| FrontPageMag.com | By Robert Spencer | By Hugh Fitzgerald | Books | Dhimmi Watch | Robert Spencer | Islam 101 | Qur'an Blog |  |
|
|
||||||||||
|
|
Here is a paragraph from Obama's speech on Jeremiah Wright today (thanks to James):
But the remarks that have caused this recent firestorm weren’t simply controversial. They weren’t simply a religious leader’s effort to speak out against perceived injustice. Instead, they expressed a profoundly distorted view of this country – a view that sees white racism as endemic, and that elevates what is wrong with America above all that we know is right with America; a view that sees the conflicts in the Middle East as rooted primarily in the actions of stalwart allies like Israel, instead of emanating from the perverse and hateful ideologies of radical Islam.
So it's not all about Israel, and there are perverse and hateful Islamic ideologies that are creating this present conflict.
Is this just window dressing, or will he remember it if he is elected? Not that he has any more chance of becoming President than the ACLU does of coming out against the Tarek ibn Zayed Academy.
Posted by Robert at March 18, 2008 1:00 PM
Print this entry
| Email this entry
| Digg this
| del.icio.us
Another prophetic insight, O Great Leader--Obama will never become President of "The United States of Wright--errr, White America." Inshallah.
Posted by: John C![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.jihadwatch.org/nav-commenters.gif)
at March 18, 2008 1:27 PM
"Not that he has any more chance of becoming President than the ACLU does of coming out against the Tarek ibn Zayed Academy."
Don't be so sure. With our electoral system he could still pull it off. He's likely to go into the Democratic convention with a lead in pledged delegates, unless the remaining primary voters drop him like a hot potato. Whom do the super delegates line up behind - Clinton or Obama? It's a choice between the devil they know and the one they don't. Obama is most certainly down, but he's not out yet. Who expected John McCain to win the GOP nomination as easily as he did? At one point his candidacy was all but dead.
Posted by: PMK at March 18, 2008 1:28 PM
From the mouths of babes...........
Posted by: tanstaafl at March 18, 2008 1:54 PM
A clever speech, and all the arts of rhetoric, legitimate and illegitimate, were enrolled in his effort. But in the end it did not do the trick. Ascribing to his dead grandmother, who was a family member, a given, someone he did not choose, an occasional remark ("once or twice") that made him "wince" and comparing that to the incredible rants that must have punctuated a great many sermons, over a great many yearsby a pastor whom he chose to listen to, whom he chose to continue to go to, whom he chose to become afa mily friend, and his spiritual mentor and guide.
It won't wash. You do not choose your family members, even if we believe his story about "once or twice" hearing something unseemly from the remarks of his grandmother, but Rev. Wright was another matter.
And now that Barack Obama knows that there may be tapes that will show him in the audience (and in any case it is absurd for him to deny what everyone knows has to be true) he does not deny any longer that he heard at least some of those rants. Even one would be enough. And nowhere does he tell us that he ever said a thing to anyone in the congregation, much less to Rev. Wright, to express any dismay, any disagreement, with what he now claims were "totally unacceptable" statements, "incendiary remarks." Did his moral compass just start twirling on the dial last week, coming alive when those tapes began to circulate? Was that what did it?
It's late in the game to suddenly express outrage. And his attempt, yet again, to treat it all as a matter of a "crank" rather than as a problem with "black liberation theology" that sees whites as the enemy, to be blamed, and his cloaking of his refusal to "disown" Rev. Wright as something brave, noble, admirable, is hard to take. So is his attempt along the way to describe the observation of Geraldine Ferraro -- that race has something to do with Barack Obama's success in his campaign (of course it does, for god's sake, both among the black voters who have voted for him, at least in southern states, practically as a bloc, and among those white voters who have been supporting him as part of their own self-validation, proving to themselves that they are "post-racial" men and women, without bothering to investigate his policies, his personnel, his anything at all).
The speech still leaves us with this: he has not explained adequately how, for nearly twenty years, he remained glued to his seat before the likes of Rev. Wright, Sunday after Sunday, and has always expressed the greatest sympathy, fondness, admiration for this man whose measure can be taken from those tapes -- not "out-of-context" tapes, not "unrepresentative" tapes, but quite representative, if we are to believe Hopkins and other founding fathers of "Black Liberation Theology," following the letter and the spirit of such a "theology," which not all of us find quite so attractive, uplifting, and wonderful as, apparently, Barack Obama did, and does.
We have Rev. Wright's own testimony, published in the Times , that Obama told him some time ago that for reasons of political calculation he, Barack Obama, was going to have to "distance" himself from Rev. Wright. Yes, because it was expedient, it was necessary for political reasons, and not for moral ones. And Wright, not nearly as mindful of the public as Obama perhaps thought he would be, then proceeded to relay that information to others.
There's plenty one could say about that speech, about its contradictions, its cleverness, and its ultimate failure to do, at least for that part of the audience that remains vigilant and wary, he hoped it would do. The conscious artfulness with which the excuses and justifications are deployed makes the matter still worse.
Posted by: Hugh at March 18, 2008 2:02 PM
His speech was full of taqiyya
Posted by: Elric66 at March 18, 2008 2:04 PM
Why do you say he has no chance of becoming president? The Bookmakers have him as favourite and they're not usually careless with their money.
Posted by: Celsius at March 18, 2008 2:18 PM
Obama is a registered member of the church and a financial contributor. We will never know what Obama's true beliefs or view s are on the subject because we don't have him on video running around.
Any American that did not believe their church and pastors views would move to a differant church or quit going altogether.
The timing of Obama now making comments about his pastor is only conveniant for politics, not a pronoucment of his character.
Obama's character is proven through his associations and long term relationships.
The church worships 'victimhood' and 'color' not a god. How do they keep their IRS non-profit status?
Since ABC news likes to 'make' news instead of report it, they should change the wording in Rev. Wrights sermons and everywhere the word 'black' is insert the word 'white', then present that to the public and whatch the reactions. Being a racist does not have any one color, and 'claiming' to be a victim does not make it right in being a racist.
Posted by: alaskan1000 at March 18, 2008 2:25 PM
I dont see the white independent swing voters supporting Obama. Since Juan McVain has thumbed his nose at the consevative base, he will need those votes.
Posted by: Elric66 at March 18, 2008 2:27 PM
So Jeremiah Wright is a racist, conspiracy theorist, in the same vein as Louis Farrakhan, and Obama is a slick politian who will distance himself from the rantings. Both of them are behaving exactly as expected; no surprises here.
But what really concerns me is the thousands of cheering, adoring "faithful" in his congregation who devour his diatribes as "gospel truth". Reverend Wright is an idiot, but very influential thus, a dangerous idiot corrupting his gullible flock for perhaps generations to come.
Posted by: Xero G at March 18, 2008 2:29 PM
Good speech, but full of contridictions. First he tells us that Wright's tirades are rooted in his experiences of the past, and his failure to to recognize that America has moved on since those experiences, and then he recites the same old litany of injustices inflicted on Blacks today, resulting in the high incarceration rates, poverty and and anti social behavior in the Black community.
Obama is blaming Whites today for everything dysfunctional in the Black culture, life-style and attitudes. In short, Obama sat in Wright's church for 20 years, and added his own loud "Amens" to Wright's other hoopin, hollerin, leapin parishoners because he agrees with what he preaches.
at March 18, 2008 2:29 PM
Funny, I said the same thing about him WEEKS ago in another forum, when I questioned his mutation of 'Christianity,' which sounds curiously like Islam.
(Probably because he worships Louis Farrakhan.)
Posted by: Lori B. at March 18, 2008 2:37 PM
NOBAMA!!!
Posted by: Drewbenstein at March 18, 2008 2:38 PM
I do not believe he exonerated himself with the speech, but it was clever enough to fool the masses, especially with the MSM lobbying so hard for him.
That being said, if this doesn't bring him down, nothing will. He will get to the convention and then the superdelegates will decide who they think is best suited to defeat McCain.
Obama is by far, the worst choice of the three, but I do not share Robert's sentiment that his defeat is a foregone conclusion.
Posted by: awake
at March 18, 2008 2:42 PM
Did I strongly disagree with many of his political views, Absolutely, just as I’m sure many of you have heard remarks from your pastors, priests, or rabbis with which you strongly disagreed. ~ from the article
Obama hasnt a clue.
