|
Quote:
But he will have lots of ammunition. For the women who supported Hillary, he has this: In 1999, McCain said he didn't want to see Roe v. Wade overturned because it could force "women in America to [undergo] illegal and dangerous operations."and Iraq....these women dont want their sons and husbands serving in Iraq for another 8 years. Quote:
Most religious leaders in Chicago and the overwhelmingly white national United Church of Christ "tolerated" it because, they too, respected and valued the work of the church in Chicago and other communities around the country that its resources supported. IMO, its "intolerant" to only looking at one aspect of a person's life and work and make judgments, particularly without understand the context of the black experience in the history of the US. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
i was serious that i do not think this "issue" is an issue at all.
even less is it a legitimate point of departure for a serious discussion about the issue of racism in the united states. what there is to be said, dc has been saying to you repeatedly, matthew. i also noted that i thought the editorial that smeth posted on the last page pretty much did away with this matter. what i have put up here is a perfectly reasonable position to adopt relative to this non-issue. and i find the logic behind making it into an issue to be---um---problematic. i have offered to debate these questions---but in another thread--because i really do find this a non-issue, discussing any further the deeper problems that it raises elevates it to a place it should not be, treats it as legitimate as a point of departure, when it is not. this "issue" is nothing. so there we are. |
So, a little late to the party, but I finally got around to listening to the videos in the thread.
For the second video, the one about the tax issues with the church, I can see how that might be an issue for the church, and it sounds like the pastor crossed the line as far as endorsing a candidate, but that's an issue *for the church* and for the pastor, not obama at all. Unless he somehow conspired or asked to be endorsed from the pulpit. And, really, that sort of thing is pretty darn common, to be honest. Not that I'm defending it. Now, the really meaty one - the first video. I think the pastor crossed the line a bit, but, to be honest, not by very much. Do you believe in a Righteous God that damns those who do evil? Then it follows pretty well that if America does evil things, God may damn us for them. Starting the Iraq war could very well be viewed as an evil thing, and we might therefore expect such a God to damn us for it. This is exactly the same logic as Pat Robertson, the Hagee guy that McCain got to endorse him, and similar preachers use to say that America is damned for allowing gays, muslims, catholics and whatnot go on living. I don't agree with either sentiment, but, really, if I had to pick, I'd pick the God who damns an entire country for going to war for no good reason resulting in hundreds of thousands of deaths over the God that damns a country for allowing dudes to marry dudes. Also, notice that the first video is clearly a hit piece, assembling choice inflammatory quotes without any of the context. Add to this the fact the Obama has already denounced these views, and this is not much of an issue for me - it is still somewhat of one, because I do think the people who one chooses to associate with say something about a person, and I think some of Rev Wright's views are inflammatory and unhelpful. This article sums it up pretty well, and raises the point once again that neither Clinton or McCain are questioned on their religious views as strongly has Obama has been: http://themoderatevoice.com/religion...remiah-wright/ |
Quote:
And I think that rb's references to 'conservativeland' are totally appropriate given that angry black men tend to drive them up into high gear - a state in which they can conveniently disregard anything actually being said and concentrate on his or her 'vitriol.' I understand this man's vitriol. He is an old black man in America. My parents are old white people from the south and they understand why he is angry. Obama is a full-grown educated man who is perfectly able to speak for himself and hold his own beliefs. I have listened to and been influenced by all kinds of people. My own mother is quite a bit more radical in her beliefs than I am. Yet, somehow I managed not to be just like her. 2. I am with Obama doing whatever he has to do to mediate this 'nontroversy.' (I love that.) I am not so naive to think that campaigning for the presidency is an exercise in free-thought, pure expression of one's beliefs and skipping through dandelions. But I am not at all threatened by this issue, by an Obama presidency or the Rev. Jeremiah Wright. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
I wonder how many people here have read Obama's book, "The Audacity of Hope"? |
Quote:
Quote:
Since neither "fact" is correct, this is approaching Obama being guilty by second degree of association. I'm also curious how Obama's disagreement with and disavowal of their more controversial remarks is "throwing them under the bus"? Again, it appears to be holding Obama to different standards then other candidates. |
Quote:
It doesn't scare me. I don't feel threatened by it. I feel that it's normal and acceptable considering our past and its lingering effects on our present day reality. And there is no evidence that Obama had any significant relationship with Louis Farrakhan and certainly no evidence that he subscribed to his beliefs. This is really getting ridiculous now. All of a sudden Rev. Wright by himself's not menacing enough, I guess. Quote:
Is there any evidence that the Muslim leader of the Nation of Islam is a practicing Christian in Rev. Wright's church? |
I'm waiting for the story below (which I assume was initially posted somewhere as satire) to catch on as a serious issue with the right wingers next.
http://bobmccarty.wordpress.com/file...uhammadali.png Obama's campaign website (photo 8) Quote:
|
Quote:
Sorry, Farrakhan not a member of the church...was honored by the church, by Wright, with the church's highest award. Regarded Farrakhan as an "Icon". That's not such a wonderful thing, imo. Yes Obama distanced himself from Farrakhan, publicly and to the satisfaction of many, and right he should have. It is what it is. Cover of the December 2007 Church of Trinity's Magazine: http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2173/...872ed79e_o.jpg |
Maybe Spike Lee can make a new version of Six Degrees of Separation to highlight Obama's nebulous connections to every militant black in the US since his birth.
