Meta-Blog

SEARCH QandO

Email:
Jon Henke
Bruce "McQ" McQuain
Dale Franks
Bryan Pick
Billy Hollis
Lance Paddock
MichaelW

BLOGROLL QandO

 
 
Recent Posts
The Ayers Resurrection Tour
Special Friends Get Special Breaks
One Hour
The Hope and Change Express - stalled in the slow lane
Michael Steele New RNC Chairman
Things that make you go "hmmmm"...
Oh yeah, that "rule of law" thing ...
Putting Dollar Signs in Front Of The AGW Hoax
Moving toward a 60 vote majority?
Do As I Say ....
 
 
QandO Newsroom

Newsroom Home Page

US News

US National News
Politics
Business
Science
Technology
Health
Entertainment
Sports
Opinion/Editorial

International News

Top World New
Iraq News
Mideast Conflict

Blogging

Blogpulse Daily Highlights
Daypop Top 40 Links

Regional

Regional News

Publications

News Publications

 
Obama: I’ve never heard Rev. Wright speak like that - well, ok, except that time ..." (Updated)
Posted by: McQ on Sunday, March 16, 2008

You remember this from Obama's Huffington Post piece, I'm sure:
The statements that Rev. Wright made that are the cause of this controversy were not statements I personally heard him preach while I sat in the pews of Trinity or heard him utter in private conversation.
And you may remember me saying:
This should be like waving a red flag in front of a bull to the media. What is being claimed here is the only time the good Reverend ever preached like that was when Obama wasn't in attendance.
As well as this?
And if the MSM does its job and isn't beaten out by some blogger, we'll eventually find out if the claims made in Obama's post ring true.
It should come as no surprise then that a blogger tracked down an account of an instance when Obama was in attendance at Trinity UCC when the Rev. Wright did his thing:
Wright laced into America's establishment, blaming the "white arrogance" of America's Caucasian majority for the woes of the world, especially the oppression suffered by blacks. To underscore the point he refers to the country as the "United States of White America." Many in the congregation, including Obama, nodded in apparent agreement as these statements were made.

The sermon also addressed the Iraq war, a frequent area of Wright's fulminations.

"Young African-American men," Wright thundered, were "dying for nothing." The "illegal war," he shouted, was "based on Bush's lies" and is being "fought for oil money."

In a sermon filled with profanity, Wright also blamed the war on "Bush administration bulls—t."
The full article is here and was written in August of 2007.

Another very interesting part of the article was its final paragraph:
"If Barack gets past the primary, he might have to publicly distance himself from me," Wright told The New York Times with a shrug. "I said it to Barack personally, and he said 'yeah, that might have to happen.'"
So this wasn't news to Barack Obama. He knew what was coming and planned for it. How calculating and cold-blooded is that?

Amazing what some will try to slip by the gullible, isn't it?

UPDATE: A commenter brings up a good point. On July 22nd, Obama is listed as a speaker in Miami at the National Council of La Raza at 1:30 (EST). That would be 12:30 CST.

The posted times for the services at Trinity are 7:30 EST and 11:00 EST. Obviously he couldn't have attended the 11am service. But the commenter contends he couldn't have attended the 7:30am service either based on an assumed flight time of 4 hours between Chicago and Miami.

However, according to the OAG, commercial flights only take 2 hours and 50 minutes flight time, and as I recall, the Obama campaign uses a chartered jet which could cut down on even that time. So while the author of the article claiming to have seen Obama at the July 22 service didn't specify which service, it is possible he could have attended the 7:30 service (8:30 EST) and still made the Miami speech at 1:30 EST. He may have left the service early (after the sermon) caught the campaign plane at about 9:00 CST (10:00 EST) and made Miami by 12:30 EST for a 1:30 speech.

Another note - Rev. Wright has been scrubbed from the Obama website.

UPDATE II: The Obama campaign flatly denies Obama was at the July 22nd service:
Ben LaBolt, a spokesman for the Obama campaign, immediately denied the Newsmax report, saying Obama was in Miami that day. He referred to an item hastily posted on the Obama Fact Check website saying simply: "Fact: Obama did not attend services on July 22."
Another interesting note:
In a Sunday conference call, Obama campaign manager David Axelrod admitted that the campaign recognized Wright as a potential problem more than a year ago and had disinvited the pastor from giving the invocation at the announcement of Obama's presidential candidacy on Feb. 10, 2007, in Springfield, Ill.
As I mentioned above, despite Obama's attempt to say he had no idea Wright was saying such things, both Wright and now Axelrod indicate that isn't true and Obama knew the potential for his words to become a problem was there early on.

UPDATE III: Ronald Kessler of Newsmax issues a clarification:
Clarification: The Obama campaign has told members of the press that Senator Obama was not in church on the day cited, July 22, because he had a speech he gave in Miami at 1:30 PM. Our writer, Jim Davis, says he attended several services at Senator Obama's church during the month of July, including July 22. The church holds services three times every Sunday at 7:30 and 11 a.m. and 6 p.m. Central time. While both the early morning and evening service allowed Sen. Obama to attend the service and still give a speech in Miami, Mr. Davis stands by his story that during one of the services he attended during the month of July, Senator Obama was present and sat through the sermon given by Rev. Wright as described in the story. Mr. Davis said Secret Service were also present in the church during Senator Obama's attendance. Mr. Davis' story was first published on Newsmax on August 9, 2007. Shortly before publication, Mr. Davis contacted the press office of Sen. Obama several times for comment about the Senator's attendance and Rev. Wright's comments during his sermon. The Senator's office declined to comment.
 
TrackBacks
Return to Main Blog Page
 
 

Previous Comments to this Post 

Comments
When this firestorm starts to sweep into Congress and burn Democrats all hell is going to break loose. This is clearly a Democratic Party problem, not just a Barack Obama problem. The Democrats were in the process of dumping the Clintons for putting them in exactly the same position with voters that an Obama candidacy will bring them in November. They just got the Congress back, have a huge advantage over Republicans in Senate races because so many more GOP seats are up, and here comes the biggest political sh*tstorm ever — a candidacy destroyed after Obama has virtually won the nomination.

It’s almost too painful to look at. But I can’t say that they don’t deserve it.
 
Written By: Martin McPhillips
URL: http://mcphillips.blogspot.com/
Could this be Obama’s "monkeybusiness" moment?
 
Written By: GW
URL: http://wolfhowling.blogspot.com
Just read Daily Kos every day if you don’t think this is "main stream" Dem thinking.

30% of the country (including an estimated 70% of African Americans and percent of non-AA’s) loves the Jeremiah Wrights of this world. "It is not racist" when a member of the opressed community says crap like this. And "it is not racist" when the likes of Cindy Sheehan agrees with him.

But guess what? 70% of the country hates this stuff. This 70% includes the 10% who generally are racist from the other direction, and the rest of us who are just damn tired of racial crap from any direction.

Translation. This stuff won’t sell in the generaly election.
 
Written By: vnjagvet
URL: http://www.yargb.blogspot.com
In fact, Obama was in attendance at the church when these statements were made on July 22.
So, the story that is that Obama attended this session on July 22, 2007?

Did he attend the Sunday Services at 7:30 a.m, or 11:00 a.m., or 6:00 p.m?


He was in New Hampshire on Saturday July 21, 2007

And he was in Miami on July 22nd, 2007 at 1:30 pm. (that would 12:30 CST)

SENATORS CLINTON AND OBAMA TO ADDRESS NCLR ANNUAL CONFERENCE
UPDATED SCHEDULE OF KEY SPEAKERS AND EVENTS
Sunday, July 22 11:00 a.m. LATINAS BRUNCH, Una Charla Con Hillary – Hall B
Congresswoman Ileana Ros-Lehtinen (R-FL)
Senator Hillary Clinton (D-NY)
Interview led by Monica Lozano, Publisher and CEO, La Opinión

1:30 p.m. SPECIAL FORUM: Foro Del Pueblo Con Sen. Obama – Room D128-129, (Open to the public)
Featured Speaker: Senator Barack Obama (D-IL)

So, ya think he flew to Chicago on the red eye, and then went to the 7:30 AM (Central time) services, and then hopped on a plane for Miami (4 hours, including the hour lost in the time zone)? Considering travel to and from the airport, and not considering getting to his scheduled speech one minute before he was scheduled to speak, he would have had to leave the sermon about six minutes after it started, leaving no time to nod his agreement to the Reverend Wright.