My pastor would never bring up politics, he would never disrespect his congregation or himself, my pastor would never have such a lack of respect for his office.
at March 18, 2008 2:46 PM
Glowbama hearts the New Black Panthers
http://gatewaypundit.blogspot.com/2008/03/obama-may-want-to-rethink-his-new-black.html
at March 18, 2008 2:56 PM
"But what really concerns me is the thousands of cheering, adoring "faithful" in his congregation who devour his diatribes as "gospel truth". Reverend Wright is an idiot, but very influential thus, a dangerous idiot corrupting his gullible flock for perhaps generations to come."
--Xero G
Well said.
at March 18, 2008 3:00 PM
NOBAMA!!!
Posted by: Drewbenstein
LOL! Would make an awesome bumper sticker!
Posted by: champ at March 18, 2008 3:00 PM
'The Black Liberation Theology' and 'Islam' are from the same fabric.
Both of the above beliefs worship 'man' not God.
Obama is claiming to be Christian....big problem is that he does not go to a Christian church. Christian is in the name ON the church but is not seen IN the church.
Really, comm'on....you going to tell me they worship Jesus Christ? He was a Jew, Hebrew, of light skin (assumed), and not African. Black Liberation Theology preaches hate of everything that Jesus was and who he was. How can they hate everything about him and 'claim' him at the same time? Can't happen.
Posted by: alaskan1000 at March 18, 2008 3:01 PM
The Obama speech is an opportunity to examine how willing many African Americans have been to sit through rhetoric that if it came from a white person, would be viewed as hateful and racist. I doubt that Obama is the only African American who has had this problem, but is this really all that important in the fight against jihadist.
My disagreement with this site is that it can seem as if the purpose is to elect Republicans rather than to just defeat the jihadists. I do agree with people here that the Democrats have said precious little of value on this subject. In fact they seem almost unwilling to recognize the evil of Islamism. There is a lot of Republican rhetoric on the subject but once in power they seem almost as unwilling to confront the Islamists as the Democrats have been. The Bush family has been in an alliance with the Saudis. I have heard very little from Bush that directly confronts the Saudis and their network of mosques.
I seen little of substance from McCain's website about this problem.
Posted by: Jerry M at March 18, 2008 3:11 PM
Funny thing, Obama listened to White for 20 years and has just now decided to disagree with what was spewed from this pulpit for so long?
Why?
Did Obama suddenly have a revelation; or was the harsh light of media investigation the eye-opener here?
And what about the money behind Obama especially Opra -- the former Baptist whose epiphany moment came when she heard her minister say that God was both Omnipotent and Jealous and decided that this God did not live up to her exhalted expectations and high-minded-righteous demands for what a diety should be.
Her rantings and ramblings have elevated her as a kind of New-Age priestess who seems to communicate with angels and other assorted celestial beings.
Does he disavow her notions as well?
In short, where does he stand on such questions?
How long will he remaining standing?
Regarding his latest pronouncement I project that his stance will last only until after the election. Then, he will be reawakened anew as CAIR and the ACLU whisper into his ear.
Obama is a master politician -- nothing more.
Posted by: witness at March 18, 2008 3:12 PM
Barack Obama chose to attend this church pastured by the Reverend Jeremiah Wright for the past twenty years, the church did not choose Barack Obama. The displays of demagoguery, and hateful bigotry by Reverend Wright could not have possibly occurred in a short and sudden vacuum of a thousand sermons that Reverend Wright gave when Barack Obama was not in attendance.
Obama has called the Reverend Wright his mentor, and; oh should he take that back? But unfortunately it is to late to do that. His wife had already started the ball rolling a couple of weeks before on here comment "this was the first time in her life she was proud to be an American", and she would go on to make that statement a couple of more times in speeches on behalf of her husband.
Imagine if John McCain or Cindy McCain came out and said "this was the first time in their lives they were proud to be Americans".
Barack Obama asks us to believe that he never heard any of the sermons in which Rev. Jeremiah Wright denounced and asked God to damn America. Neither was he present, he says, for Rev. Wright's message in which he said America got what it deserved on 9/11 because we bombed Hiroshima and Nagasaki to end World War II and have bombed other countries. He apparently also missed the one about how America created AIDS. The implication appears to have been that it was a plot to wipe out blacks, since the disease disproportionately affects African Americans.
It is black preachers like Wright who continue to keep the black community in a perpetual polarizing rage against White America. This is how demagogues, and bigots like Reverend Wright maintain their power over their flock. But these black preachers of hate actually end up weakening their church attendees because they take away there ability to function positively in white society and thus they deny themselves the great American possibilities of the their right to the pursuit of happiness.
Can you imagine yourself living and dying in American society while all the time having hated the country you lived in?
Who is is the candidate Barack Obama whose theme is "Change". Sadly very few of his supporters really don't have a clue.
Posted by: Mackie at March 18, 2008 3:16 PM
Barack "I'll stand by the Muslims" Obama actually made a TRUTHFUL statement about Islam? That's a miracle.
Posted by: Dumpling at March 18, 2008 3:16 PM
Well, I would expect Obama to duck and cover over this stuff. The truth is that Barack has been a member of that church for twenty years, and has been filmed nodding his head in agreement with Wrights sermons.
This does not mean that Obama agrees with everything Pastor Wright has said, they are not clones, but what it does mean is that it is almost impossible for Obama to have not heard racist remarks and sermons coming from Wright. The question is, if he does not agree with the 'stupid remarks', made by Wright, why has he stuck with Wright for twenty years? Did Barack think these kind of remarks were stupid ten years ago, or just now as he is running for office? Another question is, just how has Rev Wrights thinking effected Obama's? We will never hear that one, Obama will deny that it exists. Yet listening to the same guy spout his ideas for twenty years has to have some effect on the listener...
at March 18, 2008 3:17 PM
"...a view that sees the conflicts in the Middle East as rooted primarily in the actions of stalwart allies like Israel, instead of emanating from the perverse and hateful ideologies of radical Islam."
-Obama-
Jerry M,
this is the statement and the focus of why Robert posted it. I guarantee you that if he had not uttered that phrase, this article would not have been posted.
you wrote:
"My disagreement with this site is that it can seem as if the purpose is to elect Republicans rather than to just defeat the jihadists."
What article, specifically, would have given you that impression?
at March 18, 2008 3:22 PM
Obama failed the "leadership" principles he professes to have. Knowing of the nature of these Sermons and remaining an active member, while professing such strong resentment of the message, shows he is but the follower of others. A true "leader" would have made their objections clear and acted accordingly on principle alone, by leaving that Church.
Just another Politician quick and handy with plausable excuses.
Posted by: flowerknife_us at March 18, 2008 3:22 PM
If he attended the church ONCE and was seen nodding his head in agreement etc. it would make me queasy but to EMBRACE this putrid being and call him your 'mentor' and go to his 'church' for twenty years...and gush about how he changed your life and THEN turn around on this 'beloved mentor' and within a matter of weeks conveniently trash him.... What a two-faced lowlife snake in the grass conniving lying son of a bitch this 'Paragon of Hope' is. A little 3rd rate turd squeezed out by the PR Spinmeisters of the Left.
Posted by: poetcomic1 at March 18, 2008 3:28 PM
"My disagreement with this site is that it can seem as if the purpose is to elect Republicans rather than to just defeat the jihadists."
... from a posting above
There will be a time when this nation can no longer afford the folly of choosing between a bush and a kerry, or a clinton, obama, or mccain to occupy the White House. I hope we can survive the next four years. I cannot assume that mccain would be any better than the other two with respect to the long term survival of our still-mostly free Republic. I cannot say even now, for certain, that the hollow-man kerry would have been any worse than the terminally ignorant bush. Next time, I hope the Republican voters don't let the New York Times tell them who they should nominate, or who they deem to be 'electable'. (I thought Romney might represent our best chance among those running this time, but then the truly best, brightest, and most courageous are repulsed by the political game and don't make it past square one.
I do not intend to vote for McCain, by the way. Screw the RNC.
Posted by: Infidel33 at March 18, 2008 3:35 PM
Obama reminds me of a post-War German. He was there but he was never there when something bad happened. He didn't hear anything. He saw nothing. He lied.
Either that or he is stupid of enormous proportions.
So far I've got him pegged as an elusively intelligent liar of little substance.
He fulfills the role of the 'benign negotiator' described by Shelby Steele.
He trades on 'white guilt'.
He will absolve 'whitey' in return for ultimate power.
And noone knows for sure what will happen once he has attained that power.
Ask yourselves one question only if that's all you have: 'whom would the moslems want to see in the White House?.
Run kids.. as fast as you can!
