that remains to be seen. this is undoubtedly come up again during debates. november is a long way away.
It could be more damaging in the primary than the general. If Obama gets the nomination, and the Republicans try to nail him with it, all the Democrats have to do is start tossing around some of Robertson's or Falwell's or Hagee's quotes. There is ripe fruit on the Christian Right.
An honest undecided voter will then see that the religious issue is a wash and move on to different issues to base their decision on.
It could be more damaging in the primary than the general. If Obama gets the nomination, and the Republicans try to nail him with it, all the Democrats have to do is start tossing around some of Robertson's or Falwell's or Hagee's quotes. There is ripe fruit on the Christian Right.
An honest undecided voter will then see that the religious issue is a wash and move on to different issues to base their decision on.
I agree the right have issues with christian wackos. but its mccain vs obama. mccain hasn't sat in church for 20 years listening to such hate speech. its easy for people to see the difference, this isnt a matter of extreme christian views vs extreme wright views.
I agree the right have issues with christian wackos. but its mccain vs obama. mccain hasn't sat in church for 20 years listening to such hate speech. its easy for people to see the difference, this isnt a matter of extreme christian views vs extreme wright views.
As I stated before, Wright sells DVDs of his sermons. If there more, worse comments than the ones we hear over and over again on the news, we'd be hearing them as well. A couple minutes taken completely out of context does not make for enough material to cover 20 years. Like I said, an honest voter will see the religious issue as a wash and vote for one, the other, or neither based on other issues.
Now, I have an issue with it being called hate speech, because I don't hear it that way.
I see you are an Obama supporter. I like obama too but doesn't this bother you at all that he was a member of this church for 20 years? wright says alot of hateful things. obama is asking for my vote, why should I give it to him when he embraced this type of hate speech for so long? (lets keep this civil if we can, I am not for or against obama, just looking for discussion)
for me...no...
I could care less what is pastor said...
I have to ask...why is this such a big deal...? it's not like Obama said these things himself....
so he may have sat and listened to his pastor say some things you or I may not agree with...so what...
Does everyone have to agree with everything their clergy says...?
I think people are making a big deal over nothing...
I've been a member of a very conservative Lutheran church my whole life. My pastor has gone on rants about abortion, gay rights, and many other things I don't agree with.
Does this mean that I am embracing one man's opinion because I have a personal history at my church? No. I'm respecting my family's history and beliefs. I go to church there because it's where my niece and nephew were baptized, and it's nice to go as a family.
I've been a member of no church all my life because I can't stand to perpetuate the anti-whatever rants of various church leaders. I could not go to a church that preached anti-white sentiments or anti-gay sentiments, etc. I can't quietly go and tacitly support the prejudiced statements of others. I feel that in doing so, I am supporting my own beliefs, the history of my family and the beliefs of my family be damned. (I sound something like Wright myself at the moment, it strikes me.) However, I do feel that way. On my father's side of the family are a bunch of fundamentalist and racist ministers. I don't need their history and beliefs as part of mine in my life. I vehemently reject what they have to say in no uncertain terms. I don't have to sit "politely" while other speak for me, no matter that what they say is not what I would ever say. Of course, this comes at a price, which not everyone is exactly thrilled to pay.
I am not trying to start anything or be unfriendly, however, as I do have a history of saying what I think and not standing by what others say quietly, I must say that I do not understand standing by Sunday after Sunday listening to someone expounding ideas that are so clearly wrong and saying nothing or doing anything to change the situation from the inside out. I do understand wanting to be part of a group, but surely there are other groups to be a member of that would more clearly echo one's beliefs. I don't understand allying oneself with a group that is fundamentally contrary to one's person.
You may not be embracing any particular person's beliefs by going a particular church, but you are enabling those beliefs as you are enabling the leader to continue to spread his or her beliefs to others throughout the years. They, in turn, will likely spread those beliefs, as well. You are very likely financially supporting the speaker with continued visits and tithes. At the very least you are an enabler of beliefs you find immoral. It is very close to embracing the beliefs, if you look at the practical outcome--so close that there is no real practical difference between embracing the beliefs and holding them at arms' length.
This is not intended to be a personal attack on you or on anyone. However, it is intended to be a reflection on why some people might not be keen to accept that Mr. Obama should be "absolved" of his relationship with the Rev. Wright and his beliefs. There is personal accountability in all we do. In my opinion, Sen. Obama enabled Wright for 20 years to say and spread hurtful beliefs. Mr. Obama says he has the courage to lead the country, but he didn't have the courage to even attempt to transform even one small group--he apparently did not even have the courage to try to transform the beliefs of even one man whom he admires. This doesn't exactly demonstrate presidential leadership to me.
