I understand. Plus I learn so much from everyone here. No offense taken.

Mrs. Clinton’s advisers said they had spent recent days making the case to wavering superdelegates that Mr. Obama’s association with Mr. Wright would doom their party in the general election.
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/20/us/politics/20memo.html?_r=1&ref=politics&oref=slogin

When Clinton was then asked specifically if her campaign was pushing the Wright story — she shrugged and took the next question, ignoring the reporter.
http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/03/clinton-doesnt.html

I do not know much about Tim Wise but I referenced the writing after seeing it on Racialicious because I was not hearing too many Whites saying anything beyond what the pundits have been offering the last few days.

I have already expressed my anger and disgust here with this latest political ploy so I will not focus on it at the moment.

I don’t think Tim Wise’s comments are more credible because he is White and I agree he is saying what many here have already said. I just wanted to pass on the essay.

Peace.

I saw his sorry @ss on Chris Matthews when the brotha asked point blank—-”what are you afraid of”. Yes, Pat Buchanan did look like a fool. And the nerve of him to call someone racist–as if he isn’t! MOFOS!

No, they can’t, and won’t, because they don’t want to be on record stating that Americans are a bunch of racist voters, too nearsighted to see past a video of a black man who is angry at the country. To explain why Wright makes Obama unelectable would mean explaining that whoever thinks so also thinks Americans are racist and easily scared by a video of an angry black man and who thinks that Americans will be only too ready to believe that Obama is just such an angry black man, and therefore is to be feared. In other words, those who think Wright makes Obama unelectable also think the absolute worst of the American voter. And who wants to publicly admit that?

Ridicule works, and maybe this can be turned into something. I saw the briefest snippet of a black commentator asking Pat Buchanan if he was scared of Wright and Obama and Pat looked stupid and said “no, no, it’s just that it was racist and divisive, blah blah”

If the Clinton campaign is indeed using Wright to convince supers, then I want her on the record saying this crap about the American voter.

If BO felt that these beliefs were wrongheaded, why maintain the close relationship? Note I didn’t say leave the church, I said end the relationship.

If you can’t understand that rational (not racist) people are thinking along those lines, you need to talk to people outside your circle.

If there are still people who wish to conclude that Barack Obama is an abject failure, well then that’s what they need. Leave them to live on their own bile and hatred.

A little-known politician just came and spoke life to our dreams. That doesn’t happen too often.

This is completely untrue. Senator Obama never admitted to hearing any of the sermons that have been played to the public. He’s admitted to being in the church when things have been said that “may be considered controversial.” He went on to explain in a later interview that the Rev. would frequently use street language when chiding the congregation about infidelity and such. He never reversed himself!

This is the point that Obama’s surrogates are failing to make. It’s killing me watching former objective journalists like Anderson Cooper repeatedly making the claim that Obama listened to such sermons for 20 years. The snippets that they have shown span more than 5 years, which is clear evidence that in the review of hundreds of sermons spanning at least a decade, they only found 4 snippets.

Clearly, they are not indicative of the vast majority of the sermons that Wright has delivered. And it’s an ugly false indictment of the church’s congregation to think that thousands of black folks showed up every Sunday morning to hear hate sermons.

What is really pissing me off is how few of UCC’s white leaders are coming forward to defend the church. The president of UCC, who is white, could go a long way to helping the church and Senator Obama just by virtune of attaching his white face to the church.

I’m going to vent a little here. I am sorry if it is tangential. It doesn’t feel tangential to me but I have weird ways of understanding things so it might be

From what I know, white anti-racists including but certainly not limited to Wise have for many many years been having elaborate conferences and building organizations and getting grants and other funds and writing and saying stuff.

Tim Wise in particular has been a white man who for many years has making an actual living off of saying and writing stuff that people of color have been saying and writing. And he gets lauded because in comparison to other white people what he says has much less BS in it.

I have been thinking about this white anti-racist thing in reference to the dynamics with Senator Obama — because of how incredibly functionally irrelevant the work of white anti-racists has been (IMO) in actually affecting the way that white people collectively comprehend reality.

