Another Clinton Surrogate & a Clinton Campaign Staffer Push Rev. Wright Story

I hope the Clinton campaign push the Rev. Wright story because the media certainly won't touch it. They love Obama and are apologetic and dismissive of anything that he does. If Clinton had received even some of the help that Obama has received from the media, then she would already be the Democratic nomination. To make up for this unfair treatment, the Clinton campaign has had to justifiably use other methods to stay in the race. This process should be up to the people of America to decide, and that most definitely includes FL and MI, and it should not be up to the media to choose the candidate for the people as they have done.

Joseph Wilson??? Come on, people, you guys must only read the New York Times. This clown lied his way through the "Plame-Gate" episode, wrote a book and made lots of money, and even got his wife to write a book, and his story was virtually ALL LIES!! How can you put any faith into this guy? Even the Washington Post apologized for the way they kissed up to him originally. Testifying under oath to the Senate changed his story a whole lot, and exposed him as the fraud he is, but the Times never carried that info to their readers, so I can understand why some of you still believe in him. What a joke!!

As far as the Obama/Wright connection, as a 58-yr old white guy, I don't take TOO much exception to Obama sticking by his pastor. I also believe that, since Obama can refer to someone as a "typical white person", that give us white guys the right to refer to someone as a "typical black person", right?

Yeah, right, see how far that gets the first white politician or journalist who starts doing it.

What happens if we change just one fact - Wright is a non-Black - and keep everything else the same. We would still have the same questions about Obama's character and judgment: why does he keep this relationship? why did he not do something about it? why did he keep silent for over a year? why does he perpetuate Wright's teaching to the next generation such as his kids?

So the reality is that Obama'speech is to deflect the attention to the fact that he has not answered any of the questions; he is also arrogant to take on the holier than thou attitude to judge and lecture the rest of America as racists and throw his grandma and the blacks under the bus with "to denounce Wright is to denounce the blacks"...This issue has nothing with Blacks, it is all about Obama's character and judgment.

Thank god that the election isn't actually being held at this blog.

The reaction to his campaign alone proves what his experience has shown him. There are indeed white people who are afraid of him simply because he's black. He treaded a line of appearing like a 'safe black man' rather than an angry one just for those people.

Fortunately, there are many many more atypical people of all colors who are not afraid. And actually find it bizarre that some of any kind are.

Meanwhile, this whole mess about Reverend Wright could have been avoided if Fox and Chris Wallace had simply told the truth.

Lets see, can Hillary drop out as a democrat and decide to run as an independent?

Can you imagine the outrage that would have erupted if Hillary Clinton, John McCain, or Ralph Nader had spoke of the "typical black person?"

How about if any of the other Presidential candidates had talked about how non-blacks are "bred" in a manner similar to what Barak Obama said about white people?

Where does it say that Barak Obama or his pastor get a pass to disparage other races in speeches without being held accountable for their actions?

UpAndWay wrote:
>>It really doesn't matter what Hillary's "surrogates" are saying. Obama told everyone to look at the elephant in the room then to politely ignore it. Sorry dude, you can't have it both ways anymore.

When did Obama every tell everyone to politely ignore it? I thought he said we need to look it square in the face and politely deal with it. Personally, I (as an Obama supporter) hope that race is brought up every day and discussed every day in the media (including Rev. Wright and Obama's relationship with the United Trinity Church), every day, every day, every day, until people are sick of it and finally start discussing Iraq, health care, the recession, illegal immigration, Big Brother, the next several Supreme Court appointments, abortion rights, and some issues that affect our lives (at least my life) more than what some retired pastor said years ago, and the "judgement" (what a nice, warm, vague, fuzzy criticism) Obama didn't show by leaving the congregation.

Many in the media are rhapsodizing over Obama’s speech. They are saying that this is a speech that will be studied for years. Maybe so, but not for the reasons they think. The speech was nothing more than a slick way of changing the topic. Not only that, the speech used rhetorical techniques in a cynical attempt to soften the image of Rev. Wright, and limit the damage he is doing to Obama. For example, Obama uses a technique called “moral equivalence,” which attempts to equate a greater sin with a lesser one, thereby reducing the impact of the greater sin. He equates disavowing Wright with disavowing his grandmother, hoping to demonstrate that it would be wrong to disavow Wright for his racist and anti-American comments, just as it would be wrong to disavow his grandmother for her racist comments. However, the two sins are not equivalent. Wright is a public figure, who bellowed out his comments to a large audience, while the grandmother’s comments were private. Moreover, he attempted to balance Ferraro’s comments against those of Wright. Once again, the comparison should fail, because Wright’s were loud, unmistakable, intentional, and could not be interpreted as anything but what they were. Ferraro’s comments, on the other hand were racist only if interpreted as such, and Ferraro clearly stated that she did not intend them to be racist.

For my part, I would like to see the records contained in the Obama passport files, and I think requesting such is fair and reasonable.

Hillary Clinton has been forced to provide her daily schedules while she was first lady. The Clintons have been investigated with a microscope by Ken Starr.

Axelrod now whines on a daily basis for his timetable for the Clinton tax and financial records.

Now, we need the same time of treatment of Barak Obama and ALL of his financial records (FULL Rezko disclosure), not just a chosen few.

We need Barak Obama's daily schedule and detailed records of every activity since entering public service.

We need Barak Obama's passport records to verify where he was and what he was doing at specific times important to national security.

We need Michelle Obama's senior thesis to confirm her acknowledged past positions versus her claimed present positions.

