Leatherneck - Very well said.

:thumb: Most of the people pitching a fit over this whole thing were not voting for him anyway and it just reinforces their decision. In the general election Obama (or Clinton) will wipe the floor with McCain in debates and I think neither candidate is going to let themselves be swift boated.

And either one will be trounced -- soundly! :lol:

Leatherneck - You are once again very convincing in your post. Very logical assessment of the situation.:thumb:

And I know one other thing: that I and I think many others will have a very hard time believing what Sen. Obama says about racial unity if he becomes the President. This country in my opinion has bent over backwards to try to rectify the past discrimination; and to try and give blacks an equal opportunity to succeed (and Sen. Obama's rise is defacto proof of that). For Wright to dwell on what happened 50, 75 or a 100 years ago; to say that we had 9/11 coming to us as a result of dropping the A bomb is not in any way going to help unify this country; it is going to make such unification much more difficult. And if other leaders of other black churches are doing the same, it will make it even more difficult. And I don't care how many times Sen. Obama says he doesn't have those same beliefs, his actions speak much more than his words.

Not only do I agree with this, I'd like to bump it to the new page for others to see it. :thumb:

Of course he has the right to express his opinion. No one on here has said he doesn't have a right to his opinion. But isn't he, like all of us, accountable for his opinions and beliefs? I am, you are, he is and so is Sen. Obama. And despite all the wonderful words about racial unity in Sen. Obama's speeches, I judge a man and a woman not on what he or she says, but rather by his or her actions. And I'm sorry, but Sen. Obama's continued support of Rev Wright by continuing to attend Wright's church when Wright was saying such things, by continuing a close friendship with Wright, by having Wright marry him, baptize his children and serve as his spiritual advisor reveals much, much more to me than some flowery words in eloquent speeches.

Outstanding post, LN! :thumb::thumb: on the bolded passage. I really do not care what Barack Obama has to say or how eloquently he says it - his past actions have placed him into such a deep hole that words alone will not remove him from it.

LN, If you believe Obama's continued attendance at Trinity UCOC is grounds for distrusting his public comments on race, do you think that GWB's 2000 campaign stop at Bob Jones University was similarly hypocritical given his "compassionate conservative" theme? What about the 2000 smear campaign against John McCain in South Carolina in which "push pollsters" insinuated that McCain had fathered an illegitimate black child (who was, in fact, an orphan from a Mother Theresa's orphanage in Bangladesh). Was that incongruous with "compassionate conservatism"? Or do you not believe Bush's campaign was behind that?

I love the moral equivalency arguments. A 20-year pattern of behavior = isolated lapses in judgment. :lol:

LN, If you believe Obama's continued attendance at Trinity UCOC is grounds for distrusting his public comments on race, do you think that GWB's 2000 campaign stop at Bob Jones University was similarly hypocritical given his "compassionate conservative" theme? What about the 2000 smear campaign against John McCain in South Carolina in which "push pollsters" insinuated that McCain had fathered an illegitimate black child (who was, in fact, an orphan from a Mother Theresa's orphanage in Bangladesh). Was that incongruous with "compassionate conservatism"? Or do you not believe Bush's campaign was behind that?

 

See this type of post is really irritating to me as it is just a bunch of spin bull. You know full well and good that Bush attending one campaign stop is completely different than if Bush had attended Bob Jones' church for a long time, had asked Jones to marry him, had asked Jones to baptize Bush's children and said that Jones was Bush's spiritual advisor. If you can't see that difference, then that speaks as much about you as Sen. Obama's decisions speak about him.

 

And on the Bush smear of McCain, heck yes it bothered me. I voted for McCain in the primary, not Bush, in part because of that. I have a feeling however that Sen. Obama's poor choices in re Wright aren't going to affect your support of him one iota however. Am I wrong?

