View Full Version : Obama Woes



Karried
03-17-2008, 10:52 AM
Poor Obama.. his Preacher is a real work of art.. but he pales in comparison to the Harlem preacher who is mad at Obama.. and his White momma. How crude.

ohGawdtheSmell... help me with these silly videos:

YouTube - Obama's Preacher Says God Damn America (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d5SEsKPLZ1U)
[/URL]

http://www.youtube.com/v/-tMa4UtP5lI&hl=en (http://www.youtube.com/v/d5SEsKPLZ1U&hl=en)


[URL]http://www.youtube.com/v/d5SEsKPLZ1U&hl=en"


Do you think this is going to really negatively affect the campaign?

I do.

soonerliberal
03-17-2008, 04:48 PM
How many of us have had our pastor say something at one time or another we have not agreed with?

Wright has said some very controversial things on several separate occasions. However, once made aware of these statements, Obama instantly spoke against them and removed Wright from his campaign team.

There is a definite double standard here. Longtime McCain supporter, Rev. John Hagee, claimed Catholics are going to Hell and Katrina was God's revenge for homosexuality. McCain has repeatedly defended Hagee, without any reprehension from the media.

Regardless of all of this, Obama will be delivering a major speech on religion and race tomorrow to qualm all these issues.

betts
03-17-2008, 05:05 PM
I consider all this smear tactics by someone. It's hard to know if it's the Clinton camp or the McCain camp, but I would suspect a zealous aide. I would hope neither of the candidates would stoop to this kind of smear campaign, but I am sure there are plenty of people who would.

Oh GAWD the Smell!
03-17-2008, 06:14 PM
Poor Obama.. his Preacher is a real work of art.. but he pales in comparison to the Harlem preacher who is mad at Obama.. and his White momma. How crude.

ohGawdtheSmell... help me with these silly videos:

YouTube - Obama's Preacher Says God Damn America (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d5SEsKPLZ1U)
[/URL]

http://www.youtube.com/v/-tMa4UtP5lI&hl=en (http://www.youtube.com/v/d5SEsKPLZ1U&hl=en)


[URL]http://www.youtube.com/v/d5SEsKPLZ1U&hl=en"


Do you think this is going to really negatively affect the campaign?

I do.

Here you go...I think two of them are the same though :)

d5SEsKPLZ1U

-tMa4UtP5lI

d5SEsKPLZ1U


As for the content...I'm trying to figure out why people are trying to hold him accountable for things other people say and/or do.

If I know a gay man, does that mean I'm gay? No.

If I know somebody that robbed a bank, does that mean I want to rob banks? No.

If my preacher turns out to be gay and robs a bank, does that say that I agree with his choices or condone his actions? No. (BTW, this one actually happened.)

Nobody is going after Hillary's associations. Hell, her HUSBAND isn't exactly somebody that I'd hang out with. I think she's getting off incredibly easy for the crap she's been pulling for months now. I honestly don't know why the press doesn't just hammer her on dozens of issues. She's been held above reproach on stuff that they're hammering him on.

I think that he's one of the most straightforward, honest, and genuine political figures we've had in years (as much as a politician can be anyway), and nobody was ready for that, nor do they know how to handle it. So they go after him on things that, if any other candidate did them, wouldn't be an issue.

I don't agree with quite a few of his views on how to run this country, but right now...I have to say that I'll probably vote for him. Because I don't want THAT woman running my country, and McCain is spitfire batsh*t crazy.

Don't get me started on how easy they're taking it on McCain.

PennyQuilts
03-18-2008, 05:10 AM
I've been quite a fan of Obama and am very distressed by this development. He has made an issue of "judgment" but now wants us to believe that he didn't realize his mentor, uncle-figure and personal spiritual advisor held these beliefs. Note, he hasn't tried to say that he knew about the beliefs but disagreed with them - rather - he has claimed ignorance. That is nonsense. If a preacher made comments like this only rarely, the congregation would be in shock and that is all they'd talk about. The video sermons were sold by the church. Watch the congregation in the clips - these are folks very comfortable and familiar with this sort of hatefulness. They aren't looking shocked and that tells you a lot about what sort of teachings they have been provided.

Obama chose that church. The Reverend is no caricature and Obama and his congregation are completely out of the mainstream if he/they think this is no big deal. If Obama thinks that is okay, so be it. That tells me about his values, his judgment and his ability to see clearly for everyone when it comes to the values and concerns. I have raised my children to avoid bigotry and tried to live my life like that. This guy does NOT have the moral high ground. Hate is hate. I have never in my life heard someone talk about black people that way (I mean in person - we've all seen clips and read things). If someone talked about black people or others like that, I would turn on my heel and walk away and there is no way I'd expose my children to them. Obama CHOSE this guy. Says it all, to me.

If Obama somehow didn't know about this, he is an idiot. Twenty years a member of that church. His Mentor. Come on. Not the kind of person we need to lead this country. He has made no effort to personally distance himself from Reverend Wright (which I kind of admire). That is the only thing about this that speaks of integrity.

Comparing Obama's relationship with Reverend Wright with McCain's guy doesn't seem quite the same. In the first place, Obama clearly has a personal relationship with this guy and a close one at that. Trying to say that this guy is just a "spiritual" advisor and that we shouldn't hold Obama accountable for Reverend Wright's political beliefs asks us to engage in mental gymnastics. You don't hold this world view in a vacuum. If Obama shares his spiritual beliefs, I don't want him to be the one making decisions on who lives and who dies.

In the second place, what Reverend Wright is preaching is not even close to being simply off color or theoretically questionable. It is horrible and hateful.

Obama has chosen a hateful nut as his spiritual advisor. He tries to claim he didn't know. If true, what does that say about his "judgment?" He claims he didn't support the Iraqi war because he used good sense. You can't help but wonder if he refused to support the war because he was opposed to attacking the historical enemies of Israel. He says he is no anti semite. I have completely given him the benefit of the doubt but now I feel like that was a mistake. I can't express how disappointed I am. I really wanted Obama to be the real deal.

