Clinton Would Have Left Obama's Church

Nice, Brian, nice. :):)

After she gets flak on this latest smear job, she's gonna say: "I misspoke."

Great first post, Brian.

Hillary is a typical middle class opportunist, gender shill, apologist, capitulationis, appeaser. If she had been in Nazi Germany and churches had spoken out against imperialism, aggression, racism against Jews, as Wright has spoken out against Amerikan class empire, imperialism, which she participated in, she would be demanding that "Good Germans" embrace their class nationalism, class ideology, class imperialism, as she has in Amerika, and disgustingly refuses to apologize for her vote for aggression, occupation and the Police, fascist enabling laws, the Patriot act that violates the Constitution.

This kind of rotten middle class appeasement, political opprotunism, deserves the phrase "Damn Ameirka", and its class thugs, and class whores who feel they have to attack religious, moral leaders opposed to ther imperial policies, rotten class history, racist history, the whole of the failed democratic experiment, democratic revolution, American revolution that allowed class thugs, white propertied men, as Patriarchs, to put property rights over other people's property rights, and even over human rights, slavery, and corporate fascist policies that she herself has voted for. Sad to say, Obama a civil rights lawyer too voted for the fascist Patriot act, and all three failed Presidential candidates, McCain, Hillary and Obama capituated to the corruption, negation of the Constitution instead of upholding those rights.

My defense here is more for Wright, the Pastor who has every right to "damn" Amerikan class, and race despotism. Hillary's class whoing apologetics reflects her embrace of liberal warhawks, its zionists, neocon, duplicitous asses, who were junior parnters in Amerikan empire and war crimes.

Face it, we all know she's leave a church in an instant if she thought it would hurt her chances of election. Then she'd be all "I never met the man - I only went in the church door to avoid the sniper fire..."

Obama was brave in a way Clinton couldn't understand even if the polls and her advisers explained it to her.

Does she actually get kickbacks from McCain for this cr4p?

I dare to say that Mrs. Clinton would, most likely, not have entered in the first place. Perhaps I am wrong, and she can pull out a video clip, where she is trying to clap to the rhythm of the gospel choir (I am not saying white people don't have rhythm, but she just strikes me as a particularly... hmmm... not too groovy, to use an outdated expression).

Anyway, it is not really her scene, and as such it is completely understandable that she would have left.

Obama was brave in a way Clinton couldn't understand even if the polls and her advisers explained it to her.

And he would never stoop to the tactics the Clinton family are using. If the Democratic Party thinks this is going to help the party, they are sadly mistaken.

I think she needs to explain her own religious connections. I guess I'll have to tune in to HuffingtonPost since they are the only ones who have addressed it except Mother Jones.

Super delegates forget Carville the Enforcer because you are not going to have a party soon and it won't matter if you endorse Hillary or Obama because it will be much too late. At this rate, you have a better shot with Obama and the pastor than you do with Hillary and Bill Clinton and all the people they owe for the millions they have in the bank and Bill's charity and library donors. I'll take Obama...

Boy, she is really pushing the African American community...right out the door. I guess that shows you what she thinks of our votes. You don't do that Hillary and I cannot believe Tubbs Jones, Sheila J Lee, and Maxine would not say anything. I know John Lewis is glad he left you.

This is a new low for Clinton, and I think addressing the issue this late in the controversy was a bad move. She's about a week too late. Instead of genuine, this now comes across as a smear.

Actually, you saying it's a smear is a smear. The way it works is this - the candidates comment on one another's postions. Obama's position is that it is acceptable for him to stay for 20 years in a church that most Americans find objectionable. Hillary says she disagrees with staying in such a church. It all seems calm enough to me. Why are you so touchy Brian?

What Obama did with his Race speech is an indication of how he would handle the job of President. He showed that not only did he have a better grasp of the race issue than most people who can only see one side (because they are not bi-racial) but attempted to show that there can be some common ground (love the sinner but hate the sin!?) that does not involve isolating or ostracizing individuals with whom you do not always agree.

What if this principle could be applied to real world scenarios eg: Arab/Israeli conflict, Iraq, Iran etc...

Who would be a better president a divider or a unifier?

I think what Hillary has failed to understand is that you can't just turn your back on people or situations that may prove difficult or even at odds with your personal goals and ambitions for the sake of expediency.

To make a lame quote.......sometimes the answer is not Black or White.......it may be somewhere in between.

Who would be a better president a divider or a unifier?

Just who is Obama going to unite on the subject of his church and his pastor? Please by all means, try and be specific. Let's see if you have even the slightest concept of what you are talking about.

whooosh!

(I think you missed the point, dugan)

Obama's position is that it is acceptable for him to stay for 20 years in a church that most Americans find objectionable. Hillary says she disagrees with staying in such a church. It all seems calm enough to me. Why are you so touchy Brian?

Seriously, dugan? So, now a candidate's church membership is fair game as an "issue"? I understand if you want to know about it as a biographical detail, but to say it's an "issue" to be debated between the candidates is morally repugnant—to me, at least.

All you have to do is answer the question, if you can. Who is Obama going to unite on the question of his pastor? This is not a trick question. We have all these people claiming Obama is going to unite this and unite that, and I want to know how this is going to happen. Or is it all a lot of hot, meaningless air?

The point of all the responses to your question, dugan, is that it does not Fing matter who Obama does or does not unite on the question of his pastor because to do so is impossible and to suggest that he should need to smells rankly of a lack of understanding of what, exactly, constitutes an "issue."

Dugan perhaps you can explain why Hillary Clinton is hanging out with "The Family" a bunch of right wing conservatives. And please tell us why today she is hanging out with right wingers or the very people who she accused of the infamous or famous-- whichever-- "vast right wing conspiracy."

As a matter of fact, ANY Hillary Clinton supporter please answer that question. Tell us why she is selling out her party and her fellow Democrat. Tell us why she is playing like Karl Rove and the Republicans. Bill Clinton is over in Kentucky lying--which we all know now he is QUITE capable of--about Obama blocking the revotes in Michigan and Florida. OMG I am trying to remain civil but the Clinton's are pushing my limit. They are LYING on a daily basis and it is getting old. Just when I think this woman and man can't say anything worse they go and top themselves. Who are these people?

All the Obama supporters need to send a message every morning to ALL the news stations and DEMAND they pressure her to release her tax returns NOW before she gets away with anything else. She is getting a free ride and it is time to end it.

I'll type this real slow for you. The appeal of Barack Obama is that he is the post racial candidate who was going to 'bridge' the racial gap of mistrust and misunderstanding that has existed among Americans of different backgrounds. African father. White mother. Hawaian upbringing. Indonesian schooling, etc.

Now, we are faced with the fact of Obama's church.

In light of the PROMISE portrayed through Obama's multiracial background, and the recurring theme of his campaign that he is going to unite America to face it's problems, I will ask you again. How is he going to unite people, given the nature of his relationship to this church?

It is already a divisive issue in America, THANKS TO HIM. It will likely only get worse.

What sort of fantasyland are you people living in?

I don't know how your computer works, my friend, but mine displays all the text at once no matter how fast it was typed.

It is already a divisive issue in America, THANKS TO HIM. It will likely only get worse.

