AMERICAblog: Did Hillary sit next to Rev. Wright at prayer breakfast?
CDS2
· 1 year ago
test
High Crimes & Misdemeanors
· 1 year ago
oh crap, not CDS????
CDS2
· 1 year ago
I'm baaaaaack.....
ScottPakin
· 1 year ago
Every single day Every word you say Every game you play Every time you stay Ill be watching you
Oh, cant you see You belong to me How my poor heart aches With every post you make
Every move you make Every vow you break Every smile you fake Every claim you stake Ill be watching you
EdNSted
· 1 year ago
After a very frustrating day yesterday, I finally got IE7 to work with the new Disqus commenting system. I had to first shut down all instances of my browser, then from the Control Panel, Internet Options, delete ALL temp files and ALL cookies. Then restart IE and come back to Ablog, and FINALLY, clicking on te login link actually worked and took me to the Disqus login page. After that, I was able to post comments.
John Aravosis
· 1 year ago
But just think, all that brain activity fended off Alzheimer's for a good 5 more years :-) Actually, I failed to mention previously that Haloscan permitted us to ban a max of 20 people, that's it. We had to keep unbanning the trolls in order to ban more. Also, Haloscan didn't permit us other ways of banning people, etc. I'm not kidding, this is a HUGE step forward in terms of keeping the comments troll free, or less troll-y.
SarainKC
· 1 year ago
Frankly, I love the fact that the trolls are contained more. Although I don't get the rating system. I noted John, you only have a "2". I don't feel so bad now :)
John Aravosis
· 1 year ago
Well, I think the ratings help do two things. They help rate comments themselves, so a comment that's really hated, i.e, a troll, can potentially be disappeared,but just as importantly, the more positive ratings you get personally the more clout you get, which help[s us, and you, perhaps get a sense of which names are real people and which are new trolls. Yeah, the trolls can click negatives on some peop;le's profile, but far more of us will click negative on a troll, and I'm pretty sure that the system gives me a warning light, so to speak, when a comment gets too many negatives - i.e., I can go check it out to make sure it's not a troll.
Jeremy in Denver
· 1 year ago
Yes, I'm hoping people do take the time to positively rate whoever posts thoughtful content and negatively rate those who resort to lies, strawmen, personal attacks, and so on so the trolls will get such heavy negative karma that they get dropped off the list entirely.
Trolls do suck, big-time.
OlderAndWiser
· 1 year ago
Thanks, John. Actually, I rather like it now. Doesn't take this old lady long to adjust to changes. : ) And I'm just jesting with Nellie.
High Crimes & Misdemeanors
· 1 year ago
Ed - I gave my laptop a swift kick like i do when i meet repukes. laptop finally working with DISQUS. repuke, not so good....
+
Nigel Elliott
· 1 year ago
Priceless. John, you just made my Friday. :)
BLOGGING BITCH!
· 1 year ago
So, I can only register to comment if I'm just a number? I don't get it.
OlderAndWiser
· 1 year ago
So, you don't know what "alphanumeric" means?
OlderAndWiser
· 1 year ago
Oh yeah, this is the woman whose own daughter is not allowed to talk to the press. WHY? Hillary Clinton seems to talk about everyone else, with gusto.
People who live in stones shouldn't throw glass houses.
GDawg
· 1 year ago
This is great, to see Democrats labeled as racist. Geraldine Ferraro is outraged by labeled as a racist. Hillary & Bill have labeled as racist. Now the Dems get to see to what Repubs have had to experience. And it's only going to get worse for the Dems.
Imagine if Obama will the popular vote, but Hillary gets the superdelegates because of backroom deals. The blacks are going to be outraged and screaming racism, and it will directed at white Democrats. Finally the Dems get a taste of their own medicine. I love it.
lynchie
· 1 year ago
But republicans are racist.
