As Alana noted, this morning the New York Times reported a super PAC was weighing a “hard-line attack” against President Obama by “linking him to incendiary comments by his former spiritual adviser, the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr., whose race-related sermons made him a highly charged figure in the 2008 campaign.” The Romney campaign, and then Governor Romney himself, immediately repudiated the effort.
I should say that I’ve never felt raising the issue of Obama’s relationship with Jeremiah Wright was somehow illegitimate. The relationship was obviously a long and important one to Obama. The Reverend Wright married Barack and Michelle Obama, baptized their children, and was the inspirational force behind Obama’s first autobiography. That relationship was unquestionably a significant one and was probably quite useful in terms of understanding Obama. If a conservative had a similarly close relationship with a comparable figure on the right, especially a comparable hate-figure on the right, journalists would have focused on it far more than the press focused on Obama and Wright in 2008. There was an obvious double standard being applied.
Speaking of which, isn’t it interesting (as Ed Morrissey and Jennifer Rubin have pointed out) how media inquiries into Romney’s Mormon faith is deemed as not only legitimate but necessary, whereas inquiries into the Obama-Wright relationship was (and is) considered insignificant, unrevealing, and even unseemly? There’s a deep theological reason that explains this difference in approach: Romney is a Republican, while Obama is a (liberal) Democrat.
With all that said, Romney is wise not to pursue the issue of Obama’s relationship with the Reverend Wright, for two reasons. The first is that it’s precisely the kind of sideshow Obama wants this campaign to revolve around. Romney needs to focus like a laser beam on the economy — and Jeremiah Wright’s past sermons, for all their offensiveness, are of very little interest to Americans, particularly in a struggling economy. In addition, Obama is more or less a known quantity at this stage. People’s judgment about his past are basically locked in. There’s no particular upside to Romney in focusing attention on Wright.
Oh, and one other thing: The fact that Governor Romney and his campaign responded so quickly and emphatically to the possibility that an anti-Obama super PAC might resurrect the Obama-Wright relationship is a sign they are firing on all cylinders.
I think yours is a good analysis of this issue.
But let's ask the question even if Joe Klein gets angry (Klein's bully tactics are tiresome anyway): So what real world influence did Wright have on Obama? Where does it show up in Obama? n nLiberals may be wrong (they are) in arguing that the question about the relationship can't be asked. But they seem to be right when they say it had no influence. Because, for me, it didn't. I just don't see any Wright in Obama.
No influence? Every time I hear Obama talk, I hear the echo of Rev. Wright. It's so obvious that Obama lifted his whole speaking style from Wright, complete with the comfort zone of blaming "the white man's greed" (make that the 1%) for a "world in need" (make that the 99%).
Well, you're hearing things that I don't hear. n nI have watched and heard, for example, this president for three straight years praise the US military and the men and women who serve in it. I have heard him state that their devotion and sacrifice are the most moving things he has seen and that he is motivated by them daily. n nThe president recently awarded a Medal of Honor to the widow of a soldier killed in Vietnam (Rose and Les Sabo). Here's what he said in part: n n"No words will ever be truly worthy of their service. And no honor can ever fully repay their sacrifice. But on days such as this we can pay tribute. We can express our gratitude. And we can thank God that there are patriots and families such as these." n nIf you can hear echoes of Jeremiah Wright (other than the God reference) in that praise of our armed services then you have better hearing than I do. n nPresident Obama's criticism of the wealthy and appeals to class division and envy is boilerplate liberalism. We've all heard it since we first got interested in politics. Nothing new in that.
*Focused* on it, Mr. Wehner? The duration of any Republican presidential candidate's campaign, upon the revelation of such relationships, would have been measured in nanoseconds. nBut with The One, it was "move on, nothing so see here." "Double standard" doesn't begin to describe it. But, call it what you will, it was all despicable. With their biased reporting they write off about 40 percent of the electorate, then wonder why their balance sheets are in the red. The dim bulbs here are not the conservatives.
