robot_parade

I read the transcripts. I listened to what he said. I disagree with your assertion that his statements were racist or race-baiting. They were certainly anti-government - when the government has done *bad* things, I'm anti-government too. I notice you switched from "anti-american" to "anti-government". Those two things are not the same.

I disagree that Rev Wright being *angry* with America, and white Americans, for treating him and other black people is racism. It's anger. It's *justified* anger. Now, I agree with Mr. Obama that the way in which the anger was expressed by Rev. Wright was divisive and unhelpful - but losing your temper and saying hurtful things is not the same as racism.

Rev. Wright said some unhelpful destructive things recently. I do not agree with your assumption that these angry unhelpful things are a sign of racism or anti-americanism.

Mr. Obama has been attending that church for *20 years*. These statements were made very recently, while Obama was on the campaign trail, not even in the church. Do you have proof showing a pattern of such divisive rhetoric from Rev. Wright? Do you have any statements of his that are actually racist or anti-american? Cite them, please.

(For the record, I'm not black, not that it really matters for this discussion.)

It's a statement of faith *of the church* as a *body of believers*. It is not a gospel or life statement or a set of commandments that each of the members must subscribe to. It explains why they are together as a body of believers.

Try using 'French' and 'France'. Do you really fail to see how "black" people have been oppressed in this country? Do you really believe that all of the oppression is in the past - something in the dim memory of our culture, but of course never happens today? Do you really not understand why a community of black Christian believers, especially within the context of when the document you quote was written, might form to support one another, to share faith, and to foster a community identity? Do you really equate these oppressed people, banding together in a community with a 'black' version of white supremacists?

Obama is not a racist - check.
He associates himself with those who are racially controversial - check.

(Shouting now)
GOOD FOR HIM! RACIALLY CONTROVERSIAL?! THAT MEANS "ANGRY BLACK PEOPLE", DOESN'T IT? DAMN RIGHT THEY'RE ANGRY - THEY HAVE A DAMN GOOD REASON FOR BEING ANGRY. WE FUCKING ENSLAVED THEIR ANCESTORS, RAPED THE WOMEN, FLOGGED THE MEN, CALLED THEM "NIGGERS", LYNCHED THEM, TOLD THEIR CHILDREN THEY WEREN'T "GOOD ENOUGH" TO GO TO SCHOOL WITH WHITE CHILDREN, AND EVEN, TO THIS VERY DAY, SUBJECT THEM TO SUBTLE RACISM *EVERY* *SINGLE* *DAY*. AND, WHEN ONE OF THEM *DARES* TO GET ANGRY ABOUT IT, PEOPLE GO AROUND FAINTING AND CLUTCHING AT THEIR PEARLS AND CRYING "OH, NO, REVERSE-RACISM!".
(Ok, done shouting)

These are not things that happened 'a long time ago'. People alive today remember some of these events. They are our history. Obama today made a truly amazing speech about reconciling people in this country. If you, or anyone else, want to hear it:


ottopilot, I hope the above doesn't seem like a personal attack. I don't mean it personally. However, you express a viewpoint that I think is wrongheaded and dangerous, and furthermore make me angry. A black community coming together and forming a community, making a statement of faith that expresses their desire to strengthen that community (*especially* when this statement was written, which was a number of years ago), is not racism. An angry black man who has lived with racism his entire life, and sometimes expresses his anger, is not racist. An angry man who is fed up with the government 'of the people' doing reprehensible, ungodly, sinful things in our name is not anti-American. A man who loses his temper and says divisive hurtful things on occasion is not a crank, or a bad person. He is simply human.

And finally, Barack Obama accepting him as a flawed human being, who he loves even as he disagrees with, instead of disavowing that relationship, is a wonderful thing, and makes me proud to be an American, and an Obama supporter.

Rekna

Odd i'm not voting for Obama because of guilt and i'm from the Midwest but currently living in the west. I don't know anyone voting for him out of guilt. No everyone I know really likes his honesty, integrity, and transparency.

SirSeymour

Agreed. The only problem is that it would be considered racism if it were a white man angry at black Americans. There is a double standard in this country for this sort of thing (which Obama alluded too today and I dearly wish he had said it outright) and until it goes away we have a problem.

I said back on the first page that Obama's disavowal of Wright's words was not enough for me, that I would be more impressed with a disavowal of the man. I have changed my mind. I wanted the disavowal because I believed that nothing short of that would have satisfied the black community if this were a white candidate and white minister. I stand by that thought but disagree with the idea now.

Obama's comparison with that uncle which you disagree with on some issues hit a cord (this was not in his speech but over the weekend for those of you just catching up here). My grandparents were like that. I loved them dearly and no problem being associated with them in front of anyone. I was honored, in fact. I really disagreed with their politics though. Seriously so. So much that we stopped discussing politics all together.

The fact that we feel the need in this country to force a man to walk away from his friends over a single issue is not good. This is a country based on freedom. Freedom of word, freedom of thought and freedom to disagree. It has become the political expedient thing to do to leave those behind that might cause a candidate problems in an election over one issue. Frankly, I view Wright as a political liability to Obama but I have to respect the fact that he would not be cowed into walking away from a friend, at least not completely.

I can't say I am an Obama supporter and if the election were today I still doubt I would vote for him but he scored points today with me.

__________________
SQL query
SELECT * FROM users WHERE clue > 0
Zero rows returned....

billege

There are few things that make a white man feel more justified in his comments than the ability to call a black man "racist."

From:
http://firedoglake.com/2008/03/18/re...ay-crazy-shit/

Yup. That about sums it up.

__________________
I can sum up the clash of religion in one sentence:
"My Invisible Friend is better than your Invisible Friend."

robot_parade

Well, to be frank, I think, as a group, 'black americans' have far more justification being angry with 'white americans' than the other way around. In this country, we had, for a long time, various laws in place that were explicitly or implicitly designed to subjugate black people. Slavery, Jim Crow laws, etc. As a class, black people have a right to be angry with white people.

Now, as Obama said, there are reasons for resentment in the other direction. Just because "my ancestors" enslaved black people, why should my kids have to be bused 30 minutes away instead of go to the local school? Was the black guy who got the job I applied for, or got into that college, less qualified than me? Good for Obama for addressing these issues. They are difficult issues, and I don't have good answers for them.

SecretMethod70

WTF, billege?! Good to see you around!

All Things Considered had a good piece today, addressing the Rev. Wright issue with respect to Black Liberation Theology.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/s...12189&ft=1&f=2

__________________
Le temps détruit tout

"Musicians are the carriers and communicators of spirit in the most immediate sense." - Kurt Elling

Ustwo

You're so vain, I bet you think this post is about you, don't you, don't you.