GrantinHouston
· 1 year ago
Blacks supported the Party of Lincoln up until FDR's "New Deal" came to the aid of poor people, black and white. Even so, Eisenhower still got 39% of the black vote in the 1950's. However, Richard Nixon took advantage of Southern Democrat's anger with Lyndon Johnson over his Civil Rights initiatives and actively invited the disgruntled "Dixiecrats" to come join the GOP as part of his "Southern Strategy", to turn the Old South from "blue" to "red"! After 1965, black America no longer felt welcome in the Republican Party.
While I agree with you much of what you said. "I love it". I don't get that statement. It is what is wrong with our political process. We all want to see our elected leaders succeed no matter what party, even if we don't necessarily agree with every thing they stand for. But to present the scenario you just presented, which I agree is plausible and to end it with "I love it".
Shameful.
I can't stand Bush and his policies...but I am certainly not "loving" watch this administration and our country for that matter fall apart.
High Crimes & Misdemeanors
· 1 year ago
The blacks are going to be outraged and screaming racism, and it will directed at white Democrats. Finally the Dems get a taste of their own medicine. I love it.
-------
interestingly, is it not courious to you, that there is a huge upsurege in control programs like "buyback" your guns in the black community. supported by oligarchy through Chase Bank????
but Gdawg, your last point is obsure at best. the DEMS are being played for fools focusing on this NON-ISSUE!!! thats the real issue here... not racism... silly marine.
highcrimes&misdemeanors +
GrantinHouston
· 1 year ago
Along with reich-wing neocon Charles Krauthammer "more of the same" Rev. Wright hate reprinted from the WaPo in this morning's Houston Chronicle, a black Chronicle manager, Stafford Burns, answers with a good Op-Ed piece about the the black church experience.
Burns asks about the hate John McCain has for Asians when he says, ""I hated the gooks. I will hate them as long as I live." He remarked that there sometimes is a reason for expressing hate.
Then the Chronicle places a column under Krauthammer's also from the WaPo's E.J. Dionne who remarked that in a YouTube world, Martin Luther King may have been given the same treatment as Fox and the MSM has given Rev. Wright. King often didn't preach the same way before a black audience as he did before a mixed one.
Listen to what King said about the Vietnam War at his own Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta on Feb. 4, 1968: "God didn't call America to engage in a senseless, unjust war. ... And we are criminals in that war. We've committed more war crimes almost than any nation in the world, and I'm going to continue to say it. And we won't stop it because of our pride and our arrogance as a nation. But God has a way of even putting nations in their place." King then predicted this response from the Almighty: "And if you don't stop your reckless course, I'll rise up and break the backbone of your power."
Good analogy, Grant, but you must remember this is the age of the Easily Offended. Whites no longer like to remember the inherent racism in this country against the descendants of slaves. Sort of like disabusing yourself of any historical foundation for the way races other than Caucasian in the US were treated.
SarainKC
· 1 year ago
I love how they have now taken Barack's comment about his grandmother being a typical white woman and twisted it. I am a white woman, and although I like to think of myself completely free of any racists opinions, this whole situation has made me reflect on my own perceptions. It is true, although hard to admit, that even now, with all I know, I too will find myself clenching my purse more tightly and often times feeling anxious if I'm alone, passing a young black man. I've had to examine myself and it's uncomfortable. Apparently it's excruciating for those who are thumping their chests in protest. Very telling.
OlderAndWiser
· 1 year ago
Disqus even advises you when you're being followed. Just got this email:
If you'd like, click the "follow" button to add nellie_oleson to your follow list.
Thanks, The Disqus Team
Makes it sound like the NSA is all over me. : )
Nellie Oleson
· 1 year ago
I hope you don't mind. It is a bit "Big Brother" though, isn't it?
OlderAndWiser
· 1 year ago
No, I don't mind, as long as you are NOT the NSA. Or a stalker. : )
Nellie Oleson
· 1 year ago
Neither.
