Surely you've heard by now the uproar over Obama's pastor. If you haven't, let's review. The Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Obama's pastor, friend, the man who married he and Michelle, buddy and admirer of Louis Farrakhan, the man from whom Obama drew the inspiration for the name of his book, The Audacity of Hope - has made a few controversial comments that have gotten out recently. No, not that "the ministries of our church address some of that Jesus agenda" quote either. More like these:


"The government gives them the drugs, builds bigger prisons, passes a three-strike law, and then wants us to sing God bless America? No, no, no! Not God bless America! God D**N America! -- it's in the Bible -- for killing innocent people! God D**N America for treating her citizens as less than human!"


"We bombed Hiroshima, we bombed Nagasaki, and we nuked far more than the thousands in New York and the Pentagon, and we never batted an eye...We have supported state terrorism against the Palestinians and black South Africans, and now we are indignant because the stuff we have done overseas is now brought right back to our own front yards. America's chickens are coming home to roost."


Hillary never had to worry about being pulled over in her car as a black man driving in the wrong! I am sick of Negroes who just do not get it! Hillary was not a black boy raised in a single parent home! Barack was. Barack knows what it means to be a black man living in a country and a culture that is controlled by rich white people! Hillary can never know that! Hillary ain't never been called a ni**er! Hillary has never had her people defined as nonpersons! Hillary ain't had to work twice as hard just to get accepted by the rich white folk who run everything, or to get a passing grade when you know you are smarter than their C-students sitting in the White House. Hillary ain't never had her own people say she wasn't white enough!


"Hillary is married to Bill and Bill have been good to us? No, he ain't! Bill did us just like he did Monica Lewinsky!" (said complete with humping motions)


Jesus was a poor black man who lived in a country and who lived in a culture, that was controlled by rich white people! The Romans were rich. The Romans were Italians, which means they were European, which means they were white -- and the Romans ran everything in Jesus' country. It just came to me within the past few weeks, y'all, why so many folk are hatin' on Barack Obama. He doesn't fit the model!


“In the 21st century, white America got a wake-up call after 9/11/01. White America and the western world came to realize that people of color had not gone away, faded into the woodwork or just 'disappeared' as the Great White West kept on its merry way of ignoring black concerns."

Obama brushes it off as Wright is "like an old uncle who says things I don't always agree with" - "It sounds like he was trying to be provocative."

Flash back to the 2000 campaign...


Hoping to make Republicans squirm over their visits to Bob Jones University, House and Senate Democrats introduced a resolution today condemning the college (http://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage.html?res=9D0DE1D81339F932A35750C0A9669C8B 63&sec=&spon=&pagewanted=all) for intolerance and criticizing its many visitors for staying silent on its anti-Catholic views.

With speeches decrying bigotry and racism, the Democrats made clear that it was Gov. George W. Bush's stop at the university, and his failure to denounce the college's policies, that compelled them to draw up the resolution. Mr. Bush later apologized for not seizing the chance to condemn the evangelical university's anti-Catholic teachings and its ban on interracial dating.

By heaping criticism on Mr. Bush, the Democrats hope not only to draw attention to a campaign misstep, but also to turn the university's policies into so much of a political mudbath that any candidate who has ever spoken there will end up vulnerable. Senator John Ashcroft, a Republican who is in a tough re-election bid in Missouri, has already been criticized for receiving an honorary degree from the college. Mr. Bush's presidential rival, Senator John McCain, has also condemned the Bush visit. But today it was Democrats who were using it in hopes of tarnishing Republicans.

OK, who's going to be the first to introduce a resolution in congress condemning the Rev. Jeremiah Wright? Kennedy? Harry Reid?

I had an uncle very similar to Wright. My uncle was also guilty of giving sloppy kisses.

Wright needs to brush up a bit on his ancient history and his Bible trivia, but he's who he is and it's a free country.

I had an uncle very similar to Wright. My uncle was also guilty of giving sloppy kisses.

Oh now that's gross, lol.


Wright needs to brush up a bit on his ancient history and his Bible trivia, but he's who he is and it's a free country.

He is, and so is President Bush and so is Bob Jones University, but let's apply the standards the Democrats have set anyway. I think it about time they live under their own rules.

Oh now that's gross, lol.

Yes, it was. Trust me on that.


He is, and so is President Bush and so is Bob Jones University, but let's apply the standards the Democrats have set anyway. I think it about time they live under their own rules.

And the Republicans don't set standards? The Republicans live under their own rules?

I could careless what Obama's Pastor has to say. He is not running for the nomination.

In the OP I linked to the congressional record containing the resolution against Bob Jones U but their queries don't hold for long, so here is the text:


Mr. TORRICELLI (for himself, Mr. REID, and Mr. ROBB) submitted the following concurrent resolution; which was referred to the Committee on the Judiciary:

S. Con. Res. 85

Whereas the Senate strongly rejects the practices of racism, segregation, and intolerance based on religious beliefs;

Whereas the administration of Bob Jones University enforces a segregationist policy by prohibiting interracial couples on the Bob Jones University campus;

Whereas officials of Bob Jones University routinely disparage those of other religious faiths with intolerant and derogatory remarks;

Whereas officials of Bob Jones University have likened the Pope of the Roman Catholic Church to a ``possessed demon'', and branded Catholicism as a ``satanic system and religion of the anti-Christ'';

Whereas the Website of Bob Jones University greets visitors with the University's belief that Catholicism and Mormonism are ``cults''; and

Whereas senior officials of Bob Jones University have made openly racist remarks on many occasions regarding African Americans and Asian Americans: Now, therefore, be it

Resolved by the Senate (the House of Representatives concurring), That Congress--

(1) condemns practices, such as those prevalent at Bob Jones University, that seek to discriminate against and divide Americans on the basis of race, ethnicity, and religion; and

(2) strongly denounces individuals who seek to subvert the American ideals of inclusion, equality, and social justice.

I could careless what Obama's Pastor has to say. He is not running for the nomination.Shsss... quit being logical while he tries to destroy a candidate he doesn't like. Look at his posts - he hates all things liberal/democrat.

And the Republicans don't set standards? The Republicans live under their own rules?

Anything specific? I'll get specific, the Democrats denounce racism, hate speech, divisiveness, intolerance, discrimination... let them practice what they preach. I expect equal contempt for Jeremiah Wright as they had for Bob Jones U.

I could careless what Obama's Pastor has to say. He is not running for the nomination.

And the people he associates with say nothing about the man? His refusal to condemn his remarks thus far says nothing of his character, nothing of the judgment of the man running as the candidate with superior judgment? Campaign workers on both he and Hillary's staff have been forced out because of stupid things they've said right and left, Ferraro being the latest. They weren't running for president, why should anyone care what they say?

Regarding Republican standards --
Anything specific? I'll get specific, the Democrats denounce racism, hate speech, divisiveness, intolerance, discrimination...let them practice what they preach. I expect equal contempt for Jeremiah Wright as they had for Bob Jones U.

Speaking of getting specific...

Inconsistency on my part? Hatred on my part? Divisiveness on my part? Intolerance? Discrimination? What? Where? Specifically?

As much as some would like for it to be so, posting the facts and expecting the left to practice what they preach is none of those things. And unlike some here, I don't resort to immature insults when inconvenient truths come out.

I wasn't insulting you. Stop getting your dander up. You didn't answer my question. I asked if Republicans set standards and follow them.

I wasn't insulting you. Stop getting your dander up. You didn't answer my question. I asked if Republicans set standards and follow them.

Sorry, I did not mean to sound as if my dander was up over you so I will edit that. I'm asking what specific standard you may have in mind? Anything related to the OP or what? There are hypocrites on both sides, the difference is the right seems much better at holding their own accountable while the left gets really selective in their outrage.

Shsss...quit being logical while he tries to destroy a candidate he doesn't like. Look at his posts - he hates all things liberal/democrat.

Not everything, we like?? Well maybe it is everything, too bad they don't come up with some of the old "southern democrat" beleifs like the party used to believe.

My parents were democrats from the 40's, I wrote down one day the patform of many of the democrats, they thought it was some communist party list. They would not believe me it was the democrats

Surely you've heard by now the uproar over Obama's pastor.
As you can see, none of the leftist want to discuss it, they just want to blow it off as not amounting to anything important.

Mitt Romney explained his and it's about time that Obama explain black liberation theology (Wrights’ and the Churches humanistic philosophy); a faith he chose and was not born into.

Yes. Let's review...

Obama has publicly said that he has not sat down to talk specifically with Wright concerning his personal political views or to run his campaign. He hasn't had that privilege, nor does Obama endorse all of Wright's religious/political ideology.

Now what was the name of the preacher that McCain was so tickled to have endorse him. You know! The one that had the Catholic Church on a greased sled preparing for hell eternal? Oh! It's, "John Hagee." Yes! Those good ol' boys "John and John." Listen I'd love to play the six degrees of separation Kevin Bacon game, but Shabbos starts soon.

Yes. Let's review...

Obama has publicly said that he has not sat down to talk specifically with Wright concerning his personal political views or to run his campaign. He hasn't had that privilege, nor does Obama endorse all of Wright's religious/political ideology.

Now what was the name of the preacher that McCain was so tickled to have endorse him. You know! The one that had the Catholic Church on a greased sled preparing for hell eternal?! Oh! It's, "John Hagee." Yes! Those good ol' boys "John and John." Listen I'd love to play the six degrees of separation Kevin Bacon game, but Shabbos starts soon.

Bobby, I got no love for Hagee, but would you compare Wright's nonsense to Hagee's? Oh yeah, and Wright is on Obama's African American Religious Leadership Committee (http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/03/14/770536.aspx). Doing anything or not as the campaign says, is that what you want on your campaign? Does that not deserve scrutiny?

As you can see, none of the leftist want to discuss it, they just want to blow it off as not amounting to anything important.

Mitt Romney explained his and it's about time that Obama explain black liberation theology (Wrights' and the Churches humanistic philosophy); a faith he chose and was not born into.

Actually, I'm a registered Republican, but since that party has turned into an authoritarian mess (far different from the Republican Party that I knew and loved), I've learned to love a few Democrats.

Why does Obama have to explain it? Anyone can Google it to get an explanation.

Mr. Obama's answer to this:

The pastor of my church, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, who recently preached his last sermon and is in the process of retiring, has touched off a firestorm over the last few days. He's drawn attention as the result of some inflammatory and appalling remarks he made about our country, our politics, and my political opponents.

