Did Obama finally put this behind him?
“I am outraged by the comments that were made and saddened by the spectacle that we saw yesterday…The person I saw yesterday was not the person that I met 20 years ago.”
What more can he say to keep the wolves at bay?
Hello Alan, If,people do not believe in abortion they need to STOP cutting programs for the disabled. And the right to live a normal life and not be penalized to marry their future spouse. I want to work but if, I do I would lose my benefits and I need my medications for my condition of bi-polar manic depression. I want the right to live and not be picked on because of my disability. I would work but I do not want to be a burden to my elderly parents who worry about me constantly.. If, given the opurtunity to share my story I would because people with disabilities have futures too Get me to Washington or New York or somewhere to voice my concern I would be there in the interest of humanity and the spirit conditon of the disabled. I approve of this message.
Sincerely W. Friendship
Ron Ziegler
Thank you Alan and Staff for being my friends
Private
Ron Ziegler
Countryside apt G-203
7610 Stirling rd
Hollywood, Florida 33024
1-954-683-2037
I can see why Senator Obama had a difficult time denouncing Rev. Wright. I have an assortment of friends. Some are as sweet as angels; other are blunt and curse like sailors. However, all would go to bat for me and stand by me through thick and thin. The only way that I would throw one under the bus is if either one does something extremely despicable to deface my character or incriminate me in something criminal. It seems that Barack was willing to keep Rev. Wright in his fold until he dissed him in public. This was enough to come out against him. Hooray, Obama!!! Although it took guts, you did it. Now, perhaps the world has been put on its axis again and will start spinning in another direction. At least, I hope so.
Betty
btw, I HATE the ACLU. I really do. Jacob Needleman said “we should be open-minded, but not so open-minded that our brains fall out”. The ACLU defends NAMBLA. Their idea of civil liberties is “anything and everything is okay”. That’s just stupid.
I’m not saying that I disagree with your position on Iraq, and I am not defending the Iraq war. But I would like to ask that in your analogy, if I were standing in front of you with a loaded sawed off shut gun and my finger on the trigger, would you think differently? You said that “Self-defense requires defense form violence not the defense from the potential for violence.” I agree. But I don’t think we should forget about an “imminent threat” or a “clear and present danger”. You feel me?
You make a VERY GOOD point when you say that we should stop throwing around the word “anti-American” and refer to instead what is “constitutional” or “unconstitutional”. Everyone who disagrees with Sean Hannity and Rush the Fatty are Anti-American. Their anti-American rants are tiresome.
However, there is definitely such a thing as Anti-American. Are you familiar with the hispanic activist group/s in our country who are blatantly and admittedly anti-American? It’s disgusting. If they don’t like America, there time would be better spent emigrating to another country or better yet, becoming active in a positive manner to change the aspects of America that they don’t like.
Frank~ I think you made some good points, however I must admit that I didn’t read your comment in full. Too many small letters on my computer screen…
The same people who think Rev. Wright used hate speech in is sermons are the same people who think that pro-peace demonstrators hate America. These are the same people who think that the ACLU is some how destroying America. Wow! Civil Liberties are destroying America. Who knew? These are the same people who consider people who criticize the Bush administration as America haters or Anti-American. These are the same people who think that calling other citizens Anti-American is some patriotic behavior. This is a sham, a shame, or deception. Saying that any speech no matter how shocking or offensive as being Anti-American is unconstitutional. It is very American to speak you mind. It is patriotic to exercise free speech. We as a nation should refrain from using the term Anti-American when describing Americans, not because you do not have the right to say it; rather it is because this behavior is Stalinistic, Maoist, Pol Potist, and reminiscent of Germany during World War Two. When describing fellow Americans the only accurate label that escapes Stalinistic tactics is the use of constitutional or unconstitutional. Is Behavior constitutional or unconstitutional not American or Anti-American, which should be the accurate wording used in political debate. Anti-American would infer that a citizen does not respect the constitution, for the constitution is America. Rev. Wright has not questioned the constitution. Citizens, who protest, criticize policy or government while respecting the constitution is not Anti-American, they are using the freedom or liberty held within the constitution. Thus they are actually quite patriotic. They are exercising the American principles of the constitution. They are truly American. Those who would call liberals Anti-American, the ACLU, and protesters Un-American or Anti-American are in reality disrespecting the ideals of a free society and the constitution. Those who scream Anti-American are not Anti-American; instead they are unconstitutional. I have enough respect for my fellow citizens to refrain from calling them Anti-American. For even though I believe that their behavior is an assault on the principle of free speech and free expression. I will not call them Anti-American. I will call them what they are; people who do not respect the First Amendment.
