O boy Obama

[fustercluck]

Seems we should fear what we DON'T know about him. No wonder he won't tell us anything but platitudinal dross...




Obama and the Minister
By RONALD KESSLER
March 14, 2008; Page A19

In a sermon delivered at Howard University, Barack Obama's longtime minister, friend and adviser blamed America for starting the AIDS virus, training professional killers, importing drugs and creating a racist society that would never elect a black candidate president.

The Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr., pastor of Mr. Obama's Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago, gave the sermon at the school's Andrew Rankin Memorial Chapel in Washington on Jan. 15, 2006.


Trinity United Church of Christ/Religion News Service
Sen. Barack Obama and the Rev. Jeremiah Wright
"We've got more black men in prison than there are in college," he began. "Racism is alive and well. Racism is how this country was founded and how this country is still run. No black man will ever be considered for president, no matter how hard you run Jesse [Jackson] and no black woman can ever be considered for anything outside what she can give with her body."

Mr. Wright thundered on: "America is still the No. 1 killer in the world. . . . We are deeply involved in the importing of drugs, the exporting of guns, and the training of professional killers . . . We bombed Cambodia, Iraq and Nicaragua, killing women and children while trying to get public opinion turned against Castro and Ghadhafi . . . We put [Nelson] Mandela in prison and supported apartheid the whole 27 years he was there. We believe in white supremacy and black inferiority and believe it more than we believe in God."

His voice rising, Mr. Wright said, "We supported Zionism shamelessly while ignoring the Palestinians and branding anybody who spoke out against it as being anti-Semitic. . . . We care nothing about human life if the end justifies the means. . . ."

Concluding, Mr. Wright said: "We started the AIDS virus . . . We are only able to maintain our level of living by making sure that Third World people live in grinding poverty. . . ."

Considering this view of America, it's not surprising that in December Mr. Wright's church gave an award to Louis Farrakhan for lifetime achievement. In the church magazine, Trumpet, Mr. Wright spoke glowingly of the Nation of Islam leader. "His depth on analysis [sic] when it comes to the racial ills of this nation is astounding and eye-opening," Mr. Wright said of Mr. Farrakhan. "He brings a perspective that is helpful and honest."

After Newsmax broke the story of the award to Farrakhan on Jan. 14, Mr. Obama issued a statement. However, Mr. Obama ignored the main point: that his minister and friend had spoken adoringly of Mr. Farrakhan, and that Mr. Wright's church was behind the award to the Nation of Islam leader.

Instead, Mr. Obama said, "I decry racism and anti-Semitism in every form and strongly condemn the anti-Semitic statements made by Minister Farrakhan. I assume that Trumpet magazine made its own decision to honor Farrakhan based on his efforts to rehabilitate ex-offenders, but it is not a decision with which I agree." Trumpet is owned and produced by Mr. Wright's church out of the church's offices, and Mr. Wright's daughters serve as publisher and executive editor.

Meeting with Jewish leaders in Cleveland on Feb. 24, Mr. Obama described Mr. Wright as being like "an old uncle who sometimes will say things that I don't agree with." He rarely mentions the points of disagreement.

Mr. Obama went on to explain Mr. Wright's anti-Zionist statements as being rooted in his anger over the Jewish state's support for South Africa under its previous policy of apartheid. As with his previous claim that his church gave the award to Mr. Farrakhan because of his work with ex-offenders, Mr. Obama appears to have made that up.

Neither the presentation of the award nor the Trumpet article about the award mentions ex-offenders, and Mr. Wright's statements denouncing Israel have not been qualified in any way. Mr. Obama nonetheless told the Jewish leaders that the award to Mr. Farrakhan "showed a lack of sensitivity to the Jewish community." That is an understatement.

As for Mr. Wright's repeated comments blaming America for the 9/11 attacks because of what Mr. Wright calls its racist and violent policies, Mr. Obama has said it sounds as if the minister was trying to be "provocative."

Hearing Mr. Wright's venomous and paranoid denunciations of this country, the vast majority of Americans would walk out. Instead, Mr. Obama and his wife Michelle have presumably sat through numerous similar sermons by Mr. Wright.

Indeed, Mr. Obama has described Mr. Wright as his "sounding board" during the two decades he has known him. Mr. Obama has said he found religion through the minister in the 1980s. He joined the church in 1991 and walked down the aisle in a formal commitment of faith.

The title of Mr. Obama's bestseller "The Audacity of Hope" comes from one of Wright's sermons. Mr. Wright is one of the first people Mr. Obama thanked after his election to the Senate in 2004. Mr. Obama consulted Mr. Wright before deciding to run for president. He prayed privately with Mr. Wright before announcing his candidacy last year.

Mr. Obama obviously would not choose to belong to Mr. Wright's church and seek his advice unless he agreed with at least some of his views. In light of Mr. Wright's perspective, Michelle Obama's comment that she feels proud of America for the first time in her adult life makes perfect sense.

Much as most of us would appreciate the symbolism of a black man ascending to the presidency, what we have in Barack Obama is a politician whose closeness to Mr. Wright underscores his radical record.
Seems it's what we




The media have largely ignored Mr. Obama's close association with Mr. Wright. This raises legitimate questions about Mr. Obama's fundamental beliefs about his country. Those questions deserve a clearer answer than Mr. Obama has provided so far.

Mr. Kessler, a former Wall Street Journal and Washington Post reporter, is chief Washington correspondent of Newsmax.com and the author of "The Terrorist Watch: Inside the Desperate Race to Stop the Next Attack" (Crown Forum, 2007).


http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120545277093135111.html?mod=opinion_main_comment aries

[oly884]

Wonder why the national media doesn't report this... nah, no bias at all.

[amgraham]

Oreilly did a story on it last night. That minister is pretty jacked up. They were playing clips of his sermons and it was all about how bad America is and the white man that runs it.. They had Juan Williams on there commenting about it and he basically said that Obama's only option is to lie and distance himself from that church.

See? Change isn't always good.. Especially when you don't know what we're changing to. I've been trying to tell all these individuals on my college campus that I've come to affectionately call "Obama's Lemmings". It doesn't matter how little he really says or how he doesn't have a solid plan he can be forthright with, they just don't see it. They just think that since he is the "change" from the "evil empire" then that's who they should vote for. If they have half a brain and see reports like this one they will think twice. I think there's a better chance of the liberal media reporting this than the half of brain thing.

[Bob98SR5]

The word "Change" is the new "Xtreme". i swear, i just can't believe that more people don't delve deeper into the details. A candidate that promises "Change" is good enough for them.

[neliconcept]

we may just end up with white slavery (im only kidding here, dont kill me)

[fustercluck]

we may just end up with white slavery (im only kidding here, dont kill me)


Seems the extremists are not interested in white slaves....

http://youtube.com/watch?v=l--EmxXz4yA

Listen to it patiently and carefully. Imagine if this message were delivered by a charismatic leader of a growing movement.

[neliconcept]

yea ive seen that before.

one sided isnt it?

[gabe]

I am amazed that people still listen to the media now days, when they've been proven liars so many times...

And it's people like this Rev. that keep racism going in this country... If he would just keep his mouth shut and take advantage of all the benefits this country has to offer, then everything would be fine... but, come to think of it, he probably is benefitting way more by encouraging african americans to feel self pity and to blame everyone else for their problems... he gets to stand on his soap box and say whatever he wants, not only that, he also gets paid by the people who listen to him... I don't have anything against pastors or christians, I am a christian, I just hate it when people who have been placed in a position of authority, exploit that power for their own personal gain...

