The Dallas Observer Blog



Add to Technorati Favorites

Blogroll

The Concession Stand

The Midway

More Wright Than Wrong, But ...

Tue Apr 01, 2008 at 02:00:53 PM

Thanks to a few incendiary soundbites, recordings of the Reverend Jeremiah Wright’s sermons are circulating among church people, making their way from hand to hand and e-mail to iPod. A politically active young man in my church gave my husband a copy of the full message from which the infamous phrase “America’s chickens are coming home to roost” had been ripped, and from there the CD found its way to me.

I listened to the September 16, 2001, sermon a few times and chewed on the preacher’s words in context. The furor over Wright’s statements has spread far and wide; you usually won’t find Pentecostals spending much time delving into the messages of a theologically liberal United Church of Christ pastor, but we were curious to see if this man deserves all of the harsh criticism that’s been directed his way. My conclusion: He doesn’t. Many black Christians -- and surely some white ones too -- see the controversy over Wright as a desperate attempt to derail and discredit Barack Obama’s candidacy. I heard this from Democrats and Republicans alike.

The real title of the Reverend Wright’s “Chickens” message is “The Day Jerusalem Fell,” and Wright, Obama’s spiritual mentor and former pastor, draws an evocative parallel between September 11, 2001, and the events of 551 B.C., when the Chaldean army ripped down the walls of the City of David, burned the temple and treated the last Judean king to the spectacle of his sons being slaughtered before his own eyes were gouged out. In the aftermath the best and brightest sons and daughters of Judah were hauled into captivity, and their lament is told in Psalm 137.

“By the rivers of Babylon,” the Psalm famously opens, “there we sat down, yea, we wept, when we remembered Zion.”

Wright turns a corner here, proceeding to the seldom-quoted conclusion of the Psalm. He notes how the people of Judah began their lament with reverence, recalling their beloved city, then moved swiftly to revenge, longing for the day when the daughters of Babylon would suffer precisely as they did: “Happy shall he be, that taketh and dasheth thy little ones against the stones,” the Psalmist writes. Wright notes three movements among the people of God, from “reverence to revenge,” from “paying tithes” in Jerusalem to “paying back” and from “worship to war.”

These same “movements,” he says, characterize the American “people of faith” after 9/11. “They have moved from hatred of armed enemies to the hatred of unarmed innocents,” Wright says. “That, my beloved, is a dangerous place to be… We want revenge, we want paybacks, and we don’t care who gets hurt in the process.”

In this message I found Wright to be a brilliant orator, dramatically weaving the events of 2,500 years ago with the terrifying images of “black people” jumping hand in hand from the Twin Towers in 2001. From alliteration to repetition to the expressive way he says “Burn!”, he’s got it all going on. I would have been interested to hear this man speak in Dallas, as he’d been scheduled to do last week until his appearance was canceled for unspecified security concerns.

I didn’t hear anything outrageous or categorically racist in this sermon. Wright purports to quote a former U.S. ambassador, Edward Peck, about America’s chickens coming home to roost, but whether Peck actually spoke those words is a matter of discussion (see here). Either way, Wright adopts the phrase as his own and identifies 9/11 as a consequence of America doing dirty around the world. From slavery to Hiroshima and the more recent retaliatory bombings in Libya and the Sudan, Wright sees little difference between the deeds of our “arrogant, racist military superpower” and the terrorists who struck the Pentagon and the World Trade Center.

I found myself carried along by Wright’s eloquent preaching. It plays beautifully as rhetoric. Violence begets violence, he says; hatred begets hatred; terrorism begets terrorism. Surely there is truth in that.

Yet it’s absurd to equate the United States’ last-ditch military measures in World War II with terrorism. Wright’s views differ little from the stereotypical leftist whine that America sucks and everything we do is bad. The preacher isn’t exactly nuanced when he wipes away the Israeli side of the equation altogether in decrying America’s support of “state terrorism against the Palestinians.”

Nor did I see much substance in the applications portion of “Chickens,” the part of the sermon where the preacher devises a practical response to his biblical exposition. Wright says he asked of the Lord, what should our response be to 9/11?

He gives a couple answers. First, self-examination: evaluating our own personal relationships with our Lord and with our families. When, he asks, is the last time we told our family members that we loved them? He sees a vital lesson in Stevie Wonder’s sentimental song, “I Just Called to Say I Love You.”

OK, now. Step back a minute. In the face of America’s greatest tragedy this century, this is what I am to do? Just call to say I love you?