Let me say at the outset that I vehemently disagree and strongly condemn the statements that have been the subject of this controversy. I categorically denounce any statement that disparages our great country or serves to divide us from our allies. I also believe that words that degrade individuals have no place in our public dialogue, whether it's on the campaign stump or in the pulpit. In sum, I reject outright the statements by Rev. Wright that are at issue.

Because these particular statements by Rev. Wright are so contrary to my own life and beliefs, a number of people have legitimately raised questions about the nature of my relationship with Rev. Wright and my membership in the church. Let me therefore provide some context.

As I have written about in my books, I first joined Trinity United Church of Christ nearly twenty years ago. I knew Rev. Wright as someone who served this nation with honor as a United States Marine, as a respected biblical scholar, and as someone who taught or lectured at seminaries across the country, from Union Theological Seminary to the University of Chicago. He also led a diverse congregation that was and still is a pillar of the South Side and the entire city of Chicago. It's a congregation that does not merely preach social justice but acts it out each day, through ministries ranging from housing the homeless to reaching out to those with HIV/AIDS.

Most importantly, Rev. Wright preached the gospel of Jesus, a gospel on which I base my life. In other words, he has never been my political advisor; he's been my pastor. And the sermons I heard him preach always related to our obligation to love God and one another, to work on behalf of the poor, and to seek justice at every turn.

The statements that Rev. Wright made that are the cause of this controversy were not statements I personally heard him preach while I sat in the pews of Trinity or heard him utter in private conversation. When these statements first came to my attention, it was at the beginning of my presidential campaign. I made it clear at the time that I strongly condemned his comments. But because Rev. Wright was on the verge of retirement, and because of my strong links to the Trinity faith community, where I married my wife and where my daughters were baptized, I did not think it appropriate to leave the church.

Let me repeat what I've said earlier. All of the statements that have been the subject of controversy are ones that I vehemently condemn. They in no way reflect my attitudes and directly contradict my profound love for this country.

With Rev. Wright's retirement and the ascension of my new pastor, Rev. Otis Moss, III, Michelle and I look forward to continuing a relationship with a church that has done so much good. And while Rev. Wright's statements have pained and angered me, I believe that Americans will judge me not on the basis of what someone else said, but on the basis of who I am and what I believe in; on my values, judgment and experience to be President of the United States.

Quote: "Hillary is married to Bill and Bill have been good to us? No, he ain't! Bill did us just like he did Monica Lewinsky!" (said complete with humping motions)

I have to agree with him on that one. I think Billy Bob squirted us all in the eye.

Now what was the name of the preacher that McCain was so tickled to have endorse him. You know! The one that had the Catholic Church on a greased sled preparing for hell eternal? Oh! It's, "John Hagee." Yes! Those good ol' boys "John and John."

I think there is a huge difference between getting an endorsement and attending a parish for over 20 years with a pastor as warped as Wright is . If Obama did not agree with the philosophy or the rhetoric he should've found another parish long ago.

I will remind everyone that they completely discounted and brushed off some questionble endorsments that Ron Paul got as 'no big deal'.

DC is right .If Obama wants to clear this up he has an opportunity for a Mitt Romney moment . Let him explain "black liberation theology " and why he by a long religious association supports the ideology.

NK

Why would Obama choose the relatively unknown Huffpo web site to publish this instead of hs favorite MSM publication the NY Slimes ? Barack Obama: On My Faith and My Church - Politics on The Huffington Post (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/barack-obama/on-my-faith-and-my-church_b_91623.html)

Basically Obama 1st says he was not present at any of the many controversial sermons (extremely doubtful and I'd be willing to bet a video is going to emerge where Obama is present during one of these rambling hate filled sermons) .Even if he wasn't present then how is it that he did not know about the Rev's sermons and their content ?

Then he says that he did not feel it appropriate to leave the church since the Rev married them and baptised his children. If that is the case then it is a lie for him to say he was not aware of the Rev's racist and hate America comments.

And I can't help but wonder what his white mother thinks of the "it's all whitey's fault "rhetoric ?

He then says that now that the Rev is retired he looks forward to continuing his relationship with the church. But the church's philosophy is there for all to see regardless of who the pastor is. Obama needs to let the public know if he believes in the 'black liberation theology 'and what it means to him.

I also wonder about the media coverup of this . Surely they knew about the Rev and his Church of hate . Why are they now only vetting Obama after he has all but locked up the nomination ? We were posting the screed at the churches web site weeks ago here .

Yes, Obama finally distanced himself from Wright but as I pointed out earlier MSNBC reports "The Obama campaign says they have no plans to ask the Rev. Jeremiah Wright to step down from a campaign spiritual advisory committee." Why not? If he disagrees with his comments that much, why not?

In his post on Huffpo he says:


Because these particular statements by Rev. Wright are so contrary to my own life and beliefs, a number of people have legitimately raised questions about the nature of my relationship with Rev. Wright and my membership in the church

Really? Those statements are so contrary to his beliefs? Rich Lowry notes this passage from Obama's book, "Dreams of My Father":


The title of Reverend Wright’s sermon that morning was “The Audacity of Hope.” He began with a passage from the Book of Samuel—the story of Hannah, who, barren and taunted by her rivals, had wept and shaken in prayer before her God. The story reminded him, he said, of a sermon a fellow pastor had preached at a conference some years before, in which the pastor described going to a museum and being confronted by a painting title Hope.

“The painting depicts a harpist,” Reverend Wright explained, “a woman who at first glance appears to be sitting atop a great mountain. Until you take a closer look and see that the woman is bruised and bloodied, dressed in tattered rags, the harp reduced to a single frayed string. Your eye is then drawn down to the scene below, down to the valley below, where everywhere are the ravages of famine, the drumbeat of war, a world groaning under strife and deprivation.

“It is this world, a world where cruise ships throw away more food in a day than most residents of Port-au-Prince see in a year, where white folks’ greed runs a world in need, apartheid in one hemisphere, apathy in another hemisphere…That’s the world! On which hope sits!”

And so it went, a meditation on a fallen world. While the boys next to me doodled on their church bulletin, Reverend Wright spoke of Sharpsville and Hiroshima, the callousness of policy makers in the White House and in the State House. As the sermon unfolded, though, the stories of strife became more prosaic, the pain more immediate. The reverend spoke of the hardship that the congregation would face tomorrow, the pain of those far from the mountaintop, worrying about paying the light bill…

Yeah, Obama is just now learning about the garbage the man preaches.

Steve a morning update is that the Rev has stepped down from the advisory committee .

I would just remind you Tom that much of the Ugly stuff that is voiced by Obama's mentor about America is proudly and openly expressed opinion, since the mid-1980s, of a majority of the vocal members of the Democratic Party.

Steve a morning update is that the Rev has stepped down from the advisory committee .

Yep, he did step down. I don't think all the questions have begun to be answered though. Think maybe 20 years of being under Wright's pastoral leadership is why Michelle could only recently find something to be proud of America for??

He says he is an uncle he does not always agree with
But he also claims he never heard the racist anti American stuff either.

I DID hear Obama say about a month or two ago something about if and when he beats Hillary he WILL wear the American flag pin and pledge allegiance to the flag.

Bobby, I got no love for Hagee, but would you compare Wright's nonsense to Hagee's? Oh yeah, and Wright is on Obama's African American Religious Leadership Committee (http://firstread.msnbc.msn.com/archive/2008/03/14/770536.aspx). Doing anything or not as the campaign says, is that what you want on your campaign? Does that not deserve scrutiny?


As many of you know, with perhaps for the exception of excon whom also is Jewish and active on political discussions, I see Christianity from a bit different perspective. In the case of Wright, a Democratic supporter of Obama with his tangent expressed extreme views based on Black theology, or Hagee, a Republican endorser of McCain and bigamist that sees Protestants as coming out of a whore, whom he thinks is the Catholic church on it's way to hell, I understand both to be strayed religious apostates. More-so problematic, concerning humanity, they miss the overall picture. To me, there is no difference between a "Wright" claimed Christianity and "Hagee" Christianity. To be perfectly straight, Obama, Oprah, and whomever else attends the retired Wright's church should withdraw membership. Same for McCain, he should never been seen at Hagee's church. I could go on to name a few more Christian ministries with rather extreme views that have taken side with McCain, but I think I've made my point. Again no disrespect to Christians, but all these radical styled views make little sense to me in the political realm.

To be perfectly straight, Obama, Oprah, and whomever else attends the retired Wright's church should withdraw membership.

The problem isn't the church; the problem is the minister. In his senior years, close to retirement, he holds back less and less of his personal philosophy. Obama says he never heard that kind of rhetoric when in attendance at that church. Had he heard such things, he says he would have challenged his pastor.

Wright will soon retire and a new pastor will take over. Things will change, and sermons will be different. As a pastor's daughter, I know that to be true.

The problem isn't the church; the problem is the minister. In his senior years, close to retirement, he holds back less and less of his personal philosophy. Obama says he never heard that kind of rhetoric when in attendance at that church. Had he heard such things, he says he would have challenged his pastor.

Wright will soon retire and a new pastor will take over. Things will change, and sermons will be different. As a pastor's daughter, I know that to be true.

Yes. To clarify: I should say "Wright's" church, or "Hagee's" church. I'm demonstrating similarities between their views, which I see both as extreme.

Politics in America, is about slinging mud to see what sticks, and spinning anything to your advantage. As the election gets closer, every pimple not covered by makeup, will be counted. What's new?

What exactly is it that offends so much in Wrights comments?

Good point, Skell. I wonder if Rev. Wright has ever mentioned Hurricane Katrina and what happened to the black population. He would have had a field day with that one.