(Obama was not in Chicago for services on July 22nd, 2007)

And even if he were, none of this puts Wrights words in Obama’s mouth.

Keep pushing it, but unless you find Obama SAYING this stuff, you’re following the oppo research meme established to try to smear Obama with positions that there is no evidence he has ever held.

But congratulations on trying to push low lower.
Translation. This stuff won’t sell in the general election.
This is not the stuff Obama is selling. But keep trying to assign these positions to him and watch a really ugly backlash. I don’t think Obama is a racist, and I don’t think the attacks on Obama are racist, I think they are pure politics, but as this meme is pushed, it will eventually be perceived as racist, since there is no way a black person, who is associated with black culture in any way can avoid this kind of rhetoric. It is not the main theme of Black Christianty by any means, but it is present. This will be seen as an attempt to disqualify any black man from national politics.

There is simply no history of Obama ever saying that he agreed with the political stances of Wright, none. In fact, before any of this became a subject of conversation, Obama had said that Wright "is like an old uncle that I don’t always agree with".

It’s going to backfire.

Imagine if Catholics were disqualified because of the heinous and cavalier way they handled child molestations for DECADES, these are not words, they were DEEDS.

I have read more than the repugnant cherry picked soundbites from Wright, for example, the sermon that inspired Obama’s book title, The Audacity of Hope.

SO you want to argue that Obama tacitly agrees with the few angry screed Wright has uttered, and then say, this is the guy that Inspired Obama’s book, but then ignore the messages from Wright that Obama has said DID inspire him.
The real lesson Hannah gives us from this chapter—the most important word God would have us hear—is how to hope when the love of God is not plainly evident. It’s easy to hope when there are evidences all around of how good God is. But to have the audacity to hope when that love is not evident—you don’t know where that somewhere is that my grandmother sang about, or if there will ever be that brighter day—that is a true test of a Hannah-type faith. To take the one string you have left and to have the audacity to hope—make music and praise God on and with whatever it is you’ve got left, even though you can’t see what God is going to do—that’s the real word God will have us hear from this passage and from Watt’s painting.
Forty years of messages of hope, and some descents into anger, but you want to pretend that the only messages were screeds damning America.

When it occurs to you that Obama may have taken the best and left the rest, then perhaps you could discuss this rationally.





 
Written By: Captin sarcastic
URL: http://
Imagine if Catholics were disqualified because of the heinous and cavalier way they handled child molestations for DECADES, these are not words, they were DEEDS.
The scumbags involved in that concealed their activity. They didn’t publish DVDs about it.

That’s correct. Those "cherry picked soundbites" are from a DVD the church sells.

"God, DAMN America!" - Sometimes soundbites stand on their own and don’t need context.
 
Written By: jpm100
URL: http://
He was in New Hampshire on Saturday July 21, 2007
He spoke in New Hampshire on FRIDAY. The article you linked was just posted Saturday. It references activity from the day before. He had all night Friday and all day Saturday to travel.

Try again, Sherlock.
 
Written By: JWG
URL: http://
Well, regardless of where he was on Friday, he apparently was in Miami on Sunday. So when did he go to church?

Even if NewsMax is wrong about this it hardly solves Obama’s Wright problem. Still, it is a break for him.
 
Written By: Tom Maguire
URL: http://
And consider it, gang... This all started because he wrapped himself up so tightly in that particular church and with that particular pastor in an effort to fight off the idea that he was a Muslim.

So effective was the argument, that he cannot seperate himself from that argument, now. Which as it happens, explains rather well the delay in his renouncing publicly Wrights racism.

 
Written By: Bithead
URL: http://bitsblog.florack.us
So he just hear it on tapes. Is this a sort of didn’t inhale excuse!?
 
Written By: capt joe
URL: http://
I don’t agree with that at all, Eric. I don’t think that Obama joined that church to fight off a Muslim identity. He joined that church to affirm his blackness, which he most fully acquired his sense of, apparently, in the radical academic setting of Columbia University as an undergrad. And he also joined that church to gain political credibility in black districts in Chicago.

Obama apparently lacked the common sense and the judgement to eventually find another church, you know, one where the pastor wasn’t horsewhipping his congregation with black racism and black separatism. And there is no reason to give him the benefit of the doubt and believe that he just sat there for twenty years without integrating Wright’s message and sublimating it (really just putting a mask on it) when his political ambitions grew larger than the black wards of Chicago.
 
Written By: Martin McPhillips
URL: http://mcphillips.blogspot.com/
The video of Wright shouting "God damn America!", with the congregation swaying and clapping, will say it all for the majority of American voters. If Obama had met this head-on at the start of his campaign things might be different, but he didn’t and they aren’t.

Those who push the various Catholic and anti-Catholic rationalizations for Obama miss the key fact that Obama is running for the job of leading America, not damning it, not punishing it. The presidency is the highest privilege America offers and a supreme trust; it is not something that Obama is owed, unless it can be proved beyond a shadow of a doubt that he is anti-American.

Obama’s only hope now is to pretend that he was somehow unaware of Wright’s slanders and attacks on America. Over the weekend Obama admitted that he would have quit the church had he known.

But how credible is that? Given that Obama had a personal mentoring relationship with Wright, that the congregation can be seen clearly rocking out with Rev. Wright’s anti-American viciousness, that the church happily sells DVDs and tapes of Wright’s sermons, and that Obama himself bought the tapes and studied them to learn the oratory which has made his campaign so powerful, it’s not credible at all.
 
Written By: huxley
URL: http://
huxley:
But how credible is that?
It’s not credible at all. Spengler provides an introduction to Wright’s black theology. I advise everyone to read it. That’s what Obama sat still for, for 20 years.

When Wright was interviewed by Sean Hannity, Wright demanded to know if Hannity had read the books of the theologican James Cone. Hannity needed to know Cone if Hannity was going to question Wright about his "black church." Well here is a quote from James Cone provided by Spengler:
Black theology refuses to accept a God who is not identified totally with the goals of the black community. If God is not for us and against white people, then he is a murderer, and we had better kill him. The task of black theology is to kill Gods who do not belong to the black community ... Black theology will accept only the love of God which participates in the destruction of the white enemy. What we need is the divine love as expressed in Black Power, which is the power of black people to destroy their oppressors here and now by any means at their disposal. Unless God is participating in this holy activity, we must reject his love. [1]
In the footnote provided by Spengler that quote is taken from: "William R Jones, "Divine Racism: The Unacknowledged Threshold Issue for Black Theology", in African-American Religious Thought: An Anthology, ed Cornel West and Eddie Glaube (Westminster John Knox Press)."

Spengler’s conclusion that Obama might just be pretending to believe these essentials of Wright’s ministry to gain viability in black politics in Chicago is something that will never be determined, because Obama is already caught in a convoluted double-bind. It is sufficient to note that he brings his daughters to that church.
 
Written By: Martin McPhillips
URL: http://mcphillips.blogspot.com/
Captin Sarcastic,
First of all, good catch on the Miami speech on Sunday. That’s the kind of provable fact checking that I appreciate whether from the left or the right. He could have made the early service, but it seems that it would be a very tight timeline to do so.

However, that doesn’t change the real problems for Obama in regards to Wright, which is namely this: 22, 22, 2, and 1. To say that he’s been a member of this congregation over 22 years, gave them over $22,000 in 2006 alone, had his 2 children baptized there and had his 1 marriage performed by Pastor Wright defies any logical reasonning that he didn’t hear at least some of that vile garbage spewed by Wright. He’s not a crazy Uncle - because a church is a choice. You’re Uncle isn’t. He can leave at any time, and should have long ago, especially if he intended a run for President that means your scrutinized to the nth degree. Instead, he kept going, and going, and going...

To me, the one sermon isn’t the problem. Heck, he might not have heard any of the sermons that have played ad nauseum over the last week. But I refuse to believe that over 22 years he didn’t hear some of that garbage. And if you need the proof, just listen to what his wife has said. Or the fact he won’t wear a silly American flag lapel pin. Or put his hand over his heart to pledge Allegiance. Or that his second book is named after a Wright sermon. Or that in his first and second book, he calls Wright a mentor (or spiritual guide, or whatever it was).

Sorry, it isn’t coincidence, and I don’t buy it one iota. Nor, I think, does any reasonable church-going adult.
 
