Throughout his campaign Barack Obama has mocked his critics, noting that they just don't get what a novel figure and consistent unifier he has been for his whole life. "They say: We don't know enough about him. His pastor once said something. He's got a funny name, sounds Muslim."
But of late Obama's pastor has been saying a lot, and finally Obama has been forced to denounce him. For the first time Obama has called the Reverend Jeremiah Wright's views "ridiculous" and even accused him of being a purveyor of "hate."
To which one might say: better late than never. Maybe Obama never really knew how radical this guy is. But how likely is this? Let's remember that Reverend Wright is the one who has been consistent over the years. He used to believe that the U.S. government manufactured the AIDS virus and deliberately spread it in the black community, and he still believes it. He thinks America may have conspired to bomb itself on 9/11, and he's never wavered in that conviction. Now, and before, he thinks that "God Bless America" is better expressed as "God Damn America!"
Obama has been hearing such messages for more than two decades, packaged in an incendiary racial ideology which surpasses anything that Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton have ever said. And yet Obama selected this man for his mentor and even called him "family." By contrast with this white grandmother, Obama actually chose to make Wright part of his intimate circle.
Even six weeks ago, having heard all the controversial comments by Wright, Obama was standing by his man. He distanced himself from some of Wright's views while refusing to repudiate Wright. He said he could no more repudiate Wright than he could repudiate his own family. This by the way is the speech that many pundits hailed for its originality and brilliance. I think it will go down as one of the biggest blunders in American political history.
What Obama should have said in that speech: "Once upon a time this man rescued my spiritual life. A long time ago when I was spiritually and emotionally at a low point, he was there for me and he helped me get over the hill. So I owe him big time. I know that he's said some crazy things, but I've overlooked them, because of what he did for me." Instead Obama tried to sound like W.E.B. Du Bois. He impressed the liberal intelligentsia, while shooting himself politically in the foot.
Now Obama would have us believe that, as far as Wright is concerned, he's had just about enough. But why? What has Wright said that has finally caused his disciple to end their relationship? While Wright has been pontificating a lot lately, he has not given us any new bombshells. But he did suggest that, in his beliefs like the one about the U.S. government and AIDS, Obama agrees with him.
Wright noted that of course Obama is now saying something different; that's because Obama is now running for president. So he has to say something different! Translation: what we see with Obama is not what we get. And Wright is in a position to know. He's nursed Obama intellectually and spiritually over the years. It is Obama himself who has given us this man, and assured us of his integrity and reliability.
The more I examine the two, the more I think that it is Wright who is being consistent and calling it the way he sees it, and Obama who is hiding the part of himself that once embraced this man and maybe still agrees with many of his beliefs but now finds him a political liability. While Obama continues to portray himself as Mr. Straight Talk, at this point he is a candidate enveloped in shadows.
Reader Comments ( Page 58 of 58)
856. Shemuh Yisroel, Adonai Elohenu! Adonai Achad!
Godless Heathen Brian at 3:10PM on May 2nd 2008
857. GHB,
Must be a different dialect.
DD's new blog is up. Get ready for an apoplectic doozie!
Mokele Mbembe at 3:15PM on May 2nd 2008
858. Obama is a smart politician who does what he has to do to win the nomination. In his heart, I think he believes his pastor was right but he has to denounce him publicly to save his campaign. He is very smart and I doubt it very much that he just "knew/ found out" that his pastor was so radical and racist, after accepting him as part of his family for 20 years. Come on...Americans are not that naive, but then,... millions are. Look at the votes he has been getting from the Whites. Sad but we have to embrace the facts that there are more far-left democrats who will support him than those who will denounce him.
Kurnia at 4:10PM on May 2nd 2008
859.