His second application is “social transformation.” And here he cites a litany of ills, from policy matters such as the availability of health care to moral issues like racism and greed among the mighty.

I guess it’s the Pentecostal in me that finds little of enduring value here. I am biased, that I know. My tradition places greater importance on matters of eternal significance: salvation, holiness, truth and love. Change the hearts of men through the power of Jesus Christ, we preach, and society will follow.

In recent weeks I have seen Wright’s ideas -- and Obama’s more measured call for racial, social and economic justice -- creeping into the conversation of church people I know, and I will be interested to see how this all plays out, what fruit it will bear. Angry words like Wright’s, in my experience, provoke little more than further angry words. “Man’s anger,” James’ epistle says, “does not bring about the righteous life that God desires.”

Maybe it’ll be different this time. I know it will in my little sphere when I see more people spending their Saturdays in street ministry, sacrificing their money and time to reach out to the poor and disadvantaged of whom Obama and Wright so powerfully speak. I’ll let you know when the rhetoric translates into action. --Julie Lyons

36 Comments:

good lord says:

Do y'all not give her an editor?

Ahead of the trend says:

It's not at all too long; it's a "column", not a blog, as if the latter had a specified limit.

oh, sorry, Julie, I got ahead of the critique.

Maybe I'm reading you increasingly carefully, maybe you've always been saying it, but I like your clear description of the main concerns of Pentecostals (eternal vs. material). I also like your balance between lauding the undeniably good aspects of Wright (i.e. delivery) with your surprising-to-me, pragmatic rejection of his knee-jerk liberalism.

religion of bacon says:

These same “movements,” he says, characterize the American “people of faith” after 9/11. “They have moved from hatred of armed enemies to the hatred of unarmed innocents,” Wright says.

"Hatred of unarmed innocents?" WTF was he referring to?

Ms. Braden says:

Overall, I enjoyed reading this article. Nice...

A

Lakewooder says:

ROB: He's saying George Bush hates black people.

Coopdizzle says:

ROB, I'm guessing he is referring to the muslim civilians that have died by American hands as a result of "collateral damage".

Matt Minyard says:

I hate oil cans!! Stay away from the oil cans!

P. Talley says:

"I found myself carried along by Wright’s eloquent preaching. It plays beautifully as rhetoric. Violence begets violence, he says; hatred begets hatred; terrorism begets terrorism. Surely there is truth in that."

You contradicted yourself in the very next paragraph!!!

There is a point when violence must be met with violence. World War II is a perfect example of this. Without the United States entering the war and bring violence this blog, this post, this argument over Rev. Wright's statements would never have been possible.

Jeebus Christ....You are never going away are you?

Just like when The Judds did about 30 farewell tours prior to taking off six month to write books and then put together a reunion tour.

It is like finding out your cold sore is really Herpes.

I hope that what you lack in content, you more than make up for with your BJ's.


anonymous says:

Julie,

People do not want to hear the truth. Rev. Wright is only telling the truth in what he said in his sermons.

This is only an attack toward Barack Obama. The media fed off of this, but it's all going to turn out good for Obama. The media is helpng his campaign and don't have enough sense to know it.

People only want to hear what they want to hear and believe what they want to believe. They only heard snippets of these sermons, and only what the media wanted them to hear.

Rev. Wright is telling the truth in his sermons and they have been taken so out of context. But it's going to work out just find for Barack Obama. You'll see.

religion of bacon says:

All you people who keep claiming that disgusting crap like "God DAMN America!" is just fine if it's taken "in context" -- please provide that context. Wright was basically saying that America deserves to be cursed by God, right? If not, please feel free to explain what he really meant. And don't give us the equivalent of "it's too much to go into -- you have to read all of Mein Kampf to understand."

anonymous says:

To: religion of bacon;
or whatever you call yourself;

You have really taken it out of context. That is not what he said. Listen for yourself to the whole sermon. But if you call yourself religion of bacon I'm not going to waste my time trying to explain anything to a piece of bacon.

Typical White Person says:

Can the Rev Wright defenders who are supporting his sermons tell me exactly how the connection between the government...black...AIDS....worked?

How was it that it ended up killing so many gay men? Did they die so that black could flourish? If that is the case, why are black evangelicals so fucking homophobic?

Are you cool with my preacher calling Rev
Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson media sluts?

Bacon has a valid point. If were are taking things out of context.....then PUT THEM IN CONTEXT....don't just bitch and moan about how we take it out of context.

If you say you don't want to waste the time....we can pretty much translate that as a I don't know.

religion of bacon says:

Hold on - I think I get it now - Rev Wright didn't mean "God DAMN all of America," he really meant (in context) "God DAMN white America!"

