Discussion: Reverend Wright And The Fallout

[Super_Ludacris]

Of course there would be. Pat Buchanan and Jerry Falwell can't go two months without being tangled up in some kind fo scandal because of what they say about homosexuality. The Westboro Baptist Church is constantly getting in trouble over their anti-gay rhetoric.

Ludacris, how can you honestly sit there and defend a man who led applause to 3000 civilian deaths?

Right, because Im clearly applauding everyone of his comments. What is this some combo deal or something? And Im not applauding as Ive said before. I just get the mentality on most of the stuff hes saying, thats all. Its a bitter ass world, what? But it aint like Barack is argreeing with him which what some people are hoping for.

[redfirebird2008]

Right, because Im clearly applauding everyone of his comments. What is this some combo deal or something? And Im not applauding as Ive said before. I just get the mentality on most of the stuff hes saying, thats all. Its a bitter ass world, what? But it aint like Barack is argreeing with him which what some people are hoping for.

No but he had the guy on his campaign, a campaign that's about unity while he's got an adviser preaching divisiveness. Doesn't make any sense to me.

[The Overlord]

Of course there would be. Pat Buchanan and Jerry Falwell can't go two months without being tangled up in some kind fo scandal because of what they say about homosexuality. The Westboro Baptist Church is constantly getting in trouble over their anti-gay rhetoric.

Ludacris, how can you honestly sit there and defend a man who led applause to 3000 civilian deaths?

Falwell blamed 9-11 on gay people, McCain had no problem hanging out with him in recent years and no one really batted an eye.

I don't agree with what Wright said, but its a doube standard that wright gets punished for railing against rich white people, but McCain can hang out with people who rail gainst gay people and that's okay.

[Matt]

Right, because Im clearly applauding everyone of his comments. What is this some combo deal or something? And Im not applauding as Ive said before. I just get the mentality on most of the stuff hes saying, thats all. Its a bitter ass world, what? But it aint like Barack is argreeing with him which what some people are hoping for.

He is agreeing with him! Even if he isn't coming out and saying it, going to his rants for 20 years is not only enabling him, but also a form of non-verabl agreement. That is like me going to a KKK rally every week for 20 years and then saying "Well, I don't agree with what they said. I just think the Grand Dragon is a good guy."

[Super_Ludacris]

I believe McCain was already thrown under the bus for condeming then supporting Falwell in a span of 5 years.


I mean the dude is old.....

[Matt]

Falwell blamed 9-11 on gay people, McCain had no problem hanging out with him in recent years and no one really batted an eye.

I don't agree with what Wright said, but its a doube standard that wright gets punished for railing against rich white people, but McCain can hang out with people who rail gainst gay people and that's okay.

McCain is appeasing his base (the religious right) during primary season. There is a difference. It is not like McCain is going to Falwell's sermons for 20 years. I am sure as the general election campaign gets closer and McCain moves back towards the middle (now that he has the nomination locked, he most definitely will) he will distance himself from Falwell. It is simply the nature of the beast. You can't really compare a photo-op every now and then for political benefit to attending a racist man's sermons every week for 20 years.

[Marx]

Right, because Im clearly applauding everyone of his comments. What is this some combo deal or something? And Im not applauding as Ive said before. I just get the mentality on most of the stuff hes saying, thats all. Its a bitter ass world, what? But it aint like Barack is argreeing with him which what some people are hoping for.

It's not like Barack is as "ignorant" about Wright's views as his pretty speeches would like for everyone to believe either.

[The Overlord]

He is agreeing with him! Even if he isn't coming out and saying it, going to his rants for 20 years is not only enabling him, but also a form of non-verabl agreement. That is like me going to a KKK rally every week for 20 years and then saying "Well, I don't agree with what they said. I just think the Grand Dragon is a good guy."

Oh please, there tons of people who go to church all the time and they often disagree with what ministers say. That happens all the time. Obama is not some robot who just agrees with what ever this guy says.

I went to Church this easter and disagreed with everything the priest was saying.

McCain is appeasing his base (the religious right) during primary season. There is a difference. It is not like McCain is going to Falwell's sermons for 20 years. I am sure as the general election campaign gets closer and McCain moves back towards the middle (now that he has the nomination locked, he most definitely will) he will distance himself from Falwell. It is simply the nature of the beast. You can't really compare a photo-op every now and then for political benefit to attending a racist man's sermons every week for 20 years.

I can and I will, McCain is two faced for calling Falwell an agent of intolerence, then sucking up to him because iit benefits him, he has no real values.

[Super_Ludacris]

It's not like Barack is as "ignorant" about Wright's views as his pretty speeches would like for everyone to believe either.

If he was ignorant he'd be agreeing with him 100%. He'd also say hes lucky to be in this cause hes black.

Barack got too much swag for that kid...:)

[Super_Ludacris]

He is agreeing with him!

Now if you can just get the exact quote where he does say that 100% You can bring the trophy home



Even if he isn't coming out and saying it, going to his rants for 20 years is not only enabling him, but also a form of non-verabl agreement. That is like me going to a KKK rally every week for 20 years and then saying "Well, I don't agree with what they said. I just think the Grand Dragon is a good guy."


LOL! Preachers say a lot of crazy stuff on Sunday, like you have to agree with 100% of what they say....

Come to B-More and see my Church where my pastor was, you'd have a heart attack. He told me he thought the Indian is laughing right now looking at 9-11 back in 2001. Dont mean I agree with him.....

[redfirebird2008]

It's not like Barack is as "ignorant" about Wright's views as his pretty speeches would like for everyone to believe either.

You gonna call out Hillary for her speeches in which she lied, in detail, about her trip to Bosnia? It's not a one-time occurrence. It's been going on throughout the campaign and has been part of prepared speeches. Just wondering since you seem to have such a huge problem with Obama's "pretty" speeches. I'm sick of her campaign and her supporters trying to act like being a good speaker is somehow a BAD thing.

[Mr Sparkle]

No, I simply want answers to three questions before I cast judgement on Obama:

1) Why did Obama attend a church for 20 years if he was aware of this hate speech being preached and disagreed with it so much. I certainly would not expose my child to a church that called black people the N-word. Why did he expose his children to a racist church?

I'm pretty sure he agreed with many things that he preacher said.
seems like the only reason to stay doesn't it?

2) Why did he appoint Wright to his campaign if he was aware of Wright's beliefs?

uh, maybe the preacher has pull in the black community, so as a politician he wants the appearance of staying close to his roots?

3) Why did he lie (or play dumb...happy redfire?) when the scandal first broke?

he is apolitician?
McCain also didn't denounce what his preacher said, infact, he said he wouldn't, and then 2 weeks later.
bam!


As pretty as his speech was, he did not answer these three essential questions and that is why he is falling in the polls on a daily basis.

nah, it's just that the majority of people in the US white, and the prespect of having some sort of black overlord scares the **** out of them (implausible as this is nowadays) it has nothing to do with his answers.
it's about this guy he knows.

[Mr Sparkle]

McCain is appeasing his base (the religious right) during primary season. There is a difference. It is not like McCain is going to Falwell's sermons for 20 years. I am sure as the general election campaign gets closer and McCain moves back towards the middle (now that he has the nomination locked, he most definitely will) he will distance himself from Falwell. It is simply the nature of the beast. You can't really compare a photo-op every now and then for political benefit to attending a racist man's sermons every week for 20 years.

:huh: so, like you say, presidential candidate goes to church for 20 years, bad,
presidential candidate implicitly supporting a homophobic, anti-feminist nutjob?

fine?

hahahaha!

ok.

[Super_Ludacris]

BTW Ive heard people in my old neighbourhood say tons worse things about 9/11 as a reflection of karma against big government and this aint just dudes on the block, its a lotta of the older generation. Shoot it was one thing a lotta younger dudes agreed on. Not saying its right but then again neither is assuming a dude who's middle name is Hussien is gonna blow up the White House or something lol.

[Matt]

Oh please, there tons of people who go to church all the time and they often disagree with what ministers say. That happens all the time. Obama is not some robot who just agrees with what ever this guy says.

I went to Church this easter and disagreed with everything the priest was saying.


LOL! Preachers say a lot of crazy stuff on Sunday, like you have to agree with 100% of what they say....

Come to B-More and see my Church where my pastor was, you'd have a heart attack. He told me he thought the Indian is laughing right now looking at 9-11 back in 2001. Dont mean I agree with him.....

Would you got a church for 20 years that preaches hate speech? Again, there is a world of difference between disagreeing with no eating meat on friday or not taking the creation myth as a literal 7 days and disagreeing with racist hate speech. Obama's priest was preaching RACISM. Would you go to a church for 20 years where the priest preached racism "every other sermon" (according to several parishioners)? Would you appoint someone who applauded 9/11 to a high level position on your campaign?


I can and I will, McCain is two faced for calling Falwell an agent of intolerence, then sucking up to him because iit benefits him, he has no real values.


I don't disagree with that. I am simply saying there is a difference.

[The Senator]

BTW Ive heard people in my old neighbourhood say tons worse things about 9/11 as a reflection of karma against big government and this aint just dudes on the block, its a lotta of the older generation. Shoot it was one thing a lotta younger dudes agreed on. Not saying its right but then again neither is assuming a dude who's middle name is Hussien is gonna blow up the White House or something lol.

Those people aren't running for President, are they? They aren't advising a leading Presidential candidate, are they?

When you run for President, you run to serve all Americans from different background with different interests and beliefs. You shouldn't hire someone who expresses utter hatred towards white folks and thinks the country which you serve to represent deserved to be attacked on 9/11.

People would throw a **** fit if George W. Bush hired Wright to serve in his administration. The Presidency and presidential elections require a certain amount of professionalism. And Jeremiah Wright lacked tact and decency.

[redfirebird2008]

Those people aren't running for President, are they? They aren't advising a leading Presidential candidate, are they?

When you run for President, you run to serve all Americans from different background with different interests and beliefs. You shouldn't hire someone who expresses utter hatred towards white folks and thinks the country which you serve to represent deserved to be attacked on 9/11.

People would throw a **** fit if George W. Bush hired Wright to serve in his administration. The Presidency and presidential elections require a certain amount of professionalism. And Jeremiah Wright lacked tact and decency.

Agree 100%.

[The Overlord]

Would you got a church for 20 years that preaches hate speech? Again, there is a world of difference between disagreeing with no eating meat on friday or not taking the creation myth as a literal 7 days and disagreeing with racist hate speech. Obama's priest was preaching RACISM. Would you go to a church for 20 years where the priest preached racism "every other sermon" (according to several parishioners)? Would you appoint someone who applauded 9/11 to a high level position on your campaign?
.

Please I bet there tons of preachers who rail against gay people and tons of people in the church who disagree with him, but they still go to that church every sunday.

It was his wife church anyway and he needed a church so he could score points with the religious people. A lot of people get dragged to churchs they may not like by their families.



I don't disagree with that. I am simply saying there is a difference.

what's the difference, opportunism makes it okay for Mccain to hang out with wackos.

[Marx]

Please I bet there tons of preachers who rail against gay people and tons of people in the church who disagree with him, but they still go to that church every sunday.

It was his wife church anyway and he needed a church so he could score points with the religious people. A lot of people get dragged to churchs they may not like by their families.




what's the difference, opportunism makes it okay for Mccain to hang out with wackos.

That's really not your argument is it? You must not be aware of all the facts. :huh:

[Darthphere]

Once and for all, I don't care about what your Preachers say in your church. You're not running for President.

[Lightning Strykez!]

Oh please, there tons of people who go to church all the time and they often disagree with what ministers say. That happens all the time. Obama is not some robot who just agrees with what ever this guy says.

I went to Church this easter and disagreed with everything the priest was saying.


You are making too much sense. Stop it please. :cmad:

[Darthphere]

Um, LS, thats not common sense at all. If I went to a church and disagreed with everything my Priest said, why would I go to that church? The answer is, I wouldn't. Anyone with common sense wouldn't.

[Marx]

You gonna call out Hillary for her speeches in which she lied, in detail, about her trip to Bosnia? It's not a one-time occurrence. It's been going on throughout the campaign and has been part of prepared speeches. Just wondering since you seem to have such a huge problem with Obama's "pretty" speeches. I'm sick of her campaign and her supporters trying to act like being a good speaker is somehow a BAD thing.

I've never said who I am supporting Firebird. I'm just sick and tired of all the lies and hypocrisy that are devouring this whole campaign. As for Clinton's speech and talking points about her Bosnian trip - as far as I am aware she was not talking about landing directly in the middle of fire. She was talking about the conditions around the area that she landed in. Obviously, I don't think it is right to say there was no meeting ceremony when there clearly was - so yeah, that was a lie.

As for Obama's speeches - yes I am a little sick of them to be entirely honest. To me, he has become the king of sidestepping and blowing smoke. You and I have already discussed at length how full of BS he is, so I don't think we need to go there again. I just have a real problem with people that claim to be so far above everything when they are just as guilty as everyone else.

[The Overlord]

That's really not your argument is it? You must not be aware of all the facts. :huh:

No, that's not point, my point is people who go church aren't robots that are programed to have the exact same opinions as their ministers. just because Obama's preacher said some bad things, it doesn't mean we should assume he just believes them.

I still think its a double standard that no way has taken McCain to task for hanging out with Falwell.

Um, LS, thats not common sense at all. If I went to a church and disagreed with everything my Priest said, why would I go to that church? The answer is, I wouldn't. Anyone with common sense wouldn't.

How much do we know about this guy? Maybe he says a bunch of stuff Obama does agree (like helping the poor) but no one is bothering to cover that. Maybe Obama went there because agreed with some of things he said, but not everything. A lot of people who go to church do the same thing.

[Darthphere]

Bad things have always outweighed good things.

"But what about all the good things Hitler did?"

It's a horrible argument to make.

[The Senator]

If Bush supporters were to point to all of Jerry Falwell's positive accomplishments after he made his remarks about 9/11, people who are currently defending Wright would ignore what good he did in his life and would continuously slam Falwell for his bigoted remarks.

Wright has said very similar things to Falwell, except he replaced gays and feminists with the entire U.S. government when coming up with a 'cause' for the terrorist attacks.

The logic appears to be this: "If _____ says something and supports Obama, then it's okay. If _______ says something and supports anyone else, it's deplorable!"

It's sad.

[Super_Ludacris]

Would you got a church for 20 years that preaches hate speech? Again, there is a world of difference between disagreeing with no eating meat on friday or not taking the creation myth as a literal 7 days and disagreeing with racist hate speech. Obama's priest was preaching RACISM. Would you go to a church for 20 years where the priest preached racism "every other sermon" (according to several parishioners)? Would you appoint someone who applauded 9/11 to a high level position on your campaign?


I don't disagree with that. I am simply saying there is a difference.

Yeah I'd still go to the church, its Sunday Service with the family to pray myself to god. All that other stuff? I dont have to listen or agree with what dude is saying.I dont function like that. I believe in Faith but Im my own man. Yes, I need reminding of Faith spiritually in bad times but any other personal values that may differ with you own, you put to one side. All you need is a reminder to restore your belief when times are hard. I mean how else would say, Gay Christians live or moderate muslims. Great if they have a preacher who caters to them. But all that other stuff a pastor would say at Sunday Service, ou debate that with him at the luncheon or something. Most churches in areas like mine arent even about speaking the word of the lord, there just that community expressing themselves with god as our witness. Even then, it aint like the Pastor is speaking for the whole community. How can you do that? We cant even agree on things in the Babershop. Matter of fact thats how I look at it, Obama saying I want you to remind me about the faith of god and that's it, **** your opinion. And I know a lot of people are following the politics thinking "How can I do that?" but I really think thats it. I side with Obama cause I can relate and I give him props for handling the best out of poor situation and turning it around a bit. So it is what it is. I do think its funny which people get it and which people dont. But all in all appreciate the new debate it brings about race perspective.




And as far as his position in the campaign. What is it exactly? Spiritual Advisor?

[Darthphere]

You know what, I'm sick and tired of that lame argument being brought up. "I don't go to church for the preacher...". Yeah you do, because if it was really about praying and and all that, you could do that at some other church where the preacher isn't a racist/bigot/hate mongering person.

I've left a couple of churches because I didn't agree with the way the preacher was preaching. Not anything like Wright or Falwell, just things I didn't like.

[Super_Ludacris]

You know what, I'm sick and tired of that lame argument being brought up. "I don't go to church for the preacher...". Yeah you do, because if it was really about praying and and all that, you could do that at some other church where the preacher isn't a racist/bigot/hate mongering person.

I've left a couple of churches because I didn't agree with the way the preacher was preaching. Not anything like Wright or Falwell, just things I didn't like.

We always go to the local church. Hence why its the local church for your convience. Aint too many who do it differently, its not worth the travel.

It is really simple as that.

End of the day though, until I see a youtube vid of Obama in the crowd cheering Wright, I take his word. Thats the main point though. Who says he was doing this all in the same church or when.

[hippie_hunter]

We always go to the local church. Hence why its the local church for your convience. Aint too many who do it differently, its not worth the travel.

It is really simple as that.

End of the day though, until I see a youtube vid of Obama in the crowd cheering Wright, I take his word. Thats the main point though. Who says he was doing this all in the same church or when.

Obama lives in Chicago, he can find a nearby church with ease if he disagreed with the pastor. Pretty damn different than a town that has one or two churches.

[Darthphere]

We always go to the local church. Hence why its the local church for your convience. Aint too many who do it differently, its not worth the travel.

