His answer was an honest one: He wasn't offended or surprised at Obama's actions but said, "He's a politician, I'm a pastor, we speak to two different audiences." This shouldn't be debatable, as every politician must remember that in order to succeed they have to appeal to a wide variety of voters and avoid controversy when possible. But political analysts are saying that Wright's statements were as good as throwing Obama under the bus at a crucial time, and that Obama's campaign is "pulling their hair out" at the remarks. Well, yeah, now they are, thanks to those who have "analyzed" these statements and interpreted them as bad for Obama.
After watching a bit of the interview that leaked onto the Internet, I thought it was clear Rev. Wright was not using the word politician to carry negative connotations. He was very soft-spoken throughout the interview, and it seemed as though he was trying to explain why he didn't take Obama's speech it personally because it was a political move. But it seems it doesn't matter what he meant, rather what they interpret it to mean. This is getting very tiring. I have a feeling Rev. Wrights recent comments are going to be splashed all around by Obama's opposition and the vicious cylce will start all over again not because of what Rev. Wright said, but the fact that he said anything at all. No matter what he said it was bound to be spun every which way. Maybe it would have been better if he avoided the limelight for a while longer just for those reasons alone.But in case it's not clear already, Obama is a politician, just like Clinton and McCain, and has to pay attention to his words and acts at all times, especially these days. If Obama did not in some way remove himself from those statements he would have been cornered, as a politician. And so he what he had to do, because in fact, as Rev. Wright was quick to say in the very same interview, he never associated himself with those statements in the first place.
0 comments:
Post a Comment