[oly884]

He's no different than a member of the KKK, neo-nazi, and so on. Simply another idiot that deserves to be thrown in the hole.

[calrockx]

I am going to looooove watching you guys squirm when Obama is president. :)

That minister is a jackass. So is Ferraro. So is Cunningham.

[waskillywabbit]

He's no different than a member of the KKK, neo-nazi, and so on. Simply another idiot that deserves to be thrown in the hole.


I could not agree more.
The problem is that he is an idiot with a platform...and lots of folks listening...including a candidate for President for over 20 years.

:flipoff:

[patrickryanb]

Yea, wow that racist dude is intense. It's kinda hard to get through. I agree with what the wabbit says, that dude is an idiot on a platform. His sort of racism is just as bad as the KKK. I think Obama is a great speaker and through that talent has captured many followers. I find it disturbing that Obama often refers to himself as black, or half black....but never does he say he is half white. The most disturbing thing is that whom ever the democrats elect, will more than likely win the office. McCain cannot compete with the two dem. options. Even more i have heard of a possible Clinton/Obama ticket. I wish people would quit playing the minority card, and just be an american, regardless of color or sex. It will be an interesting election for sure. I have no clue who to vote for. As with all politics is America, it seems like we end up voting for the lesser of evils.

[ecchamberlin]

I saw this also. It is disturbing to say the least. There are many who would agrue that he is not his minister but I say that is a tough sell. It would be different if it was a boss or co-worker. Your minister is someone who talks about morality and a system of beliefs though. By CHOOSING to associate yourself with that church and that leader of the church you associate yourself with the ideologies also.

I think this puts him in a very difficult position to talk his way out of. He needs to be asked about this. It would effect the discharge of his office as President and therefore is open game. Not to be asked to justify his choice of religion but his choice of association to an specific extremist pastor. Then it would beg the question that if he does not agree with this pastor's views, why not go to another church of the same faith?

Clinton, by suggesting that Oboma run on her ticket as VP can be hurt by this to, so she probably will not be the person to push him on this.

[Bob98SR5]

I am going to looooove watching you guys squirm when Obama is president. :)

That minister is a jackass. So is Ferraro. So is Cunningham.


Why would anyone squirm?

Personally, I am not going to squirm. I dont like him because he's alot like other politicians who speak well, promises alot, hypocritical, and never delivers. If the country votes him in, so be it. That's life, that's America.

[20005spd]

As with all politics is America, it seems like we end up voting for the lesser of evils.
you hit the nail on the head....i guess its still better than dictatorship...

[fustercluck]

I only squirm when the constitution is trampled and freedoms are lost. Why would anyone enjoy watching that?.....unless he/she is ideologically opposed to personal freedom.

[bamachem]

and so the lies begin.

he's distancing himself from his minister now, even though he has been a close friend and personal adviser during the campaign and the hate-mongering has been proven to have been occurring for at least two years.

http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/03/14/obama-calls-chicago-pastors-fiery-remarks-inflammatory-and-appalling/


Obama Calls Chicago Pastor's Statements Inflammatory and Appalling
by FOXNews.com
Friday, March 14, 2008
Border



Barack Obama speaks to reporters on a plane from Chicago to Washington Thursday. The next day he condemned, in full, controversial statements by his longtime Chicago pastor.

Barack Obama describes longtime pastor Jeremiah Wright Jr. as an æ–—ike an uncle and a spiritual mentor, but the presidential candidate rejected Wrightç—´ fiery anti-U.S. and politically divisive sermons after days of mounting pressure to do so.

Obama told FOX News Friday that he could no longer lay low as Wrightç—´ past sermons, where he condemned the United States as institutionally racist and blamed the government for HIV and the Sept. 11 attacks, were played in heavy rotation on national television.

"Once I saw them I had to be very clear about the fact that these are not statements that I am comfortable with," Obama said. "I reject them completely they are not ones that reflect my values or my ideals or Michelle's."

Obama called his remarks "inflammatory and appalling" in a written statement Friday.

Though Obama has known Wright for 20 years, he said the pastor has never been active in his campaign and that he is no longer on his African American Religious Leadership Committee.

Obama, in the interview Friday with FOX News Major Garrett, said he has been a member of the church since the early 1990s after working with the congregation as a community organizer on the south side of Chicago.

Obama married his wife Michelle at Wright's Trinity United Church of Christ, had his children baptized by Wright and donated money to the church, but he said he first learned of many of the pastor's controversial statements only when they were aired in the media in recent days.

None of these statements were ones I had heard myself personally in the pews, Obama told FOX News. Once I saw them I had to be very clear about the fact that these are not statements that I am comfortable with. I reject them completely they are not ones that reflect my values or my ideals.

He said the sermons now sparking controversy didn't resemble the sermons he remembers from Wright, which, Obama said, stuck to messages of faith, values and helping people in the community.

Obama's response came as critics called on the Illinois senator and Democratic presidential candidate to do more to distance himself from Wright, who, in a fiery sermon recorded and available on DVD, can be seen and heard saying three times: God damn America.

In his recorded sermons, he also questions America's role in the spread of the AIDS virus and suggests that the United States bore some responsibility for the Sept. 11, 2001, terror attacks.

Obama issued his more forceful statement against the sermons Friday afternoon.

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

A year ago, Wright defended his beliefs in an often contentious interview on FOX News Hannity & Colmes.

If you're not going to talk about theology in context, if you're not going to talk about liberation theology then you can't talk about the black value system, Wright said on the show's March 1, 2007, broadcast.

Wright said his teachings are based on black liberation theology, which he summed up as AÂ*fricans speaking for themselves.

Wake Forest University professor Terry Matthews, says in a lecture reprinted on the university's Web site that black liberation theology seeks to find a way to make the gospel relevant to black people who must struggle daily under the burden of white oppression.

Wright's supporters say his sermons accurately portray black America, and they contend his sermons are widely studied by theologians.

I've been at some of those sermons, the Rev. Dwight Hopkins, a member of the church, told FOX News. The majority of Wrights sermons speak to healing, he challenges the black community to be more responsible.

Wright delivered his final sermon last month and retired as leader of Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago.

Obama told FOX News he wouldn't have quit Wright's congregation if the pastor's more controversial statements were isolated, but if that became t��he tenor or tone on an ongoing basis of his sermons Obama said he would have quit.

Obviously they are ones that are from my perspective completely unacceptable and inexcusable, Obama said.

With the pastor retiring from the pulpit Obama said he doesn't see an issue in his family remaining part of the congregation.

If I thought that was the repeated tenor of the church then I wouldn't feel comfortable, but frankly that has not been my experience at Trinity United Church of Christ.

After the interview was broadcast Friday night on Hannity & Colmes, Ari Fleischer, former press secretary for President Bush, suggested on the show that the controversy and the timing of Obama's disavowal show him to be little more than a shrewd politician.

I think there's a reason Republicans I talk to are increasingly looking forward to running against Barack Obama, Fleischer said.

[dontdo_that]

Lol that youtube video was so great. I can't believe they aired this bull. "The problem on the planet is white people." "White People want to kill us." It sounds just like an extremely sarcastic joke, thats how ridiculous it is.