Oh GAWD the Smell!
03-18-2008, 10:35 AM
He gave a great speech this morning.

soonerliberal
03-18-2008, 10:48 AM
Transcript of Obama's speech - CNN.com (http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/03/18/obama.transcript/index.html)

Anyone who has been following the Wright controversy needs to read or watch his speech IN FULL.

Oh GAWD the Smell!
03-18-2008, 10:51 AM
Here's the full video:

pWe7wTVbLUU

redland
03-18-2008, 11:07 AM
Obama's speech this morning was nothing short of masterful He was especially effective I thought in addressing (in a rational way) the reasons for the racial resentments that many of both races feel. For example, many whites resent such things as school bussing and affirmative action because they see these as an infringement of their rights. Many blacks harbor bitterness over the years of discrimination that followed slavery and continue to some extent even today. This is where we are today. Do we want to stay there? I thought he also addressed effectively his relationship with Reverend Wright. Sadly, however, I think few people will change their mind about his qualifications for the presidency; and even more sadly many will not take time even to read his words. But his words give me renewed hope for America's future. Some day.

betts
03-18-2008, 12:10 PM
Obama is a masterful orator. I understand African Americans being bitter and resentful, as they do not have as easy a way as those of us who are not, even with attempts like busing and affirmative action. They have to deal with discrimination on a daily basis, even if it subtle, but anger and resentment will not solve the problem. The American melting pot is the only way I see this ultimately ending entirely, and it's my hope that in a few generations a large number of Americans will have European, African, Asian and Hispanic ancestors, and there will be a true "American" persona. We need to get over being from "German", "Greek" or "English", etc ancestry. The Europeans don't dither over whether they are Milesian, Celtic or Pict.

PennyQuilts
03-18-2008, 12:18 PM
We'll never get past the hate as long as it is deemed an acceptable idea to gather on a Sunday morning and use our victimhood and hatred of white people as a source of entertainment. My family immigrated to this country long after slavery ended. We never owned black slaves. I am not angry about busing or affirmative action. I am angry that a group of people apparently think they have the moral high ground to hate me just because of the color of my skin. Hate is hate. By sitting in the pew and donating to that church - and apparently NOT confronting his fellow parishoners, Obama became part of the problem. Those parishioners clearly enjoyed trashing this country and white people - people they may not have even known and who perhaps never did anything to them and perhaps tried to be fair and respectful and rise above race. Whatever Obama says, he funded and encouraged hatred by sitting in that pew and exposing his children - with the blood of slaves and slaveowners running in their veins - to ugly, ugly hate. It was a great speech and he said a lot of things worth considering. But at this point, as for Mr. Obama - his actions speak a lot louder than his words.

solitude
03-18-2008, 12:18 PM
Obama's speech this morning was nothing short of masterful He was especially effective I thought in addressing (in a rational way) the reasons for the racial resentments that many of both races feel. For example, many whites resent such things as school bussing and affirmative action because they see these as an infringement of their rights. Many blacks harbor bitterness over the years of discrimination that followed slavery and continue to some extent even today. This is where we are today. Do we want to stay there? I thought he also addressed effectively his relationship with Reverend Wright. Sadly, however, I think few people will change their mind about his qualifications for the presidency; and even more sadly many will not take time even to read his words. But his words give me renewed hope for America's future. Some day.

I agree. They have been talking on MSNBC about how this is the most historic speech on race since MLK's "I Have a Dream" and I have to agree. But, if possible, it's even better. It looked at the racial issue from all sides and brought it all into context of where we go from here. I was blown away by this very open and personal speech. So different than you would have heard from a "conventional" politician.

Oh GAWD the Smell!
03-18-2008, 12:32 PM
Yeah...How long has it been since we've had a president that could stand up and speak for 30 minutes solid without you cringing once?

And while I know that being a good speaker is hardly a reason to vote for a man...It would be nice to have a leader that doesn't constantly embarrass this country to the world by not being able to pronounce words or answering a question with nothing but rhetoric. Obama answers questions. He doesn't waffle about them, he answers them. He says "nuclear" with only two syllables. I've only seen him dance around a question a couple of times, I can't say that of the other candidates.

I'm watching Hillary right now, and I don't want her in charge. She's running a campaign that is based on picking other people apart and doing anything necessary to get into the White House...No matter what it does for the party or the country. Sometimes, I get the feeling that she's only staying in the race at this point to tear Obama down far enough for him to lose so she'll have a chance to run in 2012. That, or she's really going to bork up the party by stealing SD's to get the nomination.

Oh GAWD the Smell!
03-18-2008, 01:06 PM
We'll never get past the hate as long as it is deemed an acceptable idea to gather on a Sunday morning and use our victimhood and hatred of white people as a source of entertainment. My family immigrated to this country long after slavery ended. We never owned black slaves. I am not angry about busing or affirmative action. I am angry that a group of people apparently think they have the moral high ground to hate me just because of the color of my skin. Hate is hate. By sitting in the pew and donating to that church - and apparently NOT confronting his fellow parishoners, Obama became part of the problem. Those parishioners clearly enjoyed trashing this country and white people - people they may not have even known and who perhaps never did anything to them and perhaps tried to be fair and respectful and rise above race. Whatever Obama says, he funded and encouraged hatred by sitting in that pew and exposing his children - with the blood of slaves and slaveowners running in their veins - to ugly, ugly hate. It was a great speech and he said a lot of things worth considering. But at this point, as for Mr. Obama - his actions speak a lot louder than his words.

I'm sure they exist, but I've never seen a church that didn't go bonkers about homosexuals. Yet people give BILLIONS a year to churches. I guess that's okay...That hate. The fact that people tithe to that hate by the millions. Otherwise, you'd be railing against McCain for things the Baptists say and do from their blustery pulpits, or Hillary for what Methodists espouse on sunny Sundays.