Written By: Warrior Needs Food Badly
URL: http://
Captin sarcastic:
...as this meme is pushed, it will eventually be perceived as racist, since there is no way a black person, who is associated with black culture in any way can avoid this kind of rhetoric. It is not the main theme of Black Christianty by any means, but it is present. This will be seen as an attempt to disqualify any black man from national politics.
You’re saying that any predominately black church Obama might have joined and attended these past couple of decades would have featured, to some extent, Wright-style condemnations of America? U.S. of KKK-A type rhetoric? God damn America, the creator of HIV and distributor of drugs to black children rhetoric?

That’s nonsense. It’s nuts — and, for my money, really racist — to suggest that, because he is black and wished to embrace black culture, Obama had "no way" to avoid association with such hate-filled, lie-filled philosophy as Jeremiah Wright espouses.

And note that Obama has publicly and repeatedly embraced Wright’s theology and ministry, even as he’s sought to downplay or disregard Wright’s vehement hatred of America and of white people, as well as the paranoid lies he spews. It’s not as though Obama, in pursuit of his own pure and praiseworthy goals, just happened to brush up against some unsavory rhetoric in some bastion of black culture.

As for the claim that criticisms of Obama’s hand-in-glove association with Wright constitute some sort of "attempt to disqualify" him – and, indeed, “any black man” – from national politics, that’s nonsense too. Not only is Obama qualified to run for the presidency, he is running and, at long last, he is receiving the degree of scrutiny and judgment that befits his candidacy. This is all part of national politics, not some attempt to bar the participation of any person or group. What you and many other Obama supporters seem to want is a suspension of electoral business as usual. That’s not going to happen now and it’s certainly not going to happen in November, when the “God damn America” demographic is not the group that’s going to turn out and elect the next president. People who have a problem with these facts need to grow up.
 
Written By: Linda Morgan
URL: http://
I’ve never heard Rev. Wright speak like that - well, ok, except that time ..."
Funny. Reminds me of this quote.

"All right, but apart from the sanitation, medicine, education, wine, public order, irrigation, roads, the fresh water system and public health, what have the Romans ever done for us"?



 
Written By: Is
URL: http://
Cap,
Warrior’s observations are on, as are Linda’s - it’s going to make people think. At least it’s going to make thinking people think.

This disavowal could be coming along far too late for many.

Worst part is, many will suddenly turn it into a ’black vs white’ issue, and sadly I expect some property to get wrecked and possibly some lives to be lost before this is done.

I think this is going to set the ’us vs them’ clock back a solid 20 years and it’s a damned shame.
 
Written By: looker
URL: http://
Good link, Martin!

I was struck by Andrew Sullivan’s quotes from Obama about his conversion. It would seem that Obama didn’t convert to conventional Christianity—nothing whatsoever about Jesus Christ—but to a liberation victim story of blacks as an oppressed chosen people. It’s all Old Testament allusions except the confused reference to "Christians in the lion’s den." Nothing that one would recognize from the Apostle’s Creed or Christ’s injunction to love God and love one another.
"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 the 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 been spilled was our blood, the tears our tears; until the 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 shamed about, memories more accessible than those of ancient Egypt, memories that all people might study and cherish - and with which we could start to rebuild. And if part of me continued to feel that this Sunday communion sometimes simplified our condition, that it could sometimes disguise or suppress the very real conflicts among us and would fulfill its promise only through action, I also felt for the first time how that spirit carried within it, nascent, incomplete, the possibility of moving beyond our narrow dreams."
Sullivan is supposed to be a Roman Catholic, but he is so starry-eyed over Obama he doesn’t notice that Obama entirely misses the core of Christianity here. Yet for Sullivan it is the ultimate vindication of Obama’s relationship to Wright’s whatever-it-is church.
 
Written By: huxley
URL: http://
...as this meme is pushed, it will eventually be perceived as racist, since there is no way a black person, who is associated with black culture in any way can avoid this kind of rhetoric.
Glide Memorial Church a nationally known, predominantly black church in San Francisco. Its politics are, of course, progressive, but they are not Afrocentric or extremist. They do a fair amount of good in the Bay Area with their various programs. But, as far as I know, you would never hear "God damn America" shouted from Glide’s pulpit.

No, not all black churches are like Obama’s church.

If Obama had attended a church like Glide, conservatives would no doubt mutter about it, but it would not be a national scandal affecting Obama’s candidacy.
 
Written By: huxley
URL: http://

" He was in New Hampshire on Saturday July 21, 2007"


"Union Leader | July 21, 2007
By Garry Rayno

MANCHESTER — If Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama were President, he would call together the Joint Chiefs of Staff and change the military mission in Iraq immediately, he told the New Hampshire Union Leader yesterday......Manchester was the last stop for Obama in a two-day tour of the state that included stops in Hampton earlier yesterday and one in Sunapee Thursday."

His last stop in New Hampshire was on the previous day, not the 21.

http://www.hispanicmpr.com/2007/07/31/clinton-obama-appearances-highlight-of-2007-nclr-conference/

"The audience waited impatiently until 1:50 when Janet Murguía, president and CEO, NCLR and Maria Pesqueira of Mujeres Latinas en Accion, an NCLR affiliate, welcomed Obama enthusiastically"

It also appears that Obama was a little late.

http://64.233.183.104/search?q=cache:RHC5JxBi1sEJ:www.orbitz.com/flight-info/BW/BW-ORD-MIA.html+flight+time,+chicago,+miami&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us

"The average travel time from Chicago, IL to Miami, FL is 2 hours and 56 minutes.*"

I don’t know if he did attend that church service or not, but it certainly seems possible to me. Tight scheduling is not unheard of in political campaigns.




 
Written By: timactual
URL: http://
as this meme is pushed, it will eventually be perceived as racist, since there is no way a black person, who is associated with black culture in any way can avoid this kind of rhetoric.
"Soft bigotry of low expectations" is the phrase that applies to this one.

Where does this line lead? Am I to assume that a black person who "avoided this rhetoric" isn’t really "associated with black culture" and is therefore what- an Oreo? An Uncle Tom? A House Negro?

Take your logic to the logical conclusion.


 
Written By: shark
URL: http://
huxley:
No, not all black churches are like Obama’s church.
Certainly not. This "black theology" business comes out of the 1960s, of course, and you could make a case that it retrieves the spirit of Marcus Garvey from the 1920s. The black protestant churches, of which MLK was a product, wouldn’t have anything to do with this Wright character.

"Black theology" is as racist as National Socialist theology; it is a logic of race. It is black nationalism, black power, and white people are the enemy.

The well here is bottomless. I disagree with Linda who implied that membership in this church does not disqualify Obama. It disqualifies him as completely as being an active member of the Klan, or a congregant at a white Christian Identity church, would disqualify a white candidate.

This man’s candidacy is over and done with, whether he or anyone else has yet realized it. And I wish most fervently that black leaders who know what we’re dealing with here would be the first to stand up and tell Obama to get out.

If they did that, and the Democrats declared an open convention with a leadership-picked slate of candidates that included, for instance, Harold Ford Jr., then we can send this Obama and his cult directly to the historians, without passing Go.
 
Written By: Martin McPhillips
URL: http://mcphillips.blogspot.com/
Warrior’s observations are on, as are Linda’s - it’s going to make people think. At least it’s going to make thinking people think.
Well, I’m thinking this does fit in well with Obama not having an American flag pin or covering his heart during the pledge. . . .

Something of a pattern here.
 
Written By: Don
URL: http://
timactual,
Good catch. I stand corrected, it seems.

Is it just me, but is this Jeremiah Wright hole just getting deeper and wider by the second for Obama? And does it seem that maybe, just maybe, his campaign oughtta stop challenging journalists’ Obama news articles and calling them liars? Especially when it can be proven otherwise?

For a campaign that seemed to know what they were doing, they sure don’t seem to know what they’re doing...
 
Written By: Warrior Needs Food Badly
URL: http://
And note that Obama has publicly and repeatedly embraced Wright’s theology
No, Obama has publicly and repeatedly embraced his Christianity, he has NEVER repeated or espoused the specific distinctive characteristics of Wright’s theology.
But the commenter contends he couldn’t have attended the 7:30am service either based on an assumed flight time of 4 hours between Chicago and Miami.