Wright, an African-American, displays raw emotion, at times lacking tact, and expresses himself using extreme remarks. For example: "G-d damn America" which he implicates judgement upon the United States for misdeeds. In this case the same has been said numerous times by Caucasian doomsday charismatic styled evangelists.
What exactly is it that offends so much in Wrights comments?Wright, however advocates a Black Theology. A theology, that was a counter to what I'd describe as hundreds of years of White theology. This stems from a time when slavery was the norm for parts of the US, and black men begin to question what kind of Christians were white slave owners that taught all men were created equal? From this, today, the message still carries liberal implications on the political front. Quite frankly, Black Theology, is mostly misunderstood by many Caucasian nominal Christians and is seen by them, as threatening. Many other churches, mostly with African-American members, also teach Black Theology with much less consequence. Wright though, has adjoined his own opinion taking it at times to an extreme. This is why Obama has said on several occasions, contrary to Republican verbiages and in-spite of their blatant deafness, that he does not agree with the Rev Wright on several of his remarks. Senator Obama, does not solicit Wright for his campaigning advice nor does he give him that exclusive privilege. Obama came out of a family, biological father's side, of partial Muslim heritage to embrace Christianity. He is not a practitioner of Islam, nor is he a Muslim. Wright was one the few that took notice to give Obama a basic Christian understanding of the religion. Obama respected the man's passion and effort like an uncle, although he doesn't agree with some of his views. Other African-American celebrities such Oprah, attend service at Wrights church. I hope this helps.

What exactly is it that offends so much in Wrights comments?

He said that the government gives blacks drugs and then imprisons them for it

He said the US created the AIDS virus and gave it to the blacks

He said the attacks on 9-11 were the chickens coming home to roost

These are just the tip of the iceberg . Most of the sermons I've heard condemn white "middleclassness" in a derogatory manner; frequently mentions "white arrogance" and the "oppression" of African-Americans today; and has referred to "this racist United States of America." or the "United States of White America." If Obama agrees with these sentiments he should say so and prove he is not the uniter he pretends to be . If not he should explain why he sat in the church for 20 years "nodding his head in agreement " while the Rev Wright spewed his hate .

He said that the government gives blacks drugs and then imprisons them for it
That happens to be absolutely true, and if you check your history, specifically BushI, Ollie North And Gen. Noriega, of Panama, that's exactly what you will find, all in the name of stopping communism.
He said the attacks on 9-11 were the chickens coming home to roost
Funny how we forget the Shah of Iran, and who put Saddam in power, and how when oil was discovered in the middle east, Britain and The U.S. always had a puppet regime going for a friendly enroad to oil deals. The people there have been exploited for a long time by American, and British oil moguls, and nothing has changed. If you really look that's what this current war is all about, as BushII, was tired of Saddam cutting deals under the table with France, Russia, and China.

I know you agree with these comments . The question is does Obama ?

Why would Americans want to turn their country over to a candidate who attends a separatist church that views America with suspicion if not contempt? Look at the church's official literature: it is openly separatist, mirroring "separate but equal" almost perfectly.would America vote for a White candidate that had such views ?

These are just the tip of the iceberg . Most of the sermons I've heard condemn white "middleclassness" in a derogatory manner; frequently mentions "white arrogance" and the "oppression" of African-Americans today; and has referred to "this racist United States of America." or the "United States of White America."
Visit a few black churches yourself, and see that more than God gets talked about, what would you expect from former slaves, that still have to deal with a blind eye, from the former masters? Most older blacks, from that civil rights era, talk the same way.

If Obama agrees with these sentiments he should say so and prove he is not the uniter he pretends to be . If not he should explain why he sat in the church for 20 years "nodding his head in agreement " while the Rev Wright spewed his hate .
Typical election politics, the mans position is well known by now, and any more attempts to put him as some radical, is mudslinging to see what sticks. Rev Wright has been villified enough, and Obama has stated his case. Publicly and has maintained his position in all of this from the start. Is that Hillary sitting in the corner, with her fingers crossed??

I can't believe he is getting a pass on this ;Again ;it is useful to just reverse the words black and white. Would a white candidate who went to a white separatist church get the same pass as you are willing to give Obama . I think not .

If Obama agrees with these sentiments he should say so and prove he is not the uniter he pretends to be . If not he should explain why he sat in the church for 20 years "nodding his head in agreement " while the Rev Wright spewed his hate .


This is why Obama has said on several occasions, contrary to Republican verbiages and in-spite of their blatant deafness, that he does not agree with the Rev Wright on several of his remarks. Senator Obama, does not solicit Wright for his campaigning advice nor does he give him that exclusive privilege. I'm still waiting for McCain to distance himself from Hagee and some other extreme positioned evangelists that have endorsed and supports him. Think that announcement is coming anytime soon? Don't hold your breath on it.

Why would Americans want to turn their country over to a candidate who attends a separatist church that views America with suspicion if not contempt? Hello tom:

Does YOUR church believe that this is a "Christian" nation?? Lots of you Christians believe that crap... If that doesn't Separate YOU FROM ME, then I don't know what does. Talk about calling the kettle black...

Frankly, I'd rather vote for a black man who believes the way he does, than a white man who believes the way most Christains do.

excon

Hello again:

Yes, I have more to say!!

I love my country. I spilled my blood for my country. What I love most about my country is its potential to live up to the hype. But, let's not get carried away... it AIN'T living up to it yet. Frankly, it's even getting further and further behind as we speak.

So, as much as I love my country, until it starts moving in the direction I want it to, I'm not going to be singing its praises. As a matter of fact, I'm going to do the opposite.

God Damn a country that tortures... God Damn a country that puts pot smokers in jail. God Damn a country that can't get over its racist past.

excon

Yes, I do go to almost all "black" churches, and except for the one I left real quickly when they started talking about all white men are of the devil and the real black Jesus has not come yet to set his black people free, I do not hear what this pastor said in any of them.
They believe as I do that Jesus was of Hewbrew or Jewish birth,
And that yougn blacks are killing thierself by selling drugs to each others. And most still blame Aids on a virus that came because of drug use, homosexual activity and latter unprotected sex as it spread into the rest of the community. ( not saying it is all the way it is, but they believe as most Americans believe)

I do believe that those pastors who spread rasist comments that separate white and black are a disgrace, And they do it for the dollar, to again try to tell the young black they are a victim and that they need "thier" leadership to stop being one.
And sadly they are just becoming a new victim to this pastors hate and greed.

I do believe Obama needs to address this, since if he goes to such a Church, and actually believes this, I will have a lot of second thoughts before I would vote for him. I know many people who are now considering changing their vote or just not voting.

What exactly is it that offends so much in Wrights comments?

Try this:


Giving African American citizens access to quality education, to healthcare, to public facilities, to equal protection under the law was one thing.

That access, incidentally, is still being blocked. It is being blocked very sophisticatedly, both in the South and in the North (up South!), with attacks upon affirmative action, with the “conservative” agenda and with policies put in place by the Republican Party, which is the Party for the “have mores.”

Having legal access to schools and public accommodations, however, does not touch the deeper moral “American” problem, which is white supremacy! I owe much of my insights on this issue to Lewis Baldwin...

Black Africans do not control the economic systems, the military or have control over the resources (the diamonds, the oil and the natural resources that were stolen by the whites who took over South Africa), and until that changes, white supremacy will still be in charge!

White supremacy is not a legal problem. It is a spiritual problem, a psychological problem and a moral problem.

White supremacy controls the economic system in America, the healthcare system in America and the educational system in America. Hurricane Katrina has pulled the blinders off of all Americans and shown us what white supremacy means at its ugly core and what it has done to the fabric of these “still-yet-to-be-United States” (to use Maya Angelou’s term). That is what I see when looking back during the month of May.

Looking Around

Educating our children to the reality of white supremacy becomes crucial for African Americans and for all Americans. Educating our children is a term that I use pointedly. I do not mean “training” our children. That is a part of our problem now.

The misuse of that term ignores the fact that Africans do not control the military, the police, the legal structure or any of the means to enforce their race prejudice. To try to get misinformed whites and blacks to understand that fact is a waste of time.

You end up trying to make a blind man see something that he is physically and biologically unable to do. The use of the term “racism,” therefore, makes one enter into an exercise in futility and causes you to come away from that discussion frustrated, angry and wanting to do like Langston Hughes’ Jess B. Semple and smash something!

The term “white supremacy,” however, is much more accurate. White supremacy undergirds the thought, the order that they might become more rounded and fully productive citizens in this culture and in this country. What we need to do, however, is go beyond training and educate our children!

We need to educate our children to the reality of white supremacy. We need to educate our children as to the difference between desegregation and equality, the difference between the legal issues and the spiritual issues; and the difference between access in this country as opposed to acceptance in this country!

We need to educate our children about the white supremacist’s foundations of the educational system, the educational philosophy and the very curricula that immerses them in a culture of white supremacy from kindergarten through graduate school! We need to educate our children how to navigate the dangerous waters that lie ahead of them in this 21st century.

In navigating the waters, our children need to be aware of the shark-infested waters and the other predators that live in those waters.

Hurricane Katrina gave us some important images that are analogous to the future that our children have to learn how to navigate. When the levees in Louisiana broke alligators, crocodiles and piranha swam freely through what used to be the streets of New Orleans. That is an analogy that we need to drum into the heads of our African American children (and indeed, all children!).

In the flood waters of white supremacy that our children have to negotiate economically, educationally, culturally, socially and spiritually, there are not only sharks in those waters, there are also crocodiles, alligators and piranha!

The policies, with which we live now and against which our children will have to struggle in order to bring about “the beloved community,” are policies shaped by predators. Jesus taught us that white supremacy – or the thinking that any one race is superior to any other race – is against the Will of God, who only created one race, the human race!

Looking Ahead

I look back during the month of May to assess the powerful ramifications of the Brown versus Board of Education decision and our misunderstanding of what the full import of that decision meant. I look around to assess where it is we are now in terms of the work that is cut out ahead of us as we educate our children; and I look forward with hope.

We are on the verge of launching our African-centered Christian school. The dream of that school, which we articulated in 1979, was built on hope. That hope still lives. That school has to have at its core an understanding and assessment of white supremacy as we deconstruct that reality to help our children become all that God created them to be when God made them in God’s own image.

I guess he missed this quote from Obama:


There is not a liberal America and a conservative America - there is the United States of America. There is not a black America and a white America and Latino America and Asian America - there's the United States of America.

Besides the other outrageous remarks I'm more than a little sick of people like Wright fueling the fires of racism when they should be extinguishing them.

Good point, Skell. I wonder if Rev. Wright has ever mentioned Hurricane Katrina and what happened to the black population. He would have had a field day with that one.

Here's a taste:


White supremacy is not a legal problem. It is a spiritual problem, a psychological problem and a moral problem.

White supremacy controls the economic system in America, the healthcare system in America and the educational system in America. Hurricane Katrina has pulled the blinders off all Americans and shown us what white supremacy means at its ugly core and what it has done to the fabric of these “still-yet-to-be-United States”...

