The Obama Thread (Merged x6)

[Excel]

Im gonna say it now, The end of Hillarys road may be in North Carolina. After Mississippi, Obama shoud have roughly 165 pledged delegate lead on clinton and about 130 total delegate lead on her.

(^using rcp's totals)

If she does not win Pennsylvania, shes done, obviously. But realistically she will win but it will probably by a 8-12% win at most. Again 75% of the states population are cities and urban areas, places that heavily favors Obama.

The thing is, if thats the case she'll get roughly 84-85 delegates to his 68-70. That pledged delegate lead will drop to about 150ish. Than NC has 100 delegates and polls have Obama winning by about 100%. Assuming polls hold which they should, I cant recall a place where Hillarey trailed early (nor as large as 10%) and ended up winning in this whole process. After NC, the leada back up 156 and with no real major states left...itd be all over.


http://www.city-journal.org/2008/eon0306gs.html

europe also appearently loves Obama.

[SentinelMind]

Im gonna say it now, The end of Hillarys road may be in North Carolina. After Mississippi, Obama shoud have roughly 165 pledged delegate lead on clinton and about 130 total delegate lead on her.

(^using rcp's totals)

If she does not win Pennsylvania, shes done, obviously. But realistically she will win but it will probably by a 8-12% win at most. Again 75% of the states population are cities and urban areas, places that heavily favors Obama.

The thing is, if thats the case she'll get roughly 84-85 delegates to his 68-70. That pledged delegate lead will drop to about 150ish. Than NC has 100 delegates and polls have Obama winning by about 100%. Assuming polls hold which they should, I cant recall a place where Hillarey trailed early (nor as large as 10%) and ended up winning in this whole process. After NC, the leada back up 156 and with no real major states left...itd be all over.


http://www.city-journal.org/2008/eon0306gs.html

europe also appearently loves Obama.


how soon we all forget New Hampshire....

[Memphis Slim]

Mel, kiss my grits. :up:

jag


http://www.americangoodies.nl/catalog/images/qg_quickgrits.jpeg

Man! We luv some grits!!! :ikyn

[The Senator]

Im gonna say it now, The end of Hillarys road may be in North Carolina. After Mississippi, Obama shoud have roughly 165 pledged delegate lead on clinton and about 130 total delegate lead on her.

(^using rcp's totals)

If she does not win Pennsylvania, shes done, obviously. But realistically she will win but it will probably by a 8-12% win at most. Again 75% of the states population are cities and urban areas, places that heavily favors Obama.

The thing is, if thats the case she'll get roughly 84-85 delegates to his 68-70. That pledged delegate lead will drop to about 150ish. Than NC has 100 delegates and polls have Obama winning by about 100%. Assuming polls hold which they should, I cant recall a place where Hillarey trailed early (nor as large as 10%) and ended up winning in this whole process. After NC, the leada back up 156 and with no real major states left...itd be all over.


http://www.city-journal.org/2008/eon0306gs.html

europe also appearently loves Obama.

The end of Hillary's road will be, at the very latest, the convention in Denver at the end of August. As it has been said repeatedly, neither candidate will have the pledged delegates needed to clinch the nomination before the end of the primary season. Her chances of surpassing Obama in the delegate count may be over; but her chances of winning at the convention are as strong as they've ever been.

The only way this will be over before August is if Clinton drops out, or if the two join forces in a joint ticket. I don't see either happening before June, and I really don't think either will happen before August.

[Marx]

As for the B. Hussein Obama line, check out Ms. (Mr.?) Anne Coulter. Did you have fun dating her in college, Slim?

Naaah........I like my women with curves. :woot:


:lmao:

[souvlaki]

how soon we all forget New Hampshire....

Maybe I'm remembering things incorrectly, but Clinton was ahead by a wide margin in that state until the week before. It wasn't until after Iowa that he caught up. New Hampshire is more comparable to Texas and Ohio than North Carolina.

[souvlaki]

Point being he is right. I can't remember a single time where Obama had an early lead in a state and Hillary caught up. By early lead I dont mean a state where Hillary had a lead, Obama caught up, and then ended up losing it. There may have been a state or two on Super Tuesday, but I'm personally drawing a blank. All the states Clinton has won, she was at one point or another favored to win that state.

[Marx]

Maybe I'm remembering things incorrectly, but Clinton was ahead by a wide margin in that state until the week before. It wasn't until after Iowa that he caught up. New Hampshire is more comparable to Texas and Ohio than North Carolina.

The polls had Obama leading. That's why there was such "shock" when Hillary won.

[SentinelMind]

^(to souvlaki) Obama may have been ahead by one to three points in Texas and maybe Ohio in some polls (which Hillary ended up winning), but Obama not only caught up but was ahead by 10 points over Hillary two days before New Hampshire....all the polls showed Obama at least 5 points ahead after Iowa, but Hillary ended sealing the deal.

Either way, as jman said, this is going to convention. Obama's lead means nothing, he has no claim to nomination because he doesn't have enough votes....

[Excel]

The end of Hillary's road will be, at the very latest, the convention in Denver at the end of August. As it has been said repeatedly, neither candidate will have the pledged delegates needed to clinch the nomination before the end of the primary season. Her chances of surpassing Obama in the delegate count may be over; but her chances of winning at the convention are as strong as they've ever been.

The only way this will be over before August is if Clinton drops out, or if the two join forces in a joint ticket. I don't see either happening before June, and I really don't think either will happen before August.

Thats true, I meant sort unnofficial end of the road. Her chances af passing Obama in dlegeted, pledged delegates, or votes would effectivley be over, and therefore so would any major shot at the nomination.

Aftet this Tuesday, Obama will over 1600 delegates while she'll be under 1500. After Pennsylvania and NC, hell be at atleast 1727 (69 out of 158 from PENN, 58 from 117 from NC).

Assuming he gets 45% of the delegates from Indiana, West Virginia, Oregon, and Kentucky, that would put him at 1817 and Hillary (who recieved all other delegates fromthose states) at 1737.

Assuming she wins in 60%-60% in Montana and South Dakota, she'll have 1755 to Obamas 1829.

The only remaining place would be Puerto Rico. If she win 65-35, that would given them both totals 1790 to Obamas 1850.

At this point Obama would need 175 super delegates to get him the nomination, Clinton would need 235. So you see she could even get the majority of super delegates to go against the popular vote n pledged delegates...but it still probably wouldnt be enough.

how soon we all forget New Hampshire....

Key word was early...she lead there forever up until the final week, many proclaimed it a lock for her going into the week before the polls suddenly turned.

[Marx]

^(to souvlaki) Obama may have been ahead by one to three points in Texas and maybe Ohio in some polls (which Hillary ended up winning), but Obama not only caught up but was ahead by 10 points over Hillary two days before New Hampshire....all the polls showed Obama at least 5 points ahead after Iowa, but Hillary ended sealing the deal.

Either way, as jman said, this is going to convention. Obama's lead means nothing, he has no claim to nomination because he doesn't have enough votes....

That's what I've been saying all along. Some die-hard Obama supporters refuse to see it that way though.

[Excel]

The polls had Obama leading. That's why there was such "shock" when Hillary won.

Thats why I said EARLY.

Prior to that week, she was thought to be a lock to win. Go to the NH thread and read the first prediction it was all HILLARY HILLAY HILLARY. The shock was in the week leading up to it, Obamas media and press sky rockets and so did his polls numbers. Thats why EARLY is so important.

Everything so state polls have shown one thing: places where Obama leads early, he will win because she hasn't. Places where Hillary leads early, Obama has won. PLaces where she leads big (Texas, Ohio, Cali were all 15%+ favorites to Hillary in the weeks before the elctions) he closes the gap.

Which is why...if Obama leads in NC right now with 2 months ago, it would be a real shock if Hillary somehow changed their minds because changing peoples minds is the one thing she has not been able to do.

[Excel]

That's what I've been saying all along. Some die-hard Obama supporters refuse to see it that way though.

I know it is, but as I mentioned above, the minimum amount of delegates Obama shouls have going in there is 1850 while the maximum she could get is 1790. So the fact is, she could get the majority of super delegates to go for her and STILL lose because Obama only needs 175 while she would need 235.

In all likelyhood, Obama will need somewhere around 100-125 while she will need over 300. Lets be relaistic, the probability of her taking the remaining superdelagets better than 3 to 1 is impossible.

[souvlaki]

That's what I've been saying all along. Some die-hard Obama supporters refuse to see it that way though.

Since last Tuesday I've never denied that. The only way this is ending early is if she loses Pennsylvania, and I'm not getting my hopes up. And those New Hampshire polls were conflicting. There was only one poll that I know of where he had as high as a 10% lead. My point still stands, she was an early favorite in that state.

[Excel]

Interesting Math, Obama might want Florida and Michigan to revote more than hillary does...

Esimated delegate counts after wyoming, Mississippi:
Obama: 1608
Clinton: 1480

In Pennsylvania, I will give Hillary 90 delegates to Obamas 68, a 57-43 win for Hillary.

In North Carolina, I will have them split. Obama leads polls big early, and Hillary has never won a state where Obama lead in polls early. She has 1 place where he lead in most polls leading up to , which was New Hampshire. Even Texas polls final averge on RCP had Hillary winning by 2% average. So, assuming Hillary does the so far impossible and catches Obama in North Carolina and they split the delegates, i touwld go 59 for Hillary, 57 for Obama.

Totals right now would be:

Obama: 1733:
Clinton: 1629

Now in Indiana, West Virginia, Oregon, and Kentucky, I will give Hillary 56%-44% wins.
That adds 89 to Obama, and 114 to Hillary's.

Totals so far:
Obama: 1822
Clinton: 1743

I'll give her 60%-40% wins in South Dakota and Montana. Thats would give her an additional 18 delegates to Obamas 12.

The only remaining place would be Puerto Rico. If she win 65-35, that gives her 36 and Obama 19.

Final totals:
Obama: 1853
Clinton: 1797

Theres an estimates 500 super delegates left and Obama needs 172 while she needs 228. She would have to convince 65% of the super delegates to go against the voters. Which is not happening.

Just for fun, I will add in Florida and Michigan.

Florida has 210 delegates, Hillary got 50% to Obama 33% in January. Edwards took 14%. Now, obviously it would be closer. Given the demos, it screams another Cali. Ill give Hillary 56%-44%.

Michigan has 156 delegates and current polls have them tied. Ill say Hillary wins, 54-46. The 2 states would give hillary 191 more delagates, and would give Obama 165 more.

The totals would be the following:

Clinton: 1988
Obama: 2018

Again, its still over. Obama would only need 7 supers to go his way. There would not be very many left, but 7 would still be a smalle rnumber of that amount. And thats WORST case scenario really. NC wont go 59-57 for Hillary, it will likely go around 87-73 area for Obama. If polls right now have them tied in Michigan, it would seem unlikely Hillarys pulls out a big win. Also i assumed all were primaries. if there are any upcoming cuacus's, obama should win them.

Is there a Clintin supporter out there who can logically refute this? Again, if Florida and Michigan do indeed revote, it will defiently narrow the gap...but they would more than likely also push Obama over 2025.

[souvlaki]

Interesting Math, Obama might want Florida and Michigan to revote more than hillary does...

Given that it's looking like Michigan may be a caucus state, I would actually predict he might do better than that there. Also take into account that uncommitted received almost half the vote (and those are just the people that felt motivated enough to leave their house and vote AGAINST Hillary as opposed to voting FOR Obama).

[souvlaki]

Nevermind, I just noticed that according to that article current polls have them tied in Michigan. Well crap, if they are tied in Michigan, and they end up doing caucuses there I'd say Obama would win that state easily.

[Marx]

Nevermind, I just noticed that according to that article current polls have them tied in Michigan. Well crap, if they are tied in Michigan, and they end up doing caucuses there I'd say Obama would win that state easily.

I just don't think that caucus's reflect the majority of the voting electorate. A small 2-3 hour window is hardly enough time to get an accurate voting bloc.

[Lightning Strykez!]

CNN has projected that Barry Obama has taken Wyoming.

[jaguarr]

CNN has projected that Barry Obama has taken Wyoming.

Awwwwyeahhhhhh, Barry!

3XhS80rwjIg

jag

[\S/JcDc\S/]

LOL BARRY :p

Anyways, it seems mathematically unlikely that Hillary can pass him. Guess this goes to the convention.

[Lightning Strykez!]

Awwwwyeahhhhhh, Barry!

3XhS80rwjIg

jag

:lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao::lmao:

[Marx]

CNN has projected that Barry Obama has taken Wyoming.

That's not surprising. It IS a caucus.

[Lightning Strykez!]

That's not surprising. It IS a caucus.

Well it's not like Hillary can't win a caucus. She's won like...3 out of 12. :dry:

[Marx]

Well it's not like Hillary can't win a caucus. She's won like...3 out of 12. :dry:

HA HA HA HA...that's my point. They do tend to favor Barack. :cwink:

[hippie_hunter]

Not much of a surprise and not that big of a deal since Wyoming got very little coverage and has only 12 delegates. And it really won't help much for either candidate since Obama got 7 delegates to Clinton's 4.

[Kelly]

Well it's not like Hillary can't win a caucus. She's won like...3 out of 12. :dry:


Her base are just not Caucus goers.....Blue collar, shift workers, elderly. They are just not normal caucus goers.

[Marx]

Not much of a surprise and not that big of a deal since Wyoming got very little coverage and has only 12 delegates. And it really won't help much for either candidate since Obama got 7 delegates to Clinton's 4.

Yeah that's not that big of a deal. (The delegate split isn't anyway.)

[Arkady Rossovich]

Obama's win in Wyoming has nearly erased what Clinton has done. Very good for Obama,even a little bit makes a difference.

[Marx]

Obama's win in Wyoming has nearly erased what Clinton has done. Very good for Obama,even a little bit makes a difference.

Winning Wyoming hardly makes up for losing Texas, Rhode Island, and Ohio.

[Sebastos]

Obama bouncing back and winning Wyoming is great news. :up:

[Kelly]

Well as far as Texas is concerned.....we still don't know who won the majority of the delegates.........

[Cory]

whats the best website for delegate counts....well, whichever one updates the most.

[Kelly]

Pretty much every site you go to is going to have a different count from the others......I don't know that anyone has an exact count.