Believe it or not, the news media blew this up and people looking to attack Obama and his followers turned it into a flaming napalm ball of sh!t. Obama had nothing to do with it. For the last time, this is a non-issue. Shut your hole about it. I plan to report any further comments regarding Wright on a thread that doesn't directly deal with the non-issue as No Value.

That's the sort of fantasyland I'm living in.

Bill Clinton is over in Kentucky lying--which we all know now he is QUITE capable of--about Obama blocking the revotes in Michigan and Florida. OMG I am trying to remain civil but the Clinton's are pushing my limit. They are LYING on a daily basis and it is getting old.

"Supporters of the June 3 revote -- including a four-member committee of top Michigan Democrats that hatched the plan -- held out hope that the state Legislature would act on a bill to hold the new primary. But with time running short, the Obama campaign, which has little to gain and much potential for loss in a new vote, piled on the legal objections, and it remained unclear Wednesday night whether the proposal would even get an up-or-down vote in the Legislature."

Detroit News
Mar 20, 2008

Yes, because, God forbid, the any potential revote in Michigan be conducted in a lawful, legitimate manner. That would be un-American.

Believe it or not, the news media blew this up and people looking to attack Obama and his followers turned it into a flaming napalm ball of sh!t. Obama had nothing to do with it. For the last time, this is a non-issue. Shut your hole about it. I plan to report any further comments regarding Wright on a thread that doesn't directly deal with the non-issue as No Value.

I'll tell you what blew it up. Stories about this church were reported months ago, and the media had its head so far up Obama's rear nothing was ever done about it. A story like this goes nowhere until a major news organization takes hold of it. Obama is damn lucky this didn't come out 4 months ago or he'd be taking a permanent vacation from this campaign right now instead of three days.

TUCC is a church that is based on racist principles. That is the bottom line, and Barack Obama knows it. He is staying in the church for political purposes, yet you all have the gall to sit here and heehaw about Hillary Clinton's supposed hypocrisy. It is pathetic.

LYING, period. If Hillary Clinton's cronies in Michigan had left the date alone they would have had a say in the nomination. Put the BLAME where it belongs and that is on the state Party officials AND the DEMOCRATIC Governor all Hillary Clinton super delegates who will not be seated.

The appeal of Barack Obama is that he is the post racial candidate who was going to 'bridge' the racial gap of mistrust and misunderstanding that has existed among Americans of different backgrounds. African father. White mother. Hawaian upbringing. Indonesian schooling, etc.

Actually, that has nothing to do with why I support Obama. I've wanted him to run ever since I heard his speech at the Democratic convention in 2004. Note the word "heard" there. Were it not for his name, i wouldn't even have thought about his race. For me, race plays no role in my support for Obama. It's a nice bonus that he is willing to discuss the issue in an open, reasonable manner, or as John Stewart so beautifully put it last week, "As though we were adults." I support Obama because he inspires people to become personally involved in the political process, to take responsibility for their own futures and the future of our nation. I support him because he looks at issues critically and is open to contrary opinions and positions. That is the mark of a good leader, something we have sorely lacked since, I would argue, Lincoln was President.

LYING, period. If Hillary Clinton's cronies in Michigan had left the date alone they would have had a say in the nomination. Put the BLAME where it belongs and that is on the state Party officials AND the DEMOCRATIC Governor all Hillary Clinton super delegates who will not be seated.

I must say, you are very easily flustered. The Detroit News story would appear to directly refute your accusation that Bill Clinton was lying about Obama blocking the revote. Now you resort to backtracking to 4 or 5 months ago. (I don't suppose you'd like to apologize to the former President, would you?) Stick to the subject at hand, if you can.

Believe it or not, the news media blew this up and people looking to attack Obama and his followers turned it into a flaming napalm ball of sh!t. Obama had nothing to do with it. For the last time, this is a non-issue

Stevehouse, I agree completely. Looks like we're united over this issue.

Thanks, Barack.

why is everyone listening to someone who lied about what she had done. Let's get the facts out about what Pastor Wright said, the media did not let anyone no that he was quoting a white man, so listen to the entire video and then voice your opinion, the media is the people who are racist and creating all this division. Please listen to the entire video and read who Pastor Wright was quoting. This entire video was sent to the news media/Fox News/Pat Buchanan/Chris Wallace/etc. but nobody is willing to show what Pastor Wright really said because now it would make Obama look real good. Make up your own mind don't let the media do it for you.

Now read about Ambassador Edward Peck...the man from whom Jeremiah Wright was quoting.

Jhn 8:32 â€" And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free.

Wow, that's all I can say.

Seems that the Obama acolytes are out in strength against Hillary. Good to see.

However, I just ain't getting the excoriation. After all, what's wrong with this statement?

"I think that given all we have heard and seen, he would not have been my pastor," Clinton said at a news conference in Greensburg, Pa., after being asked if Obama should have left the church.

Why can't she say that, and why are the Obama acolytes taking such umbrage at it?

And Steve, hate to say it but it is an issue and will continue to be an issue.

Why can't she say that, and why are the Obama acolytes taking such umbrage at it?

The donkeys are tearing each other to shreds over any scrap of semi-scandal they can find. Cannibalism at its worst.

Please try to stay on the issue and out of other peoples bedrooms.

When Hillary refused to comment on Obama's minister problems, his campaign released photos of Mr. Wright at the Clinton White House. Next, they started talking about Bill calling him unpatriotic because he suggested that a debate about the issues by candidates who love this country would be great. Perhaps Mr. Obama and the media would be happy if Mrs. Clinton ran on a ticket of being seen and not heard like any female or child should in this country.

A story relating to an incident that occurred 12 years ago was talked about by Mrs. Clinton and entire news videos were dug up by media bias reporters who obviously had nothing else to report on in order to discredit her. Mrs. Clinton just released 11,000 pages of documents concerning her public life and they could not find anything. When will Mr. Obama do the same? For a guy who is running a well organized campaign to say that he is unorganized and cannot find documents tells me that this is a precursor to his running of the office of president.

And Steve, hate to say it but it is an issue and will continue to be an issue.

Please tell me why it's an issue.

Ya know, I can't help but think she would have been the first to say she would have stayed in that church, had this come out, oh...let's say in a general election in which she wasn't taking part. You bet your ass she's be screaming from the rafters that the Republicans had started this whole thing, how despicable it was to even suggest it, etc..

Now you see why we Republicans have hated the Clintons and their sorry cheese politics for years.

Can someone please tell this piece of crap to step aside so we can get to the real election?

ED:

Of course, and it will get worse before it gets better.

Saw a story today that 22% of both HC and BO supporters said they would vote for McCain if their man didn't get the nod.

Saw a story today that 22% of both HC and BO supporters said they would vote for McCain if their man didn't get the nod.

And Alec Baldwin said he'd move to Canada if GWB was elected again. Last I checked, he was still working as a lead on 30 Rock. (Thank God -- one of the best shows on TV.)

What people are saying now probably has very little to do with what they'll do in November, when faced with another 4 years of Republican leadership and the prospect of more Supreme Court changes looming.

I'm certain some people will sit out the election, I doubt very much many people will switch over to McCain. He's gonna have to open his mouth a few times between now and the election.