OlderAndWiser
· 1 year ago
Just jestin' this morning. : )
John Aravosis
· 1 year ago
You can turn off those notifications in your settings. But, really, all your posts are public anyway, so what's the big deal if someone can subscribe to read what you write. I mean, are you guys really commenting on blogs so that your comments WON'T be ready more widely?
Mark in Florida
· 1 year ago
Here here. (or is it Hear hear) Not sure. Anyway, I love the new blog format. hopefully it will keep the blog more informative, and above board and weed out some of the more crass contributors.
Nellie Oleson
· 1 year ago
I've been putting my favorite people to read on my follow list because it makes it easy to see where they're commenting. I just removed them all though, because I didn't realize Disqus felt it necessary to clutter their inbox with notifications.
AngelaChanning
· 1 year ago
Oh I was flattered Nellie. Thanks hon. I am still a bit confused by all of this. Sometimes the oldest comments appear first then the newest. But I will get used to it. Thank you for listening. :-)
ScottPakin
· 1 year ago
If only we got such notifications when the NSA was all over us....
High Crimes & Misdemeanors
· 1 year ago
The nose is a give-away...
So the next thing we'll hear from hilary is that, well its no big deal.
Which it should be. Again folks, there really isnt anything wrong with what the REV said, most all of it was true.
But you see, our eyes are being taken off the ball. We have corruption in Iraq, criminals in the whitehouse, the economy failing and teetering on bankruptcy.... this is all just a distraction, and we are perpetuating it by this continuous reporting on the REV speachs..
REFOCUS folks, REFOCUS!!!
+ High Crimes & Misdemeanors
GrantinHouston
· 1 year ago
If you watch the bigger sermon from which Fox News or whomever did the snipping of a 20 second sound bite, there is nothing wrong with what Rev. Wright said.
Around this video clip at YouTube are many more of Rev. Wright's sermons. I can see why Barack Obama, if he was present for many of these, may not have heard anything inflammatory.
Mark in Florida
· 1 year ago
OK. I am an Obama supporter. Big time, and even I think this photo op stuff is unfair to the Clintons. This kind of stuff backfires on Obama supporters and frankly goes against his wonderful speech a few days ago.
We have two great candidates who are only millimeters apart on most issues. All of this posturing is only going to disenfranchise the voters.
Let's get our crap together Democrats, or we will be living with 4 years of McCain and more Bush policy. Canada, Australia, Britain.....here I come if that is the case.
SarainKC
· 1 year ago
This is fair because it illustrates all the feigned "concern" over Obama getting elected because of his relationship with the same pastor the Clinton's turned to when they sought redemption from a pissed off populace was another attempt to manipulate the super delegates. As we've seen Gov Bill Richardson endorse Barack today, I think this little tactic will backfire, as it should.
Mark in Florida
· 1 year ago
Point well taken. However, I respectfully disagree on the basis that we need to discern between simply standard politics, and holding accountable questionable politics that rise to the level of deceit. This does not rise to that level. This man was seated next to the first lady, had they known he made such incendiary remarks as we have seen, I am sure they would distance themselves from this guy. And frankly so would I.
scooter in brooklyn
· 1 year ago
there's a good diary at kos contextualizing the wright sermons
But what kind of third party does he intend to form?
Rab
· 1 year ago
Thats why Hillary was silent, shazammm...
SarainKC
· 1 year ago
Yes, Hillary smiles and implies she's above it all while her little minions do her dirty work behind the scenes.
BLOGGING BITCH!
· 1 year ago
Never though I'd miss Halo.
Nigel Elliott
· 1 year ago
Does Hillary Clinton have a mole in the State Department?
Hillary Clinton Questioned Obama Travel on March 12 2008 This is what Hillary Clinton campaign said in a memo they released on March 12:
"As voters evaluate you as a potential Commander-in-Chief, do you think it’s legitimate for people to be concerned that you have traveled to only one NATO country, on a brief stopover trip in 2005, and have never traveled to Latin America? http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/3/21/82444/5...
