Tell us another one Senator Obama

Senator Obama is just now demonstrating righteous anger toward his former pastor over controversial remarks that he made at the pulpit - sermons that Senator Obama undoubtedly heard and did not object to during his 20+ years spent as a parishioner. Talk about a delayed reaction! The American people aren't stupid Senator: You are merely angry because he is raining on your parade.

Obama's 'Plan A' failed. He attempted to snowball the Reverend Wright controversy into a racial issue in a cynical ploy to convert it into political plutonium for his opponents. He even tried to profit from it and produced a DVD of his speech for fundraising purposes.

But the issue had legs; people didn't buy his multitude of excuses. Obama didn't walk out when most of us would have, and expects us to believe that he, a man revered for his intellect, had no inclination of what the Reverend was saying over a span of two decades.

Now, he is fulminating against the man that baptized his children and married him to his wife. But it's not about the Reverend: It's about Obama's poor political judgement. And indeed, the chickens HAVE come home to roost.

Wright is damaging his chances for the Presidency, and Obama is throwing his own preacher and former mentor under the bus. Just a month ago, Obama claimed that he could not denounce his pastor, but now he has done just that for political expediency.

Tell me another one Senator. You brought this on yourself, and it is wrong of you to blame a man of faith, albeit flawed, for speaking his mind just because you lacked the judgement and/or desire to stand up and walk out.

The American people don't buy it, nor should they. What we are getting is a window into Senator Obama's character - the character of a prototypical politician with designs on power.



Display:


Re: Tell us another one Senator Obama (1.81 / 33)

I'm not buying it, and you shouldn't either. Anyone that sits and listens to a man that excuses the atrocity of 9/11 and preaches racial divisiveness doesn't get the time of day from this New Yorker.


Fight for Democrats in Congress.
by owl06 on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 03:21:55 PM EST

Way to make stuff up (2.00 / 2)

Obama never "sat and listened" to Wright excuse 9/11.

Seriously, do not lie.  It's bad for your soul.


by Slim Tyranny on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 03:56:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Way to make stuff up (2.00 / 2)

I said he sat and listened to the man that said that, and did not say he was there at the time. although, it is likely that he was.


Fight for Democrats in Congress.
by owl06 on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 04:00:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Way to make stuff up (2.00 / 4)

And again, you lie.  He was NOT there for that sermon, that lie was already debunked.

Furthermore, Wright never "excused" 9/11, so that is another lie.  He rationalized it, poorly, but never excused that atrocity.  Explaining historical events is not excusing them; Wright's explanation may be bogus, but it was never meant as an excuse.

So here's a question for you: what about the rest of what Wright preached?  Do you think that God blessed America for instituting slavery, jim crow, segregation, etc.?


by Slim Tyranny on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 04:03:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Way to make stuff up (2.00 / 7)

not the best defense.  It's semantic, and begs the question. Why not try saying that Obama is inexperienced and hasn't the best staff and so didn't realize that the time to distance was when he decided to run for president. That's when he ought to have done a search of all his associates to see which ones he needed to throw under the bus.  


Hillary - alternative energy
by anna shane on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 04:07:14 PM EST
[ Parent ]

ha (2.00 / 2)

Someone needs to institute a ban on "throw under the bus" references.


by Slim Tyranny on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 04:10:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: ha (none / 0)

too Hollywood?  (hey, I'd still like him as vp, does that help?)


Hillary - alternative energy
by anna shane on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 04:12:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: ha (none / 0)

If Hillary pulled this off, how the Hell do you think Obama could reasonably be on her ticket?  He wasn't good enough to be CIC, remember? She'll be on her own.


by mikeinsf on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 08:20:38 PM EST
[ Parent ]

What do you mean? (2.00 / 2)

If Hillary pulled this off...

You mean this latest craziness?

Did Hillary somehow go back in time, and engineered this whole thing?


I have yet to see what [Obama] has done to take the highest office in the land. He is no Martin Luther King. --Helen Thomas
by ghost 2 on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 08:27:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: What do you mean? (none / 0)

Not pull off the Wright controversy... I meant pull off a victory in the face of diminishing odds.  

I understand the Wright thing is not her making.  Also, I don't think she's flipping off Obama whenever she touches her hair.


by mikeinsf on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 08:50:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Way to make stuff up (2.00 / 6)

I've heard many Black preachers give sermons. I've heard them with my own ears, as have members of my family and friends who all came up in a predominantly Black community. I have heard very eloquent and righteous condemnations of Jim Crow laws, slavery, segregation, the mistreatment of Black women by Black men, the mistreatment of women of any race, the need to stop the ongoing Black on Black violence, the need to help other people in distress and to help ourselves as well. I've heard discussions about the greatly harmful belief that AIDS was somehow created to destroy the Black community.

I've also heard outright condemnations of Farrakhan and the Nation of Islam (despite some of the social programs that they have been able to run in very neglected and poor neighborhoods).

If Wright represents anyone in the Black community, it is those who have given in to accepting excuses and blaming others for the mighty struggle that Black people in this country face. It's not all that different than the struggles the poor and working class and elderly and women and teenagers and young people and gay and lesbian people - categories in which Blacks are included - face every day.