I think I can take four - somehow I don't think it would ever be eight - years of Hitlery when I consider the alternative!
There is little difference between Hitlery and MexiCAIRn.. just check out Michelle Malkin for detailed info on his dealings with George Soros.
It will turn your stomachs. Don't say you haven't been warned.
Wishing the Republicans could also have a do-over Primary like the Dhims are about to have...
No matter who wins, we'll have a Dhim in the White House. Let it not be a semi-moslem on top of everything else.
Right now we will need damage control.. so we must vote for Republican Senators and Congressmen.
No matter who will be President, we need to ensure at least gridlock! A deadlock would be even better.
Posted by: Allah Schmallah at March 18, 2008 3:44 PM
Hey, the 'reverend' Wrong made only a 'tiny minority' of ofensive and racist comments..
at March 18, 2008 3:51 PM
Am amazed that you think Obama has no chance. President McCain? Okay by me; and I thought it was an impressive speech.
Posted by: StillBreathing at March 18, 2008 3:52 PM
"My disagreement with this site is that it can seem as if the purpose is to elect Republicans rather than to just defeat the jihadists."
-- from a posting above
Few websites can have offered criicism of the Bush Administration folly in Iraq, and in its generally ineffective, and certainly misnamed, "war on terror," than this one. The Bush Administration is Republican. Those who identify most closely with that Iraq folly that has at this website been the repeated object of unanswerable criticism, the kind that is deadliest of all, are Rebublicans. I see no evidence offered to support the assertion that "the purpose" of "this site" is "to elect Republicans."
Posted by: Hugh at March 18, 2008 3:53 PM
What is being overlooked is that people of all racial, economic, educational, social, etc. backgrounds agree with Obama's blacksupremacist "holy man" (including Barak Hussein Obama). That is - "everyone is to be blamed and will pay for my problems as long as it ain't me!". Just look at the old media, most university/college campuses, (schock) in every type and level of government, etc.
Call them the "progressives", the socialists-communists, the "enlightened", "(self-)annointed", the self-hating "Americans". The same very large (and growing) portion that see no problems at all with global-islamofascism; the same type who have essentially made Eurabia a relaity. Not to mention the unimaginable numbers here posing as "just refular people looking for a better life" (patooey!) but can't wait to turn the USA upside-down ... .
Obama has a vast following who know exactly where he stands and agree with him (and his very "Wrong Reverend Wright").
at March 18, 2008 3:54 PM
OK,, LOL,,here is one for
Multiculturalism as it's BEST in Canada,,
This is a true story,,
picture the scene,,
office building,, co-workers in cubicles,,
one cubicle,, a nervous infidel,
next cubicle,, a muslima from lebanon, who is endlessly pregnant, with aspirations for her son to travel to palestine one day,,,,
Now you know WHY the infidel lady is nervous,, hmm???
Well,, I have been educating this infidel on the truth about "the perfect man for ALL time",,
spits,,,
well,, infidel lady,, asks muslima,, how can you be proud of your religion,, you stone people to death,, and you think this is a good thing?
muslima, said with a nice bright smile,,
"but,, we use LITTLE rocks".
Me,, I get this story from the nervous infidel,, who now,, is horrified to be livin' beside a insane pregnant troll from the dark ages,,, I decide, to call my nice and friendly,,
"human rights commission",
to see what they have to say,, about this old infidels rights,,, I explained, the whole story,,
ya know what they said,,
The BITCHES hung up on me!!!
TIME TO SAY,,,
ENOUGH!!!!
I say,, infidel nation,, time to tell islam to stick it where the sun don't shine!!
SO MOTE IT BE!!!!!
)0(
solsticewitch13
in dar al harb,, GRRRR
"don't annoy the bikers"
at March 18, 2008 3:55 PM
"Next time, I hope the Republican voters don't let the New York Times tell them who they should nominate, or who they deem to be 'electable'."
by Infidel33
The first thing Republican voters across the country can do is resolve to ignore the results in Iowa and New Hampshire and make up their own minds. New Hampshire allows "independents" to vote in party primaries. If I were a resident of the Granite State I would also register as an independent and and vote "wherever the race is interesting". That's what they do. They're not independents. They're undeclared. They vote in a primary even though they have no intention of ever voting for the person they nominate.
"Electability" is a trap. It forces you to set aside your principles for the sake of the party. Every time a pol says how important it is for [pick your party] to win the White House, I cringe. Everything is about the party.
I won't be voting for McCain either but he has until November to convince me otherwise.
An aside to the Democrats:
Good or bad, it would definitely be exciting and it might gain you even more support. Let enough super delegates withhold support from both candidates and deadlock the convention, forcing the nomination of someone new. Enough of the choreographed events. Let's have some real democracy. Show us how it's done.
at March 18, 2008 3:57 PM
So this lying hypocrite is trying to throw us some red meat.
Well Adolph Wright said that Jesus was black and he was killed by white men.
He said we deliberately hooked black people on drugs, that we gave them the hiv virus.
Hard to believe anything this say anything claim anything empty suit has to offer.
Yes, he is the Manchurian candidate.
And now he is finished.
His legacy will likely be to leave a lot of bitter black people even more bitter in a land of unlimited opportunity that they are too blind to see. One hopes that the more sensible of his followers will join the mainstream.
Posted by: dgene at March 18, 2008 4:08 PM
My disagreement with this site is that it can seem as if the purpose is to elect Republicans rather than to just defeat the jihadists."
posted earlier
*********************
NOooow....
This site is obviously trying to fight jihadist...it just so happens that the Demo-CRAPS available for the pickin' are all Mo' luvers.
The ONLY hope (God help us) is going with McCain and hoping that he doesn't turn out to be a Republi-CANT.
Posted by: DeeMack at March 18, 2008 4:12 PM
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2008/03/obama_no_sudden_moves_when_tal.html
Quotes from his first book...
And I repeat this from Feb. 29 2008
[-]
Obama would be the first US president to not spend his entire life residing inside the US.
The first with a parent and siblings not living in the US. How will he deal with the immigration issue?
He would be the first president to not spend his formative years and early schooling in the US. How will he deal with the islamic textbooks in US schools?
He would be the first from a polygomous family. How will he deal with this issue?
He would be the first with muslim siblings and parents. How will he deal with the islamic threat? Will he even see islam as a threat when he has immediate, not distant, muslim relatives? Will they talk to him and influence his decisions? Will he decide that terrorists are just criminals? Ease up on security? How does he feel about the NOI?
He would be the first president with an Afro-centric ancestry instead of European. Will he try to spend billions to 'save' Africa? Or at least Kenya? Will he intervene in African countries where the US has no economic or strategic interest? Will he show any loyalty to European allies?
How does he feel about reparations? Even though he has no ancestors that were slaves would he endorse this? Or authorize it?
Will he defend always, a country that he hasn't always been proud of growing up? That his mother didn't seem proud of either. That his father didn't seem to like? And his wife, "MO", hasn't always been proud of? Even when he was made a senator?
Will his 'Afro-centric' church ever be looked into? (Well maybe a bit today)
What kind of cabinet choices would he make when he has already listed Brezinski, Dhimmi Carter's man, as one choice.
This blogger doesn't like Obama but his facts seem accurate.
http://www.freedomsenemies.com/_more/obama.htm
Will reporters question any of the things he wrote in his first book? (See link to American Thinker above)
He will be the first president to admit to cocaine usage. Will he fight against drugs?
Will reporters answer any of these questions? Normally, they would be ripping apart the candidates but instead they are tip toeing around.
How about after the election? Will they be afraid to question anything he does? Afraid to be called racist? Will they swoon when he starts talking like a preacher? Or listen to the words? And ask questions?
Will he abandon Israel?
[-]
From what I have seen many are defending him. Or excusing him.
at March 18, 2008 4:12 PM
Really, comm'on....you going to tell me they worship Jesus Christ? He was a Jew, Hebrew, of light skin (assumed), and not African. Black Liberation Theology preaches hate of everything that Jesus was and who he was. How can they hate everything about him and 'claim' him at the same time? Can't happen.
Posted by: alaskan1000
----
That reminds me.. Mahomet was WHITE by all accounts and that includes the KKKoran. He had pale skin and a red beard and red hair. Naturally red unlike his many followers who dye their beards in an obvious attempt at complete idol-worship.
So why do so many hate-Blacks 'embrace islam'?
Hey, guys.. a WHITEY is the IDOL of islam!
Hehehe.. and noone white wants to claim HIM. (elephant dung be upon him - since they already did it to Mother Mary).