Sarah says:

well said, biblegirl. looking forward to your book.

yibba says:

What Jack E. Jett said. We'll never be free from this Bible Girl junk will we?

FWIW, I am a liberal Democrat, and find Rev Wright's words deplorable. I don't believe there is any way that "god damn America" or lying/misleading people (HIV) or being nasty about entire ethnicities is okay - context schmontext. And those fellow Dems of mine who are trying to sweep this under the rug & pretend nobody *really* cares, are going to be in for a rude awakening come Nov.

Gabriel says:

I just listen to that sermon, and Julie, your analysis of it is perfect. His list of American sins were more like false accusations, and his "war" on that long list of social ills sounded like old time fasicism. He tried to sound godly, but God's spirit wasn't in it.

Morning Julie, it's always a pleasure to see you with your Bible in hand stating a position.

Personally I see Wright as a brother in arms. He is much smarter than me. He makes his political statements from the pulpit which guarantees him no less than a fifty percent approval rating on any given political position.

I on the other hand can say the same thing, without the God cloud to confuse the issue, and feel good about my world with a five percent or less approval. Price of ungodliness if you will.

Wright is right of course in his cursing America for it's sins. The America those without clear lenses who laud us for our historical purity need to at least learn to read. Then they can try to learn to think.

Brokaw's greatest generation was a miserable failure at everything but winning a war and reaping the benefits of it. What is important to note on that note is the number one thing camoflaging their failure was their Christianity.

If you look at the greatest generation and their prosperity we see one thing. White males making hay while the sun shined. No one else, no women if a man could do that job, no people of color if a white could do the job, and no one that wasn't a Christian for any reason.

Probably the most blatant evidence of the failure of the greatest generation as a viable entity is not only their children have rejected what they believed, their grand and great grand children are rejecting it.

What is unbelievable for a rational mind to comprehend is the thing that made the greatest generation so terrible is the same thing people like you Julie today are suggesting is what's needed to save us from ourselves.

I'm talking about Christianity of course. Wright's righteousness is wrong. His message without the righteousness is right on.

Catbird says:

Looking around at this years crop of presidential candidates, I have to conclude that the good Lord is about to follow through with Pastor Wright's adminition.

Stever says:

There's nothing in the sermons a leftist won't endorse, Obama's a leftist, what's the problem?

cp says:

What's the difference between Wright and his comments and guys like right-wing conservative evangelists blaming feminists and homosexuals for 9/11? It has to be taken in context by Democrats if it comes out of the mouth of a "liberal" Democrat, but if it's a right-winger saying it, it's racist, homophobic, anti-semitic, etc? This sounds like some liberal quilt trying to justify something.....

Ms. Braden says:

"What's the difference between Wright and his comments and guys like right-wing conservative evangelists blaming feminists and homosexuals for 9/11?"

Apparently there's a big difference, CP. For some ungodly reason, the media has decided to waste hundreds of hours feeding the appetite of those who would like to hang Wright on a cross for his so called outlandish statements. Meanwhile, the religious right get a free pass to preach about whatever they can think of, all in the name of Jesus. Many, many, many of President Bush's supporters have said some god awful things about why God allowed 911, Hurricane Catrina, and the AIDS epedemic.

And guess what... They certainly didn't say that God allowed those things to bless America. If it wasn't to bless America, then why would God allow those things to happen to America? Could it be that many of those Christian conservatives that spout so much of that in their sermons could actually be implying or shouting, "God damn America!", the same way Pastor Wright did in his sermon?

If I'm not mistaken, I don't recall ever seeing Faux News or any other mainstream news source taking anytime to showcase those preachers and the many things I have heard them say myself. I'm sure that if I, a little ol' nobody has heard many of those types of sermons preached on TBN, the news media, especially the journalists at Faux News, have heard it.

Hmmm... Do I smell a racist double standard in the air?

For the record: I disagree with some of Pastor Wright's expressions. However, I do not feel that it makes any sense to continue spending so much time talking about Wright, especially when the gas prices are continuing to rise. Now, if talking about Pastor Wright is going to help me put gas in my car so that I can get to and from my job, then let's talk. But from where I sit, this Wright/Obama controversy has done nothing but fueled the racist, ignorant views of folks, who, under no uncertain terms, were going to vote for Obama anyway.

Please let's move on and let's start talking about something that is truly impacting all Americans. The economy!