Or maybe the Swift Boaters will. |
This is going to be a very interesting year.
We are facing a total collapse economically and yet the biggest issue for the candidates and their supporters is this, Rev Wright. We have Shrillary and as much as I despise the thought I could actually support her I find I do. I think she is the only one with any true plan of attack to better the economy. But.... she seems to be hindered because no matter what she does to fight Obama her camp is called "racist". Obama stands up says nothing except, "Change" doesn't have to show a single plan nor tell us what "Change" means but it seems to sell. His supporters seem to be the most fervent and fierce group because any time someone attacks him, it's racist. They can't seem to come up with any reason to vote for him except, "Change". Then we have McCain.... misrepresented "at age 72 he is the oldest man ever to run for president." And people on Shrillary and Obama's teams seem to want to make age an issue. Well, in 1984 a man exactly 6 days younger than my grandmother ran for office... his age then was 73... Of course that was Ronald Reagan. That makes him in his reelection year, 1 year older than McCain. So McCain is not the oldest man to ever run for president. McCain however, does seem to want to run on 2 issues, "I'm bipartisan and can work with both parties." Which is what George W Bush said in 2000 in his campaign. And McCain seems to want to say "I'm a war hero." But he has no answers to any of the issues. The press seem to enjoy bringing up McCain Hagee, but up until very recently when they could no longer contain it never said much about Rev. Wright. The GOP seem to be divided on McCain because he doesn't come across conservative enough, even though no one truly knows what his plans to better the country are. The Dems are divided and in fighting because of the race card, Rev Wright and trying to figure out what the Hell "Change" truly means. Meanwhile, the economy continues to free fall, oil continues to skyrocket, we see a shrinking middle class, we see a government totally lost and their biggest concerns seem to be "steroids in sports" and um..... well...... I'm sure there's something else... but it's not even close to a plan to help keep the economy moving forward or to secure the dollar. I have stated in another post, the smartest thing EITHER party can do in all seriousness is LOSE this election. And it truly has become more and more obvious to me as we watch the parties from within destroy themselves and their candidates that neither party seems to want to win. 2 of 3 of candidates (the exception being Shrillary) seem to care if they win, it seems more that they wish to make some form of statement. Shrillary, IMHO, only wants to win because she feels it is "owed" to her, yet of the 3 IMHO, she does have the only true ideas needed to campaign on. So, where does this all leave us? It leaves us with a very interesing election year, followed by a president that will basically be doing nothing but watch us continue to fall into an economic abyss. But all the issues and subplots and gossip and political maneuvering are making it very fun to watch and get at people's goats as they defend their candidates but have no idea what their candidates stand for... except "Change". |
Can we, please, dispense with the silly names, like Shrillary... they do nothing but diminish your post and make you, yourself, sound shrill.
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
How about the more obvious answer which is that I feel the same way about a lot of things as this Rev. Wright does. Can I not feel the same way, see things the same way because I am white? ********************************* And, you know, one more thing...I'm not even that much of an Obama supporter. I have intended to vote for him from the beginning, because I do vote and I have to make a choice. But mostly, I am just disillusioned with American politics. I have no doubt that Obama is a politician just like everyone else and if he wins, he's just one moving van away from becoming another gilded disappointment 'playing the game' for 4-8 years until we do this all over again. So let's not paint me as some avid Obama supporter foaming at the mouth to protect their candidate. The good thing about not being attached is that I can speak frankly. I don't have to disavow anyone and yet I can still support whoever the hell I want to. |
|
Quote:
All three of the candidates are rather clear on their issues and plans. If you want to pretend otherwise, that's your own problem, but don't try to claim the candidates haven't shown what they stand for. Between that and "Shrillary"...and you wonder why people rarely respond well to your posts? |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Besides we still have what you are ignoring, you've already said you'll most likely vote for the man, then said you need more convincing, and need someone with more backbone. I've said it before and I'll say it again, you're a walking contradiction on this one pan, you don't know what's going on. |
Quote:
Quote:
|
powerclown please respond to your charge that Farrakhan is a member of the TUCC. Either back up your claim or withdraw it. Then please do the same with the claim the Farrakhan and Obama are close.