[Sebastos]

Edit.

[redfirebird2008]

Pretty much every site you go to is going to have a different count from the others......I don't know that anyone has an exact count.

They don't. Just further proof that this is a cluster**** no matter how you spin it. :woot:

[Marx]

whats the best website for delegate counts....well, whichever one updates the most.

CNN Politics is usually pretty good. Although any major news website will also have them.

[Kelly]

Well, definitely there are going to be some changes made to the DNC's way of picking their candidate. THAT we can be sure of.....lol

[Kelly]

CNN Politics is usually pretty good. Although any major news website will also have them.

CNN's count is different from FNC, and theres is different from MSNBC...lmao.

[Marx]

Well, definitely there are going to be some changes made to the DNC's way of picking their candidate. THAT we can be sure of.....lol

I think after all of this, the process needs to be looked at. I never thought I'd say something like this but - The RNC seems to make things a little easier in the voting process.

[Marx]

CNN's count is different from FNC, and theres is different from MSNBC...lmao.

Which is different from ABC, NBC, CBS, and on and on. Another reason why this is all so easily confusing!

[Kelly]

I think after all of this, the process needs to be looked at. I never thought I'd say something like this but - The RNC seems to make things a little easier in the voting process.

The RNC always has.......but DNC has simply had a frontrunner early on, therefore the cracks were never really seen.


Oh yeah, going by popular vote only always makes things easier....

[Cory]

wow i cant believe there isnt any tv station or website that can give a good accurate count

[kal-el2006]

Congrats to Obama

final count : Obama: %61 Clinton %38

[Marx]

wow i cant believe there isnt any tv station or website that can give a good accurate count

Yeah for some reason, everyone is way off.

[Kelly]

It's the percentage thing........and the fact that Texas still isn't sure.....so there is speculation on the part of the News.......it is crazy.

[Marx]

It's the percentage thing........and the fact that Texas still isn't sure.....so there is speculation on the part of the News.......it is crazy.

Well it would be nice if they could all be the same. FOR ONCE! :funny:

[Kelly]

Well it would be nice if they could all be the same. FOR ONCE! :funny:


They will be.......When they announce........The next President of the United States at the Democratic National Convention. Look at the delegate count they give, and you'll have the actual count.:applaud

[Marx]

They will be.......When they announce........The next President of the United States at the Democratic National Convention. Look at the delegate count they give, and you'll have the actual count.:applaud

But it would be nice to know ahead of time Kel :cwink:

[Kelly]

But it would be nice to know ahead of time Kel :cwink:


With undecided delegates, and delegates able to change their minds.....with the DNC.....you'll never know unless you have a clear frontrunner, way in the lead.....and even then you don't know the actual count, you just know that the opponent has no chance of winning in the end....so the count doesn't matter.

[Marx]

With undecided delegates, and delegates able to change their minds.....with the DNC.....you'll never know unless you have a clear frontrunner, way in the lead.....and even then you don't know the actual count, you just know that the opponent has no chance of winning in the end....so the count doesn't matter.

True. Hopefully the DNC process of electing a nominee will be look at.

[Excel]

real clear politics is pretty good, its updated every half minute.

[Marx]

real clear politics is pretty good, its updated every half minute.

I haven't heard of that one, I'll have to check it out Ex! http://www.superherohype.com/forums/images/smilies/icon14.gif

[Excel]

Really? its the best site around, it has every poll from every state n all that good **** :up:

[Marx]

Really? its the best site around, it has every poll from every state n all that good **** :up:

Seriously never heard of it. I appreciate the heads up Ex :yay:

[redfirebird2008]

Yeah RCP is a pretty good site. I think the proportionate delegate system is better than the RNC's primaries or the general election. I do think that both parties should have shorter primary seasons where you have say 4 days of elections total. 4 Super Tuesday's if you will, rather than a drawn out process.

[Marx]

Yeah RCP is a pretty good site. I think the proportionate delegate system is better than the RNC's primaries or the general election. I do think that both parties should have shorter primary seasons where you have say 4 days of elections total. 4 Super Tuesday's if you will, rather than a drawn out process.

4 Super Tuesdays? :shock Oh my...I don't know if I could handle it :funny:

[The Senator]

Yeah RCP is a pretty good site. I think the proportionate delegate system is better than the RNC's primaries or the general election. I do think that both parties should have shorter primary seasons where you have say 4 days of elections total. 4 Super Tuesday's if you will, rather than a drawn out process.

I disagree with this. A shorter primary season gives well-financed, highly-publicized candidates a stronger advantage than some of their opponents. It would discourage voter participation on a state-by-state basis, and would make a lot of states simply irrelevant, because candidates will focus on the delegate-heavy states rather than the smaller ones. The Democratic candidates are campaigning in Pennsylvania, Texas, and Ohio competitively for the first time in two decades... not to mention they are giving the same treatment to states like Mississippi, Wyoming and Maine. I support keeping the system the way it is. It makes politics interesting, and there isn't a coronation of one candidate because he or she had a good night or two.

[\S/JcDc\S/]

Winning Wyoming hardly makes up for losing Texas, Rhode Island, and Ohio.

Many would argue that TX, RI, and OH don't make up for losing 12 straight.

So yeah, normally winning one after losing 3 means nothing... But when you were on a streak of 12, and your opponent wins 3, winning the next one no matter the delegate count does help in the campaign.

[Marx]

Many would argue that TX, RI, and OH don't make up for losing 12 straight.

So yeah, normally winning won after losing 3 means nothing... But when you were on a streak of 12, and your opponent wins 3, winning the next one no matter the delegate count does help in the campaign.

You do have a point. But impact-wise, wyoming doesn't do much.

[Marx]

Apparently the media pendulum is swinging back and forth. The New York Times just recently published an article in which they are essentially asking "where's the beef?" The Times is drawing comparisons between the star power and the role of Barack Obama in the Senate. I thought it was interesting. Check it out.


Obama in Senate: Star Power, Minor Role
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/09/us/politics/09obama.html?_r=2&ref=politics&oref=slogin&oref=slogin

[\S/JcDc\S/]

Honestly when the media FINALLY gave him decent coverage it had no affect on me. I made up my mind when I started seeing him in townhall meetings. Good or bad media attention won't factor much in my decision process.

[Marx]

Honestly when the media FINALLY gave him decent coverage it had no affect on me. I made up my mind when I started seeing him in townhall meetings. Good or bad media attention won't factor much in my decision process.

It shouldn't effect your decision. I am just finding it all interesting that the media is playing this game between the two. Obama was winning, he's nearly untouchable in the press. He lost TX, RI, and OH and the media decides to turn up the heat.

[\S/JcDc\S/]

It shouldn't effect your decision. I am just finding it all interesting that the media is playing this game between the two. Obama was winning, he's nearly untouchable in the press. He lost TX, RI, and OH and the media decides to turn up the heat.

The heat was turned up by Hillary going on the offense (red phone add) and the media followed.

I must say, a smart decision because it makes it harder with the type of campaign Obama is trying to run based on integrity. Now for him to go on the offense it's harder for the public to take than her doing so :o

Also remember the media had her ahead in both states by 20% a couple weeks before. Yes, he did end up losing them but Texas was very close and he won the caucus... Again this is also after winning 12 straight, so I don't see how the media would turn on him just based on those Clinton victories.

[redfirebird2008]

I disagree with this. A shorter primary season gives well-financed, highly-publicized candidates a stronger advantage than some of their opponents. It would discourage voter participation on a state-by-state basis, and would make a lot of states simply irrelevant, because candidates will focus on the delegate-heavy states rather than the smaller ones. The Democratic candidates are campaigning in Pennsylvania, Texas, and Ohio competitively for the first time in two decades... not to mention they are giving the same treatment to states like Mississippi, Wyoming and Maine. I support keeping the system the way it is. It makes politics interesting, and there isn't a coronation of one candidate because he or she had a good night or two.

It would be closer to how a general election is practiced, which is what the candidates need to be ready for. In fact, one Super Tuesday would be even better. Have all 50 states vote at the same time. And by the way, it would favor Hillary big time. :cwink:

[Marx]

The heat was turned up by Hillary going on the offense (red phone add) and the media followed.

I must say, a smart decision because it makes it harder with the type of campaign Obama is trying to run based on integrity. Now for him to go on the offense it's harder for the public to take than her doing so :o

Also remember the media had her ahead in both states by 20% a couple weeks before. Yes, he did end up losing them but Texas was very close and he won the caucus... Again this is also after winning 12 straight, so I don't see how the media would turn on him just based on those Clinton victories.

The rhetoric is definately being turned up. And you're right, it does make it incredibly difficult for Obama to go negative with the campaign that he is running. I think it's a mistake on his part honestly. Clinton never claimed to be above negativity, Obama, on the other hand, says he is "above the fray." He has painted himself in a corner.

[BlackLantern]

Here is a novel concept...how about people actually going and voting on Election Day? that's the problem with a lot of younger voters...they will do all the rallies, primaries, and caucuses....but won't go out and vote on Election Day

[Marx]

Here is a novel concept...how about people actually going and voting on Election Day? that's the problem with a lot of younger voters...they will do all the rallies, primaries, and caucuses....but won't go out and vote on Election Day

You couldn't be more right BL. The younger voting bloc doesn't always follow through and that needs to change.

[Kelly]

That is a huge factor....as I posted earlier........sometimes simply "having something else to do" keeps them from the polls.......relying on that voting block is a huge risk.

[Excel]

They have been coming out though...

[BlackLantern]

They have been coming out though...

but not on Election Day, when it counts....I bet if you took a look at the number of registered voters(under 30) that vote in the primaries and the caucuses, as opposed to those same voters who turn out on Election day, there will be a huge gap....

[Kelly]

They have been coming out though...


True, and they did in a good percentage in 2004 in the primaries....but did not make it to the polls in November.



Puff Daddy or P. Diddy or Sean Combs, whateve the hell he calls himself these days.....is the perfect example....

He pushed the whole...."Vote or Die" campaign.......and then in the end.....didn't even vote.

[Lightning Strykez!]

Winning Wyoming hardly makes up for losing Texas, Rhode Island, and Ohio.

Technically, Obama didn't lose Texas. Final results won't be released until March 29th, but the word on the street is that he actually won the Texas caucus--and he was like...a HAIR behind her in the primary. Very, very close defeat there.

EDIT

[Lightning Strykez!]

That is a huge factor....as I posted earlier........sometimes simply "having something else to do" keeps them from the polls.......relying on that voting block is a huge risk.

Aye...but if Hillary wins the nomination it will no longer be a risk: that liberal youth support will evaporate.

[Marx]

Technically, Obama didn't lose Ohio. Final results won't be released until March 29th, but the word on the street is that he actually won the Texas caucus--and he was like...a HAIR behind her in the primary. Very, very close defeat there.

What? :huh:

[Lightning Strykez!]

I meant Texas. Stop reading my posts so carefully!!!!! :cmad:

[Marx]

I meant Texas. Stop reading my posts so carefully!!!!! :cmad:

No I was just really confused Lightning! Thank you for clearing it up! :smile:

[jaguarr]

True, and they did in a good percentage in 2004 in the primaries....but did not make it to the polls in November.



Puff Daddy or P. Diddy or Sean Combs, whateve the hell he calls himself these days.....is the perfect example....

He pushed the whole...."Vote or Die" campaign.......and then in the end.....didn't even vote.

I say we hold him to his word. :)

jag

[BlackLantern]

I say we hold him to his word. :)

jag

The world might be a better place...

[Lightning Strykez!]

After his woeful performance in "Raisin In The Sun" he needs to die. :rolleyes:

[jaguarr]

The world might be a better place...

After his woeful performance in "Raisin In The Sun" he needs to die. :rolleyes:

He can change his name to Puff Deady. :up:

jag

[redfirebird2008]

Anyone seen the Republican Iowa Congressman that claimed Al Quaeda will be dancing in the streets if Barack is elected President because of his name? What a douche bag. Yeah, I'm sure Al Quaeda is really looking forward to getting bombed like crazy in Afghanistan and Pakistan, which is Barack's plan. He needs to just start making fun of these idiots that are questioning his name/religion. Bust out with a line like, "Damn straight my middle name is Hussein. I'm also a Christian. You got a problem with that?" at every one of his speeches.

[cyborg ninja 14]

Anyone seen the Republican Iowa Congressman that claimed Al Quaeda will be dancing in the streets if Barack is elected President because of his name? What a douche bag. Yeah, I'm sure Al Quaeda is really looking forward to getting bombed like crazy in Afghanistan and Pakistan, which is Barack's plan. He needs to just start making fun of these idiots that are questioning his name/religion. Bust out with a line like, "Damn straight my middle name is Hussein. I'm also a Christian. You got a problem with that?" at every one of his speeches.

Or Obama is a Muslim posing as a Christian:cwink:

[Cory]

thought this was hilarious

2Xb3bDwE9jQ

[Excel]

hahahaha

[Varient]

thought this was hilarious

2Xb3bDwE9jQ

I'm laughing,.... but this ain't right,.......

[Excel]

I still find "Iraq Huessin Osama" the funniest Obama joke

[Varient]

Or Obama is a Muslim posing as a Christian:cwink:

Meh.
Someone remind me the next time we have a white canidate who may have been raised lutherine and went jewish.

I'm sure we can make it belivable that the guy is just playing,... cause once a lutherine always a lutherine,....

(disgusted at the monomanic mindset that can state with athority what ones beliefs are based on name or color.)

[jaguarr]

Haha! That vid is so wrong, Cory. :D

jag

[Memphis Slim]

Meh.
Someone remind me the next time we have a white canidate who may have been raised lutherine and went jewish.

I'm sure we can make it belivable that the guy is just playing,... cause once a lutherine always a lutherine,....

(disgusted at the monomanic mindset that can state with athority what ones beliefs are based on name or color.)


You do know it's "Lutheran", right?
Still don't think you'll have an issue, in your scenario. Not really finding any Jewish or Lutherans trapping C4 to themselves or going bonkers over a teddy bear. Thus the stigma (fair or not) with Obama's name. It's cross he has to bear, because of what others have done.

[jaguarr]

You do know it's "Lutheran", right?
Still don't think you'll have an issue, in your scenario. Not really finding any Jewish or Lutherans trapping C4 to themselves or going bonkers over a teddy bear. Thus the stigma (fair or not) with Obama's name. It's cross he has to bear, because of what others have done.