Please tell me why it's an issue.

Because the people who don't like Obama as grasping for something, anything, that they can use against him, and this is the best they've found, even though it's nothing at all.

That about sum it up?

I think so, Dennis.

Saw a story today that 22% of both HC and BO supporters said they would vote for McCain if their man didn't get the nod.

Well, good news comes from strange places.

Because the people who don't like Obama as grasping for something, anything, that they can use against him, and this is the best they've found, even though it's nothing at all.

I wish everyone would stick more to the ideas and the politics, and quit attacking personality. I think Obama is wrong in terms of his policy issues, plain and simple. I could care less about all the rest. I think his ideas on health care, taxes, and defense are all wrong. I worry about his support of Israel. I think he's a like-able guy beyond all that. Hillary is probably not so fun to be around, but I think we should all focus on debating the issues rather than the personalities.

Brian:

You may be right.

Dennis and Steve:

I don't think you were responding to me, but I do think it will be an issue. And race will be an issue, government programs, and which will be supported by candidates will be an issue.

Interesting to consider the following, Hillary may consider she has lost the "black" vote, and cannot ever get it back. What tack will she then take to fill this hole in the generally democratic wall of "can count on" voters?

It is bizarre to watch, and fascinating.

I'll make myself more clear then. I guess quoting you was too muddy?

wmolaw: Why is Rev. Wright an issue?

Steve, it's because a man who is running for president called him his spiritual advisor and part of the family. Obviously someone he hangs out with. He is also a man many of us perceive to be a racist and not simply critical of American policies, but anti-Amerikan (as you guys like to spell it). I don't know about you, but I hang out with people who share most of my views on the world. I don't hang out with people with radically different views just for a good argument.

Now, the problem that raises within the Democratic party is that, it was pretty obvious from the kissing going on at the debates that his and Hillary's political views are remarkably similar. This issue is a difference maker with many of them.

The problem it raises for him with the prospective crossover Republicans like myself is, his political views are about as far left as you're gonna see. Some of us were willing to go there to escape a possibility of Bush 3, but McCain is a lot farther to the left than Bush, even courting the Dems, and this just adds another brick against Obama who we were already kinda holding our noses to pull the lever for.

a man many of us perceive to be a racist and not simply critical of American policies, but anti-Amerikan

Just so: you perceive it to be the case. But it isn't.

If I didn't hang out with people with radically different views than my own, I'd already have ignored half of NewsVine and I wouldn't have any friends left. I'm still waiting for wmo's answer, Fred, but I'll put it to in different words now, and I think this is the core of the issue.

At what point does personal become political?

Yes, and I'm sure we'll all just take your word for it.

I think who McCain's spiritual leader is would be worth a discussion because he makes his laws based on his moral beliefs. I think Hillary Clinton's spiritual leader would be worth a discussion because we need someone to teach her the value of telling the truth.

Barack Obama's spiritual leader is worth a discussion because this man stands his ground on his morals and so it's nice to see where they might come from. But he has already said that he feels badly about the fact that Rev. Wright doesn't see redemption for white people based on their centuries of mistreatment towards blacks in this country.

He has already said that Rev. Wright is a wonderful man who is incapable of progressive thinking in that arena. But he trusts him for spiritual guidance because Barack can make his own decisions on things that aren't covered by the Bible. The Bible doesn't give black people instructions on how to live in this country with the same people who enslaved us. Different black people have different ideas on how to go about that. Sorry to the white people who can't fathom that some of us still hate you for what your ancestors did to ours, but it's true. If you expect every public official to reject every black person they know who feels that way, you're being delusional.

All we can do is try to move forward from that. That is what Barack has said repeatedly, you just aren't listening. And what's more is Barack firmly believes in a separation of church and state. He would never, for example, pass and anti-abortion law, no matter what his religious beliefs are. He knows that it is wrong to mix the two because everyone doesn't share the same religion.

What exactly is the problem with having a pastor who doesn't trust white people? Do you think Barack will pass anti-white laws? Do you think he will give a state of the union speech that ends with "@!$%# White People!!"? I mean, seriously, what is the problem?

Here's what I think it is: you all secretly suspect that if Rev. Wright can't find it in his heart to believe a white person won't screw over a black person just for the hell of it, Obama also feels that way. HE DOESN'T. How many different ways can that be told to you people?!?

Yes, and I'm sure we'll all just take your word for it.

Lol, you asked, and I like your assumption that your words are worth more than mine... Elitism at its finest. Perhaps you care to answer the question this time: At what point does personal become political?

Dem, it's worth discussing, but not in the current context. Maybe in an objective look at all the candidates' moral backgrounds. Certainly not in an attempt to paint Obama as anti-American or racist.

wmolaw

ED:

Of course, and it will get worse before it gets better.

Saw a story today that 22% of both HC and BO supporters said they would vote for McCain if their man didn't get the nod.

LoL......I love it!.....roflol......I can understand Clinton supporters voting for McCain in default ....BUT Obamanik supporters defaulting for McCain?........That's hard to believe....
But a relief ....if true...nonetheless. One way or the other.... McCaine wins against Obama.
Great news!

Saw a story today that 22% of both HC and BO supporters said they would vote for McCain if their man didn't get the nod. And Alec Baldwin said he'd move to Canada if GWB was elected again. Last I checked, he was still working as a lead on 30 Rock. (Thank God -- one of the best shows on TV.) What people are saying now probably has very little to do with what they'll do in November, when faced with another 4 years of Republican leadership and the prospect of more Supreme Court changes looming. I'm certain some people will sit out the election, I doubt very much many people will switch over to McCain. He's gonna have to open his mouth a few times between now and the election.

Don't believe that BS, Brian. I'm a Democrat, who if Hillary is not the party's choice ...will vote for McCain,..... and I'm not planning to move anywhere.

I'm curious -- as a Democrat -- what value do you see in voting for McCain?

Also, what difference do you see in the policies of Hillary and Obama that would justify voting for someone that cannot share your values if you're a Democrat?

At any rate, I'll believe the mass migration when I see it. We've got a long time until November, and I still think it's more likely that people will sit the vote out, but I don't even believe that'll be as big an issue as the polls would have you believe.

Steve:

Understand buddy, I work. Thus, I cannot always answer right away. Spend too much damn time here anyway.

Here is your question.

wmolaw: Why is Rev. Wright an issue?

It has been explicated by many before me.

1. BO has been going to this Church for 20 years, had his kids baptized there.
2. The pastor of this Church has clearly and undeniably asserted what I (and many others) consider to be racist and hateful positions and remarks. Additionally, the Church has been called an adherent to a belief system which I also believe to be racist and divisive.
3. BO has stated numerous times that Wright is his spiritual adviser, his personal friend, his mentor. BO had him on one of his campaign committees.
4. BO has not repudiated Wright, refuses to repudiate Wright.
5. BO is running for the highest elected office in this Country.
6. What BO believes, in his heart, is extremely important to all of us, and we must attempt to discern what that is through circumstantial evidence as we know that the public face of these political hopefuls is not what they believe.

