Obama's bridge to Wright
By Félix Alfonso Peña
© 2008 Félix Alfonso Peña
All rights reserved
24 March, 2008
The revelations about presidential candidate Sen. Barack Obama’s former pastor have convinced me: No way would I vote for Rev. Jeremiah Wright for president.
He’s not running? Then why is he so important? Why all the press coverage about the pastor’s rants against white people and what a white American power structure has done to African Americans?
It shouldn’t surprise many white folks that some African-Americans, like Wright, are truly and profoundly angry. Anger leads to rants. That should hardly be news, either.
And the anger is rooted in fact, not fantasy.
It’s not as if Wright made up that nasty stuff about slavery, Jim Crow, segregation and oppression. A drive through the slums of most major cities provides a graphic lesson about the persistent effects of slavery and racism.
And while a number of us harrumph and kvetch that it would all be fixed if only people took more responsibility or society assumed more responsibility, in the end we have to admit that the powerless and the powerful have not managed to eradicate color-coded hopelessness in the inner city.
It would be one thing if Wright had gone that extra step over the line and started talking murder, mayhem and hatred, but Wright simply ranted.
Anybody who wants to know what true hate reads like need only cruise the Internet to read page upon cyberpage of it, directed against African Americans, Jews, homosexuals, "race traitors" and others.
This true hate consists of lies and gross distortions of truth or logic, all concocted by people who take race personally.
Wright, on the other hand, takes racism personally. Whether he’s right or wrong about fighting hate with hate is debatable, and I would be one to debate him, but his hurts are nevertheless rooted in truth.
Some have called him an extremist; I just think of him as a ticked-off dude.
Extreme is hurting people and sowing destruction. Extreme is urging people to hurt others and sow destruction. Wright may be extremely angry in his rants, which seem a poor fit in a Christian church, but he hardly fits the description of an extremist.
As for Obama, he does not espouse extreme views, whether about race and injustice or other issues. A look at the senator’s life in politics reveals a person who, while left of center, can hardly be called radical. He talks about a convergence of interests between right and left. Scathing invective is hardly his forte.
Still, some would find Obama guilty by association.
Wright married Obama and Michelle Barack. He baptized their daughters. He was a spiritual adviser to the senator.
But that doesn’t appear to have influenced the senator to abandon his moderate agenda. In fact, his response vindicates his reputation as a bridge builder.
Obama repudiated Wright’s views and disassociated his professional life from him, but he did not turn his back on Wright. While he’s not allowing Wright to speak for him, Obama is still talking to the man,
As far as I’m concerned, talking is better than not talking.
If Wright’s still talking to Obama, there’s still a chance for change, for a switch to dialogue and a more reasonable tone when it comes to dealing with one of the most unreasonable issues in human life, racism.
I also think it speaks well of Obama that he did not simply cut off Wright completely. Too many people in Washington would do that, simply for the sake of political gain.
But keeping lines of communication open with those you disagree with is a way of life in politics. Legislators ought to do it for the sake of bipartisanship, which is important to keeping the government working for the people and not just for one party.
If Obama wins the presidency, he’ll have to build bridges with a motley crew of representatives, senators, governors, foreign heads of state and some very influential people.
For those people who advocate blowing up bridges rather than building them, I have this warning: That’s extreme.