It is really simple as that.

End of the day though, until I see a youtube vid of Obama in the crowd cheering Wright, I take his word. Thats the main point though. Who says he was doing this all in the same church or when.

Obama probably hasn't driven his own car for the last 4 years, so I doubt it has anything to do with convenience and it being his local church. Heck, I have 7, yes 7 churches I can go to that are closer than the one I go to, but I don't. I don't see how finding the right church for you to praise God is "not worth the travel".

He doesn't have to be cheering. The fact that he sat there for 20 years, taking all this is, and doing nothing about it is enough. Now show me a Youtube vid where he walks out in disgust in the middle of one of Rev. Wright's hateful services then we can talk. Until then, I don't buy any of what Obama is selling.

[Marx]

We always go to the local church. Hence why its the local church for your convience. Aint too many who do it differently, its not worth the travel.

It is really simple as that.

End of the day though, until I see a youtube vid of Obama in the crowd cheering Wright, I take his word. Thats the main point though. Who says he was doing this all in the same church or when.

If you don't approve of what the Pastor is preaching - you leave the church Luda. No one is saying that Obama is a racist and a bigot. Obama has lied about knowing anything about these comments after which he then said "yeah I was aware of controversial remarks."

You do not attend a church for 20 years, be married by him and your children baptized by him, without knowing nothing about him. To believe that Obama knew nothing is naive. He only addressed this once it became a national issue and he was left with no other choice. (That doesn't exactly put you in the most trustworthy position.)

[Tron5000]

Yes, people DO attend church because they like/agree with the pastor. I visited my girlfriend's parents' church on Sunday, and I found the priest to be very engaging, informative and even humorous. This is an Episcopalian church, and I'm not Episcopalian, but I will attend future services with her family because I really liked the priest.

If Obama disagreed with and was offended by (as I would think most people would be) the preachings of his pastor, he should have left. The fact that he didn't speaks volumes. Either a) he agreed with what was being preached and thus stayed in the church or b) he disagreed with what was being preached but stayed anyway because it was politically beneficial to him. Either option casts severe doubt on his character and judgment.

[Super_Ludacris]

If you don't approve of what the Pastor is preaching - you leave the church Luda. No one is saying that Obama is a racist and a bigot. Obama has lied about knowing anything about these comments after which he then said "yeah I was aware of controversial remarks."

You do not attend a church for 20 years, be married by him and your children baptized by him, without knowing nothing about him. To believe that Obama knew nothing is naive. He only addressed this once it became a national issue and he was left with no other choice. (That doesn't exactly put you in the most trustworthy position.)


Like I said, his opinion doesnt irk to the point I want to leave the place I want to pray.

[Kelly]

This thead is becoming a bad soap opera....

[Darthphere]

I thought it was decent soap opera like a General Hospital.

[BlackLantern]

This thead is becoming a bad soap opera....

all we need is an evil twin with a goatee and an eyepatch, along with a fiance who has brain cancer....

[Matt]

Applauding the deaths of 3,000 civilians does not irk you?

[Darthphere]

Like I said, his opinion doesnt irk to the point I want to leave the place I want to pray.

Applauding the deaths of 3,000 civilians does not irk you?

Heh, I was thinking the same thing but I doubt we'll get a coherent response.

[Super_Ludacris]

Obama probably hasn't driven his own car for the last 4 years, so I doubt it has anything to do with convenience and it being his local church. Heck, I have 7, yes 7 churches I can go to that are closer than the one I go to, but I don't. I don't see how finding the right church for you to praise God is "not worth the travel".

He doesn't have to be cheering. The fact that he sat there for 20 years, taking all this is, and doing nothing about it is enough. Now show me a Youtube vid where he walks out in disgust in the middle of one of Rev. Wright's hateful services then we can talk. Until then, I don't buy any of what Obama is selling.

Wherever you wanna pray you can go there and as far as Obama sitting there an listening to all that, we dont even know if he was saying anything as extreme in those videos in front of Obama. And again, you wont see Obama in them vids cause he wasnt there lol. Im cool with Obama first and foremost and unless Wright is appointed in the Cabinet Im not worried. If you dont buy what Obama is selling cool, but were you buying what he was saying before hand? nah..

[Marx]

Applauding the deaths of 3,000 civilians does not irk you?

That's what I was wondering...

[Marx]

Wherever you wanna pray you can go there and as far as Obama sitting there an listening to all that, we dont even know if he was saying anything as extreme in those videos in front of Obama. And again, you wont see Obama in them vids cause he wasnt there lol. Im cool with Obama first and foremost and unless Wright is appointed in the Cabinet Im not worried. If you dont buy what Obama is selling cool, but were you buying what he was saying before hand? nah..

You have to question a man who puts someone like Wright as the "spiritual advisor" to his campaign.

[Darthphere]

Wherever you wanna pray you can go there and as far as Obama sitting there an listening to all that, we dont even know if he was saying anything as extreme in those videos in front of Obama. And again, you wont see Obama in them vids cause he wasnt there lol. Im cool with Obama first and foremost and unless Wright is appointed in the Cabinet Im not worried. If you dont buy what Obama is selling cool, but were you buying what he was saying before hand? nah..

Lets say I believe this was a one time thing by the Rev. Wright. Those were the only times he ever said that, and lets say I believe Obama wasn't there (which I know chances are he wasn't) he himself said he was aware of those comments. Why stay anyway when you know that your political career is at stake? Why make him your spiritual advisor? It just doesn't make sense to me at all. Sorry.

[Super_Ludacris]

Heh, I was thinking the same thing but I doubt we'll get a coherent response.

Darth, what is there not to get? I thought the dude was crazy and some people said that but at the end of the day, just because Im there, Im not agreeing with that cause I dont agree. You wanna get upset about it, do you but I dont make that big a deal out of it. Lotta people were in disagreeement, lotta people thought it was just another typical extreme reaction and opinion post 9/11. I didnt mull on it and it wasnt like he affected my future opinons and belief.

[Matt]

Darth, what is there not to get? I thought the dude was crazy and some people said that but at the end of the day, just because Im there, Im not agreeing with that cause I dont agree. You wanna get upset about it, do you but I dont make that big a deal out of it. Lotta people were in disagreeement, lotta people thought it was just another typical extreme reaction and opinion post 9/11. I didnt mull on it and it wasnt like he affected my future opinons and belief.

Well, Phere was right about one thing...that was not coherrant in the least. I have no clue what you just said.

[Super_Ludacris]

Lets say I believe this was a one time thing by the Rev. Wright. Those were the only times he ever said that, and lets say I believe Obama wasn't there (which I know chances are he wasn't) he himself said he was aware of those comments. Why stay anyway when you know that your political career is at stake? Why make him your spiritual advisor? It just doesn't make sense to me at all. Sorry.

Because Obama is not appointing him into cabinent or using his opinions to his policy. He is saying the race and generation issue needs to be examined (for a while in this country though)

Seperate Church from state right?

[Marx]

Darth, what is there not to get? I thought the dude was crazy and some people said that but at the end of the day, just because Im there, Im not agreeing with that cause I dont agree. You wanna get upset about it, do you but I dont make that big a deal out of it. Lotta people were in disagreeement, lotta people thought it was just another typical extreme reaction and opinion post 9/11. I didnt mull on it and it wasnt like he affected my future opinons and belief.

But don't you see how this damages Obama's credibility and "judgement?"

[BlackLantern]

Because Obama is not appointing him into cabinent or using his opinions to his policy. He is saying the race and generation issue needs to be examined (for a while in this country though)

Seperate Church from state right?

The problem is this guy has Obamas' ear.....its called "the power behind the throne"

[Super_Ludacris]

Well, Phere was right about one thing...that was not coherrant in the least. I have no clue what you just said.

That just because my preacher or someone I know says those things, doesnt mean I make it a big deal to the point where it affects my personal prayers with god. And in his case he didnt repeat those things.

[Tron5000]

That just because my preacher or someone I know says those things, doesnt mean I make it a big deal to the point where it affects my personal prayers with god. And in his case he didnt repeat those things.

What do you mean "he didn't repeat those things"? Are you implying that the comments made by Jeremiah Wright were a one-off and shouldn't really matter that much?

[BlackLantern]

That just because my preacher or someone I know says those things, doesnt mean I make it a big deal to the point where it affects my personal prayers with god. And in his case he didnt repeat those things.

no but those ideals can affect his judgement, decision making, and policy decisions....

[Super_Ludacris]

The problem is this guy has Obamas' ear.....its called "the power behind the throne"

Yeah but by the same token, we would have seen examples of his influence before this. Whatever he has been telling him, it hasnt been bat**** crazy. So credit to Barack for being his own man.

[Super_Ludacris]

What do you mean "he didn't repeat those things"? Are you implying that the comments made by Jeremiah Wright were a one-off and shouldn't really matter that much?

Nah Im talking about the Pastor at a Church in Baltimore I go to.

[Super_Ludacris]

But don't you see how this damages Obama's credibility and "judgement?"

Crediblity by association (and a lotta politicans have had that) but his judgements are his own judgements. I have yet to hear him damn the country

[BlackLantern]

Yeah but by the same token, we would have seen examples of his influence before this. Whatever he has been telling him, it hasnt been bat**** crazy. So credit to Barack for being his own man.

of course he wouldn't be doing anything prior to getting into office....its kind of like how Castro promised a revolution in Cuba and then turned that country into a Communist state after he got into office. Obama could seem all warm and fuzzy while he's running for President and then turn all Black Panther once he got into office.

[Super_Ludacris]

of course he wouldn't be doing anything prior to getting into office....its kind of like how Castro promised a revolution in Cuba and then turned that country into a Communist state after he got into office. Obama could seem all warm and fuzzy while he's running for President and then turn all Black Panther once he got into office.

And how is that gonna happen?

[The Senator]

Yeah but by the same token, we would have seen examples of his influence before this. Whatever he has been telling him, it hasnt been bat**** crazy. So credit to Barack for being his own man.

How the hell do you know that? You don't know what Wright has told him. For all you know, he could be secretly plotting to enslave white folks. I'm not saying he is, but do you have any evidence which refutes this?

[The Overlord]

If Bush supporters were to point to all of Jerry Falwell's positive accomplishments after he made his remarks about 9/11, people who are currently defending Wright would ignore what good he did in his life and would continuously slam Falwell for his bigoted remarks.

Wright has said very similar things to Falwell, except he replaced gays and feminists with the entire U.S. government when coming up with a 'cause' for the terrorist attacks.

The logic appears to be this: "If _____ says something and supports Obama, then it's okay. If _______ says something and supports anyone else, it's deplorable!"

It's sad.

Its not sad, its a double standard that Obama gets nailed for this and McCain gets a free pass on hanging out with Falwell.

[The Senator]

Its not sad, its a double standard that Obama gets nailed for this and McCain gets a free pass on hanging out with Falwell.

Well, Jerry Falwell is dead, so I don't think he'll be influencing McCain's administration or saying anything hateful anytime soon.

[Super_Ludacris]

How the hell do you know that? You don't know what Wright has told him. For all you know, he could be secretly plotting to enslave white folks. I'm not saying he is, but do you have any evidence which refutes this?

Maybe we can fly in Hilary to the Black House and have her liberate them under a flurry of gunshots....

[The Senator]

Maybe we can fly in Hilary to the Black House and have her liberate them under a flurry of gunshots....

Or maybe Obama can wave his magic wand and cause it to rain candy and money, while Jews and Arabs dance hand in hand in the street and all the Republicans become Democrats, in a pastel-colored world where there will be no war and everyone will live happily ever after forever.

[Super_Ludacris]

Or maybe Obama can wave his magic wand and cause it to rain candy and money, while Jews and Arabs dance hand in hand in the street and all the Republicans become Democrats, in a pastel-colored world where there will be no war and everyone will live happily ever after forever.

hmmm did I strike I nerve? lol

Sure he can

"I dont even know why you trying to act hard/the undisputed truth is that the black man is god" http://forums.sohh.com/images/smilies/king.gif

[The Senator]

I wonder how history will judge Obama when he ****s up as badly as he's going to.

[Tron5000]

Or maybe Obama can wave his magic wand and cause it to rain candy and money, while Jews and Arabs dance hand in hand in the street and all the Republicans become Democrats, in a pastel-colored world where there will be no war and everyone will live happily ever after forever.

Will there be cake and ice cream as well? Or perhaps, ICE CREAM CAKE? Oh, Obama, deliver us from this hell on Earth...

[Super_Ludacris]

Will there be cake and ice cream as well? Or perhaps, ICE CREAM CAKE? Oh, Obama, deliver us from this hell on Earth...

Ice Cream cake is already out there. I know living in the backwoods it cant be seen but I'll send you some :woot:

[The Senator]

Will there be cake and ice cream as well? Or perhaps, ICE CREAM CAKE? Oh, Obama, deliver us from this hell on Earth...

You'll have your choice; it's a Democracy!

[Super_Ludacris]

I wonder how history will judge Obama when he ****s up as badly as he's going to.

Glad to see you concieding defeat even with Hilary gaining. Confidence FTL? :word:

[Tron5000]

You'll have your choice; it's a Democracy!

Apparently, it is. I had no idea until today.

[The Senator]

Glad to see you concieding defeat even with Hilary gaining. Confidence FTL? :word:

Oh, I understand completely the odds completely work against her in this primary. I understand that there's a 90% chance he'll be the nominee. That doesn't mean I have to concede defeat and start sucking up to Obama. As long as she's in this race, she's my candidate, and I refuse to back down when I so strongly disagree with Obama's run in the first place.

And seriously, I keep going back and forth over whether I want to support for him in November. The Wright scandal, his inexperience, his lack of foreign policy record, his staunch liberal record... I don't know if I want to vote for someone who may be a strong, bi-partisan president, or someone like McCain who has a solid record of bipartisan leadership in the Senate.

It will be a tough, tough call.

[Mr Sparkle]

Once and for all, I don't care about what your Preachers say in your church. You're not running for President.

neither is Wright.

[Super_Ludacris]

Oh, I understand completely the odds completely work against her in this primary. I understand that there's a 90% chance he'll be the nominee. That doesn't mean I have to concede defeat and start sucking up to Obama. As long as she's in this race, she's my candidate, and I refuse to back down when I so strongly disagree with Obama's run in the first place.

And seriously, I keep going back and forth over whether I want to support for him in November. The Wright scandal, his inexperience, his lack of foreign policy record, his staunch liberal record... I don't know if I want to vote for someone who may be a strong, bi-partisan president, or someone like McCain who has a solid record of bipartisan leadership in the Senate.

It will be a tough, tough call.


You are hands down the most unconfident political supporter on this board. All that and your still debating whether or not who to support or even if your candidate got it?

[Mr Sparkle]

If Bush supporters were to point to all of Jerry Falwell's positive accomplishments after he made his remarks about 9/11, people who are currently defending Wright would ignore what good he did in his life and would continuously slam Falwell for his bigoted remarks.


however, I don't remember people NOT voting for Bush because of this.
and I don't remember it being a factor in 2004 either.

weird.

[Mr Sparkle]

He doesn't have to be cheering. The fact that he sat there for 20 years, taking all this is, and doing nothing about it is enough. Now show me a Youtube vid where he walks out in disgust in the middle of one of Rev. Wright's hateful services then we can talk. Until then, I don't buy any of what Obama is selling.

has no one been been listening?
it's obvious that by and large he agrees with the things Wright has to say.
OBVIOUS.

[Super_Ludacris]

Its only a factor for as long as the democratic race goes on. Let the party crumble :(

[Kelly]

You are hands down the most unconfident political supporter on this board. All that and your still debating whether or not who to support or even if your candidate got it?


Hmmm..........you're wrong, JMan is one of the stronger posters in this forum. He's done a very good job of debating the issues, rather than getting personal........and his posts are intelligent, thoughtful, and even though myself and others may disagree with him on some points..........it is definitely evident that he has studied the issues, the candidates, etc.......and is looking to make his vote the most intelligent, thought out, researched vote he can make....doesn't make him unconfident, it makes him a voter that looks beyond the packaging.....

[Super_Ludacris]

Hmmm..........you're wrong, JMan is one of the stronger posters in this forum. He's done a very good job of debating the issues, rather than getting personal........and his posts are intelligent, thoughtful, and even though myself and others may disagree with him on some points..........it is definitely evident that he has studied the issues, the candidates, etc.......and is looking to make his vote the most intelligent, thought out, researched vote he can make....

Kel, Im talking about his confidence in his candidate. He feels Obama has a 90% of being the nominee (which is more than I think and I support him) and hes still debating candidates to chose from alternativley.

[Kelly]

Kel, Im talking about his confidence in his candidate. He feels Obama has a 90% of being the nominee (which is more than I think and I support him) and hes still debating candidates to chose from alternativley.


I don't know that that is lack of confidence, as it is a firm grip of reality.....he wants Hillary to win, that is his first choice......but reality is setting in quite fast.......nothing wrong with looking at the campaign with some savvy reality.

I think all Democrats need a healthy dose of reality and get their **** together.

[Super_Ludacris]

Really? Cause I think Psycho lady is still in this. Great if Obama gets it, but this thing is still going down like a lady of the evening and is tighter than the white man's wallet.

[Kelly]

Really? Cause I think Psycho lady is still in this. Great if Obama gets it, but this thing is still going down like a lady of the evening and is tighter than the white man's wallet.