You are the perfect political supporter though, you take anything potentially negative about the candidate personally. Its not even really negative about him, its explaining some of his appeal. Welcome to the cult of personality, enjoy the ride but watch out for the coolaid.

__________________
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.

ratbastid

Yeah, I just read a commentary piece that said, basically, that this is a test of American maturity--that Obama just said to America, "Let's sit down and have a grown-up conversation about race."

Xazy

My belief on a Rabbi is if I go to them and they tell me x, I have to accept what they say since I am going there for guidance. If I have strong objections to the person then I will not go there. Also almost all great Rabbis worth anything, have nothing to do with politics and if you ask them about any of these things (except for the topic of Israel) they will tell you the Jewish philosophy treat your neighbor how you would like to treat yourself. To me if the Rabbi I see came out and told me to do a, b or c, I would either follow him and if I disliked and felt some major issue I would never return, by going to him I accept his instruction. That is the Jewish system.

But you have to understand how great Rabbis work, recently there was an issue about a concert in the Jewish community, and a Rabbi 2 weeks before it said it should not happen. People were upset, there was lots of issues, and a lot of people said why wait so long etc... The Rabbi finally came out and said when it comes ot life and death you listen, but here when money is involved you all of a sudden question, and the reason for the delay was I was asked the question 2 weeks before it happened. That is the way it works, they may teach us daily give lectures on jewish concepts, but they do not give guidance unless asked.

abaya

Shout away, robot_parade... I'm listening, and I agree with you,.

I also listened to all 37 minutes of Obama's speech yesterday, and was blown away. It's been a long time since I even dared to feel proud to be an American, especially living abroad... but if that man becomes president, I might be able to find some pride again in my country.

__________________
And think not you can direct the course of Love;
for Love, if it finds you worthy, directs your course.
--Khalil Gibran

host

"The problem" for Obama and for Clinton and McCain as well, is that already, and increasingly. the focus of the electorate is and will be about their own pocketbooks/wallets. <h3>The wars and "a grown-up conversation about race", are not where most people are focusing their attention.</h3>

The Fed rate cuts and inflation are killing the CD savings returns and spending power of the average elderly person, and a trip to "the pumps" has become a $45 outlay, vs. $13 in late 2001.

I don't think that the people Obama needs to connect with, are paying attention or are impressed. I don't think they give a shit about what his "hate minister" has been saying. The people paying attention to the subject of this thread are those already committed to Obama and those who would never consider voting for him.

By the first week of november, unemployment will be up more than 25 percent from the present level (5% now vs. about 6.5% seven months from now) and there will be "more shocks" to the economic system. A neighbor, friend or relative will have sold a house for a lower price than anyone could predict last year, or been foreclosed on, and everyone will know one or two people who have been "downsized" or laid off.

There will be three or four scary "down days" on wall street, and the debt ceiling will be "revised up' by congress to allow another trillion of borrowing to prop up the Fed's poor balance sheet (It has $374 billion remaining on it's books of a former $800 billion asset portfolio, after recent bailouts and "guarantees" like the $30 billion it extended to JPM for it's $2 per share "purchase" of imploded Bear Stearns, last weekend.) Supplemental appropriations to fund "war operations", and perhaps another Bush "stimulus package", as well as shortfalls in anticipated federal tax revenue from the "economic downturn" will easily eat up the rest of an additional "borrowed trillion".

Obama should focus on speaking to the undecided voters about the same things that any savvy democratic WASP male candidate would be "jaw boning" about in these circumstances....think Bill Clinton in 1992. I think it's a mistake to do anything but ignore the right's linking of Obama to Wright. I've been posting for 54 weeks on this forum that it is about "the economy, stupid", and it increasingly is. Looking, talking and acting like Bill Clinton did in the 1992 campaign is what all three candidates will be advised to do. The two democrats have a distinct advantage because they can blame the party in power for the tanking economy, as Clinton did in '92.

Obama is on record in a July, 2007 CFR "FOREIGN POLICY" magazine article, proposing an increase in the size of the military via the recruiting of an addtional 92,000 ground troops. He could attract more voters by declaring that military spending, increased from $295 billion in FY 1998, to more than $700 billion annually today, with the addition of war "supplement" spending, hasn't made us safer, but it has enriched Halliburton, Blackwater, and other "republican insider" defense contractors. Obama should promise people that, in an Obama presidency, the troops now in Iraq will soon be home with their families, and they and National Guard troops will be working to rebuild and replace worn out equipment, while they are guarding the "home front" to truly "keep us safe". He should promise to make reducing military spending, with a priority to re-equip our forces with conventional armored vehicles left behind in Iraq or now beyond repair.

Instead of advocating a costly increase in spending on nearly 100,000 new ground troops, he should commit to spending $100 billion less next year on the defense and homeland security departments, via ALL BID, instead of "no bid" contracts, purging of republican, defense and security industry "cronies" from government, and SHIFTING THE SAVINGS INTO HEALTH INSURANCE REFORM SPENDING, JOB RETRAINING, etc.....

For either Obama or Hillary to be calling attention to how they are different from 1992 WASP male candidate Bill Clinton (WASP male is perceived as "plain vanilla", like the guy reading the 6:30 network news on TV), thus making the campaign about the candidate, instead of about the issues, IS EXACTLY THE REPUBLICAN STRATEGY WITH THE "HATE MINISTER" PR "OP".

IT WORKED.....OBAMA WAS FLUSHED OUT BY IT...MADE THE MISTAKE OF DEVOTING A SPEECH IN RESPONSE TO IT, A SPEECH THAT THIS WEEK, SHOULD HAVE BEEN A FRANK TALK TO THE UNDECIDED ABOUT WHAT HIS PLANS ARE TO CUSHION THE IMPACT OF RECESSSION!

ratbastid

HOLY CRAP, friends. Check out this conversation between Mike Huckabee and Joe Scarborough this morning.

http://dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/3...494/229/479797

HOLY CRAP. Could it be that we're having a grown-up conversation about race for the first time in this country? This is AMAZING.

pan6467

US of KKK A is very racist. There is no justification for the divisive, hatespeak of Rev. Wright.

Losing your temper and saying hurtful things is human. Passing those in the name of God and doing things like going to Libya in 1984 with Louis Farrakhan or naming him a "great humanitarian" is more than just losing your temper and saying hurtful things.

He's been saying it for quite sometime, not just recently.