Randy says:

While I don't approve of anyone preaching politics in church, I'm curious about which of Rev. Wright's "expressions" you agree with:

1) Do you think that the USA didn't have the right to save nearly a million lives (American and Japanese) by dropping A-bombs on Japan? Don't forget, Japan didn't surrender until after the second one was dropped.

2) Do you think that crack cocaine and AIDS were designed and developed by our government to destroy the Black community?

3) Do you believe that the US is guilty of genocide against the Palestinian people? We give them many millions of dollars in aid every year, but it mostly goes in the pockets of corrupt terrorist leaders.

4) Do you believe that the US and Israel worked together to develop a bomb that would kill only arabs and Blacks? I don't even know how this bomb could ever work.

5) Do you think that the "three strikes" law is racist because it puts away repeat criminal offenders?

If you believe any of these things, I don't see how you could stand to remain in such an evil country for a minute longer...

One last question. Is it any more or less racist for a white person to say, "I won't vote for a inexperienced Black man" than for a black person to say, "I won't vote for an old gray-haired white man"?

Have a nice day!

Jeez Randy, chill, wound that tight, well, hell, it's irrational.

Let me give you an example.

1) Do you think that the USA didn't have the right to save nearly a million lives (American and Japanese) by dropping A-bombs on Japan? Don't forget, Japan didn't surrender until after the second one was dropped.

Have you ever stopped to wonder about that? You know, dropping the most devastating weapon ever created upon the civilian population of a defeated enemy?

We all know why we dropped the bomb, right? It was to break the spirit of the Japanese civilians so they wouldn't support the military anymore, right?

Isn't that what 9-11-2001 was about? Isn't that what Islamic crazies wanted? Didn't they want to create such devastation upon the Americans where they would consider abandoning relationships with Islamic countries? Of course they didn't kill hundreds of thousands, silly them.

Maybe Rev Wright is a little like this old two tour Nam vet. Everytime I hear people like Bush talk about how terrible the terrorists are when they attack civiliams I can't help but think about our dropping atomic bombs upon civilians for the very same reasons the terrorists attack civilians.

2) Do you think that crack cocaine and AIDS were designed and developed by our government to destroy the Black community?

I don't. But I'm white. I'm not black knowing that it was the white government that introduced horrible diseases to black men for testing purposes. When you look at what white people have done to black men over the last two hundred years here in the land of the free. Introducing crack cocaine and AIDS isn't a stretch, no stretch at all.

3) Do you believe that the US is guilty of genocide against the Palestinian people? We give them many millions of dollars in aid every year, but it mostly goes in the pockets of corrupt terrorist leaders.

And the question is? Christ man, you're in Texas where the pulpit is the number one place to beg for funding the fulfilling or Revelation's end times. Even atheists like me get to kick in to the pot for providing weapons and support for God's chosen with the idiots contributions being tax deductable. It's not the U.S. bro, it's you and me.

We're getting a little wordy here and Robert has better things to do than choke and chortle his life away.

As for your assinine statement "If you believe any of these things, I don't see how you could stand to remain in such an evil country for a minute longer..."

Wright and myself aren't here just because like you it's a birthright. We're both veterans who've served our nation and have paid the price. We've paid the price and we'd like to see it get better, for everyone, even whiners like you.

Mrs Braden, it's good to see your voice again.

For the record: I disagree with some of Pastor Wright's expressions. However, I do not feel that it makes any sense to continue spending so much time talking about Wright, especially when the gas prices are continuing to rise. Now, if talking about Pastor Wright is going to help me put gas in my car so that I can get to and from my job, then let's talk. But from where I sit, this Wright/Obama controversy has done nothing but fueled the racist, ignorant views of folks, who, under no uncertain terms, were going to vote for Obama anyway.

As much as I respect you for what you say and love the way you say it, well, I want, heck, need, to disagree. Not my nature of course, but a man has to do what a man has to do, especially these days.

I believe we need the conversation on race. And I especially believe we need to have it with the ignorant who won't vote Obama because they don't believe America is ready for a black President.

The reason we need to engage the ignorant in this conversation is we need them to stand up and be counted. Think of a fashion show where they get to show of their best.

After the world gets a good look at these folks and hear why they believe what they believe then I think it only fair to hand them a cd of their statements and a dvd of their performance. It'll help them understand why there were so many snickers and not a chocolate bar to be found.

I believe this conversation is more important than what it cost you to put gas in your tank. I believe we need to discuss race until there's nothing left to discuss.

You see I believe the reason we're having to have this discussion now is because people avoided the discussion before because they found it easier to talk about other stuff, stuff like the economy.

