Rev. Jerimiah Wright

[Guest Guest]

Obama willingly subjected himself to an onslaught of questions about this, answering every single one; a show of sincerity. His family analogy really made sense to me. After all, we've all got some member of our family who says stuff we don't agree with. But we don't cut them off for that, do we? It's the same way here--the pastor's been a part of Obama's life for a long time, and he'll quickly and easily repudiate the COMMENTS, but he's not going to disown the person behind them just because of that.

Regardless, when it comes to the general election, this will be a non-issue. McCain does not DARE bring this subject up then, as he's got pastor problems FAR more severe. Connections to Hagee, Robertson, the late Falwell, and so on. Also, McCain HAS agreed with comments made by at least one of the latter two (I can't remember which); he said something along the lines of "I support his position"--memory's failing me at the moment.

[Bryan]

So there's nothing wrong with an institution that had to pay OVER $600,000,000.00 last year alone to pay off the victims of predator priests?

Sure there's something wrong with that. But lots of institutions pay out tons of money for having done things wrong but you only mentioned one. So how did the manties get in a twist? Were you among the abused?

That explains a lot about your thinking.

You're the one who used the logical fallacy (non sequitur of moving from my question to the notion that nothing is wrong with the RCC).

I think we learned more about your thinking then mine if we stick to rational reasoning.

[WilliamK]

It's now clear that Obama knew Wright would be a liability to his campaign, but he gave an interview where he said that Wright's controversial views were new to him.

Citation, please. I've seen where he denied having seen some specific sermons that have aired, but I have not seen where Obama denied all knowledge of Wright's controversial views.

[Guest Guest]

2) Iran-Contra supported the Contras against the Sandinistas. The Sandinistas were elected to the government, but their radical programs were no what the people requested. Rather than being voted into power, the Sandinistas rose through violent revolution and seized power.

They "were elected to the government" but "Rather than being voted into power, the Sandinistas rose through violent revolution and seized power" ????

Having a hard time remembering which side of your mouth you're talking out of?

[Bryan]

Citation, please.

In his Friday night cable mea culpas on the incendiary comments made by his spiritual adviser Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., repeatedly said, "I wasn't in church during the time that these statement were made. I did not hear such incendiary language myself, personally. Either in conversations with him or when I was in the pew, he always preached the social gospel. ... If I had heard them repeated, I would have quit. ... If I thought that was the repeated tenor of the church, then I wouldn’t feel comfortable there."

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/20...what-did-o.html

Here's a video. Look for it at just past the 1.5 minute mark.

http://weblogs.newsday.com/news/local/long...ight_rezko.html

I've seen where he denied having seen some specific sermons that have aired, but I have not seen where Obama denied all knowledge of Wright's controversial views.

Once can certainly parse his language such that he was referring to the cussing but Obama certainly left an impression that he was surprised by Wright's preaching (Clintonian, if we suppose something other than an accidental failure to communicate clearly). That doesn't jibe well with the NYT story about Obama and Wright contemplating his future separation from the campaign earlier last year.

[Bryan]

They "were elected to the government" but "Rather than being voted into power, the Sandinistas rose through violent revolution and seized power" ????

Having a hard time remembering which side of your mouth you're talking out of?

I'll explain it to you since you don't seem to know your history.

The Sandinistas seized power violently in the late 70s.

They held elections (finally) in 1984, and they won the popular vote at that time.

There. Was that so complicated?

[Guest Guest]

Sure there's something wrong with that. But lots of institutions pay out tons of money for having done things wrong but you only mentioned one. So how did the manties get in a twist? Were you among the abused?

Yes, I was abused by the Catholic church but not sexually. I was abused by being told lies at an impressionable age, by being fed the BS that it was the only true religion and others were by definition wrong.

That's an abuse of the trust that was placed in them and abuse and hypocrisy always get me in a twist.

[Bryan]

Yes, I was abused by the Catholic church but not sexually. I was abused by being told lies at an impressionable age, by being fed the BS that it was the only true religion and others were by definition wrong.

That's an abuse of the trust that was placed in them and abuse and hypocrisy always get me in a twist.