|
Quote:
I know what's going on. I just choose to have some fun. See once I'm called a racist and have all these implications thrown at me and put on the defensive.... I just want to rattle cages now. I tried to get people to see hat this whole Rev. Wright thing would be an issue and that how they answered the charges would help their cause. But I didn't know anything. I tried to change the way people interact by asking why call people prejudicial names like racist, bigot, etc and not just answer the issues. But I was still doing it for my own purposes (so I was told). Anyone who has followed my rantings over the years knows I am extremely consistent with my views and posts. But again, after being called racist, issues minimized and the whole holier than thou attitudes..... I'm going to just say whatever comes to mind and have some fun and here's the secret.... once I was called a racist and those implications made.... I don't care what people think anymore, obviously they haven't a clue as to who I am but they are quick to label. Just kind of recognize it as civil disobedience or place me on ignore and be done with the foolishness. As for calling Hilary "Shrillary", I have called her that over the years here. And I find it funny that now when I say I support her, still don't like here but I support her.... I am told I shouldn't call her that. Again, I truly don't care. As Billy Joel once sang, "Say a word out of line, you'll find out the friends you had are gone, forever, forever...... Say goodbye to Hollywood" |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Obviously you do care what people think, as you haven't dropped this, so to say you don't care is bullshit, but keep telling yourself that. Quote:
Quote:
You've got some fucked up picture in your head of you as a martyr or something, but a martyr is the last think you look like now. Figured I'd end this with the usual......"PITY ME MY INTERNET FRIENDS CALLED ME A RACIST, OH WHY OH WHY CRUEL WORLD, i CANNOT CONTINUE WITH MY INTERNET FRIENDS THINKING I'M RACIST..........DID I MENTION I WAS CALLED A RACIST?" |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
If we don't know you IRL (we don't) and we've said something to hurt you, ignore it. You seem to do quite well rationalizing that "we don't know anything about you, so the label doesn't mean anything", but you've not taken the critical step of actually ACTING on that belief and continue to TALK about that belief. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Dude: I was ON YOUR SIDE. I thought what happened was bogus and had serious implications for the quality of our discourse here and elsewhere. And then you created two more threads about it and EVERY GOD DAMN POST since then has been a whine about it. Grow up and get the fuck over it, or welcome to my ignore list. Because I'm sick of hearing this from you. If this hurts your feelings and you have to post two new threads about how we're ganging up on you in here, well then, I guess that's how that's going to go. It's worth that risk, because I seriously hate to see a top quality contributor turn himself into nothing more than a waste of database space. And that's all your posts have been for the last couple weeks. I'm not saying this because I'm out to get you. I'm saying this because I'd like to have you back. |
This thread is **not** about pan6467. If there's anything left to say about the topic itself, then do that. If there's nothing to say, let the thread die. If it keeps on about pan, however, I'll shut it down.
|
Quote:
Here are a couple of links that express my view better than I can. Here's obama's response to Rev Wright's speech: http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/0...-and-my-faith/ Quote:
http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/0...ther-jeremiah/ Quote:
crooksandliars is one of my favorite blogs, btw. Has a definite progressive/truth bias, though. |
Quote:
|
Rekna, post #113.
Honestly, its been pretty disappointing to read over the posts in this thread and all the others relating to it. It's been pure, unadulterated partisanship...perhaps that's what 7.75 years of Bush has done to some of you people, so I suppose I can't be too critical. I'll give you credit for being too trusting. So now it's blown up into a major issue for Obama, and we were discussing this (if one can call it discussion) BEFORE it started getting the saturation media attention its getting now. Ok, this was pretty funny. I wonder if anyone under 30 gets the "evil Barack Obama" reference? |
http://img152.imageshack.us/img152/7...ilspocktv9.jpg
Now they can google, read a wikki article and pretend they knew it all along :thumbsup: |
Quote:
You post something that demonstrated complete ignorance regarding Obama/Farrakhan(that Farrakhan belonged to his church and they had a 20 year relationship) that reaonsably could be judged as a partisan comment or at the very least, based on a pre-conceived opinion of Obama. You offer a snippy apology..."sorry, my mistake" And you conclude by expressing disappointment in OTHER posts? ....and suggesting "unadulterated partisanship.... of "some of you people'? Wow. Very heartfelt and helpful in explaining why those who want to make this an issue just dont get it. |
Quote:
Haha...ain't it the truth, although I like to think I can tell the difference here between those who quote wiki and those who don't. Quote:
|
I've looked a few videos of Rev. Wright on You Tube and what he is saying isn't all that shocking. I suppose though, for many, they don't like to see anger about injustice.
