Rev Jeremiah Wright - or WRONG? - Page 4 - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

robot_parade · 03-17-2008, 06:12 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dc_dux

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.

"maybe"? Are you not paying attention? Of course they will, and in fact, already are.

silent_jay · 03-17-2008, 07:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pan

I have stated in another post, the smartest thing EITHER party can do in all seriousness is LOSE this election.

You've also stated that you're most likely voting for Obama anyways, so I don't think what you've said in other threads has a point.

Quote:

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".

SM has given you the link twice now pan, no need for ignorance, try reading the man's platform before saying he's only about one thing. Besides reading about Obama is something you need to do, you know more about McCain than you do about Obama, those are your own words not mine.

Quote:

Originally Posted by pan

I still know more about McCain than I do about Obama and I have never really been much of a McCain fan.)

So really I don't think you have enough knowledge to say that Obama voters only say they're voting for change.

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.

Jinn · 03-17-2008, 07:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by SecretMethod70

Seriously, this willful ignorance is getting pretty tired. I've already given you the link once, but maybe you'll actually bother to do some reading this time: http://www.barackobama.com/issues/

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:

Can we, please, dispense with the silly names, like Shrillary... they do nothing but diminish your post and make you, yourself, sound shrill.

Worth repeating on page 2.

Rekna · 03-17-2008, 07:22 AM

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.

pan6467 · 03-17-2008, 08:13 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by silent_jay

You've also stated that you're most likely voting for Obama anyways, so I don't think what you've said in other threads has a point.

SM has given you the link twice now pan, no need for ignorance, try reading the man's platform before saying he's only about one thing. Besides reading about Obama is something you need to do, you know more about McCain than you do about Obama, those are your own words not mine.

So really I don't think you have enough knowledge to say that Obama voters only say they're voting for change.

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.

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"

silent_jay · 03-17-2008, 08:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by pan6467

I know what's going on. I just choose to have some fun.

Sorry, don't think you do, you don't even remember what you're typing in other threads it would appear, and now that you've been caught, you're saying you decided to 'have some fun', sure you were.

Quote:

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.

Oh you mean you were trolling? Well then sorry for feeding you. I guess rattling cages means you pissing and moaning in every thread now about whether you were called a racist or not.

Quote:

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.

Quote:

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,

Not recently you haven't, you've supported 3 candidates in 2 weeks.
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:

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.

Again we're back to this being about you. So are we going to have to put up with you pissing and moaning about this for the remainder of our time here at TFP?

Quote:

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"

You support Hillary now? Obama last week (even though you don't know much about him), McCain was the man this week, he has backbone, you're a fucking walking contradiction pan and you're talking out your ass.

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?"

Jinn · 03-17-2008, 08:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Page 1, dc_dux

pan...I guess you took nothing to heart from the last discussion....and you still have not identified the members who called you a racist.

SO please...,enough with the martyr act and give it a rest.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Page 1, roachboy

pan: there are already 2 threads taken up with your complaining about being labeled "racist" for **the way** in which you brought this topic up.

get over yourself.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Page 1, silent_jay

Look at me, someone called me a racist, look at me everybody, awww come on look at me, I was called racist, LOOK AT ME DAMNIT I WAS CALLED A RACIST.

But seriously pan, drag it back to the other 2 threads that are about you and at least leave one alone. You know for a guy who says 'this isn't about me' you sure have no problem making every thread that mentions race about you and what you may or may not have been called.

And yet, three pages later, you're still trying to make this about you. About your great attempts to be civil and "change views" - nothing on the fact that you can't fucking get over it. We're on page 4 of thread 4 in which you made yourself the poor martyr being called names.

Quote:

...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.

I'd like to call you out on acting like a twelve year-old whose just been called a doo-doo head, but I don't want to weather another 5 threads where you hopelessly defend against your perception that we've somehow hurt you. When I first saw your posts on TFP, I had a lot of respect for you. When I found out what you did for a living, I had more respect for you. But in the last few days, in the last few posts, my respect has gone from tons to none. Perhaps you should reconsider your approach to these forums. As evidenced by the previous comments, I'm not alone in thinking you've adapted quite well the victim mentality.

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.

silent_jay · 03-17-2008, 08:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JinnKai

When I first saw your posts on TFP, I had a lot of respect for you. When I found out what you did for a living, I had more respect for you. But in the last few days, in the last few posts, my respect has gone from tons to none. Perhaps you should reconsider your approach to these forums. As evidenced by the previous comments, I'm not alone in thinking you've adapted quite well the victim mentality.

