Political Punch

If u think it is dirty now,
wait until the Republican Attack Machine gets started…

***Back when EVERYONE was watching the S Carolina debate to find out if Sen. Obama was real change from the politics as usual...

Obama on his first big money supporter, Tony Rezco, "I only worked for five hours for him as a client as a junior lawyer."
(NO BIG DEAL)
and then later,
“He helped my buy my house and saved me $300,000 and gave 250k to my campaign” and then, "he never asked me for anything."

ht
Plus

His spiritual mentor for 20 years Pastor Wright said America is responsible for 9/11 and "god d@#$ America", wouldn’t most Americans stand up and walk out....

Obama said, "I was never there in the pews", and then later "I was there" ...

***the Republicans are going to dismantle Sen. Obama with this stuff
…if he wins the Nomination.

At a disputed meeting earlier this year between Obama's senior economic adviser Austan Goolsbee and Canadian diplomats over NAFTA.

In that meeting, which the Obama campaign initially denied ever took place, Goolsbee reportedly told the Canadians that Obama's tough rhetoric on NAFTA was mere political posturing. After Canadian officials leaked a key memo that called into question the Obama campaign's repeated denials, the campaign acknowledged the meeting but denied Goolsbee ever said any such thing.

"Again, this story is not true. There was no one at any level of our campaign, at any point, anywhere, who said or otherwise implied Obama was backing away from his consistent position on trade.” Obama Spokesperson Burton said.If u think it is dirty now, wait until the Republican Attack Machine gets started…

Sen. Obama in his own PA commercial, " I never took and will never take money from the oil companies."

Fact: He did receive $215,000 from the Oil Industry.

And he has two Oil Industry Executives on his fundraising staff...

If u think it is dirty now, wait until the Republican Attack Machine gets started…

If you want Louis Farrakhan, The black panther party, and Rev. Wright in the White House, vote for Obama.

Another one of Obama's misspeaks which the national media has "passed on".Obama reminds me of Kerry, one of his big endorsers.. Oh, Barry, just flip and then you can flop!!

The issue of America's past regarding race relations between blacks/whites comes up each time as a way to explain remarks made by Wright. However, I don't see this as explaining other issues, for example the church/Wright's republishing the Hamas Article and renaming it "A Fresh View of the Palestinian Struggle". This is not just simply a case of someone who had old scars leftover from a different era.

"It must be remembered that in those great days I was considered to be an "integrationist" -- this was never, quite, my own idea of myself -- and Malcolm was considered to be a "racist in reverse." This formulation, in terms of power -- and power is the arena in which racism is acted out -- means absolutely nothing: it may even be described as a cowardly formulation. The powerless, by definition, can never be "racists" for they can never make the world pay for what they feel or fear except by the suicidal endeavor which makes them fanatics or revolutionaries, or both: and invite you to those which they know you will never own. The powerless must do their own dirty work. The powerful have it done for them."

James Baldwin

Barack would do well to look at the example he is setting for those would follow in his footsteps. He is making the way a lot muddier.
He should drop out now, get some national experience, establish a reputation for competence, equanimity, and action, and maybe inherit the mantle the next time around.

After reading most of the comments, I want a say...

I am a 45 year old life-long Democratic activitist. Since my gradeschool years, I have worked in campaign offices, canvassed, done GOTV activities, visibility events, phone-banked, held positions in my county Democratic committee, and contributed to many Democratic candidates and causes. I support Senator Clinton because I think she is wonderfully intelligent, has the best policies all round, knows how Washington works...she works like noone else I've ever seen and does not give up in the face of adversity. And she has seen a lot of adversity. She lets the mostly undeserved criticism roll off her back and gracefully proceeds on. While she has her own set of flaws, she is my candidate of choice.

All that said, originally, I was willing to support Sen. Obama should he prevail in this primary. That was until I saw what his campaign was really about. Tearing down the presidency of the most popular Democratic president in recent history doesn't get a pass with this voter. The below the radar comments such as, "oh, you're likeable enough," "I'll have to think about it" (Mrs. Obama's response when asked if she'd support Sen. Clinton's candidacy), "first time in my adult life I've been proud of my country" comment," "typical white person," just don't give me confidence in Sen. Obama. His vague and clearly conflicting Rev. Wright statements just make me frustrated.

