Did Obama Say Rev. Wright Acknowledged Offending People?

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.