Uh-Oh, Press beginning to link Obama to Farrakhan

[modestyblase]

This not does bode well for Obama. 

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2008/01/an_obamafarrakhan_connection.html

Obama's Farrakhan Test
By Richard Cohen

Barack Obama is a member of Chicago's Trinity United Church of Christ. Its minister, and Obama's spiritual adviser, is the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. In 1982, the church launched Trumpet Newsmagazine, with Wright's daughters now serving as publisher and executive editor. Every year, the magazine makes awards in various categories. Last year, it gave the Dr. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. Trumpeter Award to a man it said "truly epitomized greatness." That man is Louis Farrakhan.

Maybe for Wright and some others, Farrakhan "epitomized greatness." For most Americans, though, Farrakhan epitomizes racism, particularly in the form of anti-Semitism. Over the years, he has compiled an awesome record of offensive statements, even denigrating the Holocaust by falsely attributing it to Jewish cooperation with Hitler -- "They helped him get the Third Reich on the road." His history is a rancid stew of lies.

It's important to state right off that nothing in Obama's record suggests he harbors anti-Semitic views or agrees with Wright when it comes to Farrakhan. Instead, as Obama's top campaign aide, David Axelrod, points out, Obama often has said that he and his minister sometimes disagree. Farrakhan, Axelrod told me, is one of those instances.

Fine. But where I differ with Axelrod and, I assume, Obama is that praise for an anti-Semitic demagogue is not a minor difference or an intrachurch issue. The Obama camp takes the view that their candidate, now that he has been told about the award, is under no obligation to speak out on the Farrakhan matter. It was not Obama's church that made the award, but a magazine. This is a distinction without much of a difference. And given who the parishioner is, the obligation to speak out is all the greater. He could be the next president of the United States. Where is his sense of outrage?

Any praise of Farrakhan heightens the Nation of Islam leader's standing and prestige. For good reasons and bad, he is already admired in portions of the black community, sometimes for his efforts to rehabilitate criminals. His anti-Semitism is either not considered relevant or is shared, particularly his false insistence that Jews have played an inordinate role in victimizing African-Americans.

In this, Farrakhan stands history on its head. It was Jews who disproportionately marched for civil rights and, in Mississippi, died for that cause. Farrakhan and, in effect, Wright, despoil the graves of Michael Schwerner, Andrew Goodman and, of course, their black colleague, James Chaney.

I can even see how someone, maybe even Obama, could dismiss Farrakhan as a pest, a silly man pushing a silly cause that poses no real threat to the Jewish community. Still, history instructs us that anti-Semitism is not something to trifle with. It is a botulism of the mind.

At the moment, the Obama and Clinton campaigns are involved in an utterly tasteless tussle over the legacy of Martin Luther King Jr. What is clear from rereading King's celebrated "I Have a Dream" speech of Aug. 28, 1963, is how inclusive that dream was -- "all of God's children, black men and white men, Jews and Gentiles, Protestants and Catholics, will be able to join hands and sing in the words of the old Negro spiritual, 'Free at last! Free at last! Thank God Almighty, we are free at last!'"

This, though, is not Farrakhan's dream. He has vilified whites and singled out Jews for crimes large and small, either committed by others as well or not at all. (A dominant role in the slave trade, for instance.) He has talked of Jewish conspiracies to set a media line for the whole nation. He has reviled Jews in a manner that brings Hitler to mind.

And yet Wright heaped praise on Farrakhan. According to Trumpet, he applauded his "depth of analysis when it comes to the racial ills of this nation." He praised "his integrity and honesty." He called him "an unforgettable force, a catalyst for change and a religious leader who is sincere about his faith and his purpose." These are the words of a man who prayed with Obama just before the Illinois senator announced for the presidency. Will he pray with him just before his inaugural?