Posted by: Allah Schmallah at March 18, 2008 4:13 PM
"Did I strongly disagree with many of his political views? Absolutely – just as I'm sure many of you have heard remarks from your pastors, priests, or rabbis with which you strongly disagreed."
-from speech
Not here. My pastor and priests never mixed politics in with their sermons. They spoke mainly of the need to love others. They also never used profanity in church.
at March 18, 2008 4:20 PM
memo to Senator Obama: If your "pastor" (Mr. Wrong ehr, Wright) sounded like a jihadist that's because he WAS a jihadist, stupid!
Malcolm X became a Muslim to bring jihad to the United States, which he did. Your phony "pastor" Mr. Wrong, ehr, Mr. Wright and "Church" are exhibit "A."
Posted by: pythagoras at March 18, 2008 4:20 PM
Alaskan1000 wrote:
"The church worships 'victimhood' and 'color' not a god. How do they keep their IRS non-profit status?"
From a Wall St. Journal article:
"On Christmas morning, Rev. Jeremiah Wright Jr. compared presidential candidate Barack Obama's impoverished childhood to Jesus Christ's. "Barack knows what it means to be a black man living in a ountry and a culture that is controlled by rich white people," he then trumpeted. "Hillary [Clinton] can never know that."
"Mr. Wright wasn't at a convention or a campaign stop. He was standing at the pulpit before the mostly African-American congregation of Chicago's Trinity United Church of Christ, where Sen. Obama has worshiped for more than 20 years."
BTW, Rev. Wright said in a sermon that Jesus was a black man and the Romans (i.e. Italians, i.e. White Europeans) discriminated against Jesus because of his race. I think I have it bookmarked on YouTube. I will try to find the reference.
at March 18, 2008 4:21 PM
"For the men and women of Reverend Wright's generation, the memories of humiliation and doubt and fear have not gone away; nor has the anger and the bitterness of those years."
That's your mentor you're speaking of.
"In the end, then, what is called for is nothing more, and nothing less, than what all the world's great religions demand – that we do unto others as we would have them do unto us."
Where is this taught in Islam?
Posted by: PMK at March 18, 2008 4:35 PM
Two days ago, Obama stated on national T.V. he never heard Wright make any such racist statements .
During his speach, he sings another tune.
He has one, "mislead us", or perhaps he "can't recall" what he said two days before.
And he may still be our leader. Wow.
Posted by: Islofob IS-1 at March 18, 2008 4:37 PM
Not here. My pastor and priests never mixed politics in with their sermons. They spoke mainly of the need to love others. They also never used profanity in church.
Posted by: PMK
Same here - I cannot point to a single political or profane comment ever made by my pastor either over the pulpit or over dinner that even comes close to this clown. In fact, I would love to hear my pastors take on this "spiritual leader", although I can already anticipate his response....as in false teacher with a foul mouth.
Posted by: champ at March 18, 2008 4:49 PM
After watching Obama's entire speech I feel nauseous. He tried desperately to justify the Reverend White's remarks, but it sounded to me that he was still blaming whitey.
Easy for him to talk about how black people were kept down and couldn't make enough to support their families.
Posted by: ImNoDhimmi at March 18, 2008 5:00 PM
I have a hard time with anyone telling me that the US continues to have "institutionalized racism" when I compare my life, wealth and fame with that of:
Oprah
Michael Jordan
George Washington Carver
Eddie Murphy
Give me a break. Who wouldn't stand up and walk out of a service where the preacher was spouting such nastiness? I sure would, and have.
Posted by: Stand fast in the liberty at March 18, 2008 5:09 PM
It appears Rev. Wright's views are not unique.
The audience was filled with Obama supporters, one of whom said that comments like Wright's were standard in black churches. They wondered what the fuss was about.
“I wasn’t offended by anything the pastor said. A lot of things he said were absolutely correct…. The way he said it may not have been the most appropriate way to say it, but as far as a typical black inner-city church, that’s how it’s said.”
- Gregory Davis, a financial adviser and Obama supporter
“A lot of things that he said were true, whether people want to accept it, or believe it, or not. People believe in their hearts that a lot of what he said was true.”
- Vernon Price - ward leader in Philadelphia's 22nd precinct
“I think much of what he had to say was on point in terms of America needs to challenge her foreign policy,” [said Waller]. “While it may be divisive to talk about 9/11 as chickens coming home to roost, what was really being said there is that America cannot believe that our hands are totally innocent in worldwide violence. So at the core of his arguments, I think there is a truth.”
- Rev. Alyn Waller, of the Enon Tabernacle Baptist Church in Philadelphia
Posted by: PMK at March 18, 2008 5:17 PM
Not suprising, Obama tried to look good, but ended up looking much weaker today in this speech.
Posted by: bigcatgirl13106 at March 18, 2008 5:23 PM
Hugh,
Speaking of Liberation Theology. What are your thoughts on Gutierez's (sp?)ideas?
at March 18, 2008 5:35 PM
NOBAMA!!!
Posted by: Drewbenstein
LOL! Would make an awesome bumper sticker!
Posted by: champ [TypeKey Profile Page] at March 18, 2008 3:00 PM
Hey Champ!!
Here ya go!
http://www.nobamastuff.com/Purchase.htm
at March 18, 2008 5:38 PM
I'm appalled that a "Reverend" can spout all that hate speech in a church about America. Good Gravy!! He should go to Tibet, or Iran and see what it's like there for saying such things. Really, I just can't get over it. If Obama is so against what this guy preached, why didn't he go to another church?? I would have done.
I must really be out of touch with reality, I had no idea those kind of sermons were given. The guys should be charged with treason or something. What an ingrate.
Posted by: gymgal at March 18, 2008 5:47 PM
That a man gifted with opportunities found here in America cannot express, cannot project profound GRATITUDE and love of country--necessary virtues--demonstrates his unsuitability to lead a free and just people, the People of [All] America.
Posted by: John C at March 18, 2008 5:47 PM
Thanks, Drewbenstein!
I am definitely going to buy a batch and distribute them to family & friends. Love it!!
Posted by: champ at March 18, 2008 5:56 PM
Rev. Wright's kind are the Desolating Obamanation standing in the pulpit of God.
Posted by: John C at March 18, 2008 5:57 PM
Barak Obama said
Did I strongly disagree with many of his political views? Absolutely – just as I'm sure many of you have heard remarks from your pastors, priests, or rabbis with which you strongly disagreed.
He didn't mention imams. Does he think that Muslims always agree with their imams?
I'm sure that's not the case at all.
Posted by: special_guest at March 18, 2008 6:02 PM
Obama: My pastor sounded like a jihadist
-----------------------------
I don't see in the speech that Obama said that his pastor sounded like a jihadist.
Obama is a smooth talker - but lacks substance. I want a lot more history and information on this guy before ever casting a vote for him.
Posted by: The Cool Ghoul at March 18, 2008 6:06 PM
The sesquipedalist Hugh said
whom he chose to become afa mily friend
This had me going. "Afa mily" sounds vaguely Italian, maybe an archaic term.
But, no.
Posted by: special_guest at March 18, 2008 6:35 PM
LOL special_guest!
I h ad the samet rboule readi ngt hat messa ge!
(Hugh is rubbing off on me)
Posted by: champ at March 18, 2008 6:43 PM
Barack Obama in his speech today in Philadelphia erred, as do so many on the Left, by engaging in morally relativistic thinking. According to Obama, his pastor, the histrionic buffoon Jeremiah Wright, said some objectionable things but, hey, so did Geraldine Ferraro and Obama's own white grandmother. This seemingly absolute inability of the Left to realize that there is a gradation of wrongdoing has led liberals time and time again to show a disturbing incapacity to distinguish between demagoguery and pure evil on the one hand and mere unfortunate and less than savory action or speech on the other. During the Cold War this kind of deficient thought pattern led the Left in the West to desist from criticizing the Soviet Union because America and other Western European nations also did wrong at times. You see the same kind of moral equivalizing by those who wish to exculpate Islamic radicals by brining up crimes by Christians done centuries ago (and, unlike in Islam, in direct violation of Christian tenets).
This all represents stunning moral stupidity by Obama; ethical obtuseness of the highest order. He has learned nothing. He should not be a United States Senator, let alone President of the United States.
Posted by: Wellington at March 18, 2008 6:52 PM
Who is Gutierrez? Is he connected to some "La Raza" business with which -- ojala -- I am unfamiliar?