However, according to the OAG, commercial flights only take 2 hours and 50 minutes flight time, and as I recall, the Obama campaign uses a chartered jet which could cut down on even that time. So while the author of the article claiming to have seen Obama at the July 22 service didn’t specify which service, it is possible he could have attended the 7:30 service (8:30 EST) and still made the Miami speech at 1:30 EST.
Sorry if I was unclear, I said "So, ya think he flew to Chicago on the red eye, and then went to the 7:30 AM (Central time) services, and then hopped on a plane for Miami (4 hours, including the hour lost in the time zone)?"

I am aware of the roughly 3 hour flight time, but included the hour lost to the time zone change, making it 4 hours. So there is 5 hours and 20 miuntes (Obama started the speech late) total (real time) between the start of the services and the start of the speech in Miami, with 3 hours of flight time, leaving 2 hours to get to and from the respective airports. It’s 20 minutes drive time from MIA to the Convention Center, It’s about 35 minutes drive time from the TUCC to O’Hare, so that’s another hour. Sunday traffic is no problem in Miami, not too bad in Chicago, so no likelyhood of a traffic jam, but we are up to about 4 hours of the total 5 hour window. Then there’s embarcation and disembarcation as well as runway taxi time and takeoff and landing order wait was only 40 minutes on both sides.

He would have had to leave the sermon at 7:50, and even if you stretched it to the absolute ridiculous maximum, he would not have been able to attend more than hour of a 3 hour sermon, with a major disruption as he left. It defies credulity.

In my best Cousin Vinny voice, I ax yous, why would anyone disrupt church services by arriving with a Secret Service detail only to leave a few minutes later?

It is physically possible that Obama was there for a very short period of time, but it defies logic that to think that it actually happened.

And of course he would have had to fly in late to Chicago from NH to even make this few minutes of a service.
"Soft bigotry of low expectations" is the phrase that applies to this one.

Where does this line lead? Am I to assume that a black person who "avoided this rhetoric" isn’t really "associated with black culture" and is therefore what- an Oreo? An Uncle Tom? A House Negro?
Actually hard bigotry of white expectations would apply. The black experience in America has an element of anger to it, and that anger is expressed. The meme here suggests that not only is a black person who expresses this anger inelegible to lead, but a black person who even hears anger expressed and does not immediately repudiate any such expressions of anger, is ineligible to lead. This of course would not apply to black people who were divorced from black culture, meaning not that these individuals would be "Uncle Tom’s", they simply would not be excluded by association with black culture.

Has Obama EVER expressed the attitudes that people are upset about, because if he has not, he really is being castigated for simply being black and hearing what black people hear.

I say good for him for rising above that rhetoric, and bad for you not allowing him that.
Well, I’m thinking this does fit in well with Obama not having an American flag pin or covering his heart during the pledge. . .
So now a lapel pin is a REQUIREMENT for loving your county?

Obamam DOES cover his heart with his hand during the Pledge of Allegiance, he does not during the National Anthem, as he was taught, as I was taught, as most people were taught. You remove your hat (if wearing one) and stand at attention.

I guess next someone is going to say "Once a Muslim always a Muslim", even though Obama was never a Muslim.

It’s funny, I was not a big Obama fan, but as I see this disgusting witch hunt unfold, I am certainly opposed to those conducting the witch hunt.

 
Written By: Captin Sarcastic
URL: http://
No, Obama has publicly and repeatedly embraced his Christianity, he has NEVER repeated or espoused the specific distinctive characteristics of Wright’s theology.
Obama says that Wright showed him the way to Jesus. Go read Spengler’s explanation (link above in this thread) of what that means in Wright’s church.

If Obama sat in Wright’s church for twenty years, he was imbibing Wright’s racist version of the Christian religion. Otherwise he would have gotten out of there.

Plus, he brings his daughters to that church. No further test of his sensibility vis a vis Wright needs to be made.
 
Written By: Martin McPhillips
URL: http://mcphillips.blogspot.com/
Martin:
I disagree with Linda who implied that membership in this church does not disqualify Obama.
It disqualifies him from my support (as does much else in his politics), but not from mounting a campaign, running in the primaries or, should his party still prove willing, from challenging McCain in the big race. At least I’m not aware of any way (or reason) to force the guy out.

I just don’t want him as president and I don’t think a majority of voters will this fall. At this point, I’m having trouble believing that a sufficient number of superdelegates will back his nomination, although they are Democrats, so who knows?

But if he gets through August, then come November, he’s going to lose very big time, in large measure because of his embrace of Wright and Wright’s ministry, however dorky and naiive that embrace may have been. But losing because of your church affiliation is not the same thing as being disqualified for that reason.
 
Written By: Linda Morgan
URL: http://
So Obama couldn’t attend a sermon by a black racist because he was speaking to a group of latino racists?
 
Written By: meh
URL: http://
Actually hard bigotry of white expectations would apply. The black experience in America has an element of anger to it, and that anger is expressed. The meme here suggests that not only is a black person who expresses this anger inelegible to lead but a black person who even hears anger expressed and does not immediately repudiate any such expressions of anger, is ineligible to lead. This of course would not apply to black people who were divorced from black culture, meaning not that these individuals would be "Uncle Tom’s", they simply would not be excluded by association with black culture.

Has Obama EVER expressed the attitudes that people are upset about, because if he has not, he really is being castigated for simply being black and hearing what black people hear.

I say good for him for rising above that rhetoric, and bad for you not allowing him that.
That’s a nice piece of intellectual jiu-jitsu there, but I don’t think it is bigotry to say that someone who espouses the crap Wright does IS unfit to lead, and that anyone who willingly associates with it for 20 years etc. deserves to have his judgement called into serious question. I call YOUR judgement into question, with the slick way you try to pass off some of these remarks as "justified anger"

I find it hilarious that you quite wittingly just endorsed the "Angry Black" sterotype here.

 
Written By: shark
URL: http://
And of course he would have had to fly in late to Chicago from NH to even make this few minutes of a service.
NOOOOOOOO! He was in NH on Thursday and Friday — NOT Saturday.
 
Written By: JWG
URL: http://
How is it the Democratic leadership has been so blindsided here? Worse yet, the non-Clinton wing embraced Obama.

It’s not like ABC hired some superduper detective to go snooping into Obama’s life to get this stuff. ABC just bought Wright’s sermons from Trinity Church, and, you know, listened to them.

The rest of us were content to visit the church website and see that the congregation declared itself as black first and Christian second, and included a lot of anti-American guff, and we were able to figure it out.

Then there is the matter of Obama’s extremely short, thin resume, which should have been another obvious clue.

I know everyone has their own worldview and agenda, but it should have been obvious to professionals how unsuitable Obama was. Then again, a lot of somewhat bright people fell for Obama. Ann Althouse, a centrist blogger, usually pretty intelligent and often mistaken for a raving conservative by some of her commenters—came out for Obama. I don’t get it.

 
Written By: huxley
URL: http://
So Obama couldn’t attend a sermon by a black racist because he was speaking to a group of latino racists?
The NCLR Annual Conference is also known for its high quality of distinguished speakers. Among this year’s keynote speakers are Governor Charlie Crist (R-FL), Senator Barak Obama (D-IL), Senator Hillary Clinton (D-NY) and H. Lee Scott, Jr., President and CEO of Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. Past keynote speakers have included such dignitaries as President George H.W. Bush; Mexico President Vincente Fox; Vice President Al Gore; Deputy Chief of Staff Karl Rove; Senator John McCain (R-AZ); Attorney General Janet Reno; Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger (R-CA); and President Bill Clinton.

I met Jeb Bush at the NCLR when he was running for Governor of Florida.

They lean Republican.



 
Written By: Captin Sarcastic
URL: http://
For a moment step back and consider the good chance that he could not have made the church at 7:30 - gotten on a plane, flown to Miami and made the meeting with, um, LA RAZA (I don’t want to go into that, though a lot of politicians meet with these people...the literal translation doesn’t mean ’NASCAR followers’) in Miami.

Okay, let’s say he wasn’t there.

Now, let’s start talking about the other sermons he was almost certainly there for.

It’s beginning to look really crappy Cap. And I understand Don’s point, because those were almost exactly the same thoughts that began to go through my mind. Flag pin/anthem/etc began to show a pattern (sometimes thinking people think too much maybe, but there it is).