Will you also get around to the logical fallacy you committed now that you've explained your messed-up manties?

[Guest Keith]

Will you also get around to the logical fallacy you committed now that you've explained your messed-up manties?

It's no wonder we have the country we have. We will never, ever have the best and brightest leaders. We will always be stuck with substandard leaders like we have now. No one,myself, Bryan, 2Smart etc. could ever stand up to this kind of scrutiny. If we start condemning everyone for the actions of others then

all of us are condemned.

[Guest 2smart4u]

It's no wonder we have the country we have. We will never, ever have the best and brightest leaders. We will always be stuck with substandard leaders like we have now. No one,myself, Bryan, 2Smart etc. could ever stand up to this kind of scrutiny. If we start condemning everyone for the actions of others then

all of us are condemned.

You need to get out and get some air.

[Guest 2smart4u]

Yes, I was abused by the Catholic church but not sexually. I was abused by being told lies at an impressionable age, by being fed the BS that it was the only true religion and others were by definition wrong.

That's an abuse of the trust that was placed in them and abuse and hypocrisy always get me in a twist.

It's good to see you're able to confront your demons. Verbalization is the first step to recovery.

[Guest Guest]

I'll explain it to you since you don't seem to know your history.

The Sandinistas seized power violently in the late 70s.

They held elections (finally) in 1984, and they won the popular vote at that time.

There. Was that so complicated?

It would've been easier had you put in the proper order in the first place you pompous, self-righteous little twit.

[Guest Guest]

You're the one who used the logical fallacy (non sequitur of moving from my question to the notion that nothing is wrong with the RCC).

I think we learned more about your thinking then mine if we stick to rational reasoning.

I just have to say you may have the largest ego and be the biggest A**HOLE I've ever seen posting anywhere. Continue to examine your cecum, it's something you're eminently qualified to do.

[Guest Guest]

Will you also get around to the logical fallacy you committed now that you've explained your messed-up manties?

If you're too stupid to understand that taking young children under the guise of authority and filling them full of lies is ABUSE then screw your and your asinine sense of self-righteousness.

YOU are nothing but a wanker whose mommy bought him a dictionary, what an arsehole!

[Bryan]

It's no wonder we have the country we have.

The greatest in history, you mean?

We will never, ever have the best and brightest leaders. We will always be stuck with substandard leaders like we have now.

Who is it you were going to suggest to replace them? Graduating from Harvard is something very many elected officials have in common. Harvard would tell you that it takes the best and the brightest.

No one,myself, Bryan, 2Smart etc. could ever stand up to this kind of scrutiny. If we start condemning everyone for the actions of others then all of us are condemned.

There's Keith with his red herring techniques again. Sure, I suppose some people are blaming Obama for what Wright said. But as I've said repeatedly, the real issue is one of judgment. If Obama is an agent of change then why did his church remain fixated on race for 20 years while he was a member? How could he go there for that length of time and not know what Wright was all about (turns out he apparently did know but wouldn't admit it until politics forced him to come clean).

Obama's a great speaker. Clinton is (I suppose) a intelligent and capable person. McCain has a record of achievement. Joe Biden was also a serious candidate (from the left) but the Dems didn't support his campaign. Whom do you suggest, Keith? Honestly, it sounds like you're just whining at this point.

Semper Fi. Marines.com

[Bryan]

It would've been easier had you put in the proper order in the first place you pompous, self-righteous little twit.

Poor baby. He was misled by the order.

Maybe you just should have kept reading (the quotation I used referred to the Sandinista seizure of power in 1979, in my comments afterward I placed the elections in 1984). You already had the explanation, you were just too stupid to figure it out. Sad.

http://forums.kearnyontheweb.com/index.php...ost&p=83907

[Guest Guest]

The greatest in history, you mean?