Only registered user allowed |
There’s nothing that he can say to stop the right wing from kicking this can. Predictably, we will now here them say “aha! gotcha!”….”Obama turned on his preacher…oooo, he’s not loyal!!”
(!?)
The whole thing is almost laughable. The right wing hammering away and trying to justify the 24 hour coverage of this priest shows just how desperate they are…It shows they don’t really believe in their own candidate. McCain who?
The best part is that if you switch off cable news and talk radio, the issue pretty much goes away…
Even Alan Colmes talks about not wanting to talk about it, so therefore talks about it.
Here I am writing about it.
Good grief.
April 29th, 2008 at 3:01 pm
Obama should be able to get rid of Wright by now Obama has clearly stated he does not approve of Wright’s message.
April 29th, 2008 at 3:01 pm
Well, on a personal level, I do find it hard to take Wright, but I’m also starting to like Obama more. Was that the intended effect of all this? I’m guessing no.
April 29th, 2008 at 3:25 pm
Up until the last few days, I thought that “bombastic” was a word the guy who sings that song “Mr. Bombastic, simply fantastic…” made up on his own! Am I the only one who didn’t know it was a real word? From m-w.com, “bombast” is:
pretentious inflated speech or writing
Well, I don’t think there’s much we can do to get away from this issue. People want to talk about it. But I think Alan’s doing a better job than most of balancing the Wright discussions with other topics, but the talk radio hosts can’t help what people want to talk about.
April 29th, 2008 at 4:18 pm
http://www.americablog.com/2008/04/obama-blasts-rev-wright.html
That pretty much sums it up for me.
April 29th, 2008 at 4:24 pm
I found the following on the website of Wright’s church:
• To have a church whose theological perspective starts from the vantage point of Black liberation theology being its center, is not to say that African or African American people are superior to any one else.
• African-centered thought, unlike Eurocentrism, does not assume superiority and look at everyone else as being inferior.
He hardly seems like a racist to me, and if the media had actually taken the time to read through the church’s literature, perhaps they wouldn’t have been so quick to call him a racist and bigot.
Obama hasn’t put this issue behind him yet.
April 29th, 2008 at 4:33 pm
Cheryl, you’re right to an extent.
I do have to say that Wright gets a bad rap, but there are some comments he has made that are inexcusable. Accusing the government of creating the HIV virus is complete lunacy. I can certainly see where he’s coming from, being a black man in the military for six years during the 1960s. He’s certainly had to deal with racism in his life.
Also, if you watch some of his full sermons or his talk about the differences between the black church and the white church, he sounds like a very compassionate intelligent man. That was actually my first impression in hearing his comments at the National Press Club yesterday. But when it came time for question and answer and he refused to denounce Louis Farrakhan and stood by his AIDS statement, I lost all respect for what he was saying.
I am an Obama supporter and that won’t change. And I can certainly see why Barack would have liked being around this man and going to his church. But I think that John at Americablog hit the nail on the head in saying “it’s hard to watch your friend go completely crazy”.
April 29th, 2008 at 4:49 pm
On the bright side, maybe this whole ordeal will help Obama put this “Muslim” thing behind him…..
April 29th, 2008 at 4:53 pm
This morning I listened to an African-American radio talk show host say the same thing I’ve been thinking. That Reverend Wright is doing this on purpose. That he is intentionally trying to hurt Barack Obama and his campaign.
He mentioned that at the press club conference yesterday, that Wright had been dancing and was absolutely gleeful about all of this. I had thought the same thing.
He also said that there was bad blood between Obama and Wright ever since Obama disinvited Wright from his presidential campaign announcement conference a year ago. That Wright has been pissed ever since. I think that has become evident.
This host further said that it is irrelevant that Wright may be speaking the truth about many things, that all that is being accomplished here is the destruction of Barack Obama’s run for the whitehouse.
And this is coming from a radio host, a man who has met Reverend Wright, has attended his church and other events there and who has greatly admired Wright in the past. But this morning, this host’s anger at Wright was through the roof and highly intense.