Okay? That is why Wright matters. This is quite different from the situation where BO went to Church every once in awhile, was not involved in the Church, was not close personal friends with the pastor, and could, with honesty, say that he had no idea Wright held these beliefs.

You may assert these beliefs held by Wright are true, etc., etc. And, who knows, you may be right, though I don't believe you are. But, that is not the issue. It is what BO believes which we must try to discern.

And this is a window into his soul, Steve, a true window into his soul and his personal beliefs.

And that is why it is important, and why it won't go away, for through Wright, we get to know BO better.

Dems, you say

Sorry to the white people who can't fathom that some of us still hate you for what your ancestors did to ours

Which is what Obama said. I'm first generation from Czechoslovakia. Came over in '69. As I understand it, since you say "some of us", you hate me because I look like some dudes who enslaved your ancestors a couple hundred years ago. Given how many whites in this country are immigrants who came over here after slavery was abolished, I'd guess that somewhere between 30-40% of the whites walking the streets of America today are descendants of people who had nothing to do with that. I wonder how much time you've wasted hating innocent people. But, hey, you just go ahead and hold on to that, and maybe some day I'll hate you back.

Lol, you asked, and I like your assumption that your words are worth more than mine... Elitism at its finest. Perhaps you care to answer the question this time: At what point does personal become political?

I never said your words are worth less than mine. I'm saying that, given that even Obama has stated that Dr. Wright has issues, I have to take it into consideration. I just don't know to what extent yet. You're assuring me like a used car salesman, "Sure the car has a racing stripe, but, trust me, it was used by a little old lady on Sundays to get to church."

We don't even know which of Dr. Wright's statements he disagrees with. Let's say he agrees with the "we have a non-negotiable commitment to Africa" which is something Dr. Wright feels strongly enough about to highlight on his web site. Does this mean we'll be committing even more of my money overseas to Africa? Now let's couple that with the statement that the white man is somehow responsible for the spread of AIDS in Africa. If he believes that statement, does that mean he intends to use our taxes to buy AIDS cocktails for every infected black person in Africa? I have no problem paying for that in our country, but I'm not sure I want to pay for that for other nations. So, I need to know if that non-negotiable commitment to Africa is part of Senator Obama's religion. You want to assure me that it's not. I'm saying I need to hear more from Senator Obama about that. Is that personal or political?

Good points Fred and wmolaw.

Very straightforward discussion of these concerns.

If the same thing was true of the Republican candidate it would still be Big News and the Dems would be all over it. I think as citizens, we should be skeptical of our candidates regardless of Party Affiliation. If McCain turned out to be the member of some extremist Church, I would certainly take a second (or third or fourth) look at his beliefs!

ED:

Of course, and so would those on the other side of the aisle, so to speak.

Fred:

Great point about many of the hated "whites" in this Country not even having had ancestors here when slavery was practiced.

Fact is, hate is hate, whether it is white on black, or black on white, or whatever stripe or flavor you wish to consider or hold.

Hate is not a good thing, but for a discussion of these issues to be had, one which will address ALL concerns, all perceptions, then this crap needs to stop on both sides or, as Fred said:

I wonder how much time you've wasted hating innocent people. But, hey, you just go ahead and hold on to that, and maybe some day I'll hate you back.

Is that what Wright and his ilk are hoping for?

wmo: Sorry if I came off as impatient, I was actually just trying to prevent the topic from disappearing because someone else answered it. I'll never be one to rail at someone for not being on 24 hours a day.

Ok, so here is what it seems to boil down to.

For the people who disagree with or are offended by Rev. Wright, it's an issue because they feel these beliefs will filter into Obama's Presidency. For those who have neither condition, it's not because they feel it won't filter in, and even if it did it would maybe be a good thing. I think that's what this entire discussion has been about. Thanks for the lengthy response.
1. I disagree that that constitutes an issue. It's a matter of personal faith, and do you really think a President Obama is going to write a Kill Whitey executive order or something?
2. The church's pastor may or may not espouse prejudiced remarks. I disagree that the Black Value system, which is IMO designed to empower blacks, is racist or divisive. To say it is implies they don't need empowering. Have you seen, statistically, the living conditions of blacks v. whites?
3. This is a very true statement. But if you're going to use it to make Wright an issue, let's make McCain's anti-Islam advisors an issue too.
4. Hard to repudiate a person for a handful of comments that, for all we know, is about 3% of his overall sermons.
5. Yes he is, al-hamdu lillah.
6. By "know" I think you meant "cynically believe." I'm gonna agree with that statement given the edit, but it's also hard to say "He was close to that guy, so I bet his views are a match." There's a logical leap there.

And you're absolutely right, Steve. I do take that into account when I consider McCain. I take everything I know into consideration about each candidate. When McCain says he intends to consult with our allies, I believe him. When he says we have to be open to let them change our minds like he did yesterday, I pause and I start doing my own research. Given his stance on issues in the past, I don't remember when he's let someone change his mind "when it counted".

Neither of these guys is my ideal candidate, so I have to weight everything I know about them.

I never said your words are worth less than mine.

I never said you did. I said you assumed it:

Yes, and I'm sure we'll all just take your word for it.

[that was to my response to] I don't know about you, but I hang out with people who share most of my views on the world. I don't hang out with people with radically different views just for a good argument.

So what makes you think anyone'll take your word for it over mine?

So, I need to know if that non-negotiable commitment to Africa is part of Senator Obama's religion. You want to assure me that it's not. I'm saying I need to hear more from Senator Obama about that.

No such thing; I'm try to assure people that they don't know. But it's also interesting that you put such words in my mouth, because we haven't even discussed it!

I never said you did. I said you assumed it:

Ah, semantics lesson learned. Thanks.

So what makes you think anyone'll take your word for it over mine?

I don't think they'll take either of our words for it. I think people will use their own experience to make a determination. Those who hang out with people of a like mind will probably favor my point of view. And those who hang out with people for a good argument will probably favor yours.

No such thing; I'm try to assure people that they don't know. But it's also interesting that you put such words in my mouth, because we haven't even discussed it!

Ah, I owe you an apology. I thought that when you were saying "Why is this an issue?", you were saying that it isn't. Since you're saying that we don't know, I agree with you. But I disagree that we haven't been discussing it. We have been discussing it across several threads. Maybe not the specific sample I brought up, but the overall possibility of Dr. Wright's and this church's influence.

Fred, this felt a little sarcastic toward the very end, so if it wasn't I apologize in advance (and feel free to not read the rest of this).

Ah, I owe you an apology. I thought that when you were saying "Why is this an issue?", you were saying that it isn't. Since you're saying that we don't know, I agree with you. But I disagree that we haven't been discussing it. We have been discussing it across several threads. Maybe not the specific sample I brought up, but the overall possibility of Dr. Wright's and this church's influence.

It's not really that I'm saying it isn't an issue; I was merely trying to get wmo to say why he feels it is. I was supremely interested in his response, and then the one he gave was pleasantly surprising. And yeah, we've been discussing Rev. Wright like the rest of the world, but that didn't appear to be what you were referring to at all. My basis for this was that you spent an entire paragraph on "We don't even know what Obama was disagreeing with." I don't think I've touched on that, anywhere. It's a point not worth arguing over, because we agree. If the entire issue WAS what you were referring to then never mind.