Let's see what kind of things the US is number one in:

#1 in murder

#1 in childhood poverty

#1 in lowest voter turnout

#1 in drug use per capita

#1 in air pollutants per capita

#1 in hazardous waste per capita

#1 in likelihood of children being killed by gunfire

#1 in corporate influence over democratic processes

#1 in having the largest percentage of its citizens in prisons

#1 among the top 50 nations in lack of press freedom and individual rights

#1 among the 21 richest nations in childhood disease, accidents and injuries

According to a 2003, U.S. Census Bureau survey, on any one day in the United States, 13-million people don't have enough food to eat. This figure is up 8% from 2002, and up 13% from 2000. Each year the gap between the "haves" and the "have-not's" increases in the United States.

[Guest Keith]

The greatest in history, you mean?

Who is it you were going to suggest to replace them? Graduating from Harvard is something very many elected officials have in common. Harvard would tell you that it takes the best and the brightest.

There's Keith with his red herring techniques again. Sure, I suppose some people are blaming Obama for what Wright said. But as I've said repeatedly, the real issue is one of judgment. If Obama is an agent of change then why did his church remain fixated on race for 20 years while he was a member? How could he go there for that length of time and not know what Wright was all about (turns out he apparently did know but wouldn't admit it until politics forced him to come clean).

Obama's a great speaker. Clinton is (I suppose) a intelligent and capable person. McCain has a record of achievement. Joe Biden was also a serious candidate (from the left) but the Dems didn't support his campaign. Whom do you suggest, Keith? Honestly, it sounds like you're just whining at this point.

Semper Fi. Marines.com

I thought my point was quite clear. What about your judgement Bryan? Can you say there in nothing in your life that can't be help up for ridicule or extreme scrutiny? I seriously doubt it. What about all the drivel spouted by the likes of Pat Robertson and Jerry Fallwell whom were very vocal supporters of the GOP? Where's the outrage for that? Rev. Wright is Obama's friend and spirtual advisor. Don't you think it's entirely plausible that they may only agree on spirtual issues? Are you going to tell me that you have absoltutely no friends are family members to which your opinions are not diametrically opposed? Have you completely shunned and abandonded those around you for having an opinion that you don't share? Judging by your posts I wouldn't be surprised if that were the case and that's even more pathetic. Stand back everyone for Bryan needs to cast the first stone!

[Guest Guest]

It's good to see you're able to confront your demons. Verbalization is the first step to recovery.

I guess if you started talking about being an arse you'd finally be getting yourself on the road to recovery.

[Bryan]

I thought my point was quite clear.

Did I not clearly address your point?

What about your judgement Bryan? Can you say there in nothing in your life that can't be help up for ridicule or extreme scrutiny?

Probably everybody has something like that. But where we've got a 20 year record of embarrassment we'd be unwise to make that the theme of our presidential campaign.

I'll bet it will take you quite awhile to get over trying to make various types of excuses for Obama.

I seriously doubt it. What about all the drivel spouted by the likes of Pat Robertson and Jerry Fallwell whom were very vocal supporters of the GOP?

What about it? Robertson ran for president himself. Did he base his campaign on something that his personal life belied?

Where's the outrage for that?

Earth to Keith: If Obama had merely been endorsed by Wright then his repudiation of Wright's views would have terminated the issue.

The problem is that Obama made it look like there's something about Wright that Obama endorses (20 years in the pew listening to and financially supporting Wright, not to mention referring to Wright as his spiritual mentor in his autobiography).

There's no comparison between twenty years of commitment and accepting an endorsement.

Rev. Wright is Obama's friend and spirtual advisor. Don't you think it's entirely plausible that they may only agree on spirtual issues?

No, I don't. Very few are so pietistic as to divorce spirituality from behavior, and moreover it doesn't make sense to follow a spiritual adviser on the basis of "spiritual" teachings when the guy is preaching political and social action in a way that conflicts with your own views.

Are you going to tell me that you have absoltutely no friends are family members to which your opinions are not diametrically opposed?

Certainly not. Nor would I be able to identify anyone as a mentor with whom my views were diametrically opposed.

Have you completely shunned and abandonded those around you for having an opinion that you don't share?

No. I just don't mentor under them for 20 years.

Judging by your posts I wouldn't be surprised if that were the case and that's even more pathetic. Stand back everyone for Bryan needs to cast the first stone!