See this type of post is really irritating to me as it is just a bunch of spin bull. You know full well and good that Bush attending one campaign stop is completely different than if Bush had attended Bob Jones' church for a long time, had asked Jones to marry him, had asked Jones to baptize Bush's children and said that Jones was Bush's spiritual advisor. If you can't see that difference, then that speaks as much about you as Sen. Obama's decisions speak about him.

And on the Bush smear of McCain, heck yes it bothered me. I voted for McCain in the primary, not Bush, in part because of that. I have a feeling however that Sen. Obama's poor choices in re Wright aren't going to affect your support of him one iota however. Am I wrong?

 

I think some people don't want to see the truth. Great post.

Rev. Wright's comments were offensive and in the eyes of some anti-american (whatever that means) but I have yet to find anything he says that is flat out racist. If he was racist there wouldn't be any white members of his church and the ministry of the church would be exclusively African-American. He is a controversial figure but I don't see anything that is flat out racist.

I love the moral equivalency arguments. A 20-year pattern of behavior = isolated lapses in judgment. :lol:

 

Give us the 20 year pattern then. Rev Wright has give thousands of speeches and sermons that these couple things are all we have.

Leatherneck - Just wondering do you have the same angst and problem with those that sought to blame the "moral condition" of the US as the main reason for God allowing 9/11 to happen? Falwell, Robertson and I believe even Ruth Graham made similar national statements on TV shows that were syndicated nationally. Since it is highly unlikely that George W. "broke with them," is this a failure on him as well? On the GOP?

 

 

FWIW, I think that those looking to "nail" Obama are going to see it the way they want. Even with the newest revelation of "not sure I saw him there on that date," no one whose been adamant vs. Obama has spoken of this confession, they've gone to the "well, over 20 years" argument.

 

Those that want to support Obama are going to see it their way. They want to cite other examples and comparisons that might or might not have some validity.

 

As for me, I'm probably not voting for Obama anyway (despite what Run to State thought in an earlier post ).

 

Heck yes I have the same problem with those folks. And if Bush had the same personal relationship with those folks that Sen. Obama has with Wright, like criticism of Bush would be entirely fair (and I'd be joining in on it, thank you very much).

 

And as for the comment about those people looking to "nail" Sen. Obama are going to look at it the way they want to, I challenge you to go back and look at every post I've ever made about Sen. Obama on every thread but the one dealing with this issue. I have been very complimentary and respectful of him. I resent the implication that I am trying to spin this issue to nail him. If anything, I think the spin on this issue has come from people futilely trying to defend Sen. Obama on this issue.

Here is a link to an NPR story on Obama's church and Liberation Theology. It gives some insight into where the church is coming from. Click Listen Now. It's about 3 minutes.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=88552254

And one other thought as I take a break from drafting ESOP Loan Documents (now that's exciting and probably the reason I'm all lathered up), I could give a rat's rear end less whether Sen. Obama was or was not in church that day. The issue is whether or not Sen. Obama was or was not aware of Rev. Wright's beliefs. If he was aware and continued the relationship he had, I fault Sen. Obama. If he was not aware of those beliefs, then I do not fault Sen. Obama's continued relationship. His presence in the church that day only matters if Sen. Obama denies being aware of Rev. Wright's beliefs. He has not to the best of my knowledge made such denial.

Heck yes I have the same problem with those folks. And if Bush had the same personal relationship with those folks that Sen. Obama has with Wright, like criticism of Bush would be entirely fair (and I'd be joining in on it, thank you very much).

 

And as for the comment about those people looking to "nail" Sen. Obama are going to look at it the way they want to, I challenge you to go back and look at every post I've ever made about Sen. Obama on every thread but the one dealing with this issue. I have been very complimentary and respectful of him. I resent the implication that I am trying to spin this issue to nail him. If anything, I think the spin on this issue has come from people futilely trying to defend Sen. Obama on this issue.

 

 

I don't see a difference between the aforementioned problems of the people who supported GOP and/or Bush than I do Wright for Obama. You do see a difference. That's where the conversation will have to end for me.