Ann_in_KC
· 1 year ago
I smell smoke...
bobski
· 1 year ago
So John, sitting next to the racist minister during a "Prayer Breakfast" equates to sitting in his church, listening to his hate filled, racist sermons for 20 years and thinking of him as family?
You seriously need to ease up on the Kool-Aid, son.
Nigel Elliott
· 1 year ago
Do you eat at your table with your hood on or off?
bobski
· 1 year ago
Ah yes, the ad hominem response, a certain indicator that my point hit close to home.
Jeremy in Denver
· 1 year ago
I just see that as a trollish response to a trollish post.
What you don't get, bobski, is that many people (myself included) just don't buy your and your media's tortured logic that pretty much requires us to make the following assumptions: 1) You're telling the truth about the nature of these sermons. 2) The two sermons represent the totality of this preacher's preaching style. a) We must accept your soundbites. 3) Obama must be Guilty by Association.
I asked this on TP of a GOP plant who used your exact same little argument.
What must Obama do to absolve himself of guilt in your eyes? Is it even possible?
Trolls exist in all flavors, and I would hazard to guess you're just a Clinton supporting troll at best and a GOP plant troll at worst.
*disrecommends both nigel's and bobski's posts*
bobski
· 1 year ago
bobski
· 1 year ago
> jbalsle wrote: > > I just see that as a trollish response to a trollish post.
More generalizations?
> What you don't get, bobski, is that many people (myself included) just don't buy your and your media's tortured logic that pretty much requires us to make the following assumptions:
MY media? My, my you do jump to illogical conclusions.
> 1) You're telling the truth about the nature of these sermons.
I am telling what I see and read, what you assume is something else entirely. Remember what has been said about assuming.
> 2) The two sermons represent the totality of this preacher's preaching style. > a) We must accept your soundbites.
The two sermons that have made it into the public eye. Accept or accept not, it is your choice.
> 3) Obama must be Guilty by Association.
Birds of a feather and all that.
> What must Obama do to absolve himself of guilt in your eyes?
Unless he had a mind to effecting Change in his mentor's outlook, nothing.
> Is it even possible?
Given that he has known of Wright's diatribes and done nothing, the answer is likely not.
> Trolls exist in all flavors,
Your response is ample proof of your remark.
> and I would hazard to guess you're just a Clinton supporting
Nope, sorry, I didn't vote for Bill.
> troll at best and a GOP plant troll at worst.
GOP plant? Well I did vote for Goldwater in 1964. Although I would have voted for JFK in 1960 but I was only 20 years old then and the voting age was 21.
-- "The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the abundance of those who have much, it is whether we provide enough for those who have little." -- Franklin D. Roosevelt
John Aravosis
· 1 year ago
Actually Bobski, the issue is that if he sat next to Hillary at a breakfast, especially a breakfast at which it was planned that Bill would repent for the Monica issue, then the man sitting next to Hillary would have been specifically chosen to take that seat and he would have been fully vetted. He would have been someone who the Clintons held in the highest regard. And that, my friend, is relevant when the Clintons are now saying that the same man is a hate monger.
bobski
· 1 year ago
The Clintons are saying he is a hate monger? No John, the Media is saying he is a hate monger.
This is nothing new, Wright has been known as such since the 60s.
OlderAndWiser
· 1 year ago
Oh come on, people. Did what Jeremiah Wright say really rank up there with the KKKlan, the American fascists and the "silent majority" style preachers? I very much doubt it. I've been around for 67 years and often either heard or read about the comments so-called white "moralists" preached about regarding minority populations in this country. Why don't whites want to admit it?
dad
· 1 year ago
wow. Hillary really is full of shit.
OlderAndWiser
· 1 year ago
And how many of those same white "moralists" are saying pretty much the same about the LGBT community? And have been saying it for many, many years? I left religion a long time ago because at age 15, I smelled the hypocrisy and condemnation of sex outside marriage. And grew up as a human being as a result.
