Are Jeremiah Wright’s beliefs a ‘distraction’ from the presidential campaign?

Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama has struggled to explain and then overcome his relationship with Rev. Jeremiah Wright, the controversial ex-pastor of Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago. Wright’s radical, divisive and racially tinged preaching has clashed with Obama’s message of hope, unity and racial reconciliation.

Obama this week issued his strongest denunciations of Wright to date, following Wright’s appearance at the National Press Club in Washington, D.C. Wright said Obama’s efforts to distance himself were political posturing, nothing more.

Wright’s comments have been damaging to Obama's presidential campaign. Is Obama's denunciation enough to save his candidacy? Or is the focus on Wright a distraction? Ben Boychuk and Joel Mathis, the moderators of RedBlueAmerica.com, weigh in.

Ben Boychuk

Barack Obama says he regrets that the attention on Jeremiah Wright’s “rants” is a distraction from the vital issues of the presidential election campaign. In fact, the scrutiny is a clarification, and a measure of Obama’s judgment. Comparing and contrasting the divisive theology of Wright with the “post-racial” and “unifying” politics of Obama lets voters better understand the man they would make leader of the free world.

Remember when Barack Obama regarded his relationship with the Rev. Jeremiah Wright as an asset? He even took the title of a Wright sermon for his second bestselling book, The Audacity of Hope. That was before “the chickens came home to roost” and “God damn America.” If Obama’s pastor believes such things, what does Obama believe? Voters have a right to know.

Obama in Philadelphia last month said he could “no more disown (Wright) than I can my white grandmother.” Obama insisted, rather, that a few of Wright’s statements had been taken out of context. But after Wright’s interview with Bill Moyers, his speech to the NAACP and, most disastrously, his performance at the National Press Club, the difference between Wright in context and out is impossible to discern.

Yet Obama still insists that what he heard from Wright this week was unlike anything he heard over the past two decades. That simply beggars belief. Obama chose Wright. His choice was unwise. His choice should tell voters something important about Obama that his position papers on the Iraq war and health care cannot.

Joel Mathis

On the same day Barack Obama repudiated Jeremiah Wright, we learned that U.S. home foreclosures had more than doubled in the first quarter. AP reported a protest by truckers angry over fuel prices. President Bush held a press conference acknowledging a "very slow economy" but sidestepped talk of a recession. And the Department of Defense sent out a press release announcing the death of a 26-year-old U.S. Army soldier killed in a Baghdad rocket attack.

You might not have known all of that, though, because the political spotlight was focused firmly on Obama's crazy former pastor.

But the job of the next president will not be to pick a national clergyman. Instead, the president will have to decide what to do about Iraq, health care and the economy, among other issues. Barack Obama has an argument to make that he'll end the war, extend care to more Americans and save a few of their homes from foreclosure. Given the mood of Americans these days, that could well be a winning argument. Think that's the reason Obama's critics insist so very loudly that we focus on Jeremiah Wright?

The Wright saga has been a distraction from what matters. It is past time we turn our attention to the real issues that affect the lives of Americans.

 

 

Join the Debate

Start your own blog, comment on topics, and let your voice be heard. Start your free account now!

User login

login

Ads by Google