4,881 Words of Bull
By Erick Posted in 2008 — Comments (87) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
It was a typical Obama speech -- soaring rhetoric, allusions to Martin Luther King, Jr., and probably a few fainters in the audience. It was a ballsy speech to be sure. But it was still bull.
Obama wants to be both the black candidate and the candidate above race. He wants to embrace race and move beyond race. He tries to have his cake and eat it too. He wants us to do the same. I for one threw up.
Let's be clear on one thing. Obama would not be here but for being outmaneuvered by Camp Clinton. Obama never made this campaign about race. The Clintons made it about race. Obama has tried his best to avoid race -- to be a black man transcendent of race -- and he largely succeeded until Jeremiah Wright made it to YouTube.
This is the Democratic equivalent of Mitt Romney's mormonism speech. Obama urges us to overcome. Dr. King, after all, said that we shall overcome. Obama intends himself to be the legacy of overcoming. But desiring his cake, desiring to eat it, and desiring all of us to eat in common communion with him, is a rich plate of empty calories. Like Mitt Romney's speech, it will only serve to remind Americans of that which Obama hopes they will forget. In Obama's case, that Mr. Being Above Race has shown judgment poor enough to designate as his mentor a man profoundly embittered by this country and who believes the white man killed Jesus and now distributes AIDS to kill all the black men.
Read on . . .
He begins by tying up American history quoting the preamble. Then he addressed slavery and multiculturalism. Then he got to Reverend Wright and his grandmother, throwing them both under the bus without disowning them.
But race is an issue that I believe this nation cannot afford to ignore right now. We would be making the same mistake that Reverend Wright made in his offending sermons about America – to simplify and stereotype and amplify the negative to the point that it distorts reality.
Of course, he has tried to run his campaign totally ignoring race. I take this as an admission that the Clintons have him. He now is forced to talk about it.
The fact is that the comments that have been made and the issues that have surfaced over the last few weeks reflect the complexities of race in this country that we’ve never really worked through – a part of our union that we have yet to perfect. And if we walk away now, if we simply retreat into our respective corners, we will never be able to come together and solve challenges like health care, or education, or the need to find good jobs for every American.
I welcome Barack Obama's call to work through these things. Along those lines, I would like to know how he thinks Reverend Wright, his mentor and moral compass, came up with the idea that white men invented AIDS to kill black men.
I would like to know how Reverend Wright came up with the idea that the American government was behind September 11th.
After these two paragraphs Barack Obama says
Understanding this reality requires a reminder of how we arrived at this point.
Let me tell you how we got here.
We got here because the Clintons are willing to use race to get into the White House. But more importantly, we got here because while Barack Obama has tried to be above race, he has been mentored by a man who is deeply, deeply affected by the issue of race. While Barack Obama has tried to make white people comfortable, the man who married him, baptized his children, and mentored him for twenty years has been preaching sermons, in Barack Obama's words, that
stereotype and amplify the negative to the point that it distorts reality.
Here is what Barack Obama did not answer:
He did not answer whether he has ever seriously tried to disabuse Rev. Wright of his stereotypes. If he did not, how does he expect to lead the nation away from its racist past?
And let's not forget what all of this is about -- Barack Obama using 4,881 words to distract from the fact that he has spent two decades taking spiritual advice from a man who fundamentally hates this country and cannot move forward as a result. That calls into question not this country's legacy, but Obama's judgment.
« Dueling June Obama fundraising claims? — Comments (2) | Gun Rights Open Thread: Oral Arguments Going on Now — Comments (42) »
4,881 Words of Bull 87 Comments (0 topical, 87 editorial, 0 hidden) Post a comment »
Like all we understand is short clips from Wright's sermons. That offensive language doesn't burst from a vacuum, it comes from a very specific mindset and ideology--or a "theology," which is nothing but Marxism branded as Christianity.
------------
~ Beth ~
...that some of Wright's rhetoric made him cringe, yet by and large, the man is a good man.
In fairness, neither you nor I have attended church there and I thought Obama was pretty thoughtful to say that if he was judging that church based solely on the excerpts of Wright's more inflamatory remarks, he would judge it harshly as well. We do. But then again, he also says he's been witness to many good works, there. How can you pass judgment on that?