Do you people have ANY IDEA how HUGE a boat would have to be to even just hold the sheer biomass of at least two and sometimes more of EVERY SPECIES ON THE PLANET? The boat would have to be the size of Manhattan, at the very least! NOw add in all the food for them... many of them only will eat other, live animals or their meat... so more animals needed for food... And how did the marsupials in australia all get to the ark, and then after the flood, get back to australia? Did God provide airlifts for the koalas? How did all the native species all over the world, which are supported in their locations by the local fossil record, all send a pair to mesopotamia to hitch a ride on the ark, and then get back to where they all belonged? To where they all are now? I mean, how did the species of arrow-poison frogs all get from the amazon to the ark, and then back to the amazon again? Oh, and what about ALL the world's freshwater fishes? If the seas rose and covered their lakes, they'd ALL DIE since they can't live for even a minute in salt water.
Still believe in the ark? Then, you're not that bright. Sorry.
Godless Heathen Brian at 2:43PM on May 2nd 2008
**********************************
G H B
I enjoyed your rant today about Noah's ark, and I had an idea......What if you volunteered as a children's Sunday school teacher? You could probably get away with it for two or three Sundays before they throw you out on your ear, but by then, you will have planted little tiny seeds of knowledge in their children. And then when someone comes along to teach them more bible stories..............................Anarchy.
Just a thought.
:)
tay at 5:53PM on May 2nd 2008
860. If they did find something on Ararat it would certainly change a lot of peoples minds about the authenticity of the bible.
a born atheist at 6:12PM on May 2nd 2008
861. GHB - I ahve not made it through one page of recent posts without seeing that you are showing your lack of knowledge in things pertaining to my Lord. So I will address these one on one. But for starters, the iron chariots were no problem. It was suppose to be that way, just read a few more verses, and you will see that is what Moses had prophesied. And when have you ever been rained on by salt water? My part of the world has always been fresh water.
Ok, that was tongue in cheek, how am I doing about being nice about our disagreement? Anyways it is a start, I am really trying. I will post again after a bit, and address those points.
Mokele - sorry about that. I really did think you were a man, until I got y'alls post confused.
Man_in_Wilderness at 6:59PM on May 2nd 2008
862.
Obama Campaign Linked
To Chechen Terrorism
http://www.rense.com/general80/obb.htm
Feel free to read all about it..
jim at 11:12AM on May 4th 2008
863. This was written in September 2004
Democrats Target Iran
Barak O-Bomb-a?
By SHARON SMITH
John Kerry's antiwar supporters have repeatedly warned that a military attack on Iran is imminent if George Bush is reelected. But Democrats are rattling their sabers at the same target.
On September 24, Barack Obama--the Democratic candidate for U.S. Senate from Illinois, and a shoo-in favorite--suggested "surgical missile strikes" on Iran may become necessary. "[L]aunching some missile strikes into Iran is not the optimal position for us to be in" given the ongoing war in Iraq, Obama told the Chicago Tribune.
"On the other hand, having a radical Muslim theocracy in possession of nuclear weapons is worse," he said. Obama went on to argue that military strikes on Pakistan should not be ruled out if "violent Islamic extremists" were to "take over."
A U.S. strike on Iran could well open up a new war front. When the CIA and Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) conducted a recent series of war games involving an attack on Iran, an Air Force source told Newsweek, "The war games were unsuccessful at preventing the conflict from escalating."
Why would Obama, whose staunch opposition to the Iraq war made him a hero among Democratic Party liberals, consider attacking Iran? Obama--a keynote speaker at the Democratic Party Convention--has a bright future in the Democratic Party. And the Democratic Party is a war party.
Obama opposes immediate withdrawal from Iraq. His positions are entirely consistent with the Democratic Party's platform, which explicitly puts Iran on notice: "[A] nuclear-armed Iran is an unacceptable risk to us and our allies...With John Kerry as commander-in-chief, we will never wait for a green light from abroad when our safety is at stake."
During the first presidential debate, Kerry appeared eager to stress his willingness to "go it alone" when asked his opinion about "pre-emptive war." "The president always has the right and always has had the right for pre-emptive strike," declared Kerry, adding, "That was a great doctrine throughout the Cold War."