I can't understand how a candidate can justify winning if it means losing half the Democratic party--many of Sen. Clinton's supporters will still vote for Sen. Obama if he succeeds, but after trying to paint Pres. Clinton and Sen. Clinton as racists, many will hold their noses to vote and won't get out there and fight for someone they feel doesn't really have the best interest of the Democratic party in mind. And he is going to need all the help he can get in the GE if he is the nominee. Another 28% say they will either not vote for a President or vote for Sen. McCain. In this light, Sen. Obama's talk of unifying the country looks lame if he thinks he can do if by tearing his own party apart first.

Along that line, noone has ever answered this question for me--why would Sen. Clinton condone playing the race card in the middle of a hard fought primary battle right before the S.C. vote when S.C. African Americans make up a sizeable portion of the Democratic vote there? Why? Why would she condone the race card being played when she has always supported and worked for AA causes? When President Clinton got where he was largely due to AA support? It makes no sense to me...It's ridiculous. I sincerely feel Sen. Obama's campaign set out to destroy Sen. Clinton's standing with African Americans. HE played the race card.

Initially, after hearing the 2004 convention speech, I was VERY excited about an "eventual" Obama presidency. But, as this campaign season warmed up, and I read more about him, listened to his supporters, visited blog sites, and I heard him in impromptu interviews and realized he sounded a little like President Bush with a seeming lack of off the cuff communication skills, it made me wonder...In my gut of guts, I just wasn't sold on Sen. Obama. Many of his supporters just spewed hatred for anything Clinton...unbelieveable...

Now, these are just my own gut reactions...I do have to say that Sen. Clinton has always been at the top of my list...but as any good Democrat should do, I DID look at Sen. Obama. I just didn't find what I believe is necessary in my President. I found a typical politician who runs on the platform that he is NOT a typical politician...and this typical politician has things/actions in his background that I feel make him less likely to be able to defeat John McCain in the GE should he be the Democratic nominee. He complains about Sen. Clinton beating him up for the GE, but he hasn't seen anything yet. The Republican smear machine is chomping at the bit to get at him.

Although I am white and grew up in a predominately white part of a medium sized city, I have been very close to a number of black people. The friends I had were wonderful. I learned a lot about their culture, and it was, for a 20 something woman, very fascinating and enlightening. I felt so welcomed into the families, really welcomed. For awhile, those families took the place of my own white family. I share this only to show that when I look at Sen. Obama, I don't see a "black" person...he's not at a "supposed" disadvantage in this voter's mind...I have come to my conclusion about him as a candidate based on what I've seen come out of Sen. Obama's campaign.

At this moment, I can't vote for Sen. Obama. If he is the nominee, I hope he does his homework and tries hard to earn my vote back. Right now, I feel taken for granted and overlooked...right now, I feel like he has chosen to pit the younger, newer voters against those of us who helped build the Democratic party, who fought for candidates so that all people could have equal opportunities and because there is still a lot of work to do to accomplish even these basic rights. I will continue to support Sen. Clinton because, right now, she is the best candidate, in my judgment, to get things done.

Karen,
Name a previous President, or presidential candidate that attended Pat Robertson's or Jerry Falwell's church for 20 year, gave $20,000+ to their churches, got married in their churches, etc.

You can't. That's the difference. obama attended a church with a preacher giving sermons full of hate for other races and for this great nation. Whether the sermon lasted 20 seconds or 20 years, obama should have had the courage to leave. He did not. This is a big deal-it shows obama lacks good judgement and courage to do the right thing. If he can't say no to Wright, how can he say no to the world terrorist?

Actual ttlt, having power includes having great influence over people. Wright had great influence over his congregation. He used the pulpit to spread his views among people who looked up to him, respected and trusted him. The message will spread from there. Making a racist view part of a system in which people interact, is racism.

my last post was meant for KELLY SCOTT.

Guilty as charged, so are you. I've read your posts. In any case, I am for Hillary and I don't like the the fact that he's had a lack of scrutiny and is still being babied by the media. Hillary is far more qualified. Look back at any of the debates and you'll see she gave detailed plans, had deeper knowledge of foreign and domestic affairs. I prefer her for OBVIOUS, sane reasons.

@ttlt-perhaps you should look up the definition of racist.."the belief that race accounts for differences in human character or ability and that a particular race is superior to others...discrimination or prejudice based on race..." ergo, ANYONE can be a racist, yes even blacks!!!! and they are some of the worst.
@karen, Robertson and falwell parishiners are not running for president! There is a higher standard when you run for president, especially when you run on a platform of being a unifier. BHO only considered leaving the church, or mentioning it after the fact, when he was caught in the up-roar. He then resolved that issue by adding wright to his campaign as an advisor.
A real CLASS ACT....
if BHO is the nominee, mccain looks better and better...