Tim Wise and co will say that white people will listen better to other white people so that’s why he and others should be the ones saying things (and in his case and some others, making a wage of of it).

Barack Obama spoke for himself. Other Black people from various perspectives spoke and are speaking and writing about this as is obvious here.

But so now, predictably, here comes the white anti-racist whose one claim to attention is that he is white and so (the story goes) is uniquely qualified to be heard by other white people so his words should be lauded even though nothing he says is particularly more useful analytically than what anyone else is saying. He certainly isn’t uniquely insightful apart from that IMO.

What exactly has all that energy and time and conferences and discussion groups and etc etc from the white anti-racists, and all the money/resources flowing to the white anti-racists, for all these years — what exactly has that done to actually affect the overall white comprehension they claim to be all about affecting, that’s what I want to know. Because they have been taking resources and talking and writing for some time now and so far as I can see it has not had any sort of real visceral affect on white comprehension in a collective way.

And yeah I knew in this situation with Senator Obama it was only a matter of time before Tim Wise Himself would come along and write something seeking to “explain” what others have already explained, and do it on the basis that as a white person he has the ears and attention of other white people in a unique way. That’s the story.

I would like to know if anyone is holding Tim and other white people who have been taking resources in the name of “educating other white people” really accountable. Instead of just lauding his words which are usually more or less accurate and predictably appear over and over and over again whenever racism comes up nationally, predictably saying what others have said, predictably “explaining” and “analyzing” issues that others have done already —

I would like to know who is holding him and other white people who have been making a living off of being professional anti-racists (as teachers hired for expertise in this area, as consultants, as speakers/writers etc) accountable for what their methods are, what their strategies are, why their work has not had more of an impact, as we can see right now in this situation?

All those words, the conferences, the words words words, the assumed “best” strategy of raising individual white awareness, after the resources that have flowed into white anti-racist “work” — as far as I can see, it hasn’t made one bit of real difference in how white people collectively actually respond to situations like this.

But Tim Wise stays on course, offering more words and more and more, defining and talking and writing and riding the story of “white people can hear other white people better.” And the white anti-racist “work” will continue overall, riding on that story and not seeming to take a harsh look at itself and asking why it has not made a real impact on white collective “awareness.”

Like I said above, sorry if this is a tangent, I know I’m upset about the dynamics against Senator Obama for a lot of reasons right now.

Just STFU! Fact is–The media is trying to derail a viable black candidate! Rev Wright gives the S.O.B.’s a reason to alert the white voters so they will stop voting for Barack.

America will never own up to her failures of the black race! 221 years later, when America has a chance to make it right—She fails—-AGAIN!

The problem with your logic is that you’re making the inference that Wright stood at the pulpit for 20 years and consistently spewed hate about whites and engaged in anti-American rhetoric. I think that’s an absurd assumption.

You can have whatever opinion you want, but I would have to believe that anti-American and anti-white sentiments in CHURCH are going to be the exception to the rule when a pastor is giving a sermon. And most people don’t give up on something because it’s the exception to the rule. They deal with it, even if they dislike it and disagree with it.

When it becomes the rule is when people have a problem. But I have a hard time being convinced that because we’ve seen 30 sec clips of Wright here or there that that automatically means and shows what kind of preaching he did every single Sunday for twenty straight years.

I’m just not buying into that.

“The Family avoids the word Christian but worships Jesus, though not the Jesus who promised the earth to the “meek.” They believe that, in mass societies, it’s only the elites who matter, the political leaders who can build God’s “dominion” on earth. Insofar as The Family has a consistent philosophy, it’s all about power–cultivating it, building it and networking it together into ever-stronger units, or “cells.” “We work with power where we can,” Doug Coe has said, and “build new power where we can’t.”

If anything, I suspect there is a segment of the white population who voted for Obama are re-evaluating their decision. They voted for “a different type of AA”, not one who agreed with the rantings of a Rev. Wright (or Rev. Sharpton or Rev Jackson).

I realized Obama disagrees with some of Rev. Wright’s believes, but they couldn’t have bothered him that much or caused him that much distress because he listened to them for 15 years.