Tuesday, April 29, 2008

When Internal Polls Don't Jibe With Conventional Chatter

Some kind of internal polling alarm in the Obama camp is signaling a four-alarm conflagration. Why else would he begin to publicly disown his own pastor of twenty years, calling into question his recent statements, referring to them as “rants, not grounded in truth?” It’s not like the old statements he passively defended were “non-rants” and “based in the truth.”

One thing is becoming clear despite the allegedly smitten Obama-esque demeanors of the super delegates: The only person in the situation that doesn’t seem to be changing his opinions is the Rev. Jeremiah Wright. Like him or hate him, his ranting delusional myopias are consistently delivered and defended by him—unlike the man that has assented to his preaching for the last 20 years. The initial 5th amendment pleas, claims of ignorance, and surgical attempts to separate himself from the church that has galvanized his view of middle America are ringing hollow. And it seems Obama understands this, and is willing to sever permenantly his relationship with his pastor in the name of securing the Democratic nomination.

It would also seem that between the two, the only one with any measurable character of belief is also Rev. Wright—who seems less than thrilled that his apprentice now seems willing to throw him under the bus, as it becomes apparent that Obama’s phenomenal rise will have to ultimately be sustained by the updrafts of his own beliefs—and no one wants to elect someone with a backdrop as negative as the one Rev. Wright provides.

-R

3 comments:

aahrens said...

Ah, yes - I thought the same thing. Obama's response to Wright's latest rants reveal a great deal about who he really is.

Seems desperation has set in.

AA

chantell said...

As an Obama supporter, I am super uncool with Rev. Wright's new self-aggrandizing tour. But what I don't get is that Obama can't win for losing over this issue. If he mildly criticizes Wright as he did in his race speech, he's critiqued for not distancing himself enough. If takes a harder line and makes it even clearer that he repudiates Wright's remarks and that he's definitely distanced himself from the person, he's critiqued for throwing Wright under the bus. The Catch 22's of politics.

Ron Giesecke said...

My suspicion, and this is only my guessing of course is that he's taking continued heat for the lateness of the disavowal--to mean that doing so at the beginning would have had a greater impact on media interest than doing so now.

But . . . that's why I fond all of this so interesting. And you're right: Catch 22's indeed.

-R