Every time Wright opens his mouth he seems to feel obliged to betray Barack in some way. This has nothing to do with the black church, the govt’s treatment of blacks, black-white relations, AIDS etc. This is all about Jeremiah Wright who is having the time of his life.
Thank God Barack said what he did. I think he needs to say more. This isn’t going to go away. It will be put on a very slow simmer for the months to come, and then come September, will be brought to a full boil all over again.
The conservatives/Republicans will continue to use this Wright/Race Card against him… into eternity.
Just like a dog with a bone…
April 29th, 2008 at 5:37 pm
Thurgood Marshall must be spinning in his grave. The Supreme Court Justice knew that sometimes you have to wait quietly until the the right time and circumstances are present to fight for equal rights. Now we have a loud-mouthed media hungry black minister who has denied us the chance for the first black president. What a shame,and shame on Rev.Wright. It will b twenty years before another black is seriously considered for president. Regards TOM
April 29th, 2008 at 5:53 pm
Tom, don’t write off Obama yet!
April 29th, 2008 at 6:38 pm
Obama comes out against his mentor Wright now that everyone is seeing what a paraniod,irrational person he is. I guess the scales just fell from Obama’s eyes and he’s now become aware,after twenty years of being mentored by this man,that he may have a mental disorder.
To try and continue to compare Obama’s relationship with Wright with any of McCain’s relationships is quite desperate. Has McCain refered to any of the people that he’s being associated with as his “spiritual advisor,mentor” or were they given a place on his campain staff? Has McCain written any books based on the influence of any of these people?
There’s a difference between a political association with someone and a relationship that involves giving spiritual advice and general mentoring.
I don’t see any problem with Obama’s connection with Ayers(sp?) as I see it as a superficial association. I doubt that Obama was influenced by him. The same can’t be said for,in Obama’s own words,his “spiritual advisor and mentor” Rev. Wright.
April 29th, 2008 at 7:55 pm
next to god is obama, he can’t do no wrong!!!. everything he does is right. first he won’t disowned him because he know him for 20yrs and u all agree. now he disownned him and it’s ok too. only obama eat and have his cake!
April 29th, 2008 at 8:05 pm
Has McCain refered to any of the people that he’s being associated with as his “spiritual advisor,mentor”
Yes, Rod Parsley.
http://liberalland.com/2008/03/14/mccains-spiritual-guide-america-founded-to-destroy-islam/
http://youtube.com/watch?v=ZFr59VC50tY
April 29th, 2008 at 8:08 pm
In politics NOTHING is behind you or forgoten. Obama will soon be on the same bench that john kerry once sat on. Looks like Obama did not choose his friends wisely.
April 29th, 2008 at 8:51 pm
I didn’t vote in the VA democratic primary b/c I couldn’t choose between Clinton and Obama. I still haven’t made my choice… and soon I won’t have to, b/c the remaining 8 states and delegates will decide the issue for me.
I don’t think we should say that Wright has denied us the chance to have our first black president. I think what’s most remarkable is that our society has come to the point where a black man is running a successful campaign for presidency, and I as a black person can say that I don’t want him and will not vote for him. I can’t vote for him just b/c he’s black. (On a related note, I’ve found it very interesting that many in the black community have counted out the Clintons and forgotten all that they did for minorities while in office. How often did many of us joke that Clinton was the first black president?)
Craig, I still disagree that McCain seeking Hagee’s endorsement cannot be compared to Obama and Wright. McCain WANTED this man’s endorsement.
I never agreed with all of what Wright said, I just thought that his comments were being taken out of context. Conservatives didn’t try to understand what he was saying, just got pissed at what they thought they heard.
Epiphany, I agree that he seems to be loving the spotlight. But can you blame him for being pissed at Obama? However, as a pastor I don’t know that this is the best way to deal with his anger.
April 29th, 2008 at 9:09 pm
Not so fast my anti-Obama friends. No, this story will not go away but Barack did the right thing today and came off very well for it. Even Bill O’Reilly just admitted that after Barack’s definative dismissal of Wright’s comments and views this morning, that this story is going to fade away. “Peeter out” I think I heard him say.
Not completely of course, it will be used as campaign ammunition for months to come, but Barack definately helped himself. I wouldn’t count him out just yet.