No, Steve, I sincerely apologize. I got snippy over a presumption. And, the entire issue was what I was referring to. I think the horse is pretty dead at this point, so I'll wait and see what comes out of Senator Obama's camp.

OK cool, truces all around then. \\//

Hahaha, ROTFL.

She's so dedicated to church-going that she even does it under the threat of sniper-fire.

Rev. Wright's comments were beyond objectionable. The were patently offensive and those of the lunatic fringe.

Obama is now unelectable.

Obama is now unelectable.

Just because you wish doesn't mean it's a fact.
Come November, you'll be eating these very words.
Remember that - Comment 3.1 on March 25.

In case you didn't know, Gallup polls had Obama-Clinton at 42-49 after the Wright non-issue. This was a week ago. Guess what it is today? Obama-Clinton 47-45. Hahahaha.

Ya know American people aren't as dumb as you think they are. They can see through the muck-racking to the real issues. You can try as much as you want to make a mountain out of the Wright non-issue, but the rest of the country has moved on. They are looking forward to the future, a future of hope. Hope to see you in the future someday.

Please don't tell me you rely on these polls!? I can understand making a point with some solid justification, but the polls!? ... the polls!!??

Ya know American people aren't as dumb as you think they are.

Now I know that you've never had to stand in line at Wal-Mart.

Please don't tell me you rely on these polls!?

Clinton does, Obama does, McCain does.

Why shouldn't I?

Lemme guess, you're an intellectual snob that looks down upon the millions of common folk that rely upon such polls to help in their decision making process?

Please don't tell me you rely on these polls!?

Well, I agree -- and I said the same thing last week when everyone was giddy that Clinton was suddenly doing so well in the polls. This week tells a new story. Next week may tell another story. The only worth I see in these polls will be as a retrospective.

Yeah, I agree too. Clinton was up and everyone was so giddy, especially this dude Bill Harrison. I told him wait a coupla days and boom! Just like that she's down 45-47.

3.4 neteng

More insults to the poor folks just trying to make a living. I do believe those are the very voters Hillary is depending on. Besides it is not their fault Walmart does not provide customer service training for their employees. Hillary Clinton did not care about those folks either when she sat on Walmart's board.

"In case you didn't know, Gallup polls had Obama-Clinton at 42-49 after the Wright non-issue. This was a week ago. Guess what it is today? Obama-Clinton 47-45. Hahahaha." Hahahaha. McCain is beating them both. The dirt on Clinton is already known. New dirt on Obama is coming.

The dirt on Clinton is already known.

You mean the old dirt. But she keeps manufacturing new dirt every other week. This week it is "I misspoke, but it was because I was under the stress of imagined sniper-fire." Hahaha..

You are ignoring that McCain is beating BOTH of them and Obama by the larger amount.

Daily Presidential Tracking Poll
Tuesday, March 25, 2008

The Rasmussen Reports daily Presidential Tracking Poll for Tuesday shows Looking ahead to the General Election in November, John McCain continues to lead both potential Democratic opponents.

McCain leads Barack Obama 50% to 41% and Hillary Clinton 48% to 43% (see recent daily results).

http://rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/election_20082/2008_presidential_election/daily_presidential_tracking_poll

Obama is now unelectable.

ROTFL!

John McCain continues to lead both potential Democratic opponents.

That's because McCain is flying under the radar while the Dems fight it out. Post again when it's down to only Obama and McCain. Once the media starts reporting on McCain's foreign policy gaffes, his numbers will plummet. It's a whole new race once the Democrats do away with Hillary for good.

Division by Zero:

For you that would be anything that criticizes the rotten racist, imperial history of the U.S.

Negating moral standards, puts you in an "objectionable" position, namely pro corporate, pro imperial, corporate fascism, all the same elements of Nazi Germany.

Ya know American people aren't as dumb as you think they are. They can see through the muck-racking to the real issues. You can try as much as you want to make a mountain out of the Wright non-issue, but the rest of the country has moved on. They are looking forward to the future, a future of hope. Hope to see you in the future someday.

Sort of like Obama's plan for uniting the country. He's going to unite the far left with the left and call it a day.

Actually I have quite a few republican friends who like Obama.

Actually I have quite a few republican friends who like Obama.

I like Obama. I bet he'd be cool to debate and discuss issues with. I just don't think he's right for the Presidency. Certainly he'd be less divisive than Clinton. Still, while McCain is pretty good at uniting the middle and crossing the aisle, I don't think even he could "unite the country" and Obama is nowhere near McCain in terms of unifying moderates from both Parties.

I'm an independent and I just don't buy into the "hope" "change" "hope" message. Change is slow, and we're always achieving it, even if we don't realize it at the time.

McCain is disliked because of his record of crossing over and working with the other side of the aisle.

McCain is disliked because of his record of crossing over and working with the other side of the aisle.

Exactly. He's also liked for it though. The point is, even so-called "uniters" are going to piss somebody off.

McCain is disliked by partisan hack Pubs because of his record of crossing over and working with the other side of the aisle.

Exactly. ;)

I dislike him because he supports torture & wants to continue this "war".

I don't need a good man who has decided to put on George Dubya's pants to be president. I've had enough of that.

Jfrank:

Do you really believe Hillary will end the war?

Do you really believe Obama will?

Personally, I don't think either will "end" the war, if that means a total withdrawal of troops and support.

It's a whole new race once the Democrats do away with Hillary for good

You bet it will be, Danny!....when half the Democrats move to McCain.

22% = half?

Yeah, I can see that.

Do you really believe Hillary will end the war?

No

Do you really believe Obama will?

Yes

Personally, I don't think either will "end" the war, if that means a total withdrawal of troops and support.

This "war", I don't even know what it stands for. It isn't for 911. We took out Saddam. Now we're rebuilding a nation while ours is falling apart?

The only way the middle east will have peace, is if the middle east wants it. Trying to force peace in a place that doesn't have the best track record of peace - won't work.

jfrank: Are you, by any chance, familiar with The Future of Freedom by Fareed Zakaria? He lays out a pretty solid formula of preconditions for democracy and freedom to coincide successfully. I can't remember what exactly it entailed, but there certainly were these:

• Respect for individual rights
• A decent GDP that isn't based on some really abundant natural resource in your country
• Stability

I'm not. I will be sure to check it out steve!

Thanks

I suspect that those who believe BO will immediately end the war in Iraq, immediately pull our troops out, will be sorely disappointed when and if he is elected.

This "war", I don't even know what it stands for. It isn't for 911. We took out Saddam. Now we're rebuilding a nation while ours is falling apart?

Yes, the economy is in the dumps, but no it is not because of the war. It is because of bad investments in bad mortgages. Pulling out of Iraq will not put an end to the worsening economy. The Government can and should intervene only so much in such a case. There is a delicate balance that must be maintained in terms of inflation, unemployment...this gets into interest rates, etc. and is usually a matter suitable for the Fed to handle, not really in the hands of elected politicians at all....

I suspect that those who believe BO will immediately end the war in Iraq, immediately pull our troops out, will be sorely disappointed when and if he is elected.

