Obama should have done this a long time ago.

Why?

Firedoglake has some interesting thoughts on this:

I doubt that this was done much for political reasons -- after all, we saw that only a limited bloc of voters were much influenced at all by the Big Farking Deal the media made out of Wright. The way it happened suggests this is largely a personal thing for the Obamas, and I'm not sure anyone can blame them.

But there is plenty of blame to go around, particularly within the media for blowing this affair up so wildly out of proportion to its actual meaningfulness in the first goddamned place. It's doubtful that this rupture would have occurred without it, and it's now just another vivid example of the poisonous influence of media sharks in our personal lives.

says: "Those among us that said this should have happened back in March, along with throwing Wright under the bus, can take solace in the fact that Obama finally got around to doing what needed to be done."

I tend to agree with this:

Some Obama supporters, including U.S. Rep. Robert Wexler of Florida, said that disconnecting from the church signaled a chance for the campaign to move on.

"I think it bodes well for us in the general election that we can put whatever issues there were behind us in respect to the church," Wexler said.

I don't go to Trinity United Church of Christ.  But this is a church he chose to attend.  It is where he chose to seek communion with other believers and receive spiritual guidance.  He expressed sadness in his statement, and I am sad for him.  To be forced from your church because of a political campaign and the narrow-mindedness of some people, it is sad.

I disagree rather strongly that this is a good move morally by Obama.  If it is good morally, please explain why?

Obama made it clear he wasn't happy with the comments - in which Pfleger pretended he was Clinton crying over "a black man stealing my show" - and said he was "deeply disappointed in Father Pfleger's divisive, backward-looking rhetoric, which doesn't reflect the country I see or the desire of people across America to come together in common cause."

Exactly.

Source

a guest preacher, that's it.  It's moral to leave ones church over this?

I couldn't care less what Mr. Armstrong has to say after his performance during this primary season.

[No offense intended toward you Lowell, as I respect your pov on the matter. Neiwart's comments are also interesting, and Obama's statement I find typically thoughtful and politic on his part.]

Several times because of Mr Armstrong, who I looked up to for several years.

MyDD has taken on a life of it's own - and other posters have made it worthwhile to stay and listen.

In many ways it is similar to DailyKos and RaisingKaine - I don't agree with everything said on any of the three- but all three have interesting and fascinating news and opinion and arguments (in a the good, debate sense) to read every day.

I still read Armstrong's posts, but I take them with armor on and a whole bottle of salt tablets...  in hopes I can understand what strange set of psychology it is that drives people to still support Hillary Clinton for President.  So far I am missing some key piece of data, for it makes no sense to me...

At first you would think we were talking about the Republicans in the GA and transportation...you know I mean roads was talked about under Bailies (defeated) Gilmore in a Republican era (nope) but know alas....we are talking about Obama and his church.
Look folks I supported Obama and think this was a mistake and will be seen solely as political and his words on countless stumps about "not being able" "not going to disown" etc are now going to be more fair game. The latest episode at his church was not getting nearly the traction, why is anyones guess (maybe cuz it was a shot at Hillary and not America like Wright) and he should have just remained with the denouncement.

No one is talking about it...YET...but I think if you really analyze Obama and his body language in some of the interviews it is apprarant to me that the church memebership, and that one in particualar, was more about Michelle Obama. Obama will not throw his wife under the bus by joining that church may have had political posturing but also his wife kept him and his family in that church I have no doubt. She seems more inclined to along the same wave length of that church than Obama himself in my view if you take her rather angry-view of American life and African-American life in particular.

I never have had to consider much about a First Lady before, we as a country seem to have been pretty lucky with First Ladies at least in my lifetime frankly. I only found myself not happy with Hillary when she determined to get involved in the politics of it all..publicly anyway and had found those that had come before more inspiring.

I would not support Hillary politically thats for sure, but as a person I never found her to be as bad as the right made her out to be, but I am afraid Michelle Obama is another story. I hope either she gets out with a different tone and message or recedes to the background in the campaign because in my book she is worse for Obama and his campaign than anyhting at his Church.

Remember, our kids tend to be inspired by First Ladies not there often baffonish husbands in the WH. I can remember most First Laby, whether it was reading or just say no todrugs etc growing up that were set forth by First Ladies not Presidents.

The Church is a issue but I think the rationale for why Obama may have stayed for years may certainly center around Michelle I fear---and that is what could be tragic in the General in terms of independents.

Because it has been a political distraction. The ties to that church almost did his campaign in.  The media ran with the story when it really was a non-issue.  Resign from the church - end of story.

because Fox News and Rush Limbaugh and Sean Hannity and Chris Matthews and that bow-tied clown and whoeverelseinthenoisemachine decide to make an issue of a non-issue, Democrats, and Obama in particular, are supposed to jump through hoops every time to satisfy a constituency that has no intention of being an honest broker but instead intends to pollute our discourse?