Randy says:

Dear Mr. Lacey: While I certainly appreciate your service to our country enough not to question your patriotism, I do find your judgement to be extremely flawed. I don't see how you can possibly draw any comparison between 9/11 and the use of atomic weapons against Japan. Japan attacked us without declaration of war on 12/7/41. We fought a long hard war against a nation that tortured, starved, and executed Allied prisoners of war as well as Chinese civilians. If Japan or Germany had developed atomic weapons, they would have used them first. We faced a looming invasion of Japan that promised to take nearly a million lives on both sides and reduce an entire country to ruins. Instead our government wisely chose to drop a single bomb, thinking that Japan leaders would surrender immediately. The Japanese erroneously thought that we had only one such bomb, so they chose not to suurender. We dropped the second bomb, and they surrendered. I'm not sure how you equate this sequence of events with a terrorist group who decided to unleash mindless destruction on New York City and innocent civilians. I have no idea how the terrorist mind works, but I don't appreciate your comparison of our government to a group of Islamic terrorists.

Ms. Braden says:

“While I don't approve of anyone preaching politics in church, I'm curious about which of Rev. Wright's "expressions" you agree with:” Randy

I hope it’s not too presumptuous for me to think that question was directed to me. But coupled with your comment being written right below mine, and when you used the words “Wright’s expressions”, which was drawn from my previous statement; I assumed that you were talking directly to me.
I’m not even sure if I should take your bait and engage you in conversation. But because I’m home now, and I don’t have to worry about putting gas in my car until Monday, I can take a little time to discuss some of these issues that are likely unimportant to the both of us.

“1) Do you think that the USA didn't have the right to save nearly a million lives (American and Japanese) by dropping A-bombs on Japan? Don't forget, Japan didn't surrender until after the second one was dropped.”
Um… Honestly, I don’t have an intelligent answer for you on this one. So, I will pass. And yes, I know that this is not a game show. Perhaps someone else can answer this for me. Anyone?

“2) Do you think that crack cocaine and AIDS were designed and developed by our government to destroy the Black community?”
A. Actually, I do not think that crack cocaine was developed and designed to destroy the black community. I think it was developed and designed to make “somebody” a truckload of money. No, not the government. But I’m sure that a few of those somebodies were linked to the government.
And I think that when those murderous entrepreneurs were putting together their marketing plan, black folks were at the top of the list for potential customers. It’s a fact that the drug traffickers were bringing crack by the truckloads to major cities that had dense populations of black folks. They sho’ in the hell weren’t taking their poisonous crack rocks to affluent communities or even cities like Portland, Boise, Sacramento, and New Haven. I think you get my point.
And by the way, it’s also a fact that the government’s so called “war on drugs” was a joke. And let me tell you this, if crack cocaine had destroyed communities of white folks, it would have been called a national crisis. And that “war on drugs” would have actually been a real effort to get that crack out of this country.
B. No, I don’t think that AIDS is a product of some mad scientist, who didn’t have anything else to do but make a highly potent sexually transmitted disease to kill gays and Africans. But you better believe that I think that the government was slow to confront the AIDS epidemic because the victims of the AIDS epidemic were the “undesirable” of us.
And even today, now that AIDS is disproportionately impacting the African American community, the government is slowly ramping up programs to deal with this deadly virus. If AIDS was impacting white women like it is black women, it would be an international crisis. And no, I didn’t steal that from Senator Clinton’s performance on the PBS debate. It’s just a true statement.

“3) Do you believe that the US is guilty of genocide against the Palestinian people? We give them many millions of dollars in aid every year, but it mostly goes in the pockets of corrupt terrorist leaders.”
I don’t know. Haven’t done much research on that… But I don’t put it past America to do some underhanded deals. Any country that would legalize the enslavement of millions of people for hundreds of years is capable of doing plenty of horrific deeds if no one is there to challenge/stop it.

“4) Do you believe that the US and Israel worked together to develop a bomb that would kill only arabs and Blacks? I don't even know how this bomb could ever work.”
The answer to that is no. I’m with you. I don’t even know how that bomb would work.

“5) Do you think that the "three strikes" law is racist because it puts away repeat criminal offenders?”
I think that policy got some racist fingerprints on it, but that’s not why I think it’s racist.

“If you believe any of these things, I don't see how you could stand to remain in such an evil country for a minute longer...”