Say what you will, that speech took balls.
HTML Help for Red Staters
"If we want to take this party back, and I think we can someday, let’s get to work." – Barry Goldwater
... non-whites, it wouldn't matter how many drug-abuse programs, after school programs, community centers he ran, or even how courteous he was in public to people of all races ... I don't think you (retread moby that you are) would have had any problem passing judgment on that ...
some thoughtful things are said at the typical Klan meeting, that hardly means we can't pass judgement.
"A man can never have too much red wine, too many books, or too much ammunition." -- Rudyard Kipling
Erick, I completely agree... Talk about the spinning, he was basically better off not getting up there and speaking because what came out didn't directly address the "hate America" rhetoric that Wright spews, he maybe touched upon it by stating he disagreed with it but didn't assult it as I believe he should have.
The difference with Romney and Obama is that Mitt's speech was defending a church he was born into, which teaches its disciples to spread peace throughout the world through missionaries and hasn't conducted anything anti-American in recent memory, unlike Obama who chose this church 20 years ago and subjected himself to this hate mongerer.
Before you get to heaven, you must go through hell, which in my case is the People's Republic of Massachusetts.
Of course most of the liberal talking heads were glowing afterward, ranking it as the greatest speech on race since MLK's "I Have a Dream" speech.
Pitiful. He contradicted himself time after time.
It was pitiful. CNN showed the whole country that it and its groupies (Donna Brazile, Gloria Borger) are indeed living up to the Saturday Night Live-bestowed reputation of being "completely and totally in the tank for Obama."
"If we ever forget that we are One Nation under God, then we will be a Nation gone under." - Ronald Reagan
He's pretty much the official Obama apologist / Kool-Aid drinker over there.
"No matter how much lipstick you put on the taxation pig, it's still a pig... and it's currently snout-down in your wallet." - Michael Fisk
Typical, predictable and styled for Obama.
Anything short of calling Wright a demagogue and denouncing every fiber of his beliefs was short of the mark.
Keep walking the tight-rope, Obama.
The Partisan Report,
www.partisanreport.com
Obama couldn't just blast Wright as a demagogue without leaving himself open to the charge of hypocrisy and flip-flopping. He's been a member of that church for 20 years--and now, all of a sudden, he suddenly realizes he has to denounce it?
It's always interesting how we can attack one candidate for being a flip-flopper--but if other candidates take stands we disagree with, we actually demand that they flip-flop too just so they can pander to us.
For better or worse, Obama has to explain why he never left the church. He can't pretend he just didn't know what Wright was saying. He had to explain why he could tolerate it, all those years.
Obama was being remarkably candid about it: He tolerates Wright's rants because he truly believes African-Americans have a right to their paranoia, given how they've been treated over the years. I totally disagree with that. But at least he stated his philosophy honestly.
Those who blame the Clinton's for this should be blaming the MSM. Obama would never have reached the level he has if the MSM had reported fairly.
Obama just went up and admitted he lied. Last week he said on national TV that he wasn't aware of any controversial remarks. Today he goes; Well, yeah I guess I was. He lied. He lied. He lied. Just like Nafta. Just like Rezko. It is far past time to take the MSM to task for allowing this man any further passes when he lies to us constantly. Thank goodnesses that at least FOX has been calling him out or this latest BS would have been buried as usual.
Who can promise world peace
And love-in's with Iran
Who'll end the war by pulling troops and bombing Pakistan,
Obama Man
Obama Man can.
Obama Man can 'cause he preaches "hope" and "change" and makes manure taste good.
Who can take a hate phrase,
Wrap it in a sigh
Make you think a plate of crap was Grandma's apple pie,
Obama Man
Obama Man can
Obama Man can 'cause he says he can and he can make manure taste good.
Obama Man makes, everything he fakes,
Sound as smooth and cool as ice cream.
Talk about your childish pipe dream
"Damn America" his church screams...
Who can hold your hands and,
look you in the eyes
And say he loves America
and smile while he lies...
Obama Man
Obama Man can
Obama Man can 'cause he plays upon your "hope" to make manure taste good...
Obama Man can 'cause he says he can and he can make manure taste good....