We need fair and equal treatment.

With the amount of political campaigning and posturing that goes on in the Trinity United Church of Christ (Jeremiah Wright), perhaps the validity of their tax-exempt status needs to be investigated by the IRS.

The IRS has a toll-free number whereby individual citizens can report suspected evasion of taxes or violations of tax laws.

And, yes, that goes for any church that wants to get into politics and/or political fund raising.

Everyone knows that Obama’s sticking up for Rev. Wright is wrong, wrong, wrong. Here are a few more reasons.

1. Obama says that it is unfair to pick out three or four video clips, and say that these represent the views of Rev. Wright. This would be a fair comment IF these clips did not come from videos being sold by the church. Apparently, the church thinks these are Rev. Wright's greatest hits. In addition, the fact that the church is promoting these particular videos says that the church supports the words spoken on these videos. So, why is Obama still a member?

2. Obama says that we should consider all of the good works of the church, including its work for the homeless and for HIV. Once again, this is a fair comment. However, let's put it in context. One would hope that all churches perform such good works; but they do so without also spewing anti-American rhetoric. In addition, if we look at some houses of worship in the Middle East we are going to find congregations involved in good works for their people, but we are also going to find virulent anti-Americanism. Good works in a church do not cancel out anti-American propaganda.

Obama made a tactical mistake. He has put race and hate mongering on the table as a legitimate issue. As a Clinton supporter I'm thrilled at his speech. Now he can't complain anymore that people bring up race. That's the danger in trying to CYA, you give permission for the issue to be examined.

It really doesn't matter what Hillary's "surrogates" are saying. Obama told everyone to look at the elephant in the room then to politely ignore it. Sorry dude, you can't have it both ways anymore.

No one has to try to tie Barak Obama to Jeremiah Wright. Barak Obama has tied himself to Wright and his idealogy quite well all by himself.

Over 20 years attendance and membership at the church led by Wright does that very well for the Obamas.

I find the meanness and the arrogance of the array of reactions to this whole controversy to be very disturbing. People are not thinking about the essence and the implications of their Wright-centered comments on Obama and how those implications indict each of us as 'guilty' or at least 'subject' to the exact message of his speech on race this week. Fine. Hate the candidate and don't vote for him, but be responsible and listen to the speech and truly analyze how you, as an individual, can make a contribution rather than being a detriment to the society that you'll be a part of well after November and the general elections.

How can people, in good conscience, be so dismissive? I am a black man in America, but I'm bound by a higher obligation to be truly cognizant of how I treat and interact with ALL others.

Obama's a fraud. He's been listening to Wright for 20 years. And now that he's in trouble he's trying to throw everything he can at Clinton. He's not any different than any other politician. He's not going to unite anything. He'll only cause further divides because of the controversy he sparks. He's naive and the interviews and speeches he gives smack of the arrogance of youth. If he gets the nomination and makes it to the general election, Clinton supporters won't vote for him. Michigan and Florida have been disenfranchised by many this year. The DNC, state party leaders and yes, and the candidates, primarily Obama, who dragged his feet in making a decision. This is evidence that he puts his own self interest above that of the people. A recent poll in Florida showed that democratic voters there will not vote for either nominee in the general if their primary votes are not counted. Finally, Republican swing voters, independents and undecided democrats won't vote for Obama after the Wright and Rezko controversies and the ensuing coverage of both. What does this equal? McCain in the Whitehouse. That'll shut everyone up.

Pastor say wild things to get the point across ,think shock jock. Also my Grandmother still fear white people and i use to get mad but it not there fault it was the old models and thinker.I wish people would understand that as being black we teach peace toward other but does dont practices it on each other. We would be morality wrong to treat people as less but do have differences as a people and race. We can act like are pain or discontent is not real because we dont protest and rage against the machine but were the credit for repeatedly peacefully solving the problem. We have only been free for like a generation or so. Seek understanding

It is a good ploy to get this debate over on race now rather than in October.
I am sure this will work toward Mr. Obama's favor. After all, Mr. McCain was easy to beat before and may still be easy to beat later.
Is Mr. Richardson in the very short list for VP? Obama/Richardson may balance the change and experience but will it further inject racial divisions?
I am sure lot more questions will arise.

I see increasing pressure on Mrs. Clinton to quit. Some journalists, columnists, and politicians are implicitly expressive about this.
With Florida and Michigan out of the equation, and NC, OR and possibly Puerto Rico, not to mention some top undeclared SDs in Mr. Obama's favor, does anyone know or think that Mrs. Clinton has a chance?

Could the racial divide, expressed publicly more than ever, be transcended by Mr. Obama and his folks?

Quite an interesting election!

I'm using the picture of Bill Clinton with Reverend Wright and Bill and Hillary with Tony Rezko as desktop photos on my computer to remind me what a reckless liar and devious person Hillary Clinton is.

These are nothing new. Every American should have know or have gone through them, expressed their views, show their angers and some choose not to support her because of her husband's fault. That's fine. At the least, her books were wide open and her records were there to be scrutinized. Otherwise, you wouldn't able to list so many of them. Anyway, blaming the sins of a husband on a dutiful wife is not a normal man should do. I just rammed a car infront of me yesterday while my wife talking to me over the phone. Do I blame her for distracting me? Come on, I'm holding the wheel and my foot was on the pedal! Of all the sins of Clinton, Monica Lewinsky example is the most unnecessary to be brought out again. Do we need to blame her too? Clinton era was over, get over it. It is Hillary now or maybe, Obama.