I don't disagree with everything he has to say and I don't agree with it all either. I think he tends to play the easy cards. Cards that are the flip side of the kind of fear mongering I was seeing about Islamic Terrorists. Neither approach is right or credible when delivered in such a manner. Obama has rightly distanced and disavowed what Wright is saying. He has taken a very strong line (from what I can see) that makes no bones that he does not agree with Wright (the same cannot be said, for example, of Clinton and her dealings with Geraldine Ferraro). Here's the thing, this affair is going to hurt Obama. I am not sure by how much but it will have an effect. It doesn't matter how much distance Obama puts between himself and Wright. It doesn't matter if he doesn't share Wright's beliefs, approach or any of it. The conservative media are going to take this and run with it. They will use it to continue to taint Obama with false associations with Farrakan and they will use it to make him appear un-American. The only question is by how much will this effect him? He still has to win the nomination and in the face of a the Clinton machine, there might not be much he can do to shake this. In fact, Clinton may not have to do more than just hang back and let them have at him. Let them bleed just enough of the swing votes away so that she regains lost ground. These next few months are not going to be pretty. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
He is giving a speech on race not just to deal with the pastor's remarks which has already disavowed repeatedly, but also in part because of baseless bullshit like your post that are rampant on right wing blogs, message boards, fox, townhall.com, etc. that have infused questions about his race and religion into the campaign... Obama had a 20 yr relationship with Farrakhan....Obama went to a muslim madrassa as a child and was indoctrinated....Obama does not pledge his allegiance to the flag of the US because of his secret hidden muslim faith....Obama would take the oath of office holding the koran.......and in part to suggest that this country needs to have an honest, open dialogue about race if we are to move forward and come together as a nation. But I wont be surprised when the wingnut critics spin the speech. |
Oh, so its everyone else but Obama's fault that he spent 20 years in Wright's church, agreed with his views (why else would he stay there for 20 years?), but Obama didn’t see those views as problematic until he ran for President. Are you saying someone held a gun to Obama's head and made him go to that chuch for 2 decades? Doesn't make a bit of sense to me.
Charlatan: If Wright spoke so publicly of Farrakhan as a great man and an icon, and Wright was Obama's friend and pastor for the last 20 years, why would you consider that a false association? |
Quote:
Based on what? Its like implying or assuming that every Catholic elected official in the country must be anti-choice because of their priest's or church's position on abortion ...or opposed to the US invasion and occupation of Iraq because the Pope is. Can you point to any policies or legislative initiatives or any words or actions of Obama's that support Wright's more extremists statements...other than the fact that Obama was outspokenly against the invasion of Iraq well before he had plans of running for president...and believes we need to reinvest in the nation's inner cities combined with more programs that promote self-help within the community. He is a member of that church because it is the largest (or one of the largest) congregations in Chicago of any denomination, highly respected by religious leaders of all denominations in the city, open to people of any race but primarily serving the black community in a variety of social and community-based ways that were compatible with Obama's work in the same black community, first as a legal advocate practicing poverty law and then as a state senator. (The same reason that several Senators and dozens of Congressmen belong to my synagogue in Wash, DC...because it is the largest and most influential in the city and provides more social and community services to both Jews and non-Jews than many smaller, less affluent synagogues or churches..and even though the chief rabbi tends to express extremely radical pro-Israel views on occasion that they (and I) dont always agree with.) But you will assume the worst based on your own pre-conceived perception of Oabma..so I really dont know what else to say. Doesnt make sense to you? And you wonder why Obama needs to give a speech? Look in the mirror for answers. If I sound a little harsh it is because I dont know any other way to say it. |
Quote:
Until I actually see Obama endorsing or hanging out with Farrakhan himself, I will take the reports of his "association" with Farrakhan with a large grain of salt. |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Do you think it is just a coincidence that you're here spreading, verbatim, the message visible on so many townhall.com web pages and on it's parent, Salem Comm's radio broadcasts? Wealthy conservative republican christian billionaires have invested big money to bring you the views that you share with us. You would have more impact here, and some credibility if you weren't posting, verbatim, what the CNP "crew" is paying other people to distribute. |
Quote:
Regarding the Rev. Wright's current apologists: From a statement on Palm Sunday by the Rev. Otis Moss III ... Rev. Wright's replacement Quote:
This isn't the opinion of some white republican billionaire, they are sadly unavoidable facts that Obama and his apologists need to address honestly. His chickens have come home to roost. |
Quote:
Right on. |
Personally, I believe Rev Wright statements reflect on Obama, no matter how much he denounces them now. He was his pastor for over 20 years, he presided over his wedding, and the baptism of his daughters. I can tell you that I am close to 2 Rabbi's and I go to them for advice, thoughts, and they helped make me who I am today. I hope that some of their thoughts and belief have somehow trickled in my thick head at least a drop if not more.
