Rev. Wright: 15 minutes of illuminating fame

Cross-posted at Pam's House Blend.

I can't believe the MSM has spent all this air time on a pastor who isn't running for president. Oh, OK, yes I can. Since Obama "divorced" Wright in the press conference yesterday, my question is whether the bar for the media will move even higher. His former pastor's ego was obviously bruised from the (quite frankly, sensitive) rebuke of his past comments that he received from the presidential hopeful in Obama's A More Perfect Union speech.

Some of what Wright said at the National Press Club was clarifying and on point:

Maybe this dialogue on race, an honest dialogue that does not engage in denial or superficial platitudes, maybe this dialogue on race can move the people of faith in this country from various stages of alienation and marginalization to the exciting possibility of reconciliation.

Other parts added nothing positive to the dialogue showed a public unraveling of the id. Wright felt dissed, and took it before the cameras, damaging his own credibility -- and he either doesn't seem to realize it -- or care.

I see clips from the NPC appearance and wonder what's next -- Rev. Wright lobbying for additional 15 minutes of exposure to "play the dozens" with Barack Obama? I'm sure the media would be down with that too. And that's because they never dig deeper to see what's really beneath the surface.

Wright's litany of grievances -- including a perceived attack on the black church, the conspiracy theories about the government and 9/11, or inflicting AIDS on blacks (referencing the Tuskegee experiment) -- reveal a very real thread of beliefs in a segment of the black community of a certain generation who lived under the thumb of Jim Crow and in-your-face bluntly institutionalized white privilege.

Making light of this kind of thinking diminishes the fact that it comes from an element of truth, and that white privilege, though not as boldly naked as in generations past, is alive and well. It also illuminates the lack of black cultural competence in the dominant culture. This is exemplified by those disturbed by Wright's earlier remarks (and delivery) in the first place -- and generated the fear of what I call the Secret Black Radical Trojan Horse Agenda entering the White House through the vessel of the pleasant, benign Barack Obama. You could read between the lines in the commentary -- people were musing, wondering how prevalent is Wright's belief - the bizarre mix of fact and fiction -- in the black community.

This is all crazy making? Not really. Our desperate need to discuss race honestly and openly (and SANELY), is not simply a difficult exercise. Remember, we have people who will not vote for Barack Obama under any circumstances because he is black. No one wants to really discuss those conservative white blue collar workers who fall into this category -- the current demo prized by Senator Clinton. They see a "Rev. Wright eruption" and automatically see the Secret Black Radical Trojan Horse Agenda. In Appalachia, George Packer found people who just laid it on the line (h/t, DHinMI).

After [McCain's] speech, I left the county courthouse and crossed the main street to talk to a small group of demonstrators holding signs next to McCain’s campaign bus. J. K. Patrick, a retired state employee from a neighboring county, wore a button on his shirt that said "Hillary: Smart Choice."

"East of Lexington she’ll carry seventy per cent of the primary vote," he said. Kentucky votes on May 20. "She could win the general election in Kentucky." I asked about Obama. "Obama couldn’t win."

Why not?

"Race," Patrick said matter-of-factly. "I’ve talked to people—a woman who was chair of county elections last year, she said she wouldn’t vote for a black man." Patrick said he wouldn’t vote for Obama either.

Why not?

"Race. I really don’t want an African-American as President. Race."

What about race?

"I thought about it. I think he would put too many minorities in positions over the white race. That’s my opinion.

...Everyone knows that race is a factor in Obama’s low vote among older whites, though reporters say that no one will admit it personally. In Eastern Kentucky, people (and not just J. K. Patrick) admit it personally, without hesitation or apology.

There are a whole lot of people who will never fess up. We just don't know how many, and the MSM (and progressive bloggers) seem to have little interest in exploring this.

Why do you think the Republicans and the NC GOP used that trial balloon ad featuring Wright in a six-degrees of separation between him, Obama, and gubernatorial candidates Bev Perdue and Richard Moore? Because the dog-whistle works. And that's why it has to be called out.

***

Does this mean Obama is unelectable? No. What it does mean is that there is a segment of the population, some vocal, some not, who will not be moved because their bias is not challenged in a productive way. Why? Well, because, it's hard work. Addressing this country's problem with race is too much work for many people, because it is so vast. But we are so close - witness Obama's success so far -- he is winning this race despite the implicit and explicit biases out there.

That, friends, is why this race is playing out the way it has -- the conventional wisdom and the political power structure (including the MSM) is being challenged to acknowledge the existence of white privilege within their spheres and the culture at large, and these institutions are just as much in denial as most of the country. I'm not surprised that Rev. Wright's 15 minutes of dreadful, illuminating fame has provided them with comfort food.

Perhaps Barack Obama can put this behind him now.

My last two cents -- all of this mess with Wright (and Hagee) just goes to show you why campaigning with your faith on your sleeve (or in McCain's case, just sucking up to a fundie for votes), is dangerous, mine-laden territory. I don't care who your pastor is -- he or she isn't doing the 3AM wake up call or sending military personnel to die for our country, or appointing the next Supreme Court justice.

Let's get back to the real tasks at hand, since Dear Leader is going to leave us a helluva mess to clean up.

***
When I posted this over at my pad, someone pointed out the kid gloves treatment religious figures like Pat Robertson or John Hagee receive, and this was my response:

The folks sitting in the talking head chairs and at the newsroom computers typing up their screeds about Wright and how far Obama’s apology should or shouldn’t have gone are just as much a problem as some of Wright’s comments for the reasons you stated.

The undercurrent of media reaction during this whole controversy has been about a undefined “discomfort zone” re: cultural blackness that had been crossed and the MSM, along with others who feel similarly, want it shut down pronto by Obama.

That Wright chose to self-immolate at the same time out of ego before the very white privileged media he charged with bias and taking things out of context pretty much indicates his mission was personal.

And then he threw gas on the fire with the additional conspiracy nonsense and set off the media hand-wringing and pontificating again.

Obama in the end did the right thing, and it’s clear that for him, the severing of the relationship with Wright — and with it the positive aspects of it — was painful for him even as it is necessary on a few levels. It should have been given the circumstances, because Wright’s negativity has been something completely absent from Obama’s outlook throughout this campaign.

The fact that so many, out of implicit bias, immediately attempt to hold individual blacks for the acts/words of another — collective blame assignment and responsibility to explain it — is something the LGBT community should identify with all too well. For Obama, the fact is Wright had a personal connection to him as his former pastor, only ratcheting up the Trojan Horse fear factor. I think Obama was schooled on this to some degree, which is why it took some time for him to digest and respond to what we’ve seen unfold.

How many times have we seen homophobic legislators/fundies work to pass laws preventing us from access to rights the rest of society takes for granted based on the acts or perceived acts of some small segment or individuals in our community who they can point to as the “other” and demonize? It doesn’t make an entire community responsible for defending or refuting that person’s choice or statement, but it often has to be done to also mollify the dominant community’s fears. That’s the part that receives zero analysis.

That’s why it takes something monstrously egregious to get the MSM to criticize someone like Pat Robertson or John Hagee — there is a second issue — the undeclared layer of racial discomfort in the case of Wright — that doesn’t exist for them, so Crazy Pat can easily be dismissed.

Boy, are we messed up on these issues. It’s fascinating to see it out there in all its spectacular craptitude, but the media, which holds so much sway, time after time misses the opportunity to actually get to the heart of the matter by avoiding the analysis of the cultural and racial undercurrents involved.