Posted by: Hugh at March 18, 2008 7:10 PM
re. O's grandmother who remarked on her fear of black men passing her.. well, she is in company with none other than the 'reverend' Jesse Jack-son.
Here's the direct quote. From a blogger who recalled the same thing just as I did:
Posted by: Allah Schmallah at March 18, 2008 7:11 PM
Wright aint right--He's WRONG!
Posted by: guide inside at March 18, 2008 7:36 PM
Juan Williams of all people said that this Rev Wrignt episode exposed Obama as nothing more then a "politician". Obama should have thrown Wright "under the bus" as any white politician would have been required to do by Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and the left wing media. Instead Obama threw his grandmother under the bus because he still needs Wright politically.As if one could choose their grandmother the way one can choose their pastor.It's also amusing that Obama is complaining about clips of Wright's hate speech being shown again and again on cable and the internet. When it was Obama's church that sold the dvds of Wrights sermons at their website.That's how FOX and ABC news obtained the clips.Obama's church apparently considers these clips among Rev Wright's "greatest hits".Now like Obama's middle name Hussein these Rev Wright clips are something not to be mentioned.
On a another note when JFK was assassinated Malcom X is famous for saying the assassination was "chickens coming home to roost" to America.The then leader of the Nation of Islam Elijah Muhammed removed Malcom X from his position as spokesman for the Nation of Islam because of the remark.Elijah Muhammed was smart enough to know that people loved JFK and how that hateful remark would be viewed in America. Given Rev Wrights association with Minister Louis Farrakhan, Wright knew exactly what he was saying when he preached of "chickens coming home to roost" just five days after Sept 11, 2001.Yet Barack Obama chooses to continue his association with Rev Wright. That tells you all you need to know about the kind of man he is and why he must never be elected President of the United States.
Posted by: Roxane at March 18, 2008 7:37 PM
The Constitution
We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union,
The Obamadilution
"We the people, in order to form a more perfect union."
at March 18, 2008 7:38 PM
The blank slate candidate suddenly has a lot of ugly grafitti appearing on it, like written-in-lemon juice secret messages when a little heat is appplied.
Scrawled in Rev. Wright's special brand of acid.
Obama's confession: I couldn't pick up on blatant anti-American racist crap even after 20 years of listening to it.
Not the type of intellect needed for Commander-in-Chief.
Posted by: profitsbeard at March 18, 2008 8:03 PM
Google James Cone.
This is the man who has influenced Wright and BHO.
For him to be President would be an Obamanation.
at March 18, 2008 8:11 PM
Don’t trust Obama! Yeah, he’s a good speaker, knows how to deliver a platitude filled patriotic souding speech like any lying politician running for office, but a politician’s words are just words – look at the facts. He has been a close personal friend of this damn-white-America-&the Israelis Wright moron for over 20 years! Trust that fact, not his words.
Posted by: FM at March 18, 2008 8:20 PM
The debates are bringing out a lot of suppressed emotions on both sides.
I, like a lot of posters here, worry about the disingenuous timing of Obama's repudiation of Wright's racist remarks. However, I also can't help but notice that he is the first black politician of national stature to stand up and directly speak about race issues in quite some time. His comments are infinitely more reasonable and devoid of whining than those of Jesse Jackson or Al Sharpton or Louis Farrakhan.
His comments about Wright being like an old uncle who says embarrassing things are not off the wall at all for anyone who comes from a real family. That was a very astute thing for him to say, and I suspect that most people will understand the underlying intent and sentiments behind this remark.
I doubt if this firestorm will be the end of his chances to be elected. Instead, it gives him even more of the spotlight. It is to his credit that he has survived it as well as he has. (Stashing his wife away has helped, too. Maybe she has gone into Dale Carnegie rehab somewhere).
Posted by: Eastview at March 18, 2008 8:29 PM
"His [Barack Obama's] comments about Wright being like an old uncle who says embarrassing things are not off the wall at all for anyone who comes from a real family. That was a very astute thing for him to say, and I suspect that most people will understand the underlying intent and sentiments behind this remark."
-- from a posting above
You do not choose your uncles (though you are free not to attend family reunions, or if you go, to stay well away from any "crazy old uncle").
On the other hand, you are free to choose your pastor, and if you find that the one you have chosen over a very long period of time continues to make outrageous and morally unacceptable remarks, you are free to weigh the possible damage to your budding political career (by leaving a large and well-connected church in the district which is your political base), against that moral tug.
There is a difference. And it is no justification to say that we all have our good points and our bad points. Mussolini made the trains run on time; Hitler built the "people's car," the Volkswagen, and also the autobahnen for that car to travel on; both Hitler and Mussolini instituted paid holidays for workers. So what?
Rev. Wright may have been a practitioner of a "Black Liberation Theology" that appears to be less about up-by-your bootstraps Yes-We-Canism and a lot more about the perfidy of whites, including an American government that, he claimed, deliberately propagated the AIDS virus (presumably to kill blacks). That kind of charge, and many others, are simply unacceptable, intolerable. That Barack Obama found a way to justify his own pusillanimity, possibly prompted by political ambition, and to dress it all up in the finery of furrowed-brow moral concern, should not cut any ice with the rest of us.
Posted by: Hugh at March 18, 2008 8:42 PM
In mant ways, these Black Liberation Theology/African Centric churches are really the flip side of the same coin - the other side being the Nation of Islam, Moorish Science Temple types where the shared "liturgy" is the evil White Man and Slavery and Segregation, ad nauseum. Listen to their rhetoric. God or Allah - it really doesn't matter because in the end these people with grudges the size of Rhode Island on their shoulders will never ever accept the world as it is - someone always is to blame and that someone is White Society and the US.
Posted by: HOV Dummy at March 18, 2008 8:46 PM
And red sails in the sunset. - Hugh
It's not "snails?"
Red mondegreens in the sunset...
Posted by: MarisolJW at March 18, 2008 8:52 PM
In response to a posting by Eastview, Hugh said
"On the other hand, you are free to choose your pastor, and if you find that the one you have chosen over a very long period of time continues to make outrageous and morally unacceptable remarks, you are free to weigh the possible damage to your budding political career (by leaving a large and well-connected church in the district which is your political base), against that moral tug."
This is true, and it is the point that Obama has not yet adequately addressed. My point was that Obama has a very good way of making analogies in a way that many people will identify with. Aside from whether you agree with it or not, this was a masterful rejoinder.
I do have another comment to make that is less than admiring of him. In watching his speech it was impossible not to notice that he was reading from teleprompters, and that given the moment it curiously lacked passion. Also, I wonder who, exactly, it is who writes his speeches, who crafts the phrases, who chooses analogies such as that of the crazy uncle.
Does anyone here know who Obama's speech writer is?
Posted by: Eastview at March 18, 2008 9:23 PM
David Axelrod is known to be one of them. He has also been a speechwriter for another political figure, Deval Patrick, whom Barack Obama calls his "friend" and with whom he apparently shares his thoughts (and Deval Patrick shares his phrases, or at least phrases that he has used to good effect, that someone else may have written).
Deval Patrick became governor of Massachusetts with many expressing high hopes. He was very short on policies, on specifics. But he was content to rely on the vague slogan "Together We Can." What "we can" was never specified, but judging by his first two years in office, "together we can" not very much.
He spent the first month arranging for a new, much more expensive car than the Crown Victoria Romney had had, for new drapes and new other stuff for his office -- many tens of thousands of dollars -- and hiring a personal assistant, with a salary of $72,000 for his wife, even though she was going to continue her work as a partner with a major law firm. There was so much fury over all of this manic spending, that he had to pull back quickly.
Since then, Deval Patrick has made big plans based on the assumption that the state legislature will approve the building of three casinos in the state, and that somehow these three will not compete with each other, nor with pre-existing casinos in Rhode Island and Connecticut. He has plucked wild estimates of their future revenues out of the blue. But in any case, it is unlikely that the plan on which he has based so much of his plans for the state will in fact be approved. It almost certainly will not.
A guide to what Barack Obama might offer? I don't know. But we have so little to go on with Obama, that studying the performance in office of Deval Patrick, as smooth a talker as Barack Obama, might not be entirely irrelevant.
Posted by: Hugh at March 18, 2008 9:33 PM
Eastview wrote:
"However, I also can't help but notice that he is the first black politician of national stature to stand up and directly speak about race issues in quite some time."
Not by his own volition, I assure you. This was merely an attempt at damage control. This is the candidate that was supposedly the great uniter offering "meaningful change". There is no way he wanted to delve into divisive racial politics, but alas, his hand was forced.