She is still in it if she can get the Michigan and Florida delegates added.....she desperately needs those.....

And yeah, she's in it if the Super Delegates go against the popular vote.....but if that happens the Democratic Party is screwed even more than they are right now.....

They might as well hand McCain the keys to the White House...

[Super_Ludacris]

I wonder what the over/under is on McCain surviving his first term....


Yeah Im evil. Baltimore raised to the core lol

[Tron5000]

She is still in it if she can get the Michigan and Florida delegates added.....she desperately needs those.....

And yeah, she's in it if the Super Delegates go against the popular vote.....but if that happens the Democratic Party is screwed even more than they are right now.....

They might as well hand McCain the keys to the White House...

The superdelegates are going to become a mess. The voters in Massachusetts went to the polls on primary day and selected Hillary. Now, the 2 senators from Massachusetts, Teddy "Anybody seen my car with that dead girl in it?" Kennedy and John "Purple Heart" Kerry are casting their SD votes for Obama. This might irk some of their constituents just a bit. This should be an interesting little circus.

[blackcobra]

She did say that Obama wouldn't be in the same position if he was white.

You have no proof to back up this hypothesis. Being black has NEVER been an asset in American Politics. EVER!


that isn't anywhere near what the KKK says, nor does it even compare to the type of horrible things they say and do on a regular basis. Obviously, you don't know anything about the KKK or racism.

I know alot more then you do trust me. When you live in a country (no matter where it is) where you're only 10% of the populuation. The Ruling majortiy will allways be the prime benefatcor.

Because if you did, you wouldn't make such outlandish, retarded statements against comments which in no way were designed for hateful purposes.

It's not outlandish, what she did basically say that Obama got where he is because of Affirmative Action. How being Black didn't help Al Shparpton, Carol Mosely Bruan, or Alan Keyes when they ran for President? That's what I thought.

If you have the audacity to compare Geraldine Ferraro to a member of the KKK, I see no reason as to why I should debate you. You are completely out of tune with reality.

Yep, show me one democrat who's ever said such a demeaning term towards another democrat. That's what I thought. OWNED!

[Tron5000]

You have no proof to back up this hypothesis. Being black has NEVER been an asset in American Politics. EVER!




I know alot more then you do trust me. When you live in a country (no matter where it is) where you're only 10% of the populuation. The Ruling majortiy will allways be the prime benefatcor.



It's not outlandish, what she did basically say that Obama got where he is because of Affirmative Action. How being Black didn't help Al Shparpton, Carol Mosely Bruan, or Alan Keyes when they ran for President? That's what I thought.



Yep, show me one democrat who's ever said such a demeaning term towards another democrat. That's what I thought. OWNED!

Well, someone certainly has a mighty high opinion of himself...

[Kelly]

I wonder what the over/under is on McCain surviving his first term....


Yeah Im evil. Baltimore raised to the core lol


Oh yeah....that Baltimore, is a hardcore city....lmao...:cwink:

[BlackLantern]

just because Baltimore is in The Wire doesn't make it hardcore

[The Senator]

You are hands down the most unconfident political supporter on this board. All that and your still debating whether or not who to support or even if your candidate got it?

If my candidate loses, I have to make a choice. I am supporting her until the very end. When that happens-- when she drops out of the race, either before or during the convention-- I will find someone else to support.

I have no idea who I want to support if she loses. Obama is a fine speaker, a good 'symbol' of hope. But I want more than that in a President. And when I look at the things McCain has accomplished which indicate a record of strong, bipartisan support, such as McCain-Feingold or Kennedy-McCain, I see a true leader who is willing to go beyond party and work in the best interest of America. With Obama, I see a man who says he will do great things, but has no record of doing so. With McCain, I see a man who has a record of pushing for great things, but I also see a man who wants to push for an endless war, has no idea where he stands socially, and knows nothing of the economy. I have the same fears with Obama. I think he lacks foreign policy experience, as well as economic experience to prove that he really knows what to do in a time of crisis.

So for me, like it was for many others in 2004, it will be the choice between two evils unfortunately. And it's a tough call, because while I don't want to give the Republicans the luxury of my vote, I know that with the expanding Democratic majority in the house and senate, as well as the dozen potential Democratic presidential candidates waiting in the wings, it just may be worth casting my vote for McCain.

[Super_Ludacris]

just because Baltimore is in The Wire doesn't make it hardcore

Come on down, we make you feel right at home

[BlackLantern]

I'm leaning towards McCain as well....

[BlackLantern]

Come on down, we make you feel right at home

I'm fine right here in Connecticut....we have trees and stuff...

[Tron5000]

If my candidate loses, I have to make a choice. I am supporting her until the very end. When that happens-- when she drops out of the race, either before or during the convention-- I will find someone else to support.

I have no idea who I want to support if she loses. Obama is a fine speaker, a good 'symbol' of hope. But I want more than that in a President. And when I look at the things McCain has accomplished which indicate a record of strong, bipartisan support, such as McCain-Feingold or Kennedy-McCain, I see a true leader who is willing to go beyond party and work in the best interest of America. With Obama, I see a man who says he will do great things, but has no record of doing so. With McCain, I see a man who has a record of pushing for great things, but I also see a man who wants to push for an endless war, has no idea where he stands socially, and knows nothing of the economy. I have the same fears with Obama. I think he lacks foreign policy experience, as well as economic experience to prove that he really knows what to do in a time of crisis.

So for me, like it was for many others in 2004, it will be the choice between two evils unfortunately. And it's a tough call, because while I don't want to give the Republicans the luxury of my vote, I know that with the expanding Democratic majority in the house and senate, as well as the dozen potential Democratic presidential candidates waiting in the wings, it just may be worth casting my vote for McCain.

One very great positive for McCain is that I feel he will be unflinching in "a time of crisis."

Dude didn't break for the 6 years that he was a Prisoner of War. He didn't back down when he disagreed with President Bush on a laundry list of issues (while other Republicans blindly rallied around Bush). And he didn't get down when the pollsters all had him pegged as merely an afterthought in the Republican nominating process.

The man has morals, character, integrity, leadership, experience and intestinal fortitude. These are qualities that I want my president to possess.

I've yet to see these traits exhibited by the Democrat candidates.

[The Senator]

You have no proof to back up this hypothesis. Being black has NEVER been an asset in American Politics. EVER!

Yes, I do. John Edwards was in the Senate for less than a full term when he ran for President in 2004, and he was arguably just as charismatic and more experienced than Obama was when he ran. Yet the media lambasted him for being inexperienced and painted him as a rather flimsy candidate. They made his inexperience an issue when he was the VP candidate.

Now, four years later, Obama is currently a top contender for the Presidency, when he has accomplished less than Edwards ever has. Coincidence? Or is it because the media has ordained him as the first African American president(ial candidate)?

Your assumption that being black has never been an asset in American Politics is also out of touch with reality, considering there are House districts which have voted overwhelmingly for black candidates in the past thirty years. Also, I live in DC, and we've never had a white mayor or leading white candidate since the mayor's office was established in the mid-1970s. There are some places in the U.S. where being black is more of an asset than being white.


I know alot more then you do trust me.

Show me your college transcript and I'll tell you if you know more than me.


It's not outlandish, what she did basically say that Obama got where he is because of Affirmative Action. How being Black didn't help Al Shparpton, Carol Mosely Bruan, or Alan Keyes when they ran for President? That's what I thought.

She certainly did not say that in her initial remarks.

She said people are excited about Obama because he's black, which is absolutely true. She said that excitement would not be there if he was white, because people in America like hearing tales of the American dream. She compared Obama's candidacy to her run as VP, saying that she too drew thousands of people at rallies across the country. She said Americans were caught up in the concept of an African American president. And we've seen that, considering media outlets such as MSNBC have deemed him the epitome of the American dream.


Yep, show me one democrat who's ever said such a demeaning term towards another democrat. That's what I thought. OWNED!

Well, in order for Ferraro's description of Obama to be demeaning, it'd have to be an attack. They weren't attacks. The media painted them as attacks. She was having a discussion; she didn't just come to the podium one day and say "That Obama is here because he's black and I don't like it!" She was paid to speak at a private event, where she compared her candidacy to his and vice versa. She was asked about diversity in politics and what she felt.

I know, because she gave the same speech last night, in which I was an attendee.

[Excel]

McCains is a stubburn old man; it wont matter if the people of his country want the soldiers home, as long as he wants em there than THATS WHERE THEYLL STAY!!!

:rolleyes:

How could we be so stupid as to elect someone who doesnt even listen to us or do what the majority of people want done???

[BlackLantern]

yea what spice said....

[The Senator]

Kel, Im talking about his confidence in his candidate. He feels Obama has a 90% of being the nominee (which is more than I think and I support him) and hes still debating candidates to chose from alternativley.

Scratch that. He has a 90% chance of winning the delegate count and popular vote when all is said and done. There's still a convention to be had.

[BlackLantern]

McCains is a stubburn old man; it wont matter if the people of his country want the soldiers home, as long as he wants em there than THATS WHERE THEYLL STAY!!!

:rolleyes:

How could we be so stupid as to elect someone who doesnt even listen to us or do what the majority of people want done???

Because the alternatives aren't any better, in terms of candidates. Yanking all the troops out does more harm than good at this point.

[Tron5000]

McCains is a stubburn old man; it wont matter if the people of his country want the soldiers home, as long as he wants em there than THATS WHERE THEYLL STAY!!!

:rolleyes:

How could we be so stupid as to elect someone who doesnt even listen to us or do what the majority of people want done???

Your vote is what matters. If "the majority of the people" don't want McCain to make decisions on Iraq, they won't elect him. This country isn't a democracy; it is a Constitutional Republic. You don't elect a president so you can tell him (or her) what to do. You elect a president because you trust his judgment and leadership on issues that are important to this country.

And how often does "the majority" prove to be correct? "The majority" is often ignorant of the issues and of the rewards/consequences of certain actions. That is why our government was framed the way it was; to avoid Mob Rule.

[blackcobra]

Yes, I do. John Edwards was in the Senate for less than a full term when he ran for President in 2004, and he was arguably just as charismatic and more experienced than Obama was when he ran. Yet the media lambasted him for being inexperienced and painted him as a rather flimsy candidate. They made his inexperience an issue when he was the VP candidate.

Observation doesn't equal fact. The fact of the matter is the media did say Obama was to in experienced as my facts will illustrate.

Is Experience Obama's Achilles' Heel?

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Decision2008/story?id=3491890&page=1

Democratic presidential candidates yesterday weighed in on whether Sen. Barack Obama is too inexperienced to be president and assessed if Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton can unite the nation.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/article/20070820/NATION/108200066/1002

Obama's Inexperience Apparent at Debate

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,269112,00.html

Rove: Obama "Articulate" But Inexperienced

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/03/09/politics/main2552110.shtml

I can go on all day, providing facts that dispell your fallacious assumption that the media, or anyone in the Beltway considered Obama the frontrunner. Everything changed when he won Iowa, even the Iowa's most presitgous Newspaper the DesMoines Register endorsed Senator Clinton. He won by doing a better job organizing on the grass roots level, and rasing more many then any other candidate.



Now, four years later, Obama is currently a top contender for the Presidency, when he has accomplished less than Edwards ever has.

If the American people wanted John Edwards, they would of elected him in 2004. He's been bypassed twice now by America, he's good, but the American people think Obama is better.

Your assumption that being black has never been an asset in American Politics is also out of touch with reality, considering there are House districts which have voted overwhelmingly for black candidates in the past thirty years. Also, I live in DC, and we've never had a white mayor or leading white candidate since the mayor's office was established in the mid-1970s. There are some places in the U.S. where being black is more of an asset than being white.

I live in the Bay Area and we elected a White Mayor (Jerry Brown) in an overwhelming Black city, being black isn't an asset in politics in a country that's only 10% Black, it's simple math my friend.



Show me your college transcript and I'll tell you if you know more than me.


Show me your crimminal record and prove you're not a child molestor.


She certainly did not say that in her initial remarks.

She said people are excited about Obama because he's black, which is absolutely true.[/quote]

Were people excited by Jessie Jackson, Al Shparpton, Carl Mosely Braun, and Alan Keyes too? You have zero supporting evidence to back your fallacious analogy.


She said that excitement would not be there if he was white, because people in America like hearing tales of the American dream.

Another inaccurate statement, since every single President has been White. So History proves that's another fallacious statement, that was said to divide the country, and you know what, she's somewhat sucsessfull (Mission Accomplished for Hitlery).


She compared Obama's candidacy to her run as VP, saying that she too drew thousands of people at rallies across the country. She said Americans were caught up in the concept of an African American president. And we've seen that, considering media outlets such as MSNBC have deemed him the epitome of the American dream.



Well, in order for Ferraro's description of Obama to be demeaning, it'd have to be an attack. They weren't attacks. The media painted them as attacks. She was having a discussion; she didn't just come to the podium one day and say "That Obama is here because he's black and I don't like it!"

And Wright didn't attack America, he was simply having a discussion.

[Matt]

McCains is a stubburn old man; it wont matter if the people of his country want the soldiers home, as long as he wants em there than THATS WHERE THEYLL STAY!!!

:rolleyes:

How could we be so stupid as to elect someone who doesnt even listen to us or do what the majority of people want done???

If he gets elected by a majority, than the majority of the people want him as their president, knowing his stances in Iraq. Therefore they have accepted and supported staying there and he will be carrying out what they want.

Clinton or Obama won't get us of Iraq. If we start a phased withdrawl, attacks will increase. Soldiers will die more rapidly. This will cause the American people to cry for vengence and blood. Soldiers will be returned to Iraq. We will repeat the process.

[The Senator]

Observation doesn't equal fact. The fact of the matter is the media did say Obama was to in experienced as my facts will illustrate.

Is Experience Obama's Achilles' Heel?

http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Decision2008/story?id=3491890&page=1

Democratic presidential candidates yesterday weighed in on whether Sen. Barack Obama is too inexperienced to be president and assessed if Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton can unite the nation.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/article/20070820/NATION/108200066/1002

Obama's Inexperience Apparent at Debate

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,269112,00.html

Rove: Obama "Articulate" But Inexperienced

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2007/03/09/politics/main2552110.shtml

I can go on all day, providing facts that dispell your fallacious assumption that the media, or anyone in the Beltway considered Obama the frontrunner. Everything changed when he won Iowa, even the Iowa's most presitgous Newspaper the DesMoines Register endorsed Senator Clinton. He won by doing a better job organizing on the grass roots level, and rasing more many then any other candidate.


The media made Edwards' experience an issue. They dragged his name through the mud because he didn't have any. Why hasn't Obama been attacked more for his experience? No one can name a major piece of legislation he sponsored, aside from an ethics reform bill which was a reform bill in title only. No one can name any movement on Capitol Hill which he's been a major player in. People in his own party, in Congress, detest him because the only thing Americans ever knew him for before October 2006 was his convention speech. Meanwhile, Edwards gave Clinton legal advice during the impeachment proceedings, heading the deposition of Monica Lewinski. He also co-sponsored Joe Lieberman's original 2002 Iraq war resolution. He was important on at least two fronts, and the media ignored him in 2004 because he was too inexperienced as opposed to Gephardt, Kerry and Dean.

Ever since his speech in 2004, the media have pegged Obama as the first black president. Chris Matthews, following Obama's speech, said that he thought Obama could be the first black President. I remember, because I watched that speech live as it was broadcast. And like many Americans, I was inspired. I thought he would become a driving force in the Senate and then become President one day.

But instead of focusing on his Senate career, he went right from being sworn in to writing a book to running for President. He's been running for President ever since the media and the Democratic Party fell in love with him. And I think it's a sad reflection of our party when we forgo six experienced candidates and dozens of experienced politicians to elect someone who hasn't shown us he can be a capable leader.

If Mark Warner, Governor of Virginia, ran for President, I bet the media would have attacked him because he only served one term as governor (The state constitution only allows governors to serve one term, so he really went as far as he could go). Never mind that Warner had a true bipartisan record in Richmond.



If the American people wanted John Edwards, they would of elected him in 2004. He's been bypassed twice now by America, he's good, but the American people think Obama is better.

No, the media anointed Clinton and Obama the frontrunners of this whole thing. Nevermind Edwards actually led Iowa in most polls until July last year. Nevermind that he tied Obama in some cases up until the summer as well. The media gave Obama and Clinton center stage at the debates. The media gave them time to talk. The media even spent more time floating around the notion of a "historic" election long before the pool had been wittled down to two.

Never mind the fact that there were other seasoned, established, intelligent and capable leaders in those debates as well. If elections were won on experience, Bill Richardson would be President in November. The man has been in office longer than John McCain has, if I've done my math correctly. He is intelligent, a diplomat, and has a record of working for real change as both an executive (Governor of NM) and as a legislator (he served in Congress for fifteen years or so). Joe Biden has been a Senator for thirty years. Same thing with Chris Dodd. Those three men were bypassed by the media, despite the fact that they were more qualified than Clinton or Obama or even Kerry for that matter.

The media want a black man or a female to be President. That's quite obvious, considering they wouldn't even give Dodd, Biden or Richardson the ability to talk at some of these debates (hell, it took twenty-five minutes before anyone outside of Edwards, Clinton or Obama had a chance to weigh in).



I live in the Bay Area and we elected a White Mayor (Jerry Brown) in an overwhelming Black city, being black isn't an asset in politics in a country that's only 10% Black, it's simple math my friend.