I have to ask...why is this such a big deal...? it's not like Obama said these things himself....
so he may have sat and listened to his pastor say some things you or I may not agree with...so what...
Does everyone have to agree with everything their clergy says...?
I think people are making a big deal over nothing...
would democrats feel the same way if mccain's pastor said hateful things about gays, blacks, america, etc.....? the same church he sat in for 20 years? I find it hard to believe it would be ok. for me? I would have the same issues.
As I stated before, Wright sells DVDs of his sermons. If there more, worse comments than the ones we hear over and over again on the news, we'd be hearing them as well. A couple minutes taken completely out of context does not make for enough material to cover 20 years. Like I said, an honest voter will see the religious issue as a wash and vote for one, the other, or neither based on other issues.
Now, I have an issue with it being called hate speech, because I don't hear it that way.
well he said things like the KKA of America and told his black audience that blacks are fighting the wrong enemy in regards to black on black crime. you are entitled to your opinion but I see that as hate speech.
would democrats feel the same way if mccain's pastor said hateful things about gays, blacks, america, etc.....? the same church he sat in for 20 years? I find it hard to believe it would be ok. for me? I would have the same issues.
again...I say "who cares"...
again, I have to ask, why is this an issue...? Obama did not say anything...
again, I have to ask, why is this an issue...? Obama did not say anything...
why must people link clergy with candidates...?
I really don't care what church anyone attends...
Frankly, I'm curious if there even exists an issue about Obama that wouldn't get the same 'who cares' reply.
****and as I've already stated, I don't think this issue is an important one. I only think it would indeed be pretty big for many of you if the names were switched with McCain or Hillary. I think it would be a big 'I care' issue then.
If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
Frankly, I'm curious if there even exists an issue about Obama that wouldn't get the same 'who cares' reply.
****and as I've already stated, I don't think this issue is an important one. I only think it would indeed be pretty big for many of you if the names were switched with McCain or Hillary. I think it would be a big 'I care' issue then.
Not if I thought highly of the pastor. That's where this has been spun, and you don't even realize or care. If anyone here really does some investigating you will see what a good man he is. I don't say that about a lot of religious folk, but he really is trying to help his community.
Not if I thought highly of the pastor. That's where this has been spun, and you don't even realize or care. If anyone here really does some investigating you will see what a good man he is. I don't say that about a lot of religious folk, but he really is trying to help his community.
The issue was whether Wright influenced Obama pertaining to the remarks in question, which is very conceivable.
And I'm sorry, but after the posts I've read on here, I find it hard to believe most of you would be giving Hillary a free pass on this kinda thing if it were her.
If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
The issue was whether Wright influenced Obama pertaining to the remarks in question, which is very conceivable.
And I'm sorry, but after the posts I've read on here, I find it hard to believe most of you would be giving Hillary a free pass on this kinda thing if it were her.
I hope he did influence Obama with those sermons!!! Maybe that's why Barack wants to get the fuck out of Iraq????
And I have not posted anything about Hillary and her lying scandal because I don't care. I care about issues. And McBush and the republicans are what scare me most. Should Mccain have some stupid scandal, I'll leave that alone as well. It couldn't be as bad as his positions on world issues.
Obama's pastor doesn't bother me. It's not like Obama is going to make an anti white reality on planet earth. Not going to happen, and his world views, and take on religion, is bang on the money.
Progress is not made by everyone joining some new fad,
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
I hope he did influence Obama with those sermons!!! Maybe that's why Barack wants to get the fuck out of Iraq????
I hope that he didn't take the perspective of whites out to get blacks from Wright, then. I don't share your optimism that Obama is going to get us out of Iraq. One of his advisors was quoted as saying the '16 months after taking office estimate' given by him is a 'best case scenario'. It all depends on which crowd he's talking to most of the time. I don't see any consistancy.
And I have not posted anything about Hillary and her lying scandal because I don't care. I care about issues. And McBush and the republicans are what scare me most. Should Mccain have some stupid scandal, I'll leave that alone as well. It couldn't be as bad as his positions on world issues.
Then that point doesn't apply to you, in the least. I prefer to stick with the issues, too.
If you want to tell people the truth, make them laugh, otherwise they'll kill you.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
Obama's pastor doesn't bother me. It's not like Obama is going to make an anti white reality on planet earth. Not going to happen, and his world views, and take on religion, is bang on the money.
Nice to see that someone who doesn't care for Obama can see things as they are and admit it.