Re the anthem - when you don’t have a hat - and a great many many people don’t (and does Obama regularly? I don’t know, I only see photos of him speaking when I wouldn’t expect he’d be wearing a hat) and when you don’t wear a hat, or a uniform, for the anthem most people place their hands over their hearts.
Yet, you know, that’s a little thing to me, I mean at least he STANDS for the anthem, the rest I could excuse as a difference in the flag/anthem etiquette he learned. And don’t get me started on the pledge, I think the founders would be aghast that we mindlessly mumble that on such a constant basis in the schools, but I did it anyway and still do it, though it means something to me NOW.

Still as Ricky Ricardo would say "he’s got some splaining to do".
 
Written By: looker
URL: http://
Martin;
I don’t agree with that at all, Eric. I don’t think that Obama joined that church to fight off a Muslim identity
I don’t, either. But the point I’m making is that he most certainly went to great lengths to identiffy himself as being a member there... identifying Wright as a moral leader, and so on. It’s that he’s going to ahve problems backing away from now, at least, if someone’s actually watching and making noise about what they see.
Obama apparently lacked the common sense and the judgement to eventually find another church, you know, one where the pastor wasn’t horsewhipping his congregation with black racism and black separatism
It goes deeper, in my view, Martin. One does not stay in such an environment without signing on to it’s beliefs... ones which would seem to explain very well a lot of the sludge comming out of his wife’s mouth, for example, and would also tend to explain some of what Obama himself has said. Now, granted that support, that beleif is less than fully open for inspection.

A while ago, when I posted the link between Obama and Ayers... what, a few weeks ago, now.. I suggested...
The damage that is inflicted on Obama by this association is decidedly not that he is stupid enough to directly support terrorism, but that he is willing to suborn the radical leftist politics which lead to it. This in fact is the elephant in the room, where Democrats are concerned. Their linkages to radicals. Radicals who say things like:
“Kill all the rich people. Break up their cars and apartments. Bring the revolution home, kill your parents, that’s where it’s really at,” Ayers was widely quoted as saying at the time (though he told the Times he couldn’t remember if he said it).
Certainly there’s not much a leap between what Ayers said in the quote and what Wright was saying on the tapes, except Wright had a stain of racism in addition to the hatred of anyone making dime one more than he. INdeed, I think it impossible not to draw the parallel between thew two views.

And, as in the Ayers case, he’s willing not only to put up with Wright and his nonsense, but he’s willing to quietly foster those politics.

Alas, that the only thing either of them will get called on is the overt racism, even though the whole thing is poisonous.

 
Written By: Bithead
URL: http://bitsblog.florack.us
That’s a nice piece of intellectual jiu-jitsu there, but I don’t think it is bigotry to say that someone who espouses the crap Wright does IS unfit to lead
I agree
and that anyone who willingly associates with it for 20 years etc. deserves to have his judgement called into serious question.
I disagree.

This is representative of black Christianity, BUT, and it is a huge but, it is not the defining characteristic of black Christianity, just an element, and a minor element at that. You are trying to argue that the rare angry comments define the church, and that is far from the truth. The overwhleming message is a message of love, hope, perserverence, and faith. You are cherry picking moments of anger and trying to paint the entire church as this is the only message every delivered.
I call YOUR judgement into question, with the slick way you try to pass off some of these remarks as "justified anger"
Blacks in America are justified in expressing anger, and this anger has it’s place. But blacks also express hope and other positive emotional responses to America’s direction.

I believe that the difference between you and I is one of dimension. I see Wright’s comments in the context of his larger career, and I see the impact of those comments on Obama reflected in Obama’s lifelong commentary, where he clearly contradicts the angry messages and accepts the messages of love and hope. I have read one of Obama’s books, and he addresses these issues, and he has clearly not accepted the angry messages. You see this as one dimensional, making Wright’s angry comments the only relevant comments he has ever made, and charging Obama with only anger and ignoring everything Obama has ever said, and judging him as if not only anger is all he ever heard, but that he agrees with the anger.
I find it hilarious that you quite wittingly just endorsed the "Angry Black" sterotype here.
Again, dimension and context. When I acknowledge that this anger can be justified, I do not make this as an acknowledgment that the stereotype of blacks that are nothing but angry is accurate.

You dehumanize blacks by suggesting that any one emotion must define them.

Wright’s sermons showed that he is both hopeful AND angry, Obama has dispensed with the anger and seized the hope.

What I see as a distintion between us is that I believe Obama’s lifelong stated positions on these topics, but you want to argue that he has been outright lying all this time and his positions are instead identical to Wrights.

By that logic, I could say that no actually believes their own publically stated positions, and with no evidence at all from their own words of actions, convict them of having beliefs simply because they heard those beleifs expressed.

This is the worst kind of smearing through guilt by association.

I ask again...

Has Obama EVER expressed the attitudes that people are upset about, because if he has not, he really is being castigated for simply being black and hearing what black people hear.

I say good for him for rising above that rhetoric, and bad for you not allowing him that.

 
Written By: Captin Sarcastic
URL: http://
I say good for him for rising above that rhetoric, and bad for you not allowing him that.
Lets say that circumstances lead me to believe that he’s not so much "rising above the rhetoric" than trying to have it both ways....
 
Written By: shark
URL: http://
Oh good grief. Everyone, let’s stop falling CS’s subterfuge of plane flights and was Obama there or not there and so forth, because it’s a peripheral argument. Again, as I stated previously, it doesn’t matter if Obama was there for any of that hateful sermons given by Wright. He’s been a member over 22 years, and if in 22 years he can’t discern that man’s nature and the nature of that church, then in my book he’s not fit to lead a precinct dog catcher commission, let alone be President.

CS do you really want to double down on the "black anger" argument? Really? Because sorry, it’s one thing to be angry, but completely another to be a racist and a hater. Toss in the paranoid rantings that AIDS was created by America, and that we’re responsible for 9/11, and you’ve got the complete salad of crazy.
This is representative of black Christianity, BUT, and it is a huge but, it is not the defining characteristic of black Christianity, just an element, and a minor element at that. You are trying to argue that the rare angry comments define the church, and that is far from the truth. The overwhleming message is a message of love, hope, perserverence, and faith. You are cherry picking moments of anger and trying to paint the entire church as this is the only message every delivered.
Don’t you dare try and say that this is even representative of black Christianity, because those of us that do go to church know that lie for what it is. If I drive to south Dallas and go to TD Jakes church, there is where I’ll find the peace and love and joy and hope expressed in church by a black pastor and mostly black congregation. They trash puked up by Wright’s church may or may not representative of what they preach, but they put that cr@p on DVD’s for sale, and post much of that same on their website! I’ll bet a dollar to a dime I’d be hard pressed to find that as representative of TD Jakes church, and those like his.
I ask again...

Has Obama EVER expressed the attitudes that people are upset about, because if he has not, he really is being castigated for simply being black and hearing what black people hear.

I say good for him for rising above that rhetoric, and bad for you not allowing him that.
You know what, let’s ask this question: what exactly has Obama said? Not much, other than America is screwed up, and he’ll bring "hope" and "change". America isn’t screwed up - it’s actully the greatest country in the world to live in, warts and all. But you can’t tell that from what little he purposely avoids saying. So we look at those around him. Who does he surround himself with? A blatantly racist and paranoid pastor. A wife a that is only now proud of America, a "mean" country. He’s come clean - he says - about Rezko, a typical Chicago fixer in the most corrupt local political machine in the country.

It’s hard to believe that he’s starting to make Hillary look refreshingly honest. So you keep on carrying that water for him, and tell us that his anger is justified. I’ll just listen to his racist preacher and his angry wife, and his message that America isn’t good, but he’ll bring "hope" and "change", and I’ll go pull the lever for anyone but him. Even frickin’ Hillary.
 
Written By: Warrior Needs Food Badly
URL: http://
Lets say that circumstances lead me to believe that he’s not so much "rising above the rhetoric" than trying to have it both ways....
Really, so please, point me to a quote where Obama says any of these things?

Obama is clearly trying to have it only one way, and since his own lifetime of rhetoric is unassailable, you are finding the closest person to him who’s rhetoric is assailable, and assigning that rhetoric to Obama.

It is not bad judgement to listen to someone, even for long periods of time, if that person has something important to say, and if they also say things you disagree with, it does eliminate the good.

Judgement is not only choosing not listen to someone, but also listening to them but separating the wheat from the chaff.

This whole meme is so completely (and exclusively) smear politics that it is nauseating.





