Ted West: The Naked Conservative

The Obama Factor - The Spin Zone

nobody@vox.com(TedWest) — Fri, 02 May 2008 03:07:50 -0700

"Turns out the Wright show was not that complex after all. Everyone understands it now. Even Obama."

"Brilliant and devastating, this column demonstrates why Charles Krauthammer is the pre-eminent political analyst in America." - Ted West

Yesterday, Glenn Beck presented Reverend Wright "in context." That is, he took the lines about which Wright has protested that the media was presenting out of context, and Beck showed a few minutes of each sermon surrounding the Wright quotes.

Context didn't help. in fact, it only made his quotes seem far worse... and it didn't do much for the congregation either. As my wife observed, "I saw some children sitting there."

So today, Beck spends the whole hour of his CNN Headline News show "with" Reverend Wright. It promises to be a real treat... a wonderful lead-in to the Diamondbacks-Mets game for me.

Read and post comments | Send to a friend

All The Wright Stuff

nobody@vox.com(TedWest) — Tue, 29 Apr 2008 05:49:37 -0700

I don't usually subscribe to conspiracy theories, but this doesn't make sense. on the one hand we have a guy who is evil and apparently very selfish in the person of Reverend Jeremiah Wright, and on the other we have a angry opportunist who would sell his soul for the Presidency in the person of Barack Obama. And the two are supposed to be like white on rice in their personal lives... I mean... like black on beans.

So what explains Wright's seeming refusal to keep a low profile at least until the people have voted in November? Is he really so mean and self-centered that he's willing to destroy any chance for Obama to be elected simply because he fancies himself to be some sort of savior to the black community? He certainly possesses enough hate, but what would he gain?

Just this moment, they started speculating on Fox & Friends as to Wright's reasons for being so outrageously provocative the week before another crucial vote?

Well, here's one possibility. Barack Obama has been criticized for being inexperienced and his motives and character have recently come into question as well. But he is admired in some circles for his loyalty to Wright, and what does he get for that loyalty but an apparent kick in the teeth?

What happens if Obama continues to maintain his loyalty and hold his tongue and Wight continues to be an embarrassment and more? Wouldn't Obama come out smelling like a rose if there were to be a final straw and he "reluctantly" had to condemn Wright in no uncertain terms? In one instant, his inexperience and wimpiness become a thing of the past, and his "good character" takes center stage. Hope is restored.

In that moment when all seemed lost, Obama fells the dragon and Camelot is saved.

It's just a thought, but I wanted to advance it because it would explain an awful lot. The idea came to me last night while my wife and I sat there speculating about what could possess Wright to be so careless and so unconcerned about his prodigy, and it finally dawned on me that he and Obama might not be as bright as some people think, but they might be more clever than anyone has imagined.

Will it work in the ultimate sense? It's hard to say. Cynics will certainly dissect all of it, and my theory will surely be raised. But it might be worth a shot given that Obama has fallen so far, so fast.

For my part, I won't be pleased to be right for the very reason that such a plan could succeed. I can see a lot of suspicion, but such a conspiracy could be very difficult to prove, and since people naturally want to assume the best, especially about a guy they pinned all their hopes on to begin with, a substantial number of voters could be won over and won back.

All the analysis on Fox & Friends has been of the sort that no one understands how Wright can do what he's doing, and everyone assumes that Wright is a renegade, but the discussion concluded with not a single other reason for Wright's actions being advanced, at least not one that makes any sense,

Read and post comments | Send to a friend

Bedtime For Obama Or Morning In Goddam America?

nobody@vox.com(TedWest) — Tue, 18 Mar 2008 02:11:07 -0700

I envy Barack Obama. I mean, rarely does a person get to explain his explanations.

Usually, when one has to deal with something that's blowing up in one's face, he gets one chance to tell his one story. The people then either buy his account or they don't, and if they don't, well, as they say in the black community, "The dear boy's muffed it."

But Barack gets a do-over after having failed utterly last weekend in his attempt to detail how it was possible to be a member of Trinity Church, attend regularly for decades, and not realize that his mentor and advisor, Reverend Wright was an America-hating racist pastor of a congregation apparently crawling with a lot of the same type of people

In several interviews, the freshman Senator alleged that he was never in church on those occasions when Wright was accusing America of genocide, condemning Israel for existing, and simulating the nasty right there in the pulpit.