On another note, I want to explore the possibility that Obama does truly condemn his minister's points of view on America. What is the purpose of a minister? From my basic understanding, ministers generally provide guidance in finding faith in God. Perhaps it is possible to listen to your religious leader on topics of religion, but understand the fine line between legitimate religious preaching and brainless, opinionated rambling about how America is evil. Is it humanly impossible to accept or consider some information while knowing other information is bogus and just plain wrong, even if it comes from the same source?

In addition, the its not too far-fetched to consider that since Obama has been campaigning, the pastor has seen it as an outlet to spread his point of view by tagging Obama to himself which would in turn bring him media coverage. Unfortunately, there are individuals out there who will read the news articles provided here and agree with the pastor and perhaps take action. In such case, he has already accomplished what he wanted to.

[ecchamberlin]

Ned you make some very valid arguments there. It is possible. I don't think he agreed with him about his hateful and racist views. I do however think that he choose associate himself with this guy and by seeking his counsel in Obomas time of political need (Run for Senate and President) is judgmentally questionable. So the questions need to be asked.

Obama is very intelligent and extremely well spoken. If he can satisfactorily answer why he chose to seek this mans counsel when making his decision to run for Senate and the Presidency then that is the end of it IMO. It is just very hard to separate the "he was just my minister" point from his racist anti diversity views.

If Clinton does not, and I don't think she can, question him about this then you can bet that McCain will do just that.

There are no perfect candidates. Just too much spin by the time they reach this point in their careers. I guess you just have to ask yourself if things like this popping up are deal breaker for you if it is about your candidate. It will get much worse as we get closer. Although I do feel that if Oboma wins the Dem nomination and it is he and McCain in the election it will much more civil than if it were Clinton and McCain....IMHO

[ChickenLover]

If Clinton does not, and I don't think she can, question him about this then you can bet that McCain will do just that.


McCain doesn't have the stomach for it. As a matter of fact, he has already publicly defended Obama on this issue. If anyone is going to pounce, it will be the Clintons... In one way or another.

On a side note: Rasmussen is reporting that Obama's national lead dropped by 7 points overnight.

[Bob98SR5]

yes, i find it incredulous that obama did not know his minister's views on issues. i can't recall where i read it, but obama's most recent book's title was taken from one of said minister's sermons.

well, whatever. personally, id sure like to hear concrete plans from mr. obama---im still undecided as i dont like mccain too much either. if obama can articulate in concrete terms his plans for the war on terror (pulling troops out of iraq is NOT a plan), immigration, how he intends to keep the economy going, etc instead of this incessant motherf'g b.s "CHANGE, CHANGE, CHANGE" speeches, platitudes and MLK-esque crap, i'll listen and i may consider voting for him.

chuck: you wanna help me here?

[ecchamberlin]

Yeah I hear you guys. I am still undecided also. I would never vote for a Clinton(and not because she is a she) but still researching Obama and McCain.

[calrockx]

you've heard what i've heard, bob. from his speeches, to what i've read on his website, he's laid enough groundwork for me to support his stances on issues and support him as a candidate.

i admit tho, he's not perfect. and i even agree with some things clinton and mccain say, but still...obama is my guy for this election.

slam the "change" talk all you want, but besides being seemingly sincere in that commitment (yeah, a politician, i know), it's what americans want to hear and he's delivering what they want. i like how he's had a consistent message, while hillary tries a few different voices.

[Seanz0rz]

anyone remember the southpark where it was a choice between a piece of fecal matter and a feminine hygiene product?

thats they way i feel about this election. out of the 3 who are battling it out, none deserve my vote. this is the first election i get to vote in (missed 04 by days) and i get to chose between a human waste and a bag full of vinegar and water. great. i understand that you are "suppose to" (i have huge issue with this) vote for the candidate who is closest to your beliefs. none of these guys do, save for ron paul, and he was promptly crushed. i even took serious issue with things that ron paul stood for, but it was things i valued less than some others which are very important to me. i have been a liberal/democrat all my life until the last couple years when i have watched the dems become weaker and weaker. i hate republicans, i think they are evil, but at least they have the balls to do what they want, right or not. dems dont even have the balls to stand up for what they think is right, which might even be worse than being evil.

no intentions to hurt any one's feelings or the like, just how i feel. what ever party affiliation you have, im sure you are a great person behind it. i simply wish there were no party lines, and people voted for whomever they thought best fit for the job. instead people vote certain ways based solely on party affiliation. what the hell is wrong with you people?

and this concludes my rant for this evening. stay tuned for my rant on finals, crazy girlfriends, and crazy family members next week!

[expatoz]

Ned's post is the most accurate and balanced so far.

First, if you believe in the sound bytes and articles from any media in isolation, you are a fool. Obama, like any intelligent person, will listen to many different points of view. Some will be agreed upon, some will be simply "taken in" and stored as a point of view, a view that you might not subscribe to. Have YOU not got any friends who you care about, but they say things at times you would not subscribe to yourself?

Second, if you believe the people of color of this country need to get off their high horse and just get on with making the best of things, you are two times a fool. The white majority of this country (of which I am) have no idea what it is like to live in another color skin. Racism is rife, period! The anger and hate from people of color is justified in this and many other countries (including my own - Australia). White people have occupied land held by others for lifetimes. White people demand people of color fit in to the white culture, and believe ignorantly that this is a land of opportunity for anyone, regardless of color, race, religion, sexual identity...BS!

Thirdly, Obama's success to date is a HUGH reflection on the desire of many Americans of the NEED for change. Any Change. How could anyone justly vote John Mc, Hillary (or Bush :rofl:) for President with the problems this country faces? Seriously! The only way I could see anyone voting for Hillary is if you wanted two presidents running the country...Hillary and Bill. I have a lot of time for Bill, but even he is not the right person for the job now.

My fear is that Obama gets elected to president, struggles to meet the demands of ever increasingly problematic foreign and local policy, gets accused of "See, a Black man failed as president", and that he becomes a target for assassination by a white extremist (group or person), at which point you watch the brick house tumble like a pack of cards as civil war looms its head in reaction to blame for the assassination.

To end my rant :clap: :clap: :clap: I suggest any white person look at themselves and think carefully about how they came to be where they are today (white privilege). It is telling that many of us are happy to live on the backs of slavery, war, racism, power, money and fear. :confused: :chill:

[calrockx]

and that he becomes a target for assassination by a white extremist (group or person),


Interestingly, on that note, some white supremacists don't get as riled up over Obama as you'd expect. As expressed by even David Duke...



All this contorted rationalization suggests that white supremacists feel compelled to explain away the confounding notion of an immensely gifted and appealing black man. Yet it also reflects the fact that, unlike Jesse Jackson, Obama simply lacks certain cultural signifiers--not to mention an urban-centric policy agenda--that would viscerally threaten racist whites obsessed with maintaining "white rights," ending affirmative action, and cutting off nearly all non-European immigration.

But there may be one more factor at work: hatred overload. It's a testament of sorts to Hillary Clinton that, by virtue of her cartoonish image as a leftist man-hating shrew, she manages to arouse more vitriol among white supremacists than a black man. Meanwhile, white racists absolutely despise John McCain for his support of George W. Bush's immigration reform plan, which they view as a dire threat to America's European-based culture. "I don't think Obama will be any more negative for the United States than Hillary or John McCain," explains Duke. "In fact," he added, "we probably have less preference for a European like a John McCain or a Hillary who has betrayed our interests, our heritage, our rights."

