It's taking a while for the rightwing punditry to figure out what the "story" is, finding out what is gravely and terribly wrong with Barack Obama and his retired Pastor, Jeremiah Wright.
The brief history:
- Obama is a crypto-muslim, maybe. Just look at the pictures and call on him to denounce Farrakhan.
- Then it was guilt-by-association, mostly. Does Obama hold the all the same (non-Christian?) beliefs as his Pastor?
- Then it was time to question his patriotism (and that of his wife).
- Then we had the video loops. It was time to question Obama's patriotism all over again, his stance on terrorism, his view of HIV, his "separatist" leanings, his embrace of "hate theology" ... and testing his willingness to avoid "the ugly" in the American Experience.
As all that is fading (especially under cross-examination, but not in the realm of the unexamined), we have two camps:
- 1. those out to smear, especially by labeling Wright as "racist" and "anti-American" (a man who is a veteran, even ... there are no holds barred, here).
- 2. Those who accept that Barack is not racist, find solid evidence (in legislation AND in word) to reject the rest of the guilt-by-association. Their "misgivings" are coalescing - without apology (or visible retraction) for prior remarks, sadly - around two things. Barack's invitation for the country to discuss race is either liberal or too liberal and Barack's purported self-incrimination in "not walking out".
It is therefore reasonable to ask what he did - empowered as he was as a high-profile, long-standing parishioner - to change the viewpoint of Wright and Trinity, and whether those efforts were successful.
Are we serious? Pity Barack Obama. He was supposed to (a) be busy raising two kids; (b) keep a full time job as a community organizer, as a civil rights lawyer, as a professor of constitutional law, as a professional politician in the State Senate with demands from the electorate and campaigns to run; (c) keeping his star rising within the Democratic party by helping fundraise for a long list of others; (d) exercise and eat right; and (e) have sufficient time to reform his Church.
Look, most people are in-and-out, have their particular spiritual needs met one way or another (including simply fellowship, rather than theology) and leave the reforming to ... how shall we say, those who don't want the meeting to end.
That's a commonsense observation, not an insider one, so we can only imagine if it is true or not.
Still, it's amazing how wacked-out pundits can get, when they go seeking for the answer they want.