No. Senator Obama wanted to continue on his present course, offering little in terms of policy, complemented by a mainly absentee voting history. He certainly is not clearly distinguishable from Senator Clinton.
The main difference is he was and continues to lead this primary. That being said, he was all too happy to take race off the table, with his campaign labeling Bill Clinton (or anyone else for that matter) as a racist for merely pointing out Obama's near-90% voting bloc among African Americans.
obama's half-hearted attempt at clarification today seemed more of a rationalization than anything else, and I believe it will continue to hurt him....but make no mistake. He was speaking to the superdelegates this morning, and no one else.
Posted by: awake at March 18, 2008 9:37 PM
Hugh, here is a link for Gusyave Gutierez - The father of liberation theology - Liberation Theology has beeen used mostly in south america to justify violence against tyrannical regimes
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gustavo_Guti%C3%A9rrez
Posted by: RecoveringHog at March 18, 2008 10:00 PM
Hugh
FYI That should have been Gustavo Gutierrez
at March 18, 2008 10:01 PM
stickman: John McCain was only guilty of bad judgment for sitting in on a few meetings with less than ethical individuals. Once he understood what was going on, he cut out and that's why a slap on the wrist of McCain is all that's warranted. Barack Obama, by contrast, associated with a vile, clownish, self-pitying black minister for going on twenty years. There is no comparison.
Eastview: Obama has wanted it both ways. He has desired to be a uniter while belonging to a church which was a divider. I guess the chickens are indeed coming home to roost.
Posted by: Wellington at March 18, 2008 10:08 PM
I do have another comment to make that is less than admiring of him. In watching his speech it was impossible not to notice that he was reading from teleprompters, and that given the moment it curiously lacked passion.
Dick Morris and Frank Luntz both mentioned Obama's use of a teleprompter while reading his speech, and how it lessened the impact of his speech.Morris also noted that the speech revealed Obama's weakness and lack of ruthlessness in not throwing Wright "under the bus".
Posted by: Roxane at March 18, 2008 10:09 PM
I checked it out, and McCain was involved in the keating scandal, somehow I had confused abscam, bcci and the Keating scandals. Oh well, back to reading "The Golovlovs".
Posted by: stickman at March 18, 2008 10:11 PM
stickman: Yes, McCain was one of the "Keating Five." He was easily the least guilty of all and, as I mentioned above, was blameworthy of only some very temporary bad judgment, for which he has apologized unconditionally.
Obama's attempt to make amends, by contrast, is full of conditionalizing and moral equivalency reasoning (pulling his own grandmother into it all is truly shameful). I'm beginning to think Senator Obama wants to outslick the ultimate slickster, Bill Clinton. Ain't washin' with me, but there are a lot of gullible voters out there, be they whites with way more guilt than they should feel and blacks with way too much animosity towards a country which gives them a greater shot at success than any on earth. Yep, it's a phony and stupid world.
Posted by: Wellington at March 18, 2008 10:31 PM
Hugh, thanks for the info about Obama's speech writers. In listening to Obama I am always struck by the heavy dose of cliches and sloganeering in his speeches, and how little of real substance there is. Many Americans seem to be dazzled by the novelty of this guy, and one has to admit that, as novelties go, he's not bad. But we have to ask about what happens when the novelty wears off, and he's sitting in the White House. The vetting process underway, although late in getting started, is beginning to do what it's intended to do.
Posted by: Eastview at March 18, 2008 10:35 PM
How can a man who seems to not object when his government is blamed for infecting people with AIDS want to be the leader of that government? Will he stop those seemingly ongoing injections?
Will he stop the government, if elected, from giving drugs to black people? Did the government 'give' him the drugs he took in college? Was it shipped free to him since he calls himself black?
Was there a clip of the Rev. Wright praising the US that was overlooked?
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2008/03/obama_no_sudden_moves_when_tal.html
Quotes from his first book...
From the American Thinker link, above-
Obama: 'no sudden moves' when talking to whites
Thomas Lifson
Judith A. Klinghofer cites a passage from Barack Obama's first autobiography to remember when listening to his speech today:
[-]
On p. 94-95 he describes an effective tactic to deal with White people:
It was usually an effective tactic, another one of those tricks I had learned: People were satisfied so long as you were courteous and smiled and made no sudden moves. They were more than satisfied; they were relieved - such a pleasant surprise to find a well-mannered young black man who didn't seem angry all the time.
On the evidence of his career, Obama has learned well how to reassure white people that he is not a grievance-mongering racialist with a chip on his shoulder. But Pastor Wright's obvious contrast with this approach, combined with the self-proclaimed importance of the Reverend to his life, suggests manipulativeness may well be at work.
So expect no sudden moves in The Speech, but watch for smooth ones.
[-]
snip
So if Obama is elected will he then have Rev. Wright become an employee, as advisor, of the government that he hates? What then?
It's hard to blame 'The Man' when you are 'The Man'. -Wanda Sykes
at March 18, 2008 10:37 PM
He, or his speechwriter, like to lift phrases from American history. And some of them, but not all, can be tracked down. The one he keeps re-using, and that he used early on in today's speech -- that "improbable experiment" -- has a ring to it. I suspect that the well-turned phrase comes either from some figure in American history, or was said by a professor conducting a class at law school or even by an emeritus professor giving a talk. When did Paul Freund, who was good at quoting Mr. Justice Holmes, die? Or might it have been a subtitle used by Bernard Bailyn, or Michael Kammen? One never knows.
Posted by: Hugh at March 18, 2008 10:48 PM
Does anyone here know who Obama's speech writer is?
Posted by: Eastview
Here a thought, the MSM write his speeches or maybe they rewrite them.
BHO maybe black but he is camillion as well. He use anything he thinks of that will win him your support. And another thing he doesn't move quickly like a camillion. It is all a show.
He has so many unknowns the few knowns are amplified and they were very liberal to begin with. No, I would not let him date your sister much less mine.
@Eastview
Color me wrong but I get a distinct feeling that you have a moral relativism POV or your just in love with his voice?
at March 18, 2008 11:11 PM
The speech gave me no more insight into the actual world-view of Barak Obama, but it was certainly well-crafted and delivered. Obama's principle asset is that he doesn't sound like a politician.
One positive is that he acknowledged the redemptive character of American society and criticized his Pastor for among things insisting American society is static.
There were certainly negatives, including the absence of specificity in his disassociations with Rev Wright's assertions.
I think Obama is fascinating...and potentially dangerous. My intellect is impressed while my gut instincts are skeptical. His Liberalism, not his skin color or his church, is what concerns me.
Finally, I'm with PMK. I think Obama will get the nomination...the general-election is harder to call.
Posted by: Cornelius at March 18, 2008 11:11 PM
Today Barack Obama punctuated his decision - of the last 20 years - that he is more interested in embracing an insidious, anti-white, anti-semite, anti-american extremist than getting the white vote. Obama now has unequivocally stated that he is in Rev.Wright's camp and has no plans whatsoever to disavow him. He's accepting him with all his ludicrous and hate-filled charges of gov't invented AIDS to kill black people, 9/11 was an inside job, Israel is the aggressor against Palestinians, whites are evil, etc.. We should not be surprised, b/c Obama has followed through on this choice to embrace extremism every week for the last twenty years when he sat through this guys sermons. Can you imagine this guy being the spiritual advisor and close confidante to the White House and President?? (much less Farrakhan!) This is insanity!!!!!
btw, a good site: http://www.stop-obama.org/
at March 18, 2008 11:57 PM
Hugh: I googled "improbable experiment", and came up with this,
http://www.freedomhousedoc.com/gpage.html1.html
Note the use of the word "audacious".
But, what do I know? I've spent my evening trying to find a searchable online version of the Talmud that was not edited by the likes of Elizabeth Dilling.
Posted by: skevin at March 19, 2008 12:07 AM
After watching Obama's speech on Race, I had the oddest feeling that the man thinks everyone but him just fell off a turnip truck. What else can he believe if he thinks any intellegent person would believe that he's just learning about Wright's racist, anti-Americanm views.
This man has a character and judgement problem. Do we really need him in the White House?
Posted by: rational
at March 19, 2008 12:36 AM
Obama--a man caught in his own racial divide, trying to put one over on The Man by affecting the mannerisms of The Man, while simultaneously trying to actualize his Interior Coloredness. And here I thought Muslims had a lock on cognitive dissonance.
Posted by: John C at March 19, 2008 1:02 AM
Hugh-
The "improbable experiment in democracy" phrase sounds like something lifted from de Tocqueville.