Nonetheless, Obama needed Black voters. He attempted a political strategy using race that is now miserably failing him. His words describing people in PA were greatly insulting. His words in SF were insulting. Frankly, his health care policy is insulting. And besides presenting a positive iconic image for Blacks, all that benefit seems to be at risk now

I have no patience left for Obama left at this point. All I see happening from his unwillingness to just honestly let people know that Wrights' sermons were just words that did not represent the Black community, or Black theologians in general, or what he actually believed a long time ago is Black people being set up to take a fall. That's bad for America, bad for Democrats and bad for Blacks - all of us.

Obama owes it to the Black community to let everyone who will listen that Blacks may still be suffering but there are many who are dealing with it in a positive and hopeful way. I really don't care if it has ruined his chances to become the Democratic nominee.

I do care about the people who will be hurt because of Obama's arrogant, self-serving political ambitions and his sudden repudiation of his pastor. Sorry, but it is not possible that now is the first and only time that Wright has blamed Whites, or Americans in general for current problems in the Black or any other community.

I don't exactly hear many people running around saying slavery of any kind was, or is a good thing. This framing of Wright just being "descriptive" is so transparently defensive and pathetic while being manipulative is just another example of politics. The Black community, nor America in general has done nothing to deserve this type of manipulation using race as a pointed blame and punishment stick. We deserve to be able to believe what politicians say, and trust that they will actually do something substantial to address the ever growing list of things that Bush and Republicans have done to this country.

This is not what I want to be dealing with right now. How about the artificial increase in rice prices that are starving entire countries? How about anything but Wright or Obama?


Barack Obama is my President
by Jeter on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 06:30:09 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Excellent comment. (2.00 / 2)

Everyone should take the time to read your comment.  

Thank you.  


I have yet to see what [Obama] has done to take the highest office in the land. He is no Martin Luther King. --Helen Thomas
by ghost 2 on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 08:31:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Amen to that! (2.00 / 1)

"I do care about the people who will be hurt because of Obama's arrogant, self-serving political ambitions and his sudden repudiation of his pastor."


by CoyoteCreek on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 09:04:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Way to make stuff up (none / 0)

I love your comment.


by wblynch on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 02:54:20 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Hey folk! Historical exhibit! (1.00 / 0)

The last living Wright apologist left on the earth!

25 cents!


Until recently I was selling drugs, and now I'm selling Obama T-shirts.
by switching sides on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 02:57:05 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Tell us another one Senator Obama (2.00 / 0)

He didn't excuse 9/11. The "coming home to roost" line was badly taken out of context.
John McCain isn't evil. He's just wrong about a lot of things. Vote Obama!
by proseandpromise on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 04:13:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

What about 'Bill rode us like he did Monica' (2.00 / 4)

I'm sure in context that's not at all offensive.


by catfish1 on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 04:35:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: What about 'Bill rode us like he did Monica' (2.00 / 1)

In context you learn that he was quoting someone else.  But hey, you run with a GOP talking point (and GOP intellectual curiosity) all that you want.


John McCain isn't evil. He's just wrong about a lot of things. Vote Obama!
by proseandpromise on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 04:39:04 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Context, people, context!!!! (none / 0)

Come on...crawl inside his brain and see what he REALLY meant...

You gots to be getting up in the CONTEXT!!


Until recently I was selling drugs, and now I'm selling Obama T-shirts.
by switching sides on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 02:59:19 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: What about 'Bill rode us like he did Monica' (2.00 / 2)

Whoops...I missed your subject line.  That changes what you mean.

No, I agree with you on the "riding dirty" line.  I thought that was the most offensive part of all of the clips.  

I'm not saying Wright has clean hands.  I just hate that people are getting rec'd diaries repeating talking points that are demonstrably false.  i.e. "Obama sat under someone who excused 9/11"  That is completely not true.  


John McCain isn't evil. He's just wrong about a lot of things. Vote Obama!
by proseandpromise on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 04:40:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Tell us another one Senator Obama (2.00 / 1)

I KNEW I would read "context" here. Thanks.


by JFK464 on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 06:11:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Tell us another one Senator Obama (2.00 / 1)

Yes. "Context" is so tiresome when we want bumper-sticker discourse.


by mikeinsf on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 08:22:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Tell us another one Senator Obama (none / 0)

He (Wright) misinterpreted the "chickens" line in the first place, but Wright's meaning was very obvious. Why isn't Obama asked about what controversial opinions he first disagreed with, and when did he first hear them.


by handsomegent on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 07:27:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Tell us another one Senator Obama (none / 0)

Because it matters very little.  Do you honestly think Obama is a secret black supremecist, anti-American.  What exactly do you think this implies about Obama?  Maybe that he has bad political judgement...maybe.  But, honestly, isn't this just about an underlying fear of Obama for a variety of incredulous reasons?  Even if you don't have those fears, you at best seem to be exploiting the existence of those fears in others.  Or am I missing some other meaning of this Wright flap?


John McCain isn't evil. He's just wrong about a lot of things. Vote Obama!
by proseandpromise on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:30:08 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Wright DID say something new this weekend (2.00 / 7)

He said Obama says what he says for political purposes and in response to the latest poll.


by Trickster on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 04:14:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Wright DID say something new this weekend (2.00 / 16)

That's interesting.