[ecchamberlin]

That is interesting Charles. I would not have guessed that as his position on the mater. Thanks

Sean I think things may be being a bit over simplified. Like you I do not vote party lines as I agree that it is sheepish and lazy. However, I don't think that the GOP is "evil". That sounds a bit Pres Bush'ish as fare as labeling stuff. I do not believe that the Rep Party as a whole is out to do harm which would be considered intent and therefore evil.

This is a great thread and I hope it can stay on track as it has so far...

[Seanz0rz]

i should clarify, as that post was very late at night. haha. when i say evil, i mean that they do not have the interests of the people in mind when making decisions, only the interests of themselves and others who influence them greatly. im not saying they are necessarily getting paid off for certain things (though i do think that does happen, alot more than we think it does) but they are only concerned with looking good and furthering their career.

in fairness, the dems are just as evil as the republicans, if not more so, since they claim to be the party affiliated with the lower classes.

[fustercluck]

Obama Attended Hate America Sermon

Sunday, March 16, 2008 7:14 PM

By: Ronald Kessler Article Font Size




Obama claims he was completely unaware that the Reverend Wrightç—´ trademark preaching style at the Trinity United Church of Christ targeted Ã¥Å*ªhite America.

Contrary to Senator Barack Obamaç—´ claim that he never heard his pastor Jeremiah A. Wright, Jr. preach hatred of America, Obama was in the pews last July 22 when the minister blamed the Ã¥Å*ªhite arrogance of Americaç—´ Caucasian majority for the worldç—´ suffering, especially the oppression of blacks.


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


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


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


If Obamaç—´ claims are true that he was completely unaware that Wrightç—´ trademark preaching style at the Trinity United Church of Christ has targeted Ã¥Å*ªhite America and Israel, he would have been one of the few people in Chicago to be so uninformed. Wrightç—´ reputation for spewing hate is well known.


In fact, Obama was present in the South Side Chicago church on July 22 last year when Jim Davis, a freelance correspondent for Newsmax, attended services along with Obama. [See: 念bama痴 Church: Cauldron of Division.脳


In his sermon that day, Wright tore into America, referring to the å¡«nited States of White America and lacing his sermon with expletives as Obama listened. Hearing Wrightç—´ attacks on his own country, Obama had the opportunity to walk out, but Davis said the senator sat in his pew and nodded in agreement.


Addressing the Iraq war, Wright thundered, 添oung African-American men were 電ying for nothing. The 妬llegal war, he shouted, was 澱ased on Bush痴 lies and is being �ought for oil money.


Obama痴 most famous celebrity backer, Oprah Winfrey began attending Wright痴 church in 1984. Last year, Newsmax magazine reported that Winfrey abruptly stopped attending years ago, and suggested that she did so to distance herself from Wright痴 inflammatory rhetoric. She soon found herself a target of Wright, who excoriated her for having broken with �raditional faith.


The Reverend Wright痴 anti-white theology that Senator Obama expressed surprise over is evident on the church痴 website. The site says the congregation subscribes to what it calls the Black Value System, which is described as a disavowal of 登ur racist competitive society and the pursuit of �iddle-classness. That is defined as a way for American society to 都nare blacks rather than 徒illing them off directly or �lacing them in concentration camps, just as the country structures 殿n economic environment that induces captive youth to fill the jails and prisons.


的n the 21st century, white America got a wake-up call after 9/11/01, Wright wrote in the church-affiliated magazine Trumpet four years after the attacks. 展hite America and the western world came to realize that people of color had not gone away, faded into the woodwork or just 租isappeared as the Great White West kept on its merry way of ignoring black concerns.



The Relationship Unravels


Senator Obama now is attempting to minimize his long and close relationship with the controversial minister.

On Friday, John McCainç—´ campaign distributed a Wall Street Journal op-ed å¾¹bama and the Minister written under my byline based on my reporting for Newsmax going back to early January of this year.


The op-ed included details of a sermon Wright gave at Howard University blaming America for starting the AIDS virus, training professional killers, importing drugs, shamelessly supporting Israel, and creating a racist society that would never elect a black man as president. [See: 徹bama痴 Minister痴 Hatred of America.脳


Obama痴 campaign quickly responded to the Wall Street Journal op-ed, posting a statement on the Huffington Post. In his statement, Obama acknowledged that some of Wright痴 statements have been 妬nflammatory and appalling.


Saying he strongly condemns Wrightç—´ comments, Obama continued, çš„ categorically denounce any statement that disparages our great country or serves to divide us from our allies. I also believe that words that degrade individuals have no place in our public dialogue, whether itç—´ on the campaign stump or in the pulpit. In sum, I reject outright the statements by Rev. Wright that are at issue. [emphasis added]


Again, Obama moved to narrowly distance himself from specific comments Wright had made, while still praising his minister in recent interviews for leading him to Jesus and preaching a 都ocial gospel.


Obama went on to claim that he first learned about Wrightç—´ controversial statements when he began his presidential campaign. But this assertion conflicts with the fact that just before Obamaç—´ nationally televised campaign kickoff rally on Feb. 10, 2007, the candidate disinvited Wright from giving the public invocation.


At the time, Wright explained: 展hen [Obama痴] enemies find out that in 1984 I went to Tripoli to visit Col. Muammar el-Qaddafi with Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan, 殿 lot of his Jewish support will dry up quicker than a snowball in hell.


According to Wright, Obama then told him, ?You can get kind of rough in the sermons, so what we致e decided is that it痴 best for you not to be out there in public.' Still, Obama and his family prayed privately with Wright just before the presidential announcement.


Apparently Obama never foresaw Wright痴 sermons making national television or becoming a sensation on YouTube. But lending graphic detail to the saga, ABC News and other networks began running a 2003 sermon in which Wright said, 典he government gives them the drugs, builds bigger prisons, passes a three-strike law and then wants us to sing 賎od Bless America. No, no, no, God damn America, that痴 in the Bible, for killing innocent people ... God damn America for treating our citizens as less than human. God damn America for as long as she acts like she is God and she is supreme. [Click Here to see video]


Obama has described Wright as a sounding board and mentor. Wright is one of the first people Obama thanked after his election to the Senate in 2004. Obama consulted Wright before deciding to run for president. The title of Obamaç—´ bestseller å…¸he Audacity of Hope comes from one of Wrightç—´ sermons. Obamaç—´ æ·»es We Can! slogan is one of Wrightç—´ exhortations.


Apologists for Wright have said that what he says is normal in black churches, and many blacks claim such preaching cannot be understood by whites.


çš„f youæ±e black, itç—´ hard to say what you truly think and not upset white people, the New York Times quoted James Cone as saying. Cone is a professor at Union Theological Seminary and the father of what is known as black liberation theology.


But Juan Williams, a Fox News commentator and author of 摘nough: The Phony Leaders, Dead-End Movements, and Culture of Failure That Are Undermining Black America, tells Newsmax that Wright痴 sermons reflect �he victim mindset that is so self-defeating in the black community and one that is played on by weak black leadership that chooses to have black people identified as victims rather than inspiring them as people who have overcome. In posing as victims, they say the most prejudiced and vicious things, not only about whites but about America. They call it theology. In fact, it痴 nothing but bigotry.


