Clinton takes the low road, goes after Obama on Wright
When the controversy surrounding some of Jeremiah Wright’s sermons first erupted a couple of weeks ago, the Clinton campaign went out of its way to say absolutely nothing about the story publicly. If a reporter brought it up during one of the campaign’s many conference calls, you could practically hear tumbleweeds rolling. The flap was undermining the Obama campaign, and Team Clinton saw no need whatsoever to intervene.
This was, to my mind, the right call. Given the racial elements of the campaign thus far, it would have been a huge risk for the Clinton campaign to be seen stoking the same fires as Fox News. Yes, Ickes & Co. were using it with superdelegates, but that’s behind the scenes. The public pitch was different: “When Clinton was then asked specifically if her campaign was pushing the Wright story — she shrugged and took the next question, ignoring the reporter.”
That was five whole days ago. The desperation factor has apparently grown more intense.
Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, in a wide-ranging interview today with Pittsburgh Tribune-Review reporters and editors, said she would have left her church if her pastor made the sort of inflammatory remarks Sen. Barack Obama’s former pastor made.
“He would not have been my pastor,” Clinton said. “You don’t choose your family, but you choose what church you want to attend.” […]
The Clinton campaign has refrained from getting involved in the controversy, but Clinton herself, responding to a question, denounced what she said was “hate speech.”
“You know, I spoke out against Don Imus, saying that hate speech was unacceptable in any setting, and I believe that,” Clinton said. “I just think you have to speak out against that. You certainly have to do that, if not explicitly, then implicitly by getting up and moving.”
It’s hard to overstate how disappointing this is. Clinton waited until the story had died down and then decided to make her first public comments on the controversy, going after Obama for staying with his church.
I know Clinton is willing to fight as hard as possible for his nomination, but tactics like these are pretty low.
This may sound cynical, but my guess is that media interest in Clinton’s debunked Bosnia story had become too great a distraction. The controversy (and damaging videos) undermined Clinton on two fronts — credibility and national security experience — both of which are of critical significance.
So, how better to change the subject that to revive the Jeremiah Wright story with brand new criticism?
Clinton has been offered repeated chances to comment on the Wright controversy for three weeks. She’s not only declined, she’s avoided saying a single word. Today, all of a sudden, Clinton has all kinds of concerns she’s anxious to share. What a remarkable coincidence.
What’s more, we now have a situation in which John McCain defended Obama against Wright-related charges, and Mike Huckabee defended Obama, but Hillary Clinton sat down with editors of a conservative newspaper to reignite a fire that had already largely gone out.
Less than a week ago, former Mondale campaign manager Bob Beckel said, “Many liberals like myself, who would be happy to support Hillary Clinton if she earned the nomination, would abandon her if her campaign seeks to exploit the Wright controversy either in the remaining contests or with superdelegates.”
Now, it appears she’s doing both. I’d hoped Clinton was above this.
Congratulations, superdelegates, your lack of leadership is allowing Clinton to tear this party apart. Why don’t we wait a few more weeks/months because all of this Judas/Blue Dress stuff is helping us so much in the general.
You know, I wouldn’t vote for her if she were the last liberal left. Her tactics are smarmy, untoward, downright fraudulent and I am disgusted with their new trend of white-trashiness. Apparently, this trait has been beneath the surface all along. I just never saw it. I detest her and what she’s doing to win a g*/d@%n contest. That’s what it is, afterall! I’d like to see Nancy P. get into a one-on-one with Hillary and let her know she’s a scumbag for trailing this out and to stop once and for all.
I hope they don’t have any more debates. She may poison his coffee.
The latest polls give a good reason for their panic.
Her lead in Pennsylvania has been continually dwindling, according to a Rasmussen poll which now has her leading only by 10 points (49-39). Meanwhile, Obama’s lead in North Carolina has ballooned to a 21-point advantage (55-34).
http://tpmelectioncentral.talkingpointsmemo.com/polltracker/
If you assume the undecideds split evenly in both cases, we’re talking about delegate gains of 140 for Obama (71, 69) and 133 for Clinton (87, 46). She’d actually come out of the next two big contests a net loser in delegates.
So, would she rather McCain win if Obama got the nomination? With the hope that she might have a shot again in four years?
I doubt it… As. Far. As. I. Know.
She is not attacking him for his race or his religion, this is specifically questioning his choice not to leave this church after hearing remarks he knew to be controversial.
She can’t just let this go, John McCain and the 527’s will not. This is a valid question in my mind, and in the minds of many others who have spoken out about his refusal to leave this church.
This was certainly going to come up at some point, it was just a matter of time.
I don’t think I’ve been accused of “Clinton Derangement Syndrome” before… but it’s hard not to see this in an extremely harsh light. I mean really. “Bosnia? Uhm what? Hey, did you hear about that ANGRY BLACK MAN!?” Ugh.
If she succeeds in getting the nomination by making Obama radioactive it’s hard to imagine voting for her.
Steve you want to reconsider your thoughts on whether Hillary is trying to undermine Obama for the general election? She clearly doesn’t care about the Democratic Party, I don’t see why some still chose to ignore this.
Steve:
If the last few weeks of this primary have made anything clear, it’s that you just cannot be too cynical about the Clinton campaign.
And Vermonter:
Can there really be any doubt any more that HRC would rather see McCain win than BO? Is there any other explanation that fits the facts as well?
This is all she’s got left? The flop sweat is showering down in buckets now. Any fool could have just said, “I misspoke, let’s move on.” But no, she has to start spewing bile that’s so last week that anyone on the planet can see it for what it is.
It’s still true today, it’s not the act that gets you, it’s the coverup. Or in this case, the moronic and totally transparent attempt to change the subject from something that can neither be defended nor denied. How pathetic.
This is so wrong on so many levels. Wright was expressing anger about real feelings AND real facts. He is not racist (Pat Buchanon IS!). She is clearly pandering to the lowest, dumbest, and meanest elements in the PA primary. McCain may be crazy, old and wrong, but at least he is enough of a GENTLEMAN to not do this! God help us…
I would not be at all surprised to learn that it was the Clintons who slipped the highly edited clip to YouTube in the first place. As anyone who has seen the three minutes preceding — where it is obvious Wright is quoting a white US ambassador — the edited clip itself is a monstrous lie.
Not content with her attempts to besmirch a rival candidate, in racist terms which have nothing at all to do with any governmental or even campaign policy under Obama’s control — not to mention besmirching one of America’s most respected religious leaders (a former marine and US Navy corpsman who served his country in ways which brought presidential commendation from LBJ — the hillbilly slimeballs, having wreaked all the havoc they could go one giant step further by gratuitously opening up the healing wound to pour another handful of salt on it.
To paraphrase Cicero: How long, O Hillary, must we uphold thine offenses? Isn’t it high time someone of importance in the party offers her the noble Roman’s way out? Or, to paraphrase Henry II: Will no one rid us of this pest? How about Just. Go. Home.