4dogs
· 1 year ago
I think it would be better to try and get beyond tit for tat over who's sitting with Wright. Obama is wise to talk about things that most people are worried about. The more he does this the more confidence people will have with him. He has taken a hit with this. It would help for us all to get back on track. So the guy in states who are worried about losing their home will say: He's the one who will help me. In the end that will be who gets the vote.
nicho
· 1 year ago
It would, if it weren't for the whisper smear campaign by the Hillary camp.
tofubo
· 1 year ago
john, your 1st mistake is applying the same rules you do to obama to a clinton or a republican, stop doing that, and we can all sleep better
BREAKING NEWS: This just in . . . Obama shits, and it don't stink (so says Jonny Aravosis)!
nicho
· 1 year ago
Well, I *have* been invited to the White House. And I never got anywhere near the president, much less had my picture taken with him. However, I did get to chat with a couple of low-level White House functionaries.
To be fair, the president wasn't there. It was Reagan and he was upstairs recovering from the Bush Crime Family's attempt on his life. However, Poppy, Bar and Nancy stood in for him. They never mingled with the commoners. They made a brief cameo and bolted.
dacaesar
· 1 year ago
Wright is solely Obama's political problem none of the Clintons' making. These desperate attempts to tar Hillary with flimsy associations with Wright smack of pure wingnuttery. These gotcha photos mean nothing in relation to Hillary. She has her own baggage of puffed up and manufactured offenses without any help from John. If this is the game we feel must play in order to win, then we are sure to lose the presidency. It's sophomoric "she did it too" reactions that will sink us all and assure a McCain presidency.
nicho
· 1 year ago
It's the Clintonistas who have been propagating a whisper smear campaign about Obama and White. They opened a can of worms. Now, they're being dragged in.
A Clinton supporter who lives down the street called me the other day and asked "So, what do you think about Obama's minister? I told her she probably didn't want to pay attention to it. She persisted it. I told her I was more concerned about Hillary's membership in a right-wing theocratic cult, The Family.
Coming Undone
· 1 year ago
This picture should remind the Clintons about all of the people that stood with them in their time of need, but instead of being thankful and moving away from the Rev Wright story, Hillary is trying to use the story to persuade the Super-Delegates to give her the nomination. This was also a time when Hillary was always talking about the right wing smear machine, and now because she wants to win at any cost she has become a part of that right wing smear machine.
sukabi
· 1 year ago
It would be instructive for everyone concerned to actually LISTEN to the sermon in full before opening their mouths and commenting... what the "media" is playing is a gross distortion of what Rev. Wright's sermon was about... and a gross distortion of what he actually said... and it is INEXCUSABLE as the FULL sermons are available for everyone to listen to.
The general public will never listen to the whole sermon. That's the political reality. People will see and hear an angry black minister ranting political anger to a predominantly black and adulate audience and say "I've seen enough". If people are indignant about Clinton's supposed "whispering campaign", get ready for the right wing screaming from the rooftops 24/7 onslaught.
And while we're discussing not giving context enough weight, Obama seems to give himself way too much credit for one speech against a resolution he didn't have to vote for, while virtually blaming Hillary for the whole debacle and its aftermath. That's not fair either, but that's politics. By that same reasoning, there was no difference between Bush and Kerry in 2004. We should have all stayed home.
sukabi
· 1 year ago
By posting the links HERE I wasn't aiming at the general public, but at members of THIS audience who are happily making knee jerk reactionary comments on something that is available to them in full context, but they are apparently too ____________ (fill in the blank) to actually find or listen to the available full sermon.
And yes, John Avarosis this means you as well. As one of the "High Profile, A-list bloggers on the "Intertubes" you, as well as the "MSM", contribute to "shaping" the "news"... and thus the opinions of your readers... Try raising the bar a bit and provide actual context and content for your pieces.