Me as well, had a lot of respect for pan prior to a week or so ago, now it's truly pathetic.

ratbastid · 03-17-2008, 09:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JinnKai

When I first saw your posts on TFP, I had a lot of respect for you. When I found out what you did for a living, I had more respect for you. But in the last few days, in the last few posts, my respect has gone from tons to none.

QFT, couldn't say it better. (Well, perhaps replace "none" with "little"--you're not beyond redemption, IMO.)

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.

roachboy · 03-17-2008, 09:09 AM

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.

robot_parade · 03-17-2008, 09:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by roachboy

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.

Wait, what was the thread about again? :-)

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:

Originally Posted by Barack Hussein Bin Obama Laden Saddam

I vehemently disagree and strongly condemn the statements that have been the subject of this controversy. I categorically denounce any statement that disparages our great country or serves to divide us from our allies. I also believe that words that degrade individuals have no place in our public dialogue, whether it’s on the campaign stump or in the pulpit. In sum, I reject outright the statements by Rev. Wright that are at issue….

And here's some commentary giving context to Wright's remarks:

http://www.crooksandliars.com/2008/0...ther-jeremiah/

Quote:

The current media flap over the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Barack Obama’s former pastor, strikes me as nothing short of strange. Anyone who attends church on a regular basis knows how frequently congregants disagree with their ministers. To sit in a pew is not necessarily assent to a message preached on a particular day.

And lots of other good stuff.

crooksandliars is one of my favorite blogs, btw. Has a definite progressive/truth bias, though.

Rekna · 03-17-2008, 12:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by roachboy

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.

Please don't close this down until powerclown either backs up or withdraws his claims about Obama, Farrakhan, and the TUCC. We can't let such blatant dishonesty go unchecked on these forums.

powerclown · 03-17-2008, 07:40 PM

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.

Quote:

Ok, this was pretty funny. I wonder if anyone under 30 gets the "evil Barack Obama" reference?

Ustwo · 03-17-2008, 07:51 PM

Now they can google, read a wikki article and pretend they knew it all along

dc_dux · 03-17-2008, 07:54 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by powerclown

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.

Let me make sure I understand.

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.

powerclown · 03-17-2008, 08:19 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ustwo

Now they can google, read a wikki article and pretend they knew it all along

Winnar! Evil Spock - TOS, episode "Mirror, Mirror".
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:

Beamed up during an ion storm, which causes a transporter malfunction, the landing party of Kirk, McCoy, Scotty and Uhura find themselves in a mirror universe aboard a parallel Enterprise run by ruthless barbarians. The ion storm also caused their malicious counterparts to beam to the real starship. Kirk and the others must find a way home before they are discovered and exposed by their parallel crew members, who use treachery, back-stabbing and seduction to get what they want.

dc_dux, big "race speech" by Obama tomorrow. Quite timely, don't you think?

Charlatan · 03-17-2008, 08:39 PM

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.

Rekna · 03-17-2008, 08:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by powerclown

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?

Ahh sorry I didn't see your retraction. Thanks for clarifying.

dc_dux · 03-17-2008, 09:12 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by powerclown

dc_dux, big "race speech" by Obama tomorrow. Quite timely, don't you think?

powerclown...what the fuck is he supposed to do?

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.

powerclown · 03-17-2008, 09:31 PM

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?

dc_dux · 03-17-2008, 09:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by powerclown

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?),

THere you again......Obama "agreed with his (Wright's) views"....more baseless bullshit.

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.

Charlatan · 03-17-2008, 10:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by powerclown

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?

Just because my friend's friend is an ass, doesn't mean I am.

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.

host · 03-17-2008, 11:16 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by powerclown

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?

Tiny little world of opinion, produced, directed and distributed by www.Salem.cc "media property", www.townhall.com controlled and managed by:

Quote:

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpu...the-right.html

Posted by: host | Jul 15, 2007 12:22:48 PM

Tapper, had he done his "homework", would have been able to point out the "interviewee" and the "MSM" critic was

Council for National Policy's Stuart W. Epperson's and Edward G. Atsinger III's Salem Radio Network's Hugh Hewitt..... (Salem owns townhall.com, too....)

How is it that Hewitt can "front" for two CNP billionaire's 1200 station, Christian radio propaganda network, and it's "web presence", townhall.com, yet not even be asked about the influence on politics of the secretive Council for National Policy, and the "things" assembled by it's members...Eric Prince's "Blackwater", and Hewitt's employer...also owner of "Salem News Network"...Salem Media...huge...but not MSM?