Agree with #6. She is bringing up a legitimate difference. Read Hitchens article in Slate today, “The statements of clergymen like Jeremiah Wright aren’t controversial and incendiary; they’re wicked and stupid” http://www.slate.com//id/2187277/pagenum/all
She is right. This is a perfectly legitimate isue for her to comment on - especially since she was asked.
Yes he’s some change agent – he thinks he can change the ways of Washington but he couldn’t change the mind or rhetoric of his own crazy Reverend Wright.
Then the fact that he lied about it – said he had never heard the remarks. Yet he disinvited Wright to his presidential announcement knowing full well of his controversial remarks.
The GOP is foaming at the mouth in anticipation of running against Obama in the general election – how many times do you think you’ll see Reverend Wright’s outrageous and hate filled statements played over and over again in campaign commercials? Or how about his designation as the “Most Liberal” senator? How many commercials will we see about that?
“You don’t choose your family, but you choose what church you want to attend.” […]
This is true, if you believe that a church is just another ‘consumer item’ and not an affiliation of persons. This is true, if you believe that a church is just the pastor or priest or rabbi and not a congregation. This is true, if you believe that the sole reason for being a member of a church is to ‘be a member of a church for political reasons’.
If this is true, then I am waiting for all persons who supported Bush’s war against Iraq to denounce the Pope who has declared the Iraq war to be immoral. If this is true, then I am waiting for all members of Pat Robertson’s church to denounce him and leave that church. If this is true, then I am waiting for very large numbers of persons to denounce their churches and quit them.
This whole issue of Rev. Wright strikes me as being of a double standard for ‘black preachers and black churches’ versus ‘white preachers and white churches’. When are all of the persons denouncing Wright and the Trinity United Church of Christ going to denounce the preachers whose endorsements have been sought by McCain? Is Hillary ready for someone to dig deeply into her religious affiliations?
Or is the objective of the Clinton camp to destroy Obama??? Is the objective of the Clinton camp to destroy the Democratic Party??? I suggest that the first will not be accomplished with doing the second.
Clinton is right!
This may sound cynical, but my guess is that media interest in Clinton’s debunked Bosnia story had become too great a distraction.
Cynical? Maybe. But we’re talking about the lady who can’t seem to remember if people actually shot at her or not.
And IMO Doug nailed it in #1.
We can thank the “super”delegates for this farce. It’s time for them to end this.
And I’d also like to thank Hillary for showing us how desperate she really is. She will no doubt treat us to a host of other incidents before she finally exits stage left. Her lashing out against one of the Democratic party’s major constituencies has a silver lining; it proves that Hillary actually knows she’s about to lose the race.
Now all we need is some superdelegates to wake the hell up and end this stupidity.
NEWSFLASH: You do choose your HUSBAND.
Because I am not part of the never blame America crowd my take on Wright’s sermon are quite different than others (Whites mainly), because I didn’t find what he said to be all that shocking. Many of his remarks related to race were as fitting as they were discomfiting, and his views on the American governments propensity to fuck up were neither fatuous nor exceptional. I assumed that the remarks would create a political liability for Obama, but based on the substance of Wright’s arguments (OK the HIV nonsense IS NOT unlike the 9/11 truther garbage found out in the blogosphere) they were NOT inexpiable.
You can argue all you want about Wright’s fire and brimstone approach (you know, those scary Black Men leading crowds of angry Black people!) but, listen to the extended cuts of his sermons and tell me what was disgusting about his remarks. I remain unconvinced that Wright is wrong.
When I am in a good mood, I think that the people condemning the Trinity United Church of Christ are being ethnocentric. That is, unable or unwilling to judge others by anything but their own ethnic backgrounds and biases.
When I am not in a good mood, I think that this whole thing stinks of racism.
There has been little effort to discuss Wright and these ‘controversies’ within any context of other than soundbites selected for emotional reactions.
I am seeking 527’s to contribute to that will fight slime with slime and $ for $ against anything that the rethugs will put up in the general election against Obama. McCain’s preachers are more offensive than Wright is!
I’m as opposed to the candidates tearingthe party apart as this drags on as the next person, but I have trouble seeing how this is “low” or even particularly egregious. Yes, it looks worse because she said nothing for weeks, so there is a contrast or change but:
a) it appears she was asked directly and
b) she answered with what she would have done.
She does not appear to have attacked Obama (presumably the paper would have covered anything that newsmaking). I’ve spoken with many Democratic friends who have said (as I have) that we would have left a similar church - does that mean we’re taking low blows at Obama or tearing the party apart?
Again, I think it unfair that Clinton apparently is not allowed to campaign at all, but this is even beyond that - she now is not allowed to answer a direct question by talking about her own views or what she would do or would have done in a given situation.
I really don’t think I am particularly numb to offense in any Carvillian way, and I support Clinton so I concede some bias, but I think I’m pretty fair-minded on this stuff (I’ve posted several posts defending Obama from trolls here in the past few weeks) and I really just don’t see the issue on this one.
“He would not have been my pastor,” Clinton said.
I’ve seen variations on this in countless comments on many political blogs, but I had thought it was an obviously weak argument that would not catch on. I guess I had thought that it was an argument never really given in good faith. The argument, as I understand it is:
1. His pastor was anti-American
2. Obama saw him spouting anti-Americanisms from the pews for 20 years (20 Years!)
3. He could have left at any point in those 20 years (20 Years!)
4. By not leaving, he was signalling that he supported those anti-Americanisms.
Of course, we have so little reason to believe that Wright is anti-American. What do we have? A hand-full of sermons? In his 40 years (I think) of service to his community, we have a hand-full of sermons that people find objectionable. Actually, what we really have is a hand-full of
Ironic that Obama was touting his religiousness and now it’s come back to bite him in the ass.
Obama fans are trying to bury Wright and his comments because they know how damning they are. Good for Hillary, who by the way was criticised last week for saying nothing. If Clinton doesn’t win the nomination 37% of us (that will more than tilt this election) will vote for McCain. Voting for Obama is voting for one scary guy.
Maybe I’m just being purposely dumb, but I don’t get the “racist” part of Wright’s sermons. Which things are we talking about? Is it the drugs/HIV thing — which was blamed on the government? I mean I think it’s particularly crazy to think that our current government could effectively run most any program, so that’s a real stretch. But, truth is, things like that *have* happened (Tuskegee experiment, anyone?). People who have had bad things happen to them or their families? They tend to be more alert, more on guard, more likely to see something in the shadows when there isn’t anything there.
It’s not racist to say there’s racism. Nor to say that in our country, it has at many times and places been institutionalized. And that it generally flows from the privileged/powerful towards the non-powerful. When those with power claim themselves as victims of the oppressed, that’s usually called something different. It’s not called racism.
None of that is news to anyone, is it? I dunno, I’m white, anti-organized religion, but I’m not getting this. I mean I get it if all you saw was the sound bite clips, but not getting it if you actually read the sermons.