John Aravosis
· 1 year ago
Speaking of context, I have no idea what you're even talking about because you didn't bother mentioning it in your comment.
sukabi
· 1 year ago
The full context of the sermon(s), John.... You didn't and haven't bothered to post links to the actual sermon or even a more complete "snippet" of it as an instructive bit as to how the "MSM" is willfully distorting the Rev.'s sermons.
This whole Rev. Wright mashup, which has been going on now for over a week, could have been dispelled, and your readers better informed, IF, when the "story" broke you, and the rest of the "A-listers", did a bit of digging and posted the full sermons, instead of trying to excuse the "perceived" racism of Rev. Wright by saying "but those crazy white evangelicals are saying worse"....
dacaesar
· 1 year ago
OMG. John's not being fair to Obama by not posting the full sermons? It's not enough that John is completely in the tank for Obama and you ask for more? I'm sorry, but I don't have to listen to a whole "sermon" by Pat Robertson to know he's a loon. I suppose that some of Wright's statements are true, you have to admit that some are a bit of a stretch e.g. aids was caused by a white conspiracy against blacks. If anything, the gay community has a much stronger case to make on that front. But oh yeah, Wright isn't that sympathetic to that demographic for some reason.
sukabi
· 1 year ago
As I see it dacaesar, it's not Obama that John is short changing it's his readers. I don't believe that I once mentioned the effect this is having, or will have on either Hillary's or Obama's campaigns.
If John wants to inform his readers, and if, by the same token, his readers actually wish to be INFORMED voters then it behooves everyone if bits of "news" like this Rev. Wright "story" are discussed IN CONTEXT to discover how the "news" is being "SHAPED" for consumption and who is responsible for the "shaping". Or is the level of gutter trolling that defines our electoral process how you'd like things to stay?
dacaesar
· 1 year ago
John is not shortchanging anyone by not providing a better link to Wright's speeches. Anyone who would have the proclivity to watch them in their entirety would certainly do that on their own accord. I get the drift - "goddam america" could be seen as reasonable within the context of historic injustices e.g. slavery, misuse of military might etc. It's just that Obama must have seen this coming, just as I have heard about this guy months ago from wingers I know at my tennis club. Obama should have been savvy enough to do something about this before the inevitable shit hit the fan. Bush via Rove knew how to bury their skeletons way before W ran for the big office. I would expect no less from Barack Obama to at least try to do the same. The stupidity of our discourse demands no less vigilance.
sukabi
· 1 year ago
"The stupidity of our discourse" ... is being determined by sleaze mongers of the lowest variety.
The way to clean up the discourse is to dig it out at the source and expose the roots... by exposing those pushing the propaganda, distortions and outright lies... and holding all parties responsible for their dispersal accountable.
I don't see how that is possible without discussing things in context.
Wouldn't you like to have a candidate talk about real issues instead of make-believe "controversies" that are either "media inventions" or "fairy-tales" produced by a competing party?
I'm so sick of this grade school level crap I could scream.
Good God! You don't suppose Hillary's hatred was transferred to Rev. Wright through osmosis. Or was the seating arrangement a tacit approval for Wright's anti-American statements? Someone needs a time-out.
All Comments
Every word you say
Every game you play
Every time you stay
Ill be watching you
Oh, cant you see
You belong to me
How my poor heart aches
With every post you make
Every move you make
Every vow you break
Every smile you fake
Every claim you stake
Ill be watching you
Trolls do suck, big-time.
+
People who live in stones shouldn't throw glass houses.
Imagine if Obama will the popular vote, but Hillary gets the superdelegates because of backroom deals. The blacks are going to be outraged and screaming racism, and it will directed at white Democrats. Finally the Dems get a taste of their own medicine. I love it.
http://www.theonion.com/content/news/black_guy_...
While I agree with you much of what you said. "I love it". I don't get that statement. It is what is wrong with our political process. We all want to see our elected leaders succeed no matter what party, even if we don't necessarily agree with every thing they stand for. But to present the scenario you just presented, which I agree is plausible and to end it with "I love it".
Shameful.