Only because there are people in this country that aren't smart enough to make the distinction between someone with a traditionally Muslim middle name and extremist terrorists from the Middle East. ;)

jag

[BlackLantern]

Do people think that if Obama wins, on Inauguration Day, he is going to scream ALLLAAHHH and declare a Jihad on America???

[Memphis Slim]

Only because there are people in this country that aren't smart enough to make the distinction between someone with a traditionally Muslim middle name and extremist terrorists from the Middle East. ;)

jag



As I just said...."fair or not". :whatever:

[Varient]

You do know it's "Lutheran", right?
Still don't think you'll have an issue, in your scenario. Not really finding any Jewish or Lutherans trapping C4 to themselves or going bonkers over a teddy bear. Thus the stigma (fair or not) with Obama's name. It's cross he has to bear, because of what others have done.

Don't waste time with grammar police thing,... It doesn't bother me,.. everyone with more than 16 brain cells caught it.

Point: If you want to go there the MAJORITY of crazed white sick folk who have done the mass murder thing have SOLID CHRISTIAN NAMES,.... Yet I don't see anyone making the same connection as the dimmer folk do in regards to Obama.

"OMG! Senator Johnson has the same First Name as that white guy who bombed all those innocents in Oklahoma! "

"OMG! Govenor Kaine has the same First Name as that white guy who bombed all those innocents in Oklahoma!"

See,.. The hands thrown up false "What? What? only works with stupid people who can be led - They are usually called "sheeple".

These "people" are fast to claim others are being led astray becauses of special effects ("Obama an' his magic flute"), but then they expose their own stupidity by saying "once a muslim, always a muslim,... or Cause his middle name is hussain,...we can expect him to act like a terrorist."

Geez.


Tsk,.. "Back to reality."

V.

[Varient]

Do people think that if Obama wins, on Inauguration Day, he is going to scream ALLLAAHHH and declare a Jihad on America???

The dimmer ones do.:whatever:

[That'ssuper!]

Do people think that if Obama wins, on Inauguration Day, he is going to scream ALLLAAHHH and declare a Jihad on America???

From an outside US perspective, I'm not afraid of him becoming a Jihadist and moving so that we can spread Islam over the free world. I am afraid however, that he will "talk to your enemies," as he often puts it and instead of making any logical agreement, he will actually be ignorant to promise a deal which would give the enemies of the West an upperhand to become stronger. Pulling out of Iraq would be a good example, because it would allow radicals to plan ahead and start destabalizing the region. Then we will say "Thanks to Obama we can all thank radicals at our doorstep for his own mistep." I wish that day never to come true.

[jaguarr]

As I just said...."fair or not". :whatever:

Yeah, I think I'll go with "smart or not" as that's probably more accurate. :up:

jag

[DV8]

http://a855.ac-images.myspacecdn.com/images01/77/l_ab8b0cf3fc0fd2357158599d01b208b6.jpg

[Excel]

You don't need to post the same thing in every thread you go in Excel.

[comicgirl]

From an outside US perspective, I'm not afraid of him becoming a Jihadist and moving so that we can spread Islam over the free world. I am afraid however, that he will "talk to your enemies," as he often puts it and instead of making any logical agreement, he will actually be ignorant to promise a deal which would give the enemies of the West an upperhand to become stronger. Pulling out of Iraq would be a good example, because it would allow radicals to plan ahead and start destabalizing the region. Then we will say "Thanks to Obama we can all thank radicals at our doorstep for his own mistep." I wish that day never to come true.
This is the same zenophobe jerk that said immigrants murder more americans, but doesn't provide how he came by this "information".

[comicgirl]

He can change his name to Puff Deady. :up:

jagPresident Obama works better.

[Marx]

Do people think that if Obama wins, on Inauguration Day, he is going to scream ALLLAAHHH and declare a Jihad on America???

Unfortunately, there are some whose lightbulbs aren't exactly lit the brightest. So yes...

[comicgirl]

Do people think that if Obama wins, on Inauguration Day, he is going to scream ALLLAAHHH and declare a Jihad on America???yeah...then all his supporters will do that ululating war cry!


P.S. - that war cry was probably first heard in Athens during the first
The Peloponnesian War. I love the History Channel:word:

[Marx]

yeah...then all his supporters will do that ululating war cry!


P.S. - that war cry was probably first heard in Athens during the first
The Peloponnesian War. I love the History Channel:word:

Me too :yay:

[Excel]

A bit of news...guys tell me I am wrong...this includes florida and michigan revotes...

A bit more math....lets see....

Totals right now:
Hilldog: 1470
Obama: 1589

Results (Clinton-Obama)

Mississippi: 46%-54% (14-18)
Pennsylvnia: 56%-44% (88-70)
Guam: 35%-65% (3-1)
Indiana: 53%-47% (38-34)
North Carolina: 52%-48% (60-55)
West Virginia: 54%-46% (15-13)
Kentucky: 54%-46% (28-23)
Oregon: 54%-46% (28-24)
Montana: 56%-44% (10-6)
South Dakota: 56%-44% (9-6)
Puerto Rico: 65%-35% (36-19)
Florida: 56%-44% (118-92)
Michigan:54%-46% (84-72)

Totals:
Clinton: 2001
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Obama: 2028 DEMOCRATIC NOMINEE


Explain to me how he loses because that has him winning even if he loses every state big from now! Realistically...he should win north carolina, and at the very least be competitve in Michigan, Oregon, Montana, South Dakota and such given current polls and states around them votes.

[That'ssuper!]

This is the same zenophobe jerk that said immigrants murder more americans, but doesn't provide how he came by this "information".

What are you talking about? It's an opinion not a fact.

[BlackLantern]

What are you talking about? It's an opinion not a fact.

So your ignorance tells you that immigrants commit more murders than American citizens?

[That'ssuper!]

So your ignorance tells you that immigrants commit more murders than American citizens?

Wait. Let's start over, where are you paraphrasing that from? As for quoting speechs is a general stance he has been quoted for saying.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Political_positions_of_Barack_Obama#Iran

Here's a wikipedia quote from a 2004 speech. Where he believes that the problems of Iraq are not our problem when he states "no American soildiers can solve the political differences at the heart of somebody else's civil war." I'm afraid he does not realize that now America and its allies invaded Iraq they insighted more of the Jihadist movement against America, which will be extremely dangerous. American and the other nations caused the mess, we have an obligation to ourselves and the people we put in danger to prevent something extremely dangerous from happening. If you look at the Jihadist lifestlye, they will not stop with violence in the Middle East, they will follow Americans and others home.

By the way, let's leave the insults for somewhere else, this an open forum that has rules against degrading another poster's opinion because we don't like oppositon.

On January 30, 2007, Obama introduced the Iraq War De-Escalation Act of 2007 into Congress. Among other things, the Act calls for capping the level of troops in Iraq at January 2007 levels, and for commencing a phased redeployment of US forces from Iraq "with the goal of removing all combat brigades from Iraq by March 31, 2008, a date that is consistent with the expectation of the bipartisan Iraq Study Group.[67][68] Announcing the act on the Senate floor, Obama stated that "no amount of American soldiers can solve the political differences at the heart of somebody else's civil war."[69]

[BlackLantern]

Wait. Let's start over, where are you paraphrasing that from? I don't recall saying that.

so what is your stance on immigrants and murder?

[That'ssuper!]

so what is your stance on immigrants and murder?

I think you maybe confusing the stance that I believe that there is a potential for weakened borders on both sides of the United States to allow in immigrants from both sides to easily allow in operatives from a foreign terrorist network at the same time. Some of these people can ally with immigrants or even pose as them, how hard is it to tell a Mexican from an Iranian? Not very easy. It would not be a difficult measure which can lead to attacks on American soil because it has such little security.

Murder is a problem on the border when it comes to criminals who thrive of it, which is allowing expansion of large organized crimes like gangs such as MS13, Blackflask, and other groups to murder and kidnap, many Americans. This is something that must be stopped.

As for my stance on immigration I want to close the borders because speaking from an economic perspective, outsourcing jobs to illegal immigrants and other countries as American companies have being doing for an increased profit and limited need for a salary. I really am concerned that the removing the opporunity for Americans to secure emplyment will remove the strength of the US's financial strength. I say you Americans need to reestablish the work force for yourself so you can save your economy. Otherwise I'm for earned amnesty.

Nevertheless why ask an Australian, I not voting in this election.

[BlackLantern]

I dislike outsourcing, but from a purely legal perspective, there is nothing saying that a company is obligated to keep jobs here in the States.

[That'ssuper!]

I dislike outsourcing, but from a purely legal perspective, there is nothing saying that a company is obligated to keep jobs here in the States.

True, but it's irresponsible of a company for doing it, especially we Americans are supposed to be on the fit of recession. I think a little turn to hire some Americans and a little less profiteering off other nations can help a bit more than just lowering interest rates. The one thing, and the only thing I agree with the American president is American entrepeunrship is the one thing that can help a failing economy.

[jaguarr]

President Obama works better.

Go back and re-read the conversation. We weren't talking about Obama in that exchange. ;)

jag

[Rated-X]

Team Obama Hits Clinton on Experience Claims (http://time-blog.com/real_clear_politics/2008/03/team_obama_hits_clinton_on_exp.html)

The Obama campaign unloads on Hillary Clinton's "experience" with this memo by Greg Craig offering a point-by-point rebuttal of her claims:
To: Interested Parties

From: Greg Craig, former director, Policy Planning Office, U.S. State Department

RE: Senator Clinton's claim to be experienced in foreign policy: Just words?

DA: March 11, 2008

When your entire campaign is based upon a claim of experience, it is important that you have evidence to support that claim. Hillary Clinton's argument that she has passed "the Commander- in-Chief test" is simply not supported by her record.

There is no doubt that Hillary Clinton played an important domestic policy role when she was First Lady. It is well known, for example, that she led the failed effort to pass universal health insurance. There is no reason to believe, however, that she was a key player in foreign policy at any time during the Clinton Administration. She did not sit in on National Security Council meetings. She did not have a security clearance. She did not attend meetings in the Situation Room. She did not manage any part of the national security bureaucracy, nor did she have her own national security staff. She did not do any heavy-lifting with foreign governments, whether they were friendly or not. She never managed a foreign policy crisis, and there is no evidence to suggest that she participated in the decision-making that occurred in connection with any such crisis. As far as the record shows, Senator Clinton never answered the phone either to make a decision on any pressing national security issue - not at 3 AM or at any other time of day.

When asked to describe her experience, Senator Clinton has cited a handful of international incidents where she says she played a central role. But any fair-minded and objective judge of these claims - i.e., by someone not affiliated with the Clinton campaign - would conclude that Senator Clinton's claims of foreign policy experience are exaggerated.

Northern Ireland:
Senator Clinton has said, "I helped to bring peace to Northern Ireland." It is a gross overstatement of the facts for her to claim even partial credit for bringing peace to Northern Ireland. She did travel to Northern Ireland, it is true. First Ladies often travel to places that are a focus of U.S. foreign policy. But at no time did she play any role in the critical negotiations that ultimately produced the peace. As the Associated Press recently reported, "[S]he was not directly involved in negotiating the Good Friday peace accord." With regard to her main claim that she helped bring women together, she did participate in a meeting with women, but, according to those who know best, she did not play a pivotal role. The person in charge of the negotiations, former Senator George Mitchell, said that "[The First Lady] was one of many people who participated in encouraging women to get involved, not the only one."

News of Senator Clinton's claims has raised eyebrows across the ocean. Her reference to an important meeting at the Belfast town hall was debunked. Her only appearance at the Belfast City Hall was to see Christmas lights turned on. She also attended a 50-minute meeting which, according to the Belfast Daily Telegraph's report at the time, "[was] a little bit stilted, a little prepared at times." Brian Feeney, an Irish author and former politician, sums it up: "The road to peace was carefully documented, and she wasn’t on it."

Bosnia:

Senator Clinton has pointed to a March 1996 trip to Bosnia as proof that her foreign travel involved a life-risking mission into a war zone. She has described dodging sniper fire. While she did travel to Bosnia in March 1996, the visit was not a high-stakes mission to a war zone. On March 26, 1996, the New York Times reported that "Hillary Rodham Clinton charmed American troops at a U.S.O. show here, but it didn't hurt that the singer Sheryl Crow and the comedian Sinbad were also on the stage."

Kosovo:

Senator Clinton has said, "I negotiated open borders to let fleeing refugees into safety from Kosovo." It is true that, as First Lady, she traveled to Macedonia and visited a Kosovar refugee camp. It is also true that she met with government officials while she was there. First Ladies frequently meet with government officials. Her claim to have "negotiated open borders to let fleeing refugees into safety from Kosovo," however, is not true. Her trip to Macedonia took place on May 14, 1999. The borders were opened the day before, on May 13, 1999.

The negotiations that led to the opening of the borders were accomplished by the people who ordinarily conduct negotiations with foreign governments - U.S. diplomats. President Clinton's top envoy to the Balkans, former Ambassador Robert Gelbard, said, "I cannot recall any involvement by Senator Clinton in this issue." Ivo Daalder worked on the Clinton Administration's National Security Council and wrote a definitive history of the Kosovo conflict. He recalls that "she had absolutely no role in the dirty work of negotiations."

Rwanda:

Last year, former President Clinton asserted that his wife pressed him to intervene with U.S. troops to stop the Rwandan genocide. When asked about this assertion, Hillary Clinton said it was true. There is no evidence, however, to suggest that this ever happened. Even those individuals who were advocating a much more robust U.S. effort to stop the genocide did not argue for the use of U.S. troops. No one recalls hearing that Hillary Clinton had any interest in this course of action. Based on a fair and thorough review of National Security Council deliberations during those tragic months, there is no evidence to suggest that U.S. military intervention was ever discussed. Prudence Bushnell, the Assistant Secretary of State with responsibility for Africa, has recalled that there was no consideration of U.S. military intervention.

At no time prior to her campaign for the presidency did Senator Clinton ever make the claim that she supported intervening militarily to stop the Rwandan genocide. It is noteworthy that she failed to mention this anecdote - urging President Clinton to intervene militarily in Rwanda - in her memoirs. President Clinton makes no mention of such a conversation with his wife in his memoirs. And Madeline Albright, who was Ambassador to the United Nations at the time, makes no mention of any such event in her memoirs.