In navigating the waters, our children need to be aware of the shark-infested waters and the other predators that live in those waters.

Hurricane Katrina gave us some important images that are analogous to the future that our children have to learn how to navigate. When the levees in Louisiana broke alligators, crocodiles and piranha swam freely through what used to be the streets of New Orleans. That is an analogy that we need to drum into the heads of our African American children (and indeed, all children!).

In the flood waters of white supremacy that our children have to negotiate economically, educationally, culturally, socially and spiritually, there are not only sharks in those waters, there are also crocodiles, alligators and piranha!

Yep, we white folk are just sharks, alligators, crocodiles and piranha preying on innocent black children. I guess he missed all the dollars, donations and time put in by those white supremacists trying to help the victims of Katrina. Personally, I specified my Red Cross donation be used only to help some rich white family. :D

By the way Rev. neither piranha or crocs inhabit Lousiana... except for maybe the occasional zoo or aquarium specimen. I don't know the fate of the piranha at the New Orleans Aquarium but apparently the tanks were intact though most of the fish died after the emergency generator failed. The zoo lost only a pair of river otters (http://news.mongabay.com/2005/0830-new_orleans_aquarium.html). No loose crocs or piranha that I'm aware of ;)

Visit a few black churches yourself, and see that more than God gets talked about, what would you expect from former slaves, that still have to deal with a blind eye, from the former masters? Most older blacks, from that civil rights era, talk the same way.

I have visited two black churches in my city and neither offered anything like Wright does. They were too busy dancing, singing, shouting and preaching the gospel. If "more than God gets talked about" the way it does in Wright's church I demand an IRS investigation. The left has been demanding that for years in predominantly white, conservative churches for doing nothing more than offering a voter guide listing all of the candidate's positions on the issues. This guy is openly endorsing Obama from the pulpit and that's a huge no-no.

This is why Obama has said on several occasions, contrary to Republican verbiages and in-spite of their blatant deafness, that he does not agree with the Rev Wright on several of his remarks. Senator Obama, does not solicit Wright for his campaigning advice nor does he give him that exclusive privilege. I'm still waiting for McCain to distance himself from Hagee and some other extreme positioned evangelists that have endorsed and supports him. Think that announcement is coming anytime soon? Don't hold your breath on it.

Bobby, flashback to last year:


Obama's Church: Cauldron of Division

Jim Davis
Thursday, Aug. 9, 2007

Presidential candidate Barack Obama preaches on the campaign trail that America needs a new consensus based on faith and bipartisanship, yet he continues to attend a controversial Chicago church whose pastor routinely refers to "white arrogance" and "the United States of White America."

In fact, Obama was in attendance at the church when these statements were made on July 22. (http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2007/8/8/194812.shtml)

Obama has spoken and written of his special relationship with that pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr.

The connection between the two goes back to Obama's days as a young community organizer in Chicago's South Side when he first met the charismatic Wright. Obama credited Wright with converting him, then a religious skeptic, to Christianity.

"It was ... at Trinity United Church of Christ on the South Side of Chicago that I met Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr., who took me on another journey and introduced me to a man named Jesus Christ. It was the best education I ever had," Obama described his spiritual pilgrimage to a group of church ministers this past June.

Since the 1980s, Obama has not only remained a regular attendee at Wright's services in his inner city mega church, Trinity United Church of Christ, along with its other 8,500 members, he's been a close disciple and personal friend of Wright.

Wright conducted Obama's marriage to his wife Michelle, baptized his two daughters, and blessed Obama's Chicago home. Obama's best-selling book, "The Audacity of Hope," takes its title from one of Wright's sermons.

Because of this close relationship, questions have been raised as to the influence the divisive pastor will have on the consensus-building potential president.

Obama and Wright appear, at first blush, an unlikely pair. Wright is Chicago's version of the Rev. Al Sharpton.

It was no surprise that Sharpton recently announced that with Wright's backing, he was setting up a chapter of his New York-based National Action Network in Chicagoland. The chapter will be headed by Wright's daughter, Jeri Wright.

Minister of Controversy

Obama was not the only national African-American figure to cozy up to Wright. TV host Oprah Winfrey once described herself as a congregant, but in recent years has disassociated herself from the controversial minister.

A visit to Wright's Trinity United is anything but Oprah-style friendly.

As I approached the entrance of the church before a recent Sunday service, a large young man in an expensive suit stepped out to block the doorway.

"What are you doing here?" he asked.

"I came to hear Dr. Wright," I replied.

After an uncomfortable pause, the gentleman stepped aside.

On this particular July Sabbath morning, only a handful of white men — aside from a few members of Obama's Secret Service detail — were present among a congregation of approximately 2,500 people.

The floral arrangements were extravagant. Wright, his associate pastors, choir members, and many of the gentlemen in the congregation were attired in traditional African dashiki robes. African drums accompanied the organist.

Trinity United bears the motto "Unashamedly Black and Unapologetically Christian."

Wright says its doctrine reflects black liberation theology, which views the Bible in part as a record of the struggles of "people of color" against oppression.

A skilled and fiery orator, Wright's interpretation of the Scriptures has been described as "Afrocentric."

When referring to the Romans, for example, he refers to "European oppression" — not addressing the fact that the Egyptians, who were also a slave society, were people of Africa.

The Trinity United Web site tells of a "commitment to the black community, commitment to the black family, adherence to the black work ethic, pledge to make all the fruits of developing acquired skills available to the black community."

"Some white people hear it as racism in reverse," Dwight Hopkins, a professor at the University of Chicago Divinity School, a member of the Trinity United Church of Christ, tells The New York Times. Blacks tend to hear a different message, Hopkins says: "Yes, we are somebody; we're also made in God's image."

Controversy Abounds

Several prior remarks by Obama's pastor have caught the media's attention:


# Wright on 9/11: "White America got their wake-up call after 9/11. White America and the Western world came to realize people of color had not gone away, faded in the woodwork, or just disappeared as the Great White West kept on its merry way of ignoring black concerns." On the Sunday after the attacks, Dr. Wright blamed America.

# Wright on the disappearance of Natalee Holloway: "Black women are being raped daily in Africa. One white girl from Alabama gets drunk at a graduation trip to Aruba, goes off and gives it up while in a foreign country and that stays in the news for months."

# Wright on Israel: "The Israelis have illegally occupied Palestinian territories for over 40 years now. Divestment has now hit the table again as a strategy to wake the business community and wake up Americans concerning the injustice and the racism under which the Palestinians have lived because of Zionism."

# Wright on America: He has used the term "middleclassness" in a derogatory manner; frequently mentions "white arrogance" and the "oppression" of African-Americans today; and has referred to "this racist United States of America."

Bush's Bulls--t

Wright's strong sentiments were echoed in the Sunday morning service attended by NewsMax.

Wright laced into America's establishment, blaming the "white arrogance" of America's Caucasian majority for the woes of the world, especially the oppression suffered by blacks. To underscore the point he refers to the country as the "United States of White America." Many in the congregation, including Obama, nodded in apparent agreement as these statements were made.

The sermon also addressed the Iraq war, a frequent area of Wright's fulminations.

"Young African-American men," Wright thundered, were "dying for nothing." The "illegal war," he shouted, was "based on Bush's lies" and is being "fought for oil money."

In a sermon filled with profanity, Wright also blamed the war on "Bush administration bulls--t."

Those are the types of statements that have led to MSNBC's Tucker Carlson describing Wright as "a full-blown hater."

Wright first came to national attention in 1984, when he visited Castro's Cuba and Col. Muammar Gaddafi's Libya.

Wright's Libyan visit came three years after a pair of Libyan fighter jets fired on American aircraft over international waters in the Mediterranean Sea, and four years before the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, Scotland — which resulted in the deaths of 259 passengers and crew. The U.S. implicated Gaddafi and his intelligence services in the bombing.

In recent years, Wright has focused his diatribe on America's war on terror and the U.S. occupation of Iraq.

For a February 2003 service, Wright placed a "War on Iraq IQ Test" on the Pastor's Page of the church Web site. The test consisted of a series of questions and answers that clearly portrayed America as the aggressor, and the war as unjustified and illegal. Marginally relevant issues regarding Israel received attention.

The test also portrayed the Iraqi people as victims of trade sanctions, but Saddam Hussein's propensity for using "oil for food" proceeds to build palaces rather than buy medicine was never mentioned.

At the end of the test, the pastor wrote, "Members of Trinity are asked to think about these things and be prayerful as we sift through the ‘hype' being poured on by the George Bush-controlled media." Obama's campaign staff did not respond to a NewsMax request for the senator's response to Wright's statements.

In April, however, Obama spoke to The New York Times about Wright, and appeared to be trying to distance himself from his spiritual mentor. He said, "We don't agree on everything. I've never had a thorough conversation with him about all aspects of politics."

More specifically, Obama told the Times, "The violence of 9/11 was inexcusable and without justification," adding "It sounds like [Wright] was trying to be provocative."

Obama attributed Wright's controversial views to Wright being "a child of the '60s" who Obama said "expresses himself in that language of concern with institutional racism, and the struggles the African-American community has gone through."

"It is hard to imagine, though, how Mr. Obama can truly distance himself from Mr. Wright," writes Jodi Kantor of The New York Times. On the day Sen. Obama announced his presidential quest in February of this year, Wright was set to give the invocation at the Springfield, Ill. rally. At the last moment, Obama's campaign yanked the invite to Wright.

Wright's camp was apparently upset by the slight, and Obama's campaign quickly issued a statement "Senator Obama is proud of his pastor and his church."

Since that spat, there is little evidence, indeed, that Sen. Obama has sought to distance himself from the angry Church leader. In June, when Obama appeared before a conference of ministers from his religious denomination, Wright appeared in a videotaped introduction.

One of Obama's campaign themes has been his claim that conservative evangelicals have "hijacked" Christianity, ignoring issues like poverty, AIDS, and racism.

This past June, in an effort to build a new consensus between his new politics and faith, Obama's campaign launched a new Web page, faith.barackobama.com | People of Faith for Barack Home (http://www.faith.barackobama.com).

On the day the page appeared on his campaign site, it offered testimonials from Wright and two other ministers supporting Obama. The inclusion of Wright drew a sharp rebuke from the Catholic League. Noting that Obama had rescinded Wright's invitation to speak at his announcement ceremony, Catholic League President Bill Donohue declared that Obama "knew that his spiritual adviser was so divisive that he would cloud the ceremonies."