I can't stand Bush and his policies...but I am certainly not "loving" watch this administration and our country for that matter fall apart.
-------
interestingly, is it not courious to you, that there is a huge upsurege in control programs like "buyback" your guns in the black community. supported by oligarchy through Chase Bank????
but Gdawg, your last point is obsure at best. the DEMS are being played for fools focusing on this NON-ISSUE!!! thats the real issue here... not racism... silly marine.
highcrimes&misdemeanors
+
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/editorial/o...
Burns asks about the hate John McCain has for Asians when he says, ""I hated the gooks. I will hate them as long as I live." He remarked that there sometimes is a reason for expressing hate.
Then the Chronicle places a column under Krauthammer's also from the WaPo's E.J. Dionne who remarked that in a YouTube world, Martin Luther King may have been given the same treatment as Fox and the MSM has given Rev. Wright. King often didn't preach the same way before a black audience as he did before a mixed one.
Listen to what King said about the Vietnam War at his own Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta on Feb. 4, 1968: "God didn't call America to engage in a senseless, unjust war. ... And we are criminals in that war. We've committed more war crimes almost than any nation in the world, and I'm going to continue to say it. And we won't stop it because of our pride and our arrogance as a nation. But God has a way of even putting nations in their place." King then predicted this response from the Almighty: "And if you don't stop your reckless course, I'll rise up and break the backbone of your power."
http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/editorial/o...
Hi OlderAndWiser,
nellie_oleson is now following your comments. Check out nellie_oleson's Disqus profile at: http://disqus.com/people/nellie_oleson/
If you'd like, click the "follow" button to add nellie_oleson to your follow list.
Thanks,
The Disqus Team
Makes it sound like the NSA is all over me. : )
format. hopefully it will keep the blog more informative, and above board and weed out some of the more crass contributors.
So the next thing we'll hear from hilary is that, well its no big deal.
Which it should be. Again folks, there really isnt anything wrong with what the REV said, most all of it was true.
But you see, our eyes are being taken off the ball. We have corruption in Iraq, criminals in the whitehouse, the economy failing and teetering on bankruptcy.... this is all just a distraction, and we are perpetuating it by this continuous reporting on the REV speachs..
REFOCUS folks, REFOCUS!!!
+
High Crimes & Misdemeanors
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QOdlnzkeoyQ
Around this video clip at YouTube are many more of Rev. Wright's sermons. I can see why Barack Obama, if he was present for many of these, may not have heard anything inflammatory.
We have two great candidates who are only millimeters apart on most issues. All of this posturing is only going to disenfranchise the voters.
Let's get our crap together Democrats, or we will be living with 4 years of McCain and more Bush policy. Canada, Australia, Britain.....here I come if that is the case.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/3/20/224958/...
http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=25612
Hillary Clinton Questioned Obama Travel on March 12 2008
This is what Hillary Clinton campaign said in a memo they released on March 12:
"As voters evaluate you as a potential Commander-in-Chief, do you think it’s legitimate for people to be concerned that you have traveled to only one NATO country, on a brief stopover trip in 2005, and have never traveled to Latin America?
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/3/21/82444/5...
You seriously need to ease up on the Kool-Aid, son.
What you don't get, bobski, is that many people (myself included) just don't buy your and your media's tortured logic that pretty much requires us to make the following assumptions:
1) You're telling the truth about the nature of these sermons.
2) The two sermons represent the totality of this preacher's preaching style.
a) We must accept your soundbites.
3) Obama must be Guilty by Association.
I asked this on TP of a GOP plant who used your exact same little argument.
What must Obama do to absolve himself of guilt in your eyes? Is it even possible?
Trolls exist in all flavors, and I would hazard to guess you're just a Clinton supporting troll at best and a GOP plant troll at worst.
*disrecommends both nigel's and bobski's posts*
>
> I just see that as a trollish response to a trollish post.
More generalizations?