Obama Man can 'cause his preacher taught him how to make manure taste good....
"Even when you fall on your face, you're still moving forward."
"If we ever forget that we are One Nation under God, then we will be a Nation gone under." - Ronald Reagan
______________________________
"Those who expect to reap the blessings of freedom must, like men, undergo the fatigue of supporting it."
-Thomas Paine: The American Crisis, No. 4, 1777
Mike DeVine’s Charlotte Observer columns
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson
Bull is all that emanates from Obama's pie hole. Of all the Democrytes I've seen in my lifetime, he is the most putrid, disgusting and totally unsuitable for public office excuse for a politician (person?) that I've ever witnessed. I'd sooner have my wall covered with Bill and Hillary posters than have to see that oaf on TV or in any other form. I think what makes me more disgusted than anything is that he's hoodwinked so many otherwise intelligent people in this country. I have my theories on how it's happened, but they're inappropriate for discussion here, so I'll just leave it at "the guy is a walking bull repository"
The Unofficial RedState FAQ
“You are not only responsible for what you say, but also for what you do not say. ” - Martin Luther
shouldn't have put his foot in his mouth and said he can't disavow a completely and totally separatist concept like the "black community." IMO he showed practically the entire USA that his candidacy is nothing more than a pander-fest to Jesse Jackson and his ilk - the special interests that the Democrat Party would rather refer to as "subgroups" in the interest of attacking Republicans.
"He begins by tying up American history quoting the preamble. Then he addressed slavery and multiculturalism."
I couldn't believe that he said slavery was America's "original sin" - its almost like he wants us to think this country created the concept of keeping and trading people for profit.
"Then he got to Reverend Wright and his grandmother, throwing them both under the bus without disowning them."
It sounded more to me like he defended Wright at his grandmother's expense.
FWIW, Barry also needs to remember that "most of our" preachers, pastors and rabbis don't spew hateful, anti-American and racist garbage. If I ever walked into a church and saw the pastor talking about black people the way Wright does about whites I'd walk out and never come back. My folks would too.
The whole notion of Obama being a "post race candidate" is a lie.
"If we ever forget that we are One Nation under God, then we will be a Nation gone under." - Ronald Reagan
abide his church.
Mike DeVine’s Charlotte Observer columns
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson
The campaigns of Clinton, Obama and Edwards - basically everyone on the Democrat ticket that had a chance - have been a pander-fest to special interests.
"If we ever forget that we are One Nation under God, then we will be a Nation gone under." - Ronald Reagan
Unless I am mistaken, the Romans killed Jesus and I believe that the Italians are considered "white" despite being that lovely bronze color.
The Essene
More accurately, it was the combined sins of Man that made it necessary for His Sacrifice. Focusing the blame on any one particular racial, cultural and/or other arbitrary grouping is bad Christian theology, and worse ethics - as Rev. Wright so graphically demonstrates, taking that position permits one to espouse all sorts of bigotry and intolerance.
This is elementary Christian theology, so please show some respect for the subject matter, 'kay?
The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!
as to say "humanity" went through with the act of killing Jesus. The Romans, the Jewish leadership of the time, and Judas all had a hand in it.
But I do see where you're going with its sacrifice aspect.
"If we ever forget that we are One Nation under God, then we will be a Nation gone under." - Ronald Reagan
Jesus died for sin. All sin. All people.
He came to die for sin. Anyone who wants to point to a particular person or group for "killing" Jesus misses the point.
are two completely different things.
"If we ever forget that we are One Nation under God, then we will be a Nation gone under." - Ronald Reagan
he says Jesus was black.
Being a Jew, Jesus would have been olive-complected - NOT black. Anything else is racist bull on par with the Christian Identity assertion that He had blonde hair and blue eyes.
"If we ever forget that we are One Nation under God, then we will be a Nation gone under." - Ronald Reagan
While I agree with you that he was likely olive skinned, middle eastern type of guy, doesn't the whole black/white/jew/arab thing miss the point? He could have been purple. Who cares?
"I ain't never votin' fo another Democrat so long as I can draw breath! I'll vote for a dog first!" - Leola Thomas
The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!
You're OK with co-opting Christianity to imply things that it was never meant to?