Obama stayed in his church because he could do alot more to change ideas by staying than by walking away. That’s Hillary’s approach…do what you have to to get elected, abandon everyone else.
It’s amazing what happens when you hear the pastor’s quotes in the context they were delivered. See the posters comments below CNN’s Roland Martin articles:
http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2008/03/21/the-full-story-behind-rev-jeremiah-wrights-911-sermon/
http://ac360.blogs.cnn.com/2008/03/21/the-full-story-behind-wright%e2%80%99s-%e2%80%9cgod-damn-america%e2%80%9d-sermon/?s-%20?god-damn-america%20?-sermon/
I can’t say I subscribe to everything the pastor has said but I can say that it makes a heck of a difference when you hear them within the sermon.
This is a largely smear campaign. If they can’t nail the candidate, then they have to go after someone close to them to try to make the candidate look bad. Eventually, this story is going to come out – that Rev. Wright isn’t as bad as a few out of context clips make him out to be and most rational people will calm down.
Obama will get a chance to address this in the debates.
Watching CNN now, Hillary is also calling on Obama to release his state Senate records, etc. Not sure what she’s talking about specifically, but for someone who has yet to release her own tax returns to suddenly act like the person pushing for full disclosure takes amazing chutzpah. Her entire campaign seems based on bamboozling low-information voters with lies and half-truths.
Liar Liar Pants on Fire!!
It turns out that Clinton didn’t “MISSPEAK”
She was READING her speech when she said:
“I remember landing under sniper fire. There was supposed to be some kind of a greeting ceremony at the airport, but instead we just ran with our heads down to get into the vehicles to get to our base”
Look at the speech on her website and you’ll see that that LIE was in her prepared remarks!!!
How can you say you “MISSPOKE” if you are READING the lines?
If Hillary is MISS POKE, does that make Bill MR POKE?
SniperGate takes a new turn:
“Well sir, I think that my mother’s on record as having talked about this and I support what she said. I mean, I was there as well and I’m so honored that I was there.” — Chelsea Clinton
Now With More Video!
This is where Mary is supposed to remind us of Hillary’s church.
A new low for the Clinton campaign… it never ends!
If she said something about it last week, it just would have been bad. This is a whole other level of bad in the obviously huge level of cynicism involved. Politics above all… that’s what we have under Bush and I am sick of it.
If Hils is going to open up the Pandora’s box on religious affiliations then perhaps we should ask why Hils belong to a religious group that states that elites are the only ones that matter and the little people are just in the way of progress (for the elights)?
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/barbara-ehrenreich/hillarys-nasty-pastorate_b_92361.html
Sorry Danp. Same article.
Let’s keep this up and the country will be singing Hail to the Chief as McCain enters the room….
My comment got cut off.
I was going to add that it seems like people (and Clinton joins them, shamefully) are assuming that Obama cheered an anti-American diatribe every week for 20 years. I just don’t believe it. Because the argument is predicated on that, I don’t buy the argument that he should have left years before.
“Again, I think it unfair that Clinton apparently is not allowed to campaign at all, but this is even beyond that - she now is not allowed to answer a direct question by talking about her own views or what she would do or would have done in a given situation.”
Now get serious: a politician had no choice but to answer a direct question? HRC, in particular, was just unable to come up with some meaningless blather that would avoid answering the question in a way that attacked BO?
Just ask her why her prepared speech, which she delivered after being directly challenged on the facts by Sinbad and others, somehow “misspoke” about the events in Tuzla. Want to bet she manages to avoid answering directly in that case?
I appreciate your attempt to approach this without bias, but it’s not always that easy (and I’m not claiming I succeed either).
Isuppose I should thank Hilary Clinton. Each and every day, by word and by deed, she confirms that rightness of my decision not to vote for her.
Hey Anna you and your 37% can vote for McSame, it won’t matter.
retr2327 @ 36
Now get serious: a politician had no choice but to answer a direct question? HRC, in particular, was just unable to come up with some meaningless blather that would avoid answering the question
Sure she could, but I don’t see why she should have to duck a question - you are making my point that she is not allowed to campaign. And I don’t see where she actually attacked him, she said what she would have done.
And what does that have to do with the Bosnia bit? Yep, on that one she is wrong, and should be called on it, but A has nothing to do with B.
“I think it unfair that Clinton apparently is not allowed to campaign at all, but this is even beyond that - she now is not allowed to answer a direct question by talking about her own views or what she would do or would have done in a given situation.”
Mark Pencil comes across as a fair-minded Clinton supporter, so I don’t want to be contentious, but Hillary could always say “no comment”.
However, forget about doing Obama a favor, she would have done herself a favor in the eyes of progressives everywhere if, like McCain and Huckabee, she could have found words that reflect understanding of the conditions that have generated such anger and passion from some in the black community.
Her words today, “hate speech” etc., is just more evidence that she doesn’t really share the values that I and other progressives hold.
She was asked directly last week as well, but didn’t respond. So what’s different this week?
Well, she’s busted having a faulty memory (charitable reading) and slipping in the polls. Other than that, nothing has changed other than her willingness to answer a question she didn’t last week.
As far as “choosing your family” goes — this may come as a shock to some, but you CAN choose your family, in the sense that you can choose whether or not you associate with certain members of it. I have an uncle I haven’t talked to or seen in more than 10 years because he’s a racist, right-wing piece of crap. So that argument holds no water whatsoever.
And as far as those saying, “This will kill Obama in the general!” I counter with:
Do all of you really, honestly think the GOP doesn’t have a truckload more stuff on Hillary than they do Obama? Are you that wrapped up in your Clinton Cult that you don’t get that?
This and the Rezko issue (which is and should be a bigger concern than this nonsense) are about all they got, other than some experience arguments. Of course, the experience argument goes against Hillary when compared to McCain since no one has provided a single, solitary shred of evidence of Clinton’s supposed wealth of experience (and experience via osmosis doesn’t count).
So to worry about this one little issue — that will be blasted into high heaven with an ad putting Wright’s comments into context — while not worrying about the skeletons in Clinton’s closet, is the zenith of cognitive dissonance.
Sorry Hill, in context the Wright sermons are not racist or wicked or anything more than a legitimate criticism of US policy
How many of you who have posted on this blog have heard the sermons in their entirety or more than a few seconds of each in the endless reels on the MSM?
I have to admit that I had not until yesterday. Having heard his sermons in their entirety, I would say the following:
1. I still think Jeremiah Wright is demagogue who is peddling victimization, something Bill Cosby rejects and which Obama rejected in his famous speech.
2. The media has duped us because the snippets they have peddled are completely out of context.
I encourage you each to take the 20 minutes or so and listen to the sermons in their entirety on YouTube and then draw conclusions.