In failing to condemn Wright himself and claiming that he was unaware of the preacherç—´ hate-filled speech, Obama is continuing a longstanding pattern.


Obama often refers to Wright as being "like an old uncle, who sometimes says things I don't agree with." Wright is not Obamaç—´ ç¥ncle a person born into a blood relationship but a man he has cultivated for decades as a close friend, mentor and adviser.


After Newsmax broke the story on Jan. 14 that Wrightç—´ church gave an award to Louis Farrakhan in December for lifetime achievement, Obama again sought to denounce his ministerç—´ action without criticizing Wright himself.


Like Wright, Farrakhan has repeatedly made hate-filled statements targeting Jews (calling Judaism a åµutter religion?, whites, America, and homosexuals. He has called whites æ¾±lue-eyed devils and the 殿nti-Christ. He has described Jews as æ¾±loodsuckers who control the government, the media, and some black organizations.


After the Newsmax story, Obama issued a statement purportedly addressing the issue.


"I decry racism and anti-Semitism in every form and strongly condemn the anti-Semitic statements made by Minister Farrakhan," Obama said.


Again, Obama was careful not to condemn Farrakhan himself or Wright who had spoken adoringly of Farrakhan and put their church behind the award to the controversial Nation of Islam leader.


展hen Minister Farrakhan speaks, black America listens, Trumpet quoted Wright as saying. 滴is depth on analysis [sic] when it comes to the racial ills of this nation is astounding and eye-opening. He brings a perspective that is helpful and honest.


Obama adroitly said, çš„ assume that Trumpet magazine made its own decision to honor Farrakhan based on his efforts to rehabilitate ex-offenders, but it is not a decision with which I agree.


In fact, Trumpet is published by Wrightç—´ church using the churchç—´ offices. Wrightç—´ daughters serve as publisher and executive editor.


Having gotten away with sidestepping Wrightç—´ adoring comments about Farrakhan, Obama told Jewish leaders flatly in Cleveland on Jan. 24 that the award was because of Farrakhanç—´ work with ex-offenders. To date, no news outlet has pointed out that Obamaç—´ claim is false.


Obama went on to explain away Wrightç—´ anti-Zionist statements as being rooted in his anger over the Jewish stateç—´ support for South Africa under its previous policy of apartheid. As with his claim that the award to Farrakhan was made because of his work with ex-offenders, Obama made that up. Wrightç—´ statements denouncing Israel have not been qualified in any way.


On Fox News Hannity & Colmes on Saturday, Obama said he would have quit the church if he had �epeatedly been present when Wright made inflammatory statements. He was not asked why he did not quit the church when it gave an award to Farrakhan.


Having considered Wright a friend and mentor for two decades, Obama now often mentions that his pastor recently retired. Wright suggested to the New York Times last year that he and Obama might have to do something of a distancing act in the run up to the election.


"If Barack gets past the primary, he might have to publicly distance himself from me," Wright was quoted by The New York Times. "I said it to Barack personally, and he said, å¡‘eah, that might have to happen.'"





Ronald Kessler is chief Washington correspondent of Newsmax.com. View his previous reports and get his dispatches sent to you free via e-mail. Go here now.








ｩ 2008 Newsmax. All rights reserved.

http://newsmax.com/kessler/Obama_hate_America_sermon/2008/03/16/80870.html

[expatoz]

Well, I'd be curious to hear reaction to Obama's speech today, both from people here and the general US public. I think he did an excellent job not distancing himself completely and also identifying that there are reasons for the opinions of Wright.

[fustercluck]

Well he denounced the message but stopped short of excommunicating himself from the source; A hollow attempt designed to quell righteous indignation. Those who were already in the tank for him, remain so. Those who did not trust him, believe thier suspicions confirmed by his admission of previously denied behavior and endorsements. Those on the fence will likely keep their finger in the air and wait to see what everyone else does, as usual.

As is demonstrated in every day life, human nature is to congregate with those who most resemble ourselves whether that be ideologically, physically, emotionally, politically or some intersection/subset of those. I think Obama either didn't have the courage or judgement to depart from the presence of evil teaching, or he wasn't sentient/aware enough of his surroundings to avoid such influences (which have tainted his judgement and perspectives RE: his recent book content), regardless, as such, he is unfit to hold the most powerful office in the land. I also think he doesn't respect or understand the constitution. As such, personal freedom and responsibility, the building blocks of a viable society, are in jeopardy if he assumes the position of commander in chief.

Some say that the comments of his pastor (traditionally, and without exception, a driving influence in the parishioners' ideology and code of conduct) should not stain the character of Obama since he wasn't in the pews when it was said. Well, these comments are more than just an anomolous event or a momentary lapse of judgement. These sermons were multiple and packaged for sale in the church store. They were documented and proudly offered for profit. How did Obama, a man of considerable note and understanding, miss these details for 20 years? And even if he did, why wouldn't he remove himself from his pastor's influence even now? What must his pastor do or say that would rise to the level where Obama would finally say that Reverend Wright has finally stained him? Would he have to actually begin gassing Jews? Maybe cause a riot? Or would he have gone too far if his sermons ultimately moivated a vengeful slaying of whitey?

[Bob98SR5]

Mark,

i heard the speech. I can understand why people are impressed with him. He is extremely well spoken, articulate, understands how to tailor the message to the audience...which may or may not be a reflection of his ability, but more of his speech writer.

First, the positives: I too feel that institutional racism should be eliminated, but he said that even in one administration (if he were to become president), it would probably not be eradicated. but the fact that he won in the whitest of whitest states says that many americans are ready for a ....change (gnashing teeth). that was probably the most *realistic* statement that was the most memorable statement. its that kind of realism that i can identify with and what makes me want to listen to more. if i heard more of that honest admonition, i would take him more seriously.

Also, i liked his message that we need to look beyond race and work with each other to accomplish change in america. but then he took the speech into another direction which was a mea culpa for Wright's hateful words. Had he ended the speech up above at the point of denouncing Wright, that wouldve been good for me and probably wouldve been better for him. But instead, it turned into a direction that I found very questionable excuses and rationalizations of his words.

yes, there were definite huge b.s. moments. he said that he has been with this church for 20 years including being married, having his kids baptized, etc by him. he did admit to hearing views that he disagreed with, but later in his speech, said that he never heard derogatory statements made about other races. contradictory. moreover, this is what angered me the most because its typical softening of the issue. from his speech he said:

"I have already condemned, in unequivocal terms, the statements of Reverend Wright that have caused such controversy. For some, nagging questions remain. 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. Did I strongly disagree with many of his political views? Absolutely just as I知 sure many of you have heard remarks from your pastors, priests, or rabbis with which you strongly disagreed."

how could you still align yourself with this guy after he said that 9/11 was our hiroshima? or i cant recall his exact words, but it was "the chickens coming home to roost". it would be one thing to say 'I have serious issues with the war", but to sh#t on the memory and implicate those who died in the twin towers and equivocate it and minimize it by saying "he was a fierce critic...?" screw that, that's just wrong and political b.s. talk. in addition, the last sentence, he again tries to soften the blow by saying "im sure your pastor or rabbi has said things you dont agree with...". again, if my pastor said the same things about black people and the death of those in the twin towers as our fault, i would make a bee line out of that church.

the opinions of Wright are those of a pastor that i would not identify with, even if there were deep seated, hurtful roots behind them. these are not words of a religious leader who wants to heal. its demagogery, hateful, spiteful, and if it had been a white pastor, he'd find his way out of the race really fast. but because obama is (half) black, he gets a pass.