So, to recap:

God Damn America - OK
Vote based on skin color - OK
Gov created AIDS to kill Blacks - OK
Supporting Hillary would be like allowing the Clintons to anally rape you - OK
Black people have different brains than White people - OK

All of this is OK.

But:

Barack Obama is just a politician - NOT OK

Yeah, I think I see the pattern there.  Frankly, calling Barack out on his bullchips is probably one of the most rational and agreeable things I have ever heard the Reverend say.


by bobbank on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 04:58:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Wright DID say something new this weekend (2.00 / 3)

But wait!!! Didn't you listen to his pastor in context? (snark)


by JFK464 on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 06:09:11 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Good point. (2.00 / 1)

That "context" balloon has been deflated.


by Ed J on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 08:10:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Good point. (none / 0)

CONTEXT PEOPLE!!!!!

wahhhhh!!!!


Until recently I was selling drugs, and now I'm selling Obama T-shirts.
by switching sides on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 02:55:07 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Wright DID say something new this weekend (2.00 / 5)

Bob,

That post wasn't in the least bit honest. Obama never said those statements were ok.  He unambiguosly condemned those statements.

I really can't believe you just posted that utter bullshit.



Lost rate and rec for issuing a '1' to a trollish comment. The troll, not so much.

by map on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 06:11:29 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Wright DID say something new this weekend (2.00 / 2)

But you have to admit, the thing that finally got Obama riled is when Wright called him a politician.  That is the commenter's point, and it's extremely valid.


by Montague on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:35:03 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Wright DID say something new this weekend (2.00 / 5)

"Frankly, calling Barack out on his bullchips is probably one of the most rational and agreeable things I have ever heard the Reverend say."

Your entire post was so well said, bravo to you!

When BO likes to talk about changing the dialogue in national politics for the better, along with nice things on the international front like meeting with terrorist dictators without preconditions, I guess he didn't realize that people can do mean things, no matter how nice you are to them.

That's why we have armies, and guns, to defend ourselves against meanies who don't act nice, and aren't sensitive to us, and try to kill us no matter how nice we are to them.

Golly gee whiz, some people just aren't fair! Reverend Wright just isn't fair, after Barack was so nice and didn't throw him under the bus. Basic poor political judgement on Barack's part.

That's why older people who have seen life first hand support Clinton, not Obama. We think she gets it.


by 07rescue on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 06:13:32 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Wright DID say something new this weekend (2.00 / 3)

I gave you a rec'd just for the last sentence.

What was it about his own judgement that Obama claimed was far superior to others?

Remember? Judgement Matters.  It's actually an Obama campaign slogan.


I have yet to see what [Obama] has done to take the highest office in the land. He is no Martin Luther King. --Helen Thomas
by ghost 2 on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 08:23:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Wright DID say something new this weekend (none / 0)

Yeah but he said that words matter, as well.

And we all know what poppycock that was.


Until recently I was selling drugs, and now I'm selling Obama T-shirts.
by switching sides on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 02:56:13 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Obama: Wright was insensitive to ME (2.00 / 7)

and what MY CAMPAIGN IS TRYING TO DO.

That's as specific as he got, from what I saw.


by catfish1 on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 04:33:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

TR's uncalled for but (2.00 / 1)

lolololololloolol

Obama can't win with some of you. He came out as forcefully as he ever did against Wright and now Wright is a man of faith and Obama shouldn't have thrown him under the bus. And this makes it to the top of the rec list.
WoW.


Because I wont trade humanity for patriotism!
by Drewid on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 08:43:13 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: TR's uncalled for but (none / 0)

Under the train, dude.

Under the train.


Until recently I was selling drugs, and now I'm selling Obama T-shirts.
by switching sides on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 03:11:39 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Sore loser. (none / 0)


by dystopianfuturetoday on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 12:05:01 AM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Tell Us Another One senator Obama (1.83 / 12)

the problem isn't what wright says- that's all covered by freedom of speech and religion. wright
is free to say whatever, because he's not purporting to represent the whole community. people can listen to him or not- their choice.

the problem is for a person who wishes to lead this country to listen to it for twenty years, and not raise a single objection.


by campskunk on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 03:22:54 PM EST

Re: Tell Us Another One senator Obama (2.00 / 2)

your right. That is a huge problem. And if there was a candidate that sat there and listen to it for 20 years, then we might have a problem. But Wright has not given 20 years worth of sermons like this, and Barack Obama has not sat through 20 years of sermons like this. But you don't care about what actually happened, you care about the smear.


democracy!
by BlueGAinDC on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 03:30:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Hold on (2.00 / 8)

Wright gave his roosting chickens sermon the Sunday after 9/11, and it's difficult for me to believe nobody clued Obama into that sermon (assuming he didn't hear it himself) a long time before 2008.  He didn't get loony over the past month or so, he's been talking the same game for years - apparently Obama even considered severing relation at the beginning of the campaign.  