I AM SO SICK OF OBAMA'S LIES. They just keep coming. First he didn't hear the preacher raging, then he did. He tried his best with his surrogates, Dodd, Leahy, etc. to get Hillary out before she won the big states. Ohio and Texas, then Pennsylvania. She knocked him and his plan down with a swift kick. Now, he saying he wants her to stay. He's either stupid, crazy, or a lying hypocrite.

You don't go to the same preacher for 20 years, and, bring your kids to listen to him unless you agree with what he is saying.

As far as Obama saying he would have left the church.......yea, right, woulda, coulda, shoulda. The fact is HE DIDN'T.

Who cares about Reverend Wright. I can't beleive that anybody would be stupid enough to base their decision for President on this guy. He can say whatever he wants in HIS church.

Just like Pat Robertson, Jerry Falwell, etc. They say things that are far more vile than anything Wright has said, but the media don't care.

What hypocrisy.

Dems,

I'm an independent voter. I don't care about Clinton. I haven't accused Obama of doing anything illegal. I do believe he has had ethical lapses regarding Rezko.

I believe an Obama presidency would be dangerous.

To the media:
You are supposed to be informing us, giving us the unvarnished and verified facts.
You are NOT supposed to be shaping and sculpturing our opinions by what you do & don't report and how you word it.
Please do the job we, the people, depend on you to do! Anything else indicates you are in somebody's pocket and/or can't be trusted.
So much of this campaign BS could have been/ can be avoided if you would just be unbiased and give us the unadulterated facts.
Please stop the sensationalism!
Please give unbiased information.

Guys where is the huge story about Obama's lies. How about Rezko actually being bigger in Obamas life than he previously had admitted. How about the lies he told about his parents meeting at the Selma march. How about his lies about leading community organizations and exaggerating his role. How about him saying he was a professor when actually he was only a lecturer. How about him lying about the bills he passed like health care and the nuclear power leak legislation. Why is the media giving him all these passes and making a big deal about Hillary's Bosnia story. Hell at least she went to Bosnia. Where has Obama went? He's only been to one NATO country. Never been to a Latin country. The MSM just wants to let him sail along without having to answer any hard questions. It is sickening.

Dems,

I am an independent and as such I have independent thoughts. I have seen through Obama from the beginning. His words do not match his actions. I did not just have that link available. I had to search through my bookmarks to find it. I actually believe the Democratic Party is very screwed up.

Elme writes, "Obama is divisive, duplicitous, and would be dangerous as president."

================
You do realize that by using words such as duplicitous, etc. you're pretty much SHOUTING you're not just a Clinton supporter but working for them. Right? (lol) By the way...I love how you conveniently had that link handy.

re: joeysky's "...your wife, or your friend behave like this to you. Would you trust them?
Excellent point joey - I mean Hilary has told us if her pastor said those things she'd leave the church... We are left to assume that if her pastor went down on Bill, she'd stay... and you'd trust them both... Are you really comfortable calling other people's opinions absurd?
I've tried but enough is enough, so it seems to me that it's a win-win for HLC supporters - No matter if she loses the nomination or somehow goes on to lose the general election, you will all be able to go on blaming men or the media or the cultists for your lives... no need for introspection or any intellectual honesty. You all win! Congrats I guess...

Obama to win the GE? No one seriously can believe that. Just watch the Republicans....they are SO ready for this farce of a Hope-Change guy they are rolling over in laughter.

Honesty, Judgement, Character,Substance.
Throw in Ayers, Dorn, Rezko, Auchi...

They are waiting to pounce.

Obama keeps changing story all the time. I don't believe a single thing that fall out of his mouth anymore.

It's absurd that people still try to defend him. If it's too hard to relate, try imagine your husband, your wife, or your friend behave like this to you. Would you trust them?