Read the other posts...Hewitt's affluent audience of "well educated", etc..etc.., haven't a clue about who Hewitt fronts for, and obviously, neither does Tapper.

Here is their goal, from Brett Bozell III in a 1992 speech to Heritage Foundation:
"Imagine, if you will, a future wherein the media willfully support the foreign policy objectives of the United States."....

Quote:

http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&um...nG=Search+News

Obama's pastor distraction to campaign
Town Hall, DC - 9 hours ago
Trinity United Church of Christ stirred further controversy in 2007 when its magazine, Trumpet, gave its "Dr. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. Trumpeter Award" to ...
The Dishonesty of Hope Town Hall
The Foolishness of Preaching Town Hall
Sunday's Dirty Secret Town Hall
Town Hall - Town Hall
all 722 news articles »

LIVENEWS.com.au The Audacity of Dope
Town Hall, DC - 21 hours ago
I believe that the Reverend Jeremiah Wright is completely innocent of the charges of racism that have been leveled against him by Fox News and other fairly ...
Obama, Clinton Teams Exchange Fire Town Hall
all 569 news articles »
Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s Hope Speech
Town Hall, DC - Mar 14, 2008
By Amanda Carpenter Reverend Jeremiah White’s sermon that inspired the title of Barack Obama’s best-selling memoir and 2004 Democratic National Convention ...
Obama Denounces Pastor's 9/11 Comments
Town Hall, DC - Mar 14, 2008
Jeremiah Wright while attending services at Chicago's Trinity United Church of Christ. Obama, a member of the church since the early 1990s, said he would ...
Marxism, American Christians, And Election 2008
Town Hall, DC - Mar 15, 2008
Jeremiah Wright. Obama has fallen under harsh scrutiny because of the actions of his own Pastor, and this has become quite widely known within the last week ...

Town Hall Tim Russert Clubs Bambi!
Town Hall, DC - Feb 26, 2008
He goes on to note that Obama's controversial pastor Jeremiah Wright, is a fan of Farrakhan's. However, the pastor of his church, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright ...
How Does Obama Feel About America?
Town Hall, DC - Mar 6, 2008
Jeremiah Wright, whose church he joins. Wright peddles racial grievance religion. Following 9/11, he said, "[W]hite America got a wake-up call . ...
Playing the Identity Politics Game
Town Hall, DC - Mar 13, 2008
Clinton and her folks to go after Obama on the most obvious elephant in the room these days: Rev. Jeremiah Wright. continued...
Get Well By John McCaslin
Town Hall, DC - Mar 10, 2008
Jeremiah A. Wright Jr., pastor of Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago — to eat his words. Ronald Kessler, the best-selling author and Washington ...
How Liberals Play Race Politics
Town Hall, DC - Mar 6, 2008
Jeremiah Wright, Barack's spiritual mentor, whose magazine last year declared that Louis Farrakhan "epitomized greatness. ...

powerclown, if I found myself posting on this forum the "message" of the tiny little extreme conservative christian evangelical billionaire white man's club of the Coors family, Richard Mellon Scaife, Stu Epperson, Ed Atsinger III, Richard Devoss, et al.... I would demand, as their mouthpiece Hugh Hewitt certainly has, that they pay me to do it.

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.

ottopilot · 03-18-2008, 01:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by host

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.

The same can be said about the likes of George Soros and moveon.org.

Regarding the Rev. Wright's current apologists:
From a statement on Palm Sunday by the Rev. Otis Moss III ... Rev. Wright's replacement

Quote:

Trinity United Church of Christ’s ministry is inclusive and global. The following ministries have been developed under Dr. Wright’s ministerial tutelage for social justice: assisted living facilities for senior citizens, day care for children, pastoral care and counseling, health care, ministries for persons living with HIV/AIDS, hospice training, prison ministry, scholarships for thousands of students to attend historically black colleges, youth ministries, tutorial and computer programs, a church library, domestic violence programs and scholarships and fellowships for women and men attending seminary.

These are all wonderful achievements, the majority for the black community and his congregation. The only thing Rev. Moss failed to mention were the years of public record validating the fact that Rev. Wright still remains an unapologetic racist, black separatist, and anti American bigot (regarding Americans that aren't black).

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.

mixedmedia · 03-18-2008, 02:46 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by dc_dux

THere you again......Obama "agreed with his (Wright's) views"....more baseless bullshit.

