Who will (not should) be the Democratic presidential nominee in 2008?

[miked]

Originally Posted by rkmsuf

Clearly I don't get why a man would go to this church for so long, feel so close to this Rev while the messages we see from this preacher are horrible IMO.

What bothers me too is how supporters kind of brush it off as "isolated" or well Obama didn't believe those things. For me there is a disconnect there in spite of any spin or speeches going on.

The person with average intelligence might be able to consider that perhaps these clips and snippets being thrust in our faces 24/7 for the past week may not actually represent the sum.

I don't really care as much any more who wins, I just want it to be over, but to say you know it all based on your very brief exposure to his 20 year career is beyond silly.

[Noop]

Originally Posted by rkmsuf

What difference does it make. I'm on no team here.

Consider me neutral. Right smack dab in the middle.

This is what I'm talking about. It's almost impossible to fathom I've read the speech and in fact feel the way I've said I do. Amazing.

So you honestly believe he should have left the man he has known for twenty years? Even if he didn't agree with what Wright said Obama would be between a rock and a hard place.

If he leaves the church then he loses the black vote in Illinois meaning he would likely not get re-elected to the senate. He would also be turning on his friend of twenty years to appease what the church would call the white media.

If he stands by his friend and spiritual leader then reactions like yours and others will continue and he would lose the nomination and would likely never be a viable candidate for president again.

[Deattribution]

It's amazing what kind of sheep people have become. The only reason he suddenly condemns what Wright has to say is because it's come to public light and it's going to damage his campaign. Anyone who believes someone who would spew things that insane and it would only be an isolated event is a fool and probably thinks they're going to get a unbiased opinion from Jerry Falwell too. Cause the stuff he says on tv is isolated from his regular every day opinion.



Wright preached hate, Obama may not agree with it (and I don't believe he does, especially not to the same extent Wright does) but Obama shows himself to be just like any other crooked politician, staying apart of that church because it helped further his career, and his status in the black community, just like his speech means to do. It has nothing to do with integrity, personal beliefs or vision, and unfortunately for Obama that was the main things he had going for him. Atleast it's good to see he can still round up his sheep to get them to holler home run and grandslam! for a speech that amounts to nothing other than trying to save face and have no actual impact on anything that'll actually help america. It'll create some great soundbites though, and that is what america needs more of from a president.

[rkmsuf]

Originally Posted by miked

The person with average intelligence might be able to consider that perhaps these clips and snippets being thrust in our faces 24/7 for the past week may not actually represent the sum.

I don't really care as much any more who wins, I just want it to be over, but to say you know it all based on your very brief exposure to his 20 year career is beyond silly.

True, it's entirely possible that stuff about 911 was when he picked up the wrong serman one sunday. Probably never mentioned it again.

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by Noop

So you honestly believe he should have left the man he has known for twenty years? Even if he didn't agree with what Wright said Obama would be between a rock and a hard place.

If he leaves the church then he loses the black vote in Illinois meaning he would likely not get re-elected to the senate. He would also be turning on his friend of twenty years to appease what the church would call the white media.

If he stands by his friend and spiritual leader then reactions like yours and others will continue and he would lose the nomination and would likely never be a viable candidate for president again.

I think he should have left him before running for office was ever a realistic thought in his mind.

Also, the thought process here of what is "right" in the context of how it plays for votes seems diametrically opposed to Obama's entire campaign theme. But I digress.

[rkmsuf]

Originally Posted by Noop

So you honestly believe he should have left the man he has known for twenty years? Even if he didn't agree with what Wright said Obama would be between a rock and a hard place.

If he leaves the church then he loses the black vote in Illinois meaning he would likely not get re-elected to the senate. He would also be turning on his friend of twenty years to appease what the church would call the white media.

If he stands by his friend and spiritual leader then reactions like yours and others will continue and he would lose the nomination and would likely never be a viable candidate for president again.

No, my point is he should have left that church 15 years ago.

his friend and spiritual leader

that really is the point isn't it? not whether he bails now. only a fool would bail now.

[Noop]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

I think he should have left him before running for office was ever a realistic thought in his mind.