Obama likes to pilfer little literary juxtapositions. ("Audacity... hope", etc.)
But now he finds himself in a very uncomfortable and literal one.
The divisive racist Rev. Wright juxta pose.
Obama chose to remain true to this bile-bellower.
Which ends Barack's chance at being a "uniter".
The Rev. (and Obama) should have known this de Tocqueville quote:
"Those who despise people will never get the best out of others or themselves."
Posted by: profitsbeard at March 19, 2008 1:11 AM
Barry Obama's worldview is a tortuously narcissistic projection that isn't grounded in objective reality. He has great potential to run the Ship of State aground in a wreak of Homeric proportions, if ever he becomes Head of State and Chief Executive of the United States of America.
Posted by: John C at March 19, 2008 1:32 AM
@Eastview
Color me wrong but I get a distinct feeling that you have a moral relativism POV or your just in love with his voice?
Posted by: Im.mad.as.HELL!
Mad,
Neither. Merely trying to perform due diligence on various aspects of the man to discover what I can about his true nature. How I speak about him to others (including in this forum) will depend on what I find, as will my vote in November.
Good points - good speaker, mixed ethnic background (which by chance I happen to be slightly familiar with, having taught in the Peace Corps in the same region of his ethnic home, near Kisumu, Kenya), nice smile.
Bad points - speeches tend toward the vacuous even if they are delivered in proper English (in terms of grades Form gets an A- because his delivery is good, but Content gets a D+ because of lack of depth and substance, and overuse of platitudes and cliches), tends to wear his ethnicity on his sleeve, leading to a growing suspicion that he will be less beholden to the majority interests of the country than to a disgruntled minority, absence of any substantive statements that give a sense of his understanding of global geopolitics (interpretation - he has little understanding beyond what he picked up during his visits to East Africa over the past few years)...the list is too long to include here, and is growing.
at March 19, 2008 1:40 AM
Beware of Obama!!!
Obama's deep connection to Wright's church and white-supremacist views may work to his political advantage as his main platform for achieving the Presidency, regardless of his attempts to soften the edges of Wright's sharp statements.
This current upset with Wright and Barrack's defense of a man he embraces as family, certainly begs the question we must all be thinking: Is Obama playing the race card - is Obama playing on our sympathies, rather than on our sensibilites, in a cheesy and desperate effort to gain the Presidency?
I personally believe that Obama IS playing the race card to gain America's vote, and the thought that he would stoop to such a level absolutely infuriates me!
Obama is running for the highest office of the land, and resorting to such measures is pathetic, dangerous, and is not in the best interest of our nation.
I agree that racism needs to be dealt with, but it should not be used as ones platform when running for President. Shame on him!!!
Vote NO to Obama!
Posted by: champ at March 19, 2008 1:45 AM
Several posters have alluded to Obama's current troubles as having dealt a grievous blow to his nomination prospects.
If you want see just how bad it is as gauged by the betting public using real money, check out http://www.intrade.com/. His troubles with his pastor cost him about 3 percentage points, but he gained it all back with his speech yesterday. As of right now Obama stands as a 75/25 favorite over Clinton with those who are willing to put their money where their mouths are.
Posted by: Eastview at March 19, 2008 1:52 AM
More lovely thoughts from a lovely man.
http://worldnetdaily.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=59230
Tell me again, please, who are the racists in America today?
Posted by: Isabellathecrusader at March 19, 2008 5:28 AM
This man has a character and judgement problem. Do we really need him in the White House?
Posted by: rational
No, but that doesn't mean anything. Our 42nd president had similar flaws and a lot of Democrats who claim to be worried about Obama now still think Bill Clinton was just fine and dandy. They're Hillary supporters now but they'll come around before November, if Obama is nominated.
Posted by: PMK at March 19, 2008 8:14 AM
The "Presidential Flag Placement" behind him was a nice touch.
Posted by: Borg at March 19, 2008 8:34 AM
I thought this line was rich:
"I am married to a black American who carries within her the blood of slaves and slaveowners – an inheritance we pass on to our two precious daughters." I thought to myself if the statement were reversed, he might say of his Kenyan Father..."My father is the son of a slave holder and a slave master and this is my burden to bear...Rev Wright not withstanding, but this is my spiritual heritage."
at March 19, 2008 9:21 AM
What would Putin think of President Obama?
He knows McCain is tough, he knows Hillary is a hard woman, but a president named Barack? Is Putin laughing? Are the rest of the worlds tough guy leaders cracking up? This is the 'best' America can do? Putin never laughs, but I bet he will make an exception in Barack's case...
at March 19, 2008 9:26 AM
I scanned through all 100 or so comments to this posting and found very few readers who really seemed to understand what Obama was talking about in his speech. Basically, his message was that all of us have baggage -- and older generations often carry more baggage than the younger generations -- but if we don't drop this baggage, unite around common values and goals, this same baggage is going to drag us down for elections and generations to come.
As a staunch supporter of Jihad Watch, I have learned over time that many of its readers are very conservative politically. They view Jihad as a call to arms, and their rhetoric quickly turns vicious and divisive. But there are also some liberal Christians among the readers who see jihad as evil and inhumane. Rather than ratcheting up the hatred, they want to make the "us against them" attitude obsolete and disgusting. This can only be done by exposing and condemning the ideology behind jihad. It should thrown in the dustbin of history along with Communism and Nazism.
I believe Barak Obama embraces that view more than any other candidate. He has seen Islam close up, being raised through two failed marriages. He has heard the divisive rhetoric from both white and black people throughout his life, and he has succeeded by moving beyond those unproductive and negative attitudes. Americans of all stripes need to catch this vision and embrace the good while condemning the evil -- the worst of which is that which makes us hostile to other human beings.
Posted by: Chris at March 19, 2008 11:23 AM
So slavery is genetic now? Passed by blood? How many generations does that last? Do the Israeli's have slavery in their blood still from the Egyptian times?
After three generations, it is said, the family rarely has connections to what the past family used to be. Wealth and possessions rarely last more than three generations. Except for royalty and the super rich.
His pastor is beating the drum, toting the baggage, keeping it going. Like the Pali's will be 100 years from now. Focusing on the past they didn't participate in.
His grandmother made 'sterotypical' remarks about blacks? Like what, that she is afraid of being robbed? So are black grandmothers. I think that those sterotypical remarks are being made all over Europe now. Thanks to rising crime from Africian immigrants. So do something to change it. Not excuse it. The behavior, not the remarks, which will change then also. I believe even Oprah said when 9/11 happened her first thought was Please, don't let it be a black man that did it.
Bill Cosby could run and get votes accross the board.
Kind of like the jihadi's being sterotypically called 'violent'. And then blame others when we say it. Of course sterotypcial remarks are hurtful and don't apply to everyone. Would he cringe if she said something about rednecks? I'm betting he wouldn't flinch.
What is his attitude about islam? Has anyone heard? The call to pray is the most beautiful sound is the only thing that I have seen. Most non-muslims think of that call as screeching and annoying. What else does he think?
at March 19, 2008 11:54 AM
Chris-
with all due respect for us not "understanding" Obama. As a Christian myself, I find it ironic that you are trying to explain away Obama's association with Rev.Wright for the past 20 years. How exactly has he "succeeded by moving beyond those unproductive and negative attitudes?" CLEARLY, HE HAS NOT. Rather, he has embraced a radical extremist, peddling black hatred and black victimology, while trading on historical white guilt. This is Obama's game. We can all heal our racial divides if we just elect Obama to be president! What a crock! I'm a little disappointed in the supposed Christians that embrace Obama (forget that he is a huge supporter of all types of Abortion) despite his association with the ilk of Jeremiah Wright and Tony Rezko. Deeds talk louder than words. And in Obama's case, we do indeed know more about the man by the company he keeps.