He noted that Wright "has a record of giving racially inflammatory sermons and has even said that Zionism has an element of ‘white racism.' He also blamed the attacks of 9/11 on American foreign policy."

Donohue acknowledged that Obama may have different views than Wright and the other ministers on his Web site, but "he is responsible for giving them the opportunity to prominently display their testimonials on his religious outreach Web site."

Political pundits have suggested that Obama's problems with Wright are not ones based on faith, but pure politics. The upstart presidential candidate needs to pull most of the black vote to have any chance of snagging the Democratic nomination. Obama's ties to Wright and the activist African American church helps in that effort.

But the same experts same those same ties may come to haunt him if he were to win the nomination and face a Republican in the general election.

The worry is not lost on Wright.

"If Barack gets past the primary, he might have to publicly distance himself from me," Wright told The New York Times with a shrug. "I said it to Barack personally, and he said 'yeah, that might have to happen.'"

All this stuff from Obama about having never been present during any of this nonsense is a lie, he sat there an nodded in agreement as Wright talked about "white arrogance," the "United States of White America" and "Bush administration bulls--t." And since Obama apparently knew he might have to distance himself from Wright I don't see how he can be too "shocked" as he puts it over what's been playing the last week.

And by the way, I don't buy this excuse that whites just don't understand that sort of preaching, we understand it perfectly. It's divisive, offensive, inexcusable, ungodly and racist. I can't imagine Jesus preaching anything of the sort and I darn sure can't imagine our next president not only attending a church like this but calling a man like Wright his "mentor."

McCain has not rejected the enforsement of Hagee though he knows what the evangelist stands for:
Hagee endorsement of McCain has risks - John McCain News - MSNBC.com (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23448170/)


Evangelical or born-again Christian voters were key to George W. Bush's victories, but so were Roman Catholics, who chose Bush over their fellow Catholic John Kerry in 2004 and over Al Gore in 2000.

The televangelist, San Antonio megachurch leader John Hagee, has referred to the Roman Catholic Church as "the great whore" and called it a "false cult system" and "the apostate church"; the word "apostate" means someone who has forsaken his religion.

He also has linked Adolf Hitler to the Catholic church, suggesting it helped shape his anti-Semitism.

Catholic groups are pressuring McCain to reject the endorsement, which he announced at a news conference with Hagee last week. The Democratic National Committee also is publicizing Hagee's views.

"Indeed, for the past few decades, he has waged an unrelenting war against the Catholic Church," said Catholic League President Bill Donohue.

It remains to be seen how much Hagee's views may hurt McCain's standing among Catholics, a group that can hardly be considered monolithic. Though they lean Republican, their views span the political spectrum and split nearly evenly along party lines.

Despite the recent publicity, Hagee is not well-known outside his sphere of influence, which includes a congregation in the tens of thousands and an even wider television audience.

"What he holds about Catholicism in my mind is despicable," said the Rev. James Heft, religion professor at the University of Southern California. "I totally reject Hagee's view of Catholicism, but I don't know how widely known it is."

If Hagee's views become well-known, the endorsement could hurt McCain among some Catholics.

"If you offend even a small percentage, that could make the difference in an election," Donohue said in an interview Sunday.

Democrats are doing their best to keep the fracas alive, with Democratic National Committee Chairman Howard Dean raising it Sunday on CNN's "Late Edition."

"What about a guy who is a vicious anti-Catholic, who is supporting John McCain, and John McCain does not denounce or reject him?" Dean said.

So far, McCain has enjoyed strong support from Catholics, who make up about a quarter of the electorate.

Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama battle it out during Tuesday's primaries while John McCain takes the Republican lead.

He won far more of the Catholic vote, 47 percent, than any of his Republican rivals thus far, according to exit polling. Mitt Romney won 30 percent and Mike Huckabee won 9 percent, doing well among Catholics in states where they did well overall, according to exit surveys in 21 presidential primary states.

McCain has been less popular among evangelical or born-again Christians, which is where Hagee comes in. Huckabee, himself a Baptist minister, courted Hagee last year by delivering a sermon at his church. McCain has lost or split support from those voters and is working to bolster his standing.

Hello tom:

Does YOUR church believe that this is a "Christian" nation?????? Lots of you Christians believe that crap....... If that doesn't SEPERATE YOU FROM ME, then I dunno what does. Talk about calling the kettle black.....

Frankly, I'd rather vote for a black man who believes the way he does, than a white man who believes the way most Christains do.

Ex, we white Christians consider black Christians a part of the family. With the possible exception of a few wackos like Phelps, we don't have mottos like "unapologetically white."

Does YOUR church believe that this is a "Christian" nation??

Nope ;I'm a Catholic and you have never heard me make the case that this is a Christian country . At most I have said that the traditions of Judeo-Christian was part of the heritage that our laws were based on .

And I'll go even further.. My churches leadership in Rome has made statements opposing the US from time to time . I for the most part reject their criticism and have never sat through a sermon where the Priest ranted and raved like a loon throwing in hip gyrations for emphasis saying the most vile things about the country or a group within it. I would in fact make a great scene before I walked out /never to return .
That is what I would also expect from the person who claims to be a uniter and who thinks he has what it takes to be the country's leader .

McCain has not rejected the enforsement of Hagee though he knows what the evangelist stands for:
Hagee endorsement of McCain has risks - John McCain News - MSNBC.com (http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23448170/)

NK, I can't comment on Hagee because nobody seems to care to offer more than a 2 or 3 word quote out of context. That tells us a lot doesn't it? But if we really want to go down the road of holding every politician accountable for the religious connections I'd like to start with Harry Reid and Arlen Specter, we non-Mormons have been called some pretty nasty things over the years by Mormon leadership.

As for the articles claim of anti-semitism I'm not sure how that reconciles with the facts:


Hagee has received numerous honors and accolades from national Jewish organizations for his support of Israel (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Hagee#Accusations_of_Anti-Catholicism). Hagee was awarded the "Humanitarian of the Year" award by the San Antonio B'nai B'rith Council. It was the first time in the history of the San Antonio that this award was given to a gentile. Hagee was presented the ZOA Israel Award by U.N. Ambassador Jean Kirkpatrick. This award was given by the Jewish Community of Dallas, Texas. He was presented the ZOA Service Award by Texas Governor Mark White. Houston Mayor Kathy Whitmire issued a special proclamation in his honor declaring Pastor John C. Hagee Day.[citation needed]

Hagee has been to Israel twenty-two times and has met with every Prime Minister since Menachem Begin. John Hagee Ministries has given more than $8.5 million to bring Soviet Jews from the former Soviet Union to Israel. Hagee is also the Founder and Executive Director of "A Night to Honor Israel", an event which expresses solidarity between Christians and Jews on behalf of Jerusalem, the State of Israel and the United States.

He sounds really anti-semitic to me.

Hagee endorsed McCain . McCain did NOT make him a spiritual adviser . Nor has he had a 20 year relationship with Hagee ;attending his church .listening to his controversial comments and by extension agreeing with Hagee's statements. Hagee did not perform McCain's wedding and he did not baptise his children. McCain has not added countless thousands to Hagee's church coffers .

Clearly there is the difference. But you already knew that . I find it intersting that many here first endorsed Ron Paul with his racists past and now support Obama with what appears to me to be a tacit endorsment of racism .

Perhaps McCain hasn't rejected Hagee's endorsement but he has rejected the alleged offenses:


"Yesterday, Pastor John Hagee endorsed my candidacy for president in San Antonio, Texas. However, in no way did I intend for his endorsement to suggest that I in turn agree with all of Pastor Hagee's views, which I obviously do not.

"I am hopeful that Catholics, Protestants and all people of faith who share my vision for the future of America will respond to our message of defending innocent life, traditional marriage, and compassion for the most vulnerable in our society."


"Well I think it's important to note that pastor John Hagee who has supported and endorsed my candidacy supports what I stand for and believe in. When he endorses me, it does not mean that I embrace everything that he stands for and believes. And I am very proud of the Pastor John Hagee's spiritual leadership to thousands of people and I am proud of his commitment to the independence and the freedom of the state of Israel. That does not mean that I support or endorse or agree with some of the things that Pastor John Hagee might have said or positions that he may have taken on other issues. I don't have to agree with everyone who endorses my candidacy. They are supporting my candidacy. I am not endorsing some of their positions."


"We've had a dignified campaign, and I repudiate any comments that are made (http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/03/08/AR2008030800752.html), including Pastor Hagee's, if they are anti-Catholic or offensive to Catholics," McCain said.

"I sent two of my children to Catholic school. I categorically reject and repudiate any statement that was made that was anti-Catholic, both in intent and nature. I categorically reject it, and I repudiate it," McCain said.

"And we can't have that in this campaign," McCain said. "We're trying to unite the country. We're uniting the country, not dividing it."

He was responding to one critic in particular, House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, a Democrat, who raised the issue in a Thursday conference call with reporters.

"She made the attack. I am responding by saying that I am against discrimination and anti-Semitism, anti-Catholic, anything racial, and I have proved that on the campaign trail," McCain said.


I will say that he said that his words were taken out of context, he defends his position. I hope that maybe you’d give him a chance to respond. He says he has never been anti-Catholic, but I repudiate the words that create that impression.

It only took McCain a day to distance himself from Hagee's 'sins', what took Obama so long?

attending his church .listening to his controversial comments and by extension agreeing with [Wright's] statements

Obama has said more than once that he has never heard troubling comments from Rev. Wright, or he would have talked with him about them. And I have no worries that Obama agrees with anything and everything inflammatory Wright has said.

I've heard many sermons by many ministers throughout my life. In fact, because I'm a PK, I've probably heard more sermons than most people. One has to be careful not to take comments out of context. One of my former pastors had made the comment, "There are mistakes in the Bible." Of course, that woke everyone up and was the only thing anyone seemed to be able to remember from that sermon. The pastor was immediately branded a liberal (in a conservative congregation). Had they listened to the entire sermon... This is not to excuse Wright from things he has preached about, but it certainly must be something any reader or listener keeps in mind.

Omama, in his book, makes it quite clear what he thinks of Wrights,
Black Liberation Theology…Now he is condemning some of his [Wrights] statements…while Wright's church members are defending them- claiming they are being taken out of context. It all makes for an interesting side show by the Democrats…but what's new about that. Diversity is in itself, divisive.