Gimme a great big jagged one.

Keith, look at the argument you're making. It's pathetic. But I think it does show that you're somewhat shaken by all of this. It's certainly possible that Obama is a perfectly smart and nice guy through all of this (I'm not going out on a limb, though, because the Rezko thing still has to play out). What it means is that the Obama's personal life doesn't appear to jibe with the keynote of his presidential campaign. That will hurt his chances for election--and I think that's appropriate. There remain better reasons than the Wright thing to choose either of the other two serious candidates over Obama.

[Guest Guest]

Poor baby. He was misled by the order.

Maybe you just should have kept reading (the quotation I used referred to the Sandinista seizure of power in 1979, in my comments afterward I placed the elections in 1984). You already had the explanation, you were just too stupid to figure it out. Sad.

http://forums.kearnyontheweb.com/index.php...ost&p=83907

I'm not trained in proctology so I'm obviously not able to understand anything coming from you.

Perhaps if you weren't such a flaming A**HOLE things would be different.

[Guest Guest]

Poor baby. He was misled by the order.

Maybe you just should have kept reading (the quotation I used referred to the Sandinista seizure of power in 1979, in my comments afterward I placed the elections in 1984). You already had the explanation, you were just too stupid to figure it out. Sad.

http://forums.kearnyontheweb.com/index.php...ost&p=83907

How is it you're able to afford living quarters large enough to house your unjustifiably massive ego?

Or are you living on the street?

[Guest Guest]

Did I not clearly address your point?

Probably everybody has something like that. But where we've got a 20 year record of embarrassment we'd be unwise to make that the theme of our presidential campaign.

I'll bet it will take you quite awhile to get over trying to make various types of excuses for Obama.

What about it? Robertson ran for president himself. Did he base his campaign on something that his personal life belied?

Earth to Keith: If Obama had merely been endorsed by Wright then his repudiation of Wright's views would have terminated the issue.

The problem is that Obama made it look like there's something about Wright that Obama endorses (20 years in the pew listening to and financially supporting Wright, not to mention referring to Wright as his spiritual mentor in his autobiography).

There's no comparison between twenty years of commitment and accepting an endorsement.

No, I don't. Very few are so pietistic as to divorce spirituality from behavior, and moreover it doesn't make sense to follow a spiritual adviser on the basis of "spiritual" teachings when the guy is preaching political and social action in a way that conflicts with your own views.

Certainly not. Nor would I be able to identify anyone as a mentor with whom my views were diametrically opposed.

No. I just don't mentor under them for 20 years.

Gimme a great big jagged one.

Keith, look at the argument you're making. It's pathetic. But I think it does show that you're somewhat shaken by all of this. It's certainly possible that Obama is a perfectly smart and nice guy through all of this (I'm not going out on a limb, though, because the Rezko thing still has to play out). What it means is that the Obama's personal life doesn't appear to jibe with the keynote of his presidential campaign. That will hurt his chances for election--and I think that's appropriate. There remain better reasons than the Wright thing to choose either of the other two serious candidates over Obama.

it's truly amazing how you can consistently write so much and say so little.

Any chance you might learn the difference between quality and quantity and their relative merits?

[Guest Patriot]

Let's see what kind of things the US is number one in:

#1 in murder

#1 in childhood poverty

#1 in lowest voter turnout

#1 in drug use per capita

#1 in air pollutants per capita

#1 in hazardous waste per capita

#1 in likelihood of children being killed by gunfire

#1 in corporate influence over democratic processes

#1 in having the largest percentage of its citizens in prisons

#1 among the top 50 nations in lack of press freedom and individual rights

#1 among the 21 richest nations in childhood disease, accidents and injuries

According to a 2003, U.S. Census Bureau survey, on any one day in the United States, 13-million people don't have enough food to eat. This figure is up 8% from 2002, and up 13% from 2000. Each year the gap between the "haves" and the "have-not's" increases in the United States.

See what the Defeatocrats have done!!

[Guest Guest]

See what the Neocons have done!!

Fixed.