The question I have - and I'll admit it's unfair to ask it of you, here, since only Obama can answer it - is if Obama finds many of Wright's stances personally unacceptable (as he seems to at this point), why did he not sever the relationship some time ago?  The reality is that he did not get around to walking away from Wright until it became politically expedient.  Which makes me wonder if he really honestly disagrees with Wright at all, or if he just knows Wright has become a liability.  


by Thirsty Gator on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 03:37:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hold on (2.00 / 4)

He has to distance himself, and yes it is because of politics. But anyone who considers this rationally understands why he did not leave the church even if he knew that some of his views were controversial. Politics is not the reason Obama attented church, and listening to people who you disagree with is never a bad thing.

Since when does going to church mean you agree or even tolerate what your pastor says?


democracy!
by BlueGAinDC on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 03:51:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hold on (2.00 / 2)

People don't attend church to do research on opposing viewpoints.  They choose a church because on balance they agree with what's being preached.  What possible other reason to go?  Oh, unless you just want to be seen going there.

***A


by adrienne4dean on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 04:02:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hold on (2.00 / 2)

to curry favor in the community and get yourself elected.... could that be the reason?


Fight for Democrats in Congress.
by owl06 on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 04:09:10 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hold on (2.00 / 1)

Yeap, while we're at it, let's diminish/dismiss/insult Obama's faith.

Disgusting.


by Slim Tyranny on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 04:37:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hold on (2.00 / 1)

he's CLINGING TO IT.


Fight for Democrats in Congress.
by owl06 on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 04:57:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hold on (2.00 / 2)

People stick with a church because it is a community, not a convenience store.  If you've established a long-term relationship with that community, you don't just up and walk away because of a few remarks by the pastor any more than you leave your spouse after your first fight.  There's a lot more to it than just saying "I don't agree; I'm out of here." That's just an unreasonable expectation; but unreasonable seems to be the hallmark of the Wright bashers.


Nos causidicus Obama , ergo nos non suadeo
by rb608 on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 04:13:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Partially correct (2.00 / 2)

It would take an awful lot of fundamental disagreement with my pastor to run me out of my church.  But in the end, if you sit in the pew (literally or metaphorically as a member of the church) you give your tacit approval to the pastor's words and actions.  There are things my pastor could say that would make me find another church - or at least a new pastor for my church.


by Thirsty Gator on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 04:36:06 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Partially correct (2.00 / 0)

you give your tacit approval to the pastor's words and actions.
I don't see it that way.  I'm there as a member of the church as a whole, not as a personal affirmation of one man.


Nos causidicus Obama , ergo nos non suadeo
by rb608 on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 04:58:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hold on (none / 0)

That's not true at all. Sermons are a chance for views to be shared, but there are many other reasons to go to church. Like, to pray, and to connect with God.


democracy!
by BlueGAinDC on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 04:51:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hold on (none / 0)

People don't attend church to do research on opposing viewpoints.  They choose a church because on balance they agree with what's being preached.  What possible other reason to go?  Oh, unless you just want to be seen going there.

Or both.


by creeper1014 on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 07:50:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hold on (1.75 / 4)

He didn't hear it himself, stop pushing BS.


by Slim Tyranny on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 03:57:21 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hold on (2.00 / 2)

Obama said that at first, but then changed his tune a few days later, saying he "may have" been in attendance when Wright made controversial remarks. That's a 'yes.'


Fight for Democrats in Congress.
by owl06 on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 03:59:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Again, very wrong (2.00 / 3)

This is really a matter of reading comprehension.

Obama was PROVEN to be in Florida on the day of that sermon.  When he said he was in attendance during controversial remarks, that wasn't a specific reference to that sermon.  It was a general reference to the kind of controversial things a colorful-to-outlandish-to-kinda-crazy preacher would say.  Controversial, like perhaps condemning homosexuality, etc.

So it's not a "yes".  You misunderstand entirely what happened.

I corrected you --- now stop pushing that lie.


by Slim Tyranny on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 04:13:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Again, very wrong (1.66 / 3)

you are a very angry person.


Fight for Democrats in Congress.
by owl06 on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 05:37:19 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Again, very wrong (2.00 / 4)

I don't care where Obama was when Wright made those comments. Instead of denouncing Wright's anti-white, anti-American tirade, Obama lectured us on race. Bad move. And then many Obama supporters lecture you on taking Wright's words in context. If you've had friends die of AIDS, and I have, then there's no context which makes  his words acceptable. Period. Obama CHOSE to spend 20 years with his mentor. Bad. Move.


by JFK464 on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 06:15:48 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hold on (none / 0)

And you know, he may well have been there.  The thing is, when you're sitting in a pew and a pastor delivers a sermon, and delivers it with fire and passion, and that passion sweeps you up and takes you along; that's a helluva pastor.  And what he says in those moments flows along with the ideas and principles before and following; and he sounds reasonable and damned straight in his righteous indignation.  Then somebody takes a handful of passionate words and puts them in a tape loop and it doesn't even sound like the same sermon anymore without what came before or after.  

Now, I know I sat in the choir loft of my church for nigh on 20 years, and I have no doubt my pastor said some shit I didn't agree with; but I'll be damned if I remember a word of it.

What's the BFD anyway?  


Nos causidicus Obama , ergo nos non suadeo
by rb608 on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 04:19:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hold on (2.00 / 2)

"What's the BFD anyway" is exactly right.