Hillary Clinton did visit Rwanda in March 1998 and, during that visit, her husband apologized for America's failure to do more to prevent the genocide.

China:

Senator Clinton also points to a speech that she delivered in Beijing in 1995 as proof of her ability to answer a 3 AM crisis phone call. It is strange that Senator Clinton would base her own foreign policy experience on a speech that she gave over a decade ago, since she so frequently belittles Barack Obama’s speeches opposing the Iraq War six years ago. Let there be no doubt: she gave a good speech in Beijing, and she stood up for women's rights. But Senator Obama's opposition to the War in Iraq in 2002 is relevant to the question of whether he, as Commander-in-Chief, will make wise judgments about the use of military force. Senator Clinton's speech in Beijing is not.

Senator Obama's speech opposing the war in Iraq shows independence and courage as well as good judgment. In the speech that Senator Clinton says does not qualify him to be Commander in Chief, Obama criticized what he called "a rash war . . . a war based not on reason, but on passion, not on principle, but on politics." In that speech, he said prophetically: "[E]ven a successful war against Iraq will require a US occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences." He predicted that a U.S. invasion of Iraq would "fan the flames of the Middle East," and "strengthen the recruitment arm of al Qaeda." He urged the United States first to "finish the fight with Bin Laden and al Qaeda."

If the U.S. government had followed Barack Obama's advice in 2002, we would have avoided one of the greatest foreign policy catastrophes in our nation's history. Some of the most "experienced" men in national security affairs - Vice President Cheney and Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and others - led this nation into that catastrophe. That lesson should teach us something about the value of judgment over experience. Longevity in Washington, D.C. does not guarantee either wisdom of judgment.

Conclusion:

The Clinton campaign's argument is nothing more than mere assertion, dramatized in a scary television commercial with a telephone ringing in the middle of the night. There is no support for or substance in the claim that Senator Clinton has passed "the Commander-in-Chief test." That claim - as the TV ad - consists of nothing more than making the assertion, repeating it frequently to the voters and hoping that they will believe it.

On the most critical foreign policy judgment of our generation - the War in Iraq - Senator Clinton voted in support of a resolution entitled "The Joint Resolution to Authorize the Use of U.S. Military Force Against Iraq." As she cast that vote, she said: "This is probably the hardest decision I have ever had to make - any vote that may lead to war should be hard - but I cast it with conviction." In this campaign, Senator Clinton has argued - remarkably - that she wasn't actually voting for war, she was voting for diplomacy. That claim is no more credible than her other claims of foreign policy experience. The real tragedy is that we are still living with the terrible consequences of her misjudgment. The Bush Administration continues to cite that resolution as its authorization - like a blank check - to fight on with no end in sight.

Barack Obama has a very simple case. On the most important commander in chief test of our generation, he got it right, and Senator Clinton got it wrong. In truth, Senator Obama has much more foreign policy experience than either Bill Clinton or Ronald Reagan had when they were elected. Senator Obama has worked to confront 21st century challenges like proliferation and genocide on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. He possesses the personal attributes of a great leader - an even temperament, an open-minded approach to even the most challenging problems, a willingness to listen to all views, clarity of vision, the ability to inspire, conviction and courage.

And Barack Obama does not use false charges and exaggerated claims to play politics with national security.

http://time-blog.com/real_clear_politics/2008/03/team_obama_hits_clinton_on_exp.html

[sinewave]

^ nice. he laid it all out very precisely.

[jaguarr]

Excellent article and retort from the Obama campaign. With stuff like this he is staying absolutely focused on the facts and the issues at hand rather than getting into the mudslinging he's maintained he is above (despite slipping into Hillary's game a time or two along the way). This is up and up, out in the open debate on the facts as they relate to the claims of his opponent and I can appreciate that. And he's spot on with what so many people already know; Hillary is full of **** when it comes to her claims of "experience".

jag

[Kelly]

I dislike outsourcing, but from a purely legal perspective, there is nothing saying that a company is obligated to keep jobs here in the States.


Get a college degree, and take the job that runs the outsourcing....as long as there is outsourcing your job will pay more.....:cwink:

[comicgirl]

Excellent article and retort from the Obama campaign. With stuff like this he is staying absolutely focused on the facts and the issues at hand rather than getting into the mudslinging he's maintained he is above (despite slipping into Hillary's game a time or two along the way). This is up and up, out in the open debate on the facts as they relate to the claims of his opponent and I can appreciate that. And he's spot on with what so many people already know; Hillary is full of **** when it comes to her claims of "experience".

jag:applaud:applaud:applaud to be First Lady is to be the ultimate Prom Queen of the nation. Who was the last really powerful effective one? Eleanor Roosevelt.

[BlackLantern]

Get a college degree, and take the job that runs the outsourcing....as long as there is outsourcing your job will pay more.....:cwink:

speaking of outsourcing, this girl I know, who has turned me down twice for a date, just found out her job is being outsourced and is now being nice to me because she wants to see if she can get a job at my office, as we work in the same area

[jaguarr]

speaking of outsourcing, this girl I know, who has turned me down twice for a date, just found out her job is being outsourced and is now being nice to me because she wants to see if she can get a job at my office, as we work in the same area

Tell her to get her passport together if she wants to keep her job. :up:

(I do outsourcing for a living, so I get to make jokes like that.)

jag

[terry78]

speaking of outsourcing, this girl I know, who has turned me down twice for a date, just found out her job is being outsourced and is now being nice to me because she wants to see if she can get a job at my office, as we work in the same area

Tell her you've got a job for her...right here. And point at your crotch. Then say she could make a mint sewing pants.

[Super_Ludacris]

Team Obama Hits Clinton on Experience Claims (http://time-blog.com/real_clear_politics/2008/03/team_obama_hits_clinton_on_exp.html)

The Obama campaign unloads on Hillary Clinton's "experience" with this memo by Greg Craig offering a point-by-point rebuttal of her claims:
To: Interested Parties

From: Greg Craig, former director, Policy Planning Office, U.S. State Department

RE: Senator Clinton's claim to be experienced in foreign policy: Just words?

DA: March 11, 2008

When your entire campaign is based upon a claim of experience, it is important that you have evidence to support that claim. Hillary Clinton's argument that she has passed "the Commander- in-Chief test" is simply not supported by her record.

There is no doubt that Hillary Clinton played an important domestic policy role when she was First Lady. It is well known, for example, that she led the failed effort to pass universal health insurance. There is no reason to believe, however, that she was a key player in foreign policy at any time during the Clinton Administration. She did not sit in on National Security Council meetings. She did not have a security clearance. She did not attend meetings in the Situation Room. She did not manage any part of the national security bureaucracy, nor did she have her own national security staff. She did not do any heavy-lifting with foreign governments, whether they were friendly or not. She never managed a foreign policy crisis, and there is no evidence to suggest that she participated in the decision-making that occurred in connection with any such crisis. As far as the record shows, Senator Clinton never answered the phone either to make a decision on any pressing national security issue - not at 3 AM or at any other time of day.

When asked to describe her experience, Senator Clinton has cited a handful of international incidents where she says she played a central role. But any fair-minded and objective judge of these claims - i.e., by someone not affiliated with the Clinton campaign - would conclude that Senator Clinton's claims of foreign policy experience are exaggerated.

Northern Ireland:
Senator Clinton has said, "I helped to bring peace to Northern Ireland." It is a gross overstatement of the facts for her to claim even partial credit for bringing peace to Northern Ireland. She did travel to Northern Ireland, it is true. First Ladies often travel to places that are a focus of U.S. foreign policy. But at no time did she play any role in the critical negotiations that ultimately produced the peace. As the Associated Press recently reported, "[S]he was not directly involved in negotiating the Good Friday peace accord." With regard to her main claim that she helped bring women together, she did participate in a meeting with women, but, according to those who know best, she did not play a pivotal role. The person in charge of the negotiations, former Senator George Mitchell, said that "[The First Lady] was one of many people who participated in encouraging women to get involved, not the only one."

News of Senator Clinton's claims has raised eyebrows across the ocean. Her reference to an important meeting at the Belfast town hall was debunked. Her only appearance at the Belfast City Hall was to see Christmas lights turned on. She also attended a 50-minute meeting which, according to the Belfast Daily Telegraph's report at the time, "[was] a little bit stilted, a little prepared at times." Brian Feeney, an Irish author and former politician, sums it up: "The road to peace was carefully documented, and she wasn’t on it."

Bosnia:

Senator Clinton has pointed to a March 1996 trip to Bosnia as proof that her foreign travel involved a life-risking mission into a war zone. She has described dodging sniper fire. While she did travel to Bosnia in March 1996, the visit was not a high-stakes mission to a war zone. On March 26, 1996, the New York Times reported that "Hillary Rodham Clinton charmed American troops at a U.S.O. show here, but it didn't hurt that the singer Sheryl Crow and the comedian Sinbad were also on the stage."

Kosovo:

Senator Clinton has said, "I negotiated open borders to let fleeing refugees into safety from Kosovo." It is true that, as First Lady, she traveled to Macedonia and visited a Kosovar refugee camp. It is also true that she met with government officials while she was there. First Ladies frequently meet with government officials. Her claim to have "negotiated open borders to let fleeing refugees into safety from Kosovo," however, is not true. Her trip to Macedonia took place on May 14, 1999. The borders were opened the day before, on May 13, 1999.

The negotiations that led to the opening of the borders were accomplished by the people who ordinarily conduct negotiations with foreign governments - U.S. diplomats. President Clinton's top envoy to the Balkans, former Ambassador Robert Gelbard, said, "I cannot recall any involvement by Senator Clinton in this issue." Ivo Daalder worked on the Clinton Administration's National Security Council and wrote a definitive history of the Kosovo conflict. He recalls that "she had absolutely no role in the dirty work of negotiations."

Rwanda:

Last year, former President Clinton asserted that his wife pressed him to intervene with U.S. troops to stop the Rwandan genocide. When asked about this assertion, Hillary Clinton said it was true. There is no evidence, however, to suggest that this ever happened. Even those individuals who were advocating a much more robust U.S. effort to stop the genocide did not argue for the use of U.S. troops. No one recalls hearing that Hillary Clinton had any interest in this course of action. Based on a fair and thorough review of National Security Council deliberations during those tragic months, there is no evidence to suggest that U.S. military intervention was ever discussed. Prudence Bushnell, the Assistant Secretary of State with responsibility for Africa, has recalled that there was no consideration of U.S. military intervention.

At no time prior to her campaign for the presidency did Senator Clinton ever make the claim that she supported intervening militarily to stop the Rwandan genocide. It is noteworthy that she failed to mention this anecdote - urging President Clinton to intervene militarily in Rwanda - in her memoirs. President Clinton makes no mention of such a conversation with his wife in his memoirs. And Madeline Albright, who was Ambassador to the United Nations at the time, makes no mention of any such event in her memoirs.

Hillary Clinton did visit Rwanda in March 1998 and, during that visit, her husband apologized for America's failure to do more to prevent the genocide.

China:

Senator Clinton also points to a speech that she delivered in Beijing in 1995 as proof of her ability to answer a 3 AM crisis phone call. It is strange that Senator Clinton would base her own foreign policy experience on a speech that she gave over a decade ago, since she so frequently belittles Barack Obama’s speeches opposing the Iraq War six years ago. Let there be no doubt: she gave a good speech in Beijing, and she stood up for women's rights. But Senator Obama's opposition to the War in Iraq in 2002 is relevant to the question of whether he, as Commander-in-Chief, will make wise judgments about the use of military force. Senator Clinton's speech in Beijing is not.

Senator Obama's speech opposing the war in Iraq shows independence and courage as well as good judgment. In the speech that Senator Clinton says does not qualify him to be Commander in Chief, Obama criticized what he called "a rash war . . . a war based not on reason, but on passion, not on principle, but on politics." In that speech, he said prophetically: "[E]ven a successful war against Iraq will require a US occupation of undetermined length, at undetermined cost, with undetermined consequences." He predicted that a U.S. invasion of Iraq would "fan the flames of the Middle East," and "strengthen the recruitment arm of al Qaeda." He urged the United States first to "finish the fight with Bin Laden and al Qaeda."

If the U.S. government had followed Barack Obama's advice in 2002, we would have avoided one of the greatest foreign policy catastrophes in our nation's history. Some of the most "experienced" men in national security affairs - Vice President Cheney and Secretary Donald Rumsfeld and others - led this nation into that catastrophe. That lesson should teach us something about the value of judgment over experience. Longevity in Washington, D.C. does not guarantee either wisdom of judgment.

Conclusion:

The Clinton campaign's argument is nothing more than mere assertion, dramatized in a scary television commercial with a telephone ringing in the middle of the night. There is no support for or substance in the claim that Senator Clinton has passed "the Commander-in-Chief test." That claim - as the TV ad - consists of nothing more than making the assertion, repeating it frequently to the voters and hoping that they will believe it.

On the most critical foreign policy judgment of our generation - the War in Iraq - Senator Clinton voted in support of a resolution entitled "The Joint Resolution to Authorize the Use of U.S. Military Force Against Iraq." As she cast that vote, she said: "This is probably the hardest decision I have ever had to make - any vote that may lead to war should be hard - but I cast it with conviction." In this campaign, Senator Clinton has argued - remarkably - that she wasn't actually voting for war, she was voting for diplomacy. That claim is no more credible than her other claims of foreign policy experience. The real tragedy is that we are still living with the terrible consequences of her misjudgment. The Bush Administration continues to cite that resolution as its authorization - like a blank check - to fight on with no end in sight.

Barack Obama has a very simple case. On the most important commander in chief test of our generation, he got it right, and Senator Clinton got it wrong. In truth, Senator Obama has much more foreign policy experience than either Bill Clinton or Ronald Reagan had when they were elected. Senator Obama has worked to confront 21st century challenges like proliferation and genocide on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee. He possesses the personal attributes of a great leader - an even temperament, an open-minded approach to even the most challenging problems, a willingness to listen to all views, clarity of vision, the ability to inspire, conviction and courage.