To me religion is a way of life, it is what makes you who you are, what helps shape your morals, and who you go to and learn these from reflect on the type of person you are. Will it affect my vote, nope I am voting elsewhere, but do I think that someone of this close intimate nature with him is a valid point even now after he denounced him, absolutely. |
Quote:
|
yeah--see at the moment, with the financial crisis unfolding, the fed in panic mode, in which you find even the head of the imf issuing alarmed statements about the alarming situation that is overtaking the american speculative-economic infrastructure, THIS is what is understood as an important political issue?
jesus, comrades. perhaps it is time to remove our collective heads from their rectal carrying-cases----brought to you by all the major television networks---and get a bit of perspective. get some air. look around. this is not even trivial. it is straight up idiocy. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
And now I am following roachboy's advice and removing myself from this nonsense. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
George Soros contributed money to a GRASSROOTS organization, moveon.org, that RUNS on small contributions from huge numbers of individual donors, i.e., a GRASSROOTS organization. www.towhhall.com and the Salem Radio Network are an integrated media property consisting of an army of conservative evangelical republican themed talk radio hosts, and internet and print columnists. This media property is a publicly traded corporation founded, managed and controlled by two current and or former officers and members of the super secret, evangelical conservative christian republican Council for National Policy, CNP, and organzation founded in 1981 by Rev. Tim LaHaye and Paul Weyrich. CNP meetings and membership roster are kept secret and the press is barred, to the extent that it is possible, from covering them. Members include some of the wealthiest conservatives on the planet. CNP co-founder, Paul Weyrich is on record, claiming that his politics preclude the notion of everyone voting for the candidate of their choice: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&q...=Google+Search Eric Prince, founder and owner of Blackwater, the controversial mercenary army that was deployed in NOLA during the Katrina disaster and has gained notoriety for the multiple killings of Iraqi civilians and for the multi billion dollar "no bid' contracts it has been awared by the Bush government, comes from a "CNP" family: http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&s...np&btnG=Search Candidate GW Bush, in 1999 appeared before a closed CNP meeting, and gave a speech in his role as a presidential candidate. Requests for the transcript and recording of that speech from the media have been refused for nine years now by both CNP and Bush. Quote:
Quote:
Can you see that it is vastly more difficult to post verbatim, the slurs and arguments that are distributed SO OFTEN, by Salem Comm. staff, websites, and broadcasts, and be take seriously, than it is to post opinions that are shaped and supported by populist ideas and independent research? An example of the difference is the series of posts I have done about the origins of John McCain's initial post Navy employment, campaign financing, and his $50 to $100 million personal fortune. I found, on my own, 30 year old newspaper articles detailing the organized crime career of McCain's father in law. I posted photo images of the newspaper pages where I found the details I then transcribed in my posts. I criticized powerclown and others for simply posting the message about Obama's pastor that was distributed by Salem Comm. in the exact same words. |
Quote:
Rev. Wright is absolutely on record, not just in "snippets", but several years of public record spewing his hate speech. Senator Obama calls him his mentor, his spriritual guide, his friend, his inspiration. All facts. His words. Not an interpretation. This is more than guilt by association. It is questioning a man's core belief system that may live beneath a well groomed persona. He may truly not believe any of Rev. Wright's anti-social views ... that would also be equally troubling ... has he lied all this time? I believe it is highly reasonable to question the beliefs and sincerity of a (until recently) relatively unknown in national politics running for the highest office in U.S. Government. It is unfortunate for Barak Obama's campaign. From what I've read/heard of Obama, I would definitely pick him over Mrs. Clinton. But the scrutiny is deserved. Only his actions will determine his credibility in these matters. Is Senator Obama not running for the presidency of all Americans? |
Quote:
But, yer doin' a heck of a job! The volk who are posting all of the nonsense on this thread, voted for the following at least once, and some even twice. You want them to focus on this. Bashing Obama and Jeremiah Wright is a much sweeter, escapist pasttime, vs. discussing the consequences of their politics, dontcha think? Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
While powerclown and others quote a source you disapprove, does it make any of the contained facts un-factual? I grasp that most of us quote sources that often run close to themes reflecting our own points of view. That's fine. We entertain all contributions. But your criticisms read much like the pot calling the kettle black. While some here may have taken a less intellectual approach in gathering and presenting their unoriginal argument, there are still facts contained that are not to my knowledge disproved. Some are indeed junk. |
Quote:
Good luck to you if you can pull off the comparison. It's not persuasive, to the point that it is absurd. If I found myself aligned so closely with the ideas assembled, researched and pushed at townhall.com and on Salem Comm. radio, I would not be posting them here without my own research augmenting the message that Salem is paying all of it's noise machine staff to spread. Maybe it is just my personal quirk....but at least it is some kind of a standard, so I don't feel like I'm used or "owned" as a distributor of a propaganda "Op', and that is what the anti Obama/Jeremiah Wright "stuff" posted on this thread looks like. It is verbatim, what I read at townhall.com. |
Quote:
Meanwhile, back to the subject at hand ... accountability regarding Barak Obama's close relationship with Rev. Wright. |
Quote:
That's a response.... 1600 evangelical christian republican zealot radio stations and townhall.com co-ordinated corporate media "blitz" serving up anti Jeremiah Wright "hate minister" talking points, repeated over and over in posts here, and you compare this "onslaught" to "Soros and others".... okay...... |
Quote:
You may want to raise your concerns about comparing political influence in another thread instead of diverting attention from the racism of Rev. Wright. |
Remember McCain's father in law may have mob ties that got some reporter killed maybe 50 years ago.