And just to be clear, he was NOT there for that sermon.  Crazy rightwingers tried to prove it, and travel records showed that Obama was in Florida at the time.

But yea, this isn't actually a "big deal", as in there is no issue of substance here.  It's basically two things (that may overlap for some people): (1) a chance to attack a political opponent, and (2) the opportunity for racists to get worked up over a black preacher saying "anti-white" things.


by Slim Tyranny on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 04:22:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

we do not agree (1.66 / 3)

I think this is a big deal indeed.  "God Damn America" doesn't work for me.  At all.  Yes, I've read Zinn and Chomsky and I get the history.  But this is my home, warts and all.  


by Thirsty Gator on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 04:40:58 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: we do not agree (2.00 / 0)

So you think God looked down at America in the era of slavery, and blessed that aspect of America?  You think God looked down at America and gave a big thumbs up to segregation?

Or do you think God saw those crimes against humanity and saw sin and evil?

Seriously, warts and all is fine, but to pretend that those actions were anything but damnable is laughable.


by Slim Tyranny on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 04:46:39 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Nope. (2.00 / 2)

But I think nations, as well as people, can be forgiven.


by Thirsty Gator on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 04:48:44 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Nope. (2.00 / 1)

So, at the time, during and in terms of segregation, was America on the "Bless" side of God, or the "Damned" side of God?

Obama, by the way, agrees with you.  In his big speech on race, that was his driving point.  Unlike Wright, he thinks America has and will continue to improve.  Wright, because of his own generational history, is strongly focused on the crimes themselves.  Obama recognizes those historic wrongs, but thinks America is getting better.

I think it's fairly uncontroversial to say that God would consider American's racial history "sinful."


by Slim Tyranny on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 04:51:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Again, we simply disagree (2.00 / 3)

I've watched the sermon, and others.  I watched the whole hour with Wright on Moyers.  "God Damn America" isn't the only problem I had/have with Wright.  But if my pastor starts repeating "God Damn America" from the pulpit in any given sermon, she and I are going to have a strong disagreement.

Obama's caught between a rock and a hard place on this.  The right time for disagreeing with Wright about this was years ago.  He did not do so, at least publicly.  There aren't a lot of avenues for him to gracefully exit this predicament.  It doesn't mean he's not going to win the nomination.  It does mean he's been damaged.


by Thirsty Gator on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 04:58:02 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hold on (2.00 / 2)

Obama needs a neurological work-up.  He didn't hear this, he doesn't remember that.  Something's wrong.

***A


by adrienne4dean on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 04:03:35 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hold on (2.00 / 0)

It's not like he created a story about mortal danger to promote his candidacy.  Maybe you tuck your M.D. back into your drawer and start talking about the issues.


John McCain wants you to be poor!
by nklein on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 04:58:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

here you go (2.00 / 3)

Either Obama is not very well-connected to the community of his church (which I don't believe for a second) or he was being willfully ignorant of the situation.  You do not have to have your ass in the pew to hear what the sermon was about this past Sunday, particularly if it was at or on the edge of crazy.  People talk about it.  As a state senator in 2001, you can bet your ass Obama heard about the roosting chickens sermon pretty quickly after it happened even if he wasn't there.


by Thirsty Gator on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 04:46:54 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Video of 9/11 sermon for sale on church website (2.00 / 1)

and all those videos were for sale well into March of this year.


by catfish1 on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 04:36:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hold on (2.00 / 1)

Obama never agreed with Wright's racial analysis of America, from the very beginning of their relationship, as his first book makes clear. Excuse me while I quote at length from a New Yorker article:

"The first time that Barack Obama met the Reverend Jeremiah A. Wright, Jr., at Trinity United Church of Christ, on the South Side of Chicago, in the late nineteen-eighties, the young community organizer tried to make a point about the growing importance of class division in America. As Obama described the exchange in his autobiography, "Dreams from My Father," Wright wasn't having any of it: "These miseducated brothers, like that sociologist at the University of Chicago, talking about `the declining significance of race.' Now, what country is he living in?" The deluded black scholar in question was William Julius Wilson, whose 1978 book of that title analyzed the economic forces affecting black Americans and advocated universal remedies over race-specific ones. Wright, a proponent of black liberation theology, dismissed every remark about class from Obama with a categorical racial answer, and Obama allowed the topic to drop. As we all now know, he also joined Wright's church.

That conversation haunts Obama's campaign for the Presidency, in more ways than one. Their first encounter apparently set the pattern between pastor and parishioner whenever politics came up in church. As Obama suggested in Philadelphia on March 18th, when he delivered an intimate lecture on the politics of race, he deferred to the authority of the older man's experience--to Wright's "memories of humiliation and doubt and fear . . . the anger and the bitterness of those years"--even though Obama shared neither the extent of the experience nor the harsh views that derived from it."

Obama was attracted to the spirituality, the thriving community and activism of the church, not the racial politics. Here is Obama, on March 14th, when the endless youtube clips began looping:

"And the sermons I heard him preach always related to our obligation to love God and one another, to work on behalf of the poor, and to seek justice at every turn.