Are you going to hold every Catholic you meet responsible for attending services and giving their money even after their priests molested children?

Oh GAWD the Smell!
03-18-2008, 01:28 PM
HAHAHAHA!


urMlVn1ZwDg

PennyQuilts
03-18-2008, 04:43 PM
You know you can't compare molesting priests to this. The Catholic church does not set out to TEACH depravity and parents certainly don't take their children there to learn it. The difference is that these parents are taking their children specifically to learn the theology of hate. It doesn't matter if it is a white separatist or a black separatist - either one that is teaching hate is a horrible place to take a child. You LEARN prejudice and bigotry.

To teach children that white people are bad because they caused slavery (or something along those lines) is not only ignorant, but keeps these children in a mindset that may or may not be evolving. What GOOD does it do that child? How does it help him? It is one thing to teach their history - it is another to teach them to hate people who are born by an accident of fate into a particular race. The ancestors of most white people (given how many are immigrants) had nothing to do with American slavery. Moreover, many died in the civil war for the North. Additionally, few southerners had slaves to begin with. Do the parishoners feel morally justified in hating white people because white people are allegedly prejudiced? How then can they justify their own bigotry - and there is absolutely no other word that better describes what was going on in Reverand Wright's church. It is teaching that it is okay to hate other races if you have a good reason. That's a pretty slippery slope.

My experience through attendence in a number of churches is that my white children were taught that we should treat all races with respect and that "Jesus loves the little children - all the little children of the world." To think that ANY child would be taught the type of venom that was being spewed at Reverand's Wright church is sickening and does nothing but undermine respectful race relations.

People like me, who WERE taught tolerance, are understandably shocked that we are so hated. We didn't create history. Most of us are bending over backwards to be fair. The only sin most of have in that we weren't born black. I think it is horrible that some parents are teaching their children to hate me and/or my children on that basis. I also think it is horrible that anyone would feel justified in doing it. Equal rights is one thing. This is not about that. This is about hate, whatever the basis. It is a cancer.

Oh GAWD the Smell!
03-18-2008, 09:01 PM
So what's the difference between teaching the hate of whites and teaching the hate of gays?

And I think I can compare the molesting priests to your argument. It happened. People know it's happened. It may still be happening. IT'S ABUSING CHILDREN. And people keep perpetuating that church and that abuse by contributing. The Church of Christ doesn't actively teach depravity, Reverend Wright made a couple of sermons that were exercises in bad judgment.

Look. I'm not defending Reverend Wright's words. He said some bad, bad things. I'm only saying that most churches preach hate in one form or another and they always have. Gay agendas, atheists are ruining the country, etc...And until you can honestly say that you denounce the people that attend every church that spews hate of ANY group of people as much as you're denouncing Obama for his attendance at Wright's, you're not being honest about why you're going after Obama with such ferocity. Or you don't believe gays are ostracized pretty much purely due to hate speech in churches.

Ever vote for a Baptist? Where do you think Sally Kern learned her special brand of vitriol? Yeah, the Baptist church. So by your logic, all Baptists are homophobic bigots because they actively support that religious denomination by their attendance and their donations.

PennyQuilts
03-19-2008, 05:27 AM
Look. I'm not defending Reverend Wright's words. He said some bad, bad things. I'm only saying that most churches preach hate in one form or another and they always have. Gay agendas, atheists are ruining the country, etc...And until you can honestly say that you denounce the people that attend every church that spews hate of ANY group of people as much as you're denouncing Obama for his attendance at Wright's, you're not being honest about why you're going after Obama with such ferocity. Or you don't believe gays are ostracized pretty much purely due to hate speech in churches.

Ever vote for a Baptist? Where do you think Sally Kern learned her special brand of vitriol? Yeah, the Baptist church. So by your logic, all Baptists are homophobic bigots because they actively support that religious denomination by their attendance and their donations.

That is unadulterated nonsense. Even Obama concedes that his reverend was way, way over the top. You have lumped every single church in the category of teaching hate - every single one. There is no support for that. That came out of the air as something you want to believe or someone with two years of college told you. :gossip:

We pick the church we attend. If one is hateful, we go to another. The fact that one is that way does NOT make all of them that way. It comes down to what the parishoners are choosing. And Mr. Obama chose THAT church. Mr. Obama is more akin to the parent who KNOWING that a given priest is an abuser, turns his children over to him on weekend camping trips, regardless. You can't compare that with someone who makes sure that abuser is removed and, failing that, moves his own family to another parish. And as for baptists or methodists or the like, I suggest you visit a few to get a feel for how they handle their sermons. Some are sedate, some are rambunctious, some are conservative and some are progressive - all within the bounds of a given denomination. The church goer picks what works best for him.

I went to a baptist church for years and NEVER heard a sermon about homosexuality. Based on that experience, I would never have any reason to think they hated them. Other baptists might have a different experience. Having close family members who are gay and who I love, I wouldn't go to one that attacked gay people. It would have been confusing to my children and I was having my hands full, already, teaching them to overlook comments and attitudes by others about their gay relatives.

You have all but accused me of being dishonest about my unhappiness with Mr. Obama. You are somehow equating my disgust with hateful racial speak with hateful homophobic attitudes and seem to be making a ton of assumptions about my position on that. The truth is, I left the Baptist church in totality because I did not agree with their attitudes about the role of women. Likewise, if the hate speech really bothered him, Mr. Obama could have changed churches or changed his religion. He did neither. He kept sending money.

So don't "preach" to me about churches and gay people. :numchucks

Oh GAWD the Smell!
03-19-2008, 08:11 AM
You're telling me that churches don't preach about gays and gay agendas? You telling me that churches don't tell their members how much they're hurting their way of life? What planet do you live on? And I didn't say all anyway. I said most. Even if I'm way off and it's only 1/4 of all churches, that's millions of people tithing to hate.