Irma, I appreciate you’re comments but can’t help wondering how we could be viewing the same information through such different lenses. I’ve acknowledged the somewhat jaundiced view I hold of Hilary, but please keep in mind that I began as an ardent supporter of her husband. There’s no conspiracy involved and I’m beyond being influenced by the press. I’m not trying to diminish the integrity of your position when I say that when Hilary supporters throw around terms like “dirty politics” and “undemocratic” I’m astounded. I can only suggest that you may not be compensating for your own bias’s and sort of seeing and hearing what you want to see and hear. I’m not trying to condescend when I say you really should consider taking a few of your most strongly felt objections to Obama and track back through their sources – as an exercise try hard to dissuade yourself or bring them into question.
You seem to be quite serious and you owe it to yourself to be fully informed about how the “other side” might come to entirely different conclusions. I’ve done it and it’s not like we’re discussing two Republicans here, we’re talking about people we ostensibly should support to a greater or lesser degree.
Kelly

Just one minute

I’m not a conspiracy theorist. I’m just curious. I do enjoy the occasional Ludlum, Forsyth and well, most tension filled political and conspiracy novels. My curiosity though, does not stem from the pages of a novel. It comes from the current stand or atmosphere in Washington. I especially got extremely angry when Patrick Lehay asked Hilary Clinton to step aside because she was hurting Barack Obama. My first thought was, this fellows’ got some nerve. There is nothing that Hilary has done to hurt Barack that he himself has not done. Why is it that the men in Washington would rather settle for a lame wounded horse in a major race rather than sent in a battle tested, battle ready, strong and very competitive Amazon? Why are these men, joined by these so called Conservative Democratic Women, so threatened by Hilary Clinton that they are trying to force her out of the race? Are they so jealous that a second Clinton is going to be president that they can not stand it? Is Patrick Lehay an ignoramus? Why is he treating her like she is no more than a nuisance? How dare he? Does Patrick know something that he thinks the rest of us are ignorant to? Does he think that we all listen to the likes of MSNBC, CNN and ABC? Have they bought into their own delusion? “Give it up already?” I wonder where he got the nerve from.

Why are they so afraid of Hilary Clinton? Do they see in her an unimaginable potential that exceeds all of their capabilities? Could this be the only woman of our time with all of the real potential to be president and are we going to let the Washington bullies silence her? I hope not.

My only conclusion is that there is a conspiracy; but not the kind you think. Is it possible that knowing that Barack Obama has not a chance in Hell of defeating John McCain, that they would much rather have McCain in the Whitehouse than a Hilary Clinton??? I’m curious, is Barack Obama a part of this conspiracy or is he so brilliantly dumb that these simple facts escape him? Is the male dominated press in on this conspiracy? Why are the women in the press intimidated by these oppressors? Very few have dared to ask challenging questions of Obama while they join in with the male dominated press corp to discredit and humiliate Hilary Clinton. Do we not want to progress pass the 1800s? I thought we were in the 21st Century? Are men still so afraid of women in power that they would do anything to destroy and discredit them? I know that I have a lot of “Whys”. I would hope that by the end of this primary season, we would come close to figuring out what Patrick and his gang is hiding and what they are holding on to. I hope though, and sincerely so, that it would not be too late.

Obama = Bully way into office by process of eliminating candidates before the people have a choice, did it in Chicago for State Senate, did it for US Senate, trying to do it for the nomination in Dem Party. Obama= Poor choice of business assoc's and friends Rezco; a slumlord and gangsta economics, Wright; a racist mentor. Obama= issues, I mean real issues he needs to deal with, such as his "grandma's" racial slurrs that made him run to Wright for guidance. Not a real good line up for reasons to represent US.....Sorry BO you're not fit for the Presidency, for one you can't bully those who prefer Hillary.

Wow, Lem, you're certainly right that we need this discussion if what you got from my post was that I "longed for the days when black people
knew their place and dared not speak ill of a society in which they connot even ride a subway without a white woman being afraid of them because of the color of their skin." Nothing could be further from the truth, and that you would take that from my post illustrates your prejudices and "ignorance," not mine. I was not afraid of the woman, first of all. But she clearly was deliberately being provocative. If you can't look at the reactions of the congregation in the Wright videos, at their cheering at his virulently anti-white, anti-American statements, and not see that his screeds could inflame any black person with latent rage (and there are good reasons for that rage), you aren't looking. I said that someone, like this young woman, who might be susceptible to that kind of rhetoric would certainly be encouraged by Wright. That's just a fact. Wright intentionally prolonging rage, and that Obama, who claims to be seeking to be a healer, "couldn't see" that for 20 years says a lot about him. But you seem to be one of the Obama supporters who finds it necessary to characterize any criticism of him as a sign of racism.