No, thank you. Until someone can answer the direct question, "Why is it that black politicians like Barack Obama are held to an impossible standard with respect to their places of worship while white politicians are allowed to cavort with all manner of disgusting 'preachers'?", I don't think Barack should have played along.

I maintain he should never have gone on to Fox News for the interview, he should have decided to just ignore the Wright imbroglio after his initial eloquent speech in Philadelphia, and he shouldn't play along with the yipping dogs of our media circus by denouncing every statement by every person that is in any ancillary manner connected to his church.

I think it speaks volumes about our country that he had to completely dissolve the bonds of his personal contract with the community he chose to worship with in order to satiate the gapping maws of our media elites. It's a shame politics requires such sacrifices of good people. But I don't think he'll gain any points from this rending of garments -- the sharks will still smell blood in the water.  

Wonderful as always, Ron!

but the sad fact is that it was a huge issue and in order for Obama to win, he had to leave.  In my opinion, this country has not moved far enough to have a mature discussion on race.  As a result, we focus on trivial issues and people like Reverand Wright instead of the real issues.

Also, I am not sure why Obama was held to a different standard (although I have an idea), but he was.  Some have stated that the difference between the Hagee/Parsley issue was the amount of time Obama spent with Wright.  They claim that since he had a 20 year relationship with Wright, the pastor's comments should be talked about.  Well if a 20 year relationship is the standard, then I must ask why the media has not reported the inflamatory comments of anyone Clinton or McCain have had 20 year relationships with.  I am sure something exists, but the media chooses to stick with the Wright story.

Finally, I think this move helps his church as well.  I am sure they are tired of being under a microsope and having their church being degraded by the national media.

If the response is disassociation so that everyone can ignore it, how does that address the fundamental problems of people's overreaction, oversimplification, and lack of understanding?

I am confused because you want to immediately address statements that can be construed as race-baiting by the Clinton campaign and her supporters.  But here, where the same forces in our society are at work, your resolution is to accept defeat and move on.

If America is really not ready to have a mature discussion on race and Obama is our next president, it seems like we would be living in a paradox.  And if we don't address ignorance, we will be dealing with the same differing scrutiny and innuendo again.

In addition to some inflammatory rhetoric, Wright also struck a nerve in America because he challenged the conventional wisdom that America is a purely positive force with nothing to apologize for.  In short, he had the "nerve" to criticize America.  His tirades served a purpose, though, because it at least got people to start talking about these issues.  Your claim that I am "accepting defeat" assumes that by Obama resigning from his church we "lose."  That is not true.  Like I said, we are finally discussing these issues and will continue to discuss them because of the Wright controversy.  Obama's resignation does not devalue or negate the discussion on race we had.  However, his resignation will help to remove a defenseless church from the microscope of the media and perhaps allow Obama to be judged not by someone else's comments, but his own.  After all, who said that because Obama resigned, we could not discuss race relations anymore?  I do not think we are mature enough as a country (yet) to honestly discuss these issues, but I think Obama's campaign and everything that happened during this primary will help move us along.  In short, the controversy over his church served its purpose.  It sparked a discussion on race.  It is not time to move beyond these preliminary discussions and dive deeper into the subject.    

This situation is completely different from Clinton's race baiting.  Hillary Clinton is a college graduate and has a law degree from Yale.  She claims to have worked for civil rights for over three decades and to understand the issues.  She should know better than to use race to bait voters.  She slowed this countries progression towards the day when we could have an honest discussion on race.  I hold her to a different standard because she is far more educated than the average American, claims to understand the consequences of using race (or gender) as a political tool, and has the platform to either diminish or improve the substance in the debate on race.  Unlike Obama's speech on race, Hillary Clinton has set us back and it will take a lot for me to forgive her for it as this is an issue I take very personally.  

by not holding people to different standards. Thats the whole problem with race in the first place my friend. If we are all turly equal as premised by our founding and under God than we all deserve to be treated and held to the same standards, not one that is conveniently used politically to dismiss someone we would rather not support.

I don't expect this behavior from Democrats.  I don't expect this behavior from Methodists.  I don't expect this behavior from lawyers, especially women lawyers.  I don't expect this behavior from the Clintons, whom I held in very high regard for a very long time.  I especially don't expect this behavior from an extremely intelligent, accomplished woman who is and wants to continue to be a trailblazer and break that last, highest glass ceiling.  I am very disappointed in both Clintons and many of those around them.  I am still speechless at Geraldine Ferraro's comments.  These are people that I taught my kids to respect and admire.  Not any more.  We are way, way past this kind of race-baiting.  The results of the primaries prove it.