Wrong, again 1984 going to Libya with Farrakhan was not "very" recently. His speech on 9/11 happened very shortly after 9/11.

"God damn America not God Bless America" is Anti-American and where does that exactly belong in a church?

Neither am I, and it shouldn't matter that I'm not but alas, it does to many if not all Obama supporters, because you can't call me racist if I'm a black man saying this.


So then we need to ask Obama which "truth" we should believe from him. Up until very recently he stated "I never heard any of these things sitting in his pews or in personal contact with him"

But Yesterday, he admits to hearing them and disagreeing vehemently with them. Yet, he named Rev. Wright to his campaign as an adviser.

Now, Obama wants to be this great Uniter, but he puts Rev. Wright on his advisory committee, then takes him off when the heat gets to hot.


Exactly when did I ever oppress a black man. When have you? I have never seen or been employed in a place that did not hire black people. I have never worked for anyone that did not have black people in upper management, in some form.

Oppression goes both ways in this country today, trust me. The oppression I see most common today isn't that between color but of financial class and that is regardless of race.

But that is not a church's mission. A church, especially on that supposedly teaches Christ's teachings should be working to support ALL men.

Yes, I do. Hatred is hatred, prejudice is prejudice and putting one group over another is by definition "supremacist".



What's this "we" bullshit? I cannot state with 100% certainty but I'm 99% sure that my ancestors never owned 1 black man or black woman as slaves. Raping a black woman? I seriously doubt. Flogged a black man? I doubt it. Called them "niggers", that may have been a strong possibility. But then again, my family were called "krauts", "Mics", "Degos" and so on. (I'm German/Welsh/Irish/Italian with some Dutch.)

My grandmother was alive when in 1917 during WWI, people blamed those in the community of German descent for the war. She watched her father get beaten to a bloody pulp because he was married to a German woman. She saw her uncles have their store windows broken, robbed and boycotted because they were German.

She doesn't hate America. She doesn't find churches that keep that prejudice alive.

My mother and father went to school with every race. My mother was teased as a kid because she was of a "weird religion" (7th Day Adventist) by all races. My mother was not allowed to play with many kids because of that reason.

Hate in many ways is still alive in this nation. Hate is a part of our past and our present. For a Presidential candidate to have a person of such hatred of this country, sit on his advisory committee, one has to ask who he will select for his cabinet.

We must ask, if Obama states he wants to be a uniter and loves this country enough to be president, why did he put such a hateful divisive person to be on his election committee? Why does he not confront what his minister and spiritual adviser and talk about how wrong it is? Instead, we get "he's like an old uncle", "do you agree with everything your pastor/rabbi etc states?"

How was it reconciling? It was a very good well rehearsed speech but I don't know let's see.

You disagree, condemn in unequivocal terms with many of Rev. Wright's political views....... but you named him to you political advisory committee.

Again, when I have gone to church I have sat, listened and if I didn't like what the message was, I got up and left and did not go back. I go to be uplifted and worship my God and be in the company of others whom share my views that religion was to be uniting, not divisive. There are enough ways to divide, I do not need my spiritual leaders to add fuel to the fire, but to try to put the fires out.

Knowing this, he still named him to his political advisory committee.

First, all these hateful things said are SOLD by the church. Yet, Obama states it's only seen on YouTube and the news.

Secondly, Oprah supposedly went to this church for 3 years and disliked the message and stopped going.

He's doing God's work? Is that the God he states should "damn America"?

Reaches out to those with HIV/AIDS? You mean the disease the Rev. states was created by our government to destroy the black race?

Does he help all needy people, all homeless people or does he just go to black communities?

That is a great, positive uplifting message for a church to have. But was this before or after Rev. Wright went to Libya to meet with Khadaffi with a most racist and divisive Louis Farrakhan?

I have known many racists and severely prejudiced people on all sides and they are almost like psychopaths. They can be the nicest people to those they hate for prejudicial reasons and then go on rampages and show hatred as soon as the person is gone.

I find it hard to believe in 20 years of listening to this hatred from the pulpit, that if you disagreed so much with it, that you, who wants to unite have not confronted this Rev. and talked to him personally, even if in private about his views and hatreds and tried to help him talk about the hatred he preaches and why he won't change his message to be more uplifting. Instead, you continued to go to his church and just as McCain is guilty by association for just trying to get support from racists, you should be guilty by association with your 20 year support of one.

No one has ever asked you to disown the black community. No one asks you to disown your grandmother, who obviously had some prejudice of her own. But you through her under the bus and said worse things about this woman, "who sacrificed again and again for me, a woman who loves me as much as she loves anything in this world" than you did about a man that says "God Damned America".

No one asked you to disown Rev. Wright. You have though: http://sweetness-light.com/archive/p...obamas-website
Funny how all of a sudden Rev. Wright's words have been taken off and you have added those from an Orthodox Jew.


Let's see Rev. Wright says, "God Damn America", meets with Farrakhan and Khaddaffi in Libya in 1984...... but Geraldine Ferraro is worse because she stated somewhere in a written essay that you are where you are only because you are black. Those are comparable statements and actions to you?

Your statement about Imus and how you were one the first to demand he be fired:

Yet, you are wanting us to forgive and understand a Reverend... who from the pulpit of your church, the man you call your "spiritual mentor", the man you had sit on your political advisory committee until the heat got to hot.... who says, "God Damn America"... who says, "the government created AIDS to kill the blacks".... who says, "America deserved 9/11"... who in 1984 went to Libya with Louis Farrakhan... who calls Louis Farrakhan a great American?

That's a bit hypocritical and divisive isn't it? It's ok for 1 man to speak hatred and be considered a great church leader but another, who is a shock radio host doing what he does, shocking America, should lose his job? It's one or the other.... you either support one's right to have their beliefs and to speak out publicly those beliefs or you don't. It's not ok for Rev. Wright to have his hatespeak if you are going to demand Imus lose his job for what you consider hatespeak.

This is not a Uniter, one who wants political changes in how things are done.... this is someone who sees things politically and jumps on bandwagons demanding people's jobs, while dismissing worse statements from someone that can help him politically .... well until those words become an issue then it "he's a goofy old uncle".... "he's misnderstood", you excuse his words and actions away with excuses but vehemently repudiate what he says.... and so on.

You had 20 years to help Rev. Wright understand his unjustifiable hatreds (but it seems some of your supporters wish to make us want to believe his statements are fair and supportable as seen here... but you state they aren't, I think you need to talk to some of your supporters who support those statements, even AFTER your speech and explain why they are wrong to support them).

