Skeptical Brotha posts both the recent NY Times article on Sen. Obama’s church and pastor (turning even more non-issues into “Issues” and “Controversy”) and Rev. Wright’s subsequent response to the reporter. A little background…

For months now, a former worker for Alan Keyes for Senate (Illinois edition) and all-around go-to conservative uber-activist by the name of Fran Eaton (aka, “IR Editor”) has been on a crusade against Senator Barack Obama’s church and, in particular, his pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Jr.

ArchPundit noted the current non-issue masquerading as controversy months ago.

Continue reading “It’s not Obama doing the dissing. It’s the cons.” after the jump.

Obama of course demolished Ms. Eaton’s former candidate-of-choice, Keyes, in the 2004 general election and she has subsequently claimed Sen. Obama is “dangerous” and “disturbing” and has gone out of her way to blame nearly everyone she can think of for the loss … ignoring the obviousness that is the fact Illinois voters preferred Obama’s progressivism to Keyes’ and, by extension, Eaton’s conservatism. (In fact, Keyes’ pure-bred conservatism proved to be too much even for Ms. Eaton. She quit the Keyes campaign midstream; though she has obviously never let go of that grudge that must have grown inside her as a result of seeing Barack Obama do so well in the 2004 Illinois election for US Senate despite all her own personal best efforts to defeat him.)

It is with this vendetta-like attitude that she has nearly single-handedly manufactured any sort of “controversy” about Sen. Obama’s church and pastor, to the point where now the Obama campaign is even responding to it as they try to thread this needle called modern presidential politicking. Even Ms. Eaton acknowledges her role in manufacturing the controversy by stating, “Finally. Finally . . . the national media is picking up on something we’re been talking about on IR for months.”

In every sense, “manufactured” is absolutely the correct word — see here, here, here, here, and here (and those are just the Eaton/Ill Review references I found in 2 minutes) — unless you prefer the less well-known word “info-pimping“.

While some could make the argument that this paints Ms. Eaton herself as being anti-Christian (she is virulently opposed to this Christian pastor after all), it’s clear that her many, many complaints are simply founded in the basest form of partisanship. She’s a conservative and Obama and Wright are not, therefore she opposes them.

She opposed them even in areas where one might expect she would agree with them. Further, she ignores facts and is uninterested in vetting her own claims with her own research (which would quickly disprove her odd-ball theories that Rev. Wright is both a supremacist and somehow anti-Semitic). Her comments and actions are the very definition of partisanship.

Given that, perhaps Sen. Obama and/or his presidential campaign team could have handled the entire Springfield announcement situation better by simply confronting head-on the rank partisanship and info-pimping coming from an old nemesis. Shining a bright light tends to make creepy-crawlies run for cover. (Then again, most everyone associated with The 2004 Alan Keyes Tour, Illinois Edition™ has been shown to be wrong several times over anyway, so this really is all par for the course. …)

But the fact of the matter is that it is not Obama doing the dissing. It is the kooky conservatives and their partisan crusade to create as much dirt as they can against people they clearly despise and then pimp their misinformation out to a national media which willingly sops up what they can in order to fill 1,440 minutes of air time every day. 

(Major hat tip to ArchPundit for months of refuting Ms. Eaton’s wacko comments.)