Also, the thought process here of what is "right" in the context of how it plays for votes seems diametrically opposed to Obama's entire campaign theme. But I digress.

Actually I was going to write that but decided against it. If leaves before being a presidential candidate do you think he ever gets elected to the senate? I don't think so and that's way I said he is between a rock and a hard place.

[Scoobz0202]

Not help America? What the hell did he say that could not possibly help America?

It's a fucking speech. Of course it's supposed to create soundbites. He's good at giving speeches. Plain and simple.

First, people can't stand Bush because he can not give a speech to save his life.

Now, Barack is catching flack because supposedly all he can do is give good speeches.

If people are so cynical to not believe anything a candidate says, then what do you vote based upon? Because everything we know about the cadidates is based upon what they say they will do.

I guess just go look at their voting records and go vote and hope for the best.

[CamEdwards]

Originally Posted by cartman

Since he didn't fall flat on his face with this speech, like it appears you were convinced was going to happen with your "color me unimpressed" posts from yesterday, I guess you have to keep plugging away.

How do you know that Obama didn't bring this up some of these instances to Wright in private in the past? You make is sound like Wright was preaching hate from the pulpit and in public 24/7, like a Phelps, when by all accounts that isn't the case. Yes he went way over the line in many instances, but it doesn't seem to be the core of what he was preaching.

No, Obama didn't fall flat on his face. But that wasn't what I suggested would happen. What I said yesterday was this:

I'm at a loss as to what Obama says next. He's clearly NOT disassociated himself from Rev. Wright, all the while suggesting that Wright's comments have nothing to do with his [Obama's] political beliefs. Well, what about personal ideology? Much of Obama's support comes from people who don't know a thing about his record. They're basing their support on the feelings he inspires in them. So what can he say to reassure those folks that, despite attending the church for more than 20 years and having a close spiritual relationship with this man, they don't reflect his personal views and in fact he finds them abhorrent? I'm waiting to see him pull a rabbit out of his hat, but I'll be darned if I can see a way for him to "win" with this issue.

I think I'm consistent in believing that Obama's speech today ultimately did not solve his problem. He was amazingly blunt in discussing racial issues in society today, but only to obfuscate his own problems with his close association for decades with Rev. Jeremiah Wright.

And I confess to being a little confused by your statement that "he went way over the line in many instances, but it doesn't seem to be the core of what he was preaching."

If someone's view is that the U.S. government is out to imprison you, out to decimate your community through the release of the AIDS virus, that blacks like Clarence Thomas and Condoleeza Rice are somehow less black than the people sitting in your pews, that the country we live in is the U-S of K-K-K-A, that God should damn this country, that we brought 9/11 on ourselves, but that we also should love our neighbor and ourselves... I'm not sure that you can disassociate the two.

Rev. Wright's theology is one that he describes as "black liberation theology". Well, if liberation theology in general can be described as Christian Socialism, then black liberation theology could best be described as Christian Socialism with a specific emphasis on social equality for blacks. I don't believe this is a "black seperatist" or a "black supremacist" movement. But when the basis of your church is that every act or thought must be viewed through a racial prism, it's kind of hard for me to accept that Obama's going to be the guy to bridge the racial divide in this country.

A quick comparison.

The marvelous new militancy which has engulfed the Negro community must not lead us to a distrust of all white people, for many of our white brothers, as evidenced by their presence here today, have come to realize that their destiny is tied up with our destiny. And they have come to realize that their freedom is inextricably bound to our freedom.
...
I have a dream that one day on the red hills of Georgia, the sons of former slaves and the sons of former slave owners will be able to sit down together at the table of brotherhood.

I have a dream that one day even the state of Mississippi, a state sweltering with the heat of injustice, sweltering with the heat of oppression, will be transformed into an oasis of freedom and justice.

I have a dream that my four little children will one day live in a nation where they will not be judged by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.

compared to:

It just came to me with -- within the past few weeks, you all, why so many folk are hating on Barack Obama. He doesn't fit the model. He ain't white. He ain't rich. And he ain't privileged.

Barack knows what it means to be a black man living in a country and a culture that is controlled by rich white people.