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.

QFT (and eloquence).

Right on.

Xazy · 03-18-2008, 05:12 AM

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.

ratbastid · 03-18-2008, 05:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by powerclown

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?

Just so you know: "guilt by association" is one of the classic logical fallacies. Right up there with reductio ad absurdum, the Strawman argument, and ad hominem.

roachboy · 03-18-2008, 05:16 AM

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.

ratbastid · 03-18-2008, 05:19 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ottopilot

.... Rev. Wright still remains an unapologetic racist, black separatist, and anti American bigot (regarding Americans that aren't black).[/B]

This isn't the opinion of some white republican billionaire, they are sadly unavoidable facts that Obama and his apologists need to address honestly.

Logical fallacies, all. "X is a racist, black separatist, anti American bigot" isn't a FACT. It's an INTERPRETATION. It's SOMEBODY'S interpretation.

mixedmedia · 03-18-2008, 05:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ratbastid

Logical fallacies, all. "X is a racist, black separatist, anti American bigot" isn't a FACT. It's an INTERPRETATION. It's SOMEBODY'S interpretation.

Right. And since the clips provided on this thread seem to be the entire basis for these statements out there in the world, I'd have to say that I don't buy it.

And now I am following roachboy's advice and removing myself from this nonsense.

Xazy · 03-18-2008, 05:39 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ratbastid

Just so you know: "guilt by association" is one of the classic logical fallacies. Right up there with reductio ad absurdum, the Strawman argument, and ad hominem.

The head of a church is not association it is the spiritual adviser of the person, which is a lot more then just association.

host · 03-18-2008, 05:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ottopilot

The same can be said about the likes of George Soros and moveon.org.

Can you understand that I don't have the vaguest inkling of what you are comparing, and how I can confidently post that you don't understand, AT ALL, waht you are saying in your comparison of Salem Communications and moveon.org?

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:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...004Mar9_2.html

The Democratic 527 organizations have drawn support from some wealthy liberals determined to defeat Bush. They include financier George Soros and his wife, Susan Weber Soros, who gave $5 million to ACT and $1.46 million to MoveOn.org; Peter B. Lewis, chief executive of the Progressive Corp., who gave $3 million to ACT and $500,000 to MoveOn; and Linda Pritzker, of the Hyatt hotel family, and her Sustainable World Corp., who gave $4 million to the joint fundraising committee.

The Democratic coalition includes many of the party's most experienced strategists, spokesmen and fundraisers, as well former staffers for Kerry's campaign and the campaigns of several of his rivals. They include Ickes, who was deputy White House chief of staff in the Clinton administration, Steve Rosenthal, a former political director for the AFL-CIO who is executive director of ACT, and Jim Jordan, formerly Kerry's campaign manager, who heads the Thunder Road Group. ....

Quote:

http://www.capitaleye.org/inside.asp?ID=302
Q&A: MoveOn.org, Bundlers and Conduits

Attention to MoveOn.org’s advertising has prompted many questions about how the group operates, and how it and others direct money to political candidates.

By Center for Responsive Politics

How much money can an individual give to a conduit?
Conduits that are federal PACs can accept contributions up to $5,000 per year from an individual. However, in a two-year election cycle only a total of $4,600 of those funds can get passed on to a single candidate. That’s because, although the money is going through a PAC, it is designated for a specific candidate and the $2,300-per-election limit applies to the individual’s contribution to a candidate. <h2>This isn’t much of an issue for MoveOn.org, however. According to the group’s website, the PAC is funded mostly by people who give less than $100, with the average donation being $45.....
</h2>
.....What information does the Federal Election Commission require from conduits like MoveOn.org?
PACs are required to file information about their earmarked contributions on their regular FEC reports—every donation is identified. They must include information about the contributor (name and address and, if the donation exceeds $200, the donor’s employer and occupation), date and amount of the contribution and information about the designated candidate. An individual or group not registered as a political committee has to report information on an earmarked contribution in a letter to the FEC within 30 days of forwarding the donation.

Is bundling legal? Why do it?
Yes, bundling, or collecting contributions from multiple individuals in order to pass along the money, is legal. For a group like MoveOn.org, bundling isn't necessarily important, because the organization's name is already on the check. But an individual who bundles checks from family, colleagues and friends—or a company or union that bundles checks from employees or members—can take credit for a total that exceeds what they could otherwise contribute. Bundlers are often given identification codes by campaigns so that the campaign can determine how much money the bundler has brought in. If a bundler reimburses individuals for contributions they make in their own name, that’s illegal.