Yes, it's quite doubtful that once Obama (if he is elected) gets into the White House and becomes all that much more privy to the circumstances will want to pull out of Iraq. The ensuing bloodbath would tarnish his record forever.

ED, there is at least a part of inflation that is tied to deficit spending. Deficit spending is something you do when you need to spend more than you take in. You know, in a situation like a three-trillion dollar war coupled with lower taxes.

We spend less than 1% of our GDP on this war per year.

This same article does, indeed, talk about the very high cost of this war, and certainly the Government needs to cut spending to manage it. Still, hiking taxes now would be too harmful to the economy at large.

Also, the rising cost of oil is likely more damaging than the actual war costs, though this is a side-effect of war.

And, for the record, I think we went in with completely the wrong strategy. I was not for an all-out invasion of Iraq. I think we still could have used force without taking on such an expensive and lengthy mission--and strengthening our armed forces in such a drastic manner. Still, I don't think the cut-and-run strategy the Democrats are proposing is a humane one. It is wholly unethical and against what this country should stand for.

It is time for the Government to start cutting spending to fall in line with revenue. Regarding Iraq, I think it will be cheaper in the long run to keep spending high now, rather than dragging out the conflict through half-measures.

Good points all, especially the oil one. Transportation costs are a huge driving factor in the costs of things, and gas prices in general hurt the consumer.

Oil is in everything we do, eat, and wear. So it's just not transportation.

Frankly, this entire run up of oil I see as artificial and inappropriate. But that is another thread.

Yawn. This is so last week's news. Get with the times. This week's flavor is "misspeaking under the threat of sniper-fire."

Yeah it's too bad Obama isn't really a Muslim though, then you could really hate him for his religion. Instead, all the people attacking his pastor have to start paying attention in church on Sunday to ensure that their pastor doesn't say anything crazy @!$%#. You'd be surprised what some of them will throw in there when they run out of material. I wonder if churches have podcasts yet...

Sgt, you make an excellent and reasonable point. Don't mind the chattering of the boo birds here on the 'Vine.

Mary, you're a fine example of the disenfranchisement movement that Obama's followers are pursuing.

backroads

Are you a Florida or Michigan voter? If not, then what the heck are you complaining about? The disenfranchisement of Florida voters started last year with the DNC, Florida Democratic Party, DNC Rules Committee, Charlie Crist, Florida Republican Legislature and all who voted to strip the delegates. So get off the Republican tactics and put the blame where it belongs. Don't try to change the game in the fourth quarter. We've been through this before.

Stop trying to blame Obama for something the Democratic Party did and the Hillary Clinton supporters agreed to when it was thought they would not need those votes.

My God, how many people did the Clintons make promises to that they would destroy this party to win? How much more money do they want to make off the American people. They have become pariahs and they do not seem to care. See what absolute power does? We should not only fear McCain but we now have to fear the Clintons. If they will do this to a fellow Democrat and the Democratic Party, just imagine what they will do if they win the WH.

BTW--I am a fine example though. As Ms Cyprah would say--fit, fab and over fifty!!

A fine example? Is that why you told Sgt to go away?

You certainly appear to be afraid of many things.

Sorry, your story doesn't ring true...another Clinton moment

Let's get the facts out about what Pastor Wright said, the media did not let anyone no that he was quoting a white man, so listen to the entire video and then voice your opinion, the media is the people who are racist and creating all this division. Please listen to the entire video and read who Pastor Wright was quoting. This entire video was sent to the news media/Fox News/Pat Buchanan/Chris Wallace/etc. but nobody is willing to show what Pastor Wright really said because now it would make Obama look real good. Make up your own mind don't let the media do it for you.

Now read about Ambassador Edward Peck...the man from whom Jeremiah Wright was quoting.

Jhn 8:32 â€" And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free. 2!#1.25 - Wed Mar 26, 2008 8:36 AM CDT

dancing, haven't you posted the same thing, verbatim, a number of other places? Rearrange the words, willya?

Obama never said that he didn't know Rev. Wright had radical views. He said that he wasn't there for the sermons that were being constantly played in bytes on tv. His schedules very much agree with that. Hard to attend a sermon in Chicago when you were at an airport or in a different city. Do you even know what his views are that you so strongly disagree with? I can tell you them very clearly.

I'd love to see anyone who says they disagree with Rev. Wright's views actually articulate them. That way you can know if it's the views you disagree with or just the sound bytes...

I've started reporting those spams as No Value, backroads...

SHEdit: dancing's spams. I'm not calling yours spam.

Steve, I've seen the same thing at least four times. Someone should tell him/her it doesn't advance any argument. Oh, well; the Times forums were a thousand times worse.

That's true. At least it's intelligent spam. But it's still spam, anyway.

It's a busy life in Camelot, we eat ham and we post spam a lot!

Dem for Obama

Obama never said that he didn't know Rev. Wright had radical views. He said that he wasn't there for the sermons that were being constantly played in bytes on tv. His schedules very much agree with that. Hard to attend a sermon in Chicago when you were at an airport or in a different city . Do you even know what his views are that you so strongly disagree with? I can tell you them very clearly.

I'd love to see anyone who says they disagree with Rev. Wright's views actually articulate them. That way you can know if it's the views you disagree with or just the sound bytes

Lol.......I wasn't there for slavery either. I wasn't at an airport... or in a different city...
I wasn't even born yet....
Yet, Rev.Wright says "I'm responsible for it".

But Barack gets a free pass on responsibility...being tarty... or absent...as usual?

when you were at an airport

My mistake. I meant to say when he was at an airport.

Rev. Wright doesn't say you're responsible for it. He says you'll probably do the same thing to me as your ancestors did to mine, given the chance.

Do I think he's right? No.

Does Obama think he's right? No.

Does Rev. Wright believe that with all his heart? Yes.

By attributing these comments to Barack or by saying that because his pastor feels that way he's somehow less of an appropriate candidate is a stretch. Obama has been saying that he's seen this type of thinking and he wants to be instrumental in moving into the future. By acknowledging that and knowing that nothing Rev. Wright could say on this issue will sway Obama from this position, am I giving him a free pass? I think I am showing some understanding.

This appears to be the first time that white America is really getting a glimpse into the minds of some African-Americans. What baffles me is that you all cannot understand how some people feel that way but not others. I have very high respect for many people who feel the same way as Rev. Wright. I disagree with the conclusions they've drawn about white people. That's why I'm working hard to promote forward thinking.

I just wish that you people could see that these issues are not as clear cut as two sound bytes.

I have a feeling Clinton is going to hurt herself a lot more with this latest comment. Why doesn't Bill say something to her? He's a smart guy. He's supposed to be her brains.

Prez

Bill cannot he is busy bashing Obama on his side so he cannot help out Hillary. Boy, I hope you other minorities are getting a good look at what it is like in America when someone other than a White male wants to be president.

The world is watching this country descend into the abyss of racism and bigotry that has defined it for so many years. Shameful...

Clinton Policy:

"Democrats united, as long as we're in front of the pack"

She'd leave the church, just like she was shot at by snipers.

The world is watching this country descend into the abyss of racism and bigotry that has defined it for so many years. Shameful...

Oh, please. A good discussion of race in this Country, a free for all regarding race in this Country is long over due.