The other thing that I was bothered by is the whole black victimization thing. Mark in your post, we will definitely disagree here. Why is it that new immigrants, who speak little or no English, do not know the US cultural, political, etc system like decades of blacks have, still fault slavery as the source of their economic misery? I can speak for my family: my mom and dad faced the same discrimination when they came to this country. i can tell you how many times myself i had been turned down for jobs because of (perceieved, but never could i prove) what i felt was racism. but we persevered. i have two black co-workers who heard this speech and said "that the jesse talk again" (though they will still vote for obama, they said). blacks, like any group in ths country, can succeed. ive had black classmates who have succeeeded and who have f'd around throughout my schooling here. personally, i think it comes down to how the kid is raised and how the family inculcates the importance of education.

overall, the direction of the speech got worse for me. it became 'the US is still a discriminatory country'. sure, its there, but i dont think that it shoudl be used as a crutch to justify Wright's shameful words. and to the point, i cannot believe a politician like Obama did not think of distancing himself from Wright earlier. His advisors surely did: http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0308/9069.html

I just found the speech disingenuous. He is just now vehemently denouncing Wright now. 20 years of being part of his church and after he's called to the mat about it because he lost 7 percentage points the next day after the story aired? Knowing well he said 9/11 was our fault? A webpage that had a very Fahrakan like view of white people, which was taken down days after the story aired? Justifying all of this because whitey persecuted them? What happens when religious figures forget the words forgiveness and preaches hatred? That is why i found the speech disingenuous and why i did not find it a true repudiation of Wright and his hatred for white people and America. He shouldve ditched him years ago.

[fustercluck]

Oprah had the character to ditch him....


Edit: Mrs Fuster just reminded me that I've been going to the same church for years, though I spend most of that time nodding off or shedding all pretense and outright snoring. I stil know exactly where my bishop's ideals are and if he preached even a fraction of what Obama's pastor did, I hear about it within days....unless such sputum were the norm...which Obama claims was not. Hmmmmm.

I think Obama agrees with Wright's perspectives.....or he would have left along time ago. Who would let Charles Manson remain a mentor because he did some good things?

[Bob98SR5]

here's the speech on one page:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/18/us/politics/18text-obama.html?_r=1&bl=&ei=5087&en=159a0f4776d53b1c&ex=1205985600&pagewanted=all

[Bob98SR5]

I think Obama agrees with Wright's perspectives.....or he would have left along time ago.


Yes, and therein lies the rub I had with the (first) repudiation and then (second and main part of the speech) the justification/rationalization. that said, i will keep a keen eye and ear on what he has to say b/c this issue does not disqualify him from my candidate pool.

and speaking of candidate pool, i find this round of survivors no better than the last 3 election cycles. mabye i'll vote for gary coleman this year

[fustercluck]

Of itself, I'd say you're right, Bob. But there is the matter of his lack of understanding of the constitution and personal freedom vs. responsibility. He is a socialist. Together with what I believe is a fundamental disrespect for the founding principes of this nation, I think he is unfit to lead. We see into his heart by virtue of those with whom he identifies.

Does anyone think this pastor felt such hate and disdain for America only during those sermons? I think he exposed the rot within that continues to this day. As a mentor to the president of the united states, he could be another Rasputin. Whispering poisonous ideologies and subversive policies into the ear of the most powerful man in the nation.....

UNFIT!!!!

http://www.the-reel-mccoy.com/movies/2002/images/TheTwoTowers_WormtongueAndKingTheoden.jpg

[calrockx]

I like what Obama said. He said what I wanted to hear.

I like that he didn't do the "politically safe thing" and completely excommunicate himelf from Wright and move on.

He has completely denounced Wright's controversial views.


I have already condemned, in unequivocal terms, the statements of Reverend Wright that have caused such controversy...Did I strongly disagree with many of his political views? Absolutely.

But he didn't forget the postive/helpful things that guys passed to him, or that this guy helped him find the Church.



But the truth is, that isn稚 all that I know of the man. The man I met more than twenty years ago is a man who helped introduce me to my Christian faith, a man who spoke to me about our obligations to love one another; to care for the sick and lift up the poor. He is a man who served his country as a U.S. Marine; who has studied and lectured at some of the finest universities and seminaries in the country, and who for over thirty years led a church that serves the community by doing God痴 work here on Earth by housing the homeless, ministering to the needy, providing day care services and scholarships and prison ministries, and reaching out to those suffering from HIV/AIDS.


Back when I used to go to Church, the priests said some crazy ish, but that wasn't enough to make me storm out the room. (I no longer go cause religion isn't for me). You can associate with someone without adopting their views.

At least we're over the whole "Is he Muslim?" deal.

I think it's punk rock that he disowned that guy's stupid remarks but didn't disown him completely, considering all the good Wright has done for him, in the face of what's politically easy. Sure it didn't appease everyone, but he did what he thought was right.

I don't thnk he justified Wright's words, just helped some understand what led to them. I can't identify with those causes, nor does it excuse the statements, but it's gives a more complete picture to the situation. "Obama demanded that black anger make an allowance for white anxiety and that white resentment make a place for black grievance." Yes I'd have liked to have seen Obama deal with this pastor issue earlier, but considering how things went down, I think he managed it well.



The profound mistake of Reverend Wright’s sermons is not that he spoke about racism in our society. It’s that he spoke as if our society was static; as if no progress has been made; as if this country...is still irrevocably bound to a tragic past.


I don't think Wright hates America. He just hates some things that have gone on in America, and didn't express those thoughts too smoothly. But to think Obama has it out for the US? Rubbish.

So...how about McCain-associated Rev. John Hagee. Not the same situation I know but that guys said some pretty wacky things. And saying 9/11 was the "chickens coming home to roost" is no more retarded than the conservative preachers saying 9/11 was divine "punishment" for abortion, feminism, or that Katrina was punishment for gay rights.

[dontdo_that]

Sort of irrelevant, sorry but is anyone else having trouble viewing the article posts by fustercluck? theres all kinds of weird symbols in places of letters?

I have spend some time reading Obama's website and have found that to be more informative that many media publications on him in terms of actual plans and courses of action (not just change change change). The bottom line is, these days its so difficult to tell who is really going to execute the concrete details they provide about certain issues without spending huge amounts of time reading/researching/listening, and then spending more time criticizing each source of information you just referenced. I don't have the time for it. Although off topic, Obama is the better candidate for me because he believes strongly in science and technology, which is my field of work and what I believe to be the future of mankind whether the USA keeps up or is left behind.

This is a great discussion so far and its always important to critique and maintain a healthy suspicion of candidates. McCain is so damn old, I don't think hes fit for president! JK :)

[Bob98SR5]

Sort of irrelevant, sorry but is anyone else having trouble viewing the article posts by fustercluck? theres all kinds of weird symbols in places of letters?

