Law School Discussion

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - blk_reign

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 ... 784
How Reverend Wright was wronged

Rev. Wright's words were twisted by the media to portray him as a crackpotRev. Wright's words were twisted by the media to portray him as a crackpot

LAST WEEK, the three cops who murdered Sean Bell in a hail of 50 bullets on the night before he was to be married were acquitted of all charges. The media, led by the New York Times, called on everyone to respect the verdict. The Times even lectured, "Anger and disappointment are understandable now, but New York's leadership has changed, and community activists need to absorb that fact before they attempt to heat up reaction."

Barack Obama had a similar message when he was asked for his reaction to the shocking verdict.

The senator responded, "Well, look, obviously there was a tragedy in New York. I said at the time, without benefit of all the facts before me, that it looked like a possible case of excessive force. The judge has made his ruling, and we're a nation of laws, so we respect the verdict that came down."

"The most important thing for people who are concerned about that shooting is to figure out how do we come together and assure those kinds of tragedies don't happen again," he continued. "Resorting to violence to express displeasure over a verdict is something that is completely unacceptable and counterproductive."

Politicians and pundits were wringing their hands out of fear that Black outrage over another case of the NYPD getting away with murder might tumble into angry protests and put race back at the center of the presidential campaign.

But days later, the corporate media did just that in their hysterical coverage of several public appearances by Obama's former pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright.

While the acquittal of Sean Bell's lynch mob was greeted with pleas for calm and reflection, Jeremiah Wright got front-paged from coast to coast, and dominated the national news for days. Even Obama, who in a speech on race in March had mildly admonished Wright, called a press conference to attack Wright's "rant" as "appalling and offensive."

The New York Times denounced Wright as "racist" and "paranoid." Liberal Times columnist Bob Herbert, an African American, piled on, calling Wright a "narcissist." Even Chicago Sun-Times film critic Richard Roeper got to chime in, sneering at Wright for "soaking up his 15 minutes of fame."

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

WHAT EXACTLY did Wright say to cause such a crazed reaction, anyway?

After more than a month of media denunciations and racist abuse, Wright came out swinging. He framed the attacks against him as an attack on the Black church and Black religiosity, pointing to a long list of Black religious figures targeted for media and state vitriol--among them, Martin Luther King Jr. and Malcolm X.

Moreover, Wright continued to challenge the hypocrisy of the U.S. government. He talked about U.S. support for the apartheid regime in South Africa and for the murderous right-wing contras in Nicaragua in the 1980s; he complained about the U.S. government spending billions on the war in Iraq while people are going hungry in the U.S.; he decried the U.S. sending 4,000 "boys and girls to die for a lie"; and he denounced unfair sentencing in drug cases that has resulted in 1 million African Americans being imprisoned.

Media pundits picked out two portions of the question-and-answer segment of his appearance at the National Press Club as the basis for declaring that Wright is racist and paranoid.

First, Wright refused to attack Louis Farrakhan, saying, "Louis Farrakhan is not my enemy. He did not put me in chains. He did not put me in slavery. And he didn't make me this color."

Second, while the Times claimed Wright accused the U.S. government of creating AIDS, what he actually said was more damning:

    Based on this Tuskegee experiment and based on what has happened to Africans in this country, I believe our government is capable of doing anything. In fact, in fact, in fact, one of the--one of the responses to what Saddam Hussein had in terms of biological warfare was a non-question, because all we had to do was check the sales records. We sold him those biological weapons that he was using against his own people. So any time a government can put together biological warfare to kill people, and then get angry when those people use what we sold them, yes, I believe we are capable.

Finally, Wright refused to back away from statements comparing Israeli treatment of Palestinians as apartheid--as former President Jimmy Carter has, and anti-apartheid leader Desmond Tutu as well.

Of course, the media are incapable of engaging and debating Wright's ideas. Instead, like petulant brats, they resort to name-calling.

there's 1 poster.. i just hit him up..

Black Law Student Discussion Board / Re: MJ OR KOBE?
« on: May 01, 2008, 05:16:12 PM »
how naive do u think i am? good lord.. i'm well aware of when b ball players were admitted str8 from hs.. and i know bryant was the first guard admitted... it isn't "natural" for  them to be misguided..but i already know that you can't handle that debate so i'll keep it light for the sake of this bs thread..

It wasnt until the 90's that players started entering the draft straight out of high school. So it's only natural for these young males to be misguided. They were basically boys taking on a man's role. Many of them were 17 coming into the NBA. Therefore they had no education and poor guidance. I agree, the 80's cats were better role models. The new role prohibits them from leaving straight out of high school. But every era has it's bad guys....

this is a joke btw for the sensitive lol..

brooke could have passed if he wanted to.. now if she was having an affair with a wesley snipes looking cat.. then it'd be newsworthy   :P

Black Law Student Discussion Board / Re: MJ OR KOBE?
« on: May 01, 2008, 04:11:31 PM »
hmm just wondering.. in contrast to the players of the 80s and 90s..which set of players had more education? which players spoke more articulately thus inspiring young boys both on and off the court?

and hands down the players of the 80s and 90s outshine these new cats anyday.. kobe is definitely a beast on the court..i'll give him that.. but he couldn't outshine jordan in his prime... jordan knew what it was like to be part of a team...

these days it's whatever team v bryant.. period..

