Why Oprah Winfrey Left Rev. Wright's Church

I think because of Wright's and Obama's backgrounds -mixed, mixed neighborhoods, exclusive, majority white schools, they both were using Trinity Church. Wright used his congregation (primarily Black) to advance his personal agendas, gain national status and build personal wealth. Obama was using it to build a political base. I don't think either are racist. Look at Wright, he's living in an exclusive, all white neighborhood and look how prominently race has played in Obama's victories. They both sound like users and both are disingenuous. Oprah didn't need the Church for personal gain.

But Winfrey also had spiritual reasons for the parting. In conversations at the time with a former business associate, who also asked for anonymity, Winfrey cited her fatigue with organized religion and a desire to be involved with a more inclusive ministry. In time, she found one: her own. "There is the Church of Oprah now," said her longtime friend, with a laugh. "She has her own following."

For a presidential candidate, not attending church isn't an option; we don't elect atheists in this country, and probably not even those whose attendance has lapsed. And he's already been accused of being a messianic figure with a cult-like following, so starting the "Church of Obama" probably wouldn't be politically prudent ;)

Shaun seeded an article earlier about Oprah's falling ratings and whether her association with Obama (and by extension Wright) has hurt her popularity. It seems as if her publicity people have been calling in a few media favors to further distance herself from the issue.

I completely agree. But it's an interesting situation. If Trinity United Church of Christ was "the place to be for any spiritually minded, up-wardly mobile African-American living in Chicago in the mid-1980s", was there really any other option as far as a church to attend for Obama?

Without support from the black community, could a young politician garner the local support necessary to begin to climb the ranks of local, state, and national politics, or would he simply be a very well-spoken city councilman somewhere with grand ideas?

Sometimes in order to get ahead, one has to play along.

Surely Trinity wasn't the only place to be for any spiritually minded, upwardly mobile African-American living in Chicago in the mid-l980s. Apparently Oprah found somewhere suitable to meet her spiritual needs. Does someone really have to go along in order to get ahead when the leader is promoting alienation rather than reconciliation?

For a presidential candidate, not attending church isn't an option; we don't elect atheists in this country, and probably not even those whose attendance has lapsed.

Infohack 3.3---That's an interesting point about just how regularly Obama attended Sunday services. I wonder how many photo ops we'll get of obama walking up to his TUCC church on Sundays to celebrate services? He's told us repeatedly that he was never in the pews when Rev Wright spewed his vitriol.....and I wouldn't put it past that Pastor to eventually come out with the hard evidence that in fact Obama was being less than honest about that. And PS ---if Oprah's ratings have been down since the big spectacle of her endorsing Obama then I SAY HURRAH.....I wish celebrities would not use their celebrity to sway voters. It really irritates me.....and it shows a lack of respect for the other half of her viewers who may just be supporters of the other party.

fromthesouth, it sounds from the article as if she simply stopped attending, rather than changed churches.

lisaed, the way it works at the church I attended growing up (Presbyterian), is that the church belongs to the congregation, not the pastor. There have been at least four or five pastors that I can think of, some better than others, one that was so bad that church attendance was down severely. But the church, which is really the group of people who come together and attend services, is still standing. People like my grandmother would never allow themselves to be driven out by a minister they didn't like.

As I said, for an aspiring young politician, simply not attending was not an option, and to leave the church means leaving the entire congregation, the friendships, memories and sense of community. Not simply the pastor and the place of worship.

I wish celebrities would not use their celebrity to sway voters

How dare she have an opinion. The nerve. I bet if she loudly supported Rudy, you wouldn't say a word.

TJG - au contraire ---I was among those who stood up and yelled that Huckabee was overusing Chuck Norris as well.

Sometimes in order to get ahead, one has to play along.

That's one of the themes of Sunday's NY Times profile of Obama. It *totally* skips how Obama "got" the nomination for state Senate -- by throwing all his competition under the bus with a technical (legal) challenge.

Obama positions himself as not-politics-as-usual .... but his political planning/action IS politics as usual. That's one of the more frustrating things about his campaign for me.

Why thank you. :)

and that is THE question that will remain in the back of voters a small group of voters' minds.

Fixed it. People know that there are bigger issues.

I think his tacit approval of Rev. Wright and his messages are indicative of how he might respond to the bigger issues. That's why it becomes important.

So he'll respond by standing by something he's been associated with for 20 years?

Where's the issue?

So he'll respond by standing by something he's been associated with for 20 years?

news flash: he disowned that association last week. AND Rev. Wright to the NYT in the summer of 2007 that Obama might have to publicly disassociated himself.

If Oprah could figure it out, shouldn't a presidential candidate be able to fathom the controversy an association with Wright might cause.

Precisely. We're left deciding whether Obama is a fool or a liar.