All I can say is, if Obama was able to pick the exact right dates to sleep in, I'd like him to pick my lottery numbers..Because after hearing Obama's explanation, well let me ask, did he remind you of anyone?

Isn't Barack the black Sergeant Shultz?

"I see nothing... nothing... "

We all know what a harmless, lovable Nazi Shultz was. His very best quality was his ineptness. And yes, OK, I know Sergeant Shultz probably wasn't a Nazi... just like, according to Hillary, Obama probably isn't a Muslim.

Still, maybe it will help if the Senator shows up for his speech today wearing a long, gray coat and a helmet? At least that way, people won't be paying much attention to what he says. Then later, they'll realize that's the same sort of thing Obama must have experienced for all those years of seeing his preacher looking like a ranting mental patient in a bullfighter's getup.

And wouldn't it be ironic if Barack Obama were to give a speech about what he didn't hear and why he didn't hear it... and nobody heard the speech?

So the best-case scenario as I see it is that Obama's speech will be transforming - he'll go from imitating Sergeant Shultz to imitating Maxwell Smart...

And loving it!

Read and post comments | Send to a friend

Obama Lied, Hope Died?

nobody@vox.com(TedWest) — Mon, 17 Mar 2008 17:18:07 -0700

The media is characterizing the current controversy as "Obama's pastor problem," when it is nothing of the sort. It should be called the "The Audacity of a Dope."

The other day, the American Thinker parsed Obama's statement in which he denounced a long string of comments by Reverend Wright, but not Wright himself, and it showed how, in lawyer-speak, it was a non-denouncing denunciation. But before the DVDs and NewsMax, the New York Times had said Obama would have a difficult time distancing himself from Reverend Wright.

Now ABC News', Jake Tapper, is saying that the reason Wright was disinvited from Obama's announcement of his candidacy was because of a Rolling Stone article from February, 2007 titled: "The Radical Roots of Barack Obama." Interestingly (in lieu of a more appropriate word), the original title of that article has been changed. So in addition to the question it raises about Obama, namely, "What did he know and when did he know it," Rolling Stone has its own question to answer: "When did you change the title, and why?"

That original title is pretty sobering, wouldn't you agree? But remember, this was a time when Hillary Clinton had already been pre-ordained to be the nominee, and Obama was the nobody he should have remained. Now, of course, it's nearly the reverse, so maybe that's why Rolling Stone has changed its title. What do you think of the updated one:: "Destiny's Child?"

New and improved? Uplifting? I mean, with a title like "The Radical Roots of Barack Obama," you might get a bad impression of the Senator, might you not?

A more neutral title would seem less prejudicial? Not "Destiny's Child," of course, I mean something like: "Obama - HUGGH, What Is He Good For?"

No, seriously, If the title had become "The Roots of Barack Obama," would anyone object?.

"Destiny's Child" makes Obama seem positively cherubic. Then again, maybe it's just me?

Last Friday, Bill O'Reilly and Bernie Goldberg agreed that they've never seen the media as corrupt as it is now - nothing any informed person didn't know already. Still, when I saw what Rolling Stone had done, it shocked me. It may not set a new standard for brazenness, but it is an egregious breach of the public trust in my opinion, a bit like trying to put lipstick on a manipulator!?!

You can find the Rolling Stone article with its new title here. You'll also find a promotional link to another Stone article, title presumably unchanged, that reads - "Matt Taibbi on Mike Huckabee, Our Favorite Right-Wing Nut Job "

Rolling Stone, Feb. 2007:

This is as openly radical a background as any significant American political figure has ever emerged from... Wright is not an incidental figure... (Obama)... uses Wright as a "sounding board"... Both the title of Obama's second book, The Audacity of Hope, and the theme for his keynote address at the Democratic National Convention in 2004 come from Wright's sermons... the surprising thing - for such a measured politician - is the depth of radical feeling that seeps through, the amount of Jeremiah Wright that's packed in there.

And this:

Obama could have picked any church... Obama chose Trinity United. He picked Jeremiah Wright. Obama writes in his autobiography that on the day he chose this church, he felt the spirit of black memory and history moving through Wright...

Obama's life story is a splicing of two different roles... One is that of the consummate insider... The other is that of a black man who feels very deeply that this country's exercise of its great inherited wealth and power has been grossly unjust.