You wish to pull out the race card, prevent discussion, the "old" way of handling race (sweep it under the rug).

Well, that is the way to destruction. Let's get it out! And, please, stop calling those who express their views "racist." I haven't seen an entire racist comment on this thread, or in the press (other than Wright's) regarding this issue. Now, there may be racism BEHIND many of the statements, on both sides, but that is what a good, free for all discussion will show.

We will be much better off if we can talk about it, if BOTH sides can talk about it honestly and openly. You seem to wish to prevent that.

We will be much better off if we can talk about it, if BOTH sides can talk about it honestly and openly.

True!

The world is watching this country descend into the abyss of racism and bigotry that has defined it for so many years. Shameful...

Uhm...this country is not defined by racism and bigotry. Take a tour of the rest of the world. Visit Rwanda or Kosovo. Head over to Darfur. Try Brazil and the way the government there treats indigenous people.

Head to Scandinavia and you won't find racism because the only people there are White.

Head to France and see how "at home" minorities feel there.

America has its issues, to be sure, and race has been discussed and fought over more here (and in a more civilized way) than in any other part of the world. We can discuss race here. The Civil Rights movement, though it met with much resistance, was a movement that happened because it happened in America.

Don't say that racism and bigotry define this country. They've been parts of it, like many other countries. What defines us is our ability to discuss, debate, and actually achieve change.

i also believe Cobra Commander had something to do with it.

C

Let' see if the MSM starts pressuring her around April 1, or continue to give her a free ride. Obama has his out there now so we are just waiting for hers and McCain's. Notice the Republicans are not saying anything about that.

You picked the date! Consider the significance!

Thank you for providing Obama's recent answer to Clinton's latest remarks.

The more we know about the man...the more respect we have for him.

He has the qualities to be one of our outstanding presidents- if given a chance.

Our next president will have to bring much more in to the office- and it's not so called experience in Washington!!

She's WAY ahead of Bill, however, who took almost 7 years to be caught committing perjury. Personally I think Hillary would be impeached in the first year of office. What a lying scumbag.

Vote libertarian and restore the Whitehouse to its constitutional limits.

djd - that link didn't work for me but this one does. They edited that nicely for irony, I especially liked the singalong with Sheryl Crow.

Thanks Glinda, looks like a left a stray ampersand in - that's the link alright.

To answer your question, no. This lady has no decency.

Or pride. You'd think she'd have left Ol' Left Hand Willy after getting blown by half the people in this country.

I think they both played a role...

ROTFL..

You should slip in that little red phone in there somewhere... Hahaha.

Let's get the facts out about what Pastor Wright said, the media did not let anyone no that he was quoting a white man, so listen to the entire video and then voice your opinion, the media is the people who are racist and creating all this division. Please listen to the entire video and read who Pastor Wright was quoting. This entire video was sent to the news media/Fox News/Pat Buchanan/Chris Wallace/etc. but nobody is willing to show what Pastor Wright really said because now it would make Obama look real good. Make up your own mind don't let the media do it for you.

Now read about Ambassador Edward Peck...the man from whom Jeremiah Wright was quoting.

Jhn 8:32 â€" And ye shall know the truth, and the truth shall make you free. 2!#1.25 - Wed Mar 26, 2008 8:36 AM CDT

18.2 reported as no value, since you've just posted it up yonder.

JonesGirl you may be my favorite person on Newsvine now. lol

Bottom line: Do you TRUST her?

I wonder if you can trust him!
:-))

THAT is a fair question. Honestly, I do not know. I guess I'm leaning towards distrust. Someone pointed out that he is a US constitution scholar, yet he's a socialist democrat.

I just answered my own question.

No, definitely not.

Bottom line: Do you TRUST her?

I wonder if you can trust him!

You can't trust politicians. Not any of them. Ever. You just have to find out which one you think you want to deceive you the most...whose deceit will benefit the country and the world the most, or harm it the least.

How's that for cynicism?

I think that it's clear that Hillary is now serving the dark side. It seemed to me that she was in essence giving a personal confession and an oath of loyalty to Richard Mellon Scaife, one of the most prominent behind-the-scenes figures in the far right machine.

Partisan and others:

How many of you (honestly now) supported Hillary prior to BO coming into the picture?

I did, and I'll still vote for her if she wins the nomination.

But that doesn't mean I like her tactics.

My, Dennis, we agree on a lot today. Without Obama, I'm voting against McCain in November basically, but with the same ends.

@wmolaw:

I wish she'd run in 2004, then we wouldn't even be having this discussion, because she'd be up for a second term, and Obama would have held off on running until 2012. Sadly, she missed her chance, and we're all paying for it. Now, however, she's the wrong person for the job of healing our nation's wounds following the last 20 years of political strife.

Thanks for responding.

Reading the posts here on NV regarding this issue, it seems clear to me that lots of NV'ers who previously supported Hillary, are just now out and out Obama supporters and are lambasting her.

It's interesting, though probably not particularly important or relevant.

She'd probably make a really good Secretary of State, though.

If she managed to finagle the nomination at this point, I would still vote for her. But not a dime of my money, nor a minute of my time, would go to her campaign.

Partisan and others:

How many of you (honestly now) supported Hillary prior to BO coming into the picture?

I was for John Edwards, to be honest. I didn't have that many negative feelings about Hillary, but I just wan't trusting her, especially after her Iraq vote. I wasn't so sure about Obama, though, it took me a long time to figure him out and to get a bead on him. It definitely wasn't an overnight decision - it just kind of came. I think that the turning point was when I realized just how hard they tried to control the electronic voting in New Hampshire. Then I knew that something was definitely smelly. Some time just after the Texas primary I sent him my first donation.

Funny how that happens. I guess that's what the primary system helps us to do. We get to know the candidates better and then make up our minds.

She'd probably make a really good Secretary of State, though.

I'd keep her in the Senate for now, not sure that she's earned her way into the inner circle. Too likely to be a source of leaks.

bondibox #19....Scaife is one of the money men behind the war-mongering, neo-conservative American Enterprise Institute.

He is but that really falls way short of reflecting the Scaife influence. He's heir to Gulf Oil and Mellon Banking fortunes and funds far more than AEI. Through his many Scaife Foundations he's got the lions share of the right wing think tanks under his thumb. Here's a better listing of his foundation network. The value of having one voice sound like a thousand, priceless!

Yeah, I definitely want Clinton far from the top. With the number of dead people that show up around the Clintons, I don't want to up the risk level of early mortality.

Here's a better listing of his foundation network.

There are networks within networks within networks within networks in this far right machine. It's mind-numbing. All designed to obscure accountability. Remember the web of holding companies that obscured Enron's debts and dirty dealings? It isn't so different.

No it isn't different at all which is why it was so helpful to my dirtbag hunting to have a good bit of formal banking and Federal contracting under my belt!

Indeed! The same crowd with the same motives...

The "kitchen sink" strategy is upgraded to the "toilet bowl" strategy.

lols, well put. Today I read an even better one, the "Tonya Harding strategy," where vindictiveness trumps winning.

Tonya Harding strategy

A lot of this stuff closely resembles the behavior of alcoholics, so Tonya Harding as a classic case is an interesting parallel. It's like they are always owed more by the world - in spite of them owning practically all of the world. It never ends.