"If we ever forget that we are One Nation under God, then we will be a Nation gone under." - Ronald Reagan
There, that makes me feel better.
Seriously now, if you know anything about Christianity and why the Christ child came, you will know that we all killed Christ. Yes, even black people. While the Romans carried out the sentence, we all did the deed.
Obama has clearly won over a great deal of the media with this orthodox liberalism and his smooth talk. The media, in turn, has turned some independents into Obama supporters. We can't underestimate the potential that this lying pastel patriot could make it into the White House and create more government programs that any other President since FDR. He will have a far left Congress to help him create a massive, massive expansion of the federal government.
And the Lord upon the Golden Horn is laughing in the sun.
... approximately.
And let's not forget what all of this is about -- Barack Obama using 4,881 words to distract from the fact that he has spent two decades taking spiritual advice from a man who fundamentally hates this country and cannot move forward as a result. That calls into question not this country's legacy, but Obama's judgment.
QFE
absentee
"Like Mitt Romney's speech, it will only serve to remind Americans of that which Obama hopes they will forget"
Huh? Mitt Romney never distanced himself from his church, and he certainly never had to condemn statements from any Mormon church officials. What was he hoping that I would forget?
Was when he told audiences that he was a Christian, implying that you can be a Christian if you accept Christ as your savior (in reality, that's a non sequitur).
It served to remind audiences of the issue of just what Mormonism is: A branch of Christianity like Methodism or Episcopalianism? A separate religion? A crackpot cult?
He was hoping that we'd forget that he's Mormon? That doesn't make sense; he never ran away from his Church or had to denounce it in any way.
After all the campaign nonsense on this, I still don't understand what was wrong with him being Mormon. I know that I'm supposed to hate Mormons and all, but it would just be nice if I understood the threat they posed. I've never heard any statements like "America is responsible for 9/11" being associated with Mormon pastors.
I didn't watch the speech because I was working. I read it, & saw the platitudes. I imagine, given the ability to practice & have a teleprompter (I'm guessing) he was able to give all the rhetorical flourish we've come to expect. The words written, however, don't read like anything of substance. As pointed out, it was a case of wanting it both ways. Of couse the Obamaphiles will say it was the greatest thing since the resurrection - however, if he had come on stage & sang "Reunited" they would fall all over themselves. I don't see this as putting the issue to bed, especially with no real substance.
have read some of it and heard some excerpts. Reading the speech one can see the purpose of the speech was twofold:
1) Mainly, to get the media to stop playing the loop of the Rev Wright's sermons -- audio, video, etc, these are simply incendiary, especially with the whooping & hollering from the congregation. This was partially accomplished by the speech, see the NY Slimes for example, saying we can now put the Wright connection to rest (not that the Slimes ever made much of the Rev's remarks). However, the more accurate picture of Obama that is now emerging will continue, and it will cost him his more moderate and even conservative supporters.
2) Secondly, someone on Obama's team relized that Obama's categorical statements of last week-- that he had never heard these offensive remarks -- was er inoperative and he needed to restate that particular claim. The Clintonian formula reached in the speech -- he heard some of these statements sometime, maybe -- will be enough to get him of the hook of being an actual liar, though, for some people.
The problem is, for Obama to deal with this issue, he needed to address the real problem with the Rev Wright -- which is not the racial attacks -- I can live with the fact that some or many blacks hate whites -- why shouldn't they? Rather, the problem is the crackpot theories which abound in the black community and which depict all world history as a struggle between powerful, evil whites and long-suffering people of color.
For Obama to truly deal with this issue, he would have to take these one by one and explain what the true history is, what blacks believe, and why they believe it. The Rev was terribly worked up over the nuclear bombs dropped on Hiroshima but does not mention the fire-bombing of Dresden or Cologne by the Allies in the same war, which was far more destructive. OK to kill Germans, but not Japanese, who for the purposes of the Rev are people of color. Similarly no outrage over our bombing of Serbia -- again just tens of thousands of white people (Christians) killed on behalf of Muslims -- that's OK with the Rev too. Not a peep about the Sudan or Rwanda, though.