Randy, with all do respect, you don’t have to see it. Just know, in that heart of yours, that Ms. Braden is not going anywhere.
And for the record, with all of America’s faults, I don’t think it is an evil country. I honestly feel that America is one of the greatest places to call home. I’m proud to be an American. I think it is a blessing that I was born here in this country, although I wish I could’ve been born in one of the country’s cooler climates. But I digress…
And yes, I am of the belief that God blesses America. I don’t care what Rev. Wright and Pat Robertson say about that.

“One last question. Is it any more or less racist for a white person to say, "I won't vote for a inexperienced Black man" than for a black person to say,
"I won't vote for an old gray-haired white man"?”

This question kind of didn’t make since to me. Does the old, gray haired, white man have experience in the same way the black man does?”

And just so you will know, Randy. This black person is not voting for Senator Obama because he’s black. Please give the brain that’s housed in my black head more credit than that.
And I’m not voting for JM because he’s white. It’s because I’m not willing to vote for a man that doesn’t mind our American troops being in Iraq for another 100 years. I’m also not voting for him because I refuse to put another so called God-fearing Rethuglican in office for another four years to do nothing but create more policies to further divide the haves from the have nots.
And lastly, any man that thought it was a good idea to vote against making MLK’s birthday a holiday deserves to be looked over when it’s time to vote for him to be the leader of this country, the country that MLK died to unite.

Randy, have a blessed weekend.

Ms. Braden says:

Hi Harvey:
You disagree with me? How dare you? **wink wink**
Harvey, know this about me. I don't get flushed, feverish, and choked up when people disagree with me, especially if they can do it respectfully and with intelligent rebuttles. And since I know you bring both of those attributes to the table, it's all good.
Perhaps I didn't make myself clear. I couldn't agree with you more that it is far past the time that this nation needs to be having an open conversation about race matters. But I don't feel like now, especially while we're in the peak of the primary race, is a good time to focus on some of these issues. Race is a biggy. But it is other issues that is impacting all of Americans that are being looked over by the media and the campaigns.
And maybe I'm wrong for feeling like this. But until both parties, black folks and white folks, make a real attempt to understand one another's experience, the conversation on race will continue to flop. Too often, white folks try to tell black folks that they don't have a right to feel a certain way. Like Randy for instance, he implied in his comment that it is ridiculous for black folks to think that AIDS was biologically engineered to destroy black people. But as you pointed out, the Tuskigee experiment, along with other horrific experiences lead many black folks to believe that the American government could and would sponsor the engineering of a medical disease that would erase black folks from the face of the planet.
Truthfully, I don't think that AIDS was engineered to wipe out gays and blacks. But perhaps, my youth helps me to not be such a skeptic. (Can I still say youth not that I'm in my early 30's? LOL)
But Harvey, maybe it's the wimp in me, but I am turned off by people who refuse to try to understand where I'm coming from. I'm attracted to white individuals, like you and Julie, who have made it clear that you wish to be fair and understand various perspectives.
I'm tired of trying to make people be fair. I'm tired of trying to get people to listen, especially those who are refusing to listen.
Tell me, Harvey, how do we have a healthy conversation on race, if both parties are not willing to be fair?
Please answer. I seek to learn and understand.

And forgive my frustrated tone. I'm burned out on many of the conversations I've read and even engaged in on the blogosphere regarding the Obama/Wright matter. I guess that's why I said I'm ready to move on. Honestly, Harvey, I don't feel like the discussion of Wright/Obama is the race talk that American needs to have. So, this whole Obama/Wright thing feels like a waste of time. Forgive me...

Randy says:

Dear Ms. Braden,

Yes, my comments were directed at you. I appreciate the time you took to reply. From the looks of it, you actually don't agree with or support most of Rev. Wright's outrageous hyperbole. I have to wonder why so many stand up to support his hate speech.

I'm also not quite sure how a thinking person either doesn't know enough about major historical events like WWII to comment or can't see what's been going on between the Israelis and the Palestinians since 1948. Nobody has to agree with anybody on this stuff, but most people would at least have an opinion.

I think your story about truckloads of crack headed for poor unsuspecting black victims is laughable. That fairytale frankly makes no sense at all.

I'll take you at your word when you say that you're not just supporting Obama because of his skin color. I doubt you would grant a 'white devil' like me the same benefit of the doubt (ha ha).

I also thought it was a cheap shot to throw in the "Rethuglican" comment. Although I happen to be an independent, non-religious, conservative, I usually have to vote for Republicans as the Democrats can't offer an alternative that isn't a powerslide towards socialism.

And please remember it was a Lincoln (a Republican) who abolished slavery in 1865. Nearly a hundred years later, it was Democrats in the South who continued to fight against full rights for blacks. I still don't understand why Democrats get black votes and continue to take them for granted.