There are many, many Congressional districts in this country where being black is an asset. I didn't say it's an asset everywhere. But there are districts which solidly favor African Americans. Districts in or near New York City, Philly, DC, Georgia, Mississippi, Detroit, etc.... some districts have been drawn to explicitly favor African Americans...

So yes, in some cases, being black is a huge asset for political candidates.



Show me your crimminal record and prove you're not a child molestor.

I never said I was a child molester, did I? You said you knew more than me. Show me your transcript and prove it. Show me where you've studied this stuff.


She certainly did not say that in her initial remarks.

Were people excited by Jessie Jackson, Al Shparpton, Carl Mosely Braun, and Alan Keyes too? You have zero supporting evidence to back your fallacious analogy.

You're telling me that thousands of people who attend Obama's rallies isn't evidence enough that people are excited over his candidacy? Ted Kennedy endorsed Barack Obama at my college two months ago. The line literally ran around two city blocks. It was estimated that we filled the arena, and that over 10,000 people stood in line at one point or another. Tell me that isn't excitement.

Also, people were excited about Jesse Jackson. The man ran for President twice. He came in second place against Walter Mondale in 1984, and was third (or fourth, I forget) in 1988. People were excited about his candidacy, and he had zero political experience whatsoever. His race contributed to the excitement. Of course, Jackson's remarks about Jewish people, as well as his adulterous lifestyle turned a lot of people off. He is lampooned for his life away from the Presidential trail, not himself as a Presidential candidate.

People also weren't excited for Carol Mosely Braun because she was a corrupt fiend who wasn't relevant in the least bit. She ran six years after she was booted out of office by the people of Illinois, and she dropped out before the primaries. Alan Keyes, meanwhile, is an uninspiring lump of worthlessness.

People like Obama because he is mainstream. Because he's an African American who appeals to everyone. Because he generates hope and what not. And a part of that has to do with his race and heritage and ethnic background. I believe that, without that inspiring stuff behind him, he would not be where he is today in the least bit. It has nothing to do with affirmative action. It has everything to do with what people look for in a leader. I commend him for his heritage and his stylistic way of doing things, but I do not think that he would be anywhere near where he is today if he were white.




Another inaccurate statement, since every single President has been White. So History proves that's another fallacious statement, that was said to divide the country, and you know what, she's somewhat sucsessfull (Mission Accomplished for Hitlery).

Every other president has been white-- that's what makes it so inspiring! It's the tale of the American dream. A man who came from a somewhat broken home, able to transcend race and become a true leader! That's how people viewed Colin Powell. Had he run for President, many believe he would have defeated Clinton in 1996. Americans have been looking for someone who makes them see beyond color. Someone of color who isn't the same as everyone else, but who represents the idea that anyone in this country can go anywhere.

And as I said, I sat through the same speech she gave those reporters at an engagement last night. She didn't say anything divisive. She discussed why Obama's race inspired a lot of people. If you took time to actually find a transcript of her whole speech and put it in context, you might be able to understand that.





And Wright didn't attack America, he was simply having a discussion.

Wrong again.

Wright said things which were rooted in hate. He compared the USA to the KKK, shouting, screaming and ranting at the pulpit. Geraldine Ferraro took Obama's candidacy and compared it to her own.

Now, let me guess, because she said "Fritz Mondale never would have picked me if I was named Gerard Ferraro," she's sexist? :huh:

[hippie_hunter]

Its not sad, its a double standard that Obama gets nailed for this and McCain gets a free pass on hanging out with Falwell.

Not really because it's pretty damn obvious that McCain didn't fall for Falwell's ********. He's called him an agent of hate for crying out loud (which is true). And he had tons of disagreements with the evangellical wing of the Republican Party before he was building up his second shot at running for President. He only hung out with Falwell and sucked up to the evangellicals because it was politically beneficial for him and even though their influence is rather waning, the evangellicals are still a very important base of the GOP.

Obama on the other hand went to this guys church for 20 years. He didn't do it for political benefit since his political career began 10 years ago. He ended up baptising his children at this church. He got married at this church. He went to Wright's sermons.

Big difference.

[Mr Sparkle]

....

Big difference.

so, you think that Obama " hanging out " with an influential black preacher in his own city wouldn't be for political purposes?

[Mr Sparkle]

Jman, you think people like Obama
"because he is mainstream. Because he's an African American who appeals to everyone. Because he generates hope and what not."

do you think perhaps some people like him because he actually says things that seem somewhat like common sense?:huh:

[hippie_hunter]

so, you think that Obama " hanging out " with an influential black preacher in his own city wouldn't be for political purposes?

Obama went to this church before his political career started. It's more than just political purposes. If it were political purposes, he probably would have went to a different, less controversal church, that would help promote his message of hope, unity, etc. Not a church that has accusations of racism and anti-Americanism.

If it were for political purposes, I'd consider him a whore, just like McCain.

[The Senator]

Jman, you think people like Obama
"because he is mainstream. Because he's an African American who appeals to everyone. Because he generates hope and what not."

do you think perhaps some people like him because he actually says things that seem somewhat like common sense?:huh:

I haven't said they didn't like him for those reasons, did I? But the fact that he's a mainstream African American and a symbolic representation of hope adds a lot of weight to his candidacy. Jesse Jackson was the same way in 84 and 88.

[Mr Sparkle]

I haven't said they didn't like him for those reasons, did I? But the fact that he's a mainstream African American and a symbolic representation of hope adds a lot of weight to his candidacy. Jesse Jackson was the same way in 84 and 88.

no, you didn't say it specifically, but people always forget to mention that.
it makes a caricature of his candidacy, and if I made generalizations like " people like Hillary because she is a woman and was married to Bill" it would sound like I'm dismissing her politically would it not?

[hippie_hunter]

Jman, you think people like Obama
"because he is mainstream. Because he's an African American who appeals to everyone. Because he generates hope and what not."

do you think perhaps some people like him because he actually says things that seem somewhat like common sense?:huh:

Asides from the Iraq War which we should have never gotten into, Obama has never really said anything that applies common sense. It's the same old, same old hope, unity, change, "Yes We Can," "There are no Red States and no Blue States, only the United States of America," and a few other inspirational words. I tend to think of Obama's speaches as completely overrated now simply because the man's a broken record who says the same thing again and again and again, who take's parts from other people (even if they allowed him to), and has even said the exact same speech at times in different circumstances.

Obama's more of an inspirational speaker. A very charasmatic one at that plus he's a half-black man who's lived a very interesting life. That's what got him far in this election. That's how he built up supporters. He's not like Alan Keyes, he's not an idiot. He's not like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton, he didn't build his campaign up as the token black candidate.

If he actually took the time early on to build a platform, campaigned for the issues and went into full detail building his campaign on that instead of going overboard on the "hope, change, and unity" stick Clinton would have creamed him by now. If he were a white man, Clinton would have creamed him.

His race and inspiration is what got Obama far and that's really all he has. I can't stand Obama for that. I can't stand him for many other reasons too, but that's another topic.

[Mr Sparkle]

Obama went to this church before his political career started. It's more than just political purposes. If it were political purposes, he probably would have went to a different, less controversal church, that would help promote his message of hope, unity, etc. Not a church that has accusations of racism and anti-Americanism.

If it were for political purposes, I'd consider him a whore, just like McCain.

I think that's an assumption, because while hey might have been there before, it has also been stated that Wright upped the rhetoric post 9-11, which in reality is a really short time comparatively speaking.

though, I have a weird question, no one so far has been able to answer it.

why do I keep hearing these accusations of anti-americanism?
he criticized the government and it's actions, I mean, what does that have to do with love of your homeland or it's people?

also, I'm stumped, I have looked at factcheck and snopes and I can't find the racist comments the guy made, can somebody quote them with a source please?

[Mr Sparkle]

His race and inspiration is what got Obama far and that's really all he has. I can't stand Obama for that. I can't stand him for many other reasons too, but that's another topic.

well that's settled then.
I mean, it really is settled.
sounds a little patronizing to me, but that's quite alright, I guess I see things differently now then back in 2004 and 2000.

[The Overlord]

I think that's an assumption, because while hey might have been there before, it has also been stated that Wright upped the rhetoric post 9-11, which in reality is a really short time comparatively speaking.

though, I have a weird question, no one so far has been able to answer it.

why do I keep hearing these accusations of anti-americanism?
he criticized the government and it's actions, I mean, what does that have to do with love of your homeland or it's people?

also, I'm stumped, I have looked at factcheck and snopes and I can't find the racist comments the guy made, can somebody quote them with a source please?

There was video clip of it on CNN, its likely on youtube now. It wasn't very nice and a lot people would hate it.

It just shame if Obama was undone something trival like the opinions of his pastor, which he has already stated are not his opinions.

that McCain didn't fall for Falwell's ********. He's called him an agent of hate for crying out loud (which is true). And he had tons of disagreements with the evangellical wing of the Republican Party before he was building up his second shot at running for President. He only hung out with Falwell and sucked up to the evangellicals because it was politically beneficial for him and even though their influence is rather waning, the evangellicals are still a very important base of the GOP.

Obama on the other hand went to this guys church for 20 years. He didn't do it for political benefit since his political career began 10 years ago. He ended up baptising his children at this church. He got married at this church. He went to Wright's sermons.

Big difference.

Again going to church doesn't mean you agree with everything your minister says. Tons of people go to churchs where preaches rail against gays, I doubt all those people are homophobes. People say they want a normal guy as president and this is what a normal guy does, he goes to church and doesn't agree with everything coming out of the preacher's mouth.

[Tron5000]

There was video clip of it on CNN, its likely on youtube now. It wasn't very nice and a lot people would hate it.

It just shame if Obama was undone something trival like the opinions of his pastor, which he has already stated are not his opinions.

Oh, he "stated" that? Well, I guess we should all just take him at his word, then.

Didn't he state that he had never heard such language from Wright? Then, in his speech last week, didn't he state that he had, in fact, heard such language?

Which statement should we believe? The first, where he denied knowledge of Jeremiah Wright's beliefs, or the second, where he acknowledged being aware of such sentiments?

[redfirebird2008]

Tron, he didn't state that he hadn't heard "such language," he stated that he hadn't heard the specific comments that had become controversial.

[Tron5000]

Tron, he didn't state that he hadn't heard "such language," he stated that he hadn't heard the specific comments that had become controversial.

Oh, then I guess everything's just fine and dandy then. He hadn't heard the statements that were on the "Best Of" DVD that sold in the church? He had never heard any fellow parishioners mention these sermons? He had never heard Wright use such language either in public or private?

Sorry, that doesn't fly with me. He did admit that he had heard statements that "could be considered controversial," but he did not address which statements these were. He's trying to play everyone for a fool, and I, for one, will not fall into that trap.

[Darthphere]

I thought Obama said he was "aware" of the remarks.

[Tron5000]

Here's 1 person who didn't buy the load of bull Obama was selling. And I'm guessing Walter E. Williams, being a 72-year-old black man in this country, probably has some experience on which to base his beliefs.

http://townhall.com/columnists/WalterEWilliams/2008/03/26/is_obama_ready_for_america

Some pundits ask whether America is ready for Obama. The much more important question is whether Obama is ready for America and even more important is whether black people can afford Obama. Let's look at it in the context of a historical tidbit.

In 1947, Jackie Robinson, signing a contract with the Brooklyn Dodgers, broke the color barrier in major league baseball. He encountered open racist taunts and slurs from fans, opposing team players and even some players on his own team. Despite that, his first year batting average was .297. He led the National League in stolen bases and won the first-ever Rookie of the Year Award. Without question, Jackie Robinson was an exceptional player. There's no sense of justice that should require that a player be as good as Jackie Robinson in order to be a rookie in the major leagues but the hard fact of the matter, as a first black player, he had to be.

In 1947, black people could not afford a stubble bum baseball player. By contrast, today black people can afford stubble bum black baseball players. The simple reason is that as a result of the excellence of Jackie Robinson, as well those who immediately followed him such as Satchel Paige, Don Newcombe, Larry Doby and Roy Campanella, there's no one in his right mind, who might watch the incompetence of a particular black player, who can say, "Those blacks can't play baseball." Whether we like it or not, whether for good reason or bad reason, people make stereotypes and stereotypes can have effects.

For the nation and for black people, the first black president should be the caliber of a Jackie Robinson and Barack Obama is not. Barack Obama has charisma and charm but in terms of character, values and understanding, he is no Jackie Robinson. By now, many Americans have heard the racist and anti-American tirades of Obama's minister and spiritual counselor. There's no way that Obama could have been a 20-year member of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright's church and not been aware of his statements.

Wright's racist and anti-American ideas are by no means unique. They are the ideas of many leftist professors and taught to our young people. The basic difference between Sen. Obama, Wright and leftist professors is simply a matter of style and language. His Philadelphia speech demonstrated his clever style where he merely changed the subject. The controversy was not about race. It was about his longtime association with such a hatemonger and whether he shared the Reverend's vision.

Obama's success is truly a remarkable commentary on the goodness of Americans and how far we've come in resolving matters of race. I'm 72 years old. For almost all of my life, a black having a real chance at becoming the president of the United States was at best a pipe dream. Obama has convincingly won primaries in states with insignificant black populations. As such, it further confirms what I've often said: The civil rights struggle in America is over and it's won. At one time black Americans did not have the constitutional guarantees enjoyed by white Americans; now we do. The fact that the civil rights struggle is over and won does not mean that there are not major problems confronting many members of the black community but they are not civil rights problems and have little or nothing to do with racial discrimination.

While not every single vestige of racial discrimination has disappeared, Obama and the Rev. Wright are absolutely wrong in suggesting that racial discrimination is anywhere near the major problem confronting a large segment of the black community. The major problems are: family breakdown, illegitimacy, fraudulent education and a high rate of criminality. To confront these problems, that are not the fault of the larger society, requires political courage and that's an attribute that Obama and most other politicians lack.

[Tron5000]

I thought Obama said he was "aware" of the remarks.

"Did I ever hear him make remarks that could be considered controversial while I sat in church? Yes."

[Marx]

I thought Obama said he was "aware" of the remarks.

He did, but some must not remember that.

[redfirebird2008]

Oh, then I guess everything's just fine and dandy then. He hadn't heard the statements that were on the "Best Of" DVD that sold in the church? He had never heard any fellow parishioners mention these sermons? He had never heard Wright use such language either in public or private?

Sorry, that doesn't fly with me. He did admit that he had heard statements that "could be considered controversial," but he did not address which statements these were. He's trying to play everyone for a fool, and I, for one, will not fall into that trap.

I'm no fool either. He's probably heard similarly controversial remarks, although not the ones that have now become infamous. He was definitely parsing words although I will take him at his word that he wasn't there when those specific remarks were made. It's pretty obvious that the pastor wouldn't just make those kinds of controversial remarks in a few random sermons though. Obama definitely knew that the guy had controversial tendencies. Such parsing is proof that he's a typical politician.

[hippie_hunter]

well that's settled then.
I mean, it really is settled.
sounds a little patronizing to me, but that's quite alright, I guess I see things differently now then back in 2004 and 2000.

I wouldn't say it's settled but I'm completely willing to bet that if Obama was a full white man that Clinton would have creamed him.

Obama's completely different than the other African-Americans who have run for President. He's not an asstard like Alan Keyes. He's not a tolken racist ******* like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton. Until recently, he was pretty much free of controversy unlike Carol Moseley Braun.

He's incredibly articulatae, he's inspiring, he's supposedly not a racist, he's not a sterotypical tolken African-American, he's lived a rather interesting life, and he focuses on a more positive message (unlike Clinton and McCain).

It's pretty cool to see a person of a different race actually have a chance this time getting into the White House and that really helps Obama out. If Obama were a white man, Clinton would have played the let's get a woman in the White House much more strongly and effectively. She would have creamed him.

If Obama stuck towards common sense like you say he does, Clinton would have creamed him. Obama doesn't do common sense. The only thing that's common sense about his campaign is his stance on the Iraq War. Everything else has been more towards the inspirational method. His inspiration helps him just as much, if not a just little bit more, than his race.

[Zen]

Oh, then I guess everything's just fine and dandy then. He hadn't heard the statements that were on the "Best Of" DVD that sold in the church? He had never heard any fellow parishioners mention these sermons? He had never heard Wright use such language either in public or private?

Sorry, that doesn't fly with me. He did admit that he had heard statements that "could be considered controversial," but he did not address which statements these were. He's trying to play everyone for a fool, and I, for one, will not fall into that trap.

First statement:"The statements that Rev. Wright made that are the cause of this controversy were not statements I personally heard him preach while I sat in the pews of Trinity or heard him utter in private conversation".

Second statement:"Did I know him to be an occasionally fierce critic of American domestic and foreign policy?” Of course. Did I ever hear him make remarks that could be considered controversial while I sat in church? Yes."


Soundbites are nice, but doing research is better. put things in context people.

and as for the youtube videos....

its funny that 20 years of preaching can only be distilled into one 30 second video... why are there not 100's of these things if he is "so filled with hate and racism"??

Shenanigans bub, Shenanigans.

[Tron5000]

First statement:"The statements that Rev. Wright made that are the cause of this controversy were not statements I personally heard him preach while I sat in the pews of Trinity or heard him utter in private conversation".

Second statement:"Did I know him to be an occasionally fierce critic of American domestic and foreign policy?” Of course. Did I ever hear him make remarks that could be considered controversial while I sat in church? Yes."