I have spend some time reading Obama's website and have found that to be more informative that many media publications on him in terms of actual plans and courses of action (not just change change change). The bottom line is, these days its so difficult to tell who is really going to execute the concrete details they provide about certain issues without spending huge amounts of time reading/researching/listening, and then spending more time criticizing each source of information you just referenced. I don't have the time for it. Although off topic, Obama is the better candidate for me because he believes strongly in science and technology, which is my field of work and what I believe to be the future of mankind whether the USA keeps up or is left behind.

This is a great discussion so far and its always important to critique and maintain a healthy suspicion of candidates. McCain is so damn old, I don't think hes fit for president! JK :)



Ned,

What you said about it being difficult to determine who will execute vs what the candidates promise is exactly why im going ot research all of these candidated very closely. in business and in life, i am always weary of the person who promises too much. i have always been disappointed, not by the expectation that was set, but by the character of a person who promises so much and never delivers. thats my general impression of obama, especially being a senator for such a short time. it would not be difficult to examine his voting record and to see if he has been an effective agent of change in his senate district or not. among other things, i look for consistency and ability to deliver. to date, like presdient bush was fairly criticized for, i have not heard of great accomplishments by obama in his very, very short political career.

[dontdo_that]

Thats a good idea Bob and I entirely agree with your course of action. When issues like this present themselves they can be useful aids in determining and better understanding the character of a candidate, but as always, the aim of the media is often to create buzz. Its important that sometimes we take news that is placed before us with a grain of salt. didn't mean to stray off topic but it seems like we have a few things going on in this discussion.

[Bob98SR5]

For those of you who are interested in a good website to search a politician's background and voting record, one of the sites I like is called Project Smart Vote at http://www.votesmart.org/

To make it easy for everyone:

Obama
http://www.votesmart.org/bio.php?can_id=9490

Hillary
http://www.votesmart.org/bio.php?can_id=55463

McCain
http://www.votesmart.org/bio.php?can_id=53270

I highly encourage everyone to take time to vote based on prior history and facts. Can the candidate do what they say they will do? Have they been effective? Do they have a history of flipping on issues? I'm sure everyone has their own hot button issues so explore. To my knowledge, this website like factcheck.org, is largely apolitical.

Bob

[dontdo_that]

Thanks Bob! Great website. Although I have spent several hours reading up on voting records at senate.gov, its really time consuming as I find myself reading the actual legislation that senators are voting on (which is long and really.. fancily worded and hard for dumb people like me to understand).

Although this discussion has taken a slight turn off of the original topic, I believe it is warranted as fustercluck's original post serves to remind us all how important it is to thoroughly investigate and critique even those we come to trust the most (or more so than others).

[expatoz]

Together with what I believe is a fundamental disrespect for the founding principes of this nation...


You mean the principles of the white people who came to this country, stood on the aboriginal people, bought slavery onto this land, disregarded any ownership of the original peoples', and made their own laws upn which all people would HAVE to abide...boy are you being blinded by white history or what?

I would love to introduce you guys to a documentary some 14 years old now, called "The Fear of Color". It is truely an amazing and possibly life changing perspective of people of color in America and the challenge a white american posed to them in helping him to understand it's not just about working hard...Bob, do you really believe that there is equal and proportional representation by non-whites in the business or politcal sector presently? Do you believe (possibly) it is an equal playing field (I think you don't because you allude to some or your own racially negative experiences).

Here's the rub from my view...people of color have had to be subservient, polite and agreeable to get along in this white culture that they find themselves today. If they do not, people pull out the color card and deem them unsuitable for any positions of power or control. They face daily discrimination simply because of the color of their skin, a discrimination that white people do have to face because its their world. By the nature of my work as an educator I have daily face time with many people of color. I hear it regularly when I ask, that it is difficult for them to be treated equally simply because of implied (associated) stereotypes. The guy who is our maintainence man at school is Latino. He is a salt oif the earth guy, very reserved, respectful and gentle. He owns (given to him) an old Cadilliac that an elderly past parent of the school donated to him. He gets pulled over every month by police to check his legal status. He was born here, right in Studio City, 32 years ago! Man, its deep out there. When he and I go down the road for lunch together, its uncomfortable. People look at him and I feel the gazes.

Where am i leading with this? I think that Wright may not be well versed in speaking in ways that meet the dominant culture of this country as it stands today. But like many have said, you are free to take it or leave it. As a white person you have that freedom. As a person of color, you may understand the vitriol (Sp) of Wright, be it somewhat ill expressed?? It's time for people of color to stop being polite and meeting the dominant cultures demands. Yes I am swinging to socialism in some form. Without us all being more equal (which it will never be) we will never move forward as a civilization. Hell, things are crumbling - the foreign relations, financial structure and family cohesiveness is falling apart at a rapid rate, just like the environment.

Good discussion. Wish I had more time to post what i really think, LOL.

Thanks
Mark

PS - I do apologize if I am taking this somewhat off topic, but I think much of what is being said here is fundamental to making good decisions, both political and otherwise, in the future.

[oly884]

Together with what I believe is a fundamental disrespect for the founding principes of this nation...


You mean the principles of the white people who came to this country, stood on the aboriginal people, bought slavery onto this land, disregarded any ownership of the original peoples', and made their own laws upn which all people would HAVE to abide...boy are you being blinded by white history or what?

Maybe I'm wrong, but I didn't see anything regarding race in the Constitution. Please point out the 'white history' in the constitution.



Where am i leading with this? I think that Wright may not be well versed in speaking in ways that meet the dominant culture of this country as it stands today. But like many have said, you are free to take it or leave it. As a white person you have that freedom. As a person of color, you may understand the vitriol (Sp) of Wright, be it somewhat ill expressed?? It's time for people of color to stop being polite and meeting the dominant cultures demands. Yes I am swinging to socialism in some form. Without us all being more equal (which it will never be) we will never move forward as a civilization. Hell, things are crumbling - the foreign relations, financial structure and family cohesiveness is falling apart at a rapid rate, just like the environment.

It is time for people of color to stop being polite and meeting the dominate culture demands? What exactly are you trying to say?

It is clear that you are judging people by the color of their skin, white people that is. I don't think anyone should be judged by the color of their skin, but by the content of their character.

As for the nice socialist comment, do you honestly think forcing people to be equal will solve problems or create more? What's your thoughts on it? Do you want to see people all making the same amount of money? Or force companies to hire a certain number of blacks, latinos, etc (regardless of whether they are qualified)?

[fustercluck]

Expat, where did the original occupants of this continent get this land? Who says it was theirs exclusively?

What is the difference between 'equality' and 'egalitarianism'?

There is no doubt people of all races were mistreated here as have been historically around the globe. You distort the image of man's inhumanity to man to you political advantage. My maternal ancestors were Cherokee. Most of them were slaughtered by the wave of Europeans who immigrated here and brought with them the barbaric traditions of Europe. I think it has taken generations of social evolution and refinement to evicerate the brutality from the general population. We are not the society we were by virtue of the personal edification afforded us by the constitution and the freedoms it recognizes.

The behaviors and attitudes displayed by Obama's preacher are more indicative of a return to barbarism, than to peaceful live and let live. I think that is a clear indication of a gangrenous infection caused by the unwillingness to heal....to forgive the tresspasses of others and emerge from adversity steeled against the tempests of life. If this pastor were truly Christian, there would be genuine forgiveness and submission to consequence. I think his judgement has been clouded by anger and hate. I think he has poisoned the members of that church to the extent that they were active....in Obama's case, that is twenty years of venom.