 
Written By: Captin Sarcastic
URL: http://
Really, so please, point me to a quote where Obama says any of these things?
Obama’s one talent is that he doesn’t say anything. Well, except "Hope" and "change" and "hope and change" and "change and hope"

What I haven’t heard is a convincing denunciation of the racist Rev....or a convincing explaination of just how he amazingly never noticed him either.
Obama is clearly trying to have it only one way, and since his own lifetime of rhetoric is unassailable, you are finding the closest person to him who’s rhetoric is assailable, and assigning that rhetoric to Obama.
YAWN. Your opinion. You’re entitled to it, but I don’t have to agree with it.
It is not bad judgement to listen to someone, even for long periods of time, if that person has something important to say, and if they also say things you disagree with, it does eliminate the good.
Listen, feel free to go on carrying water for Obama. The damage is done/being done to him and at the end of the day, that’s a good thing.
Judgement is not only choosing not listen to someone, but also listening to them but separating the wheat from the chaff.
And I just saved this quote, lets just see what you say next time a member of the GOP is on the hotseat.
This whole meme is so completely (and exclusively) smear politics that it is nauseating
Yeah, ain’t it great?
 
Written By: shark
URL: http://
From new liberal tool Captin Sarcastic (who seems to be replacing old liberal tool mkultra):
This whole meme is so completely (and exclusively) smear politics that it is nauseating.
Bullcr@p. It’s an extraordinarily clarifying look deep into Obama the man, and possible future President. I’d like to thank those that did the real work on finally crystallizing all this for me and other voters like me.

I now recognize this shallow, arrogant liberal with judgement so poor he makes my 8 year old nephew look wise by comparison, and will vote without fear for whomever runs against him. Even John McCain. And breathe a sigh of relief in doing so.
 
Written By: Warrior Needs Food Badly
URL: http://
Well, at any rate I would say his theme of unity and reconciliation is is the crapper.
 
Written By: timactual
URL: http://
Sarcastic — We all face tests in life, and those who wish to be president more so. We are judged by what we do and by what we don’t do.

The rock bottom responsibility of a president is to protect and defend America. Obama did not rise to the defense of America when it was attacked at his church. Most voters will judge him poorly for that. Maybe you won’t, but I and many others will.

Obama acknowledges the severity of the charge when he concedes that he would have quit the church had he known. But few people believe that, given Obama’s close relationship with Wright and his active participation for 20 years, that he didn’t know about his mentor’s wild, vicious rhetoric.

Again, the presidency is the highest privilege and a supreme trust. It’s up to Obama to prove his worthinesss. He flunked this test twice: by not acting in the past and by trying to weasel out of responsibility now.
 
Written By: huxley
URL: http://
Glide Memorial Church a nationally known, predominantly black church in San Francisco. Its politics are, of course, progressive, but they are not Afrocentric or extremist.
Really, that might come as news to the Pastor at Glide, Rev. Donald Guest, a 59-year-old pastor from Chicago. The fiery and often activist who shouts about racial injust (by whom?)?
Guest, who is perfectly charming in one-on-one conversation, admits that he’s probably a poor choice to preach the Summer of Love. He often mentions his ’60s membership in the radical Student Nonviolent Coordinating Committee, whose chairman was H. Rap Brown in 1967. It was Brown, later the justice minister of the Black Panthers, who famously said, "Violence is as American as cherry pie."
Righteous anger has a place. Not in the Presidential race, mind you, but it is not out of place in the pulpit of a Presidential candidates church.

The Bible clarifies the difference between righteous and sinful anger, and the contrast between these two angers is important to understand. The Bible distinguishes righteous anger as anger on behalf of others.

Wright expressed his righteous anger in a manner that Americans find repugnant, but it is still righteous anger. He is expressing his religious opinion that until America changes what he considers to be acting like God, it should be damned by God. Not an opinion that I agree with, but I do not come from that perspective where my main focus in life is repression and oppression.

America in my eyes is a great liberator, but from the black perspective, consider the Tuskegee Airmen, who participated in liberating others and came home to Jim Crow laws.

The AIDS conspiracy is over the top in my eyes, but I imagine it’s different from the perspective of someone who was aware of the Tuskegee Experiment, where black men where diagnosed with syphilis and their diagnosis and treatment was withheld so the full extent of the effects of syphilis could be studied as they autopsied their dead bodeis. The experiment continued for 40 years until a whistleblower pulled the plug.

These are the experiences that inform Wright’s opinions. Jeremiah Wright was born in 1941, Barack Obama was born in 1961. Wright saw the battles and ugliness of the civil rights movement, Obama enjoyed the improvements of that movement.

Wright sees continued repression and it evokes all that came before it. Obama see’s hope and opportunity because for him, all that came before it history, not something he lived through.

But Wright is one of the fathers of black theology, and his messages, including righteous anger over oppression by white men, are a part of the black religious experience for a great many black men and women. The good news, unless this meme gets out of hand, is that the righteous anger is not followed with suggestions of violence, revolution, or uprisings, but of acting within the system to affect change.

Is anyone really going to argue that repression and/or the effects of repression against black people in America has ended?

This whole narrative reminds me of an old Chevy Chase Skit on Saturday Night Live where he says, "I don’t judge a man according to the color of his skin, I judge him according to the size of his nostrils".

In this case, it’s not being black that you want to say out loud to discriminate against Obama, but rather his association with black culture.

You’re fine with a black President, just not one that has actually been a part of part of black culture.

I am hoping that the backlash on this is no more than some ugly words.

The nerve of you people to blame your use of this tactic on Obama.

The audacity of dope.











 
Written By: Captin Sarcastic
URL: http://
I’d like to thank those that did the real work on finally crystallizing all this for me and other voters like me.
Yeah, all nice and crystallized for you eh?

You were on the fence about whether to vote for Obama?

So it wasn’t you that said:
As a reasonable conservolibertian guy that’s fascinated by politics, I’m voting Hillary. I know that the GOP nomination is set (no matter what the Huckafreak thinks), I want my vote to count, and I really, really want a brokered Democratic convention. It should be extraordinary political theatre.

As for the lovely Mrs. Allison’s disgust with the GOP - and I share most of it - let me paraphrase two of the finer American political thinkers of our time, Trey Parker and Matt Stone: while I may or may not always support and vote for the Republicans*, I can never ever support or vote for the Democrats*.

*In the primaries
Yeah, this is just about helping you make a decision, it has nothing to do with trying to destroy a man using his black cultural background for his crime of... being a Democrat.

 
Written By: Captin Sarcastic
URL: http://
This whole meme is so completely (and exclusively) smear politics that it is nauseating.
Since his whole shtick is froth, and no substance, did you expect that anything more substantial was required to defeat him?

Still, the arguments against him on this are far stronger than the arguments for him. Make no mistake... the Anti-American stuff isn’t going to sell.

 
Written By: Bithead
URL: http://bitsblog.florack.us
Has Obama EVER expressed the attitudes that people are upset about, because if he has not, he really is being castigated for simply being black and hearing what black people hear.
No, he’s being castigated for agreeing with it.
THe problem for Obama is that his campaign is so light on specifics, people naturally tend to question what is under all the froth. And the only evidence they have to work with just now as to what is underneath all that light and airy crap, is Obama swearing fealty to Wright.
 
Written By: Bithead
URL: http://bitsblog.florack.us
No, he’s being castigated for agreeing with it.
Has he ever expressed agreement with it?

Show me the Youtube, show me the text of the speech, interview, comments?

Show me that Obama agrees with it, obviously ignoring Obama’s explicit disagreement since the very first question on this topic was asked.
Since his whole shtick is froth, and no substance, did you expect that anything more substantial was required to defeat him?
That’s nonsense, every Presidential candidate since Dukakis was conceptual and not concrete. Every candidate in the field today is making sweeping generalities designed to win, none has more susbstance than the other. And I don’t know who would make the best President, it might well be John McCain, but spare me the nonsense of a lack of substance.

And by the way, though I am disgusted that this particular group has sunk so low, I do not expect this smear to succeed. We’ll find out soon enough, but expect that this episode will backfire on Obama’s opponents and he will be stronger two weeks from now that he was two weeks ago.

Perhaps I have too much faith in the American people, but I believe that they can see through this for what it is.
 
Written By: Captin Sarcastic
URL: http://
[Gasp] Oh no, Captin Sarcastic is using my own words against me! What shall I ever do?!

.......Wait, um, how is this bad again?