I deeply regret any misunderstanding stemming from my "Monday Night Football quarterback" statement. I misspoke. I seem to have neglected to mention that it was in my backyard, with Bill and Chelsea. And that I really only brought Bill a Gatorade and paid for his cheerleaders. But I would have left Obama's church.

I'm sure Hillary's next speech will have

"I remember body slamming Andre the Giant at Wrestlemania 3"

Hillary will not win the nomination.

We would NEVER vote for a Clinton or a McCain- we would stay home!

As long time Clinton supporters- we find their behavior discus-ting- for many reasons.

As whites growing up in the 30s & 40s we believe, your remarks are VERY racist.

Obama is intelligent, HONEST, and would be a President for all Americans- not just a segment of our population. He is the Jackie Robinson of politics. People with your beliefs didn't think anyone but white could play baseball!!!

Let's call this discussion what it really is...pure racial hate..

Obama is intelligent, HONEST, and would be a President for all Americans- not just a segment of our population.

This is not true. He would be a President for all Americans who agree with his policies, just like any other President. I mean, in a literal sense, of course he'll be President for all Americans--but in the sense you mean, that's just naive. You like him, that doesn't mean suddenly all the Conservatives in America are going to like him. Just because you think taxes should be hiked, doesn't mean that suddenly, just because Obama says so, die-hard fiscal Conservatives are going to say "Oh yeah, he's so charming, let's raise taxes and go against everything we believe about the economy and government..."

Obama will be just like any other President if he wins. Some will love him, some will hate him, and most will probably tolerate him and complain incessantly about the government. Which is fine. That is, IF he wins, which I don't think he will. If McCain wins, the same will be true. Some will love him, some will hate him, ......etc. etc.

that doesn't mean suddenly all the Conservatives in America are going to like him

Eh, screw 'em.

It's out turn ;-)

It's out turn ;-)

Well, I'm not sure who "out" is or why it's their turn....

Umm, our. Our turn. oops.

Dennis:

Eh, screw 'em.

It's out turn ;-)

You hope.

You hope.

Hey, is that an Obama joke?

What's the difference?

Are you asking because you really don't know, or are you trying to make a stab at him?

Many of his entire sermons are online. You watch at least one of them and I believe you will get the answer to your question.

And Clinton's campaign would love to have you believe that if you agree with ANY of Rev. Wright's ideals, you are a racist anti-American loony.

Sorry that is pure nonsense.

Yeah..especially the belief that the US government created AIDS to infect the black people ..who in their right mind would not believe that...wow.

However, I would like to hear Wright preach the gospel. I would like to hear what we would say.

It's amazing how talented some people are at using one thing someone says and construing it to mean they are a lunatic on the whole. I'm sorry, but I just don't buy it. Did the USA create AIDS? Probably not. Is that a crazy stance? It's pretty far out there. Can you support Rev. Wright and still call BS on that one? Absolutely.

I do not believe you see the big picture and the problem this gives Obama. It goes beyond Wright. Wright has said that a basis for Trinity's philosophies is the work of James Cone, who founded the modern black liberation theology movement out of the civil rights struggles of the 1960s. Particularly influential was Cone's seminal 1969 book, "Black Theology & Black Power."

Cone wrote that the United States was a white racist nation and the white church was the Antichrist for having supported slavery and segregation.

In an interview, Cone said that when he was asked which church most embodied his message, "I would point to that church (Trinity) first." Cone also said he thought that Wright's successor, the Rev. Otis Moss III, would continue the tradition. Other interesting remarks by Cone

"Together, black religion and Marxist philosophy may show us the way to build a completely new society."

Asked about that, Cone said: "I'm not a Marxist. . . . I'm a theologian, and I want to change society. I was searching for my way forward. I want a society in which people have the distribution of wealth, but I don't know how quite to do that institutionally."
Black theology refuses to accept a God who is not identified totally with the goals of the black community. If God is not for us and against white people, then he is a murderer, and we had better kill him.

All white men are responsible for white oppression.

While it is true that blacks do hate whites, black hatred is not racism.

Theologically, Malcolm X was not far wrong when he called the white man the devil.

The black theologian must reject any conception of God which stifles black self-determination by picturing God as a God of all peoples.

We have had too much of white love, the love that tells blacks to turn the other cheek and go the second mile. What we need is the divine love as expressed in black power, which is the power of blacks to destroy their oppressors, here and now, by any means at their disposal.

Dr. Cone is a professor at the Union Theological Seminary, the "Charles Augustus Briggs Distinguished Professor of Systematic Theology."

It is a stamp of official approval for a peddler of race hatred. What would Jesus say? I daresay that Jesus would not, repeat not, approve of BLT. Because Black Liberation Theology seems to go straight against every single word in the Sermon on the Mount. Odd that the UCC has never noticed that over the last fifty years.

Obama needs to buckle up..it is going to be a rough ride.

Independent,

You got that right. But, I am sure that we will hear lots of "it's not his belief," etc., etc.

The fact is, that if it walks, etc., etc.

He has been a member of this Church for 20 years. Such a record cannot, at least honestly, result in people believing him when he says "I didn't know," or "i don't agree," or whatever.

Clinton has barely scratched this surface yet, and see the demonizing of her?

Just wait until it really gets cracking.

And, IV, I would support a watered-down version of that BLT that doesn't make such rampant generalizations. What a tasty BLT that would be. But there's a difference between these two statements:
What a load! That's extremely radical, and I hate it.
What a load! That's extremely radical, but that's just because it's essentially of a hyperbole of the facts.

He has been a member of this Church for 20 years. Such a record cannot, at least honestly, result in people believing him when he says "I didn't know," or "i don't agree," or whatever.

1) He didn't say he "didn't know". He admitted he heard controversial commentary. That's been pointed out too many times for statements to the contrary to hold water or to assume that they're made out of ignorance. So, perhaps you "haven't read" those statements, but I suspect you have, and are choosing to ignore them.

2) I've been a member of my family all my life. My brother is a staunch conservative. (Sigh.) My parents have certainly become more conservative as they've aged. (Sigh.) I'm certainly not a conservative, and I'm sure most people on Newsvine would place me firmly left-of-center. I think you overstate the influence the politics of his pastor 'must' have had on him as I assure you that the potential influence of my parents is as great, if not far greater than what would be expected of Obama's relationship with his pastor.

I firmly disagree with their stance on any number of issues. Shall I emancipate myself from that connection, or should I love them despite those differences, knowing that they have a multitude of positive qualities, as well?

You can choose your friends..you can not choose your family.

I've been a member of my family all my life. My brother is a staunch conservative. (Sigh.) My parents have certainly become more conservative as they've aged. (Sigh.) I'm certainly not a conservative,

3 out of 4 ain't bad.

You can choose your friends..you can not choose your family.

I'm sorry, IV, but that statement is Bull@!$%#. Casual friends are a choice, but close friends are family.

You can choose your friends..you can not choose your family.

I'm sorry, IV, but that statement is Bull@!$%#. Casual friends are a choice, but close friends are family.

Plus if you agree with your friends on everything, you're not a true friend. you're a sheep.