The statements that Rev. Wright made that are the cause of this controversy were not statements I personally heard him preach while I sat in the pews of Trinity or heard him utter in private conversation. When these statements first came to my attention, it was at the beginning of my presidential campaign. I made it clear at the time that I strongly condemned his comments. But because Rev. Wright was on the verge of retirement, and because of my strong links to the Trinity faith community, where I married my wife and where my daughters were baptized, I did not think it appropriate to leave the church.

Let me repeat what I've said earlier. All of the statements that have been the subject of controversy are ones that I vehemently condemn. They in no way reflect my attitudes and directly contradict my profound love for this country."

The disagreements have been there all along, as has the tension between Obama's attraction to the man as a spiritual mentor and his clear and immediate rejection of his racial politics. This may well have been politically naive--in Dreams, Obama says he was mostly concerned about Trinity's being "too upwardly mobile" when he joined--but it can also be intellectually honest.

http://www.newyorker.com/talk/comment/20 08/03/31/080331taco_talk_packer
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/barack-oba ma/on-my-faith-and-my-church_b_91623.htm l


by tomchaps on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 06:36:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Hold on (none / 0)

You make a good point about Obama's strong need for spirituality and community.  

Most of us have that need, and that's a big reason people join spiritual communities of every religion. Let's not lose sight of that.


I have yet to see what [Obama] has done to take the highest office in the land. He is no Martin Luther King. --Helen Thomas
by ghost 2 on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 08:40:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Tell Us Another One senator Obama (2.00 / 3)

Wright may not have given sermons like that every Sunday, but it's impossible to believe that in 20 years Obama never heard any of them.  He had to have known exactly what kind of preacher -- a preacher of hate -- Wright was and is.  But Obama stayed anyway.


by PlainWords on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 03:57:00 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Tell Us Another One senator Obama (2.00 / 1)

Don't simplify this --- Wright is not a "preacher of hate."  He FOUGHT hate his whole life.

I love how anger from the black community becomes wholly representative of that community, and anger at racist U.S. policies is dismissed and diminished.


by Slim Tyranny on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 03:59:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Tell Us Another One senator Obama (2.00 / 4)

He did not fight hate.  He added to it.

This does not take away from the good things his church has done, and by all accounts there are many, but neither do those good things excuse the preaching of hate.


by PlainWords on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 04:02:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

No, he fought hate (2.00 / 1)

He was a black preacher starting in the early 70s, working within the mostly white UCC, and has served in many religious and civic organizations.  He has dealt with real racism his entire life.  He has fought real racism.

Crazy to me that such a blind eye can be turned to the real racism against African-Americans that is such a significant part of America's history.


by Slim Tyranny on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 04:17:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: No, he fought hate (2.00 / 4)

Nothing I have said justifies your clear implication that I have turned a blind eye to "real" racism, and I find the suggestion highly offensive.  Furthermore, there is nothing unreal about Wright's racism.  It is not okay just because he's black.


by PlainWords on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 04:24:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

You are turning a blind eye (2.00 / 0)

if you don't acknowledge that Wright has fought far greater racism than he himself has espoused.

This is why this issue is such BS; people want to talk about it in the vacuum of Wright's church --- what about what happened to African-Americans throughout our history?  There lay the real crimes, not some loudmouthed preacher's outrageous statements about government-created AIDS epidemics.


by Slim Tyranny on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 04:28:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You are turning a blind eye (2.00 / 3)

One act of racism does not excuse another, ESPECIALLY when it is coming from someone who holds himself out as a moral leader, as the "reverend" Wright does.

The issue is not -- to use one of your favorite expressions -- "BS", but your arguments are.  Phonies like you have given liberals a bad name.


by PlainWords on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 04:41:12 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You are turning a blind eye (2.00 / 1)

I never said it was an excuse.  I was pointing out that your statement "He did not fight hate.  He added to it" is ENTIRELY FALSE.  He fought hate!  He fought hate greater and powerful than he ever espoused!  That is plain, honest fact.  He is a black man born in the 1940s.  Do you think he might have "fought" some racism along the way?

No, you want to deny him even that.  You want to say that he fought nothing, that all he did was generate hate.  That is the very definition of turning a blind eye.  You want to punish him for his current views without even acknowledging that he fought those same views of the other side; and the proponents for hating blacks have always had the greater power.

"Phony"? Hilarious.


by Slim Tyranny on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 04:44:43 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: You are turning a blind eye (2.00 / 3)

If you want to call helping the black community fighting hate, I can't stop you.  I think it would be a whole lot more honest to say he did a lot to help black people -- certainly a good thing --, but at the same time he fed the fires of hate with his preaching.  That's not what a preacher should do.  He's no Martin Luther King.

You're so busy slicing and dicing -- and excusing -- some forms of racism that you can't see it when it's right in front of you.


by PlainWords on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 05:01:18 PM EST
[ Parent ]

He became what he hated (2.00 / 1)

It happens, even to good people. He became a racist. He stereotypes his own race.


by catfish1 on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 04:37:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: He became what he hated (none / 0)

He does have a lot of hate, and you could say he is a racist.  That being said, his racism pales in comparison to the racism he and his community have fought against for decades.