I think it is best to make your argument on as many facts as you have available. Then, come back and tell me ifit changes your opinion of Wright or Obama. I’m curious to know.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=RvMbeVQj6Lw
http://youtube.com/watch?v=QOdlnzkeoyQ
“you are making my point that she is not allowed to campaign”
Well, you made two distinct points. One was that she didn’t volunteer the attack, but made it in the course of responding to a question. My point was that it was still her choice to make that attack.
As for her “not being allowed to campaign,” last week, she tried to act like she was above this sort of attack. This week, when she’s getting hammered because she’s been caught blatantly, deliberately, intentionally, and repeatedly exaggerating the events in Tuzla, she seems to have chosen a different tactic, in an attempt to divert some of the “incoming fire” she’s now experiencing (for the first time, it seems).
Does that explain how A and B relate?
@Anna,
Have you seen the full Wright sermons, they have one on this site, its not at all damning, and not at all scary, what it is is one big lie by Fox and the MSM
Diane @ 40 - I agree with you, actually. The issue of whether what Clinton said is “low” (I do not think it was) is a wholly different issue from whether progressives should get all warm and fuzzy about what she said. Just as I think she was perfectly within bounds to answer the question, it is perfectly within bounds for you to not like her answer!
Several commenters have pointed out (as did I, in fact) that responding at all is a change from last week. There could be a lot of reasons for that, all of which are pretty natural in a campaign. Her polling may be worse this week, she may have figured the issue isn’t as radioactive within her own party this week, etc. I don’t think her silence last week somehow makes discussing it permanently off limits or shows some kind of nefariousness. It certainly allows people to wonder if the change isn’t a sign of desparation; that’s the risk she takes (whether she thought it through first is another matter. . .)
The founding fathers would be sick to their stomach if they were alive today to witness the whole “criticize the USA’s mistakes = anti-american”. You’re sounding like a bunch of lockstep right wingers and it’s pathetic..
If Clinton is going to condemn Obama based upon who he chooses to affiliate, then it is only fair to take a look at who Clinton affiliates with on religious matters. This explains many of Clinton’s conservative views on social issues:
http://liberalvaluesblog.com/?p=3070
Hillary said: ““He would not have been my pastor,” Clinton said. “You don’t choose your family, but you choose what church you want to attend.” […]”
I think this shows how premeditated her remark was. See how it ties in to the controversy about Obama’s mention of his grandmother which wingnuts describe as “throwing her under the bus”. Just some rightwing whistle calls.
Good thing she’s not our nominee.
I just watched and hour and 30 mins. of the Hillary Movie, and let me tell you, if you didn’t know her before now….just take look. Facts, people, not some made up stuff. Hillary has tried very hard to keep her real self supressed. Get the popcorn out and watch, and when you’re done, send this link to everyone you know.
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=1119319130868761649
**claps approvingly**
I don’t get that either. I thought the right to criticize our government was a pretty vital one, and one that anyone with half a brain would agree makes democracy work better in the long run.
I guess it depends on who is doing the criticizing …
I Totally Agree with Doug - Those Super Delgates need to step in, or some form of leadership for our Party, whether it be Pelosi or Dean or Gore. If not sooner, immediately after the Pennslyvania Vote (whoever wins it). I also, the Polls are going to tighten up real quick to reveal the real frontrunner.
No more Lies, Jabs or unnecessary soundbites- just more ammunition for the GOP to use in ads
Trust Hillary to always take the low road. I don’t think she’d recognize the high road if it was right in front of her. In fact, I think she would start digging and create a low road because that’s the way she’s wired. She has an honesty and integrity problem and a lot of Americans recognize that. I would feel bad for the Democrats if she ends up as the nominee. She won’t have a chance in 2012 either.
If I compare the sermons of Jeremiah Wright to the parables of the Nazarene Carpenter and his anger at the Pharisees in the New Testament, they are fundamentally the same. So if Clinton wants to play the “Angry Black Man” card, I suppose I could just as legitimately play the “Hillary Hates Jesus” card.
Besides, Hillary is a piss-pot poor excuse for a Methodist if there ever was one. I doubt she’s ever even picked up the United Methodist Church’s Book of Discipline, let alone ever read the blasted thing.
Oh—and that “interview” with the Trib-Review was so totally staged. It was even on Hillary’s website a couple weeks ago—as a planned part of the campaign itinerary.
Can you say “bogus,” boys and gilrs? Good. I knew you could….
Steve, you quoted Bob Beckel? The Fox News BoB Beckel? Have you lost all perspective? Beckel says he is a liberal and on Fox News he may be, but he’s not a liberal in the same sense you are. Good grief.
Why the “low road”? It appears that everyone has some opinion re: this and Hillary is no different. Rev. Wright was speaking from the pulpit and saying things that most of us would cringe at. It’s unfortunate that a minister ( and we have many these days) can spew this and other inflammatory BS and actually believe that he is right in doing so. As we can all see, it does nothing to move us foward and help us unite but rather find some dividing issue. Not good and needs condemning. Why aren’t we doing that to Wright and the others? Let Wright and the others find a street corner and see what kind of crowd they attract. These guys are opportunists and we surely give them that.
Could you imagine the cow the Clintonites would have if Barack was asked about Bill’s serial infidelity and Barack said:
“Well, he would not have been my husband”…
Please show me where Obama said or supported the more extreme Wright positions? I can’t find any support from him other than that he did not quit the church. According to the logic of the Sen. Clinton, the fact that he didn’t walk out means that he must have supported all of Wright’s statements. Does this mean that any Catholic that did not quit the Church supported child molestation? That’s what these talking points are saying. If you’ve stayed in the church than you are a supporter of pedophilia. It’s exactly the same logic with her saying that if you don’t totally renounce all association or membership, then you are guilty of the same crime. Sounds to me like an argument that’s just being used to cause division and hatred. I can see why its being used by the right-wing’s part to keep in place the “Southern Strategy” that has been so successful for the GOP. But why on Sen.Clinton’s part? If it succeeds in getting her the nomination the Democratic coalition will be so damaged that she’ll end up losing. I don’t understand it.
DALE @22 “Ironic that Obama was touting his religiousness and now it’s come back to bite him in the ass.”
I’m afraid we have reached the era where this is almost a must for any Democrat…”touting one’s religiousness”…Religion sucks!!!
Fillphil:
A lot of people on this site (and in these comments) have recommended viewing the Wright sermons in their entirety, and I would join in that recommendation.
No, I don’t agree with every point he makes. For that matter, I think the underlying thrust of the 9/11 sermon (which I take to be along the lines of “those who use violence for their own ends should not be surprised when it is used against them) is, perhaps, overly naive and idealistic insofar as it may be read to imply that if the U.S. had not used violence itself, the 9/11 attacks might have been less likely.
But overall, I found him to be a long way from the caricature that he’s been made out to be in the clips on TV.
And one other point, since it seems to be so commonly misrepresented in the media: he absolutely does not “blame the victims of 9/11″ for the attacks. On the contrary, he speaks with real compassion and obvious horror about seeing the photos of people jumping to their deaths from the 110th floor.
