Symbiosis: Rev. Wright and the Subversive Media
By: Erik Rush
Thereâ€™s not much point left to arguing whether the provocative vitriol purveyed by Trinity United Churchâ€™s former pastor Rev. Jeremiah Wright in his sermons was warranted, understandable, excusable or in any way accurate. This columnist and an increasing number of Americans believe Wrightâ€™s tirades were wholly inexcusable and thus by nature cannot be explained away, as many have attempted to do. One would no sooner argue with a Holocaust denier, as such excursions are folly.
Nor is there much profit in attempting to divine whether former Trinity congregant and likely Democrat presidential nominee Barack Obama subscribes to Wrightâ€™s philosophy or was ever exposed to Wrightâ€™s anti-American, racist rhetoric. Obama isnâ€™t going to disclose that without sufficient motivation, and it is difficult to imagine this occurring, as it would prove him a liar based upon what he has already declared. Only the most gullible or self-deceiving individual would believe the extent of Obamaâ€™s stated ignorance as regards Wrightâ€™s bigotry given the extent and length of their association.
As though it was a long-awaited pop-culture or rare event such as a Rolling Stones tour or a popeâ€™s visit, Jeremiah Wrightâ€™s PBS interview with far Left icon Bill Moyers on April 25 was promoted with nearly the same fanfare and (in this case, inordinate) hype. The probability is very high that few in America were especially eager to hear any more from Wright, even if it was a slightly more articulate, lower-volume version of his sermon fare peppered with subjective history and a healthy dose of propaganda.
The Moyers interview, which might have been called â€œThe Audacity of Wright,â€ was rather disgusting. Most of Moyersâ€™ on-camera time was spent gazing at the reverend with a strange, mooning stare; at times, it looked like he wanted to kiss him. For the most part, the reverend came off as a sincere if somewhat uncultured smoothie.
Wright covered a lot from his professional history, including his pastoral calling, hobnobbing with both the powerful and notorious of the â€˜Sixties era, and even his assault by a bigoted testosterone junkie in the Secret Service during the Johnson administration. Much of this was conveyed in calmly-delivered anecdotes.
At other junctures, Wright was spinning so fast he could barely be seen. His response to the controversy surrounding venomous statements made during his sermons was surrealistically subjective. His view of Americansâ€™ reaction to his radical rhetoric being â€œvery, very unsettlingâ€ was the height of audacity.
A white bigot of similar caliber (who would never have been given a comparable media forum, and rightly so) expressing surprise and vexation on the part of television viewers taking exception to his bigoted drivel would be deemed either a dishonest opportunist or a dull-normal.
Yes, itâ€™s unfortunate that Wright perverts scripture and extrapolates the Jesus message into a bludgeon for vile sociopolitical criticism. Yes, itâ€™s profoundly disturbing that an individual seeking the highest office in the land may subscribe to this message. And yes, itâ€™s troubling and dangerous that men like Wright use civil activism to enrich themselves while effectively disenfranchising â€œthose they would save.â€
Individuals such as Wright are what they are for a myriad of reasons. The real story now is how manifestly seditious members of the establishment press are in validating this perverse clown and those like him, providing a forum for them not only to lie and rationalize indefensible acts, but to widen the scope of their influence.
Americans must bear this in mind when the other controversial Obama associates who have been recently exposed are trotted out and validated by the press in the coming months ahead.
Erik Rush is a Staff Writer for the New Media Alliance, Inc. (www.thenma.org).