Or the "Fact" that Israel was involved in the 9/11 attacks, or that the US introduced AIDS and drugs in the black community, or any other of these conspiracy theories in the black community. Obama could do a great service here and bridge the real gap between black and white, which is not racism but rather a lack of a shared understanding of our history.
Rather, the problem is the crackpot theories which abound in the black community and which depict all world history as a struggle between powerful, evil whites and long-suffering people of color.
Those crackpot theories are not theories which abound in the black community; they are theories that abound in the Leftist community.
To be honest, I think that Barack Obama truly disbelieves in the racist rhetoric of Jeremiah Wright. However, as a Leftist who buys into Marxist determinism, Obama could sit there listening to him week after week and not raise a stir because to his way of thinking, Wright was just lashing out at the "oppressive powers that be." (my term)
Indeed, that "excuse" was the undercurrent of Obama's speech yesterday.
Furthermore, that is why liberals, for the most part, thought it was such a great speech. Having to various degrees bought into Marxist determinism themselves, they can excuse even racism because it is simply a response to the oppression of the have-nots by the haves.
Obama's speech was truly excellent as far as the racial issues were. In many ways, even I think he said what had to be said. The problem is that he could not get away from the Marxist determinism that undermines his approach to race and everything else.
And yes America "The Ball is in your court" as spoken by another Black Pastor to tell Americans to come out and denounce racism. Actually, he meant come out and vote Obama. As to why Obama is not quiting his church...the new sorry excuse from Obama, his supporters and many black pastors is that he will not run away from the problem because to solve the problem you must face it to try and change it. Well, Obama had 20 years to do so and he did nothing. Instead, he only decided to do something now because he had been caught with his pants down.
So, any of you who was formerly a supporter of OSAMA BIN LADIN, please go back to your fellowship and try to change OSAMA & GANG...let me know what comes out of that.
Time for America to move away beyond the words and great speeches. The idea that the black community in America is poorer of is rather far fetched. I know of several black singers, actors, writers, entertainers, sportsman, lawyers, doctors, politicians and businessmen that have made it big in America...dun see any racism in there. Racism & Discrimination is not only for the blacks to claim or own.
does that mean he can excuse Islam for the hatred spread by the Mullahs? And if he were sitting there listening to that hatred, would it take him 20 years condemn it?
"a man's admiration for absolute government is proportinate to the contempt he feels for those around him". Tocqueville
...it was a brilliant, gutsy speech - I've listened to it twice. I'll listen to it again. Does he write these?
In the end, no one will buy into the White Liberal Guilt in the Fall, except White Liberals, and there aren't enough of them.
Barack is trying to tell us to STFU because he understands our pain. Sorry, it doesn't work that way.
"History will be kind to me, for I intend to write it"-Winston Churchill
Here are my two favorite quotes-
"Like the Soviet show trials during their 1930s purges, Obama's speech was not supposed to convince critics but to reassure supporters and fellow-travelers, in order to keep the "useful idiots" useful."
"Senator Obama has been at his best as an icon, able with his command of words to meet other people's psychic needs, including a need to dispel white guilt by supporting his candidacy.
But President of the United States, in a time of national danger, under a looming threat of nuclear terrorism? No."
It seems that it is after all, "just words".
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/ThomasSowell/2008/03/19/obamas_speech...
Interesting that Sowell (and Shelby Steele) can only view Obama's success as the result of white guilt. Steele takes it so far that even Tiger Woods and Michael Jordan owe their success to it.
projection out of Sowell's words, but YMMV.
Provide a link to Shelby Steele's remarks on Tiger and Michael if you are going to make such an accusation.
You've been around long enough to know that blanket accusations like that don't fly too well.
Steele's commentary is titled, "The Obama Bargain" and is in yesterday's Wall Street Journal - I don't know how to do a link, but I'll do so if I can figure it out.
Steele and Sowell say that Obama (and other blacks) are successful because of white guilt. If there are two people who should be the last people on the planet who should discount someone's merits and inflate the significance of race in their success, it's those two. And how Michael Jordan and Tiger Woods have anything to do with that discussion has escaped me, but I'm always interested in learning something new if it means anything to you.
will look it up later.