Niall O’Dowd, a Clinton Campaign fundraiser is now saying Rev Wright is just like David Duke! Sheesh, end this now.
“Clinton takes the low road”
You are being repetitive, CB. You just needed to say “Clinton takes a road” - “low” would be implied.
Oh that horrible witch. She actually had the nerve to say “You can pick your pastor.”
How vile.
I’d never vote for someone who talked such trash.
retr2327: You suggested that I listen to the sermon(s). I would prefer to hear him and others (Hagee, Robertson , the Pope etc) stand on the street corner and see what kind of crown they would attract. Lenny Bruce ssid it so eloquently-”show me a man who more than two suits and calls himself a minister and I’ll show you a hustler everytime”. These guys are surely that and don’t deserve to even consider themselves doing God’s work.
By the way Bill Clinton invited Rev. Wright to the White House when he was having his personal crises… so did Bill not “choose” his pastor then?
Now this is great.
The pastor that the Clinton’s did choose at the Foundry United Methodist Church has issued a statement on Rev. Wright:
http://www.foundryumc.org/pdfs/Statement%20concerning%20Rev.%20Jeremiah%20Wright.pdf
“The Reverend Jeremiah Wright is an outstanding church leader whom I have heard speak a number of times. He has served for decades as a profound voice for justice and inclusion in our society. He has been a vocal critic of the racism, sexism and homophobia which still tarnish the American dream. To evaluate his dynamic ministry on the basis of two or three sound bites does a grave injustice to Dr. Wright, the members of his congregation, and the African-American church which has been the spiritual refuge of a people that has suffered from discrimination, disadvantage, and violence.”
I can’t believe people are arguing about whether Clinton landed under fire or not in Bosnia instead of noticing that she was in Bosnia while Obama was in Chicago.
Why has this campaign wandered so far away from substance? On Obama’s side, I believe it is not in his interest to discuss anything of substance because that is exactly what he lacks. On Clinton’s side, I believe she keeps trying to redirect the conservations but the media keeps returning to the fluff. She made a major statement about a program to address our financial problems yesterday and no one has mentioned it except Rachel Maddow, who declined to outline the plan for listeners but instead focused on a single nitpicky point that she could use to bash Clinton with.
Here, someone refers to a trash Hillary video and claims it is fact while another person refers to Ehrenreich’s diatribe on a group that Hillary is “only peripherally involved with” by admission of the person writing the book on it. What does any of that have to do with who will be able to solve our serious national problems?
This discussion here disgusts me. You Obama supporters disgust me too. Steve Benen should have been doing something to bring the issues to the forefront, but he has climbed right up there on the Obama bandwagon and now just posts trivialities. There is a CAMPAIGN going on, not a blood feud. Josh Marshall sent me an email insisting that he has been even-handed at TPM, but the gloating over every Clinton stumble is ugly there — and he apparently doesn’t even see it. It would be a service if these various pages actually dissected the programs of the candidates, not their love lives, their pastor’s affiliations or their various “lies” (as if people’s minds were VCRs and accuracy in comparison to the past were any kind of test of presidentiality).
Obama and Clinton should debate again. They have not discussed their science policies and they need to talk about their financial programs in the light of the recent events. They need to address what is going on in China and Tibet. For starters.
Obama is a lightweight and his assassination of a person whose accomplishments so far outweigh his own is one of the worst aspects of this campaign. The more people permit him to evade scrutiny, the more likely we will end up with a well-meaning incompetent. That saddens me and frightens me, as does the chorus of ugliness in this and most of the other newsgroups.
Wow, Hillary Clinton– how low can you go?
During the past couple of weeks, many curious and intelligent Americans took the time to do some research on Rev. Wright and / or take a closer look at some of his other sermons. Apparently Hillary wasn’t one of these people, but what can we expect from someone who voted to authorize the disastrous Iraq War WITHOUT READING the fricking NIE Report?!?!
I, for one am now only waiting for two things:
1) Billary to start talking about how “illegals” are going to steal your jobs.
2) Hillary’s head to rotate 360 degrees while she projectile vomits green bile. New campaign slogan: “Vote Hillary, we are Legion!”
Excuse me but didn’t Hillary Clinton once sit on a stage when a speaker from the PLO attacked Jews for being responsible for the deaths of Palestinians and for being racist. She sat silently while this went on and in fact kissed the speaker at the conclusion of her remarks.
Like many other Hillary positions there seems to be a little double standard here.
The truth is “Obama cannot close the deal” After winning 12 primaries in a row and out sepending clinton 3-1 in ohio and texas he LOST. After all primaries are over tally would be 1900 for obama and 1850 for clinton.
Do you think that clinton should drop out just because she is behind by 50 delegates. The answer is NO-ONE in this world would drop out with this math. Obama needs to know her out else SHE is the nomenee.
Wait and watch clinton will take the nomination.
Give me a break… Are you apart of the Media? Did the media not ask her the question? But here the Media is slamming Clinton for answering it. I’m glad she responded. Obama immediately responded to the comments of Imus, but it took him until he was pushed by the media to acknowledge the horrendous remarks of his Spiritual Advisor, not just his pastor, of 20 years.
fillphil:
Nice quote from Lenny Bruce. In fact, you may have a point, since I believe I saw something in the news today to the effect that the Rev. Wright was spotted on vacation in Puerto Rico, staying at the Ritz (or some such). Nice work if you can get it!
Still, there’s a world of difference between being a hustler/living well off the church, and spouting hatred, etc., which he’s been (falsely, to me) accused off.
For that matter, care to talk about how well the Clintons have done off of their “mission”? Show me a politician who’s made tens of millions in just a few years, and I’ll show you someone who can out-hustle a minister any day.
The truth is “Obama cannot close the deal” After winning 12 primaries in a row and out sepending clinton 3-1 in ohio and texas he LOST. After all primaries are over tally would be 1900 for obama and 1850 for clinton.
Do you think that clinton should drop out just because she is behind by 50 delegates. The answer is NO-ONE in this world would drop out with this math. Obama needs to knock her out else SHE is the nomenee.
Wait and watch clinton will take the nomination.
Mary:
About time you showed up.
“Obama and Clinton should debate again. They have not discussed their science policies and they need to talk about their financial programs in the light of the recent events.” Of course, now it’s HRC who won’t agree to the debate in NC.
Hillary misspoke on Bosnia, so what! She was there dealing with the issues. She was there trying to get women there to work together to solve the problem in Bosnia. What was Obama doing at that time? The fact is that she was there!!! She wasn’t in a church listening to un-American statements, by her pastor and mentor. I’m becoming of the opinion that the media is more un-American than anyone else. Report what’s important, the fraud of Osama’s campaign. The un-American statements made by the mentor and pastor of Obama are much more important. Why aren’t you looking at the way Obama brought his house in Chicago? Where did he get the money? There’s talk of a billionaire Arabic that gave Rekzo money that filled into Osama’s pockets. There’s a lot more that will come out about Obama.
