[QUOTE=John Mace]
Did anyone see the one last week where Obama was being sworn in as prez, and Hillary is leaning out over the crowds saying “I, Hillary Clinton, swear to uphold the consitution…”?
[/QUOTE]
Yeh, I did – good one.
[QUOTE=cosmosdan]
The fact is that republicans have courted the religious right that has spouted things just as hateful for years and years. That was accepted as politically necessary. What hypocrisy!
The president has to be president to all citizens with widely varying opinions and ideas.
[/QUOTE]
These two things need to be repeated over and over again.
The media (and thus the public) are eating this up because this is the perfect confluence of guilt by association, religion and race.
If Wright had said God damn the faggots and the baby-killers, everybody would be praising him to high heaven.
Damn, folks, this is a national election, not the Jerry Springer Show.
[QUOTE=Magiver]
I disagree. It’s not illogical to judge people by the company they keep. The longer the relationship exists the greater the association. You can argue the logic of it until the Sun explodes but that won’t change the reality of it. Public opinion is a fact of life and Senator Obama is distancing himself from Reverend Wright because of the statements Wright has made.
[/QUOTE]
I’ll ask again, because Shodan couldn’t answer it. What do you “judge” about Obama from his association with Wright? Do you think he believes what Wright believes, despite the numerous denunciations? Do you think that Obama has been secretly brainwashed by Wright and, once elected, will enact laws Wright wants passed? Do you think Obama is a closet hater of whites. What, exactly, do you judge about Obama because of his relationship with Wright?
[QUOTE=Richard Parker]
We’re not playing “who is endorsing you?” We’re playing “whose endorsement did you seek out?” A different game entirely.
[/QUOTE]
Not really. The game is “who’s nuts are in a vice”. Senator Obama, and the people running his campaign, know what’s going on. His speech writers (who are excellent) wrote a great speech. It was eloquent, well delivered, but didn’t address what needed to be addressed (it didn’t fly). If he wants to run for POTUS he’ll figure it out.
[QUOTE=Magiver]
Not really. The game is “who’s nuts are in a vice”. Senator Obama, and the people running his campaign, know what’s going on. His speech writers (who are excellent) wrote a great speech. It was eloquent, well delivered, but didn’t address what needed to be addressed (it didn’t fly). If he wants to run for POTUS he’ll figure it out.
[/QUOTE]
Uh, that’s a nice new tangent. I take it you agree then that there is a distinction between being endorsed and seeking endorsement?
[QUOTE=Hamlet]
I’ll ask again, because Shodan couldn’t answer it. What do you “judge” about Obama from his association with Wright? Do you think he believes what Wright believes, despite the numerous denunciations? Do you think that Obama has been secretly brainwashed by Wright and, once elected, will enact laws Wright wants passed? Do you think Obama is a closet hater of whites. What, exactly, do you judge about Obama because of his relationship with Wright?
[/QUOTE]
It doesn’t matter what I judge. It matters what the focus groups judge. I’d say his explanation of a 20 year relationship with Wright was not accepted at face falue. I’ve already posted my opinion.
[QUOTE=Magiver]
I disagree. It’s not illogical to judge people by the company they keep. The longer the relationship exists the greater the association. You can argue the logic of it until the Sun explodes but that won’t change the reality of it. Public opinion is a fact of life and Senator Obama is distancing himself from Reverend Wright because of the statements Wright has made.
[/QUOTE]
In the way it’s being promoted in this case it clearly is. If someone has a longtime friend who is has an addiction problem is it logical to assume they must have one to? Is it logical to assume someone has the same sexual preference as their long time friend? Of course it isn’t. We’d instantly see that as illogical and stupid.
The fact that someone who Obama has known for many years holds a few unsettling opinions and has said them out loud doesn’t reflect on Obama at all, unless much more evidence is shown to indicate Obama shares some of those opinions. None, as in zero has been provided and Obama has clearly denounced the specific statements. To continue to play the guilt by association game indicates dishonesty and malice from those promoting it. They are counting on people responding emotionally rather than logically.