This makes McCain unworthy of being president. Check. Obama goes to the church of a guy who has many, shall we say, controversial views, and is good friends and promoter of Farrakhan. Completely irrelevant to Obama as a presidential candidate. Check. Intellectual Honesty? ........ mmm not so much. If you want to make a big deal out of McCain's father in law (and you know I picked my wife, the father inlaw just sorta happened) then its grossly dishonest to dismiss a direct connection of Obama and this guy. Now personally I really don't think its that big a deal. We know we are getting a typical democrat tax and spender wrapped in a false cloak of 'change' which fools young people easily, thats fine. I don't think Obama is an overt racist but if you want to try to play a game of 6 degrees here, he is far more 'tainted' than McCain. |
My advice to MM, Roach, Host, SecretMethod, Rekna, Silent Jay, Robot Parade, et al.....give the thread over to powerclown, ottopilot, seaver... There is nothing more to be said that hasnt already. Let them have the forum to pat each other on the back.
They are convinced in the righteousness of condemning a person based not on the body of his work, but solely on one aspect of his life ...his "association" with a controversial figure. It is painfully obvious that there is no point in further discussion. The thread is yours, guys. Feel free to continue to rationalize your narrow minded intolerance among yourself or respond in kind to me if that will make you feel better. In any case, I'm done here. edit: I thought Obama just gave a brilliant speech to those who are willing to listen with an open mind and recognize the need to confront the issue of race relations in America. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
It is about ethics, Ustwo. McCain now has $50 to $100 million in personal wealth, every penny because of his decision in 1980 to form a close relationship with his father in law, James Hensley. This is the record, in the year that Hensley chose to hide his equal partnership in the Ruidoso Downs horse race track from the New Mexico Racing Commission, deny his association with the man in the following description, when specifically asked if Baldwin was his partner: Quote:
He had to know what these two men were about, and he partnered with them and was employed by Marley, for 8 years and arrested twice during his employment, accused of invoice fraud related to that employment. Hensley's brother and race track business partner, Eugene, served three federal prison sentences between 1948 and 1969, one for the liquor invoice fraud that James Hensley was convicted of, too, and two times for income tax evasion convictions. McCain could have checked how his father in law came to control a $100 million dollar per year sales gross business (It grosses $300 million currently), or....he could have looked the other way deliberately, or he could have been incurious. We "enjoy" an incusrious president now. It would have been easiest to discover that Hensley's brother served 3 federal prison "stretches", and then checked out the entire background of the Hensley brothers....the newspaper articles I've provided and quoted from were only three years old, when McCain accepted the job with Hensley. McCain is not a criminal, he simply has exhibited poor enough judgment and a lack of ethical standards to be qualified to be my president. I have higher standards when it comes to who I want to be my president, than you do, Ustwo. Obama exhibits a similar ethics "deficiency" as McCain does, with his association with Rezko and the "stinky" house purchase. But, I don't give a shit about where he goes to church.....that "controversy" is a Salem Comm. pushed "Op". |
This is long, but it's worth reading. This is the complete text of Obama's speech on race, today, where he addresses the issues that have been raised about his association with Reverend Wright.
This is long. I challenge you to read it in its entirety, especially if you're among those who are trumpeting this issue. This may be the most honest speech I've ever heard a presidential candidate give. Our nation is sharply divided. I want the man who gave this speech to guide us on the path toward unity. Quote:
|
It's a great speech. Much is endearing. He appropriately attempts to appeal to the emotions of a wide range of voters.