I hear people talking about the states that Obama won in the primaries, these are all red state. The media knows that in the general election who ever the democratic candidate is will not win those states. Hillary at the end of the day will be the best candidate to go against McCain. Obama will never recover from his ministers words. The fact that he remained in the church for twenty years, a church that preached hatred. A man that takes his children to hear a preacher preach hate for America and the white people could never be president. Please wake up and realize that the Obama is a fraud. There are more things coming out about Obama that will damage him more.
But yet you have treated it as such in almost every comment you’ve made here.
And what, pray tell, has Obama done directly to “assassinate” Clinton?
Since you’ve decided to become all about substance all of a sudden, maybe you could provide some in your comments instead of insulting people, saying we all “disgust” you, and claiming to be a Democrat while only supporting your Democratic candidate of choice.
You can start by providing a link that shows Obama trying to assassinate Clinton (verbally or literally, take your pick).
I’ll be waiting, yet not holding my breath.
Let be honest! Could any body but a Black person get away with having a relationship with a racist, then run for president. They play the race card the minute you say anything a Black person disagrees with. Could a candidate who had a relationship for 20 years with a racist be president? Wright can be heard arguing that HIV-AIDS was a U.S. government plot to wipe out “people of color,” and that God should “damn” the United States. When that image is juxtaposed to Wright’s outbursts comparing the United States to the Ku Klux Klan, among other things, voters will wonder if they misread Obama and his true character, he said. Obama because his political success is built on his image as a uniter and almost messianic figure who eschews divisive strategies, this shows a totally different person. As a Hispanic I could understand the racism part, I’ve been discriminated by both Black and White people. But I love America and would never associate with any body that hated America. No matter what good you do for people, if you preach hatred then you’re a racist. Obama could never, should never be elected president of this country. As a father I would never introduce my daughters to preaching of hate.
“The Reverend Jeremiah Wright … has been a vocal critic of the racism, sexism and homophobia which still tarnish the American dream.”
Perhaps if I had grown up under Jim Crow, I might have a little righteous anger inside me as well. And considering the conservative stance taken by many black clergy on gay rights, Rev. Wright appears even more progressive.
Except he already has.
Finally, everyone is getting the chance to see the real Hillary. When her and her husband were getting dumped on during the Clinton adminstration I was inclined to feel sorry for them. NO MORE. They were the victims of dirty tricks and what they learned was how to use them and do it better than was done to them. They have shown themselves (and I mean both of them.) real low-lifes. Has anyone noticed how Billy boy never mentions Barach Obama by name. He is “her opponent.” Well, as far as I am concerned these two are Barach’s opponents, unworthy of being named.
How does someone whose affiliation with Doug Coe get off criticizing Obama over the Wright issue? Pour yourself a glass of wine, and settle down to some fascinating reading:
Hillary’s Prayer: Hillary Clinton’s Religion and Politics
“Through all of her years in Washington, Clinton has been an active participant in conservative Bible study and prayer circles that are part of a secretive Capitol Hill group known as the Fellowship. Her collaborations with right-wingers such as Senator Sam Brownback (R-Kan.) and former Senator Rick Santorum (R-Pa.) grow in part from that connection. “
Hillary misspoke on Bosnia, so what! She was there dealing with the issues.
She was there on a USO tour with a comedian and a guitar player.
That totally suits the ceremonial position she had in the White House.
I blogged about this topic at http://swimmingfreestyle.typepad.com
Excerpt:
“….Until Bosnia, sniper fire and ducked heads. Hillary Clinton’s dumb insistence on grandly embellishing her visit to Bosnia bit her in the butt. The media has picked up on the story, splicing together video of her recounting the harrowing ordeal with actual footage of her very peaceful arrival at Tuzla. Embarrassing, to say the least. The story has prompted some closer investigation into Mrs. Clinton’s executive experience claims, and it looks like there’s more “big fish” tales from Senator Clinton waiting to be investigated more fully: Northern Ireland, Macedonia, SCHIP legislation, Family and Medical Leave Act.”
Whatever, she’s only trying to make up ground for being caught lying. Except that everyone is on to her. The Wright issue died and here she is trying to bring it back to life again. Deep down, no one really believes that Obama is a racist because that means he would have to hate part of himself and he comes across as genuine whereas our friend Hillary lies and deep down, we all know she’s a lying hack.
Why has this campaign wandered so far away from substance?
Yeah, let’s get back to the issues the Clintons wanted us to talk about, like whether or not Obama plagiarized his speeches, or whether his kindergarten essays revealed too much ambition for the job.
Obama is a lightweight and his assassination of a person whose accomplishments so far outweigh his own
What, pray tell, are Hillary’s “accomplishments”?
She screwed up health care reform.
Most of her foreign policy “experience” has proven to be… how shall we say it? invented…
Isn’t religion such a great uniter!!!
#67 Mary: Why has this campaign wandered so far away from substance?
ah, let us not forget who started this little brush fire in the forest — when the clinton campaign started playing the race card in january and, as predicted, fire is now being fought with fire. which quite likely will lead to the burning of the democratic national convention in this sherman’s march to denver.
the republicans have got to be lovin’ this.
#86 TR — you beat me to the punch!
Sorry, entheo. It was low-hanging fruit.
“He would not have been my pastor,”
Does Hillary have a pastor?
I’ve heard her give the standard political talk on moral values and faith in our country, but I have no idea if she follows it up by going to church on Sunday.
It’s easy to repudiate somebody else’s church, would she do the same with her own?
Steve Benen, I’m really ashamed for you.
So what if Mrs. Clinton did wait until the controversy over Rev. Wright had died down (even if only in your own mind), before publicly commenting on it? Why is she the one who’s wrong here?
For that matter, why is it perfectly all right for Sen. Obama’s spokepeople to bring up Monica Lewinsky’s infamous blue dress from ten years ago (news for you all — Hillary Clinton was the primary victim here!), or to compare Bill Clinton to Joe McCarthy through some really twisted logical contortions — yet in your estimation, only Hillary Clinton’s campaign uses “tactics like these [that] are pretty low”?
Regarding the Rev. Wright controversy, quite frankly all too many of you here conveniently forget that Obama lied on March 15 about not being in attendance at church during the Rev. Wright more vociferous and controversial sermons: “I had not heard him make such, what I consider to be objectionable remarks from the pulpit. Had I heard them while I was in church, I would have objected. Had that been the tenor of the church generally, I probably wouldn’t be a member of the church.”
The Illinois senator was forced to admit otherwise three days later, in his speech on March 18: “Did I know him to be an occasionally fierce critic of American domestic and foreign policy? Of course. Did I ever hear him make remarks that could be considered controversial while I sat in church? Yes.”