As for you being honest...Did you even listen to his whole speech? All 37 minutes of it? I don't think you ARE being honest about why you don't like him if you take something his pastor said and hold it against him...And that's it. No other reason. Especially after what he had to say about it.

And I'll take opinions of people with two years of elementary school long before I start listening to Hannity and O'Reilly...And those two bloviating gasbags are making a lot of the same points that you are about Obama.

soonerliberal
03-19-2008, 11:01 AM
Huckabee defends Obama/Wright

"[Y]ou can't hold the candidate responsible for everything that people around him may say or do," Huckabee says. "It's interesting to me that there are some people on the left who are having to be very uncomfortable with what ... Wright said, when they all were all over a Jerry Falwell, or anyone on the right who said things that they found very awkward and uncomfortable, years ago. Many times those were statements lifted out of the context of a larger sermon. Sermons, after all, are rarely written word for word by pastors like Rev. Wright, who are delivering them extemporaneously, and caught up in the emotion of the moment. There are things that sometimes get said, that if you put them on paper and looked at them in print, you'd say 'Well, I didn't mean to say it quite like that.'"

Later, he defended Wright's anger, too:

"As easy as it is for those of us who are white to look back and say 'That's a terrible statement!' ... I grew up in a very segregated South. And I think that you have to cut some slack — and I'm gonna be probably the only conservative in America who's gonna say something like this, but I'm just tellin' you — we've gotta cut some slack to people who grew up being called names, being told you have to sit in the balcony when you go to the movie, you have to go in to the back door to go into a restaurant. You can't sit out there with everyone else. You have a separate waiting room in the doctor's office. Here is where you sit on the bus. You know what, sometimes people do have a chip on their shoulder and resentment and you have to just say 'I probably would too... in fact I may have had more of a chip on my shoulder if it were me.'"


<object width="425" height="355"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/gTFLOu8fjxU&hl=en"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/gTFLOu8fjxU&hl=en" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="355"></embed></object>


His remarks are about 3 minutes into the video...

PennyQuilts
03-19-2008, 01:02 PM
<<As for you being honest...Did you even listen to his whole speech? All 37 minutes of it? I don't think you ARE being honest about why you don't like him if you take something his pastor said and hold it against him...And that's it. No other reason. Especially after what he had to say about it.>>

You are calling me dishonest based on what? That I don't agree with you? I don't hold it against him because of what his pastor said. What I hold against him is his decision to remain with that church knowing it was preaching hatred. Can you not see the difference? As for listening to the entire speech, no I did not listen to all of it. Listened to nearly all of it and read the script three times word for word (did that on purpose to get the WORDS and not be swayed by the delivery). I have gone back to it several times to check certain areas of it, additionally. You seem to be suggesting that there is only one conclusion to be drawn and that anyone who listened to the speech would come away from it with the same opinion as yourself. My god, you are holier than thou, aren't you?

What is your problem???? I can't imagine one thing that I have written that any rational person could say was out of line. You don't have to get so personal about it just because it is not the same opinion as your own.

betts
03-19-2008, 01:45 PM
I probably shouldn't say this, but the one thing that struck me watching Wright was that unless he has a skin condition, he has more white ancestors than African. How do we deal with people who see themselves or others as "different" when that is barely the case? What percentage African blood makes you African American? Why are people prejudiced against other people who's features are slightly different but who's skin color is the same? It's this sense of "differentness" that causes the problems. If you look at animal behavior, they tend to shun other animals with differences in phenotype, so some of that may be innate in us. But what degree of differentness does it take to create hate and discrimination? This really troubles me. Reverent Wright is more like me than my daughter's African boyfriend, but he sees me as the enemy.

windowphobe
03-19-2008, 06:02 PM
How do we deal with people who see themselves or others as "different" when that is barely the case? What percentage African blood makes you African American?

In days of old, there existed something called the One-Drop Rule: if any of your family tree got anywhere near sub-Saharan Africa, you were black and that was that. There were gradations: mulatto (1/2), quadroon (1/4), octoroon (1/8), and further binary-based frippery. The idea, of course, was not so much to establish degrees of blackness, but to keep whiteness from being polluted. It was a dumb idea, and in places where it was written into the law it was a heinous idea.

In some ways, the tables have turned: I hesitate to call the possession of black ancestry a fashion statement, but I suspect there are some folks who, had they been alive in the Imitation of Life days would have tried to pass for white, but today will happily identify themselves as black. I don't have any particular problem with this - race, as the culture wants to define it, is a fairly artificial construct, and when I have to fill out a "race" line on a form I usually write in something like "mile relay" - but I tend to be wary of anyone who can detail his lineage to the percentage point. (As can I, unless there's someone I don't know among my ancestors.)

PennyQuilts
03-19-2008, 06:32 PM
It never ceases to disturb me when my guardian ad litem kids report that they are discriminated against in THEIR OWN FAMILES for being darker. In families with different fathers, it is not unusual for the kids to vary widely in the hue of their skin and, according to the kids, it makes a difference in how they are treated in the family. I have heard this quite a few times from the kids and it still shocks me. I recall one time mentioning to a young girl that I just loved her skin - it was clear and just beautiful - she had a lovely complexion. She seemed absolutely astonished (and pleased). She told me that her sisters were lighter and that they and her aunts and cousins called her names that I won't repeat - but are connected with being black. She is not the only one who has told me similar stories but she is the one that stands out because she was an absolutely lovely girl but thought she was ugly because her family thought she looked too "black."

True story.

betts
03-19-2008, 07:07 PM
It never ceases to disturb me when my guardian ad litem kids report that they are discriminated against in THEIR OWN FAMILES for being darker. In families with different fathers, it is not unusual for the kids to vary widely in the hue of their skin and, according to the kids, it makes a difference in how they are treated in the family. I have heard this quite a few times from the kids and it still shocks me. I recall one time mentioning to a young girl that I just loved her skin - it was clear and just beautiful - she had a lovely complexion. She seemed absolutely astonished (and pleased). She told me that her sisters were lighter and that they and her aunts and cousins called her names that I won't repeat - but are connected with being black. She is not the only one who has told me similar stories but she is the one that stands out because she was an absolutely lovely girl but thought she was ugly because her family thought she looked too "black."