April 29th, 2008 at 9:13 pm
o reilly will say anything for ratings and you will see this and more when (and if) obama gets on stage with Mc cain! keep in mind Time is on Macs side and you can bet the farm he is watching every comment the remaining dems make. after all look how long it took obama to make this statement. Not too smart
April 29th, 2008 at 9:23 pm
Cheryl, Reverend Wright being pissed at Obama is, as far as I am concerned, misplaced anger. It is the media, starting with Sean Hannity many months ago, who have been pushing this story along with the rest of conservative talk radio. I can well understand Dr. Wright’s anger with being taken out of context and being vilified on national television.
But his responses, three of them (so far!), have been completely inappropriate. I watched his interview on Bill Moyers Sunday night which I though was going very well. Until the last 15 minutes. That’s when he responded in a very negative way to Barack by, in so many words, saying that Barack was just another politican doing what any politican would do. For God’s sake, that was an incredibly damaging statement to make! From a man who was Barack’s friend and spirtual advisor?
But ok, he got his statements out, he defended himself. He could have left it there but instead he continues on his media tour with two more conferences which were way over the top. Again his anger is misplaced, inappropriate, selfish, and downright vengeful.
I’m sure this situation has caused great saddness for Barack but his comments in response to this were needed. I hope Reverend Wright will also do the right thing, take the high road and allow it to just end.
April 29th, 2008 at 9:52 pm
Rev. Wright’s comments are neither unpatriotic or far-fetched. The two largest purveyors and manufacturers of biological warfare products are the US and UK. There was a standing order from both to create a virus that could wipe out an entire population without a cure. Many in the gay community and elsewhere believe that the government may have succeeded and experimented on the gay population, just as they did on the blacks in Tuskegee.
April 30th, 2008 at 12:24 am
Oh does this mean I can stop defending Wright now?
Thank Buddah!
Hooray for Barack! Yeehaw.
April 30th, 2008 at 12:58 am
and alan colmes still defends this guy
alan if this guy were a personality cult you would go for him.
April 30th, 2008 at 5:42 pm
Are we acting like terrorists through our foreign policy, covert operations, or our governments past actions when pertaining to the Native Americans and Slavery? This is a good question, one that should be asked and not put down as Un-American. It is most patriotic to strive to correct, identify, and criticize the past errors or evils in order to forge a better Union, a stronger Nation. If we violated the international rules of the conduct of war, we are acting as a rouge nation. If we violated the moral and ethical standard of “act when acted upon or defense only when attacked,” we are unjust. What is terrorism? It is unethical, immoral, unjust, and illegal action causing death or great physical harm to innocent people. If one innocent person has died due to errors in policy or the illegality of policy, we, our government, have acted with malice towards ethical, moral and standards of justice. The Gulf of Tonkin and the carpet bombing of indiscriminate targets in N. Vietnam would qualify as unjust, immoral, and unethical due to the fact that the Gulf of Tonkin incident was self inflicted. Therefore all action after the Gulf of Tonkin was based on untruth and therefore is unjust. Iraq then is a similar situation, yet worse. Iraq did not attack the U.S. the President has stated that reality. Ask your self a few questions. Can I punch another man if he has not struck first? Can I strike a person under the logic of “well I thought they were going to strike me, so I struck first”/ No, I would go to jail for assault if I acted in a pre-emptive manner. We as a Nation acted not out of the standards of self-defense. Instead, we as a nation acted pre-emptivly with Iraq, which is against ethical and moral standards of action for self-defense. We must defend ourselves but only when it is ethical, moral, and just. Pre-emptive action based on shaky evidence and rumor is not ethical or moral behavior. With all this said, we cannot forget that all the initial reasons for action were false, just as the Gulf of Tonkin incident was a falsehood. Yet we used so-called faulty intelligence without a prior strike to justify a pre-emptive strike. On a personal level pre-emptive violence is illegal. I cannot by law, act in a pre-emptive fashion and use violence if no violence has been perpetrated towards me causing immediate threat to the safety of my person. Self-defense requires defense form violence not the defense from the potential for violence.
