Why is it that black people can't build each other up? Rev. Wright knows that Barack Obama could likely be the nominee for the democratic party, and he knows what he is doing is derailing his efforts and jeopardizing his bid for president. He complains so much about America and all the injustices, which there are particularly for minorities, but if he wants an end to the status quo, why is he trying to destroy his chances?

Sent by Selam | 6:26 PM ET | 04-29-2008

Wright claims he's bearing up under "an attack on the black church" - but I'm sure many Black congregations will repudiate that blanket statement.

How many Black congregations actually believe that HIV is perpetrated by Whites against them?

Sent by Tom Emmert | 6:36 PM ET | 04-29-2008

I am a white male supporter of Obama, but my enthusiasm is diminished. I was stunned by the comments of Reverend Wright. I thought that we were beyond the point in time when that kind of language would be cheered by a black congregation. White America has demonstrated by its strong support of Obama that it has put the most egregious forms of racism behind it. If Reverend Wright's congregation is representative of black America, racial hated is still alive and well.

Sent by John Landry | 7:46 PM ET | 04-29-2008

No matter how much Obama distances himself from Rev Wright, it will never be good enough for the significant number of people who will not vote for Obama under any circumstances. Obama did well initially because his constituency was present in large enough numbers. Not so in the states to come and so no amount of throwing the good Rev under the bus is going to help. Already the pundits are saying either Obama didn't go far enough or too little too late. Too bad a long term and apparently endearing relationship was ruptured in the process.

Sent by Bernard | 8:09 PM ET | 04-29-2008

We have two very educated well spoken men (Obama & Rev.Wright). They're both very much aware of the social issues facing poor people in America (blacks in particular). Both men want social justice, but in two different ways. One on a political level and the other on a spiritual level (both are good). What may not be obvious is that this is just another attack on blacks to bring division between them. Rev. Wright has a right to defend himself, maybe he could have waited-maybe not. However the media is determined to find a way to bring down a potentially black president-so far it may just be working. Hopefully not. (America ain't ready for a black president). Politics as usual!

Sent by Lavasia | 9:07 PM ET | 04-29-2008

I am a Clinton supporter, but am outraged by the way Jeremiah Wright has treated Mr. Obama and in fact all African Americans. Mr. Wright's words and actions, and most importantly his vanity, should not affect Mr. Obama's candidacy, because the younger man is more than worthy of the support and admiration he receives. The so-called pastor's lunacy and egotism is a shame to all who have looked up to him.

Sent by Eskimo | 11:19 PM ET | 04-29-2008

It is really extraordinary that a man who is said to have been someone's spiritual adviser would take deliberate steps to undermine a man's run for the highest office in the land. When Rev. Wright repeats the refrain that Sen. Obama is "just being a political" it is a shocking betrayal of someone who has loved and sought your counsel. Obama HAD to take the steps he did because the caustic, self serving comments from Rev. Wright demeaned Obama and many Rev. Wright's former congregations.

Sent by Raul | 11:45 PM ET | 04-29-2008

As an upper-middle-class white man, I don't think Reverend Wright is the extremist fanatic that Barack Obama's opponents and mainstream journalists (possibly including some at NPR) seem to be portraying him as. I watched Bill Moyers' interview with Reverend Wright at http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/04252008/watch.html, and found it very interesting; I would encourage others to do likewise. Reverend Wright struck me as a thoughtful and intelligent man, not some "kill whitey, death to America" nut job. As Wright himself pointed out, Doctor Martin Luther King was condemned as a traitor for speaking out against the Vietnam War. The same now seems to be happening to Reverend Wright. Senator Barack Obama's political opponents seem determined to turn Reverend Wright into a Willie Horton-style stereotype which they can use as an albatross around Obama's neck. It saddens me that the news media seems to be taking the quick and easy path of shallow sensationalism in its coverage of Reverend Wright and his sermons. It likewise saddens me that Senator Obama is taking the path of political expediency and distancing himself from Reverend Wright instead of standing by him. Again, I would encourage those who really want to know the truth to watch the aforementioned Bill Moyers interview.

