Talk:Jeremiah Wright/Archive 3

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This is an archive of past discussions. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page.

protection

I've semi-protected the page again... should cover the page through the Democratic convention. This should limit possible vandalism, but please try to discuss changes here before we get into another round of edit warring that might result in full protection.Balloonman (talk) 21:29, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

• Ooops! I knew there was something to be done when that round of full protection was lapsed! Betcha a few dimes that it ends up protected sooner than later... --jpgordon^∇∆∇∆ 22:31, 3 April 2008 (UTC)
• Yeah, I was on my way here to re-semi protect it, but it looks like someone got here first. Lets hope full protection will not be needed again. Tiptoety ^talk 23:33, 3 April 2008 (UTC)

Kurtz

The text,

Stanley Kurtz, adjunct fellow of the Hudson Institute and fellow of the Hoover Institution, has made the following satirical comments about Wright's sermons: "In short, from the standpoint of deconstruction and postcolonial theory (and only from that standpoint), Wright’s remarks are undisturbing, and in fact most welcome. Since the most eminent universities in the United States have consistently these discourses it follows that (unless you’ve got a problem with deconstruction or postcolonial theory — and how could you possibly?) Wright is to be commended."[1]

is a very poor addition. Kurtz admits he has created a straw man ("OK, I’ve been tweaking actual deconstructionist and post-colonial texts, and adding some "original" analysis of my own, to fit the Wright affair."). The piece is principally his rant against his (mis-)understandings about major deconstructionist and post-colonial thinkers.

CyberAnth (talk) 01:58, 4 April 2008 (UTC)

NAACP speech

Is there a source with a transcript of the speech? I remember Wright saying some things that might be applicable to his biography, but I would like to have them well-sourced first. TheslB (talk) 04:36, 28 April 2008 (UTC)

CNN has a transcript here. —Josiah Rowe (talk • contribs) 00:37, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Thanks. TheslB (talk) 04:49, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Wright Jealous of Obama

A theory is emerging that Wright is trying to sabotage Obama's candidacy out of jealousy. foxnews. Muntuwandi (talk) 04:41, 29 April 2008 (UTC)

Trip to Libya - source for quote

Can somebody provide a source for the quote about "Jewish support drying up like a snow ball in hell". The current citation does not include that. Thank you. --nyc171 (talk) 13:51, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

The quote is from Jodi Kantor's March 6, 2007 New York Times article Disinvitation by Obama Is Criticized:

“When his enemies find out that in 1984 I went to Tripoli” to visit Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi, Mr. Wright recalled, “with Farrakhan, a lot of his Jewish support will dry up quicker than a snowball in hell.” Mr. Wright added that his trip implied no endorsement of either Louis Farrakhan’s views or Qaddafi’s.

Reverend Wright wrote a letter soon thereafter disputing Kantor's reporting on him. Text of Letter from Wright to the New York Times on March 11, 2007. TheslB (talk) 14:10, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Well during the debate, they asked him about it, and they mentioned the quote and he didn't dispute it. You would think that a quote so egregious would ring off in someone's mind if he knew the person didn't say it. Barack Obama didn't see a light bulb appear above his head, not to mention, it was being asked by debate moderators, who wouldn't just make up a quote like that.Tallicfan20 (talk) 14:54, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Reverend Wright, the subject of the article, did dispute Kantor's reporting, calling it "one of the biggest misrepresentations of the truth I have ever seen in sixty-five years." Furthermore, Obama was not asked whether the quote was accurate. He was asked about Jewish-American support and he answered:

Tim, I have some of the strongest support from the Jewish community in my hometown of Chicago and in this presidential campaign. And the reason is because I have been a stalwart friend of Israel's. I think they are one of our most important allies in the region, and I think that their security is sacrosanct, and that the United States is in a special relationship with them, as is true with my relationship with the Jewish community.

And the reason that I have such strong support is because they know that not only would I not tolerate anti-Semitism in any form, but also because of the fact that what I want to do is rebuild what I consider to be a historic relationship between the African-American community and the Jewish community.

You know, I would not be sitting here were it not for a whole host of Jewish Americans, who supported the civil rights movement and helped to ensure that justice was served in the South. And that coalition has frayed over time around a whole host of issues, and part of my task in this process is making sure that those lines of communication and understanding are reopened.

But, you know, the reason that I have such strong support in the Jewish community and have historically -- it was true in my U.S. Senate campaign and it's true in this presidency -- is because the people who know me best know that I consistently have not only befriended the Jewish community, not only have I been strong on Israel, but, more importantly, I've been willing to speak out even when it is not comfortable.

When I was -- just last point I would make -- when I was giving -- had the honor of giving a sermon at Ebenezer Baptist Church in conjunction with Martin Luther King's birthday in front of a large African-American audience, I specifically spoke out against anti- Semitism within the African-American community. And that's what gives people confidence that I will continue to do that when I'm president of the United States.

TheslB (talk) 15:15, 2 May 2008 (UTC)

Letter of thanks RE: Johnson

The letter superimposed on the Johnson hospital picture is a letter of thanks. It is not, nor does it state, that it is a commendation. There is really nothing more to it.Jombl (talk) 01:52, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Here is a military letter of commendation:[2] Jombl (talk) 02:02, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Jeremiah Wright (second from right, behind I.V. pole), in 1966, as a U.S. Navy Hospital Corpsman. He is tending to President Lyndon Johnson, for which he was commended (see letter superimposed on photo).

Please review the biography we have already discussed:

During 1965 and 1966, [Wright] was awarded with three Presidential Commendations from President Lyndon B. Johnson.

And the HistoryMakers's biography:

Wright is the recipient of numerous awards, including three honorary doctorates and three presidential commendations.

I also see you changed the sourced language on Jeremiah Wright's letters of commendation from the body of the article earlier (and despite our discussion above also removed valedictorian). The photo as it appeared before your recent changes is on the right. Please stop altering the caption to remove the term commended. TheslB (talk) 04:20, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

Kari Bethel is not a Reliable Source, the source you link to is signed by her, the second part of it is a Wiki reprint. The letter is a clear letter of thanks it does not "Commend". I have already posted a copy of what a military letter of commendation looks like in the first paragraph in this section. What possible basis do you have for mischaracterizing the clearly written text from the note superimposed on the photo? "Three" presidential commendations is not a proper foundation - especially when we have one here and it is clearly a letter of thanks and not a commendation. What or where are the other two? It looks like the entire claim comes from Wiki and was based upon the op-ed piece discussed earlier.Jombl (talk) 14:29, 7 May 2008 (UTC)