Linda, you are the reason we need this dialogue--and it's good you are thinking about these issues, because you are obviously deeply ignorant about race in america. A black woman made you feel uncomfortable on the train and you "immediately thought about Dr. Wright" and longed for the days when black people "knew their place" and dared not speak ill of a society in which they connot even ride a subway without a white woman being afraid of them because of the color of their skin.

OPERATION CHAOS

David, what I want to understand is how Obama’s 20-year relationship with Rev Wright will not influence your vote but negative comments posted by anonymous people spouting utterances in support of one candidate or another on this site can influence your vote. Seems odd to me.
One other thing, as far as I know everyone in New England already cast their vote. Your warning might be a bit late.

I’m a white male, retired, from New England, and a member of the UCC. My dear, departed father used to warn me about the dangers of discussing religion or politics. I have no recollection of him warning me about the dangers of discussing religion AND politics. After reading many of these posts, I want to issue my own warning. The inherent dishonesty of attacking Wright as a way of undermining Obama and thus diverting my vote to either the Clintons or McCain is likely to backfire. I have not yet made a choice- but I regard most of the posts here as illustrative of the candidates and the candidate’s character- In my opinion, there is little difference between the utterances of the candidate and the utterances made in the candidates’name(s), made either overtly or covertly.

Ken writes:
"Has anyone heard the Rev. Weight or Obama apologize for calling Natalie Hollaway a slut. You notice no one touches that one."
-----
Obama seems to have a bit of a woman problem, possibly from being abandoned by his mother.

You'd think that Sen. Obama's campaign was created on Madison Avenue, with one of the best marketing engineers our country has. But, savvy customers always look at the list of ingredients on the label...no matter how beautiful the packaging might be!

On Obama's label you might find these ingredients in very small print: hypocrite (as in double-standard for his calls for Imus to step-down, but down-right endorsing his pastor Wright); liar (as in "I'm just as shocked to hear those remarks as you are...and if I ever heard those things, I would have left that church"); copycat (as in copies practically every idea Clinton came up for our economy and then uses Deval Patrick's speeches, etc.); fox in sheep's clothing (as in saying he admired the likes of Reagan's ideas and Bush Sr. economic plans--though both were failures).

At this point, anyone who has yet to vote in the primary and chooses Obama, does so with "OPEN EYES" and you're really helping McCain when you do so!!! Obama will be a swiftboater's dream in the GE!!!!!!!!!!!!

Obama never clearly says anything and then starts almost every response with "let me be clear." If you can't convey a point, then shut up.

I don't see any Obama supporters leaving comments on this subject. I would really like to hear how this latest statement reconciles with his other statements on the issue. To me, it just seems to be inconsistent and stated as attempts to backtrack. However, I would really like to understand the pro-Obama argument--maybe I've missed something.

Obama knew what he was doing. He was trying to make it seem like Wright was sorry for saying what he said, when in fact Wright did nothing of the sort.

Yes, Obama stated that Reverend Wright acknowledged offending people, mischaracterizing the nation, . .. It's a similar sentence construction to this: Had the Wright videos not come out and had the effect not been damaging, then Obama would not have to be defending his minister and 20 year alliance. However, semantics aside, let's just say that Obama was telling another whopper to the ladies.

ddpwoman - no, I was not saying Rev. Wright was directly responsible for this young woman's behavior. But I'm saying that, for who knows how many years, Wright rubbed salt into the wounds of those who've suffered from racial injustice in this country, and judging by the cheers of many in his congregation, it made them feel empowered by anger. I'm saying that if this young woman was already angry or inclined to be angry at whites, she might have felt more justified in that anger by the powerful symbol of a black minister encouraging her anger. And who knows how many others who (unlike you) are easily led, are reacting the same way, just as they do in his church? I'm just saying Wright not only inflames racism of all kinds in some generic sense. He intentionally keeps anger alive in those who still feel themselves to be treated unequally. (Meanwhile, I've read, he himself lives in a prosperous gated community.)

Extremism and extremists are the death knell of the Democratic Party. If ever we have needed moderation in our actions and words it is now, but the media will not enable it because anything said in low tones with deliberate thoughts does not play well.

I am voting for Hillary because she has the best grasp of the policies and the problems. Obama and Michelle are students of the school of Black Liberation Theology. I am liberal but I am not brain-dead. When told to take Wright's comments in 'context', I find even more scary rhetoric. When told to read Obama and Michelle's writings, I find more separatism and inability to articulate a united vision.