Just goes to show you that many things are beyond logic.

Have a nice day.

I really mean that.

Randy says:

Dear Ms. Braden: Apparently you posted again mentioning me while I was responding to you. Did I ever say I was white in my original post, or did you just make that assumption? Does my writing look 'white' to you? When I wrote my original post, I didn't consider what your skin color might be. It simply didn't matter because I wanted to debate you on the facts.

As far as the AIDS discussion, I think it's unreasonable for anyone to believe that AIDS was designed to wipe out blacks, gays, etc. AIDS is an equal opportunity scourge that doesn't take race, ethnicity or anything else into account before it infects and kills. On the known facts, it is simply ignorant to believe otherwise.

It doesn't cure one person or save one life to continue to spread misinformation about AIDS. That's a fact and not an opinion. If community leaders could inform people rather than dream up conspiracy theories, perhaps the AIDS epidemic could be brought under control.

I support science, not superstition...

Ms. Braden says:

Randy,
Where should I begin? Or should I even begin?
Honestly, I'm trying to figure out why should I engage in a conversation with someone who calls my comments laughable and a fairy tale that makes no sense? Why should I engage in conversation with someone that would imply that I think of them as a "white devil"?
Really, what would be the point in continuing a dialogue with you? To show who's the smartest? Well, Randy, I don't get into those types of contest. Although I'm well aware of my shortcomings, I'm pretty secure as a person.
Tell me, Randy, do you even respect my views anyway? Do you really want to engage in a healthy, respectful conversation?
And yes, I do have an opinion about those historical events you spoke of. However, I don't feel like my opinion, which is based on limitted information and insight, qualifies to be splashed all over your and my computer screen for public documentation. Forgive me for being honest about not being "all knowing". I guess I'm guilty of spending too much time learning and focusing on certain aspects of history. And by some of your comments, it's clear that you've done the same. I guess that both of us need to gain some balance.
Well, I've gone further in this particular comment than I intended. Randy, I guess your words are more seductive than I realized them to be. But you, no matter how hard you try, will not succeed in drawing me in next time. Honestly, I've had enough of the verbal olympics that are taking place on some of these blogs. Too much competition, and not enough thoughtful, fair exchanges...
You also have a nice day. And I mean it too.
Braden

Randy says:

Ms. Braden: I meant no harm. I honestly don't know how to have an intelligent discussion without presenting facts to support an opinion. I'm certainly not "all knowing" either, but I have a wide range of interests and read a lot. I'm a firm believer that if everyone had a better grasp of this country's history, we would be a stronger nation. By the way, I was joking when I referred to myself as a "white devil". Best regards!

Ms. Braden says:

Randy,
Where should I begin? Or should I even begin?
Honestly, I'm trying to figure out why should I engage in a conversation with someone who calls my comments laughable and a fairy tale that makes no sense? Why should I engage in conversation with someone that would imply that I think of them as a "white devil"?


Really, what would be the point in continuing a dialogue with you?

Oh Ms Braden, you're obligated to engage in a conversation with him, yup, obligated.

You see the conversation isn't about you. It isn't about him. It's about ideas and them, the all important them.

The way I look at it the internet comboxes and discussion forums are are not unlike podiums in auditoriums. All the visitors to these websites that have comboxes and discussion forums is the audience in the auditoriums. The audience or visitors are the all important them.

For me it's about presenting an idea in the best way I can possibly present it for acceptance, not by my fellow speakers, but the folks in the audience. I learned a long time ago the speakers have their minds made up and I'm not going to live long enough to change the way they look at things.

I've decided the best tool I have most of the time for presenting my perspective as the better perspective on an issue is the arguments presented by the other side. In fact sometimes I've found that I don't know the words nor do I have the skill to make a point come to life the way someone on the other side of discussion can do for me.

I don't look at these discussions as arguments. They're opportunities to present ideas. I don't look at those on the other side of a discussion as idiots. They are necessary props a lot of the time for a successful presentation. I could line up words and have them march to a tune and not have the effect that sometimes we get from a rant from the other side. Their attitude and their presentation can be what gives our presentation legitimacy.

Yup, Ms Braden, you're obligated to engage in conversations with those who don't agree with you, no matter how much you don't want to do so.

Let's use the Obama/Wright race topic for an example. If only people who hated these black men and people who loved these black men read these comments then the comments mean nothing. But if there's one person who hasn't made up their mind who ventures onto this discussion then it becomes extremely important.

That person is the all important them that you're obligated to give your best presentation of your best ideas.