I guess one of my biggest problems isn't necessarily JUST with the comments we've seen from Rev. Wright. It is that Rev. Wright's comments don't seem out of line with liberation theology in general, and black liberation theology in particular. And I'm having a hard time seeing how black liberation theology is anything but a perversion of Martin Luther King's vision of a society in which we are judged by the content of our character, rather than the color of our skin.

I'm sure if you look through Rev. Wright's sermons, you'll see a lot of talk of hope, and love, and charity. But if he is, as he says he is, a proponent of black liberation theology, then it will always be about the racial division, not the common ground we all share. It seems to me the message of Rev. Wright is completely different than the message Barack Obama has been expressing, which makes me wonder how he could have attended this church for 20+ years.

For the record, yes, my mind is made up on who I will vote for. But my mind is NOT made up as to who Barack Obama is and what he would mean for this country.

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by Noop

Actually I was going to write that but decided against it. If leaves before being a presidential candidate do you think he ever gets elected to the senate? I don't think so and that's way I said he is between a rock and a hard place.

I refuse to believe that one church, and one man, held the key to whether Obama would have made it in politics. I think you're painting his either/or choices way too simply.

[cartman]

Originally Posted by CamEdwards

No, Obama didn't fall flat on his face. But that wasn't what I suggested would happen. What I said yesterday was this:

Sounds like you weren't expecting much, based on these bits.

[CamEdwards]

Originally Posted by cartman

Sounds like you weren't expecting much, based on these bits.

Actually sounds like I wasn't impressed by his interview with Gwen Ifill and thought "boy, if that's from his speech I'm not impressed."

Frankly, I didn't know what to expect, which is why I also expressed my curiousity as to WHAT Obama would say today. And ultimately, yes, I'm less than impressed with Obama the candidate's answers, though he sure does talk pretty.

[Radii]

Originally Posted by CamEdwards

I'm sure if you look through Rev. Wright's sermons, you'll see a lot of talk of hope, and love, and charity. But if he is, as he says he is, a proponent of black liberation theology, then it will always be about the racial division, not the common ground we all share. It seems to me the message of Rev. Wright is completely different than the message Barack Obama has been expressing, which makes me wonder how he could have attended this church for 20+ years.

For the record, yes, my mind is made up on who I will vote for. But my mind is NOT made up as to who Barack Obama is and what he would mean for this country.

I think this, and pretty much all of your post, is extremely well put and mostly matches my feelings about all of this.

Last week I planned to vote for Obama in the North Carolina primary. Today I still plan to vote for Obama in the North Carolina primary. It would probably take quite a bit for that to change. But I don't feel nearly as strongly now as I did a week ago.

[Toddzilla]

Goddammit, Cam, you're like a big right-wing teddy bear: Can't agree with you, way too hard to argue with you, and impossible to dislike. My DFH card ought to be revoked

[CamEdwards]

Originally Posted by Toddzilla

Goddammit, Cam, you're like a big right-wing teddy bear: Can't agree with you, way too hard to argue with you, and impossible to dislike. My DFH card ought to be revoked

LOL. That's the best compliment ever. Seriously, thank you.

[Vegas Vic]

I haven't yet had a chance to listen to Obama's speech, but did he give a reason for the decision to cancel Rev. Wright's appearance at his announcement to run for president last year?

[Young Drachma]

Originally Posted by Vegas Vic

I haven't yet had a chance to listen to Obama's speech, but did he give a reason for the decision to cancel Rev. Wright's appearance at his announcement to run for president last year?

Please stop causing problems.

[cartman]

Originally Posted by Vegas Vic

I haven't yet had a chance to listen to Obama's speech, but did he give a reason for the decision to cancel Rev. Wright's appearance at his announcement to run for president last year?

He couldn't make it to the announcement because he was out organizing caucuses and trying to get super-delegates switch to Obama against their will.

[Vegas Vic]

Originally Posted by Dark Cloud

Please stop causing problems.

For closure, I think it's the one puzzling item that hasn't been addressed.