The issue was whether Wright influenced Obama pertaining to the remarks in question, which is very conceivable.
And I'm sorry, but after the posts I've read on here, I find it hard to believe most of you would be giving Hillary a free pass on this kinda thing if it were her.
Hillary would not get a free pass on this. A reversed situation with Clinton's minister saying comparable things would ensure a firestorm or such proportions, she would never have been able to consider running for dog catcher, no less president.
How does this not matter? Obama doesn't say this objectionable stuff himself, but he gives $27,000+ *this year* to a church that does. It matters. You vote with your money. You talk with it, like it or not. Every time you buy clothes made by a sweatshop or a rug made by child laborers you are perpetuating sweatshops and childhood slavery. It doesn't matter that you're not personally the enslaver; you're paying someone else to do that for you so you can have something you want. I don't care if that something you want is a tangible or an intangible. In the end, you are financing and perpetuating a practice no matter how far removed from it you like to think you are. So long as you are providing a market for the ideas or practices, you are complicit. And it does matter.
I hope that he didn't take the perspective of whites out to get blacks from Wright, then. I don't share your optimism that Obama is going to get us out of Iraq. One of his advisors was quoted as saying the '16 months after taking office estimate' given by him is a 'best case scenario'. It all depends on which crowd he's talking to most of the time. I don't see any consistancy.
Then that point doesn't apply to you, in the least. I prefer to stick with the issues, too.
To be honest, I don't really see anyone getting us out of Iraq anytime soon. It really is a quagmire over there. We can't really leave until the place doesn't just collapse under its own weight. And when will that be? Not anytime soon. As much as I would prefer not to see McCain in office, he may be the only presidential contender who is actually being realistic or openly honest about Iraq. I think that both Clinton and Obama are playing politics/selling us a story we like about leaving Iraq. We may in fact *have* to have some type of military presence in Iraq for the next 100 years, even as the majority of troops are withdrawn. So, in fact, I don't really see us as "leaving" Iraq. We're not going to do that because it's against our national interests to abandon Iraq. But, hopefully, we'll be able to bring a good portion of our troops home within a reasonable time frame. Again, though, I'm not sure what "reasonable time frame" actually means since I feel that I don't really have a good grasp on the depth of the problems we face over there.
Comments
did you figure out who "Ferricon" is and how to spell his name yet?
An honest undecided voter will then see that the religious issue is a wash and move on to different issues to base their decision on.
I agree the right have issues with christian wackos. but its mccain vs obama. mccain hasn't sat in church for 20 years listening to such hate speech. its easy for people to see the difference, this isnt a matter of extreme christian views vs extreme wright views.
Now, I have an issue with it being called hate speech, because I don't hear it that way.
for me...no...
I could care less what is pastor said...
I have to ask...why is this such a big deal...? it's not like Obama said these things himself....
so he may have sat and listened to his pastor say some things you or I may not agree with...so what...
Does everyone have to agree with everything their clergy says...?
I think people are making a big deal over nothing...
I've been a member of no church all my life because I can't stand to perpetuate the anti-whatever rants of various church leaders. I could not go to a church that preached anti-white sentiments or anti-gay sentiments, etc. I can't quietly go and tacitly support the prejudiced statements of others. I feel that in doing so, I am supporting my own beliefs, the history of my family and the beliefs of my family be damned. (I sound something like Wright myself at the moment, it strikes me.) However, I do feel that way. On my father's side of the family are a bunch of fundamentalist and racist ministers. I don't need their history and beliefs as part of mine in my life. I vehemently reject what they have to say in no uncertain terms. I don't have to sit "politely" while other speak for me, no matter that what they say is not what I would ever say. Of course, this comes at a price, which not everyone is exactly thrilled to pay.
I am not trying to start anything or be unfriendly, however, as I do have a history of saying what I think and not standing by what others say quietly, I must say that I do not understand standing by Sunday after Sunday listening to someone expounding ideas that are so clearly wrong and saying nothing or doing anything to change the situation from the inside out. I do understand wanting to be part of a group, but surely there are other groups to be a member of that would more clearly echo one's beliefs. I don't understand allying oneself with a group that is fundamentally contrary to one's person.
You may not be embracing any particular person's beliefs by going a particular church, but you are enabling those beliefs as you are enabling the leader to continue to spread his or her beliefs to others throughout the years. They, in turn, will likely spread those beliefs, as well. You are very likely financially supporting the speaker with continued visits and tithes. At the very least you are an enabler of beliefs you find immoral. It is very close to embracing the beliefs, if you look at the practical outcome--so close that there is no real practical difference between embracing the beliefs and holding them at arms' length.