Sent by David B. Mitchell | 2:43 AM ET | 04-30-2008

Why do White people assume that Obama believes the same politics that Wright does? That does not make any sense to me. Clearly if people watched the interview with Moyers and then his speech, Rev. Wright has a serious split personality disorder. And I must disagree with the comment that Rev. Wright has the right to defend himself. Surely he does, but he does not have to defend himself while simultaneously trying to bring down Obama. That just bespeaks a narcissism and ego of a man that reaches no bounds.

Sent by Debrazza | 4:46 AM ET | 04-30-2008

Thank you, David Mitchell. Because judging from these comments people are still focusing on these 30-second sound bites.

Sent by JCN | 10:23 AM ET | 04-30-2008

I would like to know just what is on the mind of our so called "Black Leadership" as far as Obama is concerned. They seem to be determined to sabatoge him at ever turn. Are they so beholden to the Clintons or is there some self-destructive reason that they want to tear down one of their own? Every time I turn around their seems to be another one of these people not just endorsing Clinton, but they seem to have to try to defame Obama.

Sent by Franklin Wilson | 10:29 AM ET | 04-30-2008

Why are we entertaining this as a real issue? There are no four panel analyst sessions discussing anything of real importance, like the economy, health care, the housing foreclosure crisis. I am just saddened and quite frankly annoyed that something like this has taken up so much media time. I am also insulted, as an educated voter, that this is being spun as if it has true relevance. Will Rev. Wright's comments make any difference in the near, future after the election when American citizens of all races are homeless, jobless and Americans are still casualties of an ongoing war? I think not.

Sent by Q. Thompson | 10:40 AM ET | 04-30-2008

The Obama v. Wright fiasco has elevated to black-on-black crime with Wright being the perpetrator. The news media wont let this issue go. Is Obama v. Wright really more important than the economy, the war in Iraq, gasoline prices. It's time to move on from this. I'm interested in understanding how each candidate is going to address these issue. It's a shame that the American news media has reduced itself to nothing more than tabloid news during an historic presidential campaign. I hope that America is not as idiotic to lose sight of the real issues that we all face.

Sent by Glenn | 10:44 AM ET | 04-30-2008

I too appreciate David's statement but I have to disagree with JCN. I am not judging Rev Wright by a snippet. In fact, I was among those who thought he was being mistreated until he decide to go on the see me-see me tour. One has to assume that Rev wright is either naive or deeply self involved not to have considered the way his states in defense of himself would be taken. Larger than that is the very clear message it sends that Rev Wright doesn't really give a damn about Sen. Obama because if he cared at all he would have used is 15 minutes of fame to heal and points us to a higher plain, but instead he dismissed it all with a wave of his hand. "He's says what he has to say as a politician..." It seems a clear case to me of the crushed ego of the mentor/spiritual father figure and he, Rev Wright should be ashamed of himself.

Sent by raul | 1:03 PM ET | 04-30-2008

George Bush's grandfather had commercial dealings with Nazi Germany after it was against the law and no one is asking him to disown his grandfather

Sent by AM | 2:41 PM ET | 04-30-2008

Obama had to do it! As I wrote on this link today: http://afro-americawriter.spaces.live.com/blog/cns!2D30651C10302D91!488.entry, Obama had no other choice. This is a guy running for the highest office of the free world, and Rev. Wright at the National Press Club (NPC) had no clue (I think he did but really didn't care)of what his "performance" could do to jeopardize a brilliant campaign.

I'm all for Rev. Wright defending his life's work of more than 30 years reduced to a three-minute video of soundbites on YouTube. That's why I had no problem with his interview with Bill Moyers on PBS Friday night. Even Wright's speech at the NAACP event Sunday was okay (for the most part) but to go to the NPC, an unfamiliar environment with a combative tone was uncalled for.

Sent by Moji | 2:43 PM ET | 04-30-2008

When Obama and Clinton initially started there was a certain amount of respect for each other, and you could see it. I had high hopes of them either running together or perhaps one having the other in his/her cabinet. The media saw this, and decided that this was not good, so the media decided to pit them against each other. Once the media got them to a frenzied pitch, the media turned around and said, "look at those two!" Then the media dug up some old footage of his spiritual advisor, and decided to run a certain sound byte. When Obama defended his spiritual advisor, the media said to itself, "ooh! that's no good!", so what did they do? They got a certain group of people in a frenzy. To the point that they told Obama,he MUST renounce and denounce this man! Even though I am not an Obama supporter, even I felt a deep sense of sadness for him when I saw him struggling to convince the world that he has done precisely that! and of course, the media is running it every 10 seconds it seems. Is anybody sick of the media and it's dirty tricks????! ! ! ! I hate them all!