But rather than hold him to account for misleading the public in such an off-hand manner, most of the punditry overly lauded that speech as some sort of “landmark”, never bothering to consider the fact that if he hadn’t lied in the first place, that speech would never have been given.
(And for that matter, why was Sen. Obama, in a follow-up interview the next day, allowed to get away with labeling his grandmother “your typical white person”? My head spins at the thought of the ensuing furious reaction, were Hillary Clinton to ever refer to her campaign chair Maggie Williams as “your typical black person.”)
This has become so over the top that I swear to God, if Obama had been caught on videocamera pilfering the collection plates at Trinity Church, half of the senator’s supporters would insist that he was merely making change, while the other half would instead praise his attendance at Sunday services!
Obama was completely disingenuous with the media for well over a year regarding his relationship with alleged influence peddler Tony Rezko, going so far in that South Carolina debate that he only worked 5 hours for the man, and further implying that he only did so because his law firm was under retainer to the man. Of course, we now know otherwise, that the man raised approximately $250K for Obama and further spent over $500K to facilitate the Obama family’s purchase of that faux-Georgian mansion in Chicago’s Hyde Park district.
(I also find it interesting that many posters here conveniently ignore the fact that if Obama hadn’t first attempted to smear Mrs. Clinton during that same South Carolina debate about her service on the Wal-Mart board, her retort about his work with “slumlord Rezko” would not have been offered.)
Obama has also apparently misled the public about his state legislative records and accomplishments, claiming credit for legislation that we now know was literally taken away from his Democratic colleagues by State Senate President Emil Jones — who’s apparently another piece of work whose dirty laundry we’ll undoubtedly learn about soon enough — and handed to Obama as sponsor, strictly for the purpose of bolstering the man’s political resume.
There’s a rather disturbing pattern clearly developing here, whereas Obama gets caught in embarrassing situations that belie his claim as the proponent of “new politics,” and then proceeds to tell the public just enough to get him over the next hill, and practically nobody in either the liberal blogosphere or on the cable news networks bothers to call him on it.
Instead, for far too many of us who fancy ourselves as progressives and liberals, this entire primary campaign has been reduced to, “How do we beat the bitch?”
It is literally to laugh, if it wasn’t so pathetic and sad.
“why is it perfectly all right for Sen. Obama’s spokepeople to bring up Monica Lewinsky’s infamous blue dress from ten years ago”
There’s a difference between supporter and spokesperson. I’ll let others take care of the rest.
Yep - looks like we got two lying, cheating, worthless excuses for humanity ready to represent the Democrats this election cycle. The more I read on this site, the more disgusted I get. And this is exactly what the Repugs want…and I’m a Democrat fro heavens sake!!!!!!
Mary, for the longest time, I felt you were a sincere supporter of Hillary Clinton and only wanted her to win the nomination. Lately you’ve seemed to go a wee bit off the deep end in your defense of her and in your tearing down of Obama. And frankly now I wonder if you just aren’t some right-wing troll hoping to roil the waters on the Democrat side and make us hate each other.
You keep telling us how you’ll vote for anone over Barack, how mean Steve Benen has been to your candidate. And how unfair, ugly and rude the Obama supporters here have been to you. And for my part in that, I am truly sorry. I miss Anne and Zeitgeist and hope that they’ll return once this primary is over. They always contributed to the commenting community with their own perspectives and unique insights.
But Mary, if you feel like we’re that God-Awful there are some very good sites that are not just pro-Clinton but vehemently anti-Obama. And I quit reading them in mid Jan, when I couldn’t stand it any more. And this was when I was still FOR Edwards.
Hillaryis44, TaylorMarsh.com, NoQuarter.com, CorrenteWire. And MyDD.com tilts more towards Clinton, but there are some Pro-Obama diarists there, so that’s one I still read. Corrente and NoQuarter both have some great writers and most of them are great progressives and I can’t wait to get back to them because I learn many different things, but I won’t until the Obama hater stops. I’m telling you this, so maybe for your own sanity you might prefer any of these sites to TCB or even TPM.
(And please, don’t think that I’m asking you to leave, because I am not at all.)
Dee
You’re worried about being cynical? I’m worried about you being in a state of denial. This hit from Clinton is not remotely surprising, and I guarantee you it was poll-tested (”Why did he stay in the church?”). And of COURSE she’s putting it out there now because 1) she wants to get Bosnia out of the news, 2) the story is dying down and 3) he’s rebounding in polls, including PA and NC. Completely expected from a person with the character of Hillary Clinton.
Barack should not blamed for Rev Wrights words, people are suggesting he was using these words for 20 years non-stop. I don’t think he had prior information of the 9-11 attack. We don’t hold McCain responsible for the racist remarks of his two idiot pastors. We don’t hold Hillary responsible for her pastor (the one who was found guilty of child molestation)
We overlook her connections with the highly secret Fellowship Foundation, which I hear is a highly controversial group. J.Sykes
Cunt.
Hillary is such a hypocrite. Now that we have all seen the photo of Rev Wright with former president Clinton we also know that Rev Wright was ‘best man’ at this prayer breakfast. As the best man Rev Wright also sat next to the First Lady to comfort and support her as husband annouces Monia Lewinsky to the world. The photo her sitting next to Rev Wright wasn’t given as much coverage because Hillary kept quite on the subject over the last 3 weeks. I hope now this photo hit the media again in Pennslyvania and the rest of America.
After the Bosnia misspoke misstatement her credibility is sliding downward - fast. Even Chelsea backing her mom on this fairytale. We are not allowed to mention the ‘L’ word but as her recently released WH papers reveal, she was home the days of these encounters between Bill and Monica. Sounds nasty to me.
The main thing is that politically the Democrats loss the White House to these disgraces. A president faced impeachment. America has been in the dog house since and will be for quite sometime. Do we really want these people back in the White House?
Rev Wright has been a vetted spiritual advisor to the White House since president LB Johnson. Neither Obama or any of us support any of the sound-bit messages that were broadcasted. Some of us were enlightened once we heard the whole sermon and put the sound-bite in context. Nevertheless, many have scorned a man who has been a truly wonderful pastor. I bet if we at least allowed him the opportunity to apologize it would be an apology we’d never forget.
These kitchen-sink tatics are tearing the Democratic party apart. She and Bill instigates them and the Obama camp is pushed to act or not against personal attacks. The ‘him or me’ attitude is the epitome of divisiveness and has been the driving force of her whole campaign. I honestly don’t see how some American people won’t see the writing on the wall.
Everytime Sen. Clinton makes a decent speech its always overshadowed by some mess from her camp. She took on Home ownership yesterday.
But since Obama’s presidential speech on the subject of race, Bill Cilnton brings up or doesn’t bring up Obama’s patriotism, that Hillary and McCain are the perfect American pairing, Richardson’s endorsement is called ‘Judas’ and now she wants to once again bring up Rev. Wright.
It really is shame on Hillary Clinton but does that really have to include the rest of us with her? again?