Race isn't an issue, Colin Powell could have probably been elected to any office he sought.


It's not a black/white issue, it's a poor/rich issue. But let's get in that "white guilt" and make the whites feel guilty about what their ancestors did to ours.

Why not, give us what your solution is to all this instead of harping on it and using it as an excuse to excuse away Rev. Wright's hatespeak?

This is what you were allowing your children to learn when they heard their pastor say, "God Damn America".... "The government created AIDS to kill blacks".... etc. But they can't succumb to cynicism, even though the pastor teaches hatred and cynicism and paranoia against the nation.

But he is your religious mentor..... he sat on your campaign committee.... you stated last week you never heard any of it... then this week you say you heard it but vehemently disagreed with it. You are also quick to say "former pastor". If he "too often failed..." then why did you continue to sit through his sermons, why up until all this happened did you refer to him as your spiritual adviser, your religious mentor? Then when this becomes a HUGE issue... he's your former pastor who "too often failed to understand is that embarking on a program of self-help also requires a belief that society can change."


Yet, again, why did you not talk to Rev. Wright and explain that to him? And if he did not share those views, why did you continue to go to his sermons?

Or was it all for political gain and now you need to distance yourself because it is no longer politically helpful in getting elected?

How is that change from any other politician? How is that being a Uniter? That is the same politics as usual. Use what you can as long as you can, then discard what hurts you and distance yourself as much as possible.

I can go further, but why? To me, I have shown the questions I have and the responses will be hatred, attacks and more excuses.

Accepting one as flawed is one thing, calling him your "spiritual mentor", sitting through his hatespeak racist sermons (while you disagree vehemently), naming him to your political committee then dropping him as soon as he becomes a liability..... all seems very hypocritical, all seems very calculated to get elected.... but he is the agent of change and hope.... you have your opinions, I have mine. I just took a great deal of time explaining my views and opinions on all this and I stand by these beliefs, I make no excuses for them.

I am human though, I do get irrational, defensive and emotional. I do make mistakes getting my points across when I am attacked by being called (or implicated as) a racist for my views, for being talked down to and having my opinions and views dismissed as uneducated, so last week, divisive, and so on, while those attacking give no rational for their beliefs or it is lost in the process of the attacks, the put downs, the excuses. I do not believe I am alone in this. I tend to believe it is in fact human nature to have these feelings.

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

host

pan, I held back from posting during and after mixedmedia tried unsuccessfully but quite patiently to persuade (shame ?) you into STFU.

With all due respect, and I don't even know how much you are due, anymore, the "racism" is institutionalized, and was even more so. when Jeremiah Wright was "coming up":

Since you've appointed yourself, "judge", how does your process work? Is it permissible for a former slave to exhibit the angry speech that has come from Jeremiah Wright? Does the generation following "slave" status, have to be silent, in your estimation, or just "toned down" to a degree you find acceptable? What about the generation after that....is it just "yah sir", and "noooo sir", is that all you want to hear coming out of "their mouths", pan?

Again, who are you to judge? Recognizing that I am not in a position to judge, because I have not had the experience of the FBI, for example, regard my entire race as presumed "enemies of the state", is what is separating my POV
from yours right now, pan, and from the POV of actual racists.....

Do you get the "gist" pan? Please stop, please?

ratbastid

pan, you missed the point of the speech entirely because you are SO locked into your point of view. It's a shame, because it's the first time the racial divisions in our country have been honestly and universally addressed by ANYONE, EVER, and it's a GREAT BIG DEAL. But you're hung up about one guy in a robe and what another guy should or shouldn't have done about him. You listened to that whole speech through a certain filter, and nothing that's not consistent with the filter could make its way into your mind.

Tiny, tiny thinking, pan. Tiny, compared to what's now on the table.

You missed the part where Obama said that black anger--at systematic oppression, the socioeconomic leftovers of slaver, etc--is real. You missed where he acknowledged that there's anger among white Americans, about being blamed for things they never did, about losing job opportunities to affirmative action, being subjected to angry rhetoric like Wright's, etc. You missed the part where he said we could point fingers, put hate speech on high-repeat on the news, continue to blame OR we could come together and address these issues as a unified America.

Far as I'm concerned, when THAT'S what's now in the public discourse, the concerns you're cemented into are petty, small, and not worth dealing with. Not when what's now in front of us is a REAL opportunity to unite America. The first opportunity we've had EVER.

Jinn

Pan:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/COINTELPRO

Have you ever had this sort of thing directed at you?

Reverend Wright was born in 1941. He is certainly aware of such things, if not directly effected by them. He would've been in his 20s or 30s - easily within his lifetime.

If you think institutional racism is gone, or you think that being frustrated to the point of "God Damn America" is hate speech, then perhaps you should evaluate how privileged you really are.

Racism isn't just about calling people names and segregating them. "The collective failure of an organization to provide an appropriate and professional service to people because of their colour, culture or ethnic origin." is a fine example. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Institutional_racism

__________________
"I'm typing on a computer of science, which is being sent by science wires to a little science server where you can access it. I'm not typing on a computer of philosophy or religion or whatever other thing you think can be used to understand the universe because they're a poor substitute in the role of understanding the universe which exists independent from ourselves." - Willravel

pan6467

If he had done this before the issue came up, if he had shown actions that he truly felt this way, I'd be far more open minded.

But, it was not until he could no longer say, "I was never there when Rev. Wright said those things." While he later stated, "I was there and was disgusted by it." Which was it Obama? Were you there or not?

It was not until this blew up and he could no longer control it that he separated himself from Rev. Wright. For Obama to say he is a Uniter but to have such a hateful minded man on his election committee and to state how such a man was his spiritual mentor, his religious leader, Obama's words ring hollow to me.

It was nothing more than an attempt to save his political dreams. That is it.

Of course he doesn't want fingers pointed NOW, but where was this great speech when Rev. Wright was his "spiritual mentor and leader".... Where were the actions of unity when he put such a hateful man on his election advisory committee?

Those questions need answered, for me at least.

Say what you want about me, but these are legitimate questions that need answered if we are to elect this man.

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

robot_parade

Wow. And my opinion of Mike Huckabee just shot up. Could this be...dare I say it...'Change'? (The word 'Change' is a registered trademark of The Obama Presidential Campaign, Inc., and is used here with permission ;-))

loquitur

Look, realistically, those people inclined to cut Obama some slack will do so, and those who aren't won't. The question is whether the people in the mushy middle -- you know, the ones whose votes tend to decide elections -- will find Obama's speech persuasive, will tolerate Wright's positions because they recognize it's the product of pain, or won't find the connection of the two troubling. And the fact is, it's just too early to tell right now.