April 30th, 2008 at 7:03 pm
The same people who think Rev. Wright used hate speech in is sermons are the same people who think that pro-peace demonstrators hate America. These are the same people who think that the ACLU is some how destroying America. Wow! Civil Liberties are destroying America. Who knew? These are the same people who consider people who criticize the Bush administration as America haters or Anti-American. These are the same people who think that calling other citizens Anti-American is some patriotic behavior. This is a sham, a shame, or deception. Saying that any speech no matter how shocking or offensive as being Anti-American is unconstitutional. It is very American to speak you mind. It is patriotic to exercise free speech. We as a nation should refrain from using the term Anti-American when describing Americans, not because you do not have the right to say it; rather it is because this behavior is Stalinistic, Maoist, Pol Potist, and reminiscent of Germany during World War Two. When describing fellow Americans the only accurate label that escapes Stalinistic tactics is the use of constitutional or unconstitutional. Is Behavior constitutional or unconstitutional not American or Anti-American, which should be the accurate wording used in political debate. Anti-American would infer that a citizen does not respect the constitution, for the constitution is America. Rev. Wright has not questioned the constitution. Citizens, who protest, criticize policy or government while respecting the constitution is not Anti-American, they are using the freedom or liberty held within the constitution. Thus they are actually quite patriotic. They are exercising the American principles of the constitution. They are truly American. Those who would call liberals Anti-American, the ACLU, and protesters Un-American or Anti-American are in reality disrespecting the ideals of a free society and the constitution. Those who scream Anti-American are not Anti-American; instead they are unconstitutional. I have enough respect for my fellow citizens to refrain from calling them Anti-American. For even though I believe that their behavior is an assault on the principle of free speech and free expression. I will not call them Anti-American. I will call them what they are; people who do not respect the First Amendment.
April 30th, 2008 at 7:03 pm
Frank~ I think you made some good points, however I must admit that I didn’t read your comment in full. Too many small letters on my computer screen…
April 30th, 2008 at 7:51 pm
btw, I HATE the ACLU. I really do. Jacob Needleman said “we should be open-minded, but not so open-minded that our brains fall out”. The ACLU defends NAMBLA. Their idea of civil liberties is “anything and everything is okay”. That’s just stupid.
I’m not saying that I disagree with your position on Iraq, and I am not defending the Iraq war. But I would like to ask that in your analogy, if I were standing in front of you with a loaded sawed off shut gun and my finger on the trigger, would you think differently? You said that “Self-defense requires defense form violence not the defense from the potential for violence.” I agree. But I don’t think we should forget about an “imminent threat” or a “clear and present danger”. You feel me?
You make a VERY GOOD point when you say that we should stop throwing around the word “anti-American” and refer to instead what is “constitutional” or “unconstitutional”. Everyone who disagrees with Sean Hannity and Rush the Fatty are Anti-American. Their anti-American rants are tiresome.
However, there is definitely such a thing as Anti-American. Are you familiar with the hispanic activist group/s in our country who are blatantly and admittedly anti-American? It’s disgusting. If they don’t like America, there time would be better spent emigrating to another country or better yet, becoming active in a positive manner to change the aspects of America that they don’t like.
April 30th, 2008 at 8:01 pm
I can see why Senator Obama had a difficult time denouncing Rev. Wright. I have an assortment of friends. Some are as sweet as angels; other are blunt and curse like sailors. However, all would go to bat for me and stand by me through thick and thin. The only way that I would throw one under the bus is if either one does something extremely despicable to deface my character or incriminate me in something criminal. It seems that Barack was willing to keep Rev. Wright in his fold until he dissed him in public. This was enough to come out against him. Hooray, Obama!!! Although it took guts, you did it. Now, perhaps the world has been put on its axis again and will start spinning in another direction. At least, I hope so.
Betty
May 1st, 2008 at 5:39 pm
Hello Alan, If,people do not believe in abortion they need to STOP cutting programs for the disabled. And the right to live a normal life and not be penalized to marry their future spouse. I want to work but if, I do I would lose my benefits and I need my medications for my condition of bi-polar manic depression. I want the right to live and not be picked on because of my disability. I would work but I do not want to be a burden to my elderly parents who worry about me constantly.. If, given the opurtunity to share my story I would because people with disabilities have futures too Get me to Washington or New York or somewhere to voice my concern I would be there in the interest of humanity and the spirit conditon of the disabled. I approve of this message.
Sincerely W. Friendship
Ron Ziegler
Thank you Alan and Staff for being my friends
Private
Ron Ziegler
Countryside apt G-203
7610 Stirling rd
Hollywood, Florida 33024
1-954-683-2037
May 2nd, 2008 at 4:59 pm