I don't for a moment think that Obama shares Wright's views on Farrakhan. But the rap on Obama is that he is a fog of man. We know little about him and for all my admiration of him, I wonder about his mettle. The New York Times recently reported on Obama's penchant while serving in the Illinois Legislature for merely voting "present" when faced with some tough issues. Farrakhan, in a strictly political sense, may be a tough issue for him. This time, though, "present" will not do.

[Michael Tee]

Yeah, "Press beginning to link . . . "

Like it's just dawning on them now.  This stuff was held in reserve by the Clintons, like the fire-extinguisher behind the glass plate, "Break in Case of Emergency."

So the Minister's daughters are publishing pro-Farrakhan stuff and the parishioner is to be held responsible?  Guilt by association?

Put the question to Obama and see him split his black supporters straight down the middle?  Hopefully, Obama's prepared for this:

- Do you support your church mag supporting Farrakhan?  I don't speak for my church's magazine, I'm sure they have their own mind, they must support some of the same things I support and maybe some that I don't.I certainly support their freedom to support anyone they wish to support.

- Would you welcome support from Farrakhan?  Well, if he supports some things that I can't and never will support, anti-semitism for example, it's a purely hypothetical question because anyone who would support anti-semitism or any other form of racial or religious discrimination would never knowingly support Barak Obama

- Would you renounce Farrakhan?  I renounce anti-semitism,  I renounce racial and religious discrimination, and if that 's what Farrakhan is advocating, then of course I would renounce him and any support from him.

This whole campaign suddenly got a lot dirtier.

[modestyblase]

I think this will test his mettle.
Why shouldn't he be asked about it, btw?
Farrakhan is a despicable individual, and he and Obama are both affiliated with Wright-that makes his view on Farrakhan a fair question to pose.
Barak's been pounded before on not owning up to rough situations-like voting present, per Hilde's statement(her rightfully posed statement, at that), on tough issues. Cohen is pointing out another example of that, thats all.

This stuff was held in reserve by the Clintons, like the fire-extinguisher behind the glass plate, "Break in Case of Emergency."... This whole campaign suddenly got a lot dirtier.

It's called politics. No one ever claimed it was nice. If the candidates want to play candyland, they need to go to a playground.

[Michael Tee]

It's a tenuous connection at best.  I go to a synagogue whenever my wife can succeed in dragging me in, maybe at most twice a year for major religious holidays, I snooze through whatever bullshit the moron at the pulpit is droning out (probably advocating the use of nuclear weapons on Arabs who won't stop objecting to the theft of their land) and try to re-create mentally the best and most satisfying moments of my life so the time won't be a total waste.  Why the hell should I be held personally responsible for whatever moronic drivel the rabbi chose to spew out over his captive audience?  Why should I be held responsible for his idiocies and those of his heroes?  Where is it written that a parishioner has to pay for the thought-crime of his preachers?

[modestyblase]

Well, MT, you've made my point, almost.

Obama is a good church-goin' guy, as he has sold himself. Active in his church, etc. YOU on the other hand, as you said, go about once or twice/yr. WERE YOU active in your synagogue, then yes: I would hold you responsible to explain your stance on any associations that activity brings to light that are questionable.

[Plane]

Three degrees of separation.

Not a strong connection.

My pastor has children and they know people too, I would be surprised if all of the people three degrees of separation from me agreed with me .


Obama very likely is more socially active than the advradge guy , so within three degrees of seaparation there could easily be a million people , including a thousand famous ones .

He better not require agreement from the whole mob.

[modestyblase]

I'll let the article reiterate:

"It's important to state right off that nothing in Obama's record suggests he harbors anti-Semitic views or agrees with Wright when it comes to Farrakhan. Instead, as Obama's top campaign aide, David Axelrod, points out, Obama often has said that he and his minister sometimes disagree. Farrakhan, Axelrod told me, is one of those instances.

