Letters to the Editor

• Response (and greater respect) to Joan from Kenkapkk part 2

  [Read the article: How much can John Edwards help Barack Obama?]
  [Read more letters about this article: Here]

  About Obama and Wright. First, I doubt that any affiliation with a black Pastor who in your words was "highly critical" of America, no matter how less content driven offensively (HIV, etc), from that traditon, would not have similarly been seized upon by the right as "Un American" and a reflection of Obama's patriotism, and most likely seized upon by Clinton herself in her desperation to win. After her sordid performance regarding William Ayers vis a vis Obama in the ABC debate, can you refute this assertion? Does it not matter that Clinton's former pastor-confidant during his administration came out in defense of Wright? Also, after watching Wright on Bill Moyers, to see the speech in its entire context changes completely the "God Damn America" phrase. In any of your columns on Wright, I saw no revealing of the feelings that were reflected in the letter (that a huge percentage of readers wouldn't see) nor an awareness to explore more fully what Wright meant and providing an *invitation* for discussion about it, rather than jumping on the CW of the problem it created for Obama. (The over the top HIV and other stuff is another matter.)

  Secondly. People are complex. Whatever political motivation drove Obama to that church, I believe there was a sincere connection regarding Wright's ability to mentor Obama spiritually in a highly positive manner. That's why initially I believe he would not distance himself from Wright. I usually find with important people in our life (like spouses for example), and particularly charismatic teachers,, we may find 70-80% authentic, good energy and 20-30% stuff we would rather let go of. Given Wright's 30-35 year career, the good he had done in the community (America was not what it is now 20 years ago-height of Reagan -Bush I with eight years recently of Bush II-far worse), and his own personal history, the meaningful mentoring, the warmth and essential goodness that came from the man probably caused Obama to pass over what he felt were the man's flaws and excesses. For those who believe Obama is a calculating fraud, his relationship with Wright and how he handled it demonstrates exactly the OPPOSITE. I have seen other commentators on TV who attended Trinity Church, some white, who were very upset at the media characterization of Wright. This is what I meant about the context, not only of Wright's career, but of his relationship with Obama.

  I have been through this personally. I belong to a non –denominationa, interfaith church who had at its center a very charismatic and significant minister for 17 years. His ability to create service-celebrations was unique and was a glue that held the community together. Yet in some ways he could be an extraordinarily emotionally disconnected person and had boundary problems. Eventually he retired amidst some contentiousness. So I can understand first hand the tensions between the enormous gifts one can offer a community and yet the struggle or difficulty with one's shadow side. *And you have to be there and in it to understand that dialectic.*

  Didn't Salon have to wrestle with these very issues in its defense of Bill Clinton during his administration and particularly during the impeachment process? Your or our "comfort level" with his shadow sexual piece was not the comfort level of many other Americans, whose feelings and fears were stoked by those seeking political advantage. Is there a mirror here?

  Finally, and this may seem over the top. The dissonance I feel and have felt very strongly with the clear, direct, open person in your letters and the biased, unbalanced, often disingenuous appearing writer of the column-and editor who helps choose what gets printed (my opinion-let others weigh in-with civility) in a strange way parallels Wright himself. The person Obama knew intimately may not have completely dovetailed with the public persona the preacher presented himself to be. How much Obama wrestled with it is unclear, but it was not (sic) a black or white issue for him.

  Although your styles (you and Wright) are completely different, I see similarities in this disparity.

  I would not have reacted so strongly to your columns if I had not been deeply dismayed, often offended by the consistent thread and vision you created that in my opinion departed from much of what I had felt Salon stood for. I am sorry for my own weaknesses in expressing that dismay in terms that were not of the best of my own, but apparently they got though.

  As I said, I don't think you are intellectually bereft. Quite the opposite. But I would like you, as apparently others, many others, also believe, to think through deeply this criticism and contemplate where it might apply and how it might serve the magazine more fully, if at all. Perhaps you do and have. I have not seen it reflected in the columns.

  Again I appreciate your courage in engagement with your readership.

  Permalink Saturday, May 17, 2008 10:59 AM