True story.

I wish your story were wrong, because it's somewhat "Stockholm syndrome"-ish. But I have a dear friend who told me that her fiance's family was not pleased with his choice of a bride, despite the fact that she is a smart, charming, beautiful woman, and a physician, because she was "too dark", and they wanted their grandchildren's skin to be lighter. Interestingly, they did not end up marrying, and her ex-fiancee married a Caucasian woman. That was about ten years ago, and I was hoping that times and attitudes were changing.

PennyQuilts
03-19-2008, 07:28 PM
I am not sure how stockholmish it is - in historical times I could see where passing for white could have survival benefits. But this attitude does not appear to be in response to being a hostage or anything of the kind. This is learned, cultural attitudes that take place in the bedrooms and in the private rooms of black families. Whatever its origin, it is being taught by black people at the expense of their own precious black children. That lighter skinned children would be favored and darker skinned children allowed to be treated badly within their own homes and communities is heart breaking. We are talking about babies, children. If a parent could allow their darling child to be called ugly by their own family members says a lot about the likelihood that they would think white people would also be vicious to their child - even if a white person wouldn't even consider such a thing.

soonerliberal
03-20-2008, 06:31 PM
Ben Smith's Blog - Politico.com (http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0308/Jeremiah_Wright_was_White_House_guest.html)


http://images.politico.com/global/clintonwright.jpg

PennyQuilts
03-20-2008, 06:48 PM
Hmm. Never noticed that Bill had such big hands...

dismayed
03-20-2008, 08:17 PM
Has anyone stopped to think that he probably was attending that church because that is where all the black, rich, Chicagoan politicians were going and he was networking?

He can't really fess up to that can he.

gmwise
03-22-2008, 09:22 AM
I would not have been a member of a church for over 20 years, and disagreed with its tenets.
Obama even consider this man a spiritual advisor,close family friend.
Obama I had a great deal of hope for. I am floored by these developments.
I thought he was a man who sought racial unity, instead of hatred.
I understand academically the history of the African American History.
And I thank the fact we have a continuing contribution from African Americans, but I see this as a set back for racial relations.
How can you have racial unity when every Sunday there is HATE being preached against races, and the goverment.
I will not vote for this man, no matter what part of the ticket he is on.
I can't see me trusting him further.
Looks like THE DREAM will just be a dream for a while yet.

soonerliberal
03-22-2008, 11:11 AM
I would not have been a member of a church for over 20 years, and disagreed with its tenets.
Obama even consider this man a spiritual advisor,close family friend.
Obama I had a great deal of hope for. I am floored by these developments.
I thought he was a man who sought racial unity, instead of hatred.
I understand academically the history of the African American History.
And I thank the fact we have a continuing contribution from African Americans, but I see this as a set back for racial relations.
How can you have racial unity when every Sunday there is HATE being preached against races, and the goverment.
I will not vote for this man, no matter what part of the ticket he is on.
I can't see me trusting him further.
Looks like THE DREAM will just be a dream for a while yet.

You are a perfect example of what is wrong with the American voting public.

You heard a 10 second sound byte, got pissed off, made rash judgments about not only the Church, but the candidate as well. But let me guess, you didn't take the 37 minutes and watch or listen to Obama's discussion on the topic? You didn't take the time to analyze how just because someone says something in a 10 second sound byte you disagree with, at a time when you are NOT present, doesn't mean he the remainder of his 20 years of work you have seen has no value. You didn't take the time to place your feet in Rev. Wright's shoes for a few minutes. You didn't take the time to realize that you still may have a grandparent or parent who utters words that are racist in nature. You did not listen to the COUNTLESS individuals who are not black that have attended Trinity weekend after weekend, who were welcomed with open arms by the membership of the Church.

Use your own mind, not the mind of Fox News' commentators obsessed with scandal that increases ratings.



This is not to say that race has not been an issue in the campaign. At various stages in the campaign, some commentators have deemed me either "too black" or "not black enough." We saw racial tensions bubble to the surface during the week before the South Carolina primary. The press has scoured every exit poll for the latest evidence of racial polarization, not just in terms of white and black, but black and brown as well.

And yet, it has only been in the last couple of weeks that the discussion of race in this campaign has taken a particularly divisive turn.

On one end of the spectrum, we've heard the implication that my candidacy is somehow an exercise in affirmative action; that it's based solely on the desire of wide-eyed liberals to purchase racial reconciliation on the cheap. On the other end, we've heard my former pastor, Reverend Jeremiah Wright, use incendiary language to express views that have the potential not only to widen the racial divide, but views that denigrate both the greatness and the goodness of our nation; that rightly offend white and black alike.

I have already condemned, in unequivocal terms, the statements of Reverend Wright that have caused such controversy. For some, nagging questions remain. Did I know him to be an occasionally fierce critic of American domestic and foreign policy? Of course. Did I ever hear him make remarks that could be considered controversial while I sat in church? Yes. Did I strongly disagree with many of his political views? Absolutely - just as I'm sure many of you have heard remarks from your pastors, priests, or rabbis with which you strongly disagreed.

But the remarks that have caused this recent firestorm weren't simply controversial. They weren't simply a religious leader's effort to speak out against perceived injustice. Instead, they expressed a profoundly distorted view of this country - a view that sees white racism as endemic, and that elevates what is wrong with America above all that we know is right with America; a view that sees the conflicts in the Middle East as rooted primarily in the actions of stalwart allies like Israel, instead of emanating from the perverse and hateful ideologies of radical Islam.