This comment will have shocked those who recall the decades-long standoff between the U.S. and former USSR quite differently--as a period when a "first strike" by either side could easily have led to "mutual assured destruction." "Pre-emptive war" is the centerpiece of the Bush Doctrine, announced to the world after September 11.
To be sure, Kerry made no fewer than 27 allusions to allies, the United Nations, summits and treaties during the debate--and continued to insist that the invasion of Iraq was a mistake. But when asked, "Are Americans now dying in Iraq for a mistake?" Kerry's answer was "No." Kerry proceeded to outline his strategy for winning, by "beginning to not back off of Falluja and other places and send the wrong message to terrorists...You've got to show you're serious."
This strategy, right-wing New York Times columnist William Safire eagerly pointed out, "requires us to inflict and accept higher casualties." This also happens to be the strategy Bush is now pursuing in Iraq.
Kerry promises to begin replacing U.S. troops with Iraqi forces next summer, with a complete U.S. pullout by the end of his first term. This strategy, known as "Vietnamization" in 1968, was the campaign slogan of Richard Nixon--denounced by the antiwar movement, John Kerry among them, when it proved to be a colossal failure.
Kerry's argument that the invasion of Iraq was "the wrong war in the wrong place at the wrong time" is a sleight of hand. This is not an antiwar statement. On the contrary, it is an argument that the Iraq war was a distraction from the "real" war on terrorism--in Afghanistan, Iran, North Korea and elsewhere.
Kerry's strategy is a recipe for more war--by crushing the resistance in Iraq and taking aim at other targets in the years ahead, a strategy not very different from Bush's. As Safire gloated after the debate, ""His abandoned antiwar supporters...shut their eyes to Kerry's hard-line, right-wing, unilateral, pre-election policy epiphany." The debate is not between pro-war Republicans and antiwar Democrats, but over which war in which place at which time will better advance the global aims of U.S. imperialism.
The two fsces of Obama.....He talks out both ends..
jim at 3:10PM on May 5th 2008
864. This was written in September 2004 Guess Obama forgot about these statements that he made..lol
Democrats Target Iran
Barak O-Bomb-a?
By SHARON SMITH
John Kerry's antiwar supporters have repeatedly warned that a military attack on Iran is imminent if George Bush is reelected. But Democrats are rattling their sabers at the same target.
On September 24, Barack Obama--the Democratic candidate for U.S. Senate from Illinois, and a shoo-in favorite--suggested "surgical missile strikes" on Iran may become necessary. "[L]aunching some missile strikes into Iran is not the optimal position for us to be in" given the ongoing war in Iraq, Obama told the Chicago Tribune.
"On the other hand, having a radical Muslim theocracy in possession of nuclear weapons is worse," he said. Obama went on to argue that military strikes on Pakistan should not be ruled out if "violent Islamic extremists" were to "take over."
A U.S. strike on Iran could well open up a new war front. When the CIA and Defense Intelligence Agency (DIA) conducted a recent series of war games involving an attack on Iran, an Air Force source told Newsweek, "The war games were unsuccessful at preventing the conflict from escalating."
Why would Obama, whose staunch opposition to the Iraq war made him a hero among Democratic Party liberals, consider attacking Iran? Obama--a keynote speaker at the Democratic Party Convention--has a bright future in the Democratic Party. And the Democratic Party is a war party.
Obama opposes immediate withdrawal from Iraq. His positions are entirely consistent with the Democratic Party's platform, which explicitly puts Iran on notice: "[A] nuclear-armed Iran is an unacceptable risk to us and our allies...With John Kerry as commander-in-chief, we will never wait for a green light from abroad when our safety is at stake."
During the first presidential debate, Kerry appeared eager to stress his willingness to "go it alone" when asked his opinion about "pre-emptive war." "The president always has the right and always has had the right for pre-emptive strike," declared Kerry, adding, "That was a great doctrine throughout the Cold War."