I would have a hard time accepting that Michael Jordan or Tiger Woods were successful because of "white guilt". Both men are very talented athletes that have used their talents to elevate excellence in their respective sports. IMO, they are good role models for kids and have used their God-given talents well. Tiger Woods, especially, has been able to succeed in a sport that is typically reserved for "rich white guys" and I don't think he would have been nearly as successful as he is if he didn't just have lots of honest to goodness raw talent.
Now, as for Obama, I agree with Geraldine 100%. Obama, as a white guy, is nothing more than a John Edwards. And we both know where he sits right now.
More later.
And one reason alone.
The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!
A government big enough to give you everything you want is strong enough to take everything you have - Thomas Jefferson
The man works magic with a ball and club.
I meant what I said and I said what I meant. An elephant's faithful 100 percent.
I will also be away, but I will check back later, because if someone can explain Steele's comment about how Woods and Jordan (and others) are "bargainers," I'm interested to hear it.
As for Ferraro's comment, it was nonsense because it's not like they literally picked up some black guy off the street for a Democratic nominee. If she had said that race may have had some impact, that might have made sense. But as it stands, it's totally ridiculous.
Yeah. Only in the form of a request, and all that.
The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!
Shelby Steele was simply saying that Tiger Woods and Michael Jordan do not challenge the politics of Whites. They are not saying or implying in any way that their success is do to being "bargainers": they are simply saying that they approach whites as "bargainers." Interestingly enough, OJ Simpson would be another example of a "bargainer."
Indeed, note that when Michael Jordan was asked a few years ago about why he was not more open and forthcoming about his support for Bill Bradley, Jordan replied, "Because Republicans buy my shoes, too."
As opposed to Jordan and Simpson, an example of a "challenger" would be Jim Brown, greatest running back (football player and athlete in general) of all time. He did challenge whites (and everyone else). Note the difference between the personas of Jim Brown and Michael Jordan; that is what Shelby Steele is talking about.
Again, it has nothing to do with their success on the field.
I will also make the point that I think Steele's dichotomic classification is both too generic and too blunt. In many ways, we approach everyone on every issue as either "bargainers" or "challengers": it is by no means limited to how Blacks interact with Whites. For example, think about how you relate to your coworkers, regardless of what race or ethnicity they may be.
Moreover, in truth, we all act as both "bargainers" and "challengers" to varying degrees. Again, using the examples above, Michael Jordan and OJ Simpson are not only a "bargainer" but have occassionally "challenged" the system and Jim Brown has occassionally "bargained" his position.
Okay, okay, Jim Brown never "bargained." He's Jim.
that whites also "mask" as well.
Mike DeVine’s Charlotte Observer columns
http://thehinzsightreport.com
www.theminorityreportblog.com
www.race42008.com
"One man with courage makes a majority." - Andrew Jackson
"If there are two people who should be the last people on the planet who should discount someone's merits and inflate the significance of race in their success, it's those two."
Can you be a little more explicit in what you mean here? Thanks!
The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!
have you seen the clip of Chris Mathews dancing with Ellen D?.. to freaking funny.
" Got to love the Lord for making things like that."
Morally Compromised
If someone was to charge that someone else got to their position because of white guilt, Sowell and Steele would be the most likely suspects, and I'm sure they're heard that exact charge made against them many times. I assume that they wouldn't agree with that, and in fact, they have the intellect to show that they have a right to their success for that alone. Given that, it should be the last thing that they would say about someone else. They can have 100 reasons why they don't like Obama, but the idea that he's a success because of white guilt or that he's a "bargainer" should be #101 on their list, and probably left unsaid.
"If someone was to charge that someone else got to their position because of white guilt, Sowell and Steele would be the most likely suspects,"
Why are you suggesting that this would be the case?
The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!
Or overly patient of attempts to waste my time. I quoted a assertion that you made, and I asked you why you made that assertion.
The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!
The fact being that people make the charge that the achievements of Sowell and Steele, for example, are the result of their race. Steele talks about that specifically in a Hoover Digest about "The Loneliness of the Black Conservative." (For example, "it is never fun to be called “an opportunist,” “a house slave").
...of being such a thing, you want them to refrain from doing the same - and the truthfulness or falsity of any particular accusation doesn't signify.
Well, that's weird of you, but I guess that it can tolerated. Carry on.