my argument was never that Obama wanted to be politically expedient (a point he's brow beating now btw lol).. rather he did exactly what he had to do in order to garner "confused" (insert eye roll  ::) ) white voters in the "easiest" way possible for him...easy of course is subjective as there's clearly backlash from the amount of time he took to do so..however had he taken the stance that the majority of the members of the church feel..he'd supposedly run the risk of kissing his campaign goodbye.. in other words he's playing the game that he has to play right now.. does that mean he agrees with the comments in question? of course not.. that's never been my argument.. i'm not Obama and i don't know what's running through his head.. but i do know that what he's done is contradict earlier comments regarding this matter.. and to me that's almost as bad as "mis-speaking" about Bosnia... it calls one's character into question and in turn validates every single question that has been posted regarding "why did u stay in 'that' church for 20 yrs... by siding with the media spin on the matter he in turn sells himself out for the sake of voters.. which goes back to the questions i posed originally to cui (who's yet to answer) about Americans being unable to make their own decisions while falling for the okedoke that the left and right are trying to create Obama = Wright.. and that's a gross misconception...

personally i'd much rather hear Michelle speak at this point.. her brutal honesty is something that her husband can take notes on..

now.. let me point out that you've proven Wright's point in that Obama has said what he's had to say for political reasons.. he never said that Obama didn't believe what he said per se.. but he has called it for what it is..

Not to bring this back up, but I was away most of yesterday and never got a chance to respond to black reign (i love that name by the way)  I don't agree with you at all here, simply because if Obama wanted to be politically expedient, he could have cut the cord with Rev. Wright back in March when the controversy first started. He's never shown an inclination to lean towards expediency. He could have sided with McCain and Hillary's backing of suspending the fuel excise tax, but he didn't at a time when gas is damn near 4 bucks a gallon. That surely would have been the easy way out. Obama already showed his loyalty to the Rev, unfortunately the Rev didn't reciprocate.

Black Law Student Discussion Board / Re: MJ OR KOBE?
« on: April 30, 2008, 02:29:13 PM »
of all of the things that are going on right now in the world.. you make your return post about sports.. how surprising...


He should have left “what Obama stuff out?” he was asked a question and he responded in kind..  u still haven’t told me what a “man of God” is supposed to do.. esp when he receives death threats.. bomb threats @ the church he built.. invasion of privacy by broadcasting the location and aerial views of his home on television..  obama hasn’t been thrown under a bus.. wright didn’t lie.. obama did what he supposedly had to do in order to garner the security of those supposed scared white voters.. big bad black man scary u know… racist bigot preacher yada yada.. I know what obama did on march 18th.. I heard the speech like everyone else..that has nothing to do with yesterday..

So what do u think Wright is gaining from this since u’re saying he’s getting personal gain.. what say you ? as for “preaching in this manner’.. Wright’s sermons have aired on TVOne every Sunday morning for the past two yrs.. he’s been interviewed on nightline yrs ago.. and he’s done magazine interviews through the yrs.. and as I said before he’s always spoken on a regular basis at various functions.. so what’s new?

have you ever been to a black church? Notice on Bill Moyer, Wright spoke differently than he did at the two religious events on CSPAN. It's not arrogance.

and why now? better now than in November.

& even better after Obama takes it.  Not that it will make a significant diff. 
Of course I've been to a black church. I go to a black church, Baptist.  I understand the argument (yes the mainstream absolutely doesn’t get the black church but I think it’s both an attack on him and the black church but MORESO an attack on him)but I do think his speeches…well…particularly the Q & A session came across extremely arrogant even though the questions were dumb as hell at times.  It was moreso his demeanor than anything he said. 

But come on, he threw Obama under a bus for personal gain.  And he put Obama in a tight spot.  No matter what Obama said both sides of this debate would be unhappy.

Preaching?  Is that really what he’s doing now? One thing about that  still irks me.  Would he be preaching in this manner (you know on Bill Moyers, throwing Obama under a bus, etc.)  had it not been for the media attack?  If not, he should just go on as he would have normally.

cui.. i found out some more info about the recent appearance... the "timing" behind the press club event had nothing to do with Wright.. it's an annual event that he speaks at every yr.. the Samuel Dewitt Proctor Conference (where he also serves on the Board of Directors).. in fact Obama spoke at the conference in 06.. the difference now is that there was a lot of media coverage because they knew that Wright would be there.. he didn't call a press conference to "make it about him".. this is a conference among  preachers and leaders

so the reality of this situation is that the only "event" that Wright actually scheduled surrounding his bad press is the Moyer's interview...

Good stuff, thanks.   :)

It is not just that though.  He should have left that Obama stuff out. And with some of those questions I’d expect some people may be flippant HOWEVER, I’d expect a man of God to kind of rise above that- that’s what I meant by saying that.  But for his flippant demeanor, throwing Obama a bit under the bus, using this as the subject matter several times in a matter of days EVEN if the event was previously scheduled, I think I’d be more ‘on his side’.  On March 18 in Philly, Obama denounced the comments Wright had made but not him

And the media’s messin’ up again: WTF is up with calling it a “divorce”.  And WTF is up with all of the newspaper headlines “fury”.  The Obama I saw was frustrated but “a fury”?

Pages: 1 2 3 [4] 5 6 7 8 9 ... 784