His explanation of Rev. Wright's age and experiences makes sense in some respects, but Rev. Wright was not an old man 20 years ago when Senator Obama began attending his church. While Obama now decides to distance himself from the divisiveness of Wright's rhetoric, his status as an Illinois state Senator, a US Senator, and a presidential candidate had brought increased status and legitimization to Rev. Wright's views by association. Racial tension in the 80's was not what it was in the 60's, but the current racial climate is not much better or worse than it was the day Barak Obama stepped foot into his church. The picture painted of an old cranky man living in the past is not really accurate while addressing Rev. Wright's long documented volatile rhetoric. This issue goes more to Senator Obama's ability to access his environment and exercise wise judgement. The issue also illustrates the willing hypocracy of Senator Obama and his apologists ... all critical attributes that should be examined when individuals seek the presidency. His ongoing relationship with Rev. Wright clearly demonstrates a questionable record of his ability to make decisions and magnifies potential flaws of his overall credibility. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
Three years ago, he became addicted to methamphetamine and fell in love with a very toxic young woman. I watched his decline and eventual suicide via AK47. People CHANGE. Just because someone is one way when you meet them, and speaks messages that resonate with you at the time does NOT mean that they will continue to resonate with you, nor that you will continue to support their public positions. Quote:
I really find it hard to believe that you never befriended someone who later changed their ways, their personality, or their politics in such a way that despite respecting them as a person still (for their formative effect in your life), you disagree with their positions. If you truly haven't, perhaps you should give credit to those of us who have. If you have, then perhaps you should understand that people change. EDIT: Just watched Obama's "Race Speech" on youtube. I don't see how the fuck anyone could watch that and think he was ANYTHING like his "Former Pastor" Reverend Wright. For fuck's sake people, do you listen to the words coming out of his mouth? Quote:
|
Quote:
There are people (on TFP and in the real world) who will conveniently ignore the degree to which this speech addresses and resolves their issues with Obama, and will continue to attack him on this issue. In so doing, they'll be ignoring the ONLY candidate who's dealing in reality on the issue of race in America. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
I fully admit to my partisan hackery. That notwithstanding, I can't fathom that you could have fully read or watched it and still have that question. |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
Quote:
To me action speaks louder then words, I know he sat there, and he went to his services for years and had him preside over all these personal things for him (wedding, baptisms, etc..) and until now never calling him out on his racial issues. To me that says a lot. As far as his speech, I take it with a grain of salt, he wants to be elected, there is a possible fire, so he gets his speech writer team together (and we all know every politician have them), not sure which were involved in this speech, but they wrote an amazing one. Now do I think he full embraces his Rev opinion, no, but do I think that a part of it rings true in his personal values, that I do, or he would not sit there and listen to him for that many years. If he did not truly at some part of him agree / accept these views, he could have left, I know if it was me, I would. And for that part alone I judge him as a person. |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
As I said earlier, I think he has an extreme uphill battle in overcoming prejudice in this election. I am amazed he has been able to do so well so far. Can you imagine how tough it must be for a black man with a name like his to come so far?
I have personally spoken to people here in southern Ohio who think he is a Muslim who is sympathetic to terrorism and will not honor our flag or the pledge. CNN just did a poll on TV news where 13% think he is a Muslim. Even Hillary when asked if she thinks Obama is a Muslim hedged her answer with "as far as I know he isn't". I think that his speech was mostly right on and he did a good job of explaining his old reverand's remarks but I fear that many voters do not pay attention to details and will instead be swayed by video of the reverand saying "God damn America" over and over. I hope I am wrong. |
Quote:
I didn't hear much about taking full responsibility for his error in judgement not disavowing the good pastor long ago ... and why we should expect him to make better decisions in the future. The speech was otherwise moving. |
Quote:
I don't know a single person in real life who has never disagreed with something their religious leader has said and still followed that person to some degree. Seriously, I don't think you realize just how ridiculously unreasonable your expectation is. Not only that, I think it's pretty dangerous to be in a position where you agree with everything your religious leader says. It shows that you're more interested in being told things you agree with than having your own views challenged and thinking for yourself. I know a lot of Catholics who would either have no candidate to vote for in any election, or who would not have any church to go to, if they insisted that they agree with everything their religious leaders say. Anytime you find yourself agreeing 100% with someone on a consistent basis...it's time to find someone different to pay attention to. |
Quote:
"Do you believe Obama is Muslim?" "No, of course he's not." "You sure?" "Yeah, I'm sure. He says he's not a Muslim. I have no reason to believe otherwise. Insinuating that is offensive to both Senator Obama AND Muslims." "You sure?" "Well, yes. I'm going to take the man at his word. He's not a Muslim." "You sure?" "Yes! Absolutely, as far as I know, the man is not a Muslim." "AHA! You said 'as far is I know'! GOTCHA!!" I'm fairly pro-Obama, and I'm clear that so-called hedge wasn't REALLY a hedge. The rest of your post is very well taken, though, flstf. The guy has had to climb uphill, and I'm proud of America he's made it as far as he has. |
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
I honestly don't get this. Obama is not Rev. Wright. He doesn't claim any of Wright's ideas as his own. He isn't talking about appointing the guy to a government post.
My mentor in my career is a homophobic, close-minded bigot. He's disrespectful towards women and has been sued more than once for sexual harassment. Politically he and I have nothing in common. Yet he's the reason I'm still working for my company despite some overly generous offers to go elsewhere. |
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Judge Obama on what he has done not what his pastor has done. The fact that the best thing anyone can come up with is that he went to church with a pastor who is resentful of being mistreated by the color of his skin says a lot about Obama's record.