That being said, I have to say Obama is a fantastic speaker. It's really a pleasure to listen to him. And no one should underestimate how important speaking ability and communication is for a President -- especially given the current guy's ineptitude in that department.

ratbastid

You're buying the right-wing spin. What he SAID was "I wasn't there when those sermons that got onto YouTube were given". And that's true, he wasn't. He was out on the campaign trail on those particular days. He never said that he had never heard Wright say controversial things.

But of course you've been against Obama from the beginning.

Cynical much?

At the very least, can you admit that his speech gives us a unique opportunity to address racial issues? Can you get beyond your bias against the man long enough to see the good this speech might have done for the country? Because we're suddenly having a very unique conversation in this country--and by clinging to your Obama-fixated cynicism, you're making SURE that you're not part of it.

Oh My God Please let's not go back there. Please don't be so vain as to think that this thread is about you. Nothing I've said--including things responding to you--is about you.

Edit: Um... Except, of course, for the one post above that WAS about you, which I agree with roachboy was, at the very least, off-topic.

Ace_O_Spades

I agree with the earlier comment that you are viewing Obama's speech on this issue within a certain judgmental lens. A lens that bars you from being able to understand why someone wouldn't want to publicly and personally shame someone you love who may have said hurtful things. We all have family members or friends like this, and we love them anyway, despite what they say. I don't believe that 9/11 was an inside job, but my aunt does. I don't love her any less, and it doesn't make me believe it, no matter how many times she says it to me.

And I'll say this... The reason Obama didn't bring this up until now is because it's a non-issue with respect to Obama the candidate. Obama doesn't believe those things, but he still holds the Rev. in high regard for his decades of positive work. These things are what real friendship are about, accepting the good parts of a relationship with the bad.

I would hate to be one of your friends if you treat them the way you want Obama to treat a longtime friend.

__________________
Feh.

jewels

I agree with RB: Your cynicism is astounding and unwielding. Not open minded = closed minded, ya?

So if this issue had not been brought to light, you'd be more open minded about Obama? Your posts pre-Reverend didn't sound any different than those since the video was released.

__________________
We are always more anxious to be distinguished for a talent which we do not possess, than to be praised for the fifteen which we do possess.
Mark Twain

pan6467

So it is ok to fight hate, prejudiced and anger with hate, prejudiced and anger?

What does whether or not I am privileged have to do with a Rev. preaching in his church "God Damn America."

Regardless of what some may think here I am in no way shape or form racist. My best friends in the Navy were black men that I shared my hopes, pain and dreams with. I shared more with them because they were like brothers than I have with many of my white friends.

I work with black and white addicts and I treat them equally and give the same hope and faith equally.

I have never seen a man or woman or religious person not hired nor seen them fired simply because of race or sex or religion. I have attended many management meetings in different companies and have never been told as a manager to hire or fire anyone based on race/ethnicity/sex/religion. I was always told to hire the person best suited for the job. As a manager and when I owned my own business, I worked to hire the best people I could because the better the people I surrounded myself with, the better I looked.

I got that philosophy from my father, who hired and promoted many people of differing areas. I never once heard my father say he didn't hire a man because he was black, even though he was most qualified. My father went out and recruited those who would help him move forward and make him look his best. We had black men, women, people of all religions at our family dinner table as dad interviewed them. Our families at times would become close. I called the kids of many of those he hired from differing backgrounds, friends.

I am not saying racism doesn't exist, but I have seen it on both sides, but never once in any company I have been employed by.

Don't lecture me about racism. Racism only exists when we allow it. Obama allowed his Rev. continue and exploit racism and did nothing until he, himself realized he would not get elected if he didn't do something.

His actions and what he has done about it for the last 20 years by following a man exploiting and continuing racism from a pulpit speaks more of his character than a well written and rehearsed speech.

To excuse this Rev.'s hatred and prejudicial sermons and his trip to Libya and his praising of Farrakhan, as that of someone he saw segregation and lived through all those racist times is a bullshit self serving excuse.

Thurgood Marshall saw it, Rev. Martin Luther King lived through it, Colin Powell, Clarence Thomas and many many others we will never know and they were uniters. Not 1 of them ever used hatred and prejudice to further their own causes. Not one of them went to terroristic states with men of hate to meet with the leader of that country. If anything, most were pronounced "not black enough", they were met with hostility as "sell outs".

So don't talk to me about racism. Don't tell me how it is "ok, because he lived through it and you didn't."

I believe Obama's gist was hatred and prejudice isn't the answer to racism and prejudice. Yet, he chose for 20 years to go to a church where the Rev. taught that, lived by that (as demonstrated with his 1984 trip to Libya with Louis Farrakhan), he chose to name this Rev to his election advisory committee, to be married by him, to have him baptize his kids.

Then 1 week he says "I was never there and never saw this man speak those hateful things" and a week later when he needs damage control he say, "Ok, I was there but I vehemently disagreed with it." Nowhere does he ever say he discussed it with Rev. Wright and try to change his mind. But he and his supporters are quick to make excuses for it.

To say America deserved 9/11, is forgivable? And to put a man that says, that on your election committee and call him your spiritual and religious mentor, is commendable and should not be questioned?

To put a man, who calls one of the biggest public racists (Farrakhan) in the USA a "great man" and gives him awards and traveled to a terroristic state (Libya) that called for the destruction of the USA and meet with the leader of that country with Farrakhan on you election committee and call him your "spiritual and religous mentor" is acceptable and should not be questioned.

To say you vehemently disagree with the man, but to put him on your election advisory committee is commendable and acceptable and should not be questioned?

I'm sorry. I need to question those actions and to expect answers from the man who wants to be my president. I think it says a lot about his character and own private political beliefs and I as a voter am entitled to ask and want answers to these questions.

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

Ace_O_Spades

You make no argument that Obama is using hate, prejudice and anger in his campaign. Just that someone he happens to love does these things. That doesn't mean Obama supports his ideas. You've disregarded decades of the man's actions and are focusing on two or three questionable decisions, not all of which Obama was probably even aware of.

How can you go your entire life WITHOUT admiring someone who ends up being a tad skewed behind the curtains. Surely you don't repudiate and shun everyone who doesn't meet your base evaluation of them?

__________________
Feh.

pan6467

Really, what were my posts on Obama pre-controversy? What were my comments on any of the candidates?