These people have been given opportunities most of us cannot even imagine.  As Spiderman's uncle said, with great power comes great responsibility.  Another way to put it: to whom much is given, much will be expected. If that isn't a double standard, what is?

We have heard a lot about healing, and reconciliation, and party unity in the past few days.  I'm all for that.  Hillary Clinton can start by making this right, soon.  In doing so, she will salvage her own reputation and that of her husband.

to distort peoples records and words, its not convenient to use means that will justify your particular end or view, its not convenient to call WV, PA, OH, KY Democrats who supported Hillary as somehow all being racist against Obama, its not convenient to spin it that people are not voting "for" but "against" candidates, its not convenient to ignore vote after vote and trend after trend because we do not like the outcome and I guess it will not be convenient for us to ignore Hillary Clinton may win the popular vote and be left in the cold because its a delegate count....when we all know if it was our guy in Obama and rolls were reversed would be shouting at the rooftops about 2000.

If rolls were reveresed you can bet that Obama would get the nod if he had the popular vote count but not the delegate count....well that might not be racism but sure smacks of I don't know affirmative action run amuck.

Convenience. Please. If you "don't expect this behavior from Democrats" than whats the explaination Spotter for what we have seen in Appalachia. Thats somehow the Clinton machines fault. What is it exactly or can we not talk openly with candid dialogue because people fear the honesty in the debate. Until that day my friend, we will all be living things out of the "convenient" prism of politics.

What you said has absolutely nothing to do with what I said.  Hillary Clinton lost the race FOR DELEGATES because of HER OWN words and behavior, that of her husband, and that of her campaign operatives.  She lost, fair and square.  You can rehash this shameful spectacle and all her bogus arguments all you want, but SHE OWES US the opportunity to unify.  Demanding that of Obama and his supporters, while rehashing a losing, failed campaign, are not going to accomplish anything.  It is counterproductive to keep making these points, which have been rejected by THE VOTERS.

Those in the early primaries or those in Appalachia. Look I supported Obama in the Va Primary but do you really think if Wright occurred the week before Iowa we would be having this discussion. Please. My point was if you hold Clinton accountable then you must hold the very Dems that supported overwhelmingly in WV and KY and southern OH and southeastern PA. Votes are a reflection of the will of the people and apparently the potential for her to win the popular vote is lost on you.

has absolutely nothing to do with race and I believe I made that pretty clear in my post.  Do I hold her to a different standard because of her education?  Yes.  Do I hold her to a different standard because of her claimed experience in the civil rights movement?  Yes.  Do I hold her to a different standard because of her supposed understanding of racial discrimination in this country?  Absolutely.  However, I never once said or implied that I hold her to a different standard because of some arbitrary factor such as race.

Also, my political preference also has little to do with my interpretation of events.  I will admit that on a subconscious and perhaps even conscious level it does play some role.  However, it is not the predominating force.  I am clearly not the only one who holds these opinions.  Exit poll after exit poll continues to show that voters believe she has attacked unfairly in this campaign.  Senator Clinton's unfavorable ratings and disapproval numbers have risen in the black community.  Part of the reason Hillary Clinton's standing has dropped in the black community has much to do with her using the politics of race to receive votes.  Let us not forget that early in the campaign she had a lead among black women and tied among black men.  Her campaign squandered much of that lead when they began making remarks similar to the "Jesse Jackson," "hard working Americans, white Americans," "Obama wouldn't be where he was if he were not black," "African American and eggheads," etc statements.  These comments were not taken out of context and I refuse to listen to (or read) another condescending lecture about how I "just didn't understand" what she meant to say.  This is not a a figment of my imagination or some "convenient" political tool I use to justify my aversion to Hillary Clinton.  It is a reality that has been recognized by all but Senator Clinton's most ardent supporters.

I never said the reason states like WV or PA voted for Hillary Clinton was because of racism. Was a it factor?  Absolutely.  A disturbingly high number of voters in states like WV admitted to such in the exit polls and in other interviews.

Finally, let's quit this "popular vote" nonsense.  We both know that it is intellectually dishonest to claim that she has a popular vote lead based on numbers from flawed primaries in Michigan and Florida, the exclusion of results from caucuses (which she had little problem with until she started losing them), and the omission of results from non-binding primary results in states like Idaho and Washington.  She knows it and the superdelegates know it which is why the argument will not convince enough superdelegates to swing her way to give her the nomination.  If that were not enough, the rules say that you win the nomination based on delegates, not popular vote.  This is an arbitrary measure that Clinton and her supporters came up with because things were not going their way.  If they wanted popular vote to be the standard for determining victory, it should have been spelled out BEFORE the contests and not toward the end because they were losing.  As Donna Brazile said, when you change the rules midway or at the end of the game, it is called cheating.