Sure, this strategy worked like anything for McCain. No personal questions. No questions about ideology. No attempt to connect the dots between personal backstory and ideology and current decisions–just stress, like a laser, the economy and competence (which also propelled President Bob Dole to office–though he did finally lament, "where's the outrage?"–where indeed, not in Mittensville). n nThough sure, maybe Mittens can explain how his expertise at leveraged buyouts (the leveraged debt was held by the companies bought not by Bain, hence the term) works for the U.S. which is pretty much in leveraged debt up to its eyeballs. Short of outsourcing California and laying off us aging baby boomers into another dimension, let's here how the numbers will add up–other than more free-enterprise rah rah about unleashing the capitalist engine–it may like the leashes just where they are at the buyers market enabling record profits and cash reserves.
besht2003- are you an Obama supporter in drag? The issue of jeremy Wright was legitimate in 2008 but it is now four years later. Even the attacks on Romney about his "bullying" and his 'dog hater status' have fallen by the wayside. The attention span of the American public can be counted in nanoseconds- the "pocket' issues are the only ones that are everpresent and Romeny is wise to use them to maximum effect.And don't you think that the public knew about Clinton and his moral fibre when they elecled him in 1992? Unfortunately, character is not an issue for voters. Money and the economy, unemployment and incompetence are.
Learn to spell
Romney has proven that he can move fast and move fast in an unerringly acuurate and rational way. Going negative this early, given the positives he's been slowly building, would suck him into Obama campaigns trap. Better to wait and see what Blacks, Hispanics and Jews make of Obama's samesex marriage gambit. It also would work wonders if Romney asked Blacks the Reagan Question – "Are you better off today than you were four years ago?" If Obama continues to be vicious, then the Wright video is a weapon ready to fire. But, not yet.
Romney has proven that he can move fast and move fast in an unerringly acuurate and rational way. Going negative this early, given the positives he's been slowly building, would suck him into Obama campaigns trap. Better to wait and see what Blacks, Hispanics and Jews make of Obama's samesex marriage gambit. It alao would work wonders if Romney asked Blacks the Reagan Questuin – "Are you better off today than you were four years ago?" Right now, there'e no need to go after Wright. At any rate, MSM is already in apinster's rage about an ad which has not even been made yet.
Al Sharpton repeatedly stated yesterday on Politics Nation it was UNAmerican and possibly something resembling treason to so much as mention Rev Wright. Frankly I can't decide whether that's simply a cartoon response or paranoia.
Raising (resurrecting) the Wright issue might have been a calculated and preemptive "shot over the bow" by the Romney campaign (covertly of course, under the cover of a super PAC) to get the message across: "Take a shot at my religion, and we start talking about yours".
re: religion. I think so. Call it preparing the battlefield, putting the campaign and its surrogates on notice of what hellfire will fall on them when they challenge or ridicule Mr. Romney's faith. Including an army of independent allies of enough substance that they only have to mention the amount and post the storyboards, if not the actual ad, on youtube. n nWhere's my popcorn? n nChicago is about to discover Main Street America remembers how to use tar-and-feathers.
The goal of the left is to impose double standard whenever it benefits them. The same applies to political correctness, a weapon only the left is allowed to use. nAs congressman A. West said it well: there are a lot of communists in the left.
Lest it be forgotten, it was Wright himself who broke surface, alleging that someone very close to Obama paid or offered to pay a $150,000 to zip it until after the '08 elections. That the Dem machine has been activated, not just to deflect Republican ads (about which they can't do much, apart from shouting 'racism'), but also to stick it to any DEM supporter (for example, the owner of the Chicago Cubs), shows that there is something in this new Wright story which scares the bejesus out the Dems.
What's weird – Orwellian, even – is that bringing up Wright is being framed as "racist." There was an article in the Chicago Tribune about the relationship of the Cubs ownership to a PAC contemplating a Wright based attack, and it used the words "racially tinged." There was absolutely NO explanation of the racial connection, and everyone, even the Cubs ownership, seemed to agree that the racial angle was present and being exploited. I don't get it – I suppose I must be a "racist" or something.
I haven’t noticed any real discussion of the merits of Mormonism in the media, but maybe I haven’t been reading the obscure websites that conservative commentators use to justify their attacks on what they describe as “the media.” Frankly, I can’t see why the beliefs of the Mormons are any harder for a rational (or a credulous) person to take than the standard miracles that Christians, Jews, and Muslims all purport to believe in such as the miracle birth, the parting of the Red Sea, the resurrection of Jesus, or the recitation (Koran) to an illiterate man by an angel.
considering that the obama camp will undoubtedly attack mormon romneys religious beliefs , i think it is important that obamas history with america damning reverend wright is brought to the fore. ndespite having distanced himself supposedly obama has a troubling history with this america hating jew hating reverend.