And Barack Obama does not use false charges and exaggerated claims to play politics with national security.

http://time-blog.com/real_clear_politics/2008/03/team_obama_hits_clinton_on_exp.html



http://forums.sohh.com/images/smilies/yes.gif

*Bumps Ether*

Teh Obama Swag Show FTW

[Super_Ludacris]

Damn dude is even dominating the video games


http://i25.tinypic.com/2n19swn.jpg

[jaguarr]

Damn dude is even dominating the video games


http://i25.tinypic.com/2n19swn.jpg

:funny:

jag

[Varient]

.
Obama: 2028 DEMOCRATIC NOMINEE


Explain to me how he loses because that has him winning even if he loses every state big from now! Realistically...he should win north carolina, and at the very least be competitve in Michigan, Oregon, Montana, South Dakota and such given current polls and states around them votes.

Meh.

In minds like mine,.... the numbers don't matter,.... the next president has already been chosen,... all this is a dog and pony show behind a smokescreen involving poor acting.

V.

[Apollo]

Damn dude is even dominating the video games


http://i25.tinypic.com/2n19swn.jpg

thats really great! :woot:

[comicgirl]

The Clinton campaign's argument is nothing more than mere assertion, dramatized in a scary television commercial with a telephone ringing in the middle of the night. There is no support for or substance in the claim that Senator Clinton has passed "the Commander-in-Chief test." That claim - as the TV ad - consists of nothing more than making the assertion, repeating it frequently to the voters and hoping that they will believe it.:word::word:

[Arkady Rossovich]

Obama won again,and has more than 100 delegate lead than Clinton.

[comicgirl]

Obama won again,and has more than 100 delegate lead than Clinton.
I say again
NO MORE DRAMA - VOTE OBAMA:grin:

[comicgirl]

Ok, this is why I love Obama. This took place today at a local school in my town; about 10 miles from my house. It's a multi-racial neighborhood that has come back in leaps and bounds.


It's Obama in a landslide -- at Downey School.

Wednesday March 12, 2008, 5:06 PM
The Pennsylvania Primary may be weeks away, but it was Sen. Barrack Obama in a landslide at Harrisburg's Downey School.

The Illinois senator walked away with Wednesday's mock vote among the school's fifth- through eighth-grades. Obama captured 151 votes to Sen. Hillary Clinton's 21. Sen. John McCain won on the Republican side, but managed to garner only 15 votes.

While the balloting was unofficial, this vote went far beyond the typical classroom exercise of students stuffing slips of paper into a shoe box.

http://www.pennlive.com/midstate/index.ssf/2008/03/its_obama_in_a_landslide_at_do.html

[Excel]

Hahahaha...the fact that Obamas election as President would instantly make us more liked around the world is one of the things I like about him...I hate all this anti-American crap.

[Zen]

has anyone been able to calculate with any kind of accuracy the reach of the limbaugh effect?

i heard on the tv... and was skeptical... that 24% of the people who voted hillary in Ohio... were doing so because of limbaugh.

[BlackLantern]

Hahahaha...the fact that Obamas election as President would instantly make us more liked around the world is one of the things I like about him...I hate all this anti-American crap.

People hate America...they always have and always will regardless of what we do

[Zen]

People hate America...they always have and always will regardless of what we do

why do you believe this?

[BlackLantern]

why do you believe this?

Because, speaking from personal experience, its the truth. I joined the USN right out of HS in 1997. I served from 97 to 2002 and spent most of it abroad...mostly in the Pacific...there was anti-american sentiment most everywhere I visited in one form or another. I have also traveled abroad as a civilian and it is the same case.

[Zen]

Because, speaking from personal experience, its the truth. I joined the USN right out of HS in 1997. I served from 97 to 2002 and spent most of it abroad...mostly in the Pacific...there was anti-american sentiment most everywhere I visited in one form or another. I have also traveled abroad as a civilian and it is the same case.

ohh, well you said always.

;)



from my experience as a history major, the world hasnt always hated us. in fact...there was a time when even Iran asked for our help (under the assumption that our reputation to help the will of the people over a dictator.... should extend to them. we used to have a great reputation) against the installed power of the Shah....

your right though, in the context of a decade. it might have something to do with our foreign policy decisions in the recent past. :dry:

[Darkly Dexter]

Because, speaking from personal experience, its the truth. I joined the USN right out of HS in 1997. I served from 97 to 2002 and spent most of it abroad...mostly in the Pacific...there was anti-american sentiment most everywhere I visited in one form or another. I have also traveled abroad as a civilian and it is the same case.


Duh...

The Anti-americanism doesn't exists because of Bush, it exists because of all the **** the United States government did during the Cold War and after it...

[comicgirl]

Duh...

The Anti-americanism doesn't exist because of Bush, it exists because of all the **** the United States government did during the Cold War and after it...

I
Yeah, but we didn't need a Pres. throwing gas and bringing x-tra matches.

[BlackLantern]

Duh...

The Anti-americanism doesn't exists because of Bush, it exists because of all the **** the United States government did during the Cold War and after it...

I think a big part of it is that American culture is evident most everywhere in the world...be it a McDonalds', Wal-Mart, or something like that. For the most part we are a very xenophobic society who expects everyone else in the world to accomodate us. Lots of people feel that Americans are just loud and crude...uncultured. The sentiment comes from us as a culture, not who our leaders are.

[Memphis Slim]

I think a big part of it is that American culture is evident most everywhere in the world...be it a McDonalds', Wal-Mart, or something like that. For the most part we are a very xenophobic society who expects everyone else in the world to accomodate us. Lots of people feel that Americans are just loud and crude...uncultured. The sentiment comes from us as a culture, not who our leaders are.


And they all try to get over here to live!! Go figger!! And when major diasters hit, they ask us to help! :hehe: And when someone gets attacked, they want our assistance and protection.

That bad ol' America....

[BlackLantern]

And they all try to get over here to live!! Go figger!! And when major diasters hit, they ask us to help! :hehe: And when someone gets attacked, they want our assistance and protection.

That bad ol' America....

It's lonely at the top.....and its thankless. We are a country in a permanent "Damned if you do...damned if you don't" situation.

[That'ssuper!]

People hate America...they always have and always will regardless of what we do

While I like the U.S., I have to agree here, speaking from my perspective, I don't see that people hate the American people, but rather the policy making of the government there. Unfortunately people tend to associate the two in this paticular situation. Although I don't think most people hate us, more or less they are tired of them interferring where they are not needed. For America has many military installations in areas where they are no longer needed now.

[Cory]

im pretty worried if obama did get elected president...heck maybe even if he wins the democratic race...someon will try and assassinate him :(

[Super_Ludacris]

Obama won again,and has more than 100 delegate lead than Clinton.

Swaggin!

[BlackLantern]

im pretty worried if obama did get elected president...heck maybe even if he wins the democratic race...someon will try and assassinate him :(

Yes....I've had that thought ever since there was rumblings about him running for president. If he does win, some psyhco out there is going to be like "I ain't havin' no ****** runnin' my country" and try and blow his head off.

[Super_Ludacris]

Barack has been bumping Hov's new joint during the campaign. His swagger levels are so serious...

http://videovault.morrisvideos.com/videos/barack-obama-says-he-bumps-jay-z-american-gangster



Teh Obama Swag Show Rolls On!

[ObakeTora]

Yes....I've had that thought ever since there was rumblings about him running for president. If he does win, some psyhco out there is going to be like "I ain't havin' no ****** runnin' my country" and try and blow his head off.


As much a part of this country we are and have contributed to, it really sucks that we still have to worry about that. There is alot to be said about black patriots. Someone in Asia asked me why would you stand up for a country that has in the past treated you worse then the enemy?

[Darkly Dexter]

I think a big part of it is that American culture is evident most everywhere in the world...be it a McDonalds', Wal-Mart, or something like that. For the most part we are a very xenophobic society who expects everyone else in the world to accomodate us. Lots of people feel that Americans are just loud and crude...uncultured. The sentiment comes from us as a culture, not who our leaders are.

On the contrary, I don't think the rest of the world hates american culture. In fact, the western civilization has a lot of cultural similarities (well, that's why it's called civilization in the first place). Wherever you go, you will see people eating in McDonald's, watching american tv series and movies, and listening american music.
Still, not to like "the american way of life" isn't enough reason to hate a whole country. So, I really think it is a problem with the history of the foreign policy of the United States.

[souvlaki]

Yes....I've had that thought ever since there was rumblings about him running for president. If he does win, some psyhco out there is going to be like "I ain't havin' no ****** runnin' my country" and try and blow his head off.

That reminds me of this article that was recently in the Onion: http://www.theonion.com/content/news/nations_presidential_assassins

[Zen]

has anyone been able to calculate with any kind of accuracy the reach of the limbaugh effect?

i heard on the tv... and was skeptical... that 24% of the people who voted hillary in Ohio... were doing so because of limbaugh.


The Ohio secretary of state's office doesn't have statistics yet on how many voters crossed parties in the primary (it's still compiling them), but the Cleveland Plain Dealer is reporting that in Cuyahoga County alone, the state's largest county, at least 16,000 Republicans switched parties for the primary.




http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/03/did-ohio-crosso.html

[Varient]

The Ohio secretary of state's office doesn't have statistics yet on how many voters crossed parties in the primary (it's still compiling them), but the Cleveland Plain Dealer is reporting that in Cuyahoga County alone, the state's largest county, at least 16,000 Republicans switched parties for the primary.




http://blog.wired.com/27bstroke6/2008/03/did-ohio-crosso.html

I shake my head at the mindset involved in doing things like this,...

[comicgirl]

I shake my head at the mindset involved in doing things like this,...dude, people in my area (Central PA) are changing parties to vote for Obama. You guys have no idea how unpopular Hillary and Co. are here. Plus, there's a general feeling that no one wants to give the Clintons that kind of legacy.

[comicgirl]

Hahahaha...the fact that Obamas election as President would instantly make us more liked around the world is one of the things I like about him...I hate all this anti-American crap.
:word::word::word: Pres. elect Obama! Yeah baby.


http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23617413/

Since Reconstruction, only five black candidates – including Obama – have ever won a statewide election for governor or U.S. senator. You can add eight Lieutenant Governors to the total. Four were elected independently. The rest of the list is made up of attorneys general, treasurers, auditors, comptrollers, and secretaries of state.

David Paterson is about to become Governor of New York. America's 3rd black governor. While at the same time Elliot Spitzer becomes the 22nd Governor to leave office because of a scandal.

If you do a bit more math, you can perhaps estimate the total number of statewide elections over the past two centuries. Look at that figure versus the five black candidates and you begin to get a feel for just how far off the mark Ferraro's comments really were.

[BlackLantern]

As much a part of this country we are and have contributed to, it really sucks that we still have to worry about that. There is alot to be said about black patriots. Someone in Asia asked me why would you stand up for a country that has in the past treated you worse then the enemy?

it's a good point. as a black man, I have served in the military(where racism is still prevalent) I pay taxes I vote....but I basically understand that I will always be considered "less than" by people in this country.

[Kelly]

it's a good point. as a black man, I have served in the military(where racism is still prevalent) I pay taxes I vote....but I basically understand that I will always be considered "less than" by people in this country.

That is a huge generalization, and I take offense at this....

[BlackLantern]

That is a huge generalization, and I take offense at this....

Take offense all you want...it still happens. I walk into certain stores, I am going to be followed. I don't go into certain bars in my area because I know I am not welcome. it's how the world is, I'm just trying to stay out of its way.

[Excel]

it's a good point. as a black man, I have served in the military(where racism is still prevalent) I pay taxes I vote....but I basically understand that I will always be considered "less than" by people in this country.

Dunno where you live, but thats not true...whats kinda funny to me if all Ferrarro did was COMPLIMENT us, as if our skin color is now something of priveledge or something that gets you really far in elections :huh:

However I dunno what you talking about, unless the black person is what most people nowadays refer to as a "*****" or some black kid who dresses and talks like he's gangsta n all that ****, I don't see any problem, and I as a black person look down at those kinda thugs who give us a bad name to some people.

[Kelly]

Take offense all you want...it still happens. I walk into certain stores, I am going to be followed. I don't go into certain bars in my area because I know I am not welcome. it's how the world is, I'm just trying to stay out of its way.


Not from everyone, and yeah I do take offense to it because I am part of that "people" you speak of, and I DON'T feel that way. In MY AREA, I'm the minority, and ya know what, that's ok.......I live across from a black woman, below me is a hispanic family maybe 2 other white families live in my complex...........and we are all just friends.....we don't treat each other any other way, except as friends.....and my friends do the same. So not all "people" feel the way you say...

[BlackLantern]

Not from everyone, and yeah I do take offense to it because I am part of that "people" you speak of, and I DON'T feel that way. In MY AREA, I'm the minority, and ya know what, that's ok.......I live across from a black woman, below me is a hispanic family maybe 2 other white families live in my complex...........and we are all just friends.....we don't treat each other any other way, except as friends.....and my friends do the same. So not all "people" feel the way you say...

I didn't say all people....I live in the northeast and a lot of the racism here is just under the surface...of course we're all polite in public, but behind closed doors, things are different.

[Kelly]

I didn't say all people....I live in the northeast and a lot of the racism here is just under the surface...of course we're all polite in public, but behind closed doors, things are different.

People means People......in the context you used it in, it was a generalization of all people.

You didn't say, people where I live, people in my neighborhood.....etc.

Yeah, well I'm the same behind or in front of the door, and I associate with friends who feel as I do.....

Sometimes the chips on our shoulders blind us to the "other people"...:cwink:

[jaguarr]

Pfffft! You people! :cmad:

jag

[BlackLantern]

People means People......in the context you used it in, it was a generalization of all people.

You didn't say, people where I live, people in my neighborhood.....etc.

Yeah, well I'm the same behind or in front of the door, and I associate with friends who feel as I do.....

Sometimes the chips on our shoulders blind us to the "other people"...:cwink:

and thats' you....our experiences shape us....I have experienced my fair share of racism, both here in Connecticut and when I traveled in the service...the world is an ugly place and a lot of people are blind to it....Like I said...I live my life and try to stay out of the way.

[Kelly]

and thats' you....our experiences shape us....I have experienced my fair share of racism, both here in Connecticut and when I traveled in the service...the world is an ugly place and a lot of people are blind to it....Like I said...I live my life and try to stay out of the way.