He's pissed off at white America, because white America ran the government that institutionalized racism and violated civil rights based on race.   He should be pissed off; I would be, too.


by Slim Tyranny on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 04:40:16 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: He became what he hated (2.00 / 2)

His anger is understandable, but it does not excuse the preaching of hate from the pulpit.  I may understand how he got the way he is, but that doesn't mean he should be anybody's moral or spiritual leader.

I find your repeated attempts to parse and quantify and rate different kinds of racism -- and excuse some of them even when they do great harm -- deeply offensive.


by PlainWords on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 04:45:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: He became what he hated (none / 0)

Your embrace of equating Wright's words with segregation/jim crow/etc. is deeply offensive.

The fact of the matter is, focusing on Wright's racism while ignoring the racist history of America is ridiculous.


by Slim Tyranny on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 04:49:01 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: He became what he hated (2.00 / 1)

So anyone offended by Wright's racism can't say a word about it unless they first write a definitive textbook on all facets of race in America?

Now, that's ridiculous.

I'm done with you.


by PlainWords on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 05:10:25 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: He became what he hated (2.00 / 1)

"focusing on Wright's racism while ignoring the racist history of America is ridiculous."

No one is ignoring real racism, and I think that is the problem with your defense of Wright. Many people prefer to call out racism wherever we see it, including in Wright's positions, as well as in our society.

Just calling someone's statement "offensive" doesn't automatically invalidate their point. Sometimes it is exactly what you need to hear from the other side, as a reality check. When lots of people who are usually on your side start telling you what you are saying is BS it may be time to start listening and checking out their position. You may still reject it, but you owe it to yourself to give it a fair hearing.

Making excuses for hate speech doesn't cut it with many people, including myself. Older people may be more hurt by their past experiences, but also have had more time to mature and self correct, so that defense doesn't completely hold water, especially when we are talking about a purported spiritual leader.


by 07rescue on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 06:28:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

He is racist (2.00 / 2)

I could say that and I did because he is.

The core of racism is stereotyping people based on race.

He hurts his own race by espousing what he does. He is pissed off. It's OK to be pissed off.

But at some point you can make your anger constructive or destructive.

His appearances yesterday and the day before: destructive.


by catfish1 on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 04:46:36 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Tell Us Another One senator Obama (2.00 / 0)

So you're saying that Wright preached hate for 20 years?  Give me an example, 'cause I haven't seen one yet.


Nos causidicus Obama , ergo nos non suadeo
by rb608 on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 04:22:31 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Tell Us Another One senator Obama (2.00 / 1)

This is a joke, right?  Watch the video at the top of this diary, or watch some of his sermons on YouTube.


by PlainWords on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 04:26:17 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Tell Us Another One senator Obama (none / 0)

I've seen lots of them.  No problem here.  Which words would you label as "preaching hate"?


Nos causidicus Obama , ergo nos non suadeo
by rb608 on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 05:00:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Tell Us Another One senator Obama (2.00 / 1)

Get serious.  It's not the words you use; it's the message.  I won't play this game with you.  You are wasting my time.


by PlainWords on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 05:02:46 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Tell Us Another One senator Obama (none / 0)

Sorry, but you are substituting your personal interpretation for facts and transcripts.  Sorry if rational discussion is a waste of your time.  That seems to be a chronic symptom here at MyHRC.


Nos causidicus Obama , ergo nos non suadeo
by rb608 on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 08:39:49 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Tell Us Another One senator Obama (none / 0)

I actually listen to Obama's statement today... I felt sorry for him, he just doesn't know what to do.

And he wants to be the President ...


by SHIBAM8P on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 05:22:23 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Tell Us Another One senator Obama (none / 0)

"I felt sorry for him, he just doesn't know what to do."

This is a good lesson for him that people aren't always fair or nice, and changing the dynamics of Washington and the world isn't going to happen because he is nice to people (at least superficially).

Many people have their own agendas, and couldn't care less how they hurt others in their pursuit of them.


by 07rescue on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 06:33:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Tell Us Another One senator Obama (2.00 / 4)

I have been a member of the leadership of a fairly large church in the past, and I am here to tell you, one does not write checks the size Obama was writing for two decades and not be intimately involved with the pastor personally and the philosophy/mission of the church corporately.  I refuse to believe that Sen. Obama was clueless about this - there is no way he could have been.

Only Christmas/Easter churchgoers have that level of ignorance about their own church.


No politician ever lost an election because he underestimated the intelligence of the American public. - PT Barnum, paraphrased...
by jarhead5536 on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 04:06:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

bullshit (none / 0)

and that is the point.  It is ridiculous to believe he didn't know where Wright stood on these topics.


For Obama it now becomes: Faith, hope and CHANGE! And the greatest of these is Change!
by TeresaInPa on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 07:01:30 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I'm not buying it either (2.00 / 7)

but then again I haven't bought many of the Axelrod Words that Obama has been slinging for the last year.


I didn't believe in god before the primaries and I still don't.
by NewHampster on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 03:26:05 PM EST

Re: Tell us another one Senator Obama (2.00 / 6)

Rev. Wright is right.  Obama will say and do anything to keep the poll up.


by JoeySky18 on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 03:27:14 PM EST

Re: Tell us another one Senator Obama (2.00 / 6)

I get it.
He should denounce his pastor because he's evil and racist.
He didn't do enough, he needs to throw him under the bus.
Now that he threw him under the bus, he's a hypocrite because he said he thought Wright was a good pastor.