> What you don't get, bobski, is that many people (myself included) just don't buy your and your media's tortured logic that pretty much requires us to make the following assumptions:
MY media? My, my you do jump to illogical conclusions.
> 1) You're telling the truth about the nature of these sermons.
I am telling what I see and read, what you assume is something else entirely. Remember what has been said about assuming.
> 2) The two sermons represent the totality of this preacher's preaching style.
> a) We must accept your soundbites.
The two sermons that have made it into the public eye. Accept or accept not, it is your choice.
> 3) Obama must be Guilty by Association.
Birds of a feather and all that.
> What must Obama do to absolve himself of guilt in your eyes?
Unless he had a mind to effecting Change in his mentor's outlook, nothing.
> Is it even possible?
Given that he has known of Wright's diatribes and done nothing, the answer is likely not.
> Trolls exist in all flavors,
Your response is ample proof of your remark.
> and I would hazard to guess you're just a Clinton supporting
Nope, sorry, I didn't vote for Bill.
> troll at best and a GOP plant troll at worst.
GOP plant? Well I did vote for Goldwater in 1964. Although I would have voted for JFK in 1960 but I was only 20 years old then and the voting age was 21.
--
"The test of our progress is not whether we add more to the
abundance of those who have much, it is whether we provide
enough for those who have little." -- Franklin D. Roosevelt
This is nothing new, Wright has been known as such since the 60s.
So the guy in states who are worried about losing their home will say: He's the one who will help me. In the end that will be who gets the vote.
http://www.ordoesitexplode.com/photos/uncategor...
Thank you for listening.
To be fair, the president wasn't there. It was Reagan and he was upstairs recovering from the Bush Crime Family's attempt on his life. However, Poppy, Bar and Nancy stood in for him. They never mingled with the commoners. They made a brief cameo and bolted.
A Clinton supporter who lives down the street called me the other day and asked "So, what do you think about Obama's minister? I told her she probably didn't want to pay attention to it. She persisted it. I told her I was more concerned about Hillary's membership in a right-wing theocratic cult, The Family.
This was also a time when Hillary was always talking about the right wing smear machine, and now because she wants to win at any cost she has become a part of that right wing smear machine.
http://dailykos.com/story/2008/3/20/224958/631/...
http://www.youtube.com/user/TRINITYCHGO
And while we're discussing not giving context enough weight, Obama seems to give himself way too much credit for one speech against a resolution he didn't have to vote for, while virtually blaming Hillary for the whole debacle and its aftermath. That's not fair either, but that's politics. By that same reasoning, there was no difference between Bush and Kerry in 2004. We should have all stayed home.
And yes, John Avarosis this means you as well. As one of the "High Profile, A-list bloggers on the "Intertubes" you, as well as the "MSM", contribute to "shaping" the "news"... and thus the opinions of your readers... Try raising the bar a bit and provide actual context and content for your pieces.
This whole Rev. Wright mashup, which has been going on now for over a week, could have been dispelled, and your readers better informed, IF, when the "story" broke you, and the rest of the "A-listers", did a bit of digging and posted the full sermons, instead of trying to excuse the "perceived" racism of Rev. Wright by saying "but those crazy white evangelicals are saying worse"....
If John wants to inform his readers, and if, by the same token, his readers actually wish to be INFORMED voters then it behooves everyone if bits of "news" like this Rev. Wright "story" are discussed IN CONTEXT to discover how the "news" is being "SHAPED" for consumption and who is responsible for the "shaping". Or is the level of gutter trolling that defines our electoral process how you'd like things to stay?
The way to clean up the discourse is to dig it out at the source and expose the roots... by exposing those pushing the propaganda, distortions and outright lies... and holding all parties responsible for their dispersal accountable.
I don't see how that is possible without discussing things in context.
Wouldn't you like to have a candidate talk about real issues instead of make-believe "controversies" that are either "media inventions" or "fairy-tales" produced by a competing party?
I'm so sick of this grade school level crap I could scream.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RvMbeVQj6Lw&eurl...