For what it's worth, Barack Obama dropped seven points in yesterday's Rasmussen tracking poll that matches him against Hillary Clinton. Rasmussen calls last night's sample "very favorable for Clinton." Although we don't know exactly how favorable, simple math says Clinton beat Obama by a lot last night - well into double digits. It would seem a reasonable supposition that Obama's internal polls showed some similarly disquieting data, and those numbers triggered Obama's sprint around the media last night.
How much damage the Meshugenah Minister scandal will do to Obama remains anyone's guess. Hey, it's possible that by this time next week, the talk will have completely shifted to another topic. Then again, that other topic may be Michelle Obama's rhetoric which bears uncomfortable America-bashing similarities to Reverend Wright's, or why exactly the Obamas depended on the financial help of a Chicago political fixer to buy their dream home in a year in which they netted a cool $1.6 million in combined income.
The reactions from the left regarding Obama's association with Reverend Wright have been interesting. Let me share a few. (The following excerpts are long, so if you decide to just skim them, I'll understand.)
Over at Open Left, the leading light of the liberal blogosphere, Matt Stoller, decried the "swiftboating" of Obama but then unsympathetically suggested that Obama brought it upon himself because he's "not a part of any progressive fights, so there's no independent organizing going on on his behalf from people who actually understand the right-wing media and how it operates."
At The American Prospect, Ezra Klein let loose the following jeremiad:
"Does anyone believe a long association with Jerry Falwell's church would have done anything but help McCain in the Republican primary, and gotten Democrats tagged as anti-religion when they tried to point out Falwell's nuttiness in the general? It's fine to be a Christian extremist in America. It's fine to believe, and say publicly, that everyone who hasn't accepted Jesus Christ into their heart will roast in eternal hellfire, fine to believe that the homosexuals caused Hurricane Katrina and the feminists contributed to 9/11, fine to believe we must support Israel so the Jews can be largely annihilated in a war that will trigger the End Times, fine to believe we're in a holy battle with the barbaric hordes of Islam, fine to believe that we went to the Middle East to prove 'our God is bigger than your God.' What you can't believe is that blacks have suffered a long history of oppression in this country, that they're still face deep institutional discrimination, and that a country where 100 percent of the presidents have been rich white guys is actually run by rich white guys. More to the point, even if you do believe those things, you certainly can't be angry about it!"
At the Daily Kos, Jennifer Bruenjes (who blogs under the name "Scout Finch") whiffs the fetid stench of a media double standard:
"Without weighing in on whether or not the content of Reverend Jeremiah Wright's sermons should be denounced by Barack Obama, I do find one aspect of this story quite troubling. We have now seen more sermons from Barack Obama's minister in 48 hours than we ever did of Mike Huckabee ---- and Mike Huckabee was a presidential candidate for 14 long months. Why is it acceptable to scour every last sermon given by Wright, but only weeks ago we weren't allowed to see or read Mike Huckabee's sermons? In fact, not only was it totally ignored by the traditional media, but the few times the question of Huckabee's sermons was raised, it was brushed aside as inappropriate."
Ms. Bruenjes/Finch and Young Mr. Klein don't quite have their facts straight. People who followed the Republican primary fight spent weeks discussing the phrase "servant leadership." Nevertheless, if indeed Governor Huckabee gave a sermon with "God Damn America" as its exclamation point, I will concede the Kossack has a point. Regarding Klein's rant, does anyone outside the far left echo chamber really think a Jerry Falwell parishioner would have a great shot at the presidency? Even on the Republican side, such a relationship would be as much a debit as an asset as the fate of many campaigns (such as Pat Robertson's) attest. And in a general election, a Falwell disciple would have even greater problems.
Beyond these areas of factual confusion, all three essays on the topic bear a striking similarity - none of them even attempt to grapple with what potential Obama supporters might find disquieting about the candidate's relationship with Wright. Actually, it's worse than that. All three essays take as a jumping off point that if you're concerned about this relationship, you're a schmuck.
This is of course the classic Progressive method of argument - insult someone you disagree with until they come around. It doesn't often succeed, but you have to admire their perverse doggedness in relying on such a strategy at such an hour of peril.
Regarding the merits of the Obama/Wright relationship, here's the current state of play: Obama claims to have found Wright's currently controversial statements offensive. Now, you'll have to forgive the vagueness of the term "found," because we don't know exactly when Reverend Wright's greatest hits reached Obama. Nevertheless, we can assume that the Rolling Stone portrait of Reverend Wright from February 2007 popped up on the Obama campaign's radar. A relevant passage:
Fact number one: We've got more black men in prison than there are in college. Fact number two: Racism is how this country was founded and how this country is still run! We are deeply involved in the importing of drugs, the exporting of guns and the training of professional KILLERS. . . . We believe in white supremacy and black inferiority and believe it more than we believe in God. . . . We conducted radiation experiments on our own people. . . . We care nothing about human life if the ends justify the means! And. And. And! GAWD! Has GOT! To be SICK! OF THIS SHIT!"
And yet Obama didn't break ties with Wright until last night, thirteen months after this story debuted, declaring his profound offense over these remarks in the process yesterday as he toured the media.
As a thought experiment, suppose I had a regular golf game with actor/director Mel Gibson. And suppose I claimed to not be aware that he occasionally called female police officers "Sugar Tits" and engaged in public rants regarding how Jews started all the wars in the world. Let's say that I professed to be gravely offended by these acts. But let's say I kept our regular golf game running for another year. Reasonable, skeptical people might wonder precisely how offended I really was.
Likewise, reasonable people will have serious questions and questions about Barack Obama's relationship with his minister. It's a measure of how knotty this issue is that many Obama supporters refuse to seriously engage the issue, and instead belittle those who find it disquieting.
One final note - the alarming results Obama had in last night's Rasmussen tracking poll came from likely Democratic voters. As much as the left might wish otherwise, many of their own obviously find the Obama/Wright relationship cause for concern.