What's the Internet's role in all of this?
MoveOn.org’s name—a Web address—explains a lot about the group’s success. The Internet has made it much easier for conduits to get the word out about which candidates they support and why. <h3>It has also made it easier for individuals to give money, often in small amounts</h3> or as recurring contributions, as conduits have websites that allow for electronic contributions.

ottopilot, can you understand that conservatives posting about Jeremiah Wright are influenced and are replicating, verbatim, the anti Obama motivated, crap propaganda distributed by www.townhall.com staff and Salem Comm. radio talk show hosts paid to distribute the identical message, and that the organization and ownership of these Salem Media properties is the <h3>Exact opposite of a grassroots political organization, such as moveon.org?</h3> Can you grasp that difference at all..... on opposing sides, a closed, super secretive, conservative evangelical republican corporate monolith that actually is out to minimize the popular vote, and the other, an open, grassroots, populist driven and largely funded organization?

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.

ottopilot · 03-18-2008, 05:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ratbastid

Logical fallacies, all. "X is a racist, black separatist, anti American bigot" isn't a FACT. It's an INTERPRETATION. It's SOMEBODY'S interpretation.

Rationalize this as it pleases you, but denial is not a river in Egypt.

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?

host · 03-18-2008, 05:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by roachboy

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.

Hey roach....fuck you! You are posting identically to the way lebell has been posting "at" me.

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:

FEMA Director Singled Out by Response Critics
Sep 6, 2005 ... "Brownie, you're doing a heck of a job," Bush said Friday during a tour of the state, a day before Chertoff voiced his confidence. ...
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn...090501590.html

Quote:

http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?p...Ze3Jg&refer=us
SEC Failure to Grasp Plight of Bear Exposes Cracks in Vigilance

By Jesse Westbrook

March 18 (Bloomberg) -- U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission Chairman Christopher Cox was asked on March 11 if he was concerned about the financial condition of Bear Stearns Cos.

<h3>``We have a good deal of comfort about the capital cushions at these firms at the moment,'' Cox told reporters.</h3>

Three days later, the Federal Reserve said it was pumping emergency funds into the 85-year-old securities firm through JPMorgan Chase & Co., the third-biggest U.S. bank by assets. On March 16, JPMorgan announced it was buying Bear Stearns for $2 a share, or $240 million in stock, 90 percent less than the company's market value last week.

Bear Stearns's forced sale days after the SEC chief's reassurances is raising questions about the vigilance of the top U.S. securities regulator, which is charged with making sure Wall Street firms have enough cash to survive a crisis....

Quote:

President Nominates Congressman Chris Cox as SEC Chairman
Jun 2, 2005 ... He will be an outstanding leader of the SEC. President George W. Bush stands with Rep. Christopher Cox, his nominee for Chairman ...
http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/relea...0050602-4.html

Quote:

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/10/17/magazine/17BUSH.html
Faith, Certainty and the Presidency of George W. Bush
By RON SUSKIND

Published: October 17, 2004

....In the summer of 2002, after I had written an article in Esquire that the White House didn't like about Bush's former communications director, Karen Hughes, I had a meeting with a senior adviser to Bush. He expressed the White House's displeasure, and then he told me something that at the time I didn't fully comprehend -- but which I now believe gets to the very heart of the Bush presidency.

The aide said that guys like me were ''in what we call the reality-based community,'' which he defined as people who ''believe that solutions emerge from your judicious study of discernible reality.'' I nodded and murmured something about enlightenment principles and empiricism. He cut me off. ''That's not the way the world really works anymore,'' he continued. <h3>''We're an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you're studying that reality -- judiciously, as you will -- we'll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that's how things will sort out. We're history's actors . . . and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.'' ......</h3>

ottopilot · 03-18-2008, 06:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by host

ottopilot, can you understand that conservatives posting about Jeremiah Wright are influenced and are replicating, verbatim, the anti Obama motivated, crap propaganda distributed by www.townhall.com staff and Salem Comm. radio talk show hosts paid to distribute the identical message, and that the organization and ownership of these Salem Media properties is the <h3>Exact opposite of a grassroots political organization, such as moveon.org?</h3> Can you grasp that difference at all..... on opposing sides, a closed, super secretive, conservative evangelical republican corporate monolith that actually is out to minimize the popular vote, and the other, an open, grassroots, populist driven and largely funded organization?

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.