Fine. But where I differ with Axelrod and, I assume, Obama is that praise for an anti-Semitic demagogue is not a minor difference or an intrachurch issue. The Obama camp takes the view that their candidate, now that he has been told about the award, is under no obligation to speak out on the Farrakhan matter. It was not Obama's church that made the award, but a magazine. This is a distinction without much of a difference. And given who the parishioner is, the obligation to speak out is all the greater. He could be the next president of the United States. Where is his sense of outrage?"

It's not a matter of agreeing or disagreeing. I agree with Cohen's assertion: Where is the outrage from a potential future president that his church sees FARRAKHAN as someone who "epitomized greateness"? Do you have any idea who Farrakhan is??

Unless Obama can show he can handle this situation, diplomatically, he will lose the jewish vote in NY, maybe in Southern Cali, and elsewhere. There are a lot of rich, influential jews in this country. He has to handle this or it may be his doom.

[BT]

Obama has no more responsibility to denounce his minister than i do to denounce Mikey.

[BT]

Come to think of it, less so.

[Xavier_Onassis]

Farrakhan is a nut job. The Nation of Islam was founded by Elisha Mohammad (for all practical purposes: Mohammad claimed that a guy named Fard gave him the impetus), and it certainly has served to reform ex-criminals, such as Malcolm X, and turned a lot of poor Black people into hard-working family types. Mohammad said that when he died, the would end and friendly space aliens would spirit him away and take over in some sort of Millenial Utopia. No one saw this happen, and Farrakhan took over the NOI, because his son, Wallace Mohammad lacked the charisma and had become a more traditional Muslim who no longer preached, as Farrakhan and Mohammad do, that the White Race was bred for evil purposes on some island someplace. Farrakhan was a semi-successful Calypso singer born in the Caribbean with a gift of gab that far surpasses Elisha Mohammad, who had a squeaky little voice.

 But Hitler's programs were successful because of the Jews: he took their money and enslaved them and used the proceeds to benefit the Gentiles. The Jews did not cooperate with Herr Hitler willingly, however. I don't think that this is what Farrakhan believes or preaches. I can't see how anyone could be sane and believe all the silliness that Farrakhan or Elisha Mohammad puts out, but somehow, they do, because people will believe damned near anything if you make it a religion.

So Obama's daughter works for a magazine that once gave an award to Farrakhan. I fail to see how this could cause any massive Jewish campaign against Obama.

[modestyblase]

Obama has no more responsibility to denounce his minister than i do to denounce Mikey.

No one is asking him to denounce his minister, BT.  He may likely be asked to address the fact that an affiliation he supports, whose support he has thanked, also supports someone like Farrakhan. Answering that diplomatically will be a test of skill-if all Obama or anyone else can think of is that he denounce his minister or church, then they shouldn't run for president. 

So Obama's daughter works for a magazine that once gave an award to Farrakhan. I fail to see how this could cause any massive Jewish campaign against Obama.

Actually, it's Wrights daughters that work for the Church-based magazine, & the award was given last year, not in the distant past. _{And jews don't campaign, they network  (I know, I'm engaged to one!)}

I think you summed the point up well when you said you can't be sane to believe Farrakhan and his ilk. If the award were given 20+ years ago, it would be one thing. It was just given to him, which it makes it entirely another.

[BT]

Does the Nation of Islam have a positive or negative impact on the black community?

[modestyblase]

Ha, I like your questions BT. Overwhelmingly negative. They have - w/o sufficient research to back me, but from what I can recall - done a small amount of proactive social assistance. Unfortunately, that comes with cost of conversion. As it stands, NOI is generally as racist and anti-semitic as a skinhead or neo-nazi group. So is converting and keeping felons out of jail, helping addicts, etc. worth it when the price is irrational hatred?

[BT]

Be interesting to hear the take of other members.

[Michael Tee]

<<Obama is a good church-goin' guy, as he has sold himself. Active in his church, etc.>>

There's a lotta ways anyone can be active in his church.  Where's the proof he picked the preacher or vetted his sermons or got to exercise control over the contents of the preacher's daughters' magazine?