On the one hand, Obama says that Wright has been his spiritual mentor for the past 20 years. A few days ago, Obama said that he was shocked and appalled when he saw the video clips of Wright's hate speeches, and this was the first that he had heard about it. Yet, in February 2007 (13 months ago), when Obama announced his candidacy, a last minute decision was made by him and his staff to exclude Wright from appearing on stage with him. Instead, Wright and Obama prayed privately before the announcement.

So, something doesn't add up here, and Obama needs to address this if he wants to leave this issue behind.

[Buccaneer]

You know, I was thinking about this thread today. While I have been involved in POL discussions for years here, I find this thread to be a good debate. I think the main reason is that the participants, for the most part, have been civil and respectful, unlike any of the threads in the past where we had Biggle and Ewiak in it. Here we have to put up with Toddzilla going off once in a while (not to mention ignoring noop). Even though I vote for gridlock and less (not more) crap coming out of Washington, I forward to reading what Cam, JPhillips, Vic and others have to say.

[SirFozzie]

Wow, I think we've found the only few skeptics around.

I'm seeing the National Review, and a lot of the conservative (centre-right, not hard right) blogs, and even the folks behind the 700 club admit that Obama hit one out of the park on this one, with the caveat that it might have needed more soundbites to get a full run off of it with the press.

[rowech]

I did not see him give the speech but having read the text, I can tell you he nailed it. I have no doubt he gave the speech with passion as you can see it just in the words.

[Coffee Warlord]

He's an excellent orator. It's always been his greatest strength.

....still not voting for him due to his politics, but damn, he can talk.

[Arles]

This probably won't help Obama much:

http://www.abcnews.go.com/GMA/Vote20...4464194&page=1

Originally Posted by ABC News

"I vehemently disagree and strongly condemn the statements that have [been] the subject of this controversy," Obama said, saying that he'd never heard any of them personally.

"One of them I had heard about after I had started running for president and I put out a statement at that time condemning them," he continued.

But more than a year ago, Obama disinvited Wright from speaking at his candidacy announcement. Wright told The New York Times then that Obama told him, "You can get kind of rough in the sermons. … It's best for you not to be out there in public."

This is where politicians always get nabbed - trying to cover up and feign ignorance. Obama just needed to come out and say that he had heard a few of these sermons, vehemently disagreed with them and move on. Acting like he never heard any of them in 20+ years (until he ran for pres last year) is a little ridiculous. It's just going to be a matter of time before some Clinton agent shows a video with Obama clapping while Wright gives one of these sermons.

[SirFozzie]

Kinda like this, Arlie? (from today's speech)

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'm sure many of you have heard remarks from your pastors, priests, or rabbis with which you strongly disagreed.

[Mac Howard]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

I refuse to believe that one church, and one man, held the key to whether Obama would have made it in politics. I think you're painting his either/or choices way too simply.

It's not the church or Wright that will make or break Obama. It is the implied hypocrisy of a man presenting himself as a force for unity while refusing to walk away over 20 years from the rhetoric of anti-American hatred that would split the community in two. At worst Obama has some concealed sympathy for these views, at best he has turned a blind eye to them.

I think only those who already see no wrong in Obama are convinced this speech has put the matter to bed. Should he make it to the Presidential contest the Republicans will tear him to shreds with this.

[Arles]

Originally Posted by CNN

COOPER: (AUDIO GAP) ... was created by the government to kill black people. He's called America the number-one killer around the world. He's said that black people shouldn't sing "God Bless America," but say God damn America.

There's a lot of folks in America right now who have heard that. And I want to ask you why you have been listening to this pastor and close to him for nearly 20 years?

SEN. BARACK OBAMA (D-IL), PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATE: Well, first of all, Anderson, you know, I strongly condemn the statements that have been shown on the tape.

I have to confess that those are not statements that I ever heard when I was sitting in the pews at this church.

COOPER: Did you not know, though, that, I mean, a couple days after 9/11, he said, you know, this was America's chickens coming home to roost, a result of what he called American terrorism around the world? I mean, you may not have been there, but have you -- you must have heard that he had said these things.

OBAMA: You know, I confess that I did not hear about this until -- until I started running for president.
...
OBAMA: And, as I said, Anderson, if I had heard any of those statements, I probably would have walked up, and I probably would have told Reverend Wright that they were wrong.