1) I’m fascinated by the political drama - True
2) I did vote for Hillary (in Texas) to continue the political drama - True
3) I do want a brokered Dem convention (now more than ever) - True
4) It should be fascinating political theatre (esp now) - True
5) I do have vast amounts of disgust for the Republicans, as does Mrs Allison* - True
6) I fully agree with Stone and Parker - I will not vote for a Democrat any time the forseeable future - True (although I did vote for Hillary, but that was strategic...)
7) And I wasn’t sure about voting for McCain (until this stuff about Obama’s racist pastor came out) - Not sure, but probably true

See Captin, McCain - at best - was my third choice for President, and more along the lines of fourth. When he secured the nomination, it forced three choices: vote McCain (bleh), vote Democrat (oh heck no), or not vote (meh). And this was before these revalations about Obama turned up. If Hillary gained the nomination, then I’m voting for McCain. If Obama gained it - at the time, yeah, I’m still probably voting McCain, but he (McCain) would have a lot to do with it.

Now, there is no chance on this earth that I won’t vote for McCain. He infuriates me on so many levels it annoys me to think about my differences with him. Yet Obama has now proven himself infinitely worse. (I had already determined that about Billary years ago.) When the best thing you can say is about him is he has the worst judgement of any candidate in in my 25+ years of voting, then this is no man I want near the Oval Office.

I see him as crooked, arrogant, and venal. He associated with an obvious political fixer in Rezko. [Oh, but that was "bad judgement".]
He’s the most liberal Senator, as rated by National Journal. [Disqualifier right there for me.]
He’s weaselly anti-war. [Snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. Unless he decides to stay in Iraq for a full first term. Hey, with his flip-flops, who knows.]
His wife in my view doesn’t like America because we’re "mean" - her own words - and yet would be first lady.
His mentor, counsellor, spiritual advisor is an avid paranoid racist anti-American kook that Obama has closely associated with for 22 years. [And yet he says he never heard it. BS.]

Yet here you are trying to justify the hate Wright spews, saying it’s "justified", and then you try to turn it around me. It’s not a "Democrat-thing" to me in this case Captin, it’s purely an "Obama-thing". And at no point did you answer the charge that it is not about black churchs in general, because you know it’s not. It’s "Wright’s-church-thing".

Are you and your ilk so desparate in your need to fill the Presidency with a Democrat that you would put a man like this in power?
Even now I would take Hillary...ach, Hillary, over Obama. I don’t want a man that associates with racists such as Wright near the levers of power.

Truly, while I almost never agreed with you, I could at least read your posts and consider much of it honestly. I rejected it mostly, but I read it honestly.

Now you just make me sad.
 
Written By: Warrior Needs Food Badly
URL: http://
Note to those who read the above post I forgot to reference who Mrs. Allison was. She’s a writer at The Dallas Morning News, and wife to Wick Allison, editor of D Magazine. The blog that Captin pulled my quote from was either Frontburner, D Mags blog, or possibly the Dallas Observer blog, Unfair Park.

Both fine blogs - and fine reads - in general.
 
Written By: Warrior Needs Food Badly
URL: http://
The nerve of you people to blame your use of this tactic on Obama.
HAHAHAHA! I love it.

Welcome to "Tough Sh*tville", population YOU.

Everyone on the right who has ever been castigated as a racist (or sexist or whatever) in the name of leftist identity politics says hello!


To quote Steyn: "It is enjoyable to watch previously expert wielders of identity-politics hand-grenades blow their own fingers off"

:)
 
Written By: shark
URL: http://
"Is anyone really going to argue that repression and/or the effects of repression against black people in America has ended?"

You have maybe some examples of this repression?

"expressing his religious opinion that until America changes what he considers to be acting like God,..."

It is precisely what he considers that is at issue.
 
Written By: timactual
URL: http://
You have maybe some examples of this repression?
A study at the University of Chicago showed that job applicants with “black sounding” names — such as Tyrone or Tamika — are twice as likely not to hear back as applicants with “white sounding” names. In addition, young blacks are 48 times more likely than whites to be sent to prison on drug charges, despite similar rates of use. This is the racist discrimination that our society propagates, and all the personal responsibility in the world will not fix it.


Chicago Study...
The authors find that applicants with white-sounding names are 50 percent more likely to get called for an initial interview than applicants with African-American-sounding names. Applicants with white names need to send about 10 resumes to get one callback, whereas applicants with African-American names need to send about 15 resumes to achieve the same result.

In addition, race greatly affects how much applicants benefit from having more experience and credentials. White job applicants with higher-quality resumes received 30 percent more callbacks than whites with lower-quality resumes. Having a higher-quality resume has a much smaller impact on African-American applicants, who experienced only 9 percent more callbacks for the same improvement in their credentials. This disparity suggests that in the current state of the labor market, African-Americans may not have strong individual incentives to build better resumes.

"For us, the most surprising and disheartening result is seeing that applicants with African-American names were not rewarded for having better resumes," says Bertrand.


Statistically, the authors found that discrimination levels were consistent across all the occupations and industries covered in the experiment. Even federal contractors (for whom affirmative action is better enforced) and companies that explicitly state that they are an "Equal Opportunity Employer" did not discriminate less.



I know, we should tell people not to give their kids black names!!!

This is why I can’t work with conservatives. I agree that the welfare system and a lot of the rhetoric has not been productive in it’s intended goal of reversing the effects of institutional racism. I agree that major changes were needed in how welfare was handled. Where you lost me was the pretense that none of these effects of institutional racism actually exist, they are all matters of individual repsonsibility and society has no responsibility whatsoever for what it has done to these people. I believe in attempting to reverse the effects of repression in a fiscally responisble manner that only encourages productivity and education always promotes individual responsibility, but doing nothing will not solve the problem.

A person is responsible for their actions.

A society is responsible is for it’s actions.

Racism isn’t over, not by a long shot.


 
Written By: Captin Sarcastic
URL: http://
So a black man or woman with a "black" name is less likely to get a job than a black woman or man with a "white-sounding" name. Ok, I can kinda see that being true. I don’t agree with it, but that’s what it is.
This is why I can’t work with conservatives.
And because of this study, you blame conservatives?

This is why you, and liberals like you, don’t deserve an iota of respect. People like you have proven what you stand for over the last couple of weeks. Thanks for continuing to prove it with that little eight word statement.
 
Written By: Warrior Needs Food Badly
URL: http://
And because of this study, you blame conservatives?
First, you mischaracterize my comments, no, I do not say that I cannot work with conservatives because of this study, I said...
I agree that the welfare system and a lot of the rhetoric has not been productive in it’s intended goal of reversing the effects of institutional racism. I agree that major changes were needed in how welfare was handled. Where you lost me was the pretense that none of these effects of institutional racism actually exist, they are all matters of individual repsonsibility and society has no responsibility whatsoever for what it has done to these people. I believe in attempting to reverse the effects of repression in a fiscally responisble manner that only encourages productivity and education always promotes individual responsibility, but doing nothing will not solve the problem.


You see it is not that conservatives believe in personal responsibility that bothers me, I agree with conservatives on that.

It’s not the argument that welfare was counter-productive, I agree with conservatives on that.

It is that they think there isn’t a problem.

When I called myself a conservative, my view was that these were problems, but that liberals had no idea how to solve them. I believed conservatives had better ideas onhow to solve them. I came to learn that conservatives had no interest in solving these problems and were happy to pretend that is no problem, and any bad fortune that people suffered was 100% there own doing. and they denied that the repression of racism even exists.

When I say that repression exists, I get this...
You have maybe some examples of this repression?
Can you imagine someone not being aware of repression and racism in America, seriously? But that’s what he asked, as if he thinks it doesn’t exist.

THAT’s why I can’t work. Kind of hard to fix a problem working with someone who pretends there isn’t one.
So a black man or woman with a "black" name is less likely to get a job than a black woman or man with a "white-sounding" name. Ok, I can kinda see that being true. I don’t agree with it, but that’s what it is.
What is it? It’s racism. It’s not enough it’s harder for black people to get a good education, when they do excel, they are still passed over for white people with less qualification. You complain about reverse discrimination, but ignore discrimination in the first place.

So after you mischaracterize my statement, and on the basis of that mischaracterization, you state...
This is why you, and liberals like you, don’t deserve an iota of respect. People like you have proven what you stand for over the last couple of weeks. Thanks for continuing to prove it with that little eight word statement.
I still don’t think liberals have the right ideas, but they at least recognize there is a problem. I worry about their attempts to solve problems, but it’s a start.