Soundbites are nice, but doing research is better. put things in context people.

and as for the youtube videos....

its funny that 20 years of preaching can only be distilled into one 30 second video... why are there not 100's of these things if he is "so filled with hate and racism"??

Shenanigans bub, Shenanigans.

It's not "one 30 second video." If you'd actually go to youtube and search Jeremiah Wright, you'll find several videos, adding up to much longer than 30 seconds.

Telling falsehoods about it being only "one 30 second video" is nice, but doing research is better.

[Zen]

I wouldn't say it's settled but I'm completely willing to bet that if Obama was a full white man that Clinton would have creamed him.

Obama's completely different than the other African-Americans who have run for President. He's not an asstard like Alan Keyes. He's not a tolken racist ******* like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton. Until recently, he was pretty much free of controversy unlike Carol Moseley Braun.

He's incredibly articulatae, he's inspiring, he's supposedly not a racist, he's not a sterotypical tolken African-American, he's lived a rather interesting life, and he focuses on a more positive message (unlike Clinton and McCain).

It's pretty cool to see a person of a different race actually have a chance this time getting into the White House and that really helps Obama out. If Obama were a white man, Clinton would have played the let's get a woman in the White House much more strongly and effectively. She would have creamed him.

If Obama stuck towards common sense like you say he does, Clinton would have creamed him. Obama doesn't do common sense. The only thing that's common sense about his campaign is his stance on the Iraq War. Everything else has been more towards the inspirational method. His inspiration helps him just as much, if not a just little bit more, than his race.

i don't know if i compltely agree with you.

Hillary has shown just how disorganized her campaign could be. your right this would be more of a gender issue if Barack was white. he would have the white male vote locked up better than he does now. if anything i honestly beleive race has it easier than gender in this country. i think a charismatic and inspirational white guy that captured the hearts of minorities and resonated with young people... would cream hillary. see: bill clinton

...though he probably hasnt creamed hillary in a long time.

:cwink:

[Zen]

It's not "one 30 second video." If you'd actually go to youtube and search Jeremiah Wright, you'll find several videos, adding up to much longer than 30 seconds.

Telling falsehoods about it being only "one 30 second video" is nice, but doing research is better.

i have. add them up. how long is it when the statements are displayed outside their context?

30 seconds.

the only part getting play that people are objecting to are the 30 seconds of "hatefull" material.

i WANT everyone to see the longer clips that put his statements in context so they understand the truth, which is that most of his statements are directed at our countries foriegn policy and the people in government.

wouldnt want that... context.



but go ahead and count all the videos, add all the unique ones up... it still fails to make your point.

[Tron5000]

i have. add them up. how long is it when the statements are displayed outside their context?

30 seconds.

the only part getting play that people are objecting to are the 30 seconds of "hatefull" material.

i WANT everyone to see the longer clips that put his statements in context so they understand the truth, which is that most of his statements are directed at our countries foriegn policy and the people in government.

wouldnt want that... context.

but go ahead and count all the videos, add all the unique ones up... it still fails to make your point.

Fine. I guess if you say it enough you'll think it's true.

This "30 second" nonsense is just that: nonsense. I've watched the videos. I have over 7 minutes of them posted on my myspace blog. But I guess if you just continue to keep saying that, it will come true, like how Beetlejuice jumps out when you say his name 3 times.

The fact of the matter is that no matter what other "good" things Jeremiah Wright has said, the awful, hate-filled rantings with which we have become all too familiar outweigh the positive comments. Give him a pass if you like, but when members of the church admit that he makes such statements in half of his sermons, I won't let that slide. If my preacher said even one of the offensive things uttered by Jeremiah Wright (talk about "context" all you like...there's no context in which I will sit idly by while my preacher says "God Damn America" and curses from the pulpit), I'd stand up and walk right out. I would not return, and I would think less of other people who did.

[Zen]

Fine. I guess if you say it enough you'll think it's true.

This "30 second" nonsense is just that: nonsense. I've watched the videos. I have over 7 minutes of them posted on my myspace blog. But I guess if you just continue to keep saying that, it will come true, like how Beetlejuice jumps out when you say his name 3 times.

The fact of the matter is that no matter what other "good" things Jeremiah Wright has said, the awful, hate-filled rantings with which we have become all too familiar outweigh the positive comments. Give him a pass if you like, but when members of the church admit that he makes such statements in half of his sermons, I won't let that slide. If my preacher said even one of the offensive things uttered by Jeremiah Wright (talk about "context" all you like...there's no context in which I will sit idly by while my preacher says "God Damn America" and curses from the pulpit), I'd stand up and walk right out. I would not return, and I would think less of other people who did.

20 years..... 7 minutes. thats what i mean.

look, we obviously have different opinions on how insulting his remarks are. im not at odds with you about that... i recognize that neither of us seem to be able to sway each other on that issue.

i beleive his words were commenting on something that is valid in the US and i think his choice of "god damn america" was inflamatory rhetoric about those
valid points. not what i would have used...

i think your just missing my point, i am not trying to repeat ignorantly... in hopes of pounding it into your skull. or to be stubburn.

im highlighting that most people view a 30 second clip on youtube that has all the buzzclips distilled into a short video and thats what they call research, valid judgement.

there is sentiment that Wright has been an inflamatory speaker for 20 years... but he has not said god damn america for 20 years.

thats the difference.

thats why it is possible for Obama to say he hasnt heard wright say god damn america... but he has heard controversial stuff... that wasnt as insulting as that, in the pews before.

[Tron5000]

20 years..... 7 minutes. thats what i mean.

look, we obviously have different opinions on how insulting his remarks are. im not at odds with you about that... i recognize that neither of us seem to be able to sway each other on that issue.

i beleive his words were commenting on something that is valid in the US and i think his choice of "god damn america" was inflamatory rhetoric about those
valid points. not what i would have used...

i think your just missing my point, i am not trying to repeat ignorantly... in hopes of pounding it into your skull. or to be stubburn.

im highlighting that most people view a 30 second clip on youtube that has all the buzzclips distilled into a short video and thats what they call research, valid judgement.

there is sentiment that Wright has been an inflamatory speaker for 20 years... but he has not said god damn america for 20 years.

thats the difference.

thats why it is possible for Obama to say he hasnt heard wright say god damn america... but he has heard controversial stuff... that wasnt as insulting as that, in the pews before.

I admire your persistence, and I agree, we are not likely to sway each other on our beliefs about the content and context of Wright's remarks.

I just feel that there's no way that Obama could be a member of this church for 20 years (where these comments are sold on the "Best Of" DVD) and call Wright a close friend and spiritual mentor and be unaware of (what I consider racist and anti-American) the beliefs of Wright. I just don't consider that plausible. Not buying it.

[Mr Sparkle]

If Obama stuck towards common sense like you say he does, Clinton would have creamed him. Obama doesn't do common sense. The only thing that's common sense about his campaign is his stance on the Iraq War. Everything else has been more towards the inspirational method. His inspiration helps him just as much, if not a just little bit more, than his race.

well the thing is, that the " inspirational " stuff to me, seems more like common sense.
I might be wrong, but all the stuff aside from the " hope " speeches all sound like plausible stuff.

[Mr Sparkle]

there is sentiment that Wright has been an inflamatory speaker for 20 years... but he has not said god damn america for 20 years.

thats the difference.

thats why it is possible for Obama to say he hasnt heard wright say god damn america... but he has heard controversial stuff... that wasnt as insulting as that, in the pews before.

plus, wasn't most criticism from Wright aimed at the US goverment?
I haven't had a satisfactory response regarding this.
everyone just skips over this detail like it doesn't matter.

[Tron5000]

plus, wasn't most criticism from Wright aimed at the US goverment?
I haven't had a satisfactory response regarding this.
everyone just skips over this detail like it doesn't matter.

He blames our government for 9/11. He says our government manufactured and spread the AIDS virus as a means of "genocide against people of color." He says the Government wants you to sing "God Bless America," but "no, no, no...God Damn America!"

I have my problems with our government, but do you not find these comments of Jeremiah Wright to be troubling at best?

[Mr Sparkle]

I have my problems with our government, but do you not find these comments of Jeremiah Wright to be troubling at best?

the AIDS thing? yeah sounds nutty.
the 9-11, I don't think he blames as much as holds accountable.
didn't he say that thousands are killed over seas? maybe he was making a comparison.
but again.
does this make him anti-maerican, or anti-government?

[Tron5000]

the AIDS thing? yeah sounds nutty.
the 9-11, I don't think he blames as much as holds accountable.
didn't he say that thousands are killed over seas? maybe he was making a comparison.
but again.
does this make him anti-maerican, or anti-government?

He did more than make a comparison. He said our "chickens have come home to roost," meaning that we deserved what happened on 9/11. I know people whose lives were completely torn apart on that day, and I think such comments about the attack we suffered are indefensible. I consider him to be anti-American as well as anti-American government.

[Mr Sparkle]

He did more than make a comparison. He said our "chickens have come home to roost," meaning that we deserved what happened on 9/11. I know people whose lives were completely torn apart on that day, and I think such comments about the disaster we suffered are indefensible. I consider him to be anti-American as well as anti-American government.

wouldn't that mean that the actions of the US government had finally caught up with you? I mean, you don't really think that this didn't affect him and he was happy about it? do you?
it seems more like he is angry about it than anything.
besides who's "we"? isn't "we" also "him"?

[Tron5000]

wouldn't that mean that the actions of the US government had finally caught up with you? I mean, you don't really think that this didn't affect him and he was happy about it? do you?
it seems more like he is angry about it than anything.
besides who's "we"? isn't "we" also "him"?

I don't expect you to understand this issue, being that it was not your nation that was attacked that day. That said, I don't really care one way or the other for your opinion on the subject. Actually, do you even have an opinion, or do you just like asking people questions so you can avoid discussing your own beliefs?

[Mr Sparkle]

I don't expect you to understand this issue, being that it was not your nation that was attacked that day. That said, I don't really care one way or the other for your opinion on the subject. Actually, do you even have an opinion, or do you just like asking people questions so you can avoid discussing your own beliefs?

oh please, don't be pathetic.
then you don't understand Iraq or Afghanistan as your country has never been invaded in your lifetime.:o you never get to have an opinion on any foreign affairs ever again:whatever:
I think I have made my opinion on this quite clear, and I use questions to point out how I back up my stances, they are indeed so well thought out that you're actually afraid of answering a simple question.

[Tron5000]

oh please, don't be pathetic.
then you don't understand Iraq or Afghanistan as your country has never been invaded in your lifetime.:o you never get to have an opinion on any foreign affairs ever again:whatever:
I think I have made my opinion on this quite clear, and I use questions to point out how I back up my stances, they are indeed so well thought out that you're actually afraid of answering a simple question.

I'm not afraid of answering a question. I'm tired of this dance that you attempt to drag everyone into. Basically, I'm not one of your biggest fans.

No, I can not even begin to know how the lives of the citizens of Iraq or Afghanistan changed when these wars began. And I will never claim to.

"Pathetic"? And you mentioned something about me getting personal? Well-played, sir. Well-played.

[Mr Sparkle]

I'm not afraid of answering a question. I'm tired of this dance that you attempt to drag everyone into. Basically, I'm not one of your biggest fans.

dance?
all I asked was

wouldn't that mean that the actions of the US government had finally caught up with you? I mean, you don't really think that this didn't affect him and he was happy about it? do you?
it seems more like he is angry about it than anything.
besides who's "we"? isn't "we" also "him"?

in response to something you said, what dance?
you're afraid that if you answer these questions your argument might weaken? then don't answer them, but don't blame it on me, blame the fact you have no argument.

No, I can not even begin to know how the lives of the citizens of Iraq or Afghanistan changed when these wars began. And I will never claim to.

you do however, routinely speak about the Iraq war, so then, even if you don't experience something firsthand doesn't mean you can't have avalid opinion on it.

duh.

"Pathetic"? And you mentioned something about me getting personal? Well-played, sir. Well-played.

yes, I did. instead of actually discussin the issue at hand you turn it into a critique of the person offering the views you disagree with, you even, laughably I might say, suggested that I had no opinion on the matter.

so, yes.
you make it too personal.
you even said you weren't one of my biggest fans, when personally, I don;t give a crap about you negative or positive.
I don't even KNOW you.

[Tron5000]

You assume too much. I don't want to answer your questions because I don't want to waste my time on you. If you think it's because I'm afraid or something, you're giving yourself too much credit. Look, we've never agreed on almost any issue, and that is unlikely to change. That's why I will no longer play your little ego-inflating games.

[Mr Sparkle]

hahaha! yeah, I'm totally validated by a guy that has a Snarf avatar agreeing with me.

:theeyestheyroll:

[Marx]

hahaha! yeah, I'm totally validated by a guy that has a Snarf avatar agreeing with me.

:theeyestheyroll:

How about let's all just stick to the topic at hand? That sounds like a really good idea! http://www.superherohype.com/forums/images/smilies/icon14.gif

[DBella]

hahaha! yeah, I'm totally validated by a guy that has a Snarf avatar agreeing with me.

:theeyestheyroll:
Is this post really necessary?
Please, I am sure you are able to debate in a more civil manner. I think you're a an intelligent guy so there is no need to resort to such tactics.

Thank you.

How about let's all just stick to the topic at hand? That sounds like a really good idea!
That sounds like a good idea to me too.

[The Senator]

So now Rev. Wright is a raging anti-semite??? And he has bigoted views towards Italians???

Wonderful.

(oh wait... this was known before that other scandal broke out a few weeks ago... and Obama still kept Wright on as a senior adviser. Lovely.)


(CNN)—Over the past year, bulletins from Barack Obama’s church have appeared online that included writings from controversial figures like Louis Farrakahn of the Nations of Islam and Hamas leader Mousa Mohammed Marzook.

One of the articles, reprinted on the Web site’s “Pastor’s Page,” was originally printed in the Los Angeles Times as “Hamas stand.” Pastor Wright added a new title, “A Fresh View of the Palestinian Struggle.’

The article defended and justified terrorism and refused to recognize Israel’s right to exist. The LA Times came under fire for giving a platform to an alleged terrorist.

The pages appear to have been removed from the Church’s website.

This week, Obama denounced the articles, telling the Jerusalem Post that the church was “outrageously wrong” in reprinting the pieces. "Hamas is a terrorist organization, responsible for the deaths of many innocents, and dedicated to Israel's destruction,” said the Illinois senator.

Obama’s former minister, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, also came under fire this week when reports surfaced that he had written an article for Trumpet Magazine, run by his daughters, in which he said that “white supremacy is clearly in charge in America.” The article also quotes him referring to Italians’ “garlic noses,” and characterizing Jesus’ crucifixion as “a public lynching, Italian-style.”

Similar remarks from Rev. Wright prompted Obama’s public address of race last week. Recent polls suggest Obama has recovered politically after that address.

On Wednesday, Rev. Wright cancelled upcoming guest appearances in Florida and Texas, citing security concerns.

[Tron5000]

Is this post really necessary?
Please, I am sure you are able to debate in a more civil manner. I think you're a an intelligent guy so there is no need to resort to such tactics.

Thank you.


That sounds like a good idea to me too.

Word, shawty. Everyone knows Snarf totally kicks ass.

And back on topic: Jman, the hits just keep on a-coming.

[The Senator]

Some more inspirational, truthful quotes from Jeremiah Wright, as I'm sure many of Obama's supporters will call them:


(Jesus') enemies had their opinion about Him... The Italians for the most part looked down their garlic noses at the Galileans.


The government runs everything from the White House to the schoolhouse, from the Capitol to the Klan, white supremacy is clearly in charge, but Asa, like Jesus, refused to be defined by an oppressive government because Asa got his identity from an Omnipotent God.


From the circumstances surrounding Jesus' birth (in a barn in a township that was under the Apartheid Roman government that said his daddy had to be in), up to and including the circumstances surrounding Jesus' death on a cross, a Roman cross, public lynching Italian style.

This next quote may be my favorite, proving not only that Wright is a raging anti semitic jerk, but that he's as ignorant as some of those white supremacists he adamantly speaks out against. This CBS News article quotes a pamphlet Wright published and handed out as church, and was once available on his website before the "God Damn America!" scandal broke out a few weeks ago.

From a CBS News article
A June 10th, 2007 issue of the newsletter featured an open letter written by Ali Baghdadi, appearing on the "Pastor's Page," that calls Israel an "apartheid" regime. The letter says Israel worked on an "ethnic bomb" that kills "blacks and Arabs." The letter also says "Israel was the closest ally to the white supremacists of South Africa."


Lovely.

[EdRyder]

Im not trying to defend Reverend rufus but wouldnt the Italian context here be "Romans"? Dont get me wrong, as an Italian the phrase "Garlic noses" is highly offensive.Seems to me like hes just injecting racist rhetoric into an argument just for racisms sake.How were the Romans supposed to feel about Galileans?.. "We are taxing the hell out of them ,..I see why they dont like us"
Does he even have a point or was this just a chance to finally use his clever"garlic noses" slur hes been saving up?

[redfirebird2008]

Reverend Rufus, ROFL!!!!

[Marx]

Word, shawty. Everyone knows Snarf totally kicks ass.

And back on topic: Jman, the hits just keep on a-coming.

It makes you wonder how far this whole goes.

