Using Wright

October 14th, 2008 By: Michael van der Galien | Tags:

In a recent blogpost for The Daily Beast conservative pundit Tucker Carlson argued that John McCain’s campaign should attack Barack Obama for his ties to Rev. Jeremiah Wright of Trinity Church Chicago. As is well known, Wright is a radical anti-American preacher, yet Obama attended his church for 20 years. Wright is the man who ‘brought Obama to Christ.’ The latter even went so far as to call Wright his ’spiritual mentor’ in his autobiography.

But he is a radical. Shortly after 9/11 Wright said: “We bombed Hiroshima, we bombed Nagasaki, and we nuked far more than the thousands in New York and the Pentagon, and we never batted an eye…America’s chickens are coming home to roost.”

In another sermon the good reverend had the following to say: “God damn America for treating our citizens as less than human. God damn America for as long as she acts like she is God and she is supreme.”

He also is in the habit of refering to America as AmeriKKKa, which is undoubtedly not a terminology most Americans would feel comfortable about.

There are enough videos out there which the McCain campaign could use to attack Obama over his ties to Wright – Hillary Clinton’s campaign did so with magnificent results. She was trailing Obama in the polls before her campaign attacked Obama over Wright, but made a comeback once the attacks started. In the end, Obama was forced to quit his church, and to distance himself from Wright, even though he had tried to defend Wright initially.

Although I agree with Carlson that McCain should have the courage to address this issue – for it is yet another sign that Obama is not the moderate he says he is – I think that it would be a mistake for him to focus on it solely. Attacking Obama alone is not going to make McCain victorious. Rather, he needs a combined effort; attack Obama over his ties to radicals, present an alternative vision (and thus plans) for America. Only then may voters consider voting for McCain; they will not vote for someone without a vision, and who limits himself to talking about how bad the other guy is.

McCain, meanwhile, seems afraid to use Wright against Obama. He fears that doing so will result in the Obama campaign and the mainstream media once again playing the race card. Although that would almost certainly happen, it is not a good reason not to use it; recent weeks have shown that race will be used against McCain no matter what. At the same time, most voters will realize that the Wright connection has nothing to do with race, but something with radicalism and Obama’s trustworthiness.

As said, only going after Obama won’t be a winning formula for McCain but ignoring Rev. Wright constitutes malpractice on McCain’s part. It’s an association Obama does not want Americans talk about, but he said in this man’s radical, hateful, anti-American church for 20 years, and never raised his voice in objection to any hateful smears his ’spiritual mentor’ uttered.

It’s worth reminding voters of that. Not just to win, but to show them that Obama is not the man he says he is.

Share and Enjoy:
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Technorati
  • SphereIt
  • NewsVine
  • TailRank
  • Reddit
  • StumbleUpon

This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.

  1. Chris
    October 14th, 2008 at 20:36
    Reply | Quote | #1

    Not worth it.  Will please the base but drive away the middle.

  2. Michael van der Galien
    October 14th, 2008 at 20:50
    Reply | Quote | #2

    “Not worth it.  Will please the base but drive away the middle.”

    Chris, you know what’s so remarkable? Polls show (as Real Clear Politics’ Jay Cost pointed out recently) that the Wright issue actually did tremendous damage with independent and democratic voters to Obama when the Clinton campaign pushed the issue. In fact, Cost showed by using the stats available (we linked to his column back then) that Clinton may very well have won the primaries if she would have gone all out on this one. She didn’t do so, however, because it would have torn her party apart, which would cost her the general election (you need the entire base to show up).

    In other words; the polls show you’re wrong.

  3. C Stanley
    October 14th, 2008 at 21:52
    Reply | Quote | #3

    Even so, though, Michael, I wonder if it would have the same effect now if McCain revives the Wright issue.

    First, the backlash of negative campaigning seems to be hitting him awfully hard, and second, as time went by after Hillary raised the Wright issue it seems like a lot of people settled on the narrative that it shouldn’t be held against Obama that he stuck by someone as a friend until (supposedly…though I find it beyond credibility) he realized how over the top the guy’s views were.

    Obviously I don’t agree with that narrative, but it seems to me that people will hold it against McCain now (“He said he wouldn’t raise this issue! He’s going against his word! How dishonorable and desperate he is!”) rather than causing any damage to Obama.

Comments are closed.

PoliGazette Comments Policy

PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree. Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors. Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.

(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should not be posted.

(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.

(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.

(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.

(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements. Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.

Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors by email only.