As for what I stand for, I stand for holding people responsible for their own words and actions. I also believe in not convicting people for the words and actions of others, especially when those offensive words were the exception and a teaching of love and community work were the rule.

I am not 100% sure why I am so steamed about this, I am not a big Obama supporter, and may even cast my vote for McCain (I supported him in 2000). The only candidate I have ruled out is Hillary, not because I think she is so terrible, but because I do not want to go through the nastiness of the 90’s again.

Ronald Reagan was a great President, but it had little to do with his policies. Reagan gained the trust, and raised the confidence of people who were his ideological opposites, and he made America better for it. Had someone done this to Reagan, it would have been a tragedy for this country, and I believe that literally.

Obama may not be anything special, but then again he may, and I would really like to see this play out to the general without this kind of complete smear campaign.

Democrats, and liberals, gave Reagan a chance. Yeah, there were people who despised him from the beginning, but that was a minority. Too bad we have come to this, because I really don’t think a Reagan could even make it through the primaries the way we are now.

Place blame where you want, I don’t care, I am talking about the here and now, and here and now, you are attempting to destroy something with no regard for what it could be, just a disdain for the D in front of his name.

Further, disqualifying a black man for belonging to a church that preaches black liberation theology is tantamount to saying that blacks need not apply, it is a very prevelant teaching among black Americans. There is an element of anger to it, but it primarily about love and overcoming adversity, not about being separate or superior.

I think I am done with this subject, it will play out how it plays out, and perhaps I’ll discuss the post mortem on this meme and we’ll see what the damage to our nation is, or, we may learn that Obama is more resilient that you imagine, and he could recover from this with more support than ever.

I have never participated in anything like this. When I don’t like someone, I don’t liek for the reason they shouldn’t be liked, not some guilt by association tripe like this. That others have done it may make you feel better about it, I find it despicable.

We’ll see
 
Written By: Captin sarcastic
URL: http://
"A study at the University of Chicago showed that job applicants with “black sounding” names — such as Tyrone or Tamika — are twice as likely not to hear back as applicants with “white sounding” names."

Names make a difference for whites, too.

But how about Asian names or Hispanic names or some-thing else names? How about middle eastern sounding names?

How about white trailer-trash names? Suppose "JoeBob" is a liability? Lord knows there’s no doubt that JoeBob is caucasian.

What do names tell prospective employers? I worked (briefly) for a man whose wife went through the job applications and threw all the male names in the trash. She was a lawyer.

My husband’s name has been an incredible boon. His first name actually counts as a "black" name... Freeman. His last name is French but also commonly Hispanic... Pascal. His name is such that when we PCS’d to Clark AB, our car got held up in Manila while they double checked that he wasn’t Filipino.

So anyhow... my white husband’s Black-Hispanic-Filipino sounding name has made him memorable, particularly to those in his professional field. Despite one instance where he got removed from a college class list because the prof thought his full name wasn’t real... it’s served him well. It stands out on a resume for computer work.

The only real PITA factor is that half the population assumes that Pascal is his first name and Freeman is his last name. I should ask him if anyone has ever actually expressed surprise that "Mr. Freeman" is white.
 
Written By: Synova
URL: http://synova.blogspot.com
Hey Captin,

Here’s the problem with that frickin’ study you quoted. It’s in Chicago. As in Chicago, Illinois land of the biggest nest of corrupt Democrats in the country. [As proven by Obama and his little buddy...no, wait, his "I hardly knew him" aquaintance Rezko] Voted into office by - Oh my goodness, can you believe - other Democrats! So I must ask" What conservatives?! Id bet that at best, at best, you have 10-15% "conservatives" in Chicago. Yet I guess they’re all so rich that they hire and fire everyone with a "black" name. They just deign to allow the city to be run by their Democratic puppets.

Take the splinter out of your own eye before you tell me about the log in yours.
 
Written By: Warrior Needs Food Badly
URL: http://
Well heck.
Take the splinter out of your own eye before you tell me about the log in mine. Dangit. It would help if I got my bible quotes right...
 
Written By: Warrior Needs Food Badly
URL: http://


"In addition, young blacks are 48 times more likely than whites to be sent to prison on drug charges"

Oh, please.

"This is why I can’t work with conservatives."

Because, of course, all conservatives are racists and bigots motivated by greed and hatred, etc.
Yep, no bias here.

"I came to learn that conservatives had no interest in solving these problems and were happy to pretend that is no problem, and any bad fortune that people suffered was 100% there own doing. and they denied that the repression of racism even exists"

Do you actually know what conservatism is?

I am demoting you to Lieutenant. Perhaps I will demote you further, to Professor of Political Science.
 
Written By: timactual
URL: http://
"This whole meme is so completely (and exclusively) smear politics that it is nauseating."
Oh, yeah? And denouncing white people — just like thatisn’t?

You are a disgusting fool.
 
Written By: Billy Beck
URL: http://www.two—four.net/weblog.php
"Can you imagine someone not being aware of repression and racism in America, seriously? But that’s what he asked, as if he thinks it doesn’t exist."

Wrong again, professor.


"Definitions of repression on the Web:

a state of forcible subjugation; "the long repression of Christian sects" "

http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&defl=en&q=define:repression&sa=X&oi=glossary_definition&ct=title

Now that you have given an example of possible discrimination, care to try again?
Got any examples of repression?


"A society is responsible is for it’s actions."

But it is not responsible for an individual’s actions, or even a group’s actions.


"Racism isn’t over, not by a long shot."

Who said it was?
 
Written By: timactual
URL: http://
Now that you have given an example of possible discrimination, care to try again?
Got any examples of repression?
Repression does not require force, it is pushing something down, though my example does indeed include the use of force of the legal system which applies unequal punishment for equal crimes where the difference is race, and oppression is weighing something down, both of these apply when widespread racism is present.

Does it not push someone down when they can’t get a job because of their color?

Does it not weigh someone down when a better resume gets them a lesser job because of their color?

Racism, when committed by a person, is prejudice or discrimination, when committed by a society, it is repression or oppression, when commited under law, it is institutional repression.



 
Written By: Captin sarcastic
URL: http://
"Does it not push someone down when they can’t get a job because of their color?"
No more than it "push[es] someone down" when forced to admit a person because of their color.
"Does it not weigh someone down when a better resume gets them a lesser job because of their color?"
It sure does, and it happens to all colors now. Some progress.

If you are ever able to analyze this stuff at the proper metaphysical level (individual human beings), you might actually start making sense of it. When you say ridiculous things like "commited by a society", you’re out of the pool, kid. Hit the showers.
 
Written By: Billy Beck
URL: http://www.two—four.net/weblog.php
"Repression does not require force,"

It does if you speak standard English. Perhaps, though, you are speaking Ebonics.

"applies unequal punishment for equal crimes"

Your example is laughable. You have nowhere shown that they were equal crimes done under equal mitigating or aggravating circumstances. I seem to recall that this very myth was destroyed some time ago on this site.
 
Written By: timactual
URL: http://
On March 14, 2008 (during CNN Anderson Cooper 360 interview: http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0803/14/acd.01.html ):

Obama: "I have to confess that those are not statements that I ever heard when I was sitting in the pews at this church."

On March 18, 2008 (in his highly touted Philadelphia "race" speech):

Obama: "Did I ever hear him make remarks that could be considered controversial while I sat in church? Yes."

Oops, what did you say, honest Barack?


This is our best hope, the "once-in-a-lifetime leader" (if you can believe Bill Richardson’s fawning, servile obeisance to his new emperor).


Someone needs to juxtapose these two video clips and put it up on YouTube. Any taker?
 
Written By: GeorgePS
URL: http://the-unreadiness-of-barack-obama.blogspot.com

 
Add Your Comment
  NOTICE: While we don't wish to censor your thoughts, we do blacklist certain terms of profanity or obscenity. This is not to muzzle you, but to ensure that the blog remains work-safe for our readers. If you wish to use profanity, simply insert asterisks (*) where the vowels usually go. Your meaning will still be clear, but our readers will be able to view the blog without worrying that content monitoring will get them in trouble when reading it.
Comments for this entry are closed.
Name:
Email:
URL:
HTML Tools:
Bold Italic Blockquote Hyperlink
Comment:
   
 
Vicious Capitalism

Divider

Buy Dale's Book!
Slackernomics by Dale Franks

Divider

Divider