And yes, if Obama had come out with this speech before any of this, instead of lying and saying "I never saw or heard him say those things."

But he didn't, and to me that speaks volumes on his character and persona.

I have the right to question. I have the right to my beliefs.

It's one thing, Ace, to out your friends and go after them. It's another to claim to be a uniter and have such a divisive man sit on your election committee and call him your spiritual and religious mentor.

Again, you don't answer the questions, I pose, with your opinions of why I should listen and believe in this speech. You attack and talk about being closed minded, How I was anti-Obama before all this (I didn't follow Obama before any of this because I had my candidate already (Edwards)), I'd like to see these anti-Obama posts I had out before. You talk about how I need to look at how "privileged I was".

Even when I share my past and what I have seen and my interactions with people of differing backgrounds, I'm still small minded and just not giving Obama a chance.

This man is running for president of my country, I have every right to hold him to different standards than I would hold someone who lives next door to me. I have every right to question his actions, I believe it is necessary to, considering the job he wants.

But no, I'm supposed to listen to a campaign saving speech and hear things that make me question even more, ignore all that and believe what he says this time and not question him anymore? Bullshit.

Last week it was "I never heard or saw those things." This week it's "I was appalled, disgusted and vehemently disagreed but I kept going and put him on my election advisory committee and called him my spiritual and religious mentor.... even though I disagreed with his hatespeak and the hateful messages he had in his sermons."

Well which is it? You weren't there or you were. And what of next week if it comes out you actually sat front row during some of those sermons and film exists of you raising your hands and nodding and yelling praise as he delivers one of these sermons? What will you say then?

I think we should be allowed to ask these questions and we should have answers to them. It is our duty in protecting the nation to know what our leaders believe.

Right now, I have to many questions, no true answers and all I see are attacks on how I am closed minded, how I already made my decisions and so on.... but I have yet to hear answers to the questions.

Too many questions..... nothing but implied racism for asking the questions before, then a lie last week and a save my campaign speech this week. Doesn't work for me.

Again, about me and telling me what I've disregarded and how I judge people.... but not a word on why I should vote or believe Obama.

Admiring is one thing, calling someone my spiritual and religious mentor, I'm going to know everything about the man because my spirituality and beliefs are very important to me and I'm not going to just follow some schmoe, I have no intention of wanting to be like spiritually. But maybe Obama isn't all that spiritual, maybe this was just his way of garnering the black vote because having seen others black men called not black enough, he knew he needed to make sure that he couldn't be labeled that. But we don't know do we.

Admiring and being friends with someone is one thing.... but naming him to my election committee is something else. If I'm running for president, I'm making sure the people on my advisory committee are people who best exemplify my beliefs.

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

Ace_O_Spades

First let me say that you really have a lot of free time for typing, or you just type really fast... Or practice in front of the mirror while you shave, who knows.

Why put him on the advisory committee? Perhaps because he wanted spiritual advice from his pastor? Someone he knew personally who would give him what he needed from the religious portion of his life. Why would he go to someone he didn't know?

Also, the underlined section from your quote is quite inflammatory and baseless. It is quite the red herring, but we're not fooled. Too bad most of us don't get to vote and most Americans are gullible reactionaries. See? I can be inflammatory too!

But... you're not running for president... so you don't have thousands of people dedicated to going over your life with a fine tooth comb to find out what nutjob is in your past that may have done or said something questionable.

__________________
Feh.

ratbastid

pan, I've responded to points you're still hammering on. You've either got me ignore-listed, or you missed my post.

Pan, I suspect you missed my post #220. In it, I addressed some of the things you're still hammering on as if they've never been addressed.

Tully Mars

I agree with the tone many others here have set. If you were inclined to like Obama prior to his speech his speech probably solidified that preference. If you were inclined to dislike Obama his speech did little to change your opinion of him.

If you're looking for a reason to dislike him Mr. Wright's a fairly large target. Personally I admire the fact Obama didn't throw him under the bus.

But I was for Obama before this became the lead story following every commercial break on every 24 hr. news channel.

__________________
I used to drink to drown my sorrows, but the damned things have learned how to swim- Frida Kahlo

Vice President Starkizzer Fan Club

pan6467

Rat, I did miss it I appologize. Here's my response to it.

Really? Let's see dates. From what I understand the sermon stating the US deserved 9/11 happened shortly after 9/11/01.

I'd be interested to see the dates of the sermons and where Obama was supposed to be.

If all these were sermons given while Obama was on the campaign trail, then one has to wonder was Wright trying to destroy Obama? I mean he had to have known these sermons would come back at Obama.

But even Obama admitted yesterday he was there when some of the hate sermons were delivered.

But if not the sermons that are on YouTube..... there are more? What was said then?



I have? I singled Obama out back 1 month ago? 2 Months ago? I stated a severe dislike and how I was against him?

Please show me the posts.

In this case yes, too many discrepancies, too many excuses, not to be.

It was a good speech, was it "I Have a Dream"? No. It was what it was.. a political move solely made for damage control. How am I clinging to my Obama-fixated cyincism? I'm just asking questions and stating my opinions and feelings....that is it. Everyone is entitled to do that, last time I checked.

I don't accuse you of not answering or talking to me like I am closed minded simply because you are fixated on Obama winning and you don't care about or make excuses for the questions others may have or attack those asking them telling them they already have closed minds and so on. You have no idea how open minded or closed minded I was when I heard the speech. Why assume such?

Because, when I have given my opinion and asked questions I have had... the responses are quite similar every time... racism is insinuated, me having a closed mind is stated, people discuss how I have been against Obama from day one and so on. In other words the following posts do not answer the questions but attack me for asking them, in one way or another... subtly or outright.

The whole quote that you failed to post was this

I acknowledged the personal attacks I would face (close minded, how I have always been against Obama... and so on) and stated that I believed the questions were legitimate and should be answered.

I don't want this about me. I want someone to answer the questions without talking down to me, dismissing them, telling me I already had my mind made up, and so on. I don't think that is unfair to ask. I think it is very fair for me to ask and expect answers to from those who support him and are trying to win my vote or persuade me to open myself up to his message.

Again, I do not want this about me. I do not single anyone out, I simply respond to the posts that respond to me. The vast majority if not all tend to attack subtly or outright but refuse to answer the questions I ask.

First of all, is this not a personal attack that has nothing to do with the topic??????? But when I say
I'm accused of trying to make this all about me. But then when I say I'm attacked personally, everyone asks astonished and like they don't see it "really where? You aren't being attacked."

But this and your final statement seem to contradict each other and not just by a little.