If you haven't figured it out yet, EVERYTHING Obama does dooms him GE chances. Why? Because if something really did doom him, then maybe Clinton would have a shot. Until then, Clinton supporters jump on everything. I think I could this as the 5th time Obama has been doomed. If Obama is so doomed, why can't Clinton close the deal.

And enough of this "story has legs" shit. Everything has legs, you are its legs. You will prop it up even if no one else will because you want to see him lose.

Fact is, the American people have never cared much about Wright, and never will. This whole story has to do with Obama trying to end this shit so the media will start focusing on real things.


democracy!
by BlueGAinDC on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 03:27:33 PM EST

Re: Tell us another one Senator Obama (2.00 / 1)

"Everything has legs, you are its legs."

I like this quote.


Unable to rec or rate
Still supporting Obama
Still not putting up with "preening" posts
by jaiwithani on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 03:30:05 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Tell us another one Senator Obama (none / 0)

Obama gave it legs by exercising poor judgement and being there in the first place.


Fight for Democrats in Congress.
by owl06 on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 03:41:33 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Tell us another one Senator Obama (1.66 / 3)

But did Obama's poor judgement get 4000 American soldiers killed?
This is such a nonsense issue. Did Wright kill anyone? Did he molest any children? Did he steal money? Was he caught with a prostitute? NO. So what's the big deal? What Wright says only offends ignorant white voters and hillary supporters. And Hillary already has the ignorant vote all wraped up, so what's the problem?
Answer their isn't one. You all just want to hate on someone an d your target is Obama.

Stop the Hate, OBAMA 08'


"In the primary you should vote with your heart, but in the general, you should vote with your head" Hillary's husband
by venician on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 04:03:15 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: Tell us another one Senator Obama (none / 0)

"What Wright says only offends ignorant white voters and hillary supporters."  I'll be sure to advise the  African Americans I know who are offended by Wright about this.  They'll appreciate the knowledge, I'm sure.


by Thirsty Gator on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 04:43:24 PM EST
[ Parent ]

So all Obama warts Hillary's fault? (none / 0)

Obama can have warts. But be warned: said warts exist only for Hillary's benefit.


by catfish1 on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 04:39:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: So all Obama warts Hillary's fault? (none / 0)

It's not Hillary's fault; nor is he a saint, but his warts are smaller and less numerous than Clinton's.  So far, the only thing people are able to throw at him is that other people around him are bad.  Is that going to sink him? I don't think so.


John McCain wants you to be poor!
by nklein on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 05:11:27 PM EST
[ Parent ]

She can have more flaws AND more strengths (none / 0)

than him.


by catfish1 on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 07:57:41 PM EST
[ Parent ]

On that we can agree... (none / 0)

She can have more strengths.  I don't believe so, but I could be wrong.  But that is not what this discussion is concerning.  There has been a tirade by Clinton supporters that we cannot go with Obama b/c he's unelectable.  That's not the case and when people try to say that we should overturn the popular vote leader and the delegate leader b/c of some warts I will consistently bring up that she is far more spotted.


John McCain wants you to be poor!
by nklein on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 08:59:59 PM EST
[ Parent ]

I hate the electability argument (none / 0)

I just prefer Hillary as president.


by catfish1 on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:46:22 PM EST
[ Parent ]

That is a silly comment (none / 0)

Obama has led on issues.  On the issue of healthcare in Illinois, on the issue of of nuclear and coventional disarmament in U.S. Senate and on the issue of ethics in both Illinois and the U.S. Senate.

The silliness though of this comment is that I've seen you and many others disparage Obama's healthcare plan and so on.  So how do you castigate him for plans that he's developed, but say that he's a follower and has no plans?


John McCain wants you to be poor!
by nklein on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 09:08:26 PM EST
[ Parent ]

The factual errors in (2.00 / 5)

this screed are miond-boggling.


by UrbanRedneck on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 03:28:34 PM EST

Re: The factual errors in (1.00 / 0)

What sort of idiots give a post like this mojo?

Answer:  rb608, toyomama, map

Frankly, I think it's an abuse of the board.  The post is a troll, and the people who mojo-rated it are making trolls of themselves.  It's so... juvenile.

Note that I haven't troll-rated it, even though I think it's a worthless post.  That's a sanction I rarely use, but I do think we have quite a few trolls here.  If you have nothing of substance to say, then shut up.  Any rational person reading what you wrote will only think less of your cause.

And save your mojo ratings for things that really add to the discourse.


by PlainWords on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 04:35:40 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The factual errors in (2.00 / 2)

From the diary:
sermons that Senator Obama undoubtedly heard
It is undoubtable that Obama heard sermons in his years in the church.  It is factually inaccurate to assert that Obama undoubtedly heard the sermons at the heart of the controversy as that statement clearly implies.
Nos causidicus Obama , ergo nos non suadeo
by rb608 on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 04:47:57 PM EST
[ Parent ]

Re: The factual errors in (none / 0)

That wouldn't, even if correct, make the original diary statement factually correct.  


Nos causidicus Obama , ergo nos non suadeo
by