How wrong was Rev. Wright

S.C. Joe

Client # 13
Nov 2, 2007
7,139
1
0
Detroit, USA
First letter I seen that sticks up for the Reverend-read it before you disagree-

http://www.buzzflash.com/articles/jonas/107


So the Republican Right managed to go through over 30,000 recorded minutes of the sermons of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright and they came up with a few minutes of supposedly outrageous statements by him that they draped around a few disembodied remarks by Sen. Barack Obama and strung together into one of the most watched non-pornographic cinema loops of all time. (My, some Republican operatives do have a lot of time on their hands, don't they?) How so "most-watched?" Because the Fox "News" Channel has been playing and will play it endlessly, at all hours of the day and night.

Sen. Obama, for once a Democrat who does not spend all, or even most, of this time on defense, used the occasion to make a speech on race-relations and their history in this country. It was so magnificent, right up there with the FDR "nothing to fear but fear itself" (how relevant is that one now?) and "Four Freedoms" speeches, and JFK's religious freedom speech that even such personages as Reagan hagiographer Peggy Noonan and education hard-rightist Abigail Thernstrom acknowledged its greatness. But of course F "N" C, O'RHannibaugh, etc. would have none of that. After all, the Republicans have nothing substantive to run on in November. Into the void, they would sooner or later have thrust the Nixonian "Southern Strategy" (read the political use of racism) that has been at the center of their electoral successes since 1968. The Wright excerpts have just given them an excuse to thrust it sooner.

The question thus arises for persons other than F "N" C fans and fellow-travelers, just how outrageous were those statements, in the context of American politics and history. Well, let's start with the "9/11 was God's punishment" for all types of claimed U.S. outrages, such as the atomic bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Since I don't accept that there is such a God, I reject such a claim out-of-hand. But gee, I recall the Revs. Falwell and Robertson making similar claims, right at the time too, except that their foci were the supposed national sins of homosexuality, abortion, and the like.

As long as one assumes that there is a God that would (and could) wreak such havoc as "punishment" for something or other (forgetting the question of his/her responsibility, as an omnipotent being, for the original insult), the disagreement there is simply what the "punishment" is for, not whether God did it, or not, as the case may be. I don't recall anyone laying at the feet of the Georgites responsibility for the statements of Falwell/Robertson, and asking the President to explain his acceptance of support from those two (un)worthies. As for Rev. Wright's claim that he communicates directly with God, well Bush has done that too, on more than one occasion (http://www.buzzflash.com/articles/jonas/044).

OK, OK, so that's the God's vengeance thing, done by advocates on both sides of the political aisle. But what about the drug thing, the claim that the U.S. government has been at least partially responsible for the epidemic of drug use amongst African-Americans? How outrageous is that? Consider the following, from the PBS "Frontline" series: "A series of expose articles in the San Jose Mercury News by reporter Gary Webb told tales of a drug triangle during the 1980s that linked CIA officials in Central America, a San Francisco drug ring, and a Los Angeles drug dealer. According to the stories, the CIA and its operatives used crack cocaine -- sold via the Los Angeles African-American community -- to raise millions to support the agency's clandestine operations in Central America." Webb, who later a published a book on the subject, eventually lost his job at the paper and then died under mysterious circumstances.

The "Frontline" feature made no claims of proof for Webb's conclusions, but it made no claims of dis-proof either. Certainly, however, such beliefs are held by certain segments of the African-American community. And why not? The so-called "Drug War" itself is considered by many to be a racist enterprise (Jonas, S., "Why the Drug War Will Never End," chap. 7 in Inciardi, J.A., The Drug Legalization Debate, 2nd ed., Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications, 1999). According to the annual Federal government National Surveys on Drug Use, approximately 75% of illicit drug users are white. It happens that approximately 75% of those imprisoned for illicit-drug-related crimes are not.

Finally, consider the Rev.'s claims (or was it simply a reflection of the belief held in certain segments of the African-American community?) that the Human Immunodeficiency Virus was hatched in a government lab and then purposely spread in the African-American community to produce the AIDS epidemic that exists there, primarily among intravenous drug users.

There is absolutely no scientific evidence to support that claim (and as one of the early developers of the modern understanding of how AIDS spreads I can speak to this one with some personal authority [Jonas, S., "Commentary: Dealing With the Drug Problem." Preventive Medicine, 23, 539-544, 1994]). It is well-known that the epidemic first appeared among promiscuous gay men. In fact, the same Revs. Falwell and Robertson who trumpeted 9/11 as a "punishment of God" were claiming in the 1980s that the epidemic was God's punishment for the gay lifestyle, a claim implicitly echoed by President Reagan and his Attorney General Ed Meese, the still very active far-rightist, former chair of the Council on National Policy, the far-Right's highly secretive national policy coordinating body. However, the spread occurred because such gay men were subject to a wide variety of chronic infectious diseases that compromised their immune systems and made them susceptible to developing AIDS if infected with HIV.