There are 116 United Church of Christ churches in the Chicago area. There are over a dozen within 10 miles of Barack & Michelle Obama’s home. Why that church? As a private citizens if your family is fine with a pastor and church who holds as even a small part of there views anti American, Anti Semitic, Pro Hamas Terrorist organization, Anti white as part of the ministry it is your right to stay as members and be feed spiritually there and if that is what feeds your soul, fine we as fellow Americans support your rights to that. As to America being OK with our President being a member of such a church, we say no way! No one has ask you to change faiths but a change in church fellowship and spiritual advisers of which you have 116 other churches and pastors to choose from is totally within a reasonable request for someone running to be the next President of the United States! Thank you Barack Obama for your radio address where you let us know you and Michelle have chosen to continue being spiritually feed from that specific church and pastor with ALL there messages. We will support your right to that as a private citizen but we will not elect you as our President. Change & Unity are more then words they require action and hard work! The kind of solutions to serious problems we face is what Hillary Clinton offers us and is the real change and unity we are looking for. You may speak the words about these things but your actions do not.
I am still intending to vote for HRC should she get the nomination, but she is making it difficult.
I attended Trinity with my family (I am white). We were greeted warmly, both from the pulpit and by individual members of the congregation. Furthermore, I have several friends and co-workers who are members of Trinity. None of them are racist. The picture of Trinity that emerges from Clinton’s remarks, and those of her supporters, reflects either ignorance or malice. And neither is forgivable in a Democrat, a member of a party that depends upon the votes of the black community. In no sense can Wright be compared to David Duke or other white racists.
DONALD # 93…Brilliantly written.
I have been repeating your exact same thoughts to CNN, MSNBC and to deaf ears….
I am an optimist, I am absolutely sure our country is doomed if the narrow minded News Media gets their candidate in the White House.
My Fear:
The Obama camp viciously attacked Bill Clinton for McCarthyism over his speech about patriotism, although Bill Clinton did not refer to Obama. He spoke of H. Clinton running against J. Mc Cain.
Do we want a Paranoid President running ramped in the White House that near the Red phone?
Won’t it be nice, weeks or months from now, when the Clintons, the Clintonistas and our GOP trolls have all be flushed down the sewer where they belong? Then we can turn to the infinitely more enjoyable positive task of promoting the Democratic Tsunami which is coming this November.
Laugh of the Day!
“The Tonya Harding Option”
Pad your kneecaps, Barack!!
Lets all try to bring this to a higher level. Do the right thing for the country we all love. This means callling on the news media to report the news not just their opinions or silly gossipy little stories run endlessly about one candidates gaff or the other. How about asking Hillary and Barack their positions on: torture, extraordinary rendition, the death penalty, closing Git-mo, or my personal favorite, a question never asked why (taxpayers) continue to subsidize the growing of tobacco in this country?
The American public are tired of the bickering and want to have some substance in this important presidential race.
I am glad this Rev. Wright issue is getting blown back up, finally more people will, hopefully, actually read/listen to the entire sermon.
A full discussion and anlysis of the sermon may change people’s minds who are under the impression that Wright is a racist as opposed to an exuberant Preacher who is against insitutionalized racism and the ways of the past which vehemently held down people of color (and poor).
And again, like many of the commenters here, criticizing the goverment isn’t anti-american, it is Pro-American, and it is an exercise in Free speech, one of the larger foundational rights that makes us better than the rest. Since 9/11 it seems to me that everyone is afraid to criticize the government for fear of being called a harbor of terrorists by Fox & Friends and other assortment of dillweeds. Though Bush may believe he is the decider doesn’t make him right. It is still We the People and if We the People don’t like the government, then We the People have the right to get rid of it. Respect your leaders, but only for the good service they have achieved, not solely because they are a leader. And f*c& a neo-con or other dimwit who says any different, they are fascists. SO I empathize with Wright because the government African Americans received was not the same Great government that whites had.
I know many people would rather watch reality tv than actually read or particpate in critical thought, so maybe this extra exposure will get more people talking about the entirety of the sermon
“Racists United for Clinton 08″ . Who said Obama couldn’t bring conservatives and some (red bred) Liberals together.
Yes I’m talking about YOU who still PRETEND Preacher Wrights comments were offensive.
Wright only echoed what we’ve been saying all along about the War and treatment of Blacks under the Bush Administration. The only thing Wright did differently was define it within the African American experience.
So you find it offensive!?! Go join the Rethugs!
Hillary says she would have left the church if the pastor said the things Rev. Wright said. But she tells lies. How can we believe her? I refuse to have a president going in who I know is a blatant liar. People are saying she is so smart then why didn’t she think that people would go back and find that video? Obama could have said he no longer has any dealings with Rev. Wright. But he manned up and admitted he still had special feelings for him as a father figure. Rev. Wright does not hate his country. If racist Caucasians would leave, notice I didn’t say all Caucasian people, he would hold a parade at which all Black people would attend. He just doesn’t like the manner in which it is being run, which is true of the majority of us. If you read Webster’s definition of the word “racist” you will understand that black people can’t be racists. It means to be prejudiced. We do not pre-judge. Racist Caucasian people do. They assume things about us that are not true. We KNOW what they did to us.
the Clintons, the Clintonistas and our GOP trolls have all be flushed down the sewer where they belong
Ed Stephan @ 104
That, sir, would be a blatant violation of the Environmental Protection Act, as it is not legal to dispose of toxic waste in a public sewerage system. I would suggest either an EPA-certified hazardous-waste landfill—or the bowels of a derelict Navy warship destined for permanent deep-reef establishment….
Hillary Clinton not only had every right to talk about the Rev Wright controversy she needed to. She is absolutely right. Most “decent”white people in an American church would have gotten up and walked out if a pastor said the same things. If it had happened once or maybe twice, but to sit in the congregation and listen to hate speech for 20 years is unacceptable. And one thing that is barely mentioned is the fact that a Christian church is supposed to believe in “love thy neighbor as thy self.” I didn’t hear much love coming from those words. The so-called “dialogue” that we need on race relations in the United States isn’t going to happen if candidates and even regular people like myself are not allowed to express an opinion without being depicted as “taking the low road,” What I’m most upset about is that all of this infighting (and columnists like you) are going to swing the election to the Republicans who I’m sure are laughing hysterically and scheming at this moment how they are going to use the Wright videos. Obama should have walked out, should have disavowed Wright and should have more strongly condemned the thoughts and words that were expressed in the “sermon.”
Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, in a wide-ranging interview today with Pittsburgh Tribune-Review reporters and editors, said she would have left her church if her pastor made the sort of inflammatory remarks Sen. Barack Obama’s former pastor made.
Given that this is her “pastor,” one would think she would have stayed away from this stuff:
This article can be found on the web at
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080331/ehrenreich
Hillary’s Nasty Pastorate
by BARBARA EHRENREICH
[posted online on March 19, 2008]
There’s a reason Hillary Clinton has rem