As such, Reverend Wright's comments were not only wrong but divisive, divisive at a time when we need unity; racially charged at a time when we need to come together to solve a set of monumental problems - two wars, a terrorist threat, a falling economy, a chronic health care crisis and potentially devastating climate change; problems that are neither black or white or Latino or Asian, but rather problems that confront us all.

Given my background, my politics, and my professed values and ideals, there will no doubt be those for whom my statements of condemnation are not enough. Why associate myself with Reverend Wright in the first place, they may ask? Why not join another church? And I confess that if all that I knew of Reverend Wright were the snippets of those sermons that have run in an endless loop on the television and You Tube, or if Trinity United Church of Christ conformed to the caricatures being peddled by some commentators, there is no doubt that I would react in much the same way

But the truth is, that isn't all that I know of the man. The man I met more than twenty years ago is a man who helped introduce me to my Christian faith, a man who spoke to me about our obligations to love one another; to care for the sick and lift up the poor. He is a man who served his country as a U.S. Marine; who has studied and lectured at some of the finest universities and seminaries in the country, and who for over thirty years led a church that serves the community by doing God's work here on Earth - by housing the homeless, ministering to the needy, providing day care services and scholarships and prison ministries, and reaching out to those suffering from HIV/AIDS.

In my first book, Dreams From My Father, I described the experience of my first service at Trinity:

"People began to shout, to rise from their seats and clap and cry out, a forceful wind carrying the reverend's voice up into the rafters....And in that single note - hope! - I heard something else; at the foot of that cross, inside the thousands of churches across the city, I imagined the stories of ordinary black people merging with the stories of David and Goliath, Moses and Pharaoh, the Christians in the lion's den, Ezekiel's field of dry bones. Those stories - of survival, and freedom, and hope - became our story, my story; the blood that had spilled was our blood, the tears our tears; until this black church, on this bright day, seemed once more a vessel carrying the story of a people into future generations and into a larger world. Our trials and triumphs became at once unique and universal, black and more than black; in chronicling our journey, the stories and songs gave us a means to reclaim memories that we didn't need to feel shame about...memories that all people might study and cherish - and with which we could start to rebuild."

That has been my experience at Trinity. Like other predominantly black churches across the country, Trinity embodies the black community in its entirety - the doctor and the welfare mom, the model student and the former gang-banger. Like other black churches, Trinity's services are full of raucous laughter and sometimes bawdy humor. They are full of dancing, clapping, screaming and shouting that may seem jarring to the untrained ear. The church contains in full the kindness and cruelty, the fierce intelligence and the shocking ignorance, the struggles and successes, the love and yes, the bitterness and bias that make up the black experience in America.

And this helps explain, perhaps, my relationship with Reverend Wright. As imperfect as he may be, he has been like family to me. He strengthened my faith, officiated my wedding, and baptized my children. Not once in my conversations with him have I heard him talk about any ethnic group in derogatory terms, or treat whites with whom he interacted with anything but courtesy and respect. He contains within him the contradictions - the good and the bad - of the community that he has served diligently for so many years.

I can no more disown him than I can disown the black community. I can no more disown him than I can my white grandmother - a woman who helped raise me, a woman who sacrificed again and again for me, a woman who loves me as much as she loves anything in this world, but a woman who once confessed her fear of black men who passed by her on the street, and who on more than one occasion has uttered racial or ethnic stereotypes that made me cringe.

These people are a part of me. And they are a part of America, this country that I love.

Some will see this as an attempt to justify or excuse comments that are simply inexcusable. I can assure you it is not. I suppose the politically safe thing would be to move on from this episode and just hope that it fades into the woodwork. We can dismiss Reverend Wright as a crank or a demagogue, just as some have dismissed Geraldine Ferraro, in the aftermath of her recent statements, as harboring some deep-seated racial bias.

But race is an issue that I believe this nation cannot afford to ignore right now. We would be making the same mistake that Reverend Wright made in his offending sermons about America - to simplify and stereotype and amplify the negative to the point that it distorts reality.

The fact is that the comments that have been made and the issues that have surfaced over the last few weeks reflect the complexities of race in this country that we've never really worked through - a part of our union that we have yet to perfect. And if we walk away now, if we simply retreat into our respective corners, we will never be able to come together and solve challenges like health care, or education, or the need to find good jobs for every American.

Read the rest of the speech:
DRUDGE REPORT FLASH 2008® (http://www.drudgereport.com/flashos.htm)

PennyQuilts
03-22-2008, 01:46 PM
Everytime someone seems to disagree with a flaming liberal, they are told to stop getting their information from Foxnews. Seems to me the better position to take would be to offer a cogent argument instead of just attempting to be insulting (it also allows them to not have to back up their opinions). At my age, I find it amusing that some wippersnapper will assume that if I disagree with them, it must be because I can't think for myself.

There is nothing unusual or surprising that someone who learns of Obama's church situation would have reservations. Calling the news a "sound bite" is asinine. Use your head, people.

dismayed
03-22-2008, 08:04 PM
It is ironic to me that Fox News commentators (read: not their news anchors) have repeatedly questioned whether Obama was in fact a 'sleeper' Muslim, only to decide unequivocally that he is definitely a Christian when his preacher is seen on TV saying some insensitive things.

It is hard for me to make any kind of a decision on Rev. Jeremiah Wright having only seen clips from *the same one sermon* from his 20 year career. I've been Googling him tonight, trying to find out more, and I have actually found several interviews with him from earlier this year that, I think, make him sound like a person who is reasonable and not racist (such as in Germany's Der Spiegel).

The fact that he has some harsh words for our country to me doesn't necessarily make him un-American, it depends on what his intentions are. If he is trying to get people to think and trying to fix our country, I don't think that is un-American. I think at least some of the things I have seen him say in that infamous clip probably needed to be said by someone.

On Thursday NPR had an interesting take on things, pointing out that in the Bible, Jeremiah was the prophet who had some harsh things to say to his fellow citizens of Jerusalem and the way they were behaving and what would ultimately happen to their country if they didn't stop. People ignored him. They viewed him as unpatriotic when in fact it was love of God and his country that had driven him to tell all of his prophecies.