But they were not statements that I heard when I was in church.

COOPER: So, no one in the church ever said to you, man, last week, you missed this sermon; Reverend Wright said this; or...

OBAMA: No.

COOPER: I mean, I think I read in your books that you listened to tapes of Reverend Wright when you were at Harvard Law School.

OBAMA: I did.

COOPER: So, you had no idea?

OBAMA: I did not.

That interview was done on March 14. On March 18, Obama says:

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

This is "out-Clintoning" the Clintons on double talk. Maybe this is all clear to you, but I don't see that he's doing himself any favors over the past week with his comments.

[Vegas Vic]

Originally Posted by SirFozzie

I'm seeing the National Review, and a lot of the conservative (centre-right, not hard right) blogs, and even the folks behind the 700 club admit that Obama hit one out of the park on this one, with the caveat that it might have needed more soundbites to get a full run off of it with the press.

National Review Column on Obama's Speech: "An Elegant Farce"

[Groundhog]

Saying "you can get rough" does not equal "you might say those things I've heard you say that I denied having heard".

No doubt he probably did hear him say it a few times, but I don't see that particular quote as shooting himself in the foot. This church dude sounds like he'd be the type to say a lot of off-the-wall kind of crap.

[Vinatieri for Prez]

Originally Posted by rkmsuf

pick anyone you know or any church you been too and tell me you've heard these statements or anything of the like

and if you had are you repeatingly seeking out these people.

You miss the point. Have you ever heard derogatory comments filled with hate from a friend, a family member, etc. Did you run for the hills when they did it? Why do people standby a friend who may have committed a crime, beat somebody up unprovoked, etc. There is more to someone than a couple of minutes on youtube -- 20 years worth for Obama and Wright. Apparently 20 years, and probably a lifetime, of helping poor disadvantaged people. More than I personally will ever do for such people. I can forgive a guy for that. I am more concerned with actions than words. You maybe part of the problem Obama speaks about, retreating to your corner. Finally, let me ask you this. Did you live as a black man in the 50s and 60s? I am guessing you did not, and have no idea what he went through and where some of his hate is coming from. I don't agree with it, but I understand it.

But, awshucks, I am just a sheep, bedeviled by that silver tongued Obama.

[Vinatieri for Prez]

Originally Posted by Arles

That interview was done on March 14. On March 18, Obama says:


This is "out-Clintoning" the Clintons on double talk. Maybe this is all clear to you, but I don't see that he's doing himself any favors over the past week with his comments.

Don't quite get you there. He said he didn't personally hear the things that were on youtube. Then he later says he did hear other controversial stuff. You may not believe him, but it is entirely consistent.

[Mac Howard]

Originally Posted by Vinatieri for Prez

Don't quite get you there. He said he didn't personally hear the things that were on youtube. Then he later says he did hear other controversial stuff. You may not believe him, but it is entirely consistent.

"out Clintoning the Clintons" is certainly overstating it but you do seem to be guilty of an equal level of spin on this.

But, awshucks, I am just a sheep, bedeviled by that silver tongued Obama.

There does seem to be a degree of gullibility here.

Obama clearly denied knowing about the Wright's hate rhetoric until this speech. Accusing him of inconsistency is not unreasonable

Some commentators seem to want to treat Wright's words as if they stand on their own with no significant meaning outside the words themselves. But they express an opinion, an attitude even a philosophy - a rabid anti-American philosophy. For a man with ambitions to become the President of the USA such a philosophy has to be seriously objectionable. For him there is no reasonable way that these ideas can be ignored. They surely are (should be) against everything this man stands for. But, until it came to affect his candidature, it seems that Obamo didn't object, didn't remove himself from the arena of their expression, didn't try to counter them in any way (had he done so it would surely have made far more sense to include as them justification in his speech).

Even from a pragmatic point of view, as a senator, Obama should have removed himself from the sphere of this rhetoric. Are there so few black churches or well-meaning pastors that Obama cannot find one to associate with? Of course not.

Add this episode to his wife's "the first time I've felt proud ...." and Obama is in trouble.

