"As such, Rev. Wright's comments were not only wrong but divisive"
Right. So where does BH Obama explain why he sat and listened to this bigot's spew for years, but said nothing until he got caught?
This won't matter to the Keith X Hakim Ellison Corps of the Moonbat Brigade of the Democratic Party of course, but the rest of the country will see it for what it is...more spin from the candidate of a hopelessly clueless party.
Our country deserves a better President than John McCain can be, but we'll make do none-the-less.
You'll make do? What a champ....or is that chump? You've already just been settling and look at the mess America is in?
There is absolutely nowhere that is says the pastor gave sermons like that every day, year after year. I've sat through things that I didn't agree with. I do it all the time listening to Lou Dobbs but I keep coming back because most of the time, he has good points.
You'd be lying to yourself if you say you've never done the same. How about concentrating on the real issues facing America and move along from this?
I caught the last fifteen minutes of the speech as it was being delivered.
Say what you will about Senator Obama's politics, but one thing is for sure; he's got guts, and they're made of titanium.
I do not believe that either Senator Clinton or Senator McCain would start a speech at this point in a closely contested election cycle by rejecting comments made by a friend/former-advisor and THEN extrapolating in order to engage in a politically tricky discussion on racial and socio-economic groups in this country, and finally ending with a call for all Americans to both unify as a single nation and continue to recognize the divisions we tend to shy away from dicussing in order to consistently better ourselves.
Some may call his speech "academic fluff," or somesuch thing. It was not. It communicated directly to the American people one simple fact--race is still a complex issue in this country, as it is in many countries--while reminding us of the fact that we are equipped better than anywhere else in the world to deal with this issue in proactive, pragmatic ways. The first step is acceptance of the situation, and the second step is understanding and empathy regarding where other people (of all ethnic backgrounds) may stand on it.
This doesn't mean we have to "change our values" as a people and it doesn't mean that we need to fund massive quasi-Marxist programs to deal with it; we just have to live up to our ideals a bit better and more consistently (which can be no easy thing at times), and the first step in doing that is recognizing foremost that we are BOTH autonomous individuals AND a unified country, not simply one or the other.
In an incredibly narcissistic age, that's a bold, bold discussion to start, and what is particularly mind-blowing is that it has been started by the individual who is presently LEADING in the race for the Democratic nomination (the most pledged delegates, the most overall delegates, the most contests won, the largest percentage of the popular vote won). He could have denounced Reverend Wright's comments and moved on--that may have been safer politically, particularly for the one currently "out in front"--but he chose this path instead.
Senator Clinton, who in many ways would make a very good Democratic nominee, is nonetheless far too controlled by focus-group voter-numbers machinations to do such a thing; even when she goes out on a limb, she plays it pretty safe. Senator McCain has other political struggles to deal with now, but I doubt he'd have the complexity of thought to deal with racial issues in the manner Senator Obama did today.
Swift..
You continue to be nothing but clueless ugliness.
First, I can sit at a sermon, and not agree with the sermon - without having an obligation to publicly rebuke it. Suggesting that he MUST do so or be unethical, is beyond crap. You surely should know that he isn't obligated to rebuke this pastor at every turn, or even ANY turn - unless and until there is a need to contrast his views from the Pastor's.
Conversely, McCain makes comments like that the Democrats favor surrendering to Al Qaeda, and conflates Iraq with Al Qaeda. That's NOT McCain's pastor speaking, that's Maverick John. Now, I know you actually agree with that comment - which is why you are rightly seen as so unhinged - but the fact is we (meaning those of us who aren't rabid Nazis - like you) feel that our actions in Iraq have ONLY served to make Al Qaeda stronger, not weaker. We see your conduct as 'surrender' to stupidity - and a sure fire course to defeat. We also have NO desire to 'surrender' to anyone - but instead believe we should be following a strategy that can succeed, your's very clearly cannot succeed. So, while you pillory Obama (and Ellison apparently) for not having repeatedly rebuked every pastor they've ever disagreed with - you engage and embrace rampant divicivness - gladly, openly and without restraint. Your candidate engaged and engages in it without restraint. Why are we to take you seriously on a complaint you neither support through action, nor expect your candidates to support either?
Lastly, of what value to you gain by pointing to Obama's middle name? It surely, couldn't possibly be because you're a dyed-in-the-wool racist, right? I mean, you wouldn't be going after Keith Ellison in the same breath as Obama because both are a. Black and b. One is Muslim and you can conflate the other's name as carrying an association to Islam, right?
Flash, I'm sorry, you can say this guy is a fine guy in real life.. but his actions and words are those of an anything but fine guy.
I apologize for the length of my previous message. Here is the final bit of it:
Their political caution on this and related issues might make Senator Clinton and Senator McCain "better bets" to win the presidency in most election years. But I'm not so sure that's the case in 2008. Whenever our country is at a point when it needs desperately to turn a corner, it has been the individual who has gone out on a limb and made their case impressively that has won (from last century, FDR's paradigm-shifting "New Deal"; Kennedy's early-sixties statements about going "to the moon," which was conventionally viewed as anti-Soviet rhetoric that was nonetheless also viewed as being ridiculous to think might actually happen in a few short years; even Reagan's 1980's economic proposals leap to mind). Whether we like them or not, they caught people's attention and defined ages in which paradigms needed to shift a bit. We may be at a similar point now, in more ways than we presently know.
The wing nuts seem to have a double standard when it comes
to religious leaders who support the candidates.
I would like to point out one in particular who is an ardent supporter of McCain
Ohio Paster Rev.Rod Parsley who has made disparaging remarks against other religions.
What did McCain say about Parsley
"I am very honored today to have one of the truly great leaders in America,
a moral compass, a spiritual guide…thank you for your leadership and your guidance.
I am very grateful you are here."
"The wing nuts seem to have a double standard when it comes to religious leaders who support the candidates."
Really? I searched You Tube for some sweet footage of McCain's pastor spewing racist and anti-American hatred...but I came up empty.
Can you help a brother out with a link Gigi?
BTW, I wonder if Rev. Racism would be interested in a hood to match his dashiki.
Commenting by HaloScan