[Mr Sparkle]

Some more inspirational, truthful quotes from Jeremiah Wright, as I'm sure many of Obama's supporters will call them:
:huh:

you're sure of that?
oh, so now Obama supporters are ALSO racists because of what Wright said.
makes a ton of sense.
but hey, like I said in another thread, I have Italian ancestors.
the fact that Wright said " look down their Garlic Noses..." while offensive to me personally.

STILL

has

NOTHING

TO

DO
WITH
OBAMA!

let me put it this way, let's say that tomorrow Wright happens to be a child molester? still nothing to do with Obama.
Wright grows 78 feet and has to be brought down by Giant Mechas?
nothing to do with Obama.
it's weird because at first you pretty much said " yeah, I don't think it's a big deal but they made a big deal of Ferraro, so it's a double standard" to saying that Obama supporters implicitly ALSO agree with Wright because they back Obama, who...as the more observant among you know

si not Obama.

[Mr Sparkle]

also, I didn't know being anti-Israel was being an anti-semite.
I should tell some of my Jewish friends who happen to be anti-Israel.

self haters the lot of them.

[Marx]

:huh:

you're sure of that?
oh, so now Obama supporters are ALSO racists because of what Wright said.
makes a ton of sense.
but hey, like I said in another thread, I have Italian ancestors.
the fact that Wright said " look down their Garlic Noses..." while offensive to me personally.

STILL

has

NOTHING

TO

DO
WITH
OBAMA!

let me put it this way, let's say that tomorrow Wright happens to be a child molester? still nothing to do with Obama.
Wright grows 78 feet and has to be brought down by Giant Mechas?
nothing to do with Obama.
it's weird because at first you pretty much said " yeah, I don't think it's a big deal but they made a big deal of Ferraro, so it's a double standard" to saying that Obama supporters implicitly ALSO agree with Wright because they back Obama, who...as the more observant among you know

si not Obama.


You need to go back and reread all of these posts. Jman has never said anything like that. You are just trying to pick a fight that is baseless. What he is saying, (and many agree with,) is that there are some Obama supporters who blindly support Obama's campaign no matter what situation arises. That "nothing can ding Barack's armor because he is so FAR above it all it just has nothing to do with him." Give me a break, Sparkle. I know you don't believe this.

The question isn't about Wright, it is about why Obama decided to take the position that he has on this situation. Lying about never hearing controversial comments, then later saying that he had indeed heard Wright speak this way and still decided to remain with the church. This same thing has been gone over and over and over and over.

[Mr Sparkle]

You need to go back and reread all of these posts. Jman has never said anything like that. You are just trying to pick a fight that is baseless. What he is saying, (and many agree with,) is that there are some Obama supporters who blindly support Obama's campaign no matter what situation arises. That "nothing can ding Barack's armor because he is so FAR above it all it just has nothing to do with him." Give me a break, Sparkle. I know you don't believe this.

so, then I have to read stuff in context and not get angry or misinterpret stuff but the people that are here trying to connect this stuff to Obama shound't?
I'm not trying to pick a fight, if asking a question is picking a fight, then what are YOU doing with me right now?
the tone of the discussion has degenerated completely.
this has nothing to do with Barack's " armor, Fallwell,Robertson, they were not issues to me with other candidates, there's actual issues out there and this has been BY FAR the biggest issue in the campaign trail so far?
NO

you give ME a ****ing break.

you know what I do and don't believe, but I'm supposed to believe that you think that Obama is a white-hating, anti-american , anti-semite?
gawd, no.
then, associating with this nutjob reflects upon his judgment?
when other candidates associate with nutjobs all across the board?
I didn't care about that, I don't care about this.
I didn't even want Obama to be the democratic candidate.

The question isn't about Wright, it is about why Obama decided to take the position that he has on this situation. Lying about never hearing controversial comments, then later saying that he had indeed heard Wright speak this way and still decided to remain with the church. This same thing has been gone over and over and over and over.

really? that's the question?
seriously, you haven't been able to come up with a satisfactory answer?
I mean, you people have been exposed to politics in the past right?
you're really askin yourself why a politician would choose the most flattering answer in order to make himself look good?
" I did not have sexual relations with that woman"
you know what? I didn;t care about that either.
have you seen me go into the Hillary lying about landing under fire thread and go all " yeah in your face biatch!" no.
you know why?
politicians are a facade, they have to keep this facade, all the time.
that's the problem I have with career politicians, it's not that they don't have any skeletons in the closet, it's just that they know the right people to hide them.
big deal.
this isn't an issue, this is about as pressing as the puffyness of the bat-suit.
shallow ****, that for some reason, even though there's actual issues to discuss ( not like the economy is doing so well, and hey, weren't there some attacks in the green zone lately?) we are bogged down in this NON-issue.

[Marx]

so, then I have to read stuff in context and not get angry or misinterpret stuff but the people that are here trying to connect this stuff to Obama shound't?
I'm not trying to pick a fight, if asking a question is picking a fight, then what are YOU doing with me right now?
the tone of the discussion has degenerated completely.
this has nothing to do with Barack's " armor, Fallwell,Robertson, they were not issues to me with other candidates, there's actual issues out there and this has been BY FAR the biggest issue in the campaign trail so far?
NO

you give ME a ****ing break.

you know what I do and don't believe, but I'm supposed to believe that you think that Obama is a white-hating, anti-american , anti-semite?
gawd, no.
then, associating with this nutjob reflects upon his judgment?
when other candidates associate with nutjobs all across the board?
I didn't care about that, I don't care about this.
I didn't even want Obama to be the democratic candidate.




really? that's the question?
seriously, you haven't been able to come up with a satisfactory answer?
I mean, you people have been exposed to politics in the past right?
you're really askin yourself why a politician would choose the most flattering answer in order to make himself look good?
" I did not have sexual relations with that woman"
you know what? I didn;t care about that either.
have you seen me go into the Hillary lying about landing under fire thread and go all " yeah in your face biatch!" no.
you know why?
politicians are a facade, they have to keep this facade, all the time.
that's the problem I have with career politicians, it's not that they don't have any skeletons in the closet, it's just that they know the right people to hide them.
big deal.
this isn't an issue, this is about as pressing as the puffyness of the bat-suit.
shallow ****, that for some reason, even though there's actual issues to discuss ( not like the economy is doing so well, and hey, weren't there some attacks in the green zone lately?) we are bogged down in this NON-issue.


Ok first of all Sparkle, I am not trying to pick a fight with you and you know that. I'm just saying don't misquote people. While this may not be an issue to you, it certainly is to many other people. I don't think you want to see WHY this is an issue. Is this issue pulling the concentration away from other issues? Of course it is. But people do have a right to know why Obama holds this Paster in such high esteem. Don't you think?

[The Senator]

also, I didn't know being anti-Israel was being an anti-semite.
I should tell some of my Jewish friends who happen to be anti-Israel.

self haters the lot of them.

Okay.

Except he says that the Israelis want to build an ethnic bomb, and support apartheid.

Which, in my opinion, is entirely ignorant and in the expert opinion of my Jewish friends, yes, it certainly is anti-Semitic.

And to kill two birds with one stone...

Yes, this does have something to do with Obama.

If the man is so pro-Israel, how can he sit through this crap? How can he expose his daughters to this?

He lacks judgment. The judgment to say, "enough of this. I don't believe this. Why am I here?" The judgment to say, "If I'm taking a pro-Israel stance, how can I sit here and listen to this?" The judgment to say, "If I believe in peace and tolerance and unity and hope, why do I let my young daughters sit through this message of hate and intolerance?"

Everyone says they're voting for Obama because he's intelligent and has good judgment. Well, how smart is it to stay in this church for twenty years, listening to this hate speech? What kind of judgment does he have for staying here when this man's sermon goes against everything he preaches? When it preaches ignorance towards an entire group of people?

If you don't think this doesn't brush off on Obama, fine. But I do. I certainly do, especially after this.

[Mr Sparkle]

Ok first of all Sparkle, I am not trying to pick a fight with you and you know that. I'm just saying don't misquote people. While this may not be an issue to you, it certainly is to many other people. I don't think you want to see WHY this is an issue. Is this issue pulling the concentration away from other issues? Of course it is. But people do have a right to know why Obama holds this Paster in such high esteem. Don't you think?

I don't think you're trying to pick a fight with me, like I wasn't picking a fight with Jman.
I didn't misquote him, in interpreted what he said, if I quoted the head of the KKK ( god knows the comparison has been made lately) that said " let's all kill the black people) and then I said something like " I'm sure McCain supporters will find this truthful and inspirational" well...you get my point.


and by now, you don't know why? you don't know why Obama stayed there, why he hold the man in such high esteem?
he obviously agrees with him to a point, I have also been saying that all along.

on what Issues? well, seeing as his family is partially white I don't think he hates them.
anti-american? seeing as how he is running on a platform of change and hope I don't see him handing the country over to Osama anytime soon.
aside from this, what is there to cast doubt over this man?
what do his other acquaintances say or think?
I mean, I agree with some of this things that Wright said and he said stuff about my ancestry.
ooooh scary.

[Mr Sparkle]

Okay.

Except he says that the Israelis want to build an ethnic bomb, and support apartheid.


Which, in my opinion, is entirely ignorant and in the expert opinion of my Jewish friends, yes, it certainly is anti-Semitic.

wow, he's a nutjob.
we didn't know this?


And to kill two birds with one stone...

Yes, this does have something to do with Obama.

If the man is so pro-Israel, how can he sit through this crap? How can he expose his daughters to this?

He lacks judgment. The judgment to say, "enough of this. I don't believe this. Why am I here?" The judgment to say, "If I'm taking a pro-Israel stance, how can I sit here and listen to this?" The judgment to say, "If I believe in peace and tolerance and unity and hope, why do I let my young daughters sit through this message of hate and intolerance?"

Everyone says they're voting for Obama because he's intelligent and has good judgment. Well, how smart is it to stay in this church for twenty years, listening to this hate speech? What kind of judgment does he have for staying here when this man's sermon goes against everything he preaches? When it preaches ignorance towards an entire group of people?

If you don't think this doesn't brush off on Obama, fine. But I do. I certainly do, especially after this.

careful then, since Hillary was married to Bill who signed into law the defense of marriage act.
it must mean that Hillary hates the gays and doesn't want them to marry.
:huh:

I mean, I don't think that's the case, but....

[The Senator]

Sparkle:

The Obama supporters on this board, or at least a very large chunk of them, supported Wright's comments which damned white America.

I was saying that, like those comments which blamed white America for all of black America's problems, in addition to the comments in which he referred to the US as the US of KKK-A, his supporters will find some way to defend what Wright was saying in those sermons.

That somehow, someone on this forum will justify what Wright said about the ethnic bomb with a response.

It happened with Wright's earlier comments. I'm willing to bet it will happen with these comments, too.

[Mr Sparkle]

didn't wright damn the whole of America?

[The Senator]

didn't wright damn the whole of America?

In one speech.

Then in another, he referred to the US as the US of KKK-A.

Last time I remembered, I wasn't a member of the KKK? Nor did I support them?

Yet people on this forum defended those comments.

So it isn't out of the realm of possibility.

[Marx]

careful then, since Hillary was married to Bill who signed into law the defense of marriage act.
it must mean that Hillary hates the gays and doesn't want them to marry.
:huh:

I mean, I don't think that's the case, but....

Alot of Bill Clinton's measures were a start. (i.e. The Defense of Marriage Act and "Don't ask, Don't Tell.") We have moved beyond that as a country, but those were starting points...that haven't been improved upon because of the current administration.

[Mr Sparkle]

Alot of Bill Clinton's measures were a start. (i.e. The Defense of Marriage Act and "Don't ask, Don't Tell.") We have moved beyond that as a country, but those were starting points...that haven't been improved upon because of the current administration.

I don't think the administration has a lot to do with it.
seeing as San Diego recently voted to keep gay marriage illegal.
San Diego.
I thought people over here were liberal.

[Marx]

I don't think the administration has a lot to do with it.
seeing as San Diego recently voted to keep gay marriage illegal.
San Diego.
I thought people over here were liberal.

I wasn't aware of that :huh:

[The Senator]

I don't think the administration has a lot to do with it.
seeing as San Diego recently voted to keep gay marriage illegal.
San Diego.
I thought people over here were liberal.

San Diego is actually a fairly conservative city, which has only recently started to trend liberal. Up until 2004, the Republican Presidential Candidates used to win that city by upwards of ten points-- fairly significant for a city with over 1 million residents. Kerry won San Diego by five points, if I remember correctly-- 52-47 (possibly off a bit, but I don't want to look through NES data to find the figures tonight).

When Seattle votes to keep gay marriage illegal... then I'll be surprised.

[redfirebird2008]

San Diego County went to Bush 53-47, but I'm not sure about the city itself. So yeah, definitely a fairly conservative area.

[The Senator]

San Diego County went to Bush 53-47, but I'm not sure about the city itself. So yeah, definitely a fairly conservative area.

I went to San Diego a few years back. Everyone seemed really nice and fair minded. Or maybe I just hung out with the right people. Hence why I was a tad confused when I read some of these figures.

Surprisingly, though, I think two of Texas's big cities went for Kerry by pretty fair margins. Also, a county in rural Nebraska went for him, too.

Strange...

[redfirebird2008]

Probably San Antonio and El Paso...or maybe even Dallas? I'm pretty sure Houston went for Bush. Pretty conservative town there. Actually wait, just thought of one. Austin definitely went for Kerry. It's one of the most liberal cities in the nation.

[redfirebird2008]

Just looked it up and Kerry won El Paso County as well as Travis County (Austin). Dallas County went to Bush by 1%, but I wouldn't be surprised if Kerry won the city itself.

[The Senator]

Probably San Antonio and El Paso...or maybe even Dallas? I'm pretty sure Houston went for Bush. Pretty conservative town there. Actually wait, just thought of one. Austin definitely went for Kerry. It's one of the most liberal cities in the nation.

Houston, El Paso and Austin went for him. Dallas is fairly conservative.

I'm using this map, my geography may be off a bit and I don't feel like playing 'locate that city!':

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/73/US_presidential_election_2004_results_by_county.jp g

[The Senator]

Forgive me for it's horrendous size.

[Zen]

Forgive me for it's horrendous size.

well its pretty detailed, its gotta be big to see it. thanx man this map is awesome and now i feel like a dork.

[Matt]

Time out!

Obama has once again claimed that he was unaware that Pastor Wright made comments like this, on The View. Which one is it? He really can't have it both ways. Either he knew or he did not. Furthermore, he said he would leave the congregation had Wright not retired.

So he attends the church for 20 years...yet is unaware of Wright's comments and would have left the parish is Wright did not retire, only after the scandal broke. Someone needs to take the shovel off of Obama.

[Tron5000]

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0308/Obama_now_says_he_might_have_left_church.html

In appearance taped for airing this morning on "The View," Senator Obama makes news by saying he might have left Chicago's Trinity United Church of Christ if the Rev. Jeremiah Wright had not retired.

In a clip posted by ABC, Obama says: 'Had the reverend not retired, and had he not acknowledged that what he had said had deeply offended people and were inappropriate and mischaracterized what I believe is the greatness of this country -- for all its flaws -- then I wouldn't have felt comfortable staying there at the church."

Um, yeah, so I'm gonna go ahead and call BS on this one.

And I was unaware that Jeremiah Wright had "acknowledged that what he had said had deeply offended people and were inappropriate." Perhaps I missed the story on this one.

[Matt]

Likewise. When did Wright ever apologize? Hell, if anything he set his sights on Italians and Jews in response.

How can he really say he would've left had he not retired after sitting through it for 20 years? I don't buy for a second this is a new thing. Not when there are so many reports to the contrary. Hell, Obama acknolwedged it in his first speech, now he is saying once again he was ignorant? Tsk...

[Darthphere]

Sadly, Obama will get away with all of this.

[Tron5000]

http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/news/politics/blog/2008/03/obama_on_wright_not_vetting_my.html

"I'm not vetting my pastor," Obama told The View, in a taping Thursday that will be broadcast at 11 am EDT today. "I didn't have a research team during the course of 20 years to go pull every sermon he's given and see if there's something offensive that he's said."

I don't think a "research team" was needed for this one, Obama. No CSI, no JAG, just common sense. Perhaps you should have purchased Jeremiah Wright's "Best Of" DVD in your own church. Perhaps you could have spoken to fellow parishioners. Perhaps you should have attended a sermon or two. Perhaps you could've hit up YouTube for some "research."

So this guy wants us to believe that he appoints people to positions in his presidential campaign without doing his "research" on them? You trust someone to give you spiritual advice without knowing what's in their heart? Forget about racism and anti-Americanism...but if this is true, it shows Obama lacks very basic reasoning skills and judgment. But if this is not true (as I am sure is the case), it still means Obama is an idiot and outright liar, but he thinks we're even bigger fools than he is.

It's obvious Obama was aware of Wright's beliefs. That's why he canceled Wright's appearance at the rally announcing Obama's presidential candidacy, telling him his sermons could get "kinda rough." This bird won't fly, Obama.

[Matt]

Sadly, Obama will get away with all of this.

Obama supporter: Good thing I'm not voting for Pastor Wright.

Obama supporter 2: LOLZ! BARACK OWNBAMA'ED!

Rational person: But why does Obama keep flipflopping and lying about this?

Obama supporter 2: OWNBAMA'ED!

Rational person: But isn't it a bit hollow to say you would've left only after getting caught?

Obama supporter 1: I believe the man said "OWNBAMA'ED!"