[Vinatieri for Prez]

Originally Posted by Mac Howard

Obama clearly denied knowing about the Wright's hate rhetoric until this speech.

I just disagree. As I said before, he denied hearing those specific topics discussed by Wright. And he did not in his speech admit hearing about those topics, just other controversial topics. Again, you can disbelieve him, but he is consistent.

[Mac Howard]

Originally Posted by Vinatieri for Prez

I just disagree. As I said before, he denied hearing those specific topics discussed by Wright. And he did not in his speech admit hearing about those topics, just other controversial topics. Again, you can disbelieve him, but he is consistent.

I am neither for or against Obama, would probably end up voting for him if he gets the Democratic nomination and I were an American, but that interpretation of his behaviour here is head in the sand, Vinatien for Prez. He choses his words so as not to directly contradict himself - as politicians will - but he contradicts himself nevertheless.

[TroyF]

Originally Posted by Vinatieri for Prez

You miss the point. Have you ever heard derogatory comments filled with hate from a friend, a family member, etc. Did you run for the hills when they did it? Why do people standby a friend who may have committed a crime, beat somebody up unprovoked, etc. There is more to someone than a couple of minutes on youtube -- 20 years worth for Obama and Wright. Apparently 20 years, and probably a lifetime, of helping poor disadvantaged people. More than I personally will ever do for such people. I can forgive a guy for that. I am more concerned with actions than words. You maybe part of the problem Obama speaks about, retreating to your corner. Finally, let me ask you this. Did you live as a black man in the 50s and 60s? I am guessing you did not, and have no idea what he went through and where some of his hate is coming from. I don't agree with it, but I understand it.

But, awshucks, I am just a sheep, bedeviled by that silver tongued Obama.

Cam and Ksyrup are closest to the feelings I have on the issue. It's tough for me to listen to the comments by Rev. Wright and then deal with Obama being a close, personal friend of the same individual for 20+ years.

Understanding the hate and accepting it are two different things. I mean, there is a difference between saying America has made mistakes in dealing with race issues and then stating that the AIDS virus was put out by the government as a way to kill black people or that it's the USofKKKA.

What's tough for me to believe is that these tapes by Rev. Wright were put up for sale. I find it hard to believe that this is some isolated instance. I also find it hard to believe a "spiritual advisor" with those types of hateful views doesn't push a political agenda in those advisory sessions.

I guess, what it comes down to, is a few simple questions for me. Would I have my children in the church listening to that man speak on a Sunday morning? I wouldn't. Would I go back into that church? No, I wouldn't. Would I allow the man who said those words to be a part of my team in a run for The White House? No. I wouldn't.

Obama does. That simple fact makes me have serious reservations about him as a political candidate.

Shifting off of Obama for a second. . . let me just say that Rev. Wright is the type of scumbage that causes people to hate religion. He's a black Jerry Falwell. His words to nothing to fix the racial divide in this country and inspire hate in the youths he preaches(d) to. He should be ashamed of himself.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by SirFozzie

Wow, I think we've found the only few skeptics around.

Heard a pretty good one on local radio this morning, not a political commentator but just a regular guest commentator on a music format station. I thought he summed it up pretty well when he said he had to leave during the speech & run to the mirror. He wanted to see if he really looked as stupid as Obama apparently believes everyone is.

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by Vinatieri for Prez

You miss the point. Have you ever heard derogatory comments filled with hate from a friend, a family member, etc. Did you run for the hills when they did it?

First, I'd separate family from friends/acquaintances. Not only is that not the case here, but I'd argue there's a bit more going on that clouds the issue when a family member is involved (at least a close family member, not necessarily every person you are related to). Second, yes, I've heard comments that go beyond just a fleeting attempt at a joke that was based on some sort of racial or other derogatory aspect, and I consciously chose to lessen or outright cease contact with that person.