Take it all the way to August and beyond. Senator Clinton, it is time to quit parsing and worrying about who you will offend by speaking truth to bigotry. The bigots won't vote for you anyway. Instead of worrying about who you will offend, speak loudly for those you must defend. They will vote for you.

Linda,
Are you serious? You are blaming Rev. Wright for the actions of a woman he has probably never met. If you are, you have given this man way too much power. He is just a man. He is not God. You saw a black woman treating people poorly and assumed Rev. Wright was her leader. I am a black woman who is not a member of Rev. Wrights church and had it not been for the media, I would not have known what little I know about him. Trust me, black people are not so gullible as to follow a man that they've only seen on a 30 second loop on the news. But, if you think we are, I can certrainly understand why you would be so affraid of Mr. Obama. However, I can only speak for myself. I am not angry with white people. I have nothing but respect for you and all races; and I'm sure you will find many other members of the black community who feel exactly the same as I do.

God bless you,

BT, IA - No, we as individuals can't be held responsible "for what our religious leaders" say and do. But it's ridiculous to compare the sins spread throughout various Catholic churches with the very specific words and mindset of ONE preacher in ONE church. The individuals in that church may not be responsible for Wright's words (though they could, of course, demand that he leave), but the churchgoers are responsible for their own reactions--they could leave. Obama could have left any time in 20 years.

Yesterday I was on a train next to a young black woman who was trying hard to be rude and obnoxious to the white people around her and I thought about "Rev." Wright and the way his publicized rants may have encouraged her rage. That is something Wright has done for the last 20 years, in addition to perverting the Gospel. He has encouraged black people to be angry every day of their lives. Obama started out this campaign saying he wanted to bridge all divides, and if he'd meant that, he could never have tolerated such deliberate attempts to enflame racial anger. It's the opposite of what he says he is about.

I thought America is trying to find the next leader of this nation. How come the American people has to lead Obama into denouncing his Pastor's words? It took an uproar and his candidacy being in danger for him to denounce it. Which leads people to wonder if Obama share the same values as the American people. He can surely talk about unity in inspiring ways. But I'm afraid he does not practice what he preaches.

Barack Obama will make a sporting target this Fall for John McCain. As long as he understands he will be on a live firing range and the hummiliation will be with him a lifetime!

Run Barry, we'll count to five...and give ya a head start.

If you are sitting with a group of associates/friends and one idiot in the group starts to tell a racist joke do you :
1) listen to the joke and laugh on cue
2) immediately express your disapproval
3) get up and walk out

Obama did not immediately express his disapproval and he did not get up and walk out.

Here's a question: who among you has heard Rev. Wright's comments in full, not just the snippets played over and over again in the mainstream media? Because if you hear them IN CONTEXT, you might have a different view.

Beyond which, as a nation people cannot go around the world invading other countries, propping up dictatorships and generally acting the bully without making people outside of that nation angry, and they cannot rationally expect to be able to do that forever consequence-free. And the treatment the U.S. gives its own citizens is often shocking in its lack of even-handedness or fair treatment. So have a good hard look at yourselves before you go blasting someone for having the nerve to speak their truths.

Certainly things have been said in churches that I've attended that have offended me, and no doubt you have been in the presence of offensive comments as well. Are we all to walk out whenever someone says something we disagree with, or should we take their behaviour as a whole- including their work in the community and as a spiritual strength to their people- into consideration? Read Bill Maher's post about how all Catholics should walk out of the church, and you'll have an idea what I mean.

You are too kind. "For an eloquent man, not his most eloquent moment." As usual assumes that Obama just made a human blunder. Not so, he catapulted the propaganda, right out of the Republican play book.
How many people who watch The View now think Wright apologized - How many people still think Sadam had weapons of mass destruction?

The first Republican political ad will start with "he BAMBOOLZED the Democrats"
and clearly show why, then "he HOODWINKED the Democrats, yeah, he HOODWIKED the Democrats, hee, hee" and be able to show exactly how.
Obama is going down and may take the whole Democratic Party with him, but thank God Hillary spoke out when she did, how ever gently, against Wright so as to distance herself from this train wreck.

Unfortunately I am one of those life long Democrats who will vote for McCain if Obama is the nominee.

I really liked the man when he spoke at the 2004 Democratic convention...even saying..gee, that man should run for president some day. A lot has changed since then.