As I said regarding George Soros and moveon.org, the "likes" of such, implying others (too). George Soros has a highly diversified support mechanism for is interests. He is an aggressive, wealthy, and highly influential force in liberal politics. And I argue that moveon.org is one of many politically and financially aligned partisans. Just as they do, the Republicans do.

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.

host · 03-18-2008, 06:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ottopilot

As I said regarding George Soros and moveon.org, the "likes" of such, implying others (too). George Soros has a highly diversified support mechanism for is interests. He is an aggressive, wealthy, and highly influential force in liberal politics. And I argue that moveon.org is one of many politically and financially aligned partisans. Just as they do, the Republicans do.

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.

One more time....you are attempting to compare the political donations of one wealthy man, to a clearly, majority grassroots funded organization, moveon.org, to the "Op" of a corporate media conglomerate consisting of a radio network broadcasting from 1600 local stations around the country, a completely coordinated and synchronized "message" with it's web property, www.townhall.com , a corporation founded by two extreme evangelical chrisitian republican zealots; principles in a highly secretive republican aligned, billionaire dominated (Prince, Devos, Coors, Scaife, Howard Ahmanson, Philip Anschutz, Robert H. Maclellan, William H. Hunt, etc.) political group, complete with it's own mercenary "army", Blackwater.

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.

ottopilot · 03-18-2008, 06:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by host

One more time....you are attempting to compare the political donations of one wealthy man, to a clearly, majority grassroots funded organization, moveon.org, to the "Op" of a corporate media conglomerate consisting of a radio network broadcasting from 1600 local stations around the country, a completely coordinated and synchronized "message" with it's web property, www.townhall.com...a coproration founded by two extreme evangelical chrisitian republican zealots; principles in a highly secretive republican aligned, political group, complete with it's own mercenary "army", Blackwater.

Good luck to you if you can pull off the comparison. It's not persuasive, to the point that it is absurd.

(whisper) psst ... absurd? ... again, the pot calling the kettle black. Read what I actually said about George Soros and "others".

Meanwhile, back to the subject at hand ... accountability regarding Barak Obama's close relationship with Rev. Wright.

host · 03-18-2008, 06:42 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ottopilot

(whisper) psst ... absurd? ... again, the pot calling the kettle black. Read what I actually said about George Soros and "others".

Meanwhile, back to the subject at hand ... accountability regarding Barak Obama's close relationship with Rev. Wright.

Again....Soros is one damn man. moveon.org is a grassroots driven, largely small donation funded political 527. The Jeremiah Wright "stuff" is being picked up from the one major source of all of it....Salem Comm. media and web properties and "dumped" in posts on here, and you respond to that with the same lame shit, again and again, in reference to "Soros", and some vague "others".

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......

ottopilot · 03-18-2008, 06:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by host

Again....Soros is one damn man. moveon.org is a grassroots driven, largely small donation funded political 527. The Jeremiah Wright "stuff" is being picked up from the one major source of all of it....Salem Comm. media and web properties and "dumped" in posts on here, and you respond to that with the same lame shit, again and again, in reference to "Soros", and some vague "others".

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......

You may want to raise your concerns about comparing political influence in another thread instead of diverting attention from the racism of Rev. Wright.

Ustwo · 03-18-2008, 07:09 AM

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.

03-17-2008, 09:09 AM	#130 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	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. __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite

03-17-2008, 07:51 PM	#134 (permalink)
Ustwo Pissing in the cornflakes	Now they can google, read a wikki article and pretend they knew it all along __________________ Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

03-17-2008, 08:39 PM	#137 (permalink)
Charlatan Getting it. Super Moderator Location: Lion City	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. __________________ "My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars." - Old Man Luedecke

03-18-2008, 05:16 AM	#148 (permalink)
roachboy Super Moderator Location: essex ma	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. __________________ a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear it make you sick. -kamau brathwaite

03-18-2008, 07:09 AM	#160 (permalink)
Ustwo Pissing in the cornflakes	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. __________________ Agents of the enemies who hold office in our own government, who attempt to eliminate our "freedoms" and our "right to know" are posting among us, I fear.....on this very forum. - host Obama - Know a Man by the friends he keeps.

03-17-2008, 07:22 AM	#124 (permalink)
Rekna Junkie	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.

03-17-2008, 09:31 PM	#140 (permalink)
powerclown Junkie Location: Detroit, MI	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?

03-18-2008, 05:12 AM	#146 (permalink)
Xazy People in masks cannot be trusted Location: NYC	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.