If Oprah could figure it out, shouldn't a presidential candidate be able to fathom the controversy an association with Wright might cause.

i guess i dont get what people expect from obama in this case. if he had denounced wright earlier, would that have made it better? if he had gone out of his way to denounce him before the comments hit the internet, would that have made it better?

i dont agree with everything my boss says. i didnt agree with everything all my teachers and profs said - if i ran for president, would i have to go back through all of my college courses to make sure nobody said something that i might have to worry about? will people wonder why i didnt leave the church when the priest said something stupid about global politics?

lets look at it differently - if we assume obama to be smart - and i think there is plenty of evidence to demonstrate that, then we can logically say, at least for the sake of argument, that he made a conscious decision to stay in the church even though he may have disagreed with one or two or three or four things that his pastor said during his 30+ year tenure at the parish. which leaves us with - what would have been good reasons to stay? and for that i go back to all of the good, great things that the church did on behalf of the community, the faith, and the tradition of the prophetic black church in america.

we're isolating rev wright now because he had the unfortunate experience of having a couple of his sermons clipped to youtube. but obama has lots of friends and knows lots of people. if we - any of us - went thru life denouncing our friends every time they did something stupid, nobody would have any friends left.

The same popularity principles apply to any public figure. The marketing and publicity campaign principles remain the same.

ok, but they are famous for different reasons. the life of a movie star exists separate of that person's body of work. but the life of a politician is part of his everyday behavior. and following tom cruise around with a camera and a tape recorder is a curiosity but it has nothing to do with his acting. but when we start judging our supposed "leaders" against the same gossipy nonsense that surfaces when we follow around our actors and musicians, then we have a problem. it's one thing to follow it - it's quite another to prioritize those things ahead of, and in doing so, excluding, the actual real things that our leaders are supposed to be doing - setting policy and standing up for the constitution.

if we're going to attack people for what their pastors say, then i think it makes more sense to criticize them for things like: literal interpretations of the bible or fanatic belief in imaginary friends. saying that US foreign policy had something to do with 9/11 is a truth - a fact, a reality. the "god damn america" stuff is entirely misinterpreted and taken out of context. how was obama supposed to know that people were going to completely skew what wright said into something he didnt mean and intentions he didnt have?

i just really dont understand what people wanted obama to do. and saying that oprah freaking winfrey did something does absolutely not make it something that all people must have done. what a person does in regards to their faith, the practice of that faith, and the relationships in their personal lives, is unrelated to their job. it doesnt matter if obama were to, say, seek advice or counsel from wright, even as president. what matters is what his policy would be. what are people so afraid of? what do people think obama is going to do as president, as a result of what wright said in a couple of sermons? i dont get it.

Firsty your being too logical.

Political campaigning is more like entertaining. It's a popularity contest. I bet if Obama were ugly he would not have made it this far, too.

well, yeah, ok. but then we're not talking about the same thing.

The answer to what Obama would do as president as a result of what wright says is an unknown.

That's the problem. People routinely fear the unknown. It's a survival mechanism.

yep - and it's pretty obvious to me that what "people" are fearing has a dangerous racist aspect to it. what "they" fear is the angry black man. and the "they" is the "average" white american. obama is not the first candidate who has had to deal with something like this, but it's hitting him harder than most. and it's because he's black and, more specifically, the "black" that he represents to "average" white america needs to be as benign as possible. and with rev wright, it's not benign. so again, i ask - what do people fear - what could happen with obama's policies based on what wright has said. we're not saying, are we, that based on what rev wright said obama is likely to bomb iran, are we? we're not saying that, because of what wright said, obama is going to overhaul the department of interior, are we? lets get specific about what we fear is going to happen with obama's policies because of something a person entirely unrelated to his campaign or his potential presidency has said - and bear in mind, he didnt say that much that is so "offensive." again - most of what he said was misinterpreted - and obviously so, to anyone who's bothered to listen to the whole thing.

Wright did not help Obama. We haven't heard a peep out of him since his last debacle, either. Why? Likely his church members are pressuring him to keep quiet.

he's no longer the pastor.

Are the little things he has done such as not wearing a pin, not saluting the flag,and his wife's comments, etc. passive aggressive agreement with Wright? Who knows, but I do think he has been impacted by Wright over the years.

Firsty - you stated that Wright was unfortunate enough to have it on You Tube - does that mean his comments are okay, it's just he got caught?

If a candidate's wearing of a pin is the end all, be all for your choice in who to vote for, you get the government you deserve.

does that mean his comments are okay, it's just he got caught?

care to be specific about which comments you're implying he "got caught" saying? i've heard that he "spewed hate," for example, but without any explanation of how he did that, or what kind of hate it is, or to whom it's directed.