I know that McCain will go against much of what I believe as a Democrat but maybe that is just going to have to be okay. I rationalize that, through this vitriolic and "undemocratic process"of a primary, including the party leaders themselves, we will again have to reenvent ourselves....again. We may have someone who is like another Bush but maybe we will learn something.

My advice is let the Democrats, my party, destroy itself as it is doing, from within, and begin all over again.

You are too kind. "For an eloquent man, not his most eloquent moment." As usual assumes that Obama just made a human blunder. Not so, he catapulted the propaganda, right out of the Republican play book.
How many people who watch The View now think Wright apologized - How many people still think Sadam had weapons of mass destruction?

The first Republican political ad will start with "he BAMBOOLZED the Democrats"
and clearly show why, then "he HOODWINKED the Democrats, yeah, he HOODWIKED the Democrats, hee, hee" and be able to show exactly how.
Obama is going down and may take the whole Democratic Party with him, but thank God Hillary spoke out when she did, how ever gently, against Wright so as to distance herself from this train wreck.

You people make me laugh, all these what ifs.

The bottom line is that we cannot trust Sen Obama. He says one thing, but practices another. He has lied many times during this campaign, but has always received a free pass from the media, lying to evade and avoid taking responsibility or being accountable. If he is the Dem nominee, the GOP will shred him and yes, they'll use the Rev Wright to crush him.

WAKE-UP AMERICANS ! Another 8 years of cover-ups will REALLY hurt us. I am as afraid for our country (and embarrassed) as I was with the last election. I am also OUTRAGED with the medias irresponsibility in 'running with' every distraction Obama presents as if it's legitimate.

Obama is a liar!! I cannot believe how the ladies (except for Whoopi) appeared to gush all over him, especially Barbara and SHERRI. Oh my!? I'm tired of the media playing favorites and have Obama on such a high plateau. Get real people. Vote Hilliary (or McCain)

Pastor Wright is angry and frustrated he could move past the '60s. But now he has to do the right thing by coming out admitting that he offended people of all colors and all races and apologize to everybody. He has to do that very humble gesture, that very candid apology will help him to move forward. Forgineness is part of the American Way. God bless America and God bless Obama. OBAMA08.

Barack Obama supporters need to ask themselves if they would accept this person, for all his faults, if he was a white Chicago lawyer. Are people subconsciously holding Barack Obama to a lower standard because of his skin color? Do they expect less of him or feel that, as a black person, he can’t be expected to have the same moral character as, say, a white person?
There’s a lot of finger pointing and accusations of racism coming from the Obama camp but if they think this man is the best that black America has to offer, they are the ones that need to examine the stereotypical beliefs they hold toward the black community!

@BT, IA: I have a solution for you. Leave your churches too. From the sound of it the only things being shown are to little boys in the dark. Grow up.

Four months? Oh aren't we generous. Axelrove Kerry and Kennedy were cultivating Obama back in 2004 and did a test run for the gubernatorial race in MA in 2006 - they were ready and they knew all about it. And so did the subprime and Wall Street backers, the banks, Soros, etc. That you didn't know doesn't redefine reality. Besides: Hill hasn't been out there so long either. And finally: you seem to fall flat in the eloquent race as well - or are we to interpret your comment to mean 'for a two bit crook who's only been on the national scene a few months he's not performing poorly'? For that is true. He is doing remarkably well for being such a two bit crook.

What are we to make of Obama's admission in his speech that he heard Reverend Wright make controverial statements? Wright is man who derided all Italians by saying they had "garlic-sniffing" noses. I do not know anyone who makes these kinds of remarks only once or twice. The man is a bigot who preaches an ideology of victimology that is damaging to his parishioners. No way Obama had no idea. My guess is that he went along with this dangerous garbage purely for political purposes. He only objected when it hurt him politically. And he wants us to think he is a different kind of politician. Right.

I am not quite sure who the idiot is here.

Senator Obama for saying he would leave the church or Senator Obama for thinking we would believe anything he says.

I think the Wright issue reflects on Obama's veracity, willingness to stand up for his beliefs, and effectiveness in bringing about change and unity.

If only he had just said "I was wrong. I'm sorry. I should have spoken up sooner. I should never have allowed lies about AIDS to be spread to a group already vulnerable to poor health care. I ask Rev. Wright and anyone else who says such things to stop such dangerous and divisive rhetoric and to become part of this dialogue."

