when the word "courage" has lost all meaning
I was briefly watching the Today show on NBC, as Meredith Viera was interviewing some pastor regarding the Obama "denouncement" of Wright on Tuesday. The Pastor went out of his way to say that what Obama did was "courageous", and that he "should be commended".
Really?
Was it really courageous for Obama to separate himself from a man who is spewing some of the most hate-filled racist baloney that has found it's way into mainstream reporting in the last decade? Is this what passes for courage today?
Should he really be commended for taking exception to Wright's claims that the Senator was just playing politics with his distancing from the reverend's "greatest hits" that had come to light? Is that a truly commendable act, to respond to someone who's essentially saying "you didn't mean that" by saying "oh yes, I really meant that"? That's worthy of praise?
Please, people. . .this isn't "courage". It's many things, and I'll even allow that it may have been "difficult" for Obama to do (which says more about Obama than it does about the situation itself)--but it wasn't courageous.
No, the courageous thing to have done would have been to realize that the inroads Obama had to make in the Chicago political community years and years ago would have to be done WITHOUT legitimizing the gospel of the wrong reverend Wright.
Or even to fully and completly disassociate himself from Wright in Philadelphia, with his "landmark" speech on race. What kind of a landmark does that speech look like now?
Again, I come back to one point: If Obama had ANY KIND of worthwhile judgement, he would have ended his associations with Wright a long time before this weekend.
Instead, we got Wright on a stage far grander than any that he could have ever hoped for in his retirement. And he definitely took advantage of his forum.
All brought to you by Sen. Obama's judgement.
I can only hope that Obama/the Obama camp tries to make an issue of his "courage" regarding the Rev. Wright. That will really play well against McCain's story, don't you think?
Really?
Was it really courageous for Obama to separate himself from a man who is spewing some of the most hate-filled racist baloney that has found it's way into mainstream reporting in the last decade? Is this what passes for courage today?
Should he really be commended for taking exception to Wright's claims that the Senator was just playing politics with his distancing from the reverend's "greatest hits" that had come to light? Is that a truly commendable act, to respond to someone who's essentially saying "you didn't mean that" by saying "oh yes, I really meant that"? That's worthy of praise?
Please, people. . .this isn't "courage". It's many things, and I'll even allow that it may have been "difficult" for Obama to do (which says more about Obama than it does about the situation itself)--but it wasn't courageous.
No, the courageous thing to have done would have been to realize that the inroads Obama had to make in the Chicago political community years and years ago would have to be done WITHOUT legitimizing the gospel of the wrong reverend Wright.
Or even to fully and completly disassociate himself from Wright in Philadelphia, with his "landmark" speech on race. What kind of a landmark does that speech look like now?
Again, I come back to one point: If Obama had ANY KIND of worthwhile judgement, he would have ended his associations with Wright a long time before this weekend.
Instead, we got Wright on a stage far grander than any that he could have ever hoped for in his retirement. And he definitely took advantage of his forum.
All brought to you by Sen. Obama's judgement.
I can only hope that Obama/the Obama camp tries to make an issue of his "courage" regarding the Rev. Wright. That will really play well against McCain's story, don't you think?
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home