This is not intended to be a personal attack on you or on anyone. However, it is intended to be a reflection on why some people might not be keen to accept that Mr. Obama should be "absolved" of his relationship with the Rev. Wright and his beliefs. There is personal accountability in all we do. In my opinion, Sen. Obama enabled Wright for 20 years to say and spread hurtful beliefs. Mr. Obama says he has the courage to lead the country, but he didn't have the courage to even attempt to transform even one small group--he apparently did not even have the courage to try to transform the beliefs of even one man whom he admires. This doesn't exactly demonstrate presidential leadership to me.
would democrats feel the same way if mccain's pastor said hateful things about gays, blacks, america, etc.....? the same church he sat in for 20 years? I find it hard to believe it would be ok. for me? I would have the same issues.
well he said things like the KKA of America and told his black audience that blacks are fighting the wrong enemy in regards to black on black crime. you are entitled to your opinion but I see that as hate speech.
again...I say "who cares"...
again, I have to ask, why is this an issue...? Obama did not say anything...
why must people link clergy with candidates...?
I really don't care what church anyone attends...
Frankly, I'm curious if there even exists an issue about Obama that wouldn't get the same 'who cares' reply.
****and as I've already stated, I don't think this issue is an important one. I only think it would indeed be pretty big for many of you if the names were switched with McCain or Hillary. I think it would be a big 'I care' issue then.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
Not if I thought highly of the pastor. That's where this has been spun, and you don't even realize or care. If anyone here really does some investigating you will see what a good man he is. I don't say that about a lot of religious folk, but he really is trying to help his community.
The issue was whether Wright influenced Obama pertaining to the remarks in question, which is very conceivable.
And I'm sorry, but after the posts I've read on here, I find it hard to believe most of you would be giving Hillary a free pass on this kinda thing if it were her.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
I hope he did influence Obama with those sermons!!! Maybe that's why Barack wants to get the fuck out of Iraq????
And I have not posted anything about Hillary and her lying scandal because I don't care. I care about issues. And McBush and the republicans are what scare me most. Should Mccain have some stupid scandal, I'll leave that alone as well. It couldn't be as bad as his positions on world issues.
and reveling in it's loyalty. It's made by forming coalitions
over specific principles, goals, and policies.
http://i36.tinypic.com/66j31x.jpg
(\__/)
( o.O)
(")_(")
I hope that he didn't take the perspective of whites out to get blacks from Wright, then. I don't share your optimism that Obama is going to get us out of Iraq. One of his advisors was quoted as saying the '16 months after taking office estimate' given by him is a 'best case scenario'. It all depends on which crowd he's talking to most of the time. I don't see any consistancy.
Then that point doesn't apply to you, in the least. I prefer to stick with the issues, too.
Man is least himself when he talks in his own person. Give him a mask, and he will tell you the truth.
-Oscar Wilde
Nice to see that someone who doesn't care for Obama can see things as they are and admit it.
Hillary would not get a free pass on this. A reversed situation with Clinton's minister saying comparable things would ensure a firestorm or such proportions, she would never have been able to consider running for dog catcher, no less president.
How does this not matter? Obama doesn't say this objectionable stuff himself, but he gives $27,000+ *this year* to a church that does. It matters. You vote with your money. You talk with it, like it or not. Every time you buy clothes made by a sweatshop or a rug made by child laborers you are perpetuating sweatshops and childhood slavery. It doesn't matter that you're not personally the enslaver; you're paying someone else to do that for you so you can have something you want. I don't care if that something you want is a tangible or an intangible. In the end, you are financing and perpetuating a practice no matter how far removed from it you like to think you are. So long as you are providing a market for the ideas or practices, you are complicit. And it does matter.
To be honest, I don't really see anyone getting us out of Iraq anytime soon. It really is a quagmire over there. We can't really leave until the place doesn't just collapse under its own weight. And when will that be? Not anytime soon. As much as I would prefer not to see McCain in office, he may be the only presidential contender who is actually being realistic or openly honest about Iraq. I think that both Clinton and Obama are playing politics/selling us a story we like about leaving Iraq. We may in fact *have* to have some type of military presence in Iraq for the next 100 years, even as the majority of troops are withdrawn. So, in fact, I don't really see us as "leaving" Iraq. We're not going to do that because it's against our national interests to abandon Iraq. But, hopefully, we'll be able to bring a good portion of our troops home within a reasonable time frame. Again, though, I'm not sure what "reasonable time frame" actually means since I feel that I don't really have a good grasp on the depth of the problems we face over there.
douche.