I don't know if Jeremiah Wright is equally so noble, or if he is a racist. But I think too many people are jumping to a conclusion before knowing more about him.

Just one week ago Rev. Haggee, a supporter of John McCain, was saying some pretty wild stuff himself. I have caught him once or twice on TV, but again he is someone that I don't know enough about to pass judgment based on a 30 second sound clip.

In reality, there is a LOT of discussion about race that goes on in this country behind closed doors or in 'friendly' environments that no one on either side wants to admit to. The reality is that on these issues of black and white, nothing is black and white.

PennyQuilts
03-22-2008, 10:06 PM
If a conservative candidate's pastor had the type of relationship that Obama has with his pastor - and hateful bigoted statements were made by that pastor - be it against black people or gays or what have you - I do not believe you would see liberals jumping out to discount that relationship and argue that the relationship has no reflection on the conservative candidate's judgment or values. In short, I think the only people who are defending or making excuses for this relationship are driven by partisan attitudes. This isn't even a close call and it is NOT because it is a "sound bite." The pastor is a bigot. He may be a nice guy but so are a lot of pedophiles when they aren't in the heat of the moment. At the end of the day, the pastor is still a bigot and a pedophile is still a pedophile.

If Obama wants to hang with Reverand Wright that is his perogative. For anyone to try to tell me that I am just wrong or stupid for questioning why he'd want to and that I wonder what that says about Obama strikes me as just weird. How could you NOT question it? Anyone who thinks this is an unfair exercise - based on what we know now - is not thinking, period. After all these questions are investigated or perhaps with time, the concerns MAY be laid to rest. However, I don't think the man in entitled to the benefit of the doubt at this point - there are too many red flags about the Reverand. Birds of a feathers, judging by the company you keep and all that.

People are entitled to their political beliefs. However, I think it is lunacy to think that just because someone is of a certain political persuasion - be it liberal or conservative - that they have good (or bad) judgment, or are a good person or a monster. There are plenty of foolish liberals, there are plenty of foolish conservatives. Liberals can be bad people, or good. Same with conservative. Their political beliefs have absolutely nothing to do with their integrity or compassion.

The fact is, many liberals want to be nice to people and they don't want poor people to suffer or be abused. The fact is, most conservatives (as least fiscal conservatives) are also compassionate but they think that the means to achieve what is best for people is achieved differently. Liberals think conservatives are mean and greedy. Fiscal conservatives think liberals understand neither human nature or economics and that liberal policies will cause more misery for poor people than they will solve. As soon as these two groups stop talking, you have problems. Demonizing each other doesn't help.

There is has been a very troubling trend in recent years to label political opponents as "bad" people, liars and the like. Very much a holier than thou attitude that is just as unattractive when someone is attacking gays as it is when they attacking people along racial lines, religion, etc. I see more of this with young people who - as near as I can tell - don't connect the dots between actions and words. When people of a different political belief are demonized, it is a short step to move towards violence. Look at history. People haven't changed all that much, if at all. As recently as the 60s there was a great deal of political turmoil in this country and we all saw the violence that flowed from that. I remember it and don't want to go back to it. When I see rash comments made, filled with rage and hate, with no apparent understanding that it sets a tone to discourage the exchange of ideas - it seems obvious to me that this is a step towards NOT communicating and common sense tells us where that leads.

It has generally be considered an art to be able to disagree without being disagreeable. It is a desirable talent. Anyone can make ham fisted statements, lead with conclusions and get angry when others don't agree or don't understand. Spouting conclusions and making personal attacks is worse than useless. It shuts down discussion and, frankly, that is dangerous in a country as divided as this one.

Redskin 70
03-23-2008, 07:38 AM
Shocking news here.............Blacks can be bigots also
Blacks can be racist also
Preachers can be Bigots and racist
Wright is a Bigot and Racist

Now that being said.......................has anyone here never ever in their entire lives used the N word.
Has anyone ever looked at a Black teenager with baggie pants and off center hat and not thought N.
Has anyone here ever not used the Q word for gay"s
Or the F word.
And has anyone here not reflected matured and got beyond such.
Has anyone her, beside me, ever ever ever said something so stupid, so ignorant, so hateful......the minute you said it you knew you were wrong.
COme on be truthful......at least to your own self.:tiphat:

PennyQuilts
03-23-2008, 08:10 AM
I don't recall ever using the "N" word except in one situation when I said that if I ever heard my child use that word I would wash their mouth out with soap. Have I ever used the "q" word - only with my gay brother amid giggles. Does that mean that I think you have to be perfect? Of course not. But as a parent, you need to be careful what you say in public AND in private. You need to be careful who you expose your children to. You can't expect your children to avoid bigotry if you are a hypocrite. And as a parent, you have an obligation to teach your children to conduct themselves in a manner that brings honor to themselves, their family, their gender, their religious persuasion and their race.

But that isn't what we're talking about in Obama's case. The reverand didn't "slip" behind closed doors as a result of being old school when such language was open, tolerated and common. This was not a case of someone who just doesn't "get" it. I've no doubt that he is well aware of the horrible consequences of bigotry and ugly words - and yet - he publicly attacked others, on the basis of their race, in a sanctimious manner in the presence of children and in, what many people believe, the house of the lord. And as a reminder - we haven't heard any apologies or explanations from Reverand Wright. He appears to be standing behind his statements and not trying to explain them away. Good for him. At least he is being honest and while I don't agree with him, I respect his right to say what is on his mind. And I respect him for not groveling for expediency. I might actually like the man if I met him, in person.

That is all fine, I suppose. He is not running for public office. If he wants to encourage hate for whatever reason, he is not the only one. If he wants to spew hate because he feels justified, he is not alone. If he wants to teach children to hate others on the basis of their skin, he is not the first.