Well, since the 1990s, AIDS has gradually spread among poor intravenous drugs users, white and non-white, who do not have access to sterile routes of injection and thus also contracted chronic infectious diseases. Republican drug policies, too often followed by Democrats too, have made access to sterile injection routes very difficult for such persons. And so, while there is no evidence that this was a purposely hatched plot, the "Drug War," which treats the use of the "illicit" addictive drugs (but not the use of the two major addictive drug killers, alcohol and nicotine, which together kill over 50 times as many people annually as the "illicits" do) as crimes, not illnesses, has played an important role in the spread of AIDS in the African-American community. And then, older African-Americans may remember the "Tuskegee Project," in which older black men known to have syphilis (but they did not) were left purposely untreated by the U.S. Public Health Service (sic) "to see what untreated syphilis looked like."

So, not that Sen. Obama could directly use any of these arguments in dealing with the "Rev. Wright" phenomenon, nor should he, how wrong was Rev. Wright in mentioning such thoughts so obviously in passing? You be the judge.

Steven Jonas, MD, MPH is a Professor of Preventive Medicine at Stony Brook University (NY)
 

Aardvark154

New member
Jan 19, 2006
53,749
3
0
S.C. Joe said:
First letter I seen that sticks up for the Reverend-read it before you disagree-
Read it.

Three points:

1) Perhaps I'm mistaken but what I've both read and heard from many different sources was that these sermons where on DVD's released by Trinity Church, (UCC), Chicago. They were not surreptitiously recorded by “plumbers.”

2) I've never seen or heard any reputable evidence that the U.S. Government was involved in a vast conspiracy to transport illicit drugs into the U.S. (And how does one explain the huge problem with illegal drugs around the world - or is that all part of some vast conspiracy as well).

3) Holding a professional or advanced degree does not (absent other knowledge one may have) qualify one as an expert on fields outside one's own discipline.
 

fuji

Banned
Jan 31, 2005
79,957
8
0
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
is.gd
Well, so Obama stepped up and acknowledged the Wright says these sorts of things sometimes, that's he's heard him say them in his church sometimes.

I thought the speech was great. He did not try and wriggle away from the issue, he hit the issue head on: Wright is an otherwise good person who is sometimes bitter and as a result sometimes says very wrong things. That sort of bitterness is a symptom of a larger problem that society as a whole faces. It's something that needs to change.

He hit pretty much every sensitive topic about race there is, and he spoke about them all pretty openly and sensibly. That took some courage, I think.
 

S.C. Joe

Client # 13
Nov 2, 2007
7,139
1
0
Detroit, USA
You factor in Obama's young age-46-he is really is a "work of art"

Hes a little young but just think how he be later on in life.
 

papasmerf

New member
Oct 22, 2002
26,530
0
0
42.55.65N 78.43.73W
S.C. Joe said:
You factor in Obama's young age-46-he is really is a "work of art"

Hes a little young but just think how he be later on in life.
He is a piece of work
he subscribes to the idea that the "eyetalians" killed Christ............White people killed Christ according to his mentor.
 

assoholic

New member
Aug 30, 2004
1,625
0
0
....provide a link that he says that, why do I think you're just an idiot making crap up.
 

papasmerf

New member
Oct 22, 2002
26,530
0
0
42.55.65N 78.43.73W
assoholic said:
....provide a link that he says that, why do I think you're just an idiot making crap up.
Comes from one of wright's speaches
I will look it up in the morning if I remember
 

S.C. Joe

Client # 13
Nov 2, 2007
7,139
1
0
Detroit, USA
So, thats NOT him talking. What if somebody you loved in your family-grandpa, grandma said a few "off the wall" things. You would not still love them?
 

papasmerf

New member
Oct 22, 2002
26,530
0
0
42.55.65N 78.43.73W
S.C. Joe said:
So, thats NOT him talking. What if somebody you loved in your family-grandpa, grandma said a few "off the wall" things. You would not still love them?
Love yes





Correct them, yes
 

cypherpunk

New member
Mar 10, 2004
929
0
0
Aardvark154 said:
2) I've never seen or heard any reputable evidence that the U.S. Government was involved in a vast conspiracy to transport illicit drugs into the U.S. (And how does one explain the huge problem with illegal drugs around the world - or is that all part of some vast conspiracy as well).
I don't know about a transporation/crack conspiracy, but the US government IS largely responsible for the drug problems. In Colombia for example, the US destroyed domestic agribusiness two generations ago with dirt cheap food exports (to combat communism) and today the US gives $600M a year to a government that's known to be corrupt and involved in the drug trade. It almost doesn't matter whether or not there was a conspiracy.
 

cypherpunk

New member
Mar 10, 2004
929
0
0
papasmerf said:
Love yes





Correct them, yes
That makes one of us. There are at least four mouthy racists in my family tree that I see every once in a while and when they go at it I just silently wait for them to shut the fuck up. It's not as though they're going to change.
 

papasmerf

New member
Oct 22, 2002
26,530
0
0
42.55.65N 78.43.73W

papasmerf

New member
Oct 22, 2002
26,530
0
0
42.55.65N 78.43.73W
assoholic said:
..listen you stupid fuck, you posted he said "eyetalians killed christ", I say
because you have nothing intelligent to add , you are making up shit.
I have seen the clips, either produce the evidence or once again
you are exposed as the supreme idiot, many of us think you too be.
His reference to the Italian's running the country is it.........If you know the Story of Christ you know he was tried before Herod Antipas, who was the Roman ruler of the time, in Galilee. It was a ruling by Herod that led to the Crucifiction of Christ. You sometimes need to know the story before you can understand the critics.

I am not drawing a conclusion.



You also might consider toning down your crap.
 
Toronto Escorts