By Charles Coulter, Kansas City Star Editorial Board
Some things overheard and felt while sitting in the barber shop -- kudos to Doc at Calvin's Barber Shop.
1. A man cannot be blamed for another man's words.
What more does Sen. Barack Obama have to do? Pour gasoline on the Rev. Jeremiah Wright and drag his burning body through Chicago?
Obama has, in unequivocable terms, said he doesn't agree with the Rev. Wright on his more objectionable comments. Only a real coward -- a man or woman unfit to be president -- would denounce someone who has been so important to his life. As one commentator said, Rev. Wright helped Obama find his strengths. And there is nothing wrong with that.
2. Obama should not totally get a free pass on the issue of whether he was present for a controversial sermon by Wright.
He said in his speech today he has heard Wright make controversial statements but in the past week he has said he was not present for a particular sermon available on YouTube. Obama might be parsing words, but to some it's going to look like he's lying.
3. This issue -- which, again, is a major distraction from the important issues facing this country -- is solidifying Obama's African-American base.
That process was already starting but judging from the conversation in the barber shop, black voters will support Obama in droves.
Some black people I listened to see this media firestorm as another example of American racial injustice -- an attempt to bring down a black man because he was being too successful.
If someone wanted to make this campaign about race, then they got what they wanted. But it might -- and should -- backfire. And remember, Obama didn't inject race into the campaign; it was Bill Clinton.
4. Black voters are tired and frustrated by this whole issue.
5. Discrimination is not something that happened a long time ago. It's 400 years of injustice and some problems still exist.
5. And finally, to quote Doc, if a black man or woman is conscious, he or she can't help but be angry.
White America needs to learn to deal with black America's anger, just as black America needs to learn to deal with middle-class white resentment. If you want to have an honest racial discussion, let's start with the truth, and not blind, wishful thinking.
Charles Coulter is Opinion Page Editor of The Kansas City Star.
Oh my, where to begin...let's see...
First, you insult the memory of Dr. King by trying to draw extensive similarities between him and Rev. Wright. They both expressed defiance, decrying the same abhorrent behaviors, but after that there are no significant similarities and Wright simply doesn't begin to measure up. Where Dr. King demonstrated a "reasoned defiance" (he rejected hate-speech, did not slander his opponents and did not manufacture false information to advance his views, choosing instead to travel the high road), Wright demonstrates "outrageous defiance" by refusing to respect any tenets of civil discourse. It isn’t just that Dr. King was “more sophisticated” than the good reverend in how he expressed himself—the very factors that gave credibility to Dr. King show Wright to be the vile buffoon that he is.
Second, the black community would be well served to abandon anger, particularly as a tool for progress. Seldom is anger successfully channeled into progress—for every success there are scores of failures. More likely, anger (even when justified) merely begets more negative behavior, leaving the angry party worse off than they would have been had they chosen to react constructively. I submit that this is what has happened in the black community. Answer this—how is all of this anger solving problems like rampant unemployment, drug use or teen pregnancy? How much has violence been reduced as a result of this anger? How many black children have been motivated by their anger to complete their education? I am sorry but I don’t see the anger working. Rather, it leaves us with more of the same old same old. I’m reminded of the old joke where the patient says “Doc, it hurts when I do this” to which the doctor responds “Then don’t do that!” You are correct about one thing, “it ain’t illegal to be angry”—but it is pretty useless and self-destructive. Similarly, I would say that white people cause harm by hanging on to resentment. It also serves no constructive purpose. Anger and resentment are for people who want to remain mired in the past. Isn’t that what we want to escape?
Third, Wright should be called out merely because of his position as a Christian minister. As I write this, we find ourselves in a week where many religions commemorate the passion, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ—a man who was also defiant but who never uttered one word of outrage even as he was brutally tortured and executed—yet a minister whose mission it should be to emulate that behavior consciously and repeatedly chooses to act in a manner that is diametrically opposed to what Jesus taught. I believe it is written in the bible that Jesus said something along the lines of “Father, forgive them, they know not what they are doing,” not “(expletive deleted) the Pharisees.” It is unconscionable that anyone would seek to sugarcoat Wright’s vile words any week, but this week in particular.
Enough about Wright. I first became aware of your views on this when I saw you on “The O’Reilly Factor.” Remember how you only have one chance to make a first impression? I have to say that my first reaction was that I should contact the KCMO Health Department to see if my birth certificate could be changed to show that I am from ANYWHERE other than Kansas City. The only way my embarrassment could have been any worse would have been if I actually agreed with you in this matter and had to sit there and watch you mangle my beliefs. Seriously, nothing you said made any sense—not even close. You were inarticulate and had no point. O’Reilly ran circles around you and he didn’t even have to move to do it, that’s how bad it was. Then there were the clothes…perhaps you didn’t get any notice that you were going to be on national television so that you could actually look like you cared about your appearance? I shouldn’t be surprised--you are about what I would expect to see representing The Star. It has been in an extended period of decline, particularly in the news and editorial departments. Here is something to put in the suggestion box at the office…The Star Lite. Start with the regular daily paper, remove the news and editorial sections since they are of no value and sell subscriptions to the rest at a reduced cost.
This most recent post of yours concludes with the challenge that an honest racial discussion has to start with the truth. The truth would be a good place to start, yes, but to paraphrase a Jack Nicholson character from the movies, “Can you handle the truth?” Or will it simply make you angrier?