I am issuing a challenge to you all. Find and post any evidence you have that Obama is unpatriotic, racist, and hates America. Show me one case where he has said something that backs that up. The fact is the only thing you critics have is him going to church where a pastor who served the church for 20+ years gave 2-3 contravesial statements. What about the thousands of other sermons that aren't being broadcast? The real sad thing here is that this man who you want to hate so much and use to bring down Obama has likely done more for the "least of these" than you ever have. |
American politics cracks me up.
Why any of you take this seriously is beyond me. Personally, I think Hillary would make a better president than Obama, for a bunch of reasons, but he gave a great speech and certainly should not be judged on the selected musings of his reverand. |
Quote:
Sen. Obama showed poor judgement in his association with Rev. Wright and it's perceived as trouble beneath the surface for a potential president for all Americans. At some point, all racism is going to have to get over itself or just continue tearing each other down. Racism is as racism does, black, white, green. Race is being used as a political devise on all sides. Because you're black and angry doesn't justify your own rationalized blind racism. Are you comfortable with a presidential candidate for all Americans subscribing to a "Black Value System" as the basis of his church's ministry? The Trinity United Church of Christ Statement of Faith http://www.tucc.org/about.htm For fun, try switching the word "White" with "Black" used in this statement. Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
The key to his success is white guilt. Its all about race and racism, though not in the classic sense. He is where he is today, the candidate he is, because he is black. Where he white it would only be Hilary right now. It is the racism I see on the left that I credit much of it. A well spoken classic white democrat would have gone no where, but it is the unspoken glee that its a black man which compels many. Its been an embarrassment to the party that for the last several years its been black republicans who have any real power in this government. Racism goes far deeper than just the classic red neck klansman, and Obama is a true politician, he will manipulate this white guilt to his advantage. Now, note I didn't say its wrong to do so, or that anyone is being unethical here. I'd use this guilt too if I were him, but there is nothing wrong or racist by pointing out that race is a factor in his favor as well as his determent. |
Hillary wouldn't be in the race at all if she wasn't married to Bill.
What else ya got? |
Quote:
|
Ustwo... while I will agree that the colour of Obama's skin has something to do with him still being in the race, I will not agree that it is the only reason.
The fact that George Bush is white is why he managed to get so much of the white vote in the last election. It wasn't everything but it was a factor. I recognize that a small part of me would like to see a black man as president. But a larger part of me recognizes that words and actions are far more important than the colour of someone's skin. It doesn't matter what colour Jesse Jackson or George Bush is, I still wouldn't vote for either of them. Quote:
|
Quote:
|
Coolest part of the thread:
Quote:
Obama could be caught sodomizing a busload of kids, and his supporters would rationalize it. Likewise he could cure cancer and his detractors would still spew venom. Rather like good ole "W". That's just what we need another four (or eight) years of sharply polarized government, and a sharply polarized electorate... |
I would not support Obama if he sodomized a busload of kids. Or even got a few blowjobs from them.
How dare you. |
One blowjob per kid? I mean c'mon, he is Barak Obama...
|
Quote:
I do think you may be giving white voters a little too much credit assuming they will vote from a guilty conscience. Maybe that is because my family is from the south and I have many/several relatives and friends who are racist. And no, I will not reject them but I will denounce their racist opinions. I don't think many of them will have an epiphany and decide to vote for him because they suddenly realize they were wrong all these years. I don't think it makes much practcal difference which of these three candidates wins but it may be good for the country in starting to heal our racist past if a black man like Obama could hold the top spot for a while. |
Quote:
This isn't a Virgina slims add, its the reigns of the most powerful nation in human history, you don't give those to someone so people can feel there is some sort of healing of some past injustice. Were he a conservative, I'd be happily on his bandwagon, but I will not give up my principles for symbolism. I'll agree there is a bit of seductiveness giving in despite deep policy differences, but it is no less racist to me than refusing to vote for him because he is part black. |
I'm not sure you who insult more, Ustwo. Me or Obama; me because you insist that the only reason I'm voting for him is because I've got some sort of white guilt, or Obama because you believe the only reason he's gotten where he is due to being black.
I guess it doesn't really matter, since you're insulting us both. Could it be that I actually like his policies on: Civil Rights Disabilities Economy Education Energy and Environment Ethics Faith Family Foreign Policy Healthcare Homeland Security Immigration Iraq Poverty Social Security TECHNOLOGY Child Advocacy Science Says you? Nope. I have white guilt. Quote:
|
| All times are GMT -8. The time now is 05:09 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0 PL2
© 2002-2012 Tilted Forum Project