And I get what you are saying.....I was simply commenting on the generalization, not the fact that it does happen, and that some, even many people feel the way you say.....just not "people" as a whole.

[ObakeTora]

That is a huge generalization, and I take offense at this....



Don't get on BL's case, I feel the same way. Ive always felt this way for pretty much of my life. Do you have any idea what it feels like constantly having the feeling your being watched all the time? Have you ever been falsely accused, more then once? Don't take it as a generalization, because for the most part it's true. I'm sure you've never gone out of your way to oppress anyone or anyone that you know for that matter, but for me, I feel that way. It's sad my own country who my family have risked their life to defend, would rather allocate resources to my incarceration. When I think deeply about it, my country has always let me down. Why is it I can trace my roots to the beginning of the Revolutionary War, but it took the us 50 some years longer to end slavery then the UK did? I can go on and on and on about all the racist ******** I have had to tolerate in my own country, but whats the point?


and thats' you....our experiences shape us....I have experienced my fair share of racism, both here in Connecticut and when I traveled in the service...the world is an ugly place and a lot of people are blind to it....Like I said...I live my life and try to stay out of the way.

You make a really good point, but what if you can't move out of the way quick enough?


I didn't say all people....I live in the northeast and a lot of the racism here is just under the surface...of course we're all polite in public, but behind closed doors, things are different.


You know, I think its messed up you have to explain the context in which you are speaking. It's like some people purposefully look for arguments. You know if you feel you haven't contributed to racism, then its obvious the person is not reffering to you.

[The Senator]

Obama's Pastor Takes Heat for Comments
(CNN) — Barack Obama's Chicago minister, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, is under fresh scrutiny, after an ABC News report Thursday shed light on some of his controversial sermons.

In one delivered last December, Wright argues Hillary Clinton's road to the White House is considerably easier than Barack Obama's because of his skin color.

"Hillary was not a black boy raised in a single parent home. Barack was," Wright says in a video of the sermon posted on YouTube.

"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! Hillary ain't never been called a '******!' Hillary has never had her people defined as a non-person," a fiery Wright also says.

Wright, who retired from his post earlier this year, also is seen saying in the video, "Who cares about what a poor black man has to face every day in a country and in a culture controlled by rich white people?"

Wright's sermon shortly after the September 11, 2001 terrorism attacks is also under scrutiny, during which he said America had brought on the attacks with its own practice of terrorism.

"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," he says. "We have supported state terrorism against the Palestinians and black South Africans, and now we are indignant. Because the stuff we have done overseas has now brought right back into our own front yards. America's chickens are coming home to roost."

Obama and Wright have long been close. Obama has been a member of Wright's church since his days in law school, and Obama's bestselling book, The Audacity of Hope, takes its title from one of Wright's sermons. Wright also married the Obamas and baptized their two children.

But Obama has long maintained he is at odds with some of Wright's sermons, and has likened him to an "old uncle" who sometimes will say things he doesn't agree with. He has also specifically denounced Wright's 9/11 comments.

An Obama campaign spokesman also said Thursday the Illinois senator "deplores divisive statements whether they come from his supporters, the supporters of his opponent, talk radio, or anywhere else."

UPDATE: Speaking with the Pittsburgh Tribune Review, Obama said, "I profoundly disagree with some of these statements."

"Here is what happens when you just cherry-pick statements from a guy who had a 40-year career as a pastor. There are times when people say things that are just wrong. But I think it's important to judge me on what I've said in the past and what I believe," he also said.

This incident strikes me as a bit hypocritical, if you ask me. Obama, more or less, is defending his pastor's lifelong career while brushing off the above comments... much like Hillary and her supporters did with Geraldine Ferraro earlier this week...

[Varient]

it's a good point. as a black man, I have served in the military(where racism is still prevalent) I pay taxes I vote....but I basically understand that I will always be considered "less than" by people in this country.
QFT - There have always been people I run into in this country who base everything I am or could be on the color of my skin.

That is a huge generalization, and I take offense at this....

WHY?

[Varient]

Take offense all you want...it still happens. I walk into certain stores, I am going to be followed. I don't go into certain bars in my area because I know I am not welcome. it's how the world is, I'm just trying to stay out of its way.
I find it irritating that you have folk who feel they are not like this and try to take us to task for saying that there are others who do.

Dunno where you live, but thats not true...whats kinda funny to me if all Ferrarro did was COMPLIMENT us, as if our skin color is now something of priveledge or something that gets you really far in elections :huh:
Scary,.. and a cop-out on her part.

However I dunno what you talking about, unless the black person is what most people nowadays refer to as a "*****" or some black kid who dresses and talks like he's gangsta n all that ****, I don't see any problem, and I as a black person look down at those kinda thugs who give us a bad name to some people.
SMH.
There are still places in America where there are people who think a funny joke is "What do you call a black Doctor? - A n*g*er."
"What do you call a black Lawyer? - A N*g*er."
" What do you call a black police officer? - SIR."
Underlining the problem Blacklantern has brought forth.

Not from everyone, and yeah I do take offense to it because I am part of that "people" you speak of, and I DON'T feel that way. In MY AREA, I'm the minority, and ya know what, that's ok.......I live across from a black woman, below me is a hispanic family maybe 2 other white families live in my complex...........and we are all just friends.....we don't treat each other any other way, except as friends.....and my friends do the same. So not all "people" feel the way you say...
Meh.
Where did he say "all?"

I didn't say all people....I live in the northeast and a lot of the racism here is just under the surface...of course we're all polite in public, but behind closed doors, things are different.

Feel you on this,... too bad.

[StorminNorman]

This incident strikes me as a bit hypocritical, if you ask me. Obama, more or less, is defending his pastor's lifelong career while brushing off the above comments... much like Hillary and her supporters did with Geraldine Ferraro earlier this week...

The difference is that Ferraro's comments were accurate - Wright's comments are offensive, anti-American and border on racist.

I also want to see if many of the posters on here that attack the GOP for holding hands with some of the right wing pastors in this country will display the same outrage at Obama's church and religious leaders.

[redfirebird2008]

This incident strikes me as a bit hypocritical, if you ask me. Obama, more or less, is defending his pastor's lifelong career while brushing off the above comments... much like Hillary and her supporters did with Geraldine Ferraro earlier this week...

Obama praised Ferraro for being a trailblazer and said he thought her comments were ridiculous and wrong-headed. His preacher is a whackjob and he should distance himself, no doubt, but he has said he profoundly disagrees with the guy on many of these rants he goes on (or used to go on). It will be interesting to see how it plays out, but I think he should get as far away from this guy as possible or it literally will become a racial election in which case he loses in a landslide (whether that be in contests coming up against Clinton or in a general election with McCain).

[sinewave]

This incident strikes me as a bit hypocritical, if you ask me. Obama, more or less, is defending his pastor's lifelong career while brushing off the above comments... much like Hillary and her supporters did with Geraldine Ferraro earlier this week...

those are definitely ridiculous, offensive statements, i'll agree to that, but he's denounced them and they guy isn't working for his campaign or acting as a spokesperson for him. he's an aquaintance who obama has acknowledged is prone to making statements that he doesn't agree with. what more can he do? the guy isn't his preacher anymore.

The difference is that Ferraro's comments were accurate - Wright's comments are offensive, anti-American and border on racist.

I also want to see if many of the posters on here that attack the GOP for holding hands with some of the right wing pastors in this country will display the same outrage at Obama's church and religious leaders.

umm, that's pretty arrogant for you to make a definitive statement about an objective comment. the black community found it incredibly offensive for someone in clinton's campaign (who has a history of making similar comments) to say that a black man is "lucky" he's black because he wouldn't have gotten as far as he has if he wasn't. that's a discredit to all the hard work obama has gone through to get where he is today and it's ridiculous.

Obama praised Ferraro for being a trailblazer and said he thought her comments were ridiculous and wrong-headed. His preacher is a whackjob and he should distance himself, no doubt, but he has said he profoundly disagrees with the guy on many of these rants he goes on (or used to go on). It will be interesting to see how it plays out, but I think he should get as far away from this guy as possible or it literally will become a racial election in which case he loses in a landslide (whether that be in contests coming up against Clinton or in a general election with McCain).

i agree. all this racial talk isn't helping the dems or the country.

[The Senator]

those are definitely ridiculous, offensive statements, i'll agree to that, but he's denounced them and they guy isn't working for his campaign or acting as a spokesperson for him. he's an aquaintance who obama has acknowledged is prone to making statements that he doesn't agree with. what more can he do? the guy isn't his preacher anymore.

But Obama hasn't denounced his pastor. He said he disagrees with "some" of his comments... hardly a denunciation, if you ask me. When Ferraro said her comments a few days ago, Hillary Clinton said basically the same thing... that she didn't agree with her comments... yet Obama's campaign and his supporters wanted Hillary to denounce what Ferraro had said. Obama has given the same reaction Clinton gave. He expressed that he disagreed with his comments; he never denounced them. Regardless of whether the guy works for Obama's campaign, he still speaks on behalf of him. Much like Louis Farrakhan does. Obama ought to denounce everything those two have said and disassociate himself from their statements.

[sinewave]

But Obama hasn't denounced his pastor. He said he disagrees with "some" of his comments... hardly a denunciation, if you ask me. When Ferraro said her comments a few days ago, Hillary Clinton said basically the same thing... that she didn't agree with her comments... yet Obama's campaign and his supporters wanted Hillary to denounce what Ferraro had said. Obama has given the same reaction Clinton gave. He expressed that he disagreed with his comments; he never denounced them. Regardless of whether the guy works for Obama's campaign, he still speaks on behalf of him. Much like Louis Farrakhan does. Obama ought to denounce everything those two have said and disassociate himself from their statements.

whoa, how do you figure farrakhan speaks on obama's behalf? because he's black and he's offered his support, which was famously "denounced and rejected". the same with this preacher guy. you're really reaching with this.

[The Senator]

whoa, how do you figure farrakhan speaks on obama's behalf? because he's black and he's offered his support, which was famously "denounced and rejected". the same with this preacher guy. you're really reaching with this.

Farrakhan has publicly endorsed Barack Obama. Anyone can speak on behalf of a candidate. George Clooney isn't a politician or a super delegate, yet he's thrown his weight behind Obama and has spoken in favor of him on several occasions. You don't have to be publicly acknowledged by a candidate to speak on behalf of that candidate, especially if you have considerable weight among a certain demographic like Farrakhan or Wright. If you're a media magnet like those two have become, you'll get enough press, for better or worse.

[redfirebird2008]

McCain's campaign has said that an endorsement from someone is an endorsement of the candidate's views, not the other way around. They've got their own controversial endorsement to deal with in Mr. Hagee.

[sinewave]

Farrakhan has publicly endorsed Barack Obama. Anyone can speak on behalf of a candidate. George Clooney isn't a politician or a super delegate, yet he's thrown his weight behind Obama and has spoken in favor of him on several occasions. You don't have to be publicly acknowledged by a candidate to speak on behalf of that candidate, especially if you have considerable weight among a certain demographic like Farrakhan or Wright. If you're a media magnet like those two have become, you'll get enough press, for better or worse.

i don't think "speaking on his behalf" is the correct term, though. that implies that obama has authorized him to speak for him, which isn't true at all. obama has rejected farrakhan's support so he's obviously not speaking on his behalf. he might be speaking in support of him, but not on his behalf. that's seems kind of underhanded to make a claim like that. it's almost like you're trying to tie them together in voters' minds.

[redfirebird2008]

i don't think "speaking on his behalf" is the correct term, though. that implies that obama has authorized him to speak for him, which isn't true at all. obama has rejected farrakhan's support so he's obviously not speaking on his behalf. he might be speaking in support of him, but not on his behalf. that's seems kind of underhanded to make a claim like that. it's almost like you're trying to tie them together in voters' minds.

Voters' minds? LOL, as if this forum has any real impact on that.

[sinewave]

Voters' minds? LOL, as if this forum has any real impact on that.

eh, who knows how many undecided voters there are here?

[The Senator]

i don't think "speaking on his behalf" is the correct term, though. that implies that obama has authorized him to speak for him, which isn't true at all. obama has rejected farrakhan's support so he's obviously not speaking on his behalf. he might be speaking in support of him, but not on his behalf. that's seems kind of underhanded to make a claim like that. it's almost like you're trying to tie them together in voters' minds.

I'm almost certain that Louis Farrakhan has "converted" some of his followers to support Obama... however many or few there may be in that case. But Louis Farrakhan is a powerful media force. There are some people who will do whatever he says, and there are many more who cringe every time he speaks. So Farrakhan is a very powerful figure. Obama may not want his support, but that doesn't stop Farrakhan from going out there and praising Obama, while making controversial statements in the process. The same thing goes for Wright. Both have followers who will listen to them and make a decision based on who they support. It doesn't matter whether Obama acknowledges their support; what matters is that they speak in favor of him, and receive such mainstream press. Obama has to do more than reject those comments; he has to disassociate himself from them. He should make it clear that he does not want Farrakhan or Wright's support.

(But because he is a politician who needs all the support he can get, he won't.)

[Marx]

Obama's controversial Pastor (again) - "God D*** America!"

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zWvxTUy47Fk

[The Senator]

There's also an interesting Q & A posted by the Politico:


Obama, asked about his pastor — whom the campaign appears to be keeping on a religious advisory committee — by the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review, refuses to throw him overboard, as both campaigns have been doing at a furious pace with other supporters:

Q: I don't know if you've seen it, but it's all over the wire today (from an ABC News story), a statement that your pastor (the Rev. Jeremiah Wright of Trinity United Church of Christ on Chicago's South Side) made in a sermon in 2003 that instead of singing "God Bless America," black people should sing a song essentially saying "God Damn America."

A: I haven't seen the line. This is a pastor who is on the brink of retirement who in the past has made some controversial statements. I profoundly disagree with some of these statements.

Q: What about this particular statement?

A: Obviously, I disagree with that. Here is what happens when you just cherry-pick statements from a guy who had a 40-year career as a pastor. There are times when people say things that are just wrong. But I think it's important to judge me on what I've said in the past and what I believe.


Also, this guy is Obama's pastor... not just an acquaintance... so he knows him on a personal level, which makes this pretty relevant.

[Marx]

There's also an interesting Q & A posted by the Politico:



Also, this guy is Obama's pastor... not just an acquaintance... so he knows him on a personal level, which makes this pretty relevant.