It's a question I have. To me I wonder after this past week or so. Call it what you will and come up with some cutesy attack...but to me IMHO it's an extremely legitimate question I have.

Instead of answering it, you attack it. Then tell me how closed minded I am and how I am jumping at conclusions. I didn't jump to any conclusion, I simply posed a question that I have.


Exactly, and someone that is should know that if you put someone like Rev. Wright on your election advisory committee, you will be checked. Especially when this isn't just someone of the street supporting you, but the man you call your spiritual/religious mentor.

So are you implying that Rev. Wright is some nutjob that did and/or said something questionable? If so, then why is this man, Obama, calling him his spiritual/religious mentor and how he has been a follower for 20 years?

So what exactly is Rev. Wright to Obama?

OR A

hat I can agree with.

It was a catch 22, if he did he may have won some votes, if he didn't he may have lost some votes for the exact same reason... a question of character. It was a no win situation.

But he was quick to throw his white grandma under that bus.

That's more than fair and I respect that.

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

jewels

Most of your posts in these threads which were made prior to 3/18 indicate your thoughts about Obama.

http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showthread.php?t=132390

http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showthread.php?t=132420

http://www.tfproject.org/tfp/showthread.php?t=132019

My point, though, is that up until now, I'd seen you as very open minded and nonjudgmental. In the past few weeks, something's changed, or this is a side of you I hadn't seen. If you run through all your posts regarding Obama and racism in the past month or so, you'll see they're repetitive in nature. I've watched as a dozen or so well-spoken TFP members have tried to gently get you to see, but you're reading something into their posts that isn't even there.

There's no need for line by line analysis of everyone's post here. It comes down to respecting others' opinions. It may not be so from your perspective, but it feels (to me) as though you're paying lip service to everyone's answers to your questions and ignoring what was said, and responding again and again the same way.

You've been crying that your questions haven't been answered. But if your mind was truly open you'd see that your questions have all been answered in many different ways by some of the brilliant minds we have among us. No one cares if you disagree, or if you don't like Obama. We can and will respect any opinion.

Personally, I'm a Politics lurker because I learn so much from "listening" to you guys spar on the issues. It's much more fun and interesting for me to learn this way. I've always enjoyed reading you, respect you, and often agree with your positions. This time you remind me of a pit bull latching onto the food dish that's been set before him. It's all been given to you (the answers you claim you want) but you're still not letting go. I can't help but wonder what you're really looking for.

__________________
We are always more anxious to be distinguished for a talent which we do not possess, than to be praised for the fifteen which we do possess.
Mark Twain

pan6467

Ok so a week or so before it really took off, I was talking about it. But to hear people talk I have always been against Obama.

My point is other than this issue and the fact I believe I stated I felt he came out of nowhere to run for president... where else do I even mention his name let alone show I would in no way support him?


I have just gone through not only his speech, but replies, line by line showing, explaining my opinion, how I have formed it and the questions I have had.

I have even shown attacks on me, in the process of these "polite responses" to me that were trying to show me something but not answer any of my questions.



I am very happy that you have found a voice and posted. We need new ideas, opinions and views here.

I appreciate your kind words, they truly mean a lot to me. I have always been extremely honest and passionate in my posts. I may not always be right but I have always explained my views the best way I know how.... this issue is no different. We will not always agree on issues but differing in views when the differences have been spelled out, should not affect one's respect (unless I went truly racist or said something extremely hateful and derogatory, which I do not see in any of my posts...others seem to though).

Perhaps, but again, since I went through the speech and posted line by line my questions, opinions and views... I have responded to their answers, most of which were inflammatory and telling me how closed minded I am.... but very few if any answers to the questions I posed.

All I want is to have the answers to the questions I pose.

This is for the presidency of the USA..... I am wanting to know who we are getting into office and I want to know as much about that person's character as I can.

Perhaps, I am missing something and I have asked questions. This is an extremely important and vital issue to me and I am trying hard to find answers so that even if I don't support the man vote wise, I can find something to support in the man. I'm having a hard time doing that and his race is not the issue.... I have discussed many times over the issues and questions I have.

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

Tully Mars

How did he throw his grandmother under a bus? Didn't he say he couldn't disown her either even though she also said things he didn't agree with?

Growing up I heard my father and uncle discussing Jews, blacks and many people in terms I do not agree with today. If I acknowledge the fact the statements were made and that I do not agree with them- am I throwing either of them under a bus?

__________________
I used to drink to drown my sorrows, but the damned things have learned how to swim- Frida Kahlo

Vice President Starkizzer Fan Club

Ace_O_Spades

Sometimes a spade is a spade. I don't feel the need to address and tease out the asinine nature of every red herring presented to me by someone I'm talking to.

Your question is a rhetorical one designed specifically to call into question Obama's moral character, something you have been unable to do outside of stating that because he's friends with a nutjob he is himself a nutjob. Be honest, you weren't looking for an answer to that question. You were trying to state that Obama isn't spiritual and his inclusion of this advisor is more empty posturing to appease the black vote. This cannot be proven or disproven. It is an empty, circular red herring designed to self-confirm your already conclusive belief (or lack thereof) in Obama.

__________________
Feh.

pan6467

Did he mention how she said racist things and went into detail with her, yet with Rev. Wright did he go into the same amount of detail?

I addressed it above.

How dare you tell me why I asked a question. You are jumping to conclusions on it. To me, my asking if he was using the church to further his image and help him politically is a valid question, especially now. It is not meant to damage his character it is a legitimate question I have.

It's the same as asking why does McCain crossover the aisle so much, does he do it out of belief or to further his political career? Why does Hilary use Clinton more and the Rodham is almost rarely heard? Each candidate has questions on their character and it is our duty as voters to find the answers, at least to me it is.

It may not meet your standards and you may not wish to answer it or seek the answer yourself, but don't you dare tell me why I asked it.

BTW I accept your apology for the personal attack.

__________________
I just love people who use the excuse "I use/do this because I LOVE the feeling/joy/happiness it brings me" and expect you to be ok with that as you watch them destroy their life blindly following. My response is, "I like to put forks in an eletrical socket, just LOVE that feeling, can't ever get enough of it, so will you let me put this copper fork in that electric socket?"

Charlatan

Wow. I just can't believe were listening to the same speech Pan.

I've listened to it twice and read it through a third time and I have to agree with Ratbastid on this... it could be the first time I've every heard a politician speak so honestly and straightforwardly about race in the US.

As an interested foreigner, I can only say that with someone who can speak (and write) like that at the head of the US... I would feel a lot better (and that is without even addressing his policies, which I also think are solid).