Obama, on the other hand, has held himself out to be the candidate who rises ABOVE race. Yet he chose this man as his close, spiritual advisor. He had him on his staff until recently (recall that he said he'd not have anyone on his staff who made the kind of statements Imus made).

Happy Easter, all.

dismayed
03-23-2008, 09:26 AM
If a conservative candidate's pastor had the type of relationship that Obama has with his pastor - and hateful bigoted statements were made by that pastor - be it against black people or gays or what have you - I ...

I honestly can't tell if this was a reply to my last post or not. It seems like it should be because the time-stamp is right and I was the only one who posted since your last post, but everything in your post seems more aimed at soonerliberal and his points and ignores my last post. So I'm not sure.

I'll just say that I have let things slide when crazy things have been said by those on the right. To me, the things that come into play are the context, the frequency of the statements, and the intent. So far I have only seen one sermon from Rev. Wright. I still think it is an important point that the man has given literally thousands of sermons over 20 years and I only know about the one I have seen on TV. I'd like to know more. Maybe this is common place, maybe the man snapped, I don't know. This is important in the context of Obama's relationship with the man.

Generally things like this I meet with some eye rolling and move on. Pat Robertson and Jerry Fallwell saying that Colin Powell and Foggy Bottom (the State Department) should be baby nuked, saying that gays and feminists were responsible for God lessening his protection of America on 9/11, etc... things that are not fringe beliefs and are wide-spread among evangelicals... sure I don't agree with them, but I roll my eyes and move on. I mean come on, we live in Oklahoma, our fanatics aren't advisers to our politicians, they ARE our politicians. Stuff like this is really a secondary issue at best. I think both liberals AND conservatives are kidding themselves if they don't think they aren't lining up right along party lines. Conservatives view Rev. Wright's sermon as the smoking gun they've been waiting for, that they have been programmed to watch for when dealing with any black politician. Many of the same liberals who are now defending would easily be hammering a candidate on the other side of the isle for an equal situation.

And that is really the problem with modern politics. On that we violently agree.

I'll end this post by crossing the isle and agreeing with Mike Huckabee. Rev. Wright is a guy who is from a generation that was forced to set at the back of the bus. Was forced to drink from a different fountain. Was forced to enter a restaurant through a different door. Had to deal with segregation, race riots, beatings, lynchings, etc. For that fact alone I will never be able to equate his anger with someone who just generally doesn't like gays or blacks for whatever reason. It's still not right, but I'm more willing to give someone who had the pre-civil rights black experience a lot more wiggle room.

PennyQuilts
03-23-2008, 11:10 AM
No, Dismayed, I wasn't responding to your post. Just pontificating. Nice post, btw.

Saw some "newsbites" on Trinity Church's Easter sermon. A lot about public lynching and the National Republican radio, slams at conservative news organizaitons and things of that ilk. Nice uplifting Easter sermon, all in all. I notice Obama made himself scarce.

I am so disgusted with that man.

gmwise
03-27-2008, 07:46 PM
if you all bother reading my other posts.

"
Well, here goes...

I changed my political affiliation, three months ago.
AH you wondered why?

The political pundits suppose certain voting demographics.

I'm white, retired military, a supremely proud father of 2 strapping young sons, and grandfather of 3 grandsons, a recovering Baptist, limited post high school education, I believe illegal immigration is a big problem on the stand point of security.
Therefore I must vote Republican.

AH but see I'm gay, whose in a serious relationship, multicultural inclined, who lost his partner of 17 years to a drunk step-son of a state senator whose name now is on the very roadway on which my partner was killed, I welcome immigrants who are law biding, with a strong work ethic, I also actually work and knows the fears, and feelings of the average person.
I believe healthcare and prescription medicines are out of control in cost.
Therefore I must vote Democratic.

I will be damned if someone can suppose they can know for certain who I may vote for.
I was looking at Rudy Giuliani and Mike Huckabee of the Republican Party, and Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama of the Democratic Party.
Now some will question why I would change my party affiliation.
Well, let me give you some brief voting history

I voted for Ronald Reagan his second term, why not the 1st? I wasn't legal age to vote his 1st, but I worked on the campaign.
I voted for George Herbert Walker Bush the Current's Father both times.
I voted for Clinton his second term, yes despite the semen stained dress, which begs the statement, blackmail, was in the mind of the intern.
I also liked many of his policies, not all but many.
I voted for the Current Bush twice, looked at the choices Gore then Kerry. Shivers
Now some may wondered ok so don't you wished you voted for so and so, no is the answer.
Sometimes you must not only vote for you, but for the good of the nation.
I actually do not believe Gore or Kerry could have handled the 9/11 attack, the war on Terror any better then Bush, BUT
I wished we had secured Afghanistan, before we launch the attack on Iraq, we needed more allies, we had many Intel groups confirming our own assessments of Iraqi possessions of WMDs, ranging from regional to other Western powers.
Saddam did have WMDS; he used it on his own people, and during the war with Iran.
I did believe at the time when I was there we had to kill Saddam or my nephews or sons would have to come back and fight yet again.
We execute the war fairly well; it’s the post war occupation that’s giving me the fits.
We were totally unprepared for post war occupation of Iraq, not having enough troops.
Now let me also say Iraq is an artificial state in a former colonial region.
Iraqis are made up of the Kurds, Shiites, Sunnis, Jews, and even Christians.
Most "Iraqis" are not driven in being a united people, unlike what we are, or at least what I Hope we are.
I believe it was JFK who said Republicans and Democrats want the best for America; we each have different ways & speeds, of going about it.
Now how and what do I Do to try to vote for the best out there.
I never relied on once source much less one media for my news and information.

I will vote. I invite you to do your Constitutional duty as a Citizen."

gmwise
03-27-2008, 07:49 PM
Soonerlibel,
I read and research I never take anyones word for anything.

PennyQuilts
03-29-2008, 06:52 AM
gmwise, loved your post. Thanks!