I can think of one instance, in particular, that stands out. In college, there was a group of us (a few sets of dorm roommates) who used to hang out quite often. One of those was a good friend of mine, and his roommate. Over time, I noticed a distinct pattern of racial slurs from the roommate that seemed to be used as a matter of course, and I told my friend that his roommate was not welcome in my dormroom because I was uncomfortable with his continuing use of racial slurs as part of his everyday talk. And I told my friend that I would not hang out with him with that guy around. And then I had a very direct confrontation with that person over the issue, and we basically agreed to not hang around each other. The easy thing to do would have been to just endure it for the sake of "the group," but there was no way I could do that. And truthfully, my friendship with the other guy ended up fading away pretty quickly after that, too, which was OK with me because it bothered me that he didn't react the same way I did to what he heard.

Again, this is my perspective on the issue. Maybe you'd just continue to abide by someone like that and ignore it, but I don't see how anyone could or would do that. I understand the race issue clouds things for Obama here, but when things clearly go beyond expressing anger and resentment over the historical treatment of blacks, and head into outright lies/conspiracy theories attempting to feed that anger among the black community...it's time to disassociate yourself from those positions. Obama can feel strongly about certain racial issues and seek to honor those who sacrificed in the past in other, more productive ways. That he chose to bring this man closer to him, and not reject him (or at least attempt a personal dialogue with him about the harm that such statements cause)...how can that NOT be a legitimate concern for the public when you're talking about someone who is a candidate for US President?

[Passacaglia]

Originally Posted by Mac Howard

I am neither for or against Obama, would probably end up voting for him if he gets the Democratic nomination and I were an American, but that interpretation of his behaviour here is head in the sand, Vinatien for Prez. He choses his words so as not to directly contradict himself - as politicians will - but he contradicts himself nevertheless.

So you're saying he did and did not contradict himself?

[Young Drachma]

Mike Huckabee on Morning Joe this morning:

HUCKABEE: [Obama] made the point, and I think it's a valid one, that you can't hold the candidate responsible for everything that people around him may say or do. You just can't. Whether it's me, whether it's Obama...anybody else. But he did distance himself from the very vitriolic statements.

Now, the second story. It's interesting to me that there are some people on the left who are having to be very uncomfortable with what Louis Wright said, when they all were all over a Jerry Falwell, or anyone on the right who said things that they found very awkward and uncomfortable years ago. Many times those were statements lifted out of the context of a larger sermon. Sermons, after all, are rarely written word for word by pastors like Reverend Wright, who are delivering them extemporaneously, and caught up in the emotion of the moment. There are things that sometimes get said, that if you put them on paper and looked at them in print, you'd say "Well, I didn't mean to say it quite like that."

JOE SCARBOROUGH: But, but, you never came close to saying five days after September 11th, that America deserved what it got. Or that the American government invented AIDs...

HUCKABEE: Not defending his statements.

JOE SCARBOROUGH: Oh, I know you're not. I know you're not. I'm just wondering though, for a lot of people...Would you not guess that there are a lot of Independent voters in Arkansas that vote for Democrats sometimes, and vote for Republicans sometimes, that are sitting here wondering how Barack Obama's spiritual mentor would call the United States the USKKK?

HUCKABEE: I mean, those were outrageous statements, and nobody can defend the content of them.

JOE SCARBOROUGH: But what's the impact on voters in Arkansas? Swing voters.

HUCKABEE: I don't think we know. If this were October, I think it would have a dramatic impact. But it's not October. It's March. And I don't believe that by the time we get to October, this is gonna be the defining issue of the campaign, and the reason that people vote.

And one other thing I think we've gotta remember. As easy as it is for those of us who are white, to look back and say "That's a terrible statement!"...I grew up in a very segregated south. And I think that you have to cut some slack -- and I'm gonna be probably the only Conservative in America who's gonna say something like this, but I'm just tellin' you -- we've gotta cut some slack to people who grew up being called names, being told "you have to sit in the balcony when you go to the movie. You have to go to the back door to go into the restaurant. And you can't sit out there with everyone else. There's a separate waiting room in the doctor's office. Here's where you sit on the bus..." And you know what? Sometimes people do have a chip on their shoulder and resentment. And you have to just say, I probably would too. I probably would too. In fact, I may have had more of a chip on my shoulder had it been me.

MIKA: I agree with that. I really do.