__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke

ratbastid

The answer is "no". There. Does that settle it for you?

It doesn't? Hunh! Could that be because you're not interested in the answer? Could it be that you're mainly interested in the personal smear that the question is?

scout

Wow. So I want to make sure I understand everything I've read the previous 6 pages.
1] Obama isn't racist even though he hung out with one or more on several occasions, including going to church and sitting under the teachings of one for ohhh the last 20 years or so.
2] His pastor of 20 years is an admitted racist and pretty damn anti-American but thats ok because
3] His ancestors might have been slaves and might have been abused and
4] It's ok for Blacks to be racist because they have a reason
5] and anyone that thinks otherwise or disgrees with them {meaning Obama supporters} about Obama is definitely a racist pig that should be hung and/or shot on sight.
6] It's ok to be a racist as long as you might have a reason such as being black or orange, green or yellow.

So, am I pretty clear on the last 6 pages or was there something hidden in there I missed?

thanks in advance !

ratbastid

pan, please see:
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/03/...ref=rss_latest

Particularly:
Also, everything I'm finding is very clear that Wright never was a formal part of the Obama campaign and never gave political advice. Can you show me something to the contrary?

Charlatan

Scout... I don't see anything that suggests Rev. Wright is a racist. Some would like to paint his rhetoric as racist but I don't see it. Were his words inflamatory? Yes. Were they divisive? Yes. Were they helpful? No.

The only question I have is does Obama, in his words and actions appear to believe the same things that have been spouted by Rev. Wright. From what I have heard Obama say and from what I can see of his voting records, etc. I'd have to say that he does not have the same point of view.

As for the rest of your post. It too is inflammatory and helpful. I am sorry you feel that this is the way to convince people of your point of view.

__________________
"My hands are on fire. Hands are on fire. Ain't got no more time for all you charlatans and liars."
- Old Man Luedecke

robot_parade

No, it isn't. It's a statement of anger at racism in the US. I really fail to understand how, in your mind, anger at racism is the same as racism itself. Now, stuff like that *is* divisive, and inappropriate. But I don't understand how it could be considered racist.

My mistake. There are several quotes under consideration here, some of them recent, some of them not so recent.

Honestly, I don't care about Farrakhan, at all. AFAICT, he's a bit of a crank. I'm having enough trouble keeping track of you damning Obama for his close contact with Wright. I don't have time for two degrees of separation here.

Listen to the context. Really. It's exactly the same formulation as right-wing ministers use when they say God damns America because we don't round up all the gays and force them to be straight, or whatever they want to do. I don't agree with it from a theological perspective, and it isn't exactly helpful, but there it is. He's saying that, because of America's actions, God will 'damn' it. Actions like wars in the middle east, supporting dictators, etc. If God goes around damning entire countries, I think he's far more likely to do so for starting unnecessary wars that for toleration gay people.

No, he didn't. He heard about them when the media generated this controversy.

Racism is *not* dead. Amazing amounts of progress have been made, but racism is not dead. The wounds of past racism have not been healed. There's natural resentment as we work to heal those wounds. Obama spoke very eloquently about this very subject the other day.

I have to say, I think you are completely ignoring the context in which this church was formed.

Then I think we have an irreconcilable difference of opinion. A congregation of people gathered together for protection against racism and hatred in the wider society is not hatred, and it is not supremacist.

"We" as in Americans. Oppression of black people is part of our heritage as Americans. It was codified in our laws, and part of our culture. Should we feel guilty about it? Of course not, we didn't do it. However, it is part of our culture, and our heritage, and we should understand the anger of people who have been oppressed all their lives, and work to correct the injustices.

For the record, my family on my father's side did own slaves. My parents still have some historical papers documenting the slaves our family owned. I don't feel guilty about it, but I do accept it as part of my heritage.

I don't agree with your assumption that Rev. Wright hates America, or that his church is based upon prejudice and hatred. A church founded around black cultural heritage is not prejudice. Anger does not equal hate.

Was your grandmother angry at those who beat her father? Was she ever angry at a country that was prejudiced against her family because of their heritage? Did she ever get together with relatives or people of German descent to discuss their shared experiences, and to encourage one another?

Again, more prejudice. Is being angry at those who were prejudiced and did hurtful things prejudiced? Is banding together for mutual support and comfort anti-american?

I have heard nothing hateful from Rev. Wright. Angry, divisive, unhelpful...yes. Is that the norm for him, in his 20 years of preaching? Did he get up every week and say these things? I'm guessing that...certain people...have combed through everything Rev. Wright is documented to have said, looking for things that could be taken as controversial. We have a few clips of him saying controversial things.

It talked about race in an adult way, for one of the first times I've ever seen in political dialogue. It talked about the challenges from multiple perspectives.

And he said that the views were not everything there was to know about the man. He has been preaching in this church for 20 years, and you and I have heard 5 minutes of what he's said. Neither of us can say we know everything there is to know about the man. I'm willing to take Obama at his word that these statements were not the norm.

Obama says he was not present during the sermons in question. Is there proof that he was?

None of the people on his political advisory committee are likely to be perfect (I hear Jesus turned him down...)

Again, we simply disagree that this church was founded on hatred.

Oh, I so don't care about what Oprah thinks. It's like a not-care sundae, with a really big not-caring-at-all cherry on top.

He said he believes that God *does* damn America when it does evil things.

It's shocking how widespread this belief is within the black community. It's wrong, and it propagates a culture of victimhood.

This is the second time you've mentioned Farrakhan. I'm just going to ignore it.

Again, Obama claims that the statements Rev. Wright is being condemned for are not the sort of things he heard from the pulpit for 20 years. I'm not going to enter into a discussion about McCain in this thread.


My only response to this is that you were clearly listening to his speech through a very strange filter.

He changed his website. Oh, darn. How about you listen to what he says instead of divining his intentions from changes to his website. He denounced the things Rev. Wright said, and re-iterated his respect for the man, despite is flaws.

But...but...that's not what he said...at all. You quoted him and everything, and I don't see how you can interpret what he said in that way. He didn't say Ferraro's statements were worse. His point was we shouldn't judge people from sound bytes taken out of context.

Sorry, but I snipped a bunch of stuff that I can't respond to other than repeat what I've already said.

I think I've made my case as best I can. If you've interpreted anything I've said as a personal attack, please believe it was not intended as such.

I've said everything I can to respond to your points - I'll read your reply, if any, but unless I have something new to say, forgive me if I don't respond.