Sent by Cheryl | 3:55 PM ET | 04-30-2008

This is all foolishness to tar and feather a person based on association is not judging a man on his own actions nor the content of his character. That is why I believe we will never be a colorblind society. All of us are acting like Wright is the only man in American that has ever said such opinions. Geogre Wallace said segration now and segration forever. Strong Thurmond was a Dixiecrat before he became Republican who has pictures standing beside him. There are members of congress who were memebers of the klan at one point in our history.We Americas did do the STD expermiments on people. We have deined WWII veterns from the Philapines drafted into our Miltary benifits. We do, some of us believe that this country is damned becaulse of abortion and homosexuality. not only that. Who does Obama think he his running for president and has not served one full term in the senate uppity negros need to know their place. many white and blacks who are kind of powerful and feel they have paid there dues feel this way. That is what this foolishnes is all about. And for those who say they "were" going to vote for Obama until the the Wright thing. I wasn't going to but, Now after I see how my fellow americans in the press act I will vote for him and my hope is like Reagan and Bush backed by the so call right-winged preachers, that Obama wins anyway. It would be four years of hell With the press knit picking his every move and then we see one another for who we really are imperfect people looking for perfection from everybody but ourselves.

Sent by D Bowens-Davis | 3:56 PM ET | 04-30-2008

I agree wholeheartedly with David Mitchell (an earlier post). People MUST go beyond the sound byte, YouTube, and the lazy and redundant newspaper reports, media pundits, and bloggers who prefer ratings and sensationalism to truth telling and honest analysis and commentary. I saw the Bill Moyers interview and heard Rev. Wright's speeches before the Detroit NAACP and the National Press Club. [Refer to http://npc.press.org/calendar/calendarday.cfm?whatday=28&&whatyear=2008&&whatmonth=4] He was invited to keynote those events; they were not part of some media tour!! Nor were his talks in response to the media's so-called controversy over previous sermons. While he addressed the media and the sound bytes, he also remained true to his purpose for being at those gatherings and gave two terrific, engaging and highly instructive speeches. The Press Club talk opened a two-day symposium about the African American church. In his Press Club speech, he talked VERY LITTLE about Sen. Obama and more about the African American church's historic role and function, which was to bring about and encourage reconciliation, liberation and transformation. The church as a whole represents those principles. The inane questions he was asked during the Q & A... it is no wonder he responded as he did. I found his answers to be direct, honest and reasoned. Perhaps it was *the way* in which he responded that set people off. They didn't *hear* the substance of his speech; they were caught up in his mannerisms. Like he said...different, not divisive. It is a grave disservice to all of us that we are not getting the full story. Why do we hear the *same* "controversial" sound bytes? Why do we read headlines that seek only to incite and incense people? For the countless number of people who rely on network news or their local paper for coverage about the presidential campaign... it is not surprising that many are responding the way they are. It's just what the media and political powerbrokers want. It's politics, right? If we continue to "believe the hype," we will let a truly wonderful, rare and monumental opportunity to change the discourse, the direction, and the decision-making of process of this country slip through our grasp.

Sent by Marsha Bragg | 4:01 PM ET | 04-30-2008

White church...black church...this thing aught not be according to the Holy Scriptures. We (believers) ARE one in Christ Jesus. NO EXCUSES. If you don't believe this and you claim to be a Christian then your deceitful heart has tricked you into thinking that you are a believer. The world is more real to you than your supposed Lord. Rev. Wright strengthens his congregation based upon their race and this is wrong in Christ. I don't care what the white man has done or is doing. That sort of division does not exist in the real Church. I am Christian who happens to be a black woman and my brothers and sister includes all sorts of people (Asian, Mexican, White, Black..etc) because that is who God has allowed to receive His salvation.

Sent by Sabrena | 5:55 PM ET | 04-30-2008

I'm confused. What does "the black church" refer to? I know that not all African Americans are Baptist, Methodist, or Muslim. Do preaching styles and racial histories supersede denominational allegiances and theological differences? In other words are African American congregations of different denominations more alike than they are to their denominational counterparts?