Diversity is in itself, divisive.Only in your mind. :D

Obama has said more than once that he has never heard troubling comments from Rev. Wright, or he would have talked with him about them. And I have no worries that Obama agrees with anything and everything inflammatory Wright has said.


The issue that seems to be coming down is…are Wright’s comments really inflammatory, or are they being used out of context? Seems to me Obama has jumped ship and condemned many comments by Wright.

Only in your mind. :D
Yeah, there is the “Perfect World” of Idealist; and then there is reality. :D

Obama has said more than once that he has never heard troubling comments from Rev. Wright, or he would have talked with him about them.

Obama is not telling the truth . He purposely disinvited Wright from appearing at his announcment to run and told him, “'You can get kind of rough in the sermons, so what we've decided is that it's best for you not to be out there in public.”

Why would he say something like that if he was not aware of the content ?

Newsmax reports that one of their reporters was at one of the sermons and Obama was there nodding his head in agreement as the Rev ranted away.



Contrary to Senator Barack Obama's claim that he never heard his pastor Jeremiah A. Wright, Jr. preach hatred of America, Obama was in the pews last July 22 when the minister blamed the “white arrogance” of America's Caucasian majority for the world's suffering, especially the oppression of blacks.

Senator Obama has sought to separate himself from his pastor's incendiary remarks, issuing a statement Friday rejecting them as “inflammatory and appalling” but failing to renounce Wright himself for his venomous and paranoid denunciations of America.

In his press release, Obama claimed, “The statements that Rev. Wright made that are the cause of this controversy were not statements I personally heard him preach while I sat in the pews of Trinity [United Church of Christ] or heard him utter in private conversation.”

Appearing on cable news shows this past weekend, Obama claimed when he saw recent videos that have Wright making such comments as “God damn America,” he was “shocked.” Obama implied that the reverend had not used such derogatory language in any of the church services Obama attended over the past two decades.

If Obama's claims are true that he was completely unaware that Wright's trademark preaching style at the Trinity United Church of Christ has targeted “white” America and Israel, he would have been one of the few people in Chicago to be so uninformed. Wright's reputation for spewing hate is well known.

In fact, Obama was present in the South Side Chicago church on July 22 last year when Jim Davis, a freelance correspondent for Newsmax, attended services along with Obama. [See: ”Obama's Church: Cauldron of Division.” (http://archive.newsmax.com/archives/articles/2007/8/8/194812.shtml)]

In his sermon that day, Wright tore into America, referring to the “United States of White America” and lacing his sermon with expletives as Obama listened. Hearing Wright's attacks on his own country, Obama had the opportunity to walk out, but Davis said the senator sat in his pew and nodded in agreement.


http://www.nytimes.com/2007/03/06/us/politics/06obama.html?_r=1&oref=slogin

Newsmax.com - Obama Attended Hate America Sermon (http://newsmax.com/kessler/Obama_hat%20e_America_sermon/2008/03/16/80870.html?s=al&promo_code=9990-1)

DC,
I'm in reality and you're in a textbook somewhere.

Newsmax.com - Obama Attended Hate America Sermon (http://newsmax.com/kessler/Obama_hat%20e_America_sermon/2008/03/16/80870.html?s=al&promo_code=9990-1)LOL! I urge everyone to visit tom's source for news. Other headlines there:
* Norquist: McCain Will Win
* Obama Minister Exudes Hatred
* Obama Dodges Farrakhan Issue
* Democrats Have Suicidal Bent
* Barack Obama: More Taxes
Wonder where Tom gets all this info for this thread? --> NewsMax - America's News Page (http://election.newsmax.com/)

It's basically a huge propaganda site.

Only in your mind. :D

Sure, how can diversity possibly lead to divisiveness, what with all that reeducation (http://www.campusreportonline.net/main/articles.php?id=1974) taking place?

How can constant attacks on all things liberal lead not lead to divisiness?

LOL! I urge everyone to visit tom's source for news. Other headlines there:
* Norquist: McCain Will Win
* Obama Minister Exudes Hatred
* Obama Dodges Farrakhan Issue
* Democrats Have Suicidal Bent
* Barack Obama: More Taxes
Wonder where Tom gets all this info for this thread? --> NewsMax - America's News Page (http://election.newsmax.com/)

It's basically a huge propaganda site.

Sort of like reading Huffington post eh ?

NK

Don't shoot the messenger…the words are true or false no matter whom the messenger is. Would you have us base the truth on whom the messenger is…it appears that that is your litmus test.

sorta like reading Huffington post eh ?Actually I'm glad you mentioned it. They just debunked your earlier story as a falsehood:
Marc Ambinder (March 17, 2008) - Kristol Fails To Check His Sources, And So Bungles Key Fact In Anti-Obama Column (http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/03/kristol_bungles_key_fact_in_an.php)

Actually I'm glad you mentioned it. They just debunked your earlier story as a falsehood:
Marc Ambinder (March 17, 2008) - Kristol Fails To Check His Sources, And So Bungles Key Fact In Anti-Obama Column (http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/03/kristol_bungles_key_fact_in_an.php)

And Newsmax is standing by their story (http://newsmax.com/kessler/Obama_hat%20e_America_sermon/2008/03/16/80870.html?s=al&promo_code=9990-1). Let's see who's right.

How can constant attacks on all things liberal lead not lead to divisiness?

LOL, like it's a one way street.

But it's all you do here. Are you paid to be a republican/conservative shill? What's the motivation?

I remember what it was like before I came here. It was boring stuff really with everyone in a consensus agreement that the Republicans and President Bush were the sum of all evil in the world. Now we have healthy debate . What is the problem with that ? The genious of the founding fathers is that although they decried partisanship ,they created it nonetheless and America has been in a healthy debate ever since.

But it's all you do here. Are you paid to be a republican/conservative shill? What's the motivation?

Personally, I just like to make liberals squirm. Seriously NK, this "it's all you do here" stuff is old and certainly not accurate, it's more like it's just all you care to see. Would you rather this place be one big, happy liberal family?

I know it irritates the left that they don't have a monopoly in the media any more (hence all the attacks on Fox News, Newsmax, Limbaugh, Hannity, Drudge, etc.), apparently not having control over The Goracle's internet irritates them as well. That's odd, knowing that the left embraces diversity and welcomes the free exchange of ideas. :D

There's no free exchange from you guys - you just come here to disparage a whole group. It's always negative, you search and dig up negative issues about a group you despise and make threads about it here. That's ALL you do. It's like negative/smear campaigning 24/7 and you're right, it is getting tiresome for the rest of us.

There's no free exchange from you guys - you just come here to disparage a whole group. It's always negative, you search and dig up negative issues about a group you despise and make threads about it here. That's ALL you do. It's like negative/smear campaigning 24/7 and you're right, it is getting tiresome for the rest of us.

NK, that's either ignorance or an outright lie. Besides that, who needs to dig when the left is doing such good job of handing it to us on a platter? Spitzer, Wright, Ferraro, Rezko, gay porn in public schools, Saturday Night Live mocking the kid glove treatment Obama has gotten, Obama and his two faces of policy on NAFTA and now Iraq (http://www.hillaryclinton.com/news/speech/view/?id=6553), with a surrogate telling a British reporter "he will, of course, not rely on some plan that he's crafted as a presidential candidate or as a U.S. Senator."

Perhaps if you could justify the left's recent missteps you wouldn't have to resort to complaining and shooting the messenger. It's not my fault that Obama considers a profane, racist, delusional preacher like Wright a friend and mentor. I guess someone forgot to tell him to choose his friends wisely.

Perhaps if you could justify the left's recent missteps you wouldn't have to resort to complaining and shooting the messenger. It's not my fault that Obama considers a profane, racist, delusional preacher like Wright a friend and mentor. I guess someone forgot to tell him to choose his friends wisely.
After 8 years of George, and his policies, I think even the Rev. Wright could do a better job. Hey Hillary ain't out the woods, by no means and the dems have a lot of work to do, because McCain and the conservatives are going to use anything they can to smear the democratic nominee. No matter who wins the otherside ain't going to like it, but its better than reruns of Smallville isn't it? If GWB can survive with Slick Chaney, then Obama will survive his other brothers.

After 8 years of George, and his policies, I think even the Rev. Wright could do a better job. Hey Hillary ain't out the woods, by no means and the dems have a lot of work to do, because McCain and the conservatives are going to use anything they can to smear the democratic nominee. No matter who wins the otherside ain't gonna like it, but its better than reruns of Smallville isn't it? If GWB can survive with Slick Chaney, then Obama will survive his other brothers.

Beautiful, just like Howard Dean and the DNC it is all still about Bush, lol. After 8 years of nonstop hatred of Bush from the left I think we have earned our right to be heard, especially when it comes to selecting the next president.

Bobby, flashback to last year


Why are you flashing back to last year when Obama addressed this weeks ago and again as recent as days ago? The Republican news commentators on several televised networks asked the questions of Obama and he answered. I hope Republicans are going to get fitted for hearing aids and eyewear at the convention this year.


PART III. This is why Obama has said on several occasions, contrary to Republican verbiages and in-spite of their blatant deafness, that he does not agree with the Rev Wright on several of his remarks. Senator Obama, does not solicit Wright for his campaigning advice nor does he give him that exclusive privilege.

Bobby

Are you suggesting that we just take his word for it and let it go at that? Criticism of the powerful is not immoral. It is a necessary part of any truly open society, and if you want give it away don't expect too many followers.

You know the guys on the right have no reason to hear anything, unless King Ronald says it, or his co-star monkey. That still think this is 1983, and money will trickle from the pockets, of the rich and uplift the poor. Ain't worked yet. But George is doing his best imitation, but what do you expect from a guy that ran the Rangers into the ground?

The problem I have is its one thing to say you don't agree with this preacher concerning a few sound bites... but when you been in his church for 20 years and you call him your spiritual advisor... you are linked, like it or not.

This is how Ross Douthat put it at Atlantic Magazine blog


His connection to Wright isn't the equivalent of John McCain's going to Liberty University (http://www.liberty.edu/index.cfm?PID=6849&sid=102) to make nice with Jerry Falwell. It's the equivalent of John McCain taking his wife and children, most Sundays, to Jerry Falwell's church. And the disconnect between Obama's studied moderation and his congregation's radicalism requires more of an explanation than he's offered so far.
In an election when many expected that Mitt Romney's fate would be determined by how he talked (or didn't) about his Mormon faith, it may be Obama whose candidacy ends up riding on how he addresses the relationship between his politics and his church.