The Fuzzy Puppy of the VRWC. I've been usurped!
Sen. Obama believes Don Imus' ugly remarks should not be broadcast because, in part, his daughters would be hurt.
Why are Wright's remarks acceptable to be broadcast from the pulpit and on DVD? Do they not hurt my son and daughter even more?
If the Senator wants to heal America, he must condemn Wright and work to stop such rhetoric by Wright and his successor. He has not done so and I doubt he will.
Steve Willis
Professor of Law
University of Florida College of Law
"In fact, a similar anger exists within segments of the white community. Most working- and middle-class white Americans don’t feel that they have been particularly privileged by their race. Their experience is the immigrant experience – as far as they’re concerned, no one’s handed them anything, they’ve built it from scratch. They’ve worked hard all their lives, many times only to see their jobs shipped overseas or their pension dumped after a lifetime of labor. They are anxious about their futures, and feel their dreams slipping away; in an era of stagnant wages and global competition, opportunity comes to be seen as a zero sum game, in which your dreams come at my expense. So when they are told to bus their children to a school across town; when they hear that an African American is getting an advantage in landing a good job or a spot in a good college because of an injustice that they themselves never committ ed; when they’re told that their fears about crime in urban neighborhoods are somehow prejudiced, resentment builds over time."
“Republicans believe every day is the Fourth of July, but the Democrats believe every day is April 15.”
-Ronald Reagan
If you are intelligent enough to see the falsity of the "zero-sum-game" resentments, then why would you expose yourself and especially your children to the hate-filled rhetoric week after week? You may have to deal with the attitude on a day-to-day basis, but purposely exposing your children?
Obama did not take a stand against hatred in his own church until he is now running for president. This fact says the most about how poorly he would represent all of America.
I was in a church service once when a church supported evangelical leader gave a sermon. His speech was full of anger at God's people for not saving lost souls and was punctuated by a number of explicatives. I sat there in a pew with my fiancé and could plainly see this man's heart, at least at the moment, was not with God.
At the end of his speech the speaker asked everyone in the church to stand up, move to the sides of the church to make a big huge circle for a closing prayer. I knew this guy's angry speech was wrong. My fiancé and I were the only people in the church who stayed in our seats. I wasn't going to participate in a person's angry outburst that was contrary to everything I believed about the love and peace of God. A church leader later admitted to me that he thought I did the right thing.
Don't we want a president that will be the only guy still sitting in the seat? Who makes a stand for what is right and does not bow to the pressure from everyone around him or her?
I think Obama's history with Rev. Wright shows he will not make a difficult stand if it means he will pay a heavy price.
Definitely not presidential material.
the hatred in his own church yesterday? I didn't see that at all. I just saw him lecturing us on how we needed to "understand it".
Kudos to you for "sitting" your ground.
seems to me he was just saying I don't always believe his [Rev's] political views, but I do his spiritural teachings. I see nothing wrong with that.
A government big enough to give you everything you want is strong enough to take everything you have - Thomas Jefferson
I am a Catholic, I belief in God and I belief in Christ...but I do not belief in what the Catholic Church has become now. I have not been to church for many years but I teach my children about God privately. I also teach them about respecting your elders, to be polite, treat everyone equally and other basic stuff. The reason why I do not go to church is because it has become another Political Entity. I see the same in other religions and sadly the situation is not getting any better. I would like to say to Obama & his family....Belief in God & Christ but not in your Church, belief in the good of people and not in your Pastor and most important of all...belief in yourself to do the right thing.
God is everywhere and available 24hrs a day. You don't need a physical building, a false prophet and a branded religion to help you see the light.
If kids are exposed to this crap in church, race will always be an issue. To move past hate is to leave hate behind. To use the past as an excuse to hate in the present is to assure the future will "keep on hating".
I've heard that we cut Pastor Wrong some slack because of his past experiences with racism. Hmmm...seems logical. However, we've all been wronged by someone or some group. A mature person understands that man is fallen and we all fall short. The answer is not to forget the past but to forgive. Pastor Wrong has certainly not learned to forgive. He's stuck in the past and is using it to aggrandize himself and his church. All the while throwing the Good News under the proverbial bus.