JOE SCARBOROUGH: It's the Atticus Finch line about walking a mile in somebody else's shoes. I remember when Ronald Reagan got shot in 1981. There were some black students in my school that started applauding and said they hoped that he died. And you just sat there and of course you were angry at first, and then you walked out and started scratching your head going "boy, there is some deep resentment there."

[Ksyrup]

Huckabee's point is well-taken, but I think that only covers a portion of what Wright has said. It does not cover the more outrageous statements. Those go beyond cutting someone slack over how the race issue has personally affected them and the black community.

[flere-imsaho]

From the NYT editorial:

On Tuesday, Mr. Obama drew a bright line between his religious connection with Mr. Wright, which should be none of the voters’ business, and having a political connection, which would be very much their business. The distinction seems especially urgent after seven years of a president who has worked to blur the line between church and state.

Chicago Public Radio did a bit on Trinity Church this morning. The gist of the report was that these excerpts from Wright's sermons greatly mischaracterizes what Trinity is all about. Additionally, those who attended Wright's sermons are pretty bemused, saying the majority of his sermons didn't have this kind of "speech".

[Noop]

Originally Posted by Buccaneer

You know, I was thinking about this thread today. While I have been involved in POL discussions for years here, I find this thread to be a good debate. I think the main reason is that the participants, for the most part, have been civil and respectful, unlike any of the threads in the past where we had Biggle and Ewiak in it. Here we have to put up with Toddzilla going off once in a while (not to mention ignoring noop). Even though I vote for gridlock and less (not more) crap coming out of Washington, I forward to reading what Cam, JPhillips, Vic and others have to say.

GFUS.

[JonInMiddleGA]

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

Additionally, those who attended Wright's sermons are pretty bemused, saying the majority of his sermons didn't have this kind of "speech".

So as long as he doesn't spew this stuff every week it's okay?
*(not with you, with them)

{grabs popcorn}
Kind of fun in a voyeuristic sort of way watching people (metaphorically) shoot Obama's toes off one at a time.

I will now retract my previous statement about Hillary having no chance to beat Obama decisively in Pennsylvania. Now there's at least a chance.

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by Noop

GFUS.

G-File User System?

Gauge Fishing Units?

[Mizzou B-ball fan]

Originally Posted by flere-imsaho

From the NYT editorial:

Chicago Public Radio did a bit on Trinity Church this morning. The gist of the report was that these excerpts from Wright's sermons greatly mischaracterizes what Trinity is all about. Additionally, those who attended Wright's sermons are pretty bemused, saying the majority of his sermons didn't have this kind of "speech".

Even more 'bemusing' is the fact that people would defend this behavior because it doesn't happen in 'every' sermon. It reminds me of people who defend a person who gets a DUI/DWI by saying, "He's a good kid. He just made a mistake."

That's not a mistake. That's a conscious decision against better judgement.

[Noop]

Originally Posted by Ksyrup

G-File User System?

Gauge Fishing Units?

Starts with Go

[Ksyrup]

Originally Posted by Noop

Starts with Go

Oh. I think you mean GFY. Or better yet, to avoid confusion - FU.

[Fidatelo]

I still don't get it.

[albionmoonlight]

I wonder how many people will listen to the speech via youtube, etc. This seems like the first major political speech in which people have the opportunity to hear it firsthand. I don't know if people will take the opportunity or not. But it seems like it is only good for Democracy if they do. Whether you agree with it or not, you are actually engaging it--instead of just listening to someone's snarky or praise-filled description of it.

Still, I am skeptical that any significant number of people are willing to take a half-hour to listen to a political speech. Patience is not in America's DNA.

[-apoc-]

Originally Posted by albionmoonlight

I wonder how many people will listen to the speech via youtube, etc. This seems like the first major political speech in which people have the opportunity to hear it firsthand. I don't know if people will take the opportunity or not. But it seems like it is only good for Democracy if they do. Whether you agree with it or not, you are actually engaging it--instead of just listening to someone's snarky or praise-filled description of it.

Still, I am skeptical that any significant number of people are willing to take a half-hour to listen to a political speech. Patience is not in America's DNA.

It is at 1.23 million hits on youtube in 24 hours so some people are obviously interested. Of course it may just be the people who already support him making up the majority of those hits.