Are you suggesting that we just take his word for it and let it go at that? Criticism of the powerful is not immoral. It is a necessary part of any truly open society, and if you want give it away don't expect too many followers.


Well doest thy name those last red fangs in the jaws of my vengeance. :rolleyes: Seriously though, is Obama telling of facts, immoral? Whom has judged him guilty? Is criticism that's already been addressed openly, not open? Can I ask more questions to answer other questions that have already been answered?

There's yet another new email chain going around. This time it propagates Ken Blackwell, a Columnist for the New York Sun, as the heralded Republican prophet of color. The email starts on the subject content with, "what a black columnist has to say about Obama," and finishes with notation at the bottom declaring Obama is the anti-Christ, according to the Christian book of Revelations.

**************************************************

"Ken Blackwell - Columnist for the New York Sun

It's an amazing time to be alive in America. We're in a year of firsts in this presidential election: the first viable woman candidate; the first viable African-American candidate; and, a candidate who is the first frontrunning freedom fighter over 70. The next president of America will be a first.

We won't truly be in an election of firsts, however, until we judge every candidate by where they stand. We won't arrive where we should be until we no longer talk about skin color or gender. Now that Barack Obama steps to the front of the Democratic field, we need to stop talking about his race, and start talking about his policies and his politics.

The reality is this: Though the Democrats will not have a nominee until August, unless Hillary Clinton drops out, Mr. Obama is now the frontrunner, and its time America takes a closer and deeper look at him.
Some pundits are calling him the next John F. Kennedy. He's not. He's the next George McGovern. And it's time people learned the facts.

Because the truth is that Mr. Obama is the single most liberal senator in the entire U.S. Senate. He is more liberal than Ted Kennedy, Bernie Sanders, or Mrs. Clinton. Never in my life have I seen a presidential frontrunner whose rhetoric is so far removed from his record. Walter Mondale promised to raise our taxes, and he lost. George McGovern promised military weakness, and he lost. Michael Dukakis promised a liberal domestic agenda, and he l ost.

Yet Mr. Obama is promising all those things, and he's not behind in the polls. Why? Because the press has dealt with him as if he were in a beauty pageant. Mr. Obama talks about getting past party, getting past red and blue, to lead the United States of America. But let's look at the more defined strokes of who he is underneath this superficial "beauty."

Start with national security, since the president's most important duties are as commander-in-chief. Over the summer, Mr. Obama talked about invading Pakistan, a nation armed with nuclear weapons; meeting without preconditions with Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, who vows to destroy Israel and create another Holocaust; and Kim Jong II, who is murdering and starving his people, but emphasized that the nuclear option was off the table against terrorists - something no president has ever taken off the table since we created nuclear weapons in the 1940s. Even Democrats who have worked in national security condemned all of those remarks. Mr. Obama is a foreign-policy novice who would put our national security at risk.

Next, consider economic policy. For all its faults, our health care system is the strongest in the world. And free trade agreements, created by Bill Clinton as well as President Bush, have made more goods more affordable so that even people of modest means can live a life that no one imagined a generation ago. Yet Mr. Obama promises to raise taxes on "the rich." How to fix Social Security? Raise taxes. How to fix Medicare? Raise taxes. Prescription drugs? Raise taxes. Free college? Raise taxes. Socialize medicine? Raise taxes. His solution to everything is to have government take it over. Big Brother on steroids, funded by your paycheck.

Finally, look at the social issues. Mr. Obama had the audacity to open a stadium rally by saying, "All praise and glory to God!" but says that Christian leaders speaking for life and marriage have "hijacked" - hijacked - Christianity. He is pro-partial birth abortion, and promises to appoint Supreme Court justices who will rule any restriction on it unconstitutional. He espouses the abortion views of Margaret Sanger, one of the early advocates of racial cleansing. His spiritual leaders endorse homosexual marriage, and he is moving in that direction. In Illinois, he refused to vote against a statewide ban - ban - on all handguns in the state. These are radical left, Hollywood, and San Francis co values, not Middle America values.

The real Mr. Obama is an easy target for the general election. Mrs. Clinton is a far tougher opponent. But Mr. Obama could win if people don't start looking behind his veneer and flowery speeches. His vision of "bringing America together" means saying that those who disagree with his agenda for America are hijackers or warmongers. Uniting the country means adopting his liberal agenda and abandoning any conflicting beliefs.

But right now everyone is talking about how eloquent of a speaker he is and - yes - they're talking about his race. Those should never be the factors on which we base our choice for president. Mr. Obama's radical agenda sets him far outside the American mainstream, to the left of Mrs. Clinton.

It's time to talk about the real Barack Obama. In an election of firsts, let's first make sure we elect the person who is qualified to be our president in a nuclear age during a global civilizational war.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

*Subject: Kind of scary, wouldn't you think
Remember--God is good, and is in time, on time--every time.
According to The Book of Revelations the anti-christ is:
The anti-christ will be a man, in his 40s, of MUSLIM descent, who will deceive the nations with persuasive language, and have a MASSIVE Christ-like appeal....the prophecy says that people will flock to him and he will promise false hope and world peace, and when he is in power, will destroy everything. Is it OBAMA??
I STRONGLY URGE each one of you to repost this as many times as you can! Each opportunity that you have to send it to a friend or media outlet...do it!
If you think I am crazy..Im sorry but I refuse to take a chance on the "unknown" candidate"


**************************************************

Run Republicans, run. The world will end if Jesus McCain is not be elected? :rolleyes:

Ken Blackwell appears to believes literally what is in the bible. That's enough for me to discount anything that comes out of his mouth.

He doesn't even know it's the Book of Revelation, not Revelations. Sheesh.

The original Blackburn article has no such reference at the end of the piece.

Beyond Obama's Beauty - February 14, 2008 - The New York Sun (http://www.nysun.com/article/71278)

Clearly this was a C/P from one of the many bloggs that posted it.

EDIT : I found the blog the email originated from but it is pass word protected . Bottom line is that the reference to the bible is a reader comment and not from the author .

I agree fully with the theme of the article . Obama's record as thin as it is must be examined but also we need to take full measure of all the candidates . The reality is that means that his associations and his philosophical viewpoints are relevant .

Why are you flashing back to last year when Obama addressed this weeks ago and again as recent as days ago? The Republican news commentators on several televised networks asked the questions of Obama and he answered. I hope Republicans are going to get fitted for hearing aids and eyewear at the convention this year.

LOL, I know of one or two on this board that could use an eye examination (not referring to you of course).


PART III. This is why Obama has said on several occasions, contrary to Republican verbiages and in-spite of their blatant deafness, that he does not agree with the Rev Wright on several of his remarks. Senator Obama, does not solicit Wright for his campaigning advice nor does he give him that exclusive privilege.

And as I pointed out McCain has repeatedly made it clear since the day after receiving Hagee's endorsement that he was not endorsing Hagee's beliefs, yet it hasn't stopped the masses from raising the comparison in response to Obama's current dilemma. I believe you did, did you not my friend?

I raised the past because of Obama's claim that he was never present, never heard any of Wright's nonsense. The Newsmax story which is I admit in dispute at the moment, seems to show otherwise. I'd like to give Obama the benefit of the doubt but I have a really hard time believing that in 20 years he had never heard Wright say anything of the sort, especially considering he called him his mentor and they both, according to the NY Times, knew Obama would have to distance himself. Why? And what took him so long?

You know the guys on the right have no reason to hear anything, unless King Ronald says it, or his co-star monkey. That still think this is 1983, and money will trickle from the pockets, of the rich and uplift the poor. Ain't worked yet. But George is doing his best imitation, but what do you expect from a guy that ran the Rangers into the ground?

I'm firmly grounded in 2008, thank you, and this post I initiated is about Obama and his friend of 20 years, pastor and mentor, Jeremiah Wright - not Bush or Reagan. Obama knew this guy would cause problems for him before he ever announced his candidacy. He has run on the theme that words matter and that he has the judgment for the job. Do words matter or not? Does waiting over a year to distance himself from this guy show good judgment? Does lying about having never heard any of his controversial 'preaching' (http://sweetness-light.com/archive/flashback-nyt-on-obamas-wright-disinvite) show good judgment?

Hello again:

I don't know.

I bought electricity from Enron. I bought long distance service from WorldCom. I buy newspapers from Rupert Murdock. My physician is a political whacko. My attorney is a member of the ACLU. I bought a book by Ayn Rand, and one from David Duke too. I used to listen to Rush Limbaugh. I watch a TV made in China. I eat tomatoes grown in Mexico. My high school history teacher was a communist. My high school principal was a fascist. My paycheck comes from the federal government...

Uhhhh, so what?

excon

Ken Blackwell appears to believes literally what is in the bible. That's enough for me to discount anything that comes out of his mouth.

Ahem, this was not part of the column as tom pointed out:


*Subject: Kind of scary, wouldn't you think
Remember--God is good, and is in time, on time--every time.
According to The Book of Revelations the anti-christ is:
The anti-christ will be a man, in his 40s, of MUSLIM descent, who will deceive the nations with persuasive language, and have a MASSIVE Christ-like appeal... the prophecy says that people will flock to him and he will promise false hope and world peace, and when he is in power, will destroy everything. Is it OBAMA?
I STRONGLY URGE each one of you to repost this as many times as you can! Each opportunity that you have to send it to a friend or media outlet... do it!
If you think I am crazy.. Im sorry but I refuse to take a chance on the "unknown" candidate"

Bobby's notice that this was an "email chain going around" should have been your first clue that this portion was added by the blogger, not the columnist.

excon did you befriend David Duke and go to his white sheets meetings for 20 years ?

Hello again:

I read an email that said while John McCain was in the North Vietnam prison, he was brainwashed to take over the US and make it Communist.

Send this to everybody you know... We can't take a chance...

excon

Hello again:

I read an email that said while John McCain was in the North Vietnam prison, he was brainwashed to take over the US and make it Communist.

Send this to everybody you know.... We can't take a chance....

exconI got that email too. I'm sending it to all. Mine also said that he has associations with racists in South Carolina and something about Keating scandal.