Obama supporter 2: HAHA BARACK OWNBAMA'ED AGAIN!

Rational person: *shoots themself*

[The Senator]

Obama supporter: Good thing I'm not voting for Pastor Wright.

Obama supporter 2: LOLZ! BARACK OWNBAMA'ED!

Rational person: But why does Obama keep flipflopping and lying about this?

Obama supporter 2: OWNBAMA'ED!

Rational person: But isn't it a bit hollow to say you would've left only after getting caught?

Obama supporter 1: I believe the man said "OWNBAMA'ED!"

Obama supporter 2: HAHA BARACK OWNBAMA'ED AGAIN!

Rational person: *shoots themself*

:up:

[Marx]

Time out!

Obama has once again claimed that he was unaware that Pastor Wright made comments like this, on The View. Which one is it? He really can't have it both ways. Either he knew or he did not. Furthermore, he said he would leave the congregation had Wright not retired.

So he attends the church for 20 years...yet is unaware of Wright's comments and would have left the parish is Wright did not retire, only after the scandal broke. Someone needs to take the shovel off of Obama.

Obama frustrates me.

[DBella]

Sadly, Obama will get away with all of this.
He will, because he has charmed the masses into believing he is the savior. The only one who has the ability and capability to bring about change in this country. He can do no wrong and everything he says, no matter how contradicting his words are, is the truth. Fortunately, there are still people who have not been hypnotized by his charisma and question things that don't make sense.

[Tron5000]

He will, because he has charmed the masses into believing he is the savior. The only one who has the ability and capability to bring about change in this country. He can do no wrong and everything he says, no matter how contradicting his words are, is the truth. Fortunately, there are still people who have not been hypnotized by his charisma and question things that don't make sense.

I just hope there are enough of those people. Obviously, the hard core Obamamaniacs are going to be in his corner and be unable to see past the halo encircling his head. But the independents, which are a necessity for winning a national election, will (hopefully) continue to question his judgment about the people with whom he chooses to associate.

[Mr Sparkle]

while apparently ignoring the people that associate with the other two candidates. :confused:

[The Senator]

Obama's first sermon he heard Pastor Wright give was... controversial...

From Slate
On his radio show yesterday, Hugh Hewitt played excerpts of Barack Obama reading from his autobiography, Dreams of My Father. In one, Obama remembers a sermon by Rev. Jeremiah Wright:

[T]he pastor described going to a museum and being confronted by a painting title Hope.

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

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

And so it went, a meditation on a fallen world. While the boys next to me doodled on their church bulletin, Reverend Wright spoke of Sharpesville and Hiroshima, the callousness of policy makers in the White House and in the State House. ... [E.A.]

Sounds ... controversial! Keep in mind: a) Obama isn't disapproving of this sermon. In the book he weeps at the end of it; b) Demonstrating that at least some blaming of "white greed" for the world's sins--which Obama now criticizes-- isn't an exceptional topic for Rev. Wright in a few wacky sermons ("the five dumbest things") that Obama may or may not have missed. It's at the quotidian core of the Afrocentric philosophy that Obama says drew him to the church; c) Indeed, in his big March 18th race speech Obama reads the passage from his book that describes his emotional reaction to this very sermon (his "first service at Trinity")--how it made "the story of a people" seem "black and more than black." d) This is also the sermon that gave Obama the title of his next book, The Audacity of Hope. e) The "profound mistake" of this sermon is not that Wright "spoke as if our society was static"--Obama's analysis on Feb. 18th. The problem is that "white folks' greed" is not the main cause of a "world in need."

I'm not saying voters shouldn't cut Obama a lot of slack on Wright's anti-white fulminations. But the Senator should have spoken up publicly against the semi-paranoid "white greed" explanation a long time ago, no? And he could show a little humility. Again, this wasn't the occasion for him to be lecturing everyone else. ...

[Tron5000]

I felt the same about the speech as Hewitt did. I felt like Obama was lecturing ME, while HE was the one that had some splainin' to do.

[The Senator]

An interesting analysis of Rev. Wright from Jennifer Ruben, a writer on the Contentions blog:


With each new utterance on the topic of Reverend Wright, Barack Obama seems to confirm his own moral obliviousness. Worse yet, he seems to have disdain for those who are troubled by his own unwillingness, even now, to break with Wright. (Contrary to his liberal apologists who insist “leaving a church is never a simple transaction,” it is exceedingly easy–you just stand up and go.)

The latest: “I never heard him say some of the things that have people upset.” Let’s leave aside for a moment the Clintonian slipperiness of the word “some.” Let’s not dwell on the quite obvious possibility that he might have heard or read comments of Wright’s approximating those on the dozens of tapes that have now come to light. Here’s the meat of it: just “people” are upset–not him mind you, since he is operating on a higher moral plane. I suppose he would have defended Trent Lott’s single remark about Strom Thurmond with every fiber of his being.

But it gets worse. Obama insists Wright is “a brilliant man who was still stuck in a time warp.” So brilliant, apparently, that he has uncovered the plot by white America to kill African Americans and so insightful as to perceive the 9/11 attacks as caused by America’s own terrorism. Then there was his discerning observation that Israel is a “dirty” word. (In what time period would these type of views have been acceptable?) And after all this, Wright, in Obama’s eyes, is brilliant. This, we are told by the legions of Obamaphiles, is not supposed to affect voters’ view of Obama’s judgment.

Perhaps Democratic primary voters are immune to the implications of all this. Perhaps they still fancy Obama as a great ethical leader who is going to lead us out of our history of divisiveness and small-mindedness. Or perhaps they are just embarrassed to tell pollsters they are privately offended. But in a general election contest this is not going to go unnoticed. We will have to see if he can get any Republican votes and just how many independents will be irked by this moral obtuseness. (And that loud thud you just heard? The entire RNC oppo research team falling down in a faint. They are never going to top this.)

[Marx]

An interesting analysis of Rev. Wright from Jennifer Ruben, a writer on the Contentions blog:

Wow...that's pretty thought provoking analysis. She speaks the truth.

[Mr Sparkle]

Wow...that's pretty thought provoking analysis. She speaks the truth.

so you think America's foreign policy in the middle east played no role in 9-11?

[Damiean Dark]

Of course it did america has been propping up dictators for years before 9-11 Saddam was a "friend" only until recently the terrorists didnt wake up someday and say we hate america!!! this stuff has been festering for years but the average american has absolutely no clue about the middle east thats why 9-11 was such a shock to them they couldnt get there heads around why someone would do it.

[Mr Sparkle]

and of course we know that EVERY sane person and " brilliant person" in the world supports Israel right?

[Marx]

so you think America's foreign policy in the middle east played no role in 9-11?

I never said that. I'm just saying that she brings up valid arguments. I do believe whole heartedly that our foreign policy has created a lot of ill will towards this country.

[Tron5000]

I never said that. I'm just saying that she brings up valid arguments. I do believe whole heartedly that our foreign policy has created a lot of ill will towards this country.

There is ill will against every country in the world by one group of people or another. People can come up with innumerable reasons to dislike a nation. The question that comes into play is whether or not this "ill will" justifies actions that are taken against said offending nation.

[Marx]

There is ill will against every country in the world by one group of people or another. People can come up with innumerable reasons to dislike a nation. The question that comes into play is whether or not this "ill will" justifies actions that are taken against said offending nation.

That's a good question Tron. I don't think that it is ever jusitifiable to take any attack out on innocent civilians.

[Tron5000]

That's a good question Tron. I don't think that it is ever jusitifiable to take any attack out on innocent civilians.

Are you referring to a specific attacks targeting civilians, but civilians who may be casualties of strikes against other targets as well? Because I agree that civilians should never be targeted, but when evidence presents itself that warrants a strike on a specific target at a specific time, I am aware that collateral damage may sometimes be suffered in order to accomplish a specific objective.

[Marx]

Are you referring to a specific attacks targeting civilians, but civilians who may be casualties of strikes against other targets as well? Because I agree that civilians should never be targeted, but when evidence presents itself that warrants a strike on a specific target at a specific time, I am aware that collateral damage may sometimes be suffered in order to accomplish a specific objective.

I was referring to the attacks of 9/11. I agree about collateral damage on attacks abroad.

[blackcobra]

http://bravenewfilms.org/blog/35838-fox-reporter-squashed-by-wise-father-s-words-on-wright

[Matt]

Merging.

[fifthfiend]

Well,

Its official.
The race to dig into Obama has begun.

The Republican-biased, McCain-worshipping media, desperate to find any excuse to attack Obama, no matter how idiotic or utterly tangental, has seen to that.

FTFY

[Hush]

I think Obama stepped in the mud all by his lonesome. You can be a good talker but he has no substance so his Pastor made remarks that showed substance and now they are being viewed as Obama's, llike they should be.

[RockSP]

I think Obama stepped in the mud all by his lonesome. You can be a good talker but he has no substance so his Pastor made remarks that showed substance and now they are being viewed as Obama's, llike they should be.

:huh: Someone else's remarks should be viewed as his?

Uh...why?

[The Senator]

:huh: Someone else's remarks should be viewed as his?

Uh...why?

They shouldn't be taken as his remarks. They are his pastor's remarks. However, Obama's judgment needs to be questioned, and for good reason. He hired this man to head the spiritual outreach program on his campaign, he attended his church for twenty years, he let his daughters sit through this man's vile sermons... so Americans have a right to ask how this may affect an Obama administration, and whether or not Obama shares some of these views...

[Mr Sparkle]

They shouldn't be taken as his remarks. They are his pastor's remarks. However, Obama's judgment needs to be questioned, and for good reason. He hired this man to head the spiritual outreach program on his campaign, he attended his church for twenty years, he let his daughters sit through this man's vile sermons... so Americans have a right to ask how this may affect an Obama administration, and whether or not Obama shares some of these views...

again.
his judgment needs to be questioned?
how so? if the same criteria is not ever applied to the other candidates.
I have noticed that some people just don't like Obama seldom have the democratic primaries been so stupid it's like they are republicans now.
I mean, I'm sure the fact he is half black is not influencing you at all, but c'mon now.
a little less bias would be nice.

[Marx]

again.
his judgment needs to be questioned?
how so? if the same criteria is not ever applied to the other candidates.
I have noticed that some people just don't like Obama seldom have the democratic primaries been so stupid it's like they are republicans now.
I mean, I'm sure the fact he is half black is not influencing you at all, but c'mon now.
a little less bias would be nice.

People can question Obama's character, and disapprove of him, without it being racial. I certainly hope that you're not suggesting otherwise.

Now that this conversation, which has been rehashed again and again and again, has officially come full circle for the umpteenth time...judgement does come into question when you continually choose to associate with people like Reverend Wright. If Obama disagreed with this man's thoughts and opinions, he would have left the church. You don't get married by this man, have your children baptized by this man, and appoint this man to be the "spiritual advisor" to your presidential campaign, without knowing who they are and what they stand for.

[Mr Sparkle]

People can question Obama's character, and disapprove of him, without it being racial. I certainly hope that you're not suggesting otherwise.

I'm sure people can agree with him and find him to be a good candidate for reasons other than race or seeing him as a Messiah.
cuts both ways buddy.

Now that this conversation, which has been rehashed again and again and again, has officially come full circle for the umpteenth time...judgement does come into question when you continually choose to associate with people like Reverend Wright. If Obama disagreed with this man's thoughts and opinions, he would have left the church. You don't get married by this man, have your children baptized by this man, and appoint this man to be the "spiritual advisor" to your presidential campaign, without knowing who they are and what they stand for.

I never said he disagreed with him did I?
I think that there's a lot of what Wright said that is dead on.
as I'm sure Obama does, I'm sure you do to, it's just not convenient right now.

[The Senator]

again.
his judgment needs to be questioned?
how so? if the same criteria is not ever applied to the other candidates.
I have noticed that some people just don't like Obama seldom have the democratic primaries been so stupid it's like they are republicans now.


Yes, Obama's judgment needs to be questioned.

He hired Wright to work on his campaign, knowing full well what kind of divisive, racist the things the man says. He had a record of saying these things long before Obama ran for the United States Senate. The fact that Obama couldn't realize that a speech in which his pastor says "God damn America!" would be considered just a wee bit offensive to most Americans shows he's out of touch, and that he exercised poor judgment when finalizing his campaign staff.

[terry78]

Aren't we all looking for someone to tell like it is, anyway? I know when you run for office you're supposed to say what people want to hear, but we don't mean it.

[The Senator]

Aren't we all looking for someone to tell like it is, anyway? I know when you run for office you're supposed to say what people want to hear, but we don't mean it.

Considering most white people aren't members of the KKK, nor do we want to keep African Americans from being successful, I don't see how Wright is "telling it like it is."

[Arkady Rossovich]

Obama is still in the lead,the nit picking into what he says or who he surrounds himself with isn't working.

[Matt]

Obama is still in the lead,the nit picking into what he says or who he surrounds himself with isn't working.

Look at the polls in crucial swing states against McCain and say it is not working.

[Mr Sparkle]

Considering most white people aren't members of the KKK, nor do we want to keep African Americans from being successful, I don't see how Wright is "telling it like it is."

I'm sure your experience of black America rival wright's easily.
but still.

[The Senator]

I'm sure your experience of black America rival wright's easily.
but still.

My experience in white America rivals Wright's. And I can certainly say that I do not know anyone who personally thinks we should "keep the black man down," nor do we associate ourselves with the KKK.

[Mr Sparkle]

My experience in white America rivals Wright's. And I can certainly say that I do not know anyone who personally thinks we should "keep the black man down," nor do we associate ourselves with the KKK.

wright is addressing the system I think.
yes, his comments are stupid but I have problems with people that go " well, ferraro's comments are true, but wright's? OUTRAGE!" same thing to me.

[Matt]

Not really. Ferarro never claimed 3,000 people deserved to die.

[The Senator]

wright is addressing the system I think.
yes, his comments are stupid but I have problems with people that go " well, ferraro's comments are true, but wright's? OUTRAGE!" same thing to me.

They aren't really the same thing.

Ferraro said the excitement and attention given to his campaign is due to his skin color... which she followed by saying it was comparable to the attention given to her VP campaign because of her gender... Obama's campaign just likes to play the race card, and they made it a big issue... Charlie Rangel, a black Congressman, and the founder of BET both said the same things before Ferraro made her remarks, but they weren't chastised... I think that says something...

Meanwhile, Wright equated the entire white population to the KKK, which was flat out ignorant, if not entirely racist...

[Mr Sparkle]

Not really. Ferarro never claimed 3,000 people deserved to die.

Nor did Wright.:whatever:
learn to listen.

[Mr Sparkle]

They aren't really the same thing.

Ferraro said the excitement and attention given to his campaign is due to his skin color... which she followed by saying it was comparable to the attention given to her VP campaign because of her gender... Obama's campaign just likes to play the race card, and they made it a big issue... Charlie Rangel, a black Congressman, and the founder of BET both said the same things before Ferraro made her remarks, but they weren't chastised... I think that says something...

Meanwhile, Wright equated the entire white population to the KKK, which was flat out ignorant, if not entirely racist...

Obama's campaign never played the race card, it was Ferraro who played it.
and the media and you who are "playing the race card" being bullied by the mean pastor who doesn't like white people:csad:.
plus, you also need to learn to listen.

[Kelly]

wright is addressing the system I think.
yes, his comments are stupid but I have problems with people that go " well, ferraro's comments are true, but wright's? OUTRAGE!" same thing to me.

I have to strongly disagree with this statement...."same thing"????????

Ferraro was equating her rise in the political forum as a woman, during a time when that was unheard of, to the fact that he being a strong, black, articulate, young man definitely gives him an edge.......if anyone thinks that he would be where he is if his name was John Smith, a 60 year old white man, from Lincoln, Nebraska (no disrespect meant to 60 year old white men, from Nebraska named John Smith) but to think that he would be as far as he is, IN SUCH A SHORT TIME (in reference to many who come into politics and make it this far to the presidency) then I'm sorry, but they are sorely naive......to the extreme. I do not see how that is even closely equal to what Reverend Wright has said, time and time, and is still saying time and time again. Do I really care what Wright says....not really, except I find it highly amusing that he has, just recently, slammed white, affluent families, yet he is building a million dollar home in a white, affluent neighborhood. So he will be living next door to the people he just recently slammed. His home is far from the church and the pulpit he preaches from.......

Does he have a right to live where he wants, of course.......

Does he have a right to say want he wants to say from his pulpit, of course......

But people need to realize that words and actions will bring praise and ridicule, especially when they do not necessarily equal each other........

Ferraro simply stated that compared her run for the VP, with Obama's......if she was insulting him, she was in fact then, insulting herself......

As I have said before, I don't fault Obama for his choice of churches....but I do fault him in (what is my opinion) a bad judgment call in thinking that people (once they realized how strong the relationship between he and Wright actually was) would not have a problem with Wright being in such an influential member of his campaign. It's fine that he's ok with Wright's comments, but it was pretty stupid to think that many would not find the comments totally off base...........


As far as the flag pin issue.....that has to be the dumbest debate I have ever heard....................who the hell cares if he wears a flag pin on his lapel.......I would venture to say there is a majority of people in America that no longer fly the American Flag in their front yard, on their car, wear a lapel pin.........etc.......that did do so, immediately after 9/11. Are they not patriotic?........just a dumb debate.

[Mr Sparkle]

I have to strongly disagree with this statement...."same thing"????????