Lastly, his comparison of his pastor to his grandmother is rather weak. You can't pick your grandmother, but you sure as heck can pick your pastor.
"To believe in nothing is to believe in everything. To believe in everything is to believe in nothing"
...there's damage to control? The speech was ambitious, and certainly due to serve only to solidify everyone's already staunchly held positions. I doubt few were swayed. Maybe he should have done what W did and just outright refuse to discuss his life before the age of 40. And W, for example, didn't mention his DUI until someone brought it up. Now I know that's vastly different from a pastor preaching prejudice, but the point is to hold a man accountable for not addressing what later turns out to be controversial but seemed incosequential at the time is a bit of a stretch. I have many white deep south family members that bandy the N word around but are otherwise wonderful, thoughtful, patriotic, and inclusive people. Should I then shun them for good?
I have many white deep south family members that bandy the N word around but are otherwise wonderful, thoughtful, patriotic, and inclusive people. Should I then shun them for good?
You're not running for President.
If you ran for President, you would not be able to escape your association with them. You would have to pray that they were never videotaped saying the "N" word, because such videos would end up on YouTube forthwith.
Exactly what Obama is facing now.
a good job by refusing to "disown" the man. I don't disagree with Obama strictly on the basis of this association even though much has been made of it in the blogosphere. His leftists policies and overreaching populism are enough for me.
I cringe every time I hear someone speak of Obama's oratory skills. Oratory is when someone speaks words that flow with sincerity and reality. Not memorized clichés that are spoken with the halting cadence of an actor.
He is a not so slick con man who has the sincerity of Uriah Heep. Only the mindless sycophants who are proclaiming him the Messiah are enthralled by this counterfeit
I confess to never having heard a complete, prepared speech from the man. But his responses to "debate" and interview questions strike me as halting and disjointed rather than smooth and persuasive. More like Gerry Ford ("Eastern Europe is not captive to USSR",) than Ronnie ("I will not take advantage of my opponent's youth and inexperience...")
Obama's dilemma is that the paranoia and bitterness and anger of Reverend Wright is actually widespread within the black community. I give Obama a lot of credit for at least pointing that out in a national speech--which other national public leaders have ever discussed that?
It's not just Wright personally. Polls show that something like 15% of African-Americans really do believe that AIDS is a disease created by the "white power structure" to destroy blacks. Any Jews living in New York City can tell you first hand about the virulent anti-Semitism coming from Al Sharpton and Louis Farrakhan and their supporters.
In the black community, men like Sharpton and Farrakhan are admired for their gumption in standing up to "Whitey." Can Obama appeal for the votes of Sharpton's supporters without frightening off whites?
A black candidate like Colin Powell or Condoleeza Rice wouldn't appeal for such black votes. But Powell and Rice are viewed as sellouts by the black community--"Uncle Toms," "Aunt Jemimas," "not black enough," etc.
Every candidate has a core constituency and then has to reach out beyond that to win a majority. The GOP's core constituency consists of Christian evangelicals, but managed to reach out beyond that over economic and national security issues.
Obama is trying something unprecedented--a winning Presidential candidate whose core constituency consists of blacks, many of whom are still bitter and angry over the past. It will be interesting to see if such a candidate can ever reach out successfully to the dominant white majority. Or to Latino immigrants either.
Ladies & Gentlemen....all rise.
The Next President of USA....Rev Obama
We would like to thank the following groups for making this all come true.
1) Democrats who do not like Hillary Clinton
2) Whites who feel guilty
3) Anti-War Protestors...like blame Hillary for that.
4) Democrats who feel that Obama has good judgement...like Rev Wright is a good example
5) Most of the Black Community
6) People who do not like the idea of another Clinton in power.
7) People waiting for hope
8) People wanting change in Washington...like forget about the other more important changes needed
9) Suckers of great speeches
10) And last but not least...the disillusioned, inmature, naive and confused spoiled brats of America.
He acted like this is all just dredged up nonsense-- he wants to get past it? Try not attending those hatefests. Try not exposig his kids, a new generation, to all of that stuff. Does he think they'll be any freer of racial hatred than anyone else after spending their life of Sundays in that madhouse? Obviously his wife hasn't moved past race, but still, we have to. What a joke.