That's really interesting. Now I'm not a regular church going person, but I have always thought that the church in which you attend, and the pastor leading that church, speaks volumes for your own beliefs and character. I don't think it is necessarily cherry picking when the majority of what this pastor says reflects statements like these.

[The Senator]

That's really interesting. Now I'm not a regular church going person, but I have always thought that the church in which you attend, and the pastor leading that church, speaks volumes for your own beliefs and character. I don't think it is necessarily cherry picking when the majority of what this pastor says reflects statements like these.

I'm not much of a churchgoer myself. But I've encountered pastors who have said and done things which I found personally offended by, and I left the churches I had attended because of it. I think most people would find it uncomfortable and offensive to sit through some guy's malicious personal rant, rather than a sermon dictating everyone's beliefs. If Obama didn't agree with those statements, why did he stay with the church? Having been in that position myself, it sort of baffles me.

[Marx]

I'm not much of a churchgoer myself. But I've encountered pastors who have said and done things which I found personally offended by, and I left the churches I had attended because of it. I think most people would find it uncomfortable and offensive to sit through some guy's malicious personal rant, rather than a sermon dictating everyone's beliefs. If Obama didn't agree with those statements, why did he stay with the church? Having been in that position myself, it sort of baffles me.

That's what I don't understand. Obama has supposedly been at this same chruch for 20 years as has this pastor. Correct me if I'm wrong.

[sinewave]

I'm almost certain that Louis Farrakhan has "converted" some of his followers to support Obama... however many or few there may be in that case. But Louis Farrakhan is a powerful media force. There are some people who will do whatever he says, and there are many more who cringe every time he speaks. So Farrakhan is a very powerful figure. Obama may not want his support, but that doesn't stop Farrakhan from going out there and praising Obama, while making controversial statements in the process. The same thing goes for Wright. Both have followers who will listen to them and make a decision based on who they support. It doesn't matter whether Obama acknowledges their support; what matters is that they speak in favor of him, and receive such mainstream press. Obama has to do more than reject those comments; he has to disassociate himself from them. He should make it clear that he does not want Farrakhan or Wright's support.

(But because he is a politician who needs all the support he can get, he won't.)

i agree and i think he is trying to disassociate himself from them, but the fact is he has no control over what they say and do. he hasn't asked them to campaign for him, so this really isn't the same as mccain allowing hagee to share the stage with him at rallies and officially endorse him.

[sinewave]

There's also an interesting Q & A posted by the Politico:



Also, this guy is Obama's pastor... not just an acquaintance... so he knows him on a personal level, which makes this pretty relevant.

well shut my mouth. is he actually part of his campaign?

I'm not much of a churchgoer myself. But I've encountered pastors who have said and done things which I found personally offended by, and I left the churches I had attended because of it. I think most people would find it uncomfortable and offensive to sit through some guy's malicious personal rant, rather than a sermon dictating everyone's beliefs. If Obama didn't agree with those statements, why did he stay with the church? Having been in that position myself, it sort of baffles me.

i'm wondering that myself now. maybe he's got some kind of bond that transcends any controversial statements. it definitely won't help obama going forward and i'd like to see him reject his support, but at the same time, i'm not a black person and i've never experienced what this preacher might have in terms of prejudice or bigotry, so maybe he's speaking from past experiences that might have tainted his view. still, those statements aren't acceptable for anyone to make. if obama's going to live by the rule of being above petty attacks and divisiveness, he should cut all ties to this guy and explain why he continued to attend his services if he was aware of those statements beforehand. that's disappointing.

[Kelly]

That's what I don't understand. Obama has supposedly been at this same chruch for 20 years as has this pastor. Correct me if I'm wrong.


Obama helped to start that church with 19 other members I believe....

[redfirebird2008]

That's really interesting. Now I'm not a regular church going person, but I have always thought that the church in which you attend, and the pastor leading that church, speaks volumes for your own beliefs and character. I don't think it is necessarily cherry picking when the majority of what this pastor says reflects statements like these.

Who says that's representative of how the church always operates? I looked at a bulletin on their website and it looks like pretty much any other Protestant church. Lots of praise songs, some words from the scriptures and Gospel read by members of the church, and a sermon. The sermon is where he spews his garbage. At my church, the sermon makes up around 15-20% of the service at most. And my pastor has been known to go on anti-Muslim rants as well as plenty of other junk that I just tune out.

[redfirebird2008]

Obama helped to start that church with 19 other members I believe....

He wasn't a Christian until he JOINED the church so he couldn't have started it. Jeremiah Wright has been pastor at that church for like 32 years up until this February when he retired. Obama's been a member for 20 years and was an atheist for the first 12 years of Wright's position as pastor.

[Kelly]

I'm going by what I just heard on the news as they reported the story...

[redfirebird2008]

I'm going by what I just heard on the news as they reported the story...

And the news got it dead wrong.

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-wright_11feb11,1,4431179.story?ctrack=1&cset=true

"When Wright became Trinity's pastor in 1972, the church had 85 members..."

So in 1972, that church already had 85 members, meaning that Wright wasn't even the first pastor. And Obama was 11 years old and not even in Chicago when Wright took over as pastor, let alone when the church was founded.

[Kelly]

I don't know that it really has any bearing on the story itself. Seems to be the pastor simply got full of himself rather than the holy spirit.....and in some sermons, got alittle too heated.....

Obama is doing the right thing, hitting the reports head on, and distancing himself from this guy at the same time.

Only time will tell if it hurts his campaign, I think it will probably have a big impact on it....if he gets the nomination. Most news stories have a 24 hour period of BIG, I have a feeling this one will go awhile.

[redfirebird2008]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/barack-obama/on-my-faith-and-my-church_b_91623.html?view=print

Obama wrote this at Huffington Post.

[The Chairman]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/barack-obama/on-my-faith-and-my-church_b_91623.html?view=print

Obama wrote this at Huffington Post.

I read it. You have to give the man his credit (regardless of his race). He's on top of things and knows how to fan the flames.

[redfirebird2008]

I read it. You have to give the man his credit (regardless of his race). He's on top of things and knows how to fan the flames.

I'm sure a lot of people will say that denunciation wasn't good enough.

[The Chairman]

I'm sure a lot of people will say that wasn't good enough.

Very true. And yet Hilary's camp doesn't seem to care about Ferrarro's statements. Obama went on a public blog and actually posted his views. He's a class act.

[redfirebird2008]

Very true. And yet Hilary's camp doesn't seem to care about Ferrarro's statements. Obama went on a public blog and actually posted his views. He's a class act.

Hillary rejected and repudiated Ferraro's comments.

[The Chairman]

Hillary rejected and repudiated Ferraro's comments.

Ah, didn't see that. Still, the whole "Obama is a hypocrite" argument is now moot.

[redfirebird2008]

Wright was on Obama's Spiritual Advisory Committee and was forced to resign today.

[redfirebird2008]

Apparently Obama dis-invited Wright from his campaign announcement speech when he first announced that he was running for President (Olbermann just said this).

[The Senator]

Hahahaha... Obama issues a statement condemning Wright's words, and it's breaking news on every cable news network... Hillary issues a statement condemning Ferraro's words, and it barely gets mentioned at all... gotta love media bias.

[Marx]

Hahahaha... Obama issues a statement condemning Wright's words, and it's breaking news on every cable news network... Hillary issues a statement condemning Ferraro's words, and it barely gets mentioned at all... gotta love media bias.

I also found that interesting. I'm glad to know that I wasn't the only one who noticed that.

[Memphis Slim]

That's what I don't understand. Obama has supposedly been at this same chruch for 20 years as has this pastor. Correct me if I'm wrong.


Yes he has. And don't tell me that after sitting under that kind of rhetoric for that long, you don't believe in it. You give your money to it. You raise you kids in it???

This shines a serious light on his wife's comments about not being proud of her country or even this:

. http://albanysinsanity.wnymedia.net/blogs/files/2007/10/obama-no-patriot.jpg

Interesting.

[Memphis Slim]

I also found that interesting. I'm glad to know that I wasn't the only one who noticed that.


Wright is still a part of Obama's campaign. Barak even named his new book after a title of one of Wright's sermons.

Ferraro is not working with Hillary. Nor did Hillary get spiritual advice from Geraldine for 20 years. Big difference.

[Memphis Slim]

Wright was on Obama's Spiritual Advisory Committee and was forced to resign today.


Damage control. Means nothing. And it certainly didn't happen fast enough. If nothing was in the media, Wright would still be there. They kicked that chick out for calling Hillary a monster, last week, faster than Jay Garrick.

[The Chairman]

Yes he has. And don't tell me that after sitting under that kind of rhetoric for that long, you don't believe in it. You give your money to it. You raise you kids in it???

This shines a serious light on his wife's comments about not being proud of her country or even this:

. http://albanysinsanity.wnymedia.net/blogs/files/2007/10/obama-no-patriot.jpg

Interesting.

That picture proves ****. The National Anthem was being sung. Obama was taught to stand during the Anthem and put on his heart during The Pledge.

[Memphis Slim]

http://www.hulu.com/watch/11933/saturday-night-live-3am-phone-call

Man!! This funny!! :woot::woot::woot:

[The Chairman]

Damage control. Means nothing. And it certainly didn't happen fast enough. If nothing was in the media, Wright would still be there. They kicked that chick out for calling Hillary a monster, last week, faster than Jay Garrick.

Did you not read his response? He had no idea about Wright's statements until recently.

Also, you've defended similar hate filled rhetorics by Robertson & Falwell about gays and liberals. Why do you sit through their ********? Do you have a bond with them?

You're an ignorant hypocrite Slim, and don't you forget it.

[Memphis Slim]

Did you not read his response? He had no idea about Wright's statements until recently.

Also, you've defended similar hate filled rhetorics by Robertson & Falwell about gays and liberals. Why do you sit through their ********? Do you have a bond with them?

You're an ignorant hypocrite Slim, and don't you forget it.

That dude is lying through his teeth!!! He mentions Hiroshima in some papers he wrote years ago that sounded just like his pastor's comments. Twenty years?? And you never heard your pastor say these type of things before??? That is a bald faced lie and you know it. You just want them to leave your sweet prince alone. I want some answers.

[Marx]

Did you not read his response? He had no idea about Wright's statements until recently.

Also, you've defended similar hate filled rhetorics by Robertson & Falwell about gays and liberals. Why do you sit through their ********? Do you have a bond with them?

You're an ignorant hypocrite Slim, and don't you forget it.

You cannot honestly sit there and say that you believe that Obama "knew nothing about this line of thinking from his pastor." Come on, Chair. Obama attended this church for 20 years, this same pastor has been there the whole time and yet he knew nothing about it? Give me a break. Even if you give him the benefit of the doubt and say he wasn't there during any of the sermons, word travels through churches. He had to overhear or at least be aware of it - but he claims that he knew nothing until the last year or so? Respectfully, I call bull****.

[Memphis Slim]

You cannot honestly sit there and say that you believe that Obama "knew nothing about this line of thinking from his pastor." Come on, Chair. Obama attended this church for 20 years, this same pastor has been there the whole time and yet he knew nothing about it? Give me a break. Even if you give him the benefit of the doubt and say he wasn't there during any of the sermons, word travels through churches. He had to overhear or at least be aware of it - but he claims that he knew nothing until the last year or so? Respectfully, I call bull****.


And if he wasn't down with that kind of rhetoric, why did he stay there?

[Marx]

And if he wasn't down with that kind of rhetoric, why did he stay there?

Exactly. If you don't like or agree with what the pastor is preaching - you leave the church and find another one. Obama is going to have to do some serious big time explaining. To me, this is worse than what Bill Cunningham said, worse than what Ferraro said.

[Memphis Slim]

Exactly. If you don't like or agree with what the pastor is preaching - you leave the church and find another one. Obama is going to have to do some serious big time explaining. To me, this is worse than what Bill Cunningham said, worse than what Ferraro said.

If not for the media storm, Wright would still be there.

[The Chairman]

And if he wasn't down with that kind of rhetoric, why did he stay there?

Well, I can't answer this, but I'm willing to give Obama the benefit of the doubt. He's been honest enough about his shortcomings in the past, and I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt.

People stay in abusive marriages and I'm in a school in which my principal is emotionally and verbally absuvive, so anything is possible.

[Marx]

If not for the media storm, Wright would still be there.

I'm fully convinced of that Slim.

[Marx]

Well, I can't answer this, but I'm willing to give Obama the benefit of the doubt. He's been honest enough about his shortcomings in the past, and I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt.

People stay in abusive marriages and I'm in a school in which my principal is emotionally and verbally absuvive, so anything is possible.

I am somewhat willing to give him the benefit of the doubt that he may have not been at these particular sermons. But churches are communities, and are rather close. Things spread, people talk. If even by some chance he wasn't there, he would have known about this long before a year ago. I think it is highly hypocritical that Ferraro was condemned for what she said, but this pastor has been making claims like this the whole time. Very disturbing.

[Memphis Slim]

And now Obama has become a "sell-out" in the eyes of those who really believe Wright's messages.

I'm sure Wright agreed to "take one for the team".

But.......if Wright didn't, it will be interesting to see how Wright responds. A fiery "old school" cat like that would not be like"oh well.....that's how it goes."

He should be furious that the "white media" caused a split and Barak sold him out.

[The Senator]

Well, I can't answer this, but I'm willing to give Obama the benefit of the doubt. He's been honest enough about his shortcomings in the past, and I'm willing to give him the benefit of the doubt.

People stay in abusive marriages and I'm in a school in which my principal is emotionally and verbally absuvive, so anything is possible.

He's as honest as politicians come. Only willing to denounce something once it becomes a national issue. As it's been mentioned, I don't think he'd disassociate himself from Wright if it didn't become such a big news story. Clinton is guilty of the same thing... but most of her supporters aren't putting her on a holier-than-thou pedestal like Obama's are...

[Marx]

He's as honest as politicians come. Only willing to denounce something once it becomes a national issue. As it's been mentioned, I don't think he'd disassociate himself from Wright if it didn't become such a big news story. Clinton is guilty of the same thing... but most of her supporters aren't putting her on a holier-than-thou pedestal like Obama's are...