I don't need Obama to reject Wright, but I need to see some strength in actually resolving the issue, instead of just telling everybody that they were right to feel the way they do.

don't be scared, everybody.

porgy & bess. birth of a nation. song of the south. how long ago were these films released? let's be honest... the hard reality of having a black president has not existed in the public consciousness for more than a brief 4 months. considering the monumental step this is, i think that obama's doing pretty well.

What Obama's pastor said does not really bother me. Let's be honest, you really do not have to look that hard to find offensive comments in today's world. BUT, what does bother me is his evasiveness. This is why I don't think his speech was as important as everyone states. During his speech he admitted that he heard some offensive comments, but the Friday before on MSNBC, CNN, and even Fox News he stated that he never heard any such comments. That seems like he lied somewhere. If that is the truth it goes against his message, which makes him just another politician.

While there is all this bantering back and forth about whether Uncle Pastor meant this or that, or apologized, or whether Barack actually heard him, or knew of the angry hostility Wright was spewing all those 20 years, has anyone mentioned the behavior of the rest of the congregation? If we are to believe that Barack "would have left" etc, how do you explain the congregants standing and cheering Wright on? There were two guys who kept high-fiving and fisting each other behind Wright every time he made a hate-filled remark. Are we to believe that Barack was the only one in that church who a.) didn't hear or see any of this, and, b.) finally after 20 years, took issue with what was being said? Face it. He knew exactly what was being said and celebrated around him. And he agreed with it.

ah the irony of the spelling errors. It's 2 am and I'm practically seeing double. SEE, even English Professors don't always have perfect grammar.

He's a Professor. I am a Professor as well, and English Professor at that.

I cannot believe you have just resorted to failing to distinguish between journalistic style, political-rhetorical style, casual speaking style, law professor speak, etc...

You seem to want him to articulate in "business enlish."

I expected more of you than to become a half-rate "grammar nazi." He could certainly have said it more succinctly, but that wasn't your claim, which was that there is still something inappropriate about Reverend Wright's relationship with Barack Obama that you are not stating openly.

Perhaps the problem is one you are wrestling with internally.

But please don't blame Barack for this. And I saw it and didn't bat an eye. Even though half my life is other Professors and grading papers.

It was conversation. Not writing.

I won't keep hammering this home. Except... why on earth do you bring this up.

You could have written a much better article about latent misogyny or reverse sexism over the elections, with Barbara Walters oogling over Barack versus women admiring or loathing Hillary and her Imelda Marcos pantsuits and plastic surgery. That would have been a valid thing to consider. But you clearly have not, or are not willing, to let go of Reverend Wright, nor are you willing to state openly that you are not.

What's so weird about this whole Wright flap is that it's essentially ten minutes of video being extrapolated onto a whole career. It seems probable that Jeremiah Wright has been saying provocative things for a long time, but these ten minutes must be the only in his long career that people would find "hateful" since no other videos are coming to light.

Obama is a stuttering, stammering flip-flopper, and he's still beating the hag.

You libs crack me up. No need for us to do anything - you'll kill each other first. Just please - leave a little bit for us, okay?

When I think how the press screamed "Liar" if Gore said hello and this guy can keep changing his story about being in the pew, no I wasn't there...well I was there etc.and is never called on it! It's amazing. I also laughed when Obama was back one day from a vacation and called campaigning a death march.
If he can't take Hillary heat,how will he handle the scorching GOP?

And those supporting Obama are sick of the Wright story? Ha! Just wait till the GOP gets started. Hillary staying has actually protected BO.

At this point I have to believe he's suppose melt down, but for Macain , not Hillary. I think that's why the Macain loving press want her to drop out so badly. They have been saying nothing else since Iowa! Drop out before Obama melts down , we want him for Macain

Contrary to a previous poster's attempt to lay a guilt trip on those who oppose Obama and Wright.

Wright "cast the first stone", while preaching in what has become a "glass church"!

Wright damned America, I won't.

Wright preached hate from a pulpit, I haven't.

Wright shouted profane and vulgar utterances from his pulpit. I didn't.

Obama sat through all of this for more than 20 years. I wouldn't!

Greg: Sorry, but Obama was not a professor - sr. lecturer was his title. Although he had the competence, knowledge, and performance for professorship consideration, he did not publish enough-that's a requirement in all academic circles. He also spent time in other positions - evidently did not see the academic life as his life-long career. I don't think he himself calls himself a professor, although he has done so a few times...but others refer to him as that - its not true. (and I am an obama supporter - I'm not being sarcastic)