she had actually been threatened the day before by a black guy who she was afraid would have mugged her if the bus hadn't pulled up?
For arguement's sake - What if Obama decided go to the bus with his grandmother after that, assuming of course that he could? Would that have changed her views? No. The only thing she remembered from being threatened by the man at the bus stop was that he was black. It's clear to me from that passage you recite and the one in his speech - that no matter where she went, she would be afraid of black men, because one threatened her. How do you combat that? She made a generalization about all blacks based on the actions of one man. She saw a pattern that wasn't there. We have to be VERY careful not to see patterns where they do not exist. What if that man who had threatened her had been an orthodox jew or big burly white guy with a hell's angel's t-shirt or a white guy in a suit - would she have felt afraid of all white men? All jews? No. We associate crime with black men. I find it silly, personally, but that's because I've had other experiences - I'd be more afraid of the guy in the hell's angel's t-shirt and see the black man as my protector. Neither view is correct. You cannot judge the actions of a person based on who they socialize with, what church they go to, what clothes they wear, what they look like, who they sleep with, and how they talk - but people do anyway. It is why we make so many stupid mistakes.
Whether Obama went to the bus with his grandmother or not is irrelevant. It may have made her feel safe at the bus stop, but it would not have changed her view. I assuming of course that he could have gone - having not read the whole story. Based on that assumption? It still would not have changed anything - she'd have felt safe maybe with him, but still cringed away from the threatening black men. The story was not about him protecting Granny - it was about Granny's prejudices, how she associated and continues to associate blacks with violence, even though her own grandson is black. And how she has made other cringe-worthy racial slur.
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
branchandroot
no subject
Date: 2008-03-20 12:58 am (UTC)Obama's point was that no one is just one thing. Jeremiah Wright may be an anti-semite, but he is also a caring pastor, a good friend, who has helped the poor in his community and aided his people giving them hope. What Obama states - quite clearly - is that he can separate the two people, the preacher who has said these horrid things and the man he calls his friend. He can disagree with Wright, vehmently so - and I've seen no evidence that he doesn't vehmently disagree - just as I vehmently disagree with my former boss ( a wonderful woman) about her political views (she's a bit on the facist side of the fence), but by the same token love him.
And Obama has been sitting in his pews, absorbing this rhetoric, for 20 years."
What does this prove? My parents are Catholic - they go to church every Sunday, listen to a Priest preach about how homosexuality is a sin, that birth control is wrong, that you should not vote for anyone who is not pro-life or against abortion. They disagree with everything he says and the Pope says. They have brains and can think for themselves. That's what Obama said in his speech - he has a brain, he agrees with some of the things his pastor said and some he really doesn't agree with. Is someone who voted for George W. Bush and loves the guy, a homophobic? Most of us, I hate to tell you this, sleep in church. Few of us of pay attention to what a pastor says. And yes, it is possible to be best friends with, to adore and love someone that you vehementally disagree with.
his grandmother once hurt him to the core by being afraid to wait for a bus at a stop where she had actually been threatened the day before by a black guy who she was afraid would have mugged her if the bus hadn't pulled up?
For arguement's sake - What if Obama decided go to the bus with his grandmother after that, assuming of course that he could? Would that have changed her views? No. The only thing she remembered from being threatened by the man at the bus stop was that he was black. It's clear to me from that passage you recite and the one in his speech - that no matter where she went, she would be afraid of black men, because one threatened her. How do you combat that? She made a generalization about all blacks based on the actions of one man. She saw a pattern that wasn't there. We have to be VERY careful not to see patterns where they do not exist. What if that man who had threatened her had been an orthodox jew or big burly white guy with a hell's angel's t-shirt or a white guy in a suit - would she have felt afraid of all white men? All jews? No. We associate crime with black men. I find it silly, personally, but that's because I've had other experiences - I'd be more afraid of the guy in the hell's angel's t-shirt and see the black man as my protector. Neither view is correct. You cannot judge the actions of a person based on who they socialize with, what church they go to, what clothes they wear, what they look like, who they sleep with, and how they talk - but people do anyway. It is why we make so many stupid mistakes.
Whether Obama went to the bus with his grandmother or not is irrelevant. It may have made her feel safe at the bus stop, but it would not have changed her view. I assuming of course that he could have gone - having not read the whole story. Based on that assumption? It still would not have changed anything - she'd have felt safe maybe with him, but still cringed away from the threatening black men. The story was not about him protecting Granny - it was about Granny's prejudices, how she associated and continues to associate blacks with violence, even though her own grandson is black. And how she has made other cringe-worthy racial slur.