Sent by Steve Petersen | 8:40 PM ET | 04-30-2008

Steve, I've never been in a black church but every Muslim I've ever known has been a jazz musician and none were affiliated with the Nation of Islam.

Big generalization, but during slavery Old Testament heroes like Moses, Joshua, and little David were celebrated, figures who took on a more powerful but overbearing authority and defeated it, thus liberating a people chosen by God as special. Or in other words, the identification with the Israelites as a chosen people (?). Then after freedom, Christ grew more important than the heroes of the Old Testament.

A great jazz musician named Dizzy Gillespie once ranked the black churches in his hometown of Cheraw, South Carolina according to social class, with Presbyterians on the top rung of the social ladder. In descending order from there came Methodists (the denomination Gillespie grew up in), Baptists, A.M.E. Zion (or African Methodist Episcopal, founded at the turn of the 19th century, if I'm not mistaken, in Philadelphia by Richard Allen.) And finally, at the uncontested bottom, Sanctified (which is where Gillespie hung out because that was where the best music was happening).

The Creole Catholic Churches of New Orleans, where a lot of jazz musicans grew up, had their own traditions.

W.E.B. Du Bois, b. 1868 (?), grew up in predominantly white Great Barrington, Mass. and attended a Congregational Church (?), but he learned the spirituals from his grandmother. In his most famous and influential book, The Souls of Black Folk (1903), written while he was student teaching in Tennessee, he wears an anthropologist's hat, attending an outdoor worship service in Chapter 10, "On the Faith of Our Fathers." It's a beautiful book, written partly in response to Booker T. Washington's Up From Slavery, published two years before.

Hope that helps, it's the best I can do with somewhat limited experience (none)!

Sent by Mike | 12:19 AM ET | 05-01-2008

To answer Steve Petersen's question...within denominations there is a separation of churches based upon race. Grant it, some of the separation has to do with demographics but only a small portion in my opinion. The separation stems from slavery but continues by hatred and ignorance, which of course has nothing to do with Christianity. The true Church resides within a person and that person no longer possesses the ability to live and think divisively concerning his/her fellow believers...no matter the race, no matter the situation. This is where Trinity Church and any other church that magnify its worldly attributes go wrong.

Sent by Sabrena | 12:33 PM ET | 05-01-2008

Obama genuflection to appease the media and white liberals and white voters was tragic to observed. The negrophobia present in the attacks on Rev.Wright is over the top and unforgivable..

Sent by Thrasher | 2:53 PM ET | 05-01-2008

Mike and Sabrena,

Thanks for your responses! I appreciate your perspectives. Using "the black church" to discuss congregations within a denomination makes sense, but when the term ignores denominational boundaries, then it gets confusing.

Sent by Steve Petersen | 2:59 PM ET | 05-01-2008

One of the things that deeply disturbs me about the divorce for apparently "irreconcilable differences" is how neither seemed concerned for the spiritual well-being for the other. On the surface the issue is how each person dissed the other, but within a community of Christian faith, if there is a serious difference of opinion or understanding/conviction, Christians are held to a standard unlike that of those who are not members.

When I heard reverence Wright stating that he was standing up for the Black Church, I was disturbed because it seemed that his primary concern should have been for that of a parishioner and brother in Christ. As a Christian pastor his first concern should have been the spiritual well-being of Senator Obama.

In addition, I hope that his understanding of the cosmic church of Christ goes much further beyond the racial boundary he placed around it when he said he was defending the "Black Church." As an African-American Christian and someone who was raised in a black church tradition, I have also come to a realization that Christ has only one Church, with many members, from many different traditions.

It would be one thing to say that he was defending the faith -- as the Apostle Paul once said -- but I'm troubled that his claim to defend the "Black Church" included a public repudiation of Senator Obama. I suggest that a much better path for the two men would have been to first speak with one another -- if as Senator Obama claims to have been offended, then the Biblical response should have been to address the offense directly and in private with his brother. Likewise, if Rev. Wright was offended by the Senator, then he should have taken his offense to his brother in Christ first before going to a public forum. If the two men could not come to some agreement, then they should have taken their dispute to others within the community of faith and finally to a body of authority within their leadership.

It is truly unfortunate that this "divorce" has been so public and brought injury to the body and cause of Christ. For this I am grieved, but I am hopeful that that the two can reconcile and find a way to walk together.