Are the little things he has done such as not wearing a pin, not saluting the flag,and his wife's comments, etc. passive aggressive agreement with Wright? Who knows, but I do think he has been impacted by Wright over the years.

again - what is the fear? is your argument seriously that because of what wright said (not that anyone is actually explaining precisely what he said that is causing all of this - "what he said" is just as vague as this "fear of the unknown"), obama might do outlandishly crazy things? like what? like anything? like, we dont know what horrible things he might be capable of doing because he didnt walk out on rev wright?

draw the line - explain the source of your fear and then justify the fears themselves. we dont know what any of these candidates would do if elected. you're implying that wright's comments are likely (or likely enough) to cause obama to do something that you dont want him to do, but i dont see how anyone has adequately explained just what they think obama will do or how exactly they think wright's influence could possibly manifest itself in a distasteful decision or policy plan made by obama.

lets say this - lets say for the sake of argument that when rev wright said, "god damn america," he was asking god to condemn america (he wasnt, but lets just say, in an attempt to justify these vague unnamed "fears," that thats what he was saying). how exactly do we fear that that is going to influence obama? do we think that obama is going to ask congress to pass a non-binding resolution demanding that god condemn america?

or is it that we think that obama hates america because rev wright asked god to condemn it? so then the argument would be - obama isnt right for the presidency because he hates america. is that what we're saying?

or is is that we think that since obama either hates america or would like god to condemn it (which i guess would mean that we would have some plagues to deal with - flooding, locusts, etc.), he's going to sabotage the nation from the inside? like, he's an enemy of the state who happens to be running for president but when he gets to the oval office he's going to unleash plots and schemes like a mad scientist bent on world domination?

and he doesnt wear a flag pin - so that means, what - he's going to take down all the american flags from the white house? or he's going to work to undermine veteran benefits or health care? or he's going to demand that you dont get to wear a flag pin? maybe he has a problem with putting holes in his sports jackets. so maybe we're frightened that he cares more about sports jackets than about the flag?

i really have a hard time finding a rational justification for this panic. i challenge anyone to take this from A to Z - explain precisely what wright said in those sermons that obama should have found unacceptable, and why, and then explain how what he said, in the absence of what you think obama should have done, is going to impact obama as president. otherwise we're just saying, "i dont like what that guy said, and i'm pissed off that this guy didnt 'do anything' about it, at least not to my satisfaction, and therefore this guy is unqualified to be president." — without saying what "unqualified" even means. that sounds more to be like an irrational fear, or like holding a stupid, irrational grudge.

or, what i really think, what it sounds like is a bunch of indignant, bitter, affirmative-action hating, welfare hating, bigoted white people are using whatever is available to them to discredit barack obama. i would really rather not believe that, but in the absence of a better explanation, which i eagerly and urgently await (because i dont like the idea that there might be so many racists out there), it's the only logical conclusion i can draw. but, again, i'm actually begging for a better explanation. i would simply like it to make sense, thats all.

Politicians are entertainers with a twist. ;-)

That was classic!

Unfortunately, too true. :-/

What does that say about our culture?

If Oprah could figure it out, shouldn't a presidential candidate be able to fathom the controversy an association with Wright might cause.

But HE DID! So Did Wright!

--- color me so frustrated with media that I could spit ---

Wright told the NYT the the **summer of 2007** that Obama might have to disassociate himself from Wright. Wright knew it. Obama knew it.

I'm almost convinced that last week's public shenanigans by Wright and then Obama were orchestrated.

Wright did not help Obama. We haven't heard a peep out of him since his last debacle, either. Why? Likely his church members are pressuring him to keep quiet.

No, they're building him a $1.6 million home. In a gated community in Chicago.

In my more cynical moments, I might add.

On a personal note, if I were at a church and heard multiple sermons like the ones in question, I would leave the church for several reasons. For one, my kids would be sitting next to me, and that language goes totally against "the message" we want them to embrace. Also, it's one thing to dismiss an insensitive/racist/anti-gay comment as someone "having a bad day" or "getting carried away" but in a setting like a church, multiple comments become collective thoughts which can permeate a staff and congregation. Just my opinion. I attend a Baptist church in a conservative, growing, mostly white middle class suburb of Dallas.

it's not a minor point to acknowledge here that while your opinion about the "sermons in question" (i'm still not hearing exactly what the problem was) is entirely valid, as is your thoughts on what you would do in that situation, the fact is, the sermon was delivered to an audience who would probably have issues with some of the things that your church says.

lost in the translation, as it were, in this whole madness, is that if what rev wright said is surprising or offensive to a person, then that is due in large part to the fact that that person lacks the context necessary to appreciate and even understand the comments themselves. this has more to do with a clash of cultures than with patently offensive remarks.

You mean people actually listen to the sermons? On the admittedly rare occasion I attend church, I spend my time daydreaming and looking at my watch ;)

Kidding aside, this is an excellent point:

Even if he had, though, I think the press would have picked up on his leaving and pressed for a reason on why he left, and we'd still be hearing about Rev. Wright.

I personally don't believe listening to a public speaker, whether in church or in a lecture hall, is automatically an endorsement of their views, and nothing Obama has said himself leads me to believe that he holds the same opinions.

I have to admit, in seeing clips of Wright from the National Press Club, the guy is pretty entertaining. Perhaps that is a good deal of the reason for his popularity within the church.

I see your point, firsty. It's amazing how many culture clashes have surfaced since this election process began, isn't it?