There is a rumor swirling around that Hillary will drop out and endorse Obama by next Friday.  I surely hope this is the case as it will go a long way in healing our party and repairing the damage caused by this primary season.

the same thing happened to Mitt Romney in the Republican Primary. He just had ba*** enough not to leave the Mormon Church.
Everytime that guy was mentioned it was in the context of being a "Mormon". Fox, MSNBC, CNN outright prevented and real substance-based debate and were willing to hand Huckabee the coverage to get him rolling. The set him against the evangelicals....they played race/religion baiting at its finest with Romney.

Though Romney could have the last laugh and get the VP slot--maybe.

Obama now has admitted there are reasons he should have not been a member---he just publicly reinforced the premise of the oppositions media blitz against him/his church.

People are generally open about their negative feelings toward the LDS Church.  It would be the same if he were a Muslim.

As to balls, it isn't the same.  Obama is not renouncing his Christianity, he is just leaving this one church.  The LDS Church is an institution and a separate religion.  Had Romney left, he would have been an apostate.

then will we be seeing Obama attending church then. Your right, he absolutely left that particular church but maybe our President-to-be ought to leave that particular brand of Christianity behind as well. It is contradictory to his professed vision of America is it not?
As to some of the holly then now appriasals, I doubt everybody would have supported him had in been a member of Farrakan's movement now would they.

I don't believe Trinity United Church of Christ has its own brand of Christianity.  I would encourage you to read some of the materials on their site and tell me what about their "brand" should be left behind.  As far as his vision for America, a post-racial America, economic justice for all, doesn't seem inconsistent with Obama's message.  But I could not have been paying close attention.

Is it necessary to see Obama attending church?  I don't believe we saw that of the candidate Bush or of the current candidate McCain.  What purpose does seeing someone sit in a pew serve?

The Nation of Islam is a totally different subject.  I don't see what it has to do with anything.  If you want to point to different hypotheticals and say if Obama was this, then xyz would be different.  Well, of course, it would, that goes without saying.  But Obama is not, so what's the point?

On the holier than thou appraisals, I don't know who you are referring to there.  In my case, I don't believe I have said I am better than Obama.  I just think that is sad that he had to leave his church.

I agree with everything you write here. The difference being, I'm not that concerned about how Mitt Romney is/was hoisted on his own hypocritical petard :) .

But to your general point, I agree. I don't care if someone is an evangelical Baptist or a Jew or a Catholic or a Muslim or a Mormon or an atheist -- I believe the Constitution forbids me from discriminating on this basis when considering who I will or won't vote for, although I am surely in a minority on this point. How someone's spiritual beliefs affect their policy views is fair game -- but as long as they indicate that their interpretation of the Constitution isn't predicated on the book they choose to worship from, I'll consider anyone of any religious creed for any political office.  

think, in this envirement, anything related to that church will kill Obama politically.  The press will make sure of it.

And that is really sound advise - sticking your head in the sand and pretend it doesn't exist and pray it goes away.

John Kery did that in 2004 and it killed him.  He ignored the Swift Boat crowd, they defind him, Kerry lost and we are all paying the consequences for it.  

I refuse to lose this time.  And if it means throwing two ministers and a church under a bus, so be it.  Obama made a mistake in March of not cutting ties with Wright and the church and Wright burned him good and then threw Obama under the bus.  

And quite frankly, I am sick to death of any minister,  priest or rabbi sticking their nose in politics.  And I am sick of candidates using their own faith to score political points with voters.  The line of separation of church and state has been crossed - and we need to push them back behind the line.    

Bolding added by me for emphasis...

Obama resignation letter from Trinity

May 30, 2008

Dear. Rev. Moss:

We are writing to make official our decision to end our membership at Trinity.

We make this decision with sadness. Trinity was where I found Christ, where we were married and where our children were baptized. We have many friends among the 8,000 congregants who attend there and we are proud of the extraordinary good works the church continues to perform throughout the community to help the hungry, the homeless and people in need of medical care.

We also have come to appreciate your ministry and both think you have been, and will be, a wonderful pastor for years to come.

But as you know, our relations with Trinity have been strained by the divisive statements of Rev. Wright, which sharply conflict with our own views.

Our larger concern is that because of my candidacy and membership at Trinity, these controversies have served as an unfortunate distraction for other Trinity members who seek to worship in peace, and have placed you in an untenable position as you establish your own ministry under very difficult circumstances.

Our faith remains strong and we will find another church home for our family. But we also know that faith and prayer are not merely exercises to be discharged for two hours on Sunday. They are and always will be a bulwark for us in our daily lives.

We are grateful for our years as part of the Trinity community, and wish you all the best as you lead the congregation into the future. You, your family and the entire Trinity family will be in thoughts and prayers.

Sincerely
Michelle Obama
Barack Obama

h/t The Moderate Voice