Did the email about McCain and the Keating scandal happen to mention that Robert Bennett, who would later represent President Bill Clinton in the Paula Jones case, was the special counsel for the Senate Ethics Committee . That he did not think that McCain should've been included in the Senators hauled before the committee but the majority Democrats needed a sacrificial Republican to prove the scandal was bi-partisan ?

"In the case of Senator McCain, there is very substantial evidence that he thought he had an understanding with Senator DeConcini's office that certain matters would not be gone into at the meeting with (bank board) Chairman (Ed) Gray," Bennett said.

"Moreover, there is substantial evidence that, as a result of Senator McCain's refusal to do certain things, he had a fallout with Mr. Keating."

The investigation found that he was the least culpable, along with Sen John Glenn. McCain attended the meetings arranged for Keating but did nothing afterward to stop Lincoln S&L from going out of business.

McCain received only a mild rebuke from the Ethics Committee for exercising "poor judgment" for intervening with the federal regulators on behalf of Keating .At the time McCain felt justified because Keating was a constituent .However it is undeniable that Keating was a campaign fund raiser for McCain and had done favors for him. There was no appearance of quid pro quo. Still McCain admits to anyone who listens that it was the biggest mistake of his public service. Since then he has been a champion of all types of reform related to lobbying and he correctly brags that he never asks for earmark spending . Can Obama and Hillary make the same claim ?

I got that email too. I'm sending it to all. Mine also said that he has associations with racists in South Carolina and something about Keating scandal.

I don't bother to read any conspiracy emails, I hit the delete key.

Good news for all those Wright supporters out there, even though Obama is distancing himself, Cindy Sheehan is not and offers a stirring amen (http://salsa.wiredforchange.com/o/1590/t/2705/blog/comments.jsp?key=346&blog_entry_KEY=21092&t=) to Wright's messages.

I raised the past because of Obama's claim that he was never present, never heard any of Wright's nonsense. The Newsmax story which is I admit in dispute at the moment, seems to show otherwise. I'd like to give Obama the benefit of the doubt but I have a really hard time believing that in 20 years he had never heard Wright say anything of the sort, especially considering he called him his mentor and they both, according to the NY Times, knew Obama would have to distance himself. Why? And what took him so long?

People who have read advanced copies of the speech Obama will make today have confirmed that Obama admits to being in the church when Wright made some of these statements . But overall they say it is comparable to Romney's address ;although he takes shots at conservatives so reaction will probably still fall along party lines.

Excon did you befriend David Duke and go to his white sheets meetings for 20 years ?Hello again, tom:

No, but I was married to rightwinger for 18 years. I don't think it's rubbed off, has it? And, I was pretty close to her...


McCain received only a mild rebuke from the Ethics Committee for exercising "poor judgment".... Can Obama and Hillary make the same claim ?I don't know. I don't think Obama has been rebuked by the Ethics Committee. Has he?? Nahhhh, he's rubuke free. You just want to make him look bad.

Do you want a president with the first name JOHN? Do you know what a JOHN is? How disgusting...

excon

Lol

WE have a bigger problem than that in the NY NJ area . WE can't seem to find Governors who can keep their pants up . That includes our new Governor sworn in yesterday David Paterson .

The Associated Press: Report: New NY Governor Admits Affair (http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5i-jZDFiRmQdAUEK-OTzPSVIrBxOQD8VFJLSO0)

excon there are plenty of things my wife and I disagree about. This is not the same . A better analogy would be you attending synagogue for 20 years and then claiming that it has nothing to do with your value system . I want him to explain how black liberation theology has shaped him ;just like Romney did when he defended Mormanism.

Hello again, tom:

I don't disagree. It's a problem for him. Let's see how he handles it today when he address this very issue. If he nails it, he's going to be president.

excon

lol

WE have a bigger problem than that in the NY NJ area . WE can't seem to find Governors who can keep their pants up . That includes our new Governor sworn in yesterday David Paterson


That was the first story I heard today... right before I read about the alleged threesome in NJ, LOL. What do they put in the water up there tom?

The preemptive strike by both Paterson and his wife was smart though - Obama could have learned a thing or two from that.

Well, he nailed it (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=88478467) - at least for those enraptured by the man. I'm not buying what he has to sell.

I'm not buying what he has to sell.Well duh!

Well, he nailed it (http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=88478467) - at least for those enraptured by the man. I'm not buying what he has to sell.


That's your decision to turn down a good education.

Well duh!

Brilliant response as usual NK.

Brilliant response as usual NK.Thanks man. I'm known for my succinctness as I don't have nearly the free time as you do.

Not bad ; he almost nailed it . If I had a chance to ask him some questions here are a few off the top of my head

Senator you talk about the need to end segregation but you attend a church that advances the notion of seperateness. How do you explain the contradiction ?
I dispute your contention about the Reagan coalition.Reagan earned the votes of nearly 100 million Americans in his two landslide victories, and yet we're supposed to believe that his success was built on white racism.

Senator I won't quibble too much as to your timeline about the Constitutional convention . (it occurred in the heat of the summer... not spring )

Senator do you think that the acceptance of liberal paternalism has helped advance the lot of the black family ? How do you explain the upwardly mobile black community that has embraced rather than rejected "middleclassness" ;that has embraced "hope " rather than the victimization that your pastor Rev Wright exploits ?

I still maintain that his relationship with Rev Wright would be a disqualifier for anyone else. But he probably brought himself some time to prove that he and Rev Wright are at odds on the issues that the Rev rants about.

Bottom line for me will be in the details . He has yet to distance himself from the worn out liberal prescriptions that has I believe contributed to the lack of progress he outlined. So what will really change with an Obama Presidency ? A new face selling the same product ?

That's your decision to turn down a good education.

Bobby, come on, I know he's your guy and that's fine, but in over 40 years of attending church I have never, ever heard anything remotely close to the bile spewed by Wright - and yes I have attended black churches a few times as well.

It doesn't take much of an education to know all along that Obama was lying over the weekend about what he knew of his pastor and mentor. You don't spend 20 years in a church and not have a really good idea of what goes on there, and for Obama to spin this as he has today. Kathryn Jean Lopez made a good point (http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=MGU3YzI3NGFlNGUyMmVmN2I1NmE0NDQ3NGIxNTMzZGU=) about Obama's speech:


There's also this that bothers me: His loyalty to Wright seems to run a little too deep. As a friend e-mailed me during the speech: "I always thought what created a controversy was that statements made or positions held might be true, notwithstanding that they were unpopular and even bracing. In that sense, Wright's statements that Obama heard were crank statements, not controversial statements, no matter how hard he tries to sugarcoat."

They were not merely "controversial" statements they were extreme and outrageous. They offend me as a white man, as an American and as a Christian and give valid reason to question Obama's judgment. It was just 3 weeks ago that Obama said this of his church:


“I don’t think that my church is actually particularly controversial. It is a member of the United Church of Christ. It’s got a choir. We sing hymnals. We talk about scripture. You would feel at home if you were there.”

I guess that depends on who "you" might be. Today, the pastor of this not "particularly controversial" church has "expressed a profoundly distorted view of this country – a view that sees white racism as endemic, and that elevates what is wrong with America above all that we know is right with America; a view that sees the conflicts in the Middle East as rooted primarily in the actions of stalwart allies like Israel," not to mention "divisive" and "racially charged."

Which is it? Time and again of late Obama and his campaign have been entirely inconsistent, on this issue, on NAFTA, on Iraq, and on why he disinvited Wright (http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=MDI2Y2IyMDY2YjE3YTMzOThhM2Y1ZmNmOTU1YWYxZjA=) from giving the invocation at his announcement ceremony. Why am I to believe him now, and why should I believe his rhetoric about uniting the nation and healing racial divides? I need an education to spot this kind of inconsistency?

Bottom line for me will be in the details . He has yet to distance himself from the worn out liberal prescriptions that has I believe contributed to the lack of progress he outlined. So what will really change with an Obama Presidency ? A new face selling the same product ?

Peter Kirsanow at NRO makes a decent case that he will be selling the same product (http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=ZmI5YzJlNWU1OWE2NzE1OTRkZTVjMjRhOWFlMzA1YWE=).

Victor Davis Hansen calls his speech An Elegant Farce (http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YWVkMThjN2RjNDU2N2EzODE1YWRmZmQwMTE0YWFkMzg=) about moral equivalence.

Thomas Sowell sums up the controversy (http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YTQ0MDI5ZDE5MTcyYjBmMjI0MmVhZjhiOTM2MDI5NzM=) this way:


The fact that Obama talks differently than Jeremiah Wright does not mean that his track record is different. Barack Obama’s voting record in the Senate is perfectly consistent with the far-left ideology and the grievance culture, just as his wife’s statement that she was never proud of her country before is consistent with that ideology.

Senator Barack Obama’s political success thus far has been a blow for equality. But equality has its down side.

Equality means that a black demagogue who has been exposed as a phony deserves exactly the same treatment as a white demagogue who has been exposed as a phony.

We don’t need a president of the United States who got to the White House by talking one way, voting a very different way in the Senate, and who for 20 years followed a man whose words and deeds contradict Obama’s carefully crafted election-year image.

My sympathies exactly.

Ahem, this was not part of the column as tom pointed out:



Bobby's notice that this was an "email chain going around" should have been your first clue that this portion was added by the blogger, not the columnist.

My apologies. I retract my statement then.

My apologies. I retract my statement then.

Not a problem Skell. :)

I really enjoyed that speech. Once again his words inspired me. They gave me hope that the US isn't as doomed as it sometimes appears to the world. Something that you guys see as hollow, I see as an unyielding desire to change the world as we see it.

If Obama is lying then he is one of the greatest actors of all time. But given the US's record of electing former / part time actors to government positions it shouldn't really matter :)

I raised the past because of Obama's claim that he was never present, never heard any of Wright's nonsense.

You've been out of the loop then. Obama did say he heard some comments, not just everything that has been brought up as news. He doesn't attend every service, he can't. He's running a campaign for heavens sake. Most all the candidates are sleep deprived with the exception for McCain, who looks like he never woke up. But for the record, Obama did re-address this all again today in a very educational speech.





My apologies. I retract my statement then.


Actually I think Skell got the point while others whiffed. Again the columnist had his say in the email and then a Republican supporter added to it that Obama was the anti-Christ. Yes. An email going around for perhaps thousands, maybe millions, that will read their sick dynamic duo view, as it circulates as a whole.