[QUOTE=Richard Parker]
Uh, that’s a nice new tangent. I take it you agree then that there is a distinction between being endorsed and seeking endorsement?
[/QUOTE]
Sure. But it’s easier to dump someone you don’t have a lot of time invested with.
[QUOTE=Magiver]
Sure. But it’s easier to dump someone you don’t have a lot of time invested with.
[/QUOTE]
Perhaps I now understand why we’re not connecting. I took your statement, as repeated above, to be implying that McCain had dumped Hagee. But you were talking exclusively about Obama?
[QUOTE=Magiver]
Not really. The game is “who’s nuts are in a vice”. Senator Obama, and the people running his campaign, know what’s going on. His speech writers (who are excellent) wrote a great speech. It was eloquent, well delivered, but didn’t address what needed to be addressed (it didn’t fly). If he wants to run for POTUS he’ll figure it out.
[/QUOTE]
It most certainly did fly considering the praise it received. Obama could not have anticipated that Wright would thrust himself onto the public again so soon. When that happened, he dealt with it succinctly and clearly. Pretty presidential IMO.
A conservative friend of mine said Obama’s recent remarks about Wright made him respect Obama more and understand why he cut Wright some slack the first time.
[QUOTE=Richard Parker]
Perhaps I now understand why we’re not connecting. I took your statement, as repeated above, to be implying that McCain had dumped Hagee. But you were talking exclusively about Obama?
[/QUOTE]
McCain doesn’t seem hugely interested in the conservative side of the rice paddy. If he needs to cut somebody loose he doesn’t have far to travel.
[QUOTE=cosmosdan]
It most certainly did fly considering the praise it received.
[/QUOTE]
Not really. It got high praise from his core voters but he still had to hit the trail on damage control.
Wright certainly made it worse by implying they were on the same plane of thought. I guess with friends like that…
[QUOTE=cosmosdan]
A conservative friend of mine said Obama’s recent remarks about Wright made him respect Obama more and understand why he cut Wright some slack the first time.
[/QUOTE]
Yes, and a liberal friend of mine became disillusioned by it. Maybe we should hook them up. 
[QUOTE=Magiver]
Not really. It got high praise from his core voters but he still had to hit the trail on damage control.
[/quote]
It got high praise from John McCain.
[QUOTE=Diogenes the Cynic]
It got high praise from John McCain.
[/QUOTE]
Well, who did you think McCain was voting for in November?
[QUOTE=Bosstone]
From what I’ve gathered, the consensus (which is by no means unanimous) is that Kerry lost primarily because he didn’t do enough to retaliate against baseless attacks like the Swiftboat stuff. Obama seems to be picking his battles, but he is retaliating when he believes he needs to, and as forcefully as he believes he needs to.
[/QUOTE]
I remember waffling as being a big deal. Kerry was talking about the 87 bill war financing pkg and he said he voted for it before he voted against it.
McCain was against the tax cuts for the wealthy before he was for it, Then he was against torture before he was for it. He will have to deal with that.
I’m wondering how you distinguish “hitting the trail on damage control” from “continuing to campaign in two states holding a primary in a few days”.
Its a “nuance” thing. You wouldn’t understand.
[QUOTE=stolichnaya]
I’m wondering how you distinguish “hitting the trail on damage control” from “continuing to campaign in two states holding a primary in a few days”.
[/QUOTE]
I’d say he’s busy. Hillary is also campaigning in 2 states. The difference is that she is getting a freebee on Night Line tonight and it doesn’t involve damage control. She even got in a shot at Wright while ducking questions on Obama. She be busy too.
[QUOTE=Magiver]
It doesn’t matter what I judge. It matters what the focus groups judge.
[/quote]
:rolleyes: Great cop out.
Some people are asking some tough questions about Obama and Wright. People are raising difficult issues. In fact, some are wondering if this will hurt Obama in North Carolina.
Not me, of course. But people.