Randy says:

Mr. Lacey: Very well put. I certainly couldn't disagree with anything you said. I think it's important to point out that my disagreement with the words of Rev. Wright has nothing to due with his skin color.

I would disagree with any American making or supporting the same comments. I didn't know Ms. Braden's skin color when our exchange began, so as far as I'm concerned, this discussion wasn't about race.

Although Rev. Wright has the right to say anything he wants, as a church leader, he should also try to be more responsible. I don't hate Rev. Wright or Mr. and Mrs. Obama, but I disagree with things they've said about this country and its history.

As you said, it's very unlikely that any exchange here is going to change my mind, but please believe me when I say that I'm an open-minded independent conservative. I like to think that I listen to both sides, check the facts and then form an opinion.

Best regards.

Randy says:

Ms. Braden: I meant no harm. I honestly don't know how to have an intelligent discussion without presenting facts to support an opinion. I'm certainly not "all knowing" either, but I have a wide range of interests and read a lot. I'm a firm believer that if everyone had a better grasp of this country's history, we would be a stronger nation.

I'm glad to see you're a student of history. I am too. I agree with you that we need a firmer grasp of our history.

One of the things I've had to really working at grasping about our history has been the contradiction I've found in Brokaw's Greatest Generation. I was blessed with a more intimate introduction to this group than most boomers. You see I'm an honorary member of one of the outfits that landed on D Day June 6, 1944. They went through the Battle of the Bulge and they also were involved in freeing one of the death camps in Germany.

My wife's step dad was in that unit. He took my wife to the fiftieth Anniversary celebration of D Day. Through her I was introduced to the veterans via their annual get togethers.

There was a bond formed between the veterans and myself. I believe a lot of that had to do with my being a veteran. Even though we didn't fight the same war we all understood what serving is about. I was made an honorary member of the group. It was a memorable moment for me.

One year I set up a mini-cam in a conference room and introviewed all of the attendees. One of the more interesting things about those interviews was I asked for and got the perspectives of the wives. That was fascinating. Especially when you think some of the veterans had long since passed and their widows still were attending the get togethers.

Some of them were together from 1937 to 1946. About half of them stayed in the military as a career after the war. They're the inspiration for my saying about bonds between people. It takes pressure, the greater the pressure the greater the bond. War is about as great a pressure as can be applied to a relationship. Their stories start with horse drawn howitzers at Ft Sill to firing the rockets in France and Germany.

There was one constant in these stories. It was their company commander. During the Battle of the Bulge with Germans surrounding their unit he gave each and everyone a Christmas present on Christmas morning. It might have been only a pack of Juicy Fruit gum, but it was a Christmas present on Christmas day. He was a natural leader and a man amongst men, a rarity of any generation. Their love and admiration for him transcended not only fifty plus years, it passed from husband to wife and beyond.

The difficult to grasp part for me was this same man, generous and loving, was a racist of the worst sort. The one time we locked horns was over my mentioning I'd served with blacks in Viet Nam and some of them were the bravest men I'd ever known. The venom in the look and voice when he said the N word was tangible.

On the one hand I have this man who represents everything good about America. On the other hand I have this man who represents everything bad about America.

It's a balancing act of the toughest sort. One has to weigh the value of a leader of men who was instrumental in the successful destruction of one of the most horrific governments of all time. One has to weigh all that against the weight this man carried for fifty plus years in a society bent upon racial persecution.

For me it seems someone who was there when the smell of the death camp overwhelmed them for miles before they reached it would understand the death camp was all about racial hate and look inside their own heart.

He wasn't alone. The vast majority of those who so valiantly fought for European freedom came back home and not only continued to hate blacks, they taught their children and grand children to hate also.

Help me with a little grasping here Randy. Help me. Look at the facts, explain where the blacks are wrong in their protesting.

Help me understand why it's wrong for a black to complain about two hundred years of injustice and it's okay for a white to cry and whine about fifty years of forced equality.

Let's grasp together here boy.

THEVIPENT says:

To me as a black man Rev. Wright was very right. I just want you all do look up, JIM CROW, THE NWO,The Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment, REX 84, LOCAL NEWS SILK LITTLEJOHN. The thing is that nobody wants to hear the truth. Some people tell me to just get over it, but i can't. Just one more thought just think if (bush) was black would he had he still be the president.

Post a comment

(If you haven't left a comment here before, you may need to be approved by the site owner before your comment will appear. Until then, it won't appear on the entry. Thanks for waiting.)



Dallas Observer Insiders

  • Local food, music and news blasts
  • Free Stuff