[Bob98SR5]

Do you think this is a temporary blip in Obama's numbers or do think this will be his version of Howard Dean's Scream and ultimately doom his presidential aspirations?
Source: http://primebuzz.kcstar.com/?q=node/10525


Is Jeremiah Wright affecting Obama's poll numbers?
Updated at 9:30 p.m.

Sen. Barack Obama hit 50 percent to Hillary Clinton's 44 percent last week in Gallup's daily tracking poll. It was the largest advantage either contestant has had in the race since late February, according to Gallup.

Then Pastor-Gate went viral on Friday. And Obama's numbers have been steadily declining (while his negatives have ticked up). And today Gallup says Clinton is leading 47 percent to Obama's 45 percent. While not statistically significant, Clinton's two percentage point advantage in today's report is a notable shift from last week, the pollster says.

A separate pollster, Rasmussen, also finds the controversy is hurting Obama. And offers a jaw-dropping statistic. Only 8 percent of Americans have a favorable opinion of Obama pastor Jeremiah Wright.

The pollster also found that most voters, 56 percent, said Wright's comments (which included damning America) made them less likely to vote for Obama. The number includes 44 percent of Democrats.

Two-thirds of voters said they had heard about Wright and the controversy. (That prompted Bill O'Reilly to go off on his radio show this afternoon about how could a third of Americans be unaware of this issue. The Obama campaign is probably grateful that it's a third.)

Here's some solace for the Obama campaign and ammunition for the Clinton campaign via a USA Today poll since the survey was done this weekend. Both lead John McCain but Clinton is above 50 percent at 51 percent to McCain's 46 percent. McCain is closer to Obama with Obama at 49 percent and McCain at 47 percent. The two Democrats have overtaken McCain since the last survey in February by USA Today. (Other polls show McCain leading or tied).

Kate O'Beirne over at The Corner on NationalReview.com offered one of the most hilarious comments on the brouhaha. She said Michelle Obama should have included "nodding off during sermons" along with morning breath and smelly socks during her list of her hubby's faults.

Update: NBC's respected Chuck Todd said tonight, "This is potent" for Obama and he needs to hit a home run in his speech Tuesday in Philadelphia. He said it will be a week or so before the full implications of the Wright controversy will be known on Obama's poll numbers.

Do you agree with Todd's assessment?

**********


Personally, i think Obama will weather this storm unless there's nothing else unsavory for the press to latch onto. But like the article said, some people are less likely to vote for him now. This definitely has tinged my opinion of Obama and it has validated alot of the character issues i have with him as being "just another politician" who cannot be honest enough to say he messed up and move onto the important issues

Mark: i'll comment on your post later.

[fustercluck]

Obama blew it


What the candidate should have said about race.
By Michael Meyers
March 20, 2008
Tim Rutten's column, "Obama's Lincoln moment" and The Times editorial, "Obama on race" both miss the mark.

In my considered judgment as a race and civil rights specialist, I would say that Barack Obama's "momentous" speech on race settled on merely "explaining" so-called racial differences between blacks and whites -- and in so doing amplified deep-seated racial tensions and divisions. Instead of giving us a polarizing treatise on the "black experience," Obama should have reiterated the theme that has brought so many to his campaign: That race ain't what it used to be in America.


He should have presented us a pathway out of our racial boxes and a road map for new thinking about race. He should have depicted his minister, the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr., as a symbol of the dysfunctional angry men who are stuck in the past and who must yield to a new generation of color-blind, hopeful Americans and to a new global economy in which we will look on our neighbors' skin color no differently than how we look on their eye color.

In fact, I'd say that considering the nation's undivided attention to this all-important speech, which gave him an unrivaled opportunity to lift us out of racial and racist thinking, Obama blew it.

I waited in vain for our hybrid presidential candidate to speak the simple truth that there is no such thing as "race," that we all belong to the same race -- the human race. I waited for him to mesmerize us with a singular and focused appeal to hold all candidates to the same standards no matter their race or their sex or their age. But instead Obama gave us a full measure of racial rhetoric about how some of us with an "untrained ear" -- meaning whites and Asians and Latinos -- don't understand and can't relate to the so-called black experience.

Well, I am black, and I can't relate to a "black experience" that shields and explains old-style black ministers who rant and rave about supposed racial differences and about how America ought to be damned. I long ago broke away from all associations and churches that preached the gospel of hate and ethnic divisiveness -- including canceling my membership in 100 Black Men of America Inc., when they refused my motion to admit women and whites. They still don't. I was not going to stay in any group that assigned status or privileges of membership based solely on race or gender.

We and our leaders -- especially our candidates for the highest office in the land -- must repudiate all forms of racial idiocy and sexism, and be judged by whether we still belong to exclusionary or hateful groups. I don't know any church that respects, much less reflects, my personal beliefs in the absolute equality of all people, so I choose not to belong to any of them. And I would never -- as have some presidential candidates -- accept the endorsement of preachers of the gospel according to the most racist and sexist of doctrines.

But someone's race or religion is not mine or anybody else's concern. I couldn't care less that Wright is a Christian or that Louis Farrakhan professes to be a Muslim. I couldn't care less whether the hateful minister who endorsed John McCain is, deep inside, a decent man or a fundamentalist. But I do care about these pastors' divisive and crazed words; I do care that their "sermons" exploit and pander to the worst fears and passions of people based on perceptions and misperceptions about race. I hate that these preachers' sermons prejudge people's motives or behavior based on their race or ethnicity. I hate the haters, and I expected Obama to make a straightforward speech about what has become the Hate Hour -- and the most segregated hour -- in America on Sunday mornings.

I expected Obama, who up to now had been steering a perfect course away from the racial boxes of the past, to challenge racial labels and so-called black experiences. We're all mixed up, and if we haven't yet been by the process of miscegenation, trans-racial adoptions and interracial marriage, we sure ought to get used to how things will be in short order.

That would have been the forward-looking message of a visionary candidate. But Obama erred by looking backward -- as far back as slavery. What does slavery have to do with the price of milk at the grocery store? He referenced continuing segregation, especially segregated public schools, but stopped short. What is he going to do about them? How does he feel about public schools for black boys or single-sex public schools and classes? What does the gospel according to Wright say about such race-based and gender-specific schemes for getting around our civil rights laws?

We can't be united as a nation if we continue to think racially and give credence to racial experiences and differences based on ethnicity, past victim status and stereotypical categories. All of these prejudices surrounding tribe-against-tribe are old-hat and dysfunctional -- especially the rants of ministers, of whatever skin color or religion, who appeal to our base prejudices and to superstitions about our supposed racial differences. The man or woman who talks plainly about our commonality as a race of human beings, about our future as one nation indivisible, rather than about our discredited and disunited past, is, I predict, likely to finish ahead of the pack and do us a great public service.

Michael Meyers is executive director of the New York Civil Rights Coalition and a former assistant national director of the NAACP. These views are his own.


http://www.latimes.com/news/printedition/opinion/la-oew-meyers20mar20,1,5615767.story

[fustercluck]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CILIBlQ2D0Q Watch and listen.


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hAYe7MT5BxM Watch and listen.

Let the shocking relief of one man's love for his country vs. one man's hate for it demonstrate by association whom Barack chooses as his mentor....better he should hang with Ray that Jerry.