Posted by: Peaceful_Muslims? at March 19, 2008 12:04 PM
Rev. Jeremiah Wright has been consistent in his statements over the more than twenty years that Barack Obama has known him. Obama himself was first attracted to Wright when he heard him preach -- see p. 293 of "Dreams From My Father" ---- about "Sharpesville" and "Hiroshima." Now you might wonder what connects the shooting of black protesters by South African police, and the atomic bomb dropped by the Americans on Hiroshima, a move intended to obviate the necessity for an invasion of the Japanese Home Islands, which would have cost an estimated one million lives, most of them Japanese. But the answer is clear: both are examples of "whites" doing something terrible and inexcusable to "non-whites." The bomb on Hiroshima, designed to shorten the war, and limit the dead, is quite different from the Sharpesville shootings, and the Japanese casualties that resulted from the atomic bombs on Hiroshima and on Nagasaki (another city invoked by Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Obama's pastor, friend, spiritual mentor, guide, as near to a surrogate father as anyone could claim to be. Indeed, Rev. Wright seems not to know that the total casualties at both Hiroshima and Nagasaki were not greater than those of "whites" in Dresden, Hamburg, Berlin, and Cologne bombed by the American Air Force and the R.A.F., for reasons just as legitimate as was the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
Not once, not once in all of those twenty years of race-spewing against whites by Rev. Jeremiah Wright, did Barack Obama ever see fit to walk out, or to express his displeasure, or even apparently to tell the Rev. Wright that he really took issue with this or that remark. He was not exactly, Barack Obama, eager to rile the pastor, who ran a large and politically influential church. No, Barack Obama was not about to take issue with him, nor to leave a place that was politically so useful for his career.
A "profile in courage" is what the New York Times editorial today, gushing over this speech -- apparently the recycling of Obama's phrases, and of a good many plucked from American history, and even that maudlin tale -- worthy of George Bush pointing out in the audience, at some State of the Union address, some wounded soldier or grateful Iraqi who are planted beforehand so he can point to them, invoke them, and get a big round of sappy-sentimental applause -- of Ashley, and the "old black man" who was there "because of Ashley."
This is what is hailed by some as a "great speech"? This is positively Burkean, Churchillian, Lincolnesque? More like a speech delivered at some college debating competition, to my mind.
Remember only this: he has no explanation, none, for why he chose this pastor, chose not only to go to listen to him, but revered him as a guide and mentor, and stuck with him, for nearly twenty years, and not once in all that time saw fit to take issue, publicly or privately, with anything the Rev. Jeremiah Wright said.
That is what counts. Not the "mere words" delivered yesterday.
at March 19, 2008 12:13 PM
as a Jew and a radical Christian I don't feel Obama knows the Lord. He may know about HIM but it seems impossible to me a man can walk with God in the spirit and not walk out of that church after first standing up and loudly speaking out the truth. Birds of a feather flock together. what gospel is preached there. My wife told me she heard Oprah say that Jesus was "a" way to God but there were many others. We are stuck between a rock and a hard place. I can't believe there are not better people out there to be president.None of the three believe in closing our borders. None of them truly walk with god either...very scary
Posted by: noallahuphere-GOD at March 19, 2008 12:16 PM
Barack the hack and pastor Wrong called for Don Imus to be fired when he made a “certain comment”, but when Barack the hack is questioned about Farrakhan and pastor Wrong and there numerous anti-American, anti-Semitic, anti-Whitey statements, he states these men have a right to say what they want!
Apparently Dom Imus is not afforded the same rights.
Revolting American double standards, by revolting Americans and there cult of personality.
Change you can believe in.
Posted by: BurgerBoy at March 19, 2008 12:17 PM
as a Jew and a radical Christian I don't feel Obama knows the Lord. He may know about HIM but it seems impossible to me a man can walk with God in the spirit and not walk out of that church after first standing up and loudly speaking out the truth. Birds of a feather flock together. what gospel is preached there. My wife told me she heard Oprah say that Jesus was "a" way to God but there were many others. We are stuck between a rock and a hard place. I can't believe there are not better people out there to be president.None of the three believe in closing our borders. None of them truly walk with god either...very scary
Posted by: noallahuphere-GOD at March 19, 2008 12:17 PM
as a Jew and a radical Christian I don't feel Obama knows the Lord. He may know about HIM but it seems impossible to me a man can walk with God in the spirit and not walk out of that church after first standing up and loudly speaking out the truth. Birds of a feather flock together. what gospel is preached there. My wife told me she heard Oprah say that Jesus was "a" way to God but there were many others. We are stuck between a rock and a hard place. I can't believe there are not better people out there to be president.None of the three believe in closing our borders. None of them truly walk with god either...very scary
Posted by: noallahuphere-GOD at March 19, 2008 12:17 PM
From a posting by Rebecca Bynum at www.newenglishreview.org:
"James Cone is a professor at New York's Union Theological Seminary and one of the main proponents of "Black Liberation Theology" that Obama's Reverend Wright preaches. WND reported on him here.
These quotes were taken from Andrew Bostom's blog.
'James Cone, quoted in William R Jones, “Divine Racism: The Unacknowledged Threshold Issue for Black Theology”, in African-American Religious Thought: An Anthology, ed Cornel West and Eddie Glaube, Westminster John Knox Press, 2003, pp. 850, 856.
"Black theology refuses to accept a God who is not identified totally with the goals of the black community. If God is not for us and against white people, then he is a murderer, and we had better kill him. The task of black theology is to kill Gods who do not belong to the black community … Black theology will accept only the love of God which participates in the destruction of the white enemy. What we need is the divine love as expressed in Black Power, which is the power of black people to destroy their oppressors here and now by any means at their disposal. Unless God is participating in this holy activity, we must reject his love."
From James Cone’s own, Black Theology and Black Power, 1997, Orbis, p.150:
"For white people, God’s reconciliation in Jesus Christ means that God has made black people a beautiful people; and if they are going to be in relationship with God, they must enter by means of their black brothers, who are a manifestation of God’s presence on earth. The assumption that one can know God without knowing blackness is the basic heresy of the white churches. They want God without blackness, Christ without obedience, love without death. What they fail to realize is that in America, God’s revelation on earth has always been black, red, or some other shocking shade, but never white. Whiteness, as revealed in the history of America, is the expression of what is wrong with man. It is a symbol of man’s depravity. God cannot be white even though white churches have portrayed him as white. When we look at what whiteness has done to the minds of men in this country, we can see clearly what the New Testament meant when it spoke of the principalities and powers. To speak of Satan and his powers becomes not just a way of speaking but a fact of reality. When we can see a people who are controlled by an ideology of whiteness, then we know what reconciliation must mean. The coming of Christ means a denial of what we thought we were. It means destroying the white devil in us. Reconciliation to God means that white people are prepared to deny themselves (whiteness), take up the cross (blackness) and follow Christ (black ghetto)."
Does this bear any resemblance to the religion Jesus lived and taught? Can it be characterized as Christian at all?
Posted by: Hugh at March 19, 2008 12:18 PM
as a Jew and a radical Christian I don't feel Obama knows the Lord. He may know about HIM but it seems impossible to me a man can walk with God in the spirit and not walk out of that church after first standing up and loudly speaking out the truth. Birds of a feather flock together. what gospel is preached there. My wife told me she heard Oprah say that Jesus was "a" way to God but there were many others. We are stuck between a rock and a hard place. I can't believe there are not better people out there to be president.None of the three believe in closing our borders. None of them truly walk with God either...very scary
Posted by: noallahuphere-GOD at March 19, 2008 12:19 PM
as a Jew and a radical Christian I don't feel Obama knows the Lord. He may know about HIM but it seems impossible to me a man can walk with God in the spirit and not walk out of that church after first standing up and loudly speaking out the truth. Birds of a feather flock together. what gospel is preached there. My wife told me she heard Oprah say that Jesus was "a" way to God but there were many others. We are stuck between a rock and a hard place. I can't believe there are not better people out there to be president.None of the three believe in closing our borders. None of them truly walk with God either...very scary
Posted by: noallahuphere-GOD at March 19, 2008 12:20 PM
Hugh: I'm a little unclear respecting your last post who is responsible for the quote that begins "Black theology refuses to accept a God who is not identified totally with the goals of the black community." Is it Cone himself or the editors, West and Glaube, or someone else? Thanks for clarifying and, by the way, I agree with your posts entirely respecting the vileness of Wright and black liberation theology, which is just racism with a theological coat of paint over it.
Posted by: Wellington at March 19, 2008 1:15 PM
Wellington, it's simple. James Cone wrote it. He was quoted by William R. Jones, who was quoted by Andrew Bostom, who was quoted by Rebecca Bynum, who was quoted by Hugh Fitzgerald.
See? Easy as pi.
Posted by: special_guest at March 19, 20
(Note: Comments on articles are unmoderated, and do not necessarily reflect the views of Jihad Watch or Robert Spencer. Comments that are off-topic, offensive, slanderous, or otherwise annoying may be summarily deleted. However, the fact that particular comments remain on the site IN NO WAY constitutes an endorsement by Robert Spencer of the views expressed therein.)