Ferraro was equating her rise in the political forum as a woman, during a time when that was unheard of, to the fact that he being a strong, black, articulate, young man definitely gives him an edge.......if anyone thinks that he would be where he is if his name was John Smith, a 60 year old white man, from Lincoln, Nebraska (no disrespect meant to 60 year old white men, from Nebraska named John Smith) but to think that he would be as far as he is, IN SUCH A SHORT TIME (in reference to many who come into politics and make it this far to the presidency) then I'm sorry, but they are sorely naive......to the extreme. I do not see how that is even closely equal to what Reverend Wright has said, time and time, and is still saying time and time again. Do I really care what Wright says....not really, except I find it highly amusing that he has, just recently, slammed white, affluent families, yet he is building a million dollar home in a white, affluent neighborhood. So he will be living next door to the people he just recently slammed. His home is far from the church and the pulpit he preaches from.......

Does he have a right to live where he wants, of course.......

Does he have a right to say want he wants to say from his pulpit, of course......

But people need to realize that words and actions will bring praise and ridicule, especially when they do not necessarily equal each other........

Ferraro simply stated that compared her run for the VP, with Obama's......if she was insulting him, she was in fact then, insulting herself......

As I have said before, I don't fault Obama for his choice of churches....but I do fault him in (what is my opinion) a bad judgment call in thinking that people (once they realized how strong the relationship between he and Wright actually was) would not have a problem with Wright being in such an influential member of his campaign. It's fine that he's ok with Wright's comments, but it was pretty stupid to think that many would not find the comments totally off base...........


As far as the flag pin issue.....that has to be the dumbest debate I have ever heard....................who the hell cares if he wears a flag pin on his lapel.......I would venture to say there is a majority of people in America that no longer fly the American Flag in their front yard, on their car, wear a lapel pin.........etc.......that did do so, immediately after 9/11. Are they not patriotic?........just a dumb debate.


well I think that they ARE the same thing because both things DON'T matter.

I didn;t care when she said what she said nor did I blame clinton for it.

if she equates herself to Obama then good, but the comment was "he wouldn't be were he is if not for his race" or something to that nature.
are you kidding me?
when people are saying " is America ready for a black president" and questioning whether he is or is not a secret-muslim?
his race is a hindrance if it's anything at all.

[Kelly]

well I think that they ARE the same thing because both things DON'T matter.

I didn;t care when she said what she said nor did I blame clinton for it.

if she equates herself to Obama then good, but the comment was "he wouldn't be were he is if not for his race" or something to that nature.
are you kidding me?
when people are saying " is America ready for a black president" and questioning whether he is or is not a secret-muslim?
his race is a hindrance if it's anything at all.

If you are equating them because you believe neither matter, then I can see where you are coming from.....but to many "Americans" they do matter.....

As far as his race being a hindrance........no way, if it is, only to those that wouldn't vote for a Democrat even if the Democrat totally agreed on all issues with them.......you aren't seeing that as a problem on ABC, CBS, NBC, CNBC, PBS, CNN, and you are only hearing about on FNC.....its not really even a problem for them, they are simply reporting and showing what is being said from special interest groups.....PROBABLY the same special interest groups that tried to hurt John McCain in South Carolina.......NOW, will this become more of an issue if he is, indeed the Democratic Candidate.....that is a possibility......but only then will we see how much of a problem it is for him.........and I can assure you, it will be from the same group that tried to hurt John McCain.......ironic.

I can assure you, I have heard, FAR MORE PEOPLE......................BY FAR MORE PEOPLE, beyond even a percentage of majority of people, say that they are voting for Obama, YES for several other reasons, but his race is one of the reasons......THE ONLY people I've heard that would not are a very small percentage from special interest groups, that all along have shown a tone of racism, and its not even surprising.

[blackcobra]

Yes, Obama's judgment needs to be questioned.

He hired Wright to work on his campaign, knowing full well what kind of divisive, racist the things the man says. He had a record of saying these things long before Obama ran for the United States Senate. The fact that Obama couldn't realize that a speech in which his pastor says "God damn America!" would be considered just a wee bit offensive to most Americans shows he's out of touch, and that he exercised poor judgment when finalizing his campaign staff.

Obama has managed to raise more money during this primary then anyone that has come before him. So this proves, that he has the judgement, and executive skills to fix the ailing economy.

Conservatives will have to do much better then guilt by association. Bush's lapse in judgment has claimed thousands of lives, and thousands of Iraqi's That lapse in judgement has had an actual impact on our country. The words used by someone on the pulpit isn't a quantifier to determine someones entire character or judgement.

[Mr Sparkle]

If you are equating them because you believe neither matter, then I can see where you are coming from.....but to many "Americans" they do matter.....

As far as his race being a hindrance........no way, if it is, only to those that wouldn't vote for a Democrat even if the Democrat totally agreed on all issues with them.......you aren't seeing that as a problem on ABC, CBS, NBC, CNBC, PBS, CNN, and you are only hearing about on FNC.....its not really even a problem for them, they are simply reporting and showing what is being said from special interest groups.....PROBABLY the same special interest groups that tried to hurt John McCain in South Carolina.......NOW, will this become more of an issue if he is, indeed the Democratic Candidate.....that is a possibility......but only then will we see how much of a problem it is for him.........and I can assure you, it will be from the same group that tried to hurt John McCain.......ironic.

I can assure you, I have heard, FAR MORE PEOPLE......................BY FAR MORE PEOPLE, beyond even a percentage of majority of people, say that they are voting for Obama, YES for several other reasons, but his race is one of the reasons......THE ONLY people I've heard that would not are a very small percentage from special interest groups, that all along have shown a tone of racism, and its not even surprising.

I have no doubt they matter to some people.
I mean, people watch NASCAR for god's sake, the world's most boring sport.
we agree to disagree on this matter.
I just think that I never heard this same song and dance with Edwards last time around. and I heard people complain with Kerry that he wasn't personable.

meh, go fig. politics is a crazy game.

[Kelly]

I have no doubt they matter to some people.
I mean, people watch NASCAR for god's sake, the world's most boring sport.
we agree to disagree on this matter.
I just think that I never heard this same song and dance with Edwards last time around. and I heard people complain with Kerry that he wasn't personable.

meh, go fig. politics is a crazy game.


That's for damn sure........:o

[The Senator]

Obama has managed to raise more money during this primary then anyone that has come before him. So this proves, that he has the judgement, and executive skills to fix the ailing economy.

No, that proves people donated money to his campaign. It doesn't prove that he's a leader, it doesn't prove that he has good judgment... he hired a racist preacher to head his spiritual outreach program, which was a stupid move considering the Democrats are always criticized for not reaching out to religious voters. Instead of picking a safe pastor from the UCC to head that division of his campaign, he played the spoils system and chose a controversial, divisive hothead to head what could have been a revolutionary division of his campaign.


Conservatives will have to do much better then guilt by association. Bush's lapse in judgment has claimed thousands of lives, and thousands of Iraqi's That lapse in judgement has had an actual impact on our country. The words used by someone on the pulpit isn't a quantifier to determine someones entire character or judgement.

Conservative operatives have always operated that way, though. They heard a story about some mistakes Kerry made in Vietnam... BAM!... they called him on it. They saw a photo of Kerry windsurfing in Cape Cod... BAM!... they turned it into a political ad. Obama's pastor says "God Damn America?" Just wait until September, when it's being aired by the McCain campaign or a 527 in Pennsylvania, Ohio and Michigan. Maybe even Virginia and Colorado, too.

If you don't think this will be a problem for voters you know very little about voting behavior in this country.

[The Senator]

Obama's campaign never played the race card, it was Ferraro who played it.
and the media and you who are "playing the race card" being bullied by the mean pastor who doesn't like white people:csad:.
plus, you also need to learn to listen.

So I guess any time someone says the word "black" it's playing the race card? :huh:

I guess this means people can't discuss (key word: discuss; which is not equal to long-winded, hateful rants) race in this country without being accused of being racist or playing the race card? :huh:

[Kelly]

So I guess any time someone says the word "black" it's playing the race card? :huh:

I guess this means people can't discuss (key word: discuss; which is not equal to long-winded, hateful rants) race in this country without being accused of being racist or playing the race card? :huh:



At my neighborhood pub........................YES, here? hmmmmmmmmmm......

[hippie_hunter]

Obama has managed to raise more money during this primary then anyone that has come before him. So this proves, that he has the judgement, and executive skills to fix the ailing economy.

Fundraising is completely different that running the economy. Seriously, Obama supporters are like the #1 reason why I can't stand Obama :cmad:

[Kelly]

I can say the same thing about Clay Aiken......his fans totally turned me off to him. yuk.

[Memphis Slim]

This explains everything....

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s3_jh2dO78U:woot:

[C.F. Kane]

It explains that anti-Obama nerds are decent at Flash animation. So what?

[Memphis Slim]

It explains that anti-Obama nerds are decent at Flash animation. So what?


aaahhh...I see it's worked on you too. :hehe:

[Marx]

Obama has managed to raise more money during this primary then anyone that has come before him. So this proves, that he has the judgement, and executive skills to fix the ailing economy.

Conservatives will have to do much better then guilt by association. Bush's lapse in judgment has claimed thousands of lives, and thousands of Iraqi's That lapse in judgement has had an actual impact on our country. The words used by someone on the pulpit isn't a quantifier to determine someones entire character or judgement.

I'm not trying to rain on your parade Cobra, but the fact that his campaign has raised money says absolutely nothing about him as a leader. All that proves is that people have donated to his campaign. He has NO CONTROL over his campaign donations. None whatsoever. With all due respect to you, that's one of the most ridiculous things I've ever read.

[hippie_hunter]

I'm not trying to rain on your parade Cobra, but the fact that his campaign has raised money says absolutely nothing about him as a leader. All that proves is that people have donated to his campaign. He has NO CONTROL over his campaign donations. None whatsoever. With all due respect to you, that's one of the most ridiculous things I've ever read.

Maybe Cobra has a point. Maybe Obama can get people to make small donations to the economy like they did for his campaign :hehe:

[The Senator]

Maybe Cobra has a point. Maybe Obama can get people to make small donations to the economy like they did for his campaign :hehe:

Voluntary communism, eh? Intriguing...

[C.F. Kane]

aaahhh...I see it's worked on you too. :hehe:

Damn. I've responded to a Memphis Slim post. What have I done?

[Kelly]

tsk....tsk.........tsk. You have fallen into the category of, responding to **** baiting as I like to call it.....you must wear much higher boots when responding to such posts.....*winks*

[Marx]

Maybe Cobra has a point. Maybe Obama can get people to make small donations to the economy like they did for his campaign :hehe:

Voluntary communism, eh? Intriguing...

Interesting indeed.

[BlackLantern]

I'm not trying to rain on your parade Cobra, but the fact that his campaign has raised money says absolutely nothing about him as a leader. All that proves is that people have donated to his campaign. He has NO CONTROL over his campaign donations. None whatsoever. With all due respect to you, that's one of the most ridiculous things I've ever read.

Ron Paul managed to get a lot of suckers to donate to his campaign....I wonder how those people feel now, having basically thrown that money down the toilet....

[Marx]

Ron Paul managed to get a lot of suckers to donate to his campaign....I wonder how those people feel now, having basically thrown that money down the toilet....

I don't think I'd count Ron Paul out just yet BL. I'm still thinking that he will run independently.

[Kelly]

If he runs, McCain is totally screwed.......

[Marx]

If he runs, McCain is totally screwed.......

I'm actually surprised that he decided to run on the Republican primary. He still hasn't officially dropped out yet. It will definately be a blow to McCain if he does decide to run indy.

[Kelly]

He said he would stay in until the end, to get his platform out there......

[Marx]

He said he would stay in until the end, to get his platform out there......

I suppose that actually does make sense.

[Kelly]

I suppose that actually does make sense.

He believes in his platform, probably more than all three other candidates put together.....so yeah......I can definitely see him staying in for that reason.

[Marx]

He believes in his platform, probably more than all three other candidates put together.....so yeah......I can definitely see him staying in for that reason.

A couple of my neighbors are very supportive of Ron Paul and have campaigned for him. He definately has a following.

[BlackLantern]

I don't think I'd count Ron Paul out just yet BL. I'm still thinking that he will run independently.

He's out....running independent basically means he's just some guy standing there saying "I'm running for President....yay" and most of America looks at him like he's a retard....

[The Senator]

I don't think I'd count Ron Paul out just yet BL. I'm still thinking that he will run independently.

He said earlier that he was not going to run as an independent candidate or a libertarian... besides, the libertarians have Bob Carr running, their first credible candidate in a while... if Paul runs as a libertarian, he'd have to challenge him to a primary, spending more money than he'd probably want to.

I don't think Ron Paul will run either way.

[Kelly]

Nah, I don't think he's going to run........he is getting accomplished primarily what he set out to do in the first place......the mainstream media, just never gave him a chance to get his platform out there like he wanted to.....but I think he did more on the internet than he ever thought he would...

[Memphis Slim]

http://560wind.townhall.com/video/TheFivewithAmandaCarpenter/1450_042808wright

http://560wind.townhall.com/video/FoxLocal/2095_0428Wright1

[Memphis Slim]

If he still gets the Democratic nod , he will tank in the general election. I think this guy has brought this back up again just when Obama was trying to make it go away.

[Matt]

I'd say if anything is going to hurt Obama's campaign it is his connection to Ayers...but that is not what is hurting him, its not the connections. It is his notion that he is above answering questions. He gives a pretty speech on it and then just expects Americans to drop them, says they are distraction issues, gets annoyed whenever anyone brings them up. News flash: If they are important to American citizens, they are not distractions. They are valid issues. He is supposed to be proving why he is the most electable and why he is the best to take on McCain. If these issues will hurt his poll numbers, he is not the best candidate. Until he actually has a press conference or is willing to answer questions about issues such as Wright, or Ayers, or Rezko, on someone elses' terms, not his own, pre-determined terms, they will not go away.

On a side note, why do you respond to yourself Slim? Why not just post the extra 2 sentences in your original post as opposed to responding to yourself four minutes later?

[Lightning Strykez!]

If he still gets the Democratic nod , he will tank in the general election. I think this guy has brought this back up again just when Obama was trying to make it go away.

I was just commenting on this in the other thread.

I think Jeremiah Wright is one of the worst kinds of religious figures: He's an absolute media whore. He's only in it for the attention, and I'm sure his waiting until things cooled down to muck it up again with the media was not a coincidence. Clearly, he doesn't care what impact he has on Obama's campaign now...his combative appearances lately have been dripping with "revenge" in my opinion.

[The Senator]

Ultimately, I feel Wright will kill Obama's chances of winning the Presidency. In the short run, I feel he could prevent him from winning the Democratic nod. But as evident today, this will hurt him more in the long run, as McCain is now willing to criticize Wright on the campaign trail. This could very well be 2008's Swift Boat. And the ironic thing is, Obama is confronting this just like Kerry did when the Republicans questioned his war record four years ago.

[Lightning Strykez!]

I doubt it will affect Obama at all actually, now that Wright is doing his own tours of the world. He's becoming his own phenom--and that will be to his detriment because the political machine is going to throw him under the bus eventually--mark my words.

I expect Obama to address the nation specifically about religion mucking up political works and it is then that he will officially denounce Jeremiah.

[The Senator]

I doubt it will affect Obama at all actually, now that Wright is doing his own tours of the world. He's becoming his own phenom--and that will be to his detriment because the political machine is going to throw him under the bus eventually--mark my words.

I expect Obama to address the nation specifically about religion mucking up political works and it is then that he will officially denounce Jeremiah.

Well, I certainly hope that is the case. Of all the things which annoy me the most, it's his handling of this situation which turns me off. It's funny, because every time I'm about ready to say "okay, I guess I can vote for Obama," this man comes out and does something stupid. I really wish Obama would just get on stage and say "This idiot doesn't represent me and my values" and offer some reasonable, simple explanation as to why he stayed in that church. Because while I understand why he might have done so (as petty as those reasons are, in my opinion), uneducated, middle-of-the-road voters will believe anything McCain and co. spews about Wright. And as we've seen, that's already starting to happen.

[Memphis Slim]

I'd say if anything is going to hurt Obama's campaign it is his connection to Ayers...but that is not what is hurting him, its not the connections. It is his notion that he is above answering questions. He gives a pretty speech on it and then just expects Americans to drop them, says they are distraction issues, gets annoyed whenever anyone brings them up. News flash: If they are important to American citizens, they are not distractions. They are valid issues. He is supposed to be proving why he is the most electable and why he is the best to take on McCain. If these issues will hurt his poll numbers, he is not the best candidate. Until he actually has a press conference or is willing to answer questions about issues such as Wright, or Ayers, or Rezko, on someone elses' terms, not his own, pre-determined terms, they will not go away.

On a side note, why do you respond to yourself Slim? Why not just post the extra 2 sentences in your original post as opposed to responding to yourself four minutes later?

You honestly don't think people who were on hte fence and moderate Dems (white people) aren't looking at this even harder and asking. "You really want us to believe you didn't hear any of this in 20 years?" 20???

And why have the national polls shown him drop from a double digit lead to a a one point lead over Hillary, since this busted out?

I will agree with L.S. on one thing.....the Rev. is self-serving. But I think he is getting his revenge on Obama for dissing him and denouncing his sermons as wrong. He was quiet for a long time. I knew he had to be steaming when Obama refewed to him as the "old uncle" in the family.....