Sent by Edward Bryant | 5:25 PM ET | 05-01-2008

What a fascinating comment thread! To answer Steve Peterson's question about why there are so called "white" churches and "black" churches, the answer is that many American churches followed the law and custom of the US and practiced segregation., the African Methodist Episcopal Church was born, for example, when founder Richard Allen was forcibly removed from church where he was praying because he refused to pray in the so called "negro pews." Black churches were formed to spare African Americans such indignities, and because some white churches simply refused to accept them as equals or to allow them leadership or to permit them dignified participation in worship. Even the Quakers, who were known for their vehement opposition to slavery, participated in this abhorrent practice in some parts of the country. This is the legacy that Wright was referring to in some of his speeches. To the writer who noted that such separation is antithetical to the saving message of Jesus, most modern churches would surely say "Amen" but the cultural practice of separation remains in many areas. IN part this is now due to preference in styles of worship, in some part to pride in having built these institutions, in some measure to simple geography in that this remains a more residentially segregated society than some might wish to admit.

Sent by Michel Martin, host | 11:59 PM ET | 05-01-2008

The President of the US is tasked with appointing cabinet heads, ambassadors, judges and other officials, and to exercise his (her) judgment in choosing people of good and sound judgment.

When a candidate chooses to remain in the clan of the delusional likes of Rev. Wright, what does that say about that candidate's judgment?

Sent by True_Liberal | 10:19 PM ET | 05-02-2008

Salem's comment, "Why is it that black people can't build each other up?" is highly indicative of the real pernicious pathology underlying the Obama/Wright issue. Nearly 145 years after the abolishment of the institution of slavery, and 44 years after the Civil Rights Act, there remains a pervasive presumption that fixing the race problem in America is the sole responsibility of black people. Why should they build themselves up? They didn't create the problem. It's an absolute antithesis of the Pottery Barn rule: white people broke it, but black people are expected to fix it. It's ludicrous. Even if every African American wore properly-fitting pants, flawlessly spoke the King's English, and conducted him/herself with the most professional and respectful deportment at all times... racism would still exist, because it is a white problem. It's important to recognize that black behavior is not a causal factor for white racism. White racism existed prior to the very existence of African Americans. There is no causal relationship. White racism is white behavior. White racism is white pathology. Salem's question should be, "Why is it that white people don't build black people up?" When white people decided it was a good idea to bring hundreds of thousands of African blacks to North America, rob them of their culture, break up their families, enslave them, beat them, rape them, lynch them, conduct experiments on them, and deny them their basic human rights for the next 400 years, white people created a problem that only they can fix. It's time for white people to accept some of their own highly-vaunted personal responsibility and realize that it is time that they start treating black people as equals. Stop the oppression. Stop the injustice. Stop the discrimination. And absolutely stop clutching your pearls in righteous indignation any time any uppity Negro has the audacity to vent a legitimate beef with the man. Unfortunately, sometimes people need a little tough love to motivate them to do the right thing. You broke it, you fix it. Stop looking to Barack for the answer. Take a long, hard look at yourself.

As for Reverend Wright, I guess there's one good thing that has come out of decades of oppression, marginalization, and ostracism - some black people, as outsiders, have developed a truly unique objective perspective when it comes to critically assessing American culture. Wright is one of those people. When Reverend Wright related the biblical warning that violence begets violence, he was right. National Intelligence Estimates have shown that we are creating terrorists faster than we are eliminating them. Wright was right. Violence begets violence. And when Reverend Wright warned us of the biblical injunction against exacting vengeance on innocents, he was right. When we rounded up a posse/lynch mob to go after Bin Laden and al Zawahiri, we did not head east into the tribal regions of Pakistan to bring these callous killers to justice, but instead headed west into Iraq to exact our vengeance on 5 million innocent Iraqi citizens. Wright was right. We exacted our vengeance on innocents. Part of the personal responsibility required of white people includes the ability to listen to the truth and admit when we've been wrong. W.E.B. du Bois once said that the success of African Americans will be the truest test of the American experiment. If and when these oppressed peoples achieve equality, we've made it. Until we are able to hear the full meaning of a patriot like Reverend Wright, we simply have not realized our ideal. Time to pull yourself up by the bootstraps white people, you (also meaning I) have got a lot of personal work to do.

Sent by Ed Shoebridge | 4:24 PM ET | 05-10-2008