Obama has become rather arrogant, if you want my honest opinion. It's overly hypocritical to condemn Ferraro while your "spiritual mentor" is preaching these divisive sermons. And then to claim you knew nothing about it until recently, give me a break.

[Memphis Slim]

Chairman:
People stay in abusive marriages and I'm in a school in which my principal is emotionally and verbally absuvive, so anything is possible.



Please tell me you're not trying to compare this to Barak's situation.:lmao:

[The Senator]

Obama has become rather arrogant, if you want my honest opinion. It's overly hypocritical to condemn Ferraro while your "spiritual mentor" is preaching these divisive sermons. And then to claim you knew nothing about it until recently, give me a break.

I don't know if it's his fault entirely. I think a lot of his supporters are guilty of arrogance. They think he can do no wrong, that his campaign is picture perfect and that scandals like these can only exist for the Clinton campaign. Fact of the matter is, these things happen in all campaigns, at every level... but some people can't see it with him...

[Marx]

I don't know if it's his fault entirely. I think a lot of his supporters are guilty of arrogance. They think he can do no wrong, that his campaign is picture perfect and that scandals like these can only exist for the Clinton campaign. Fact of the matter is, these things happen in all campaigns, at every level... but some people can't see it with him...

I just don't see how this can or will be brushed under the carpet Jman. This is far worse than anything Bill Cunningham or Geraldine Ferraro have said.

[The Senator]

I just don't see how this can or will be brushed under the carpet Jman. This is far worse than anything Bill Cunningham or Geraldine Ferraro have said.

It is far worse, and the media knows it. Mark my words, by Monday, Chris Matthews and company will be slamming Clinton for something petty, while this goes unnoticed. He's lucky there isn't a primary on Tuesday, and that there's the Spitzer scandal going on, otherwise he may not have gotten off so luckily today.

[Marx]

It is far worse, and the media knows it. Mark my words, by Monday, Chris Matthews and company will be slamming Clinton for something petty, while this goes unnoticed. He's lucky there isn't a primary on Tuesday, and that there's the Spitzer scandal going on, otherwise he may not have gotten off so luckily today.

I'm telling you, the media may want to let this go, but the public will not.

[Memphis Slim]

I'm telling you, the media may want to let this go, but the public will not.


That's why it's good to have FOX. :hehe:

[The Senator]

I'm telling you, the media may want to let this go, but the public will not.

It will be interesting to see unfold, no doubt. However, I think the majority of voters follow the media a lot... and as long as this isn't a top priority for them, it won't be for some of the voters. This may hurt him a lot in North Carolina, a state which tends to be more patriotic than not, as well as a state which he was leading in by over 20% but now isn't so clear...

[Marx]

That's why it's good to have FOX. :hehe:

I don't agree with alot of things on FOX, but I do agree - they won't let this go.

It will be interesting to see unfold, no doubt. However, I think the majority of voters follow the media a lot... and as long as this isn't a top priority for them, it won't be for some of the voters. This may hurt him a lot in North Carolina, a state which tends to be more patriotic than not, as well as a state which he was leading in by over 20% but now isn't so clear...

I think that some might just let this fall away. But a firestorm is beginning. It's one thing for Bill Cunningham to use his middle name to elicit fear, it's one thing for Geraldine Ferraro to ask "how he got to where he is"...but it's quite another to follow a pastor for 20 years, be married by this man, have your children baptized by this man, and claim to know nothing of the hate speech he preaches.

[The Senator]

I think that some might just let this fall away. But a firestorm is beginning. It's one thing for Bill Cunningham to use his middle name to elicit fear, it's one thing for Geraldine Ferraro to ask "how he got to where he is"...but it's quite another to follow a pastor for 20 years, be married by this man, have your children baptized by this man, and claim to know nothing of the hate speech he preaches.

I do find it funny that the best excuse he could give for the man's statements was that he was getting old and was near retirement...

[Zen]

what did the paster say that has offended any of you... no link to videos, post whatever line you think is offensive, im curious.

is it only the god damn america quote or is there other things that offend you?

[Marx]

I do find it funny that the best excuse he could give for the man's statements was that he was getting old and was near retirement...

I believe my favorite line was "he's kind of like an uncle who just says things that you don't agree with." :huh:

It's a change of pace seeing Obama trip over his words.

[Marx]

what did the paster say that has offended any of you... no link to videos, post whatever line you think is offensive, im curious.

is it only the god damn america quote or is there other things that offend you?

If you don't want links to videos then I'm sure you know why all of this is causing a firestorm Zen.

[The Senator]

what did the paster say that has offended any of you... no link to videos, post whatever line you think is offensive, im curious.

is it only the god damn america quote or is there other things that offend you?

His statement basically brushing off the casualties suffered in 9/11, implying that the lives lost at the hands of America abroad were far more severe and evil, offend me incredibly. That's in addition to his "God Damn America" remarks, which were totally uncalled for and said only to ignite and infuriate African Americans, which were far more racially unsettling than what Geraldine Ferraro said...

[Matt]

what did the paster say that has offended any of you... no link to videos, post whatever line you think is offensive, im curious.

is it only the god damn america quote or is there other things that offend you?

I personally found the "KKKA" comment to be a bit much. Same with his claiming that the 9/11 attacks were the result of foreign policy. Granted, groups like Al-Queda form as a result of our support of Israel (Not because we are a predominantly Christian nation. That notion is equally ridiculous). But to sit there and almost say they are...justified in attacking a civilian target is sick.

What I find just as bad is Obama lying. The man who claims he does not lie saying he has never heard him speak this way. Please. He has gone to this church for 20 years. We have members of congregation confirming the pastor talks like this in about half his sermons. Obama has praised this guy immensely in the past (even in his book claiming this man is one of his personal inspirations). I find it very hard to believe Obama was unaware of these preachings.

[The Senator]

I believe my favorite line was "he's kind of like an uncle who just says things that you don't agree with." :huh:

It's a change of pace seeing Obama trip over his words.

If Clinton said something along the lines of "Geraldine is like that crazy old grandma with Alzheimer's," she'd be ridiculed to no end for it...

[Marx]

His statement basically brushing off the casualties suffered in 9/11, implying that the lives lost at the hands of America abroad were far more severe and evil, offend me incredibly. That's in addition to his "God Damn America" remarks, which were totally uncalled for and said only to ignite and infuriate African Americans, which were far more racially unsettling than what Geraldine Ferraro said...

Not to mention that "the black jesus was oppressed by the white people," the KKK comments, the rant against Hillary...did I miss anything else Jman? The whole thing was pretty **** offensive.

[Marx]

If Clinton said something along the lines of "Geraldine is like that crazy old grandma with Alzheimer's," she'd be ridiculed to no end for it...

Yeah, no joke.

[The Senator]

Not to mention that "the black jesus was oppressed by the white people," the rant against Hillary...did I miss anything else Jman? The whole thing was pretty **** offensive.

I think those statements are offensive enough. This man is trying to turn the African American community against Hillary Clinton, which is sickening in my book.

[Marx]

I personally found the "KKKA" comment to be a bit much. Same with his claiming that the 9/11 attacks were the result of foreign policy. Granted, groups like Al-Queda form as a result of our support of Israel (Not because we are a predominantly Christian nation. That notion is equally ridiculous). But to sit there and almost say they are...justified in attacking a civilian target is sick.

What I find just as bad is Obama lying. The man who claims he does not lie saying he has never heard him speak this way. Please. He has gone to this church for 20 years. We have members of congregation confirming the pastor talks like this in about half his sermons. Obama has praised this guy immensely in the past (even in his book claiming this man is one of his personal inspirations). I find it very hard to believe Obama was unaware of these preachings.

Obama said that he pulled the title of "The Audacity of Hope" from one of his sermons. That fact that Obama flat out lied about not knowing anything until a year ago? It honestly makes me sick.

I think those statements are offensive enough. This man is trying to turn the African American community against Hillary Clinton, which is sickening in my book.

Exactly. I'm really dumbfounded by all of this. There's such an unbelievable level of hypocrisy.

[sinewave]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/barack-obama/on-my-faith-and-my-church_b_91623.html?view=print

Obama wrote this at Huffington Post.

i know politicians are supposed to be b.s.-artists and that being articulate doesn't always equal brilliance or wisdom, but the combination of his intelligence, voice, message, judgment, thoughtfulness and persona is enough to make me think he could be a fantastic president.

Yes he has. And don't tell me that after sitting under that kind of rhetoric for that long, you don't believe in it. You give your money to it. You raise you kids in it???

This shines a serious light on his wife's comments about not being proud of her country or even this:

. http://albanysinsanity.wnymedia.net/blogs/files/2007/10/obama-no-patriot.jpg

Interesting.

Wright is still a part of Obama's campaign. Barak even named his new book after a title of one of Wright's sermons.

Ferraro is not working with Hillary. Nor did Hillary get spiritual advice from Geraldine for 20 years. Big difference.

how much right-wing press do you follow? do you honestly believe that the obama's hate america? i want you to really think about it first, though. you're accusing a half-black, half-white guy who grew up with a single (white) mom in kansas, achieved magna cum laude at harvard and became a community organizer in chicago before becoming a state, then u.s. senator and finally a presidential candidate of hating america? are you really that paranoid and gullible?

[The Senator]

Also, it appears that Tony Rezko played a bigger fundraising role in his campaign than Obama first admitted:

http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0308/9049.html

[StorminNorman]

umm, that's pretty arrogant for you to make a definitive statement about an objective comment. the black community found it incredibly offensive for someone in clinton's campaign (who has a history of making similar comments) to say that a black man is "lucky" he's black because he wouldn't have gotten as far as he has if he wasn't. that's a discredit to all the hard work obama has gone through to get where he is today and it's ridiculous.
But its true. Obama has benefited from being black. His campaigned is based around him being a symbol of CHANGE - his skin color in the White House is an aspect of that Change. He would not have such a control on that idea if it was not for his skin color.

And it is that message of "Change" that his entire campaign is based off of. His views are not much different from Hillary's, his experience is far less, he offers nothing Hillary does not and Hillary offers far more than Obama does, mainly in experience.

To argue that Obama has not benefitted from his skin color displays a willingness to deny reality.

[StorminNorman]

I don't know that it really has any bearing on the story itself. Seems to be the pastor simply got full of himself rather than the holy spirit.....and in some sermons, got alittle too heated.....

Obama is doing the right thing, hitting the reports head on, and distancing himself from this guy at the same time.

Only time will tell if it hurts his campaign, I think it will probably have a big impact on it....if he gets the nomination. Most news stories have a 24 hour period of BIG, I have a feeling this one will go awhile.

Obama can not distance himself from this guy because he has willingless accepted this rhetoric in the past. His relationship with Wright extends far beyond a simple pastor-member relationship. They are friends. They are very close. Wright is Obama's personal spirtual advisor. Obama knew exactly what type of radical positions this man has taken and believes and instead of pulling away from such devisive, anti-American rhetoric - he embraces it.

That shows a good deal about him personally and his own views.

It should be noted that the church he is affiliated with has a by law that its member must have a non-negotiable commitment to Africa. That bothers me.

[StorminNorman]

Did you not read his response? He had no idea about Wright's statements until recently.


:dry:

You...really don't believe that, do you?

Honestly :lmao:

[Varient]

(Sad Smile)
Man has a pastor who probably,... Nay,... DEFINETELY did more good than harm over 36 years,... But like the smoking,.. and his middle name,.. and wearing robes while in another country and having been born into a Muslim family,... Poor Obama has to take heat for the "greatest hits" of tepid negativity his Pastor ever uttered.

TSK.

From the outside looking in it all remains pathetic.

[Memphis Slim]

(Sad Smile)
Man has a pastor who probably,... Nay,... DEFINETELY did more good than harm over 36 years,... But like the smoking,.. and his middle name,.. and wearing robes while in another country and having been born into a Muslim family,... Poor Obama has to take heat for the "greatest hits" of tepid negativity his Pastor ever uttered.

TSK.

From the outside looking in it all remains pathetic.


Sorry Varient. You can't boil this down to something so simplistic. Not this one.

[Memphis Slim]

Obama can not distance himself from this guy because he has willingless accepted this rhetoric in the past. His relationship with Wright extends far beyond a simple pastor-member relationship. They are friends. They are very close. Wright is Obama's personal spirtual advisor. Obama knew exactly what type of radical positions this man has taken and believes and instead of pulling away from such devisive, anti-American rhetoric - he embraces it.

That shows a good deal about him personally and his own views.

It should be noted that the church he is affiliated with has a by law that its member must have a non-negotiable commitment to Africa. That bothers me.


......and why michelle seems to be even more outwardly militant than Barack. Notice how she's been put on lock down lately??

[Memphis Slim]

But its true. Obama has benefited from being black. His campaigned is based around him being a symbol of CHANGE - his skin color in the White House is an aspect of that Change. He would not have such a control on that idea if it was not for his skin color.

And it is that message of "Change" that his entire campaign is based off of. His views are not much different from Hillary's, his experience is far less, he offers nothing Hillary does not and Hillary offers far more than Obama does, mainly in experience.

To argue that Obama has not benefitted from his skin color displays a willingness to deny reality.


He has also benefited because "whites" are afraid to go after him too hard for fear of being called racist. The race card gets played to much and white folk have been gun shy.

But this...... this may show that even Obama has a "racist" side that he's trying to hide from us. I dare say he just might be. 20 years under Wrights's teachings?? As a close friend?? His advisor??? :dry:

[Memphis Slim]

His statement basically brushing off the casualties suffered in 9/11, implying that the lives lost at the hands of America abroad were far more severe and evil, offend me incredibly. That's in addition to his "God Damn America" remarks, which were totally uncalled for and said only to ignite and infuriate African Americans, which were far more racially unsettling than what Geraldine Ferraro said...


And Obama sat under this guy ....and got spiritual and "political" ideology from this dude for 20 years.

[BlackLantern]

so on Inauguration Day, if he wins, will Obama scream "KILL WHITEY" from the podium??

[Malice]

I find the great reverends words highly offensive (and I have thick skin)
And I tell you this, Obama went to the church for 20 years. That to me means, he agrees with at least half of the venoms the racist spit out.

So no way in Hell I would vote for him now...ever

[BlackLantern]

Incidents like this can kill momentum.....People that were on the fence about Obama can now be swayed by these recent events.