So Obama is being disingenuous, but it may or may not be with malicious intent. He not only had to have prior knowledge about his pastor's incendiary hate-speech even if he couldn't recite the entire spiel verbatim.. Three articles pointed that out last year before any of the reverend's actual remarks became widely known.

Today, James Taranto asked, "Are we wrong to think that Barack Obama's campaign is imploding?" He added that Jeremiah Wright "turns out to be a certifiable America-hating crackpot."

Obama's church has removed a black creed from its site, but on Barry Young's radio program today, his assistant said, "If I substituted 'white" for each mention of 'black," I'd be the biggest racist in the country."

Taranto:

Wright.proclaims himself an exponent of "black liberation theology." He cites James Cone, a distinguished professor at New York's Union Theological Seminary, whom he credits for having "systematized" this strain of Christianity. Here is a quote from Cone, explaining black liberation theology (hat tip: Spengler, a pseudonymous columnist for the Asia Times):

Black theology refuses to accept a God who is not identified totally with the goals of the black community. If God is not for us and against white people, then he is a murderer, and we had better kill him... Black theology will accept only the love of God which participates in the destruction of the white enemy. What we need is the divine love as expressed in Black Power, which is the power of black people to destroy their oppressors here and now by any means at their disposal.

Soaringly Palestinian!

Taranto: "Could Obama really have been unaware for all these years that his spiritual mentor follows a racially adversarial theology?"

Mr. Taranto refers to Obama's book: "Without evident disapproval (Obama) quotes a passage... in which Wright describes 'a world . . . where white folks' greed runs a world in need,'" and he notes that "Writing on the Puffington Host, self-described Obama backer Gerald Posner says...'"

There was no more traumatic event in our recent history than 9/11. Reverend Wright's comments would have raised a ruckus...coming so soon after the attack itself... If the parishioners of Trinity United Church were not buzzing about (them), then it could only seem to be because those comments were not out of character with what he (usually) preached... I have to wonder if it is really possible for the Obamas to have been parishioners--by 9/11 more than a decade--and not to have known very clearly how radical Wright's views were. If, on the other hand, parishioners were shocked by Wright's vitriol only days after more than 3,000 Americans had been killed by terrorists, they would have talked about it incessantly. Barack--a sitting Illinois State Senator--would have been one of the first to hear about it."

Taranto asks what Obama has to say for himself, and he answers his own question: "Essentially nothing. In his own Puffington Host post, the senator issues a series of condemnations without troubling himself to specify what he is condemning:"

In the same post, Obama States that Wright "has never been my political advisor." Wright served on an advisory committee for the Obama campaign - until last Friday.

Taranto continued:

Why does Obama feel it necessary to resort to these lawyerly--dare we say Clintoneque--evasions? Why can't he simply speak from the heart and tell us what he really thinks of black liberation theology? Two possibilities come to mind...

One is that Obama's condemnation and rejection of Wright's appalling statements is not sincere. That is not to say that Obama shares Wright's hatreds, we... would be surprised if he did. It may just be that the whole question is a matter of indifference to him, except inasmuch as it affects his own political ambitions. If Obama doesn't speak from the heart, perhaps it is because his heart has nothing to say.

At this point, though, "distancing" himself plainly is not enough. Obama needs to renounce Wright and his noxious beliefs forcefully and specifically, even if he personally is blasé about them.

But this brings us to the second possible reason he hasn't done so... it's not as if the malevolent minister is preaching to empty pews. There is a segment of the black community that embraces Wright-style bigotry... "I wouldn't call it radical. I call it being black in America," said one congregation member outside the church last Sunday... Wright's congregation has 8,000 members, the biggest in its denomination, according to the Religion News Service. Possibly Obama has reason to fear losing crucial black support if he expressly repudiates Wright and what he stands for.

I've been saying that the Democrats own racism in America, and I've also speculated that blacks may be more racist than whites. Last Sunday at Trinity Church, people such as myself were all accused of sullying the Church's good name, and that Church is huge as churches go. That community clearly doesn't see anything wrong with accusing America of genocide, asking God, from the pulpit, to damn our country, and that community doesn't see anything wrong with using vulgarities and mimicking sexual acts from that same pulpit. That community doesn't see anything wrong with blaming whitey again and again.

And Barack Obama claims he knew none of it and that he can bring us all together. And if you believe that, I've got a bridge made of DVDs to sell you.

Read and post comments | Send to a friend