This comment will have shocked those who recall the decades-long standoff between the U.S. and former USSR quite differently--as a period when a "first strike" by either side could easily have led to "mutual assured destruction." "Pre-emptive war" is the centerpiece of the Bush Doctrine, announced to the world after September 11.
To be sure, Kerry made no fewer than 27 allusions to allies, the United Nations, summits and treaties during the debate--and continued to insist that the invasion of Iraq was a mistake. But when asked, "Are Americans now dying in Iraq for a mistake?" Kerry's answer was "No." Kerry proceeded to outline his strategy for winning, by "beginning to not back off of Falluja and other places and send the wrong message to terrorists...You've got to show you're serious."
This strategy, right-wing New York Times columnist William Safire eagerly pointed out, "requires us to inflict and accept higher casualties." This also happens to be the strategy Bush is now pursuing in Iraq.
Kerry promises to begin replacing U.S. troops with Iraqi forces next summer, with a complete U.S. pullout by the end of his first term. This strategy, known as "Vietnamization" in 1968, was the campaign slogan of Richard Nixon--denounced by the antiwar movement, John Kerry among them, when it proved to be a colossal failure.
Kerry's argument that the invasion of Iraq was "the wrong war in the wrong place at the wrong time" is a sleight of hand. This is not an antiwar statement. On the contrary, it is an argument that the Iraq war was a distraction from the "real" war on terrorism--in Afghanistan, Iran, North Korea and elsewhere.
Kerry's strategy is a recipe for more war--by crushing the resistance in Iraq and taking aim at other targets in the years ahead, a strategy not very different from Bush's. As Safire gloated after the debate, ""His abandoned antiwar supporters...shut their eyes to Kerry's hard-line, right-wing, unilateral, pre-election policy epiphany." The debate is not between pro-war Republicans and antiwar Democrats, but over which war in which place at which time will better advance the global aims of U.S. imperialism.
The two fsces of Obama.....He talks out both ends..
jim at 3:10PM on May 5th 2008
865. the very church Obama is a member of makes this about race, go to tucc site and read the mission and doctrine tabs, it is about segregation of the Black Cristian Church from the Christian Church, there is no longer any doubt that there is more segregation on sunday then any other day, when you are calling yourself a black church what would happen if someone called thier church the Caucasion CHurch of Christ? the place would suffer the worst retaliation from the black community you ever saw,,
Miguni at 4:50PM on May 5th 2008
866. Two of the five superdelegates aligned with Clinton who spoke at the annual Democratic Council Convention said they would reconsider their support if Obama maintained his lead in elected delegates and the popular vote after the last contests on June 3.
Some who have supported her say they'll switch to Barack Obama if she doesn't make big gains in the remaining Democratic primaries.
FRESNO -- Hillary Rodham Clinton, stung last week by the defection of a prominent superdelegate, could lose the backing of more of these Democratic Party leaders and elected officials if she fails to make significant gains in the remaining month of presidential nominating contests, several California superdelegates said this weekend.
Truth Hurts at 12:00AM on May 6th 2008
867. I totally agree with this article. Obama sat in that church for 20 years, hearing the same thing Wright is preaching now, and said nothing until just recently - why? Because he was losing support and because it was bad for his image. No doubt he still believes all that Wright has said, which makes me wonder why people are trying to throw a hater of America into the white house.
Misti at 1:09PM on May 9th 2008
868. Please explain WTF this has to do with anything. Amendent.1. This tells me I have the right to choice or no choice re;Religion, so who cares??????
ItIsWhatItIs at 10:33PM on May 9th 2008
869. Have you asked yourself, "how has this man has risen to potentially becoming the president of the most powerful country in the world"? After 911 hasn't anyone learned? Osama = Obama. No hand on his heart during the pledge of allegience? Listening to his Pastor's anti-american remarks for years? If this man is elected our president, the USA will truly be damned as Reverend Wright summons! I truly believe Obama is the anti-Christ we've been forewarned about. Hold on to your hats everyone, we are just beginning to see our jouney to the end of time.
MEB at 2:04PM on May 11th 2008