Mostly, the subject is what Rovian politics will opponents, whether McCain or Clinton/Ickes, do to make a big deal about about an invented situation.
There are always people willing to pile on any situation, treating politics like a bad example of college football in which the opposition must be painted as monsters or fools in order to “win.” You are not the only poster to demonstrate that behavior in this campaign (or even this thread), but you are the one who most recently initiated personal slams “disguised” as political commentary.
If you are so eager to see such comments moved to the Pit, then you should restrict your posting to that arena.
You’re dancing around the issue. Wright preaches a theology of isolationism. Suggesting that his congregation support businesses based on racial ownership is inflammatory. Obama cut him loose and has now cut Trinity loose.
So from your posts here in this thread, I gather until the Wright thing happened you were seriously considering voting for Obama? Is that correct? But this issue has swayed you against voting for the man? Just want to be sure of my facts–this is the issue that convinced you that Obama was not the man for you? Other then this one issue Obama is the man?
You may assume nothing about who I will vote for since the election process has not started yet.
IMO Obama used Wright and his congregation as a springboard to get elected. He should have cut them loose a long time ago if he intended to run for POTUS.
Now you may be right about your last statement, but that wasn’t what the OP originally stated.
The original OP stated that this was a concern of ‘some’ people who would potentially NOT vote for Obama. Just trying to find out if you are one of those people. If you are on the right this is an issue and I can certainly see why this would be an issue. I know this is an issue for Mr. Moto and Shodan. Elvis1live says it is an issue, but who is he/she going to vote for instead? McCain? Elvis has no choice, either he votes for Obama or doesn’t vote at all.
I am still waiting for the OP to come back an clarify who these people are. I thought maybe you were one of them. I am sure there are a few people this will be an issue for, but for the vast majority of undecided voters (read–the moderates) I can’t see it being an issue. I mean it isn’t even in the headlines anymore is it?
Doesn’t mean it won’t be raised in the General election by the right, but who are they appealing to?
Hey that’s funny. Interested in addressing the point?
I could agree that Wright’s view is tainted by the experiences of his past. Although we have made progress, prejudice still exists and incidents of it are more recent than 1960. In the early 80s I worked at a nightclub where blacks were not welcome and good ole boys wore their racism on their sleeves.
The “Get over it” attitude has some validity but I’d be cautious about being to caviler about it. What seems reasonable to you in response to generations of wide spread institutionalized prejudice? You have yet to adequately explain how asking folks to patronize black owned businesses is insulting or shuts anyone out.
The two seem to contradict don’t they? Obama just discussed this in the interview about renouncing his membership. If he had joined the church merely to further his career then it would have been the obvious choice to cut them loose when he decided to make a presidential bid. The fact that he didn’t might indicate that he’s telling the truth. He joined for personal reasons and stayed because of an emotional attachment to the church and it’s members that still exists. He left for the reasons he just explained.
It’s hard to separate the person from the politician and I understand cynicism concerning politicians in general. Lacking any real evidence perhaps we can give someone the benefit of the doubt.
My general opinion of politicians is that they should be first in line for the Soylent Green factory tour. They’re all a bunch of ego inflated windbags who would sell their mother for 15 minutes of air time.
I usually count the number of windmills chased in a campaign and award my vote to the lowest score.
It a dirty game that does tend to corrupt but I wouldn’t be quite that cynical. I think politicians tend to compromise their principles too much under the justification of political reality. Those that have principles that is. Regardless, do you intend to defend your point or abandon it?
Your “clearly reject” is my “trying to have it both ways”.
In his press conference Saturday night. I thought I heard him say that the politically expediant thing for him to do was to reject Wright or quit his congregation when he announced. I thought he said he didn’t realize all those controversial sermons had been made at that point? I could be wrong on what he said Saturday night.
How do we discover his beliefs? Some would just ask him and believe what he says. Others will take in all the factors and evidence available.
Sure…assign him brownie points for the good things the congregation does. I’m fine with that. More positive than negative though… that is debateable.
Mentioned as recently as post 190. I and 5-4-Fighting have been asking you in several posts to explain how encouraging people to shop at black owned businesses is an insult. How people are shut out.
There have been several points and questions about this that you haven’t addressed.
What is trying to have it both ways about what he has said about both Wright and the guest speaker. {the guest speaker shouldn’t even be an issue.} He denounced the specific remarks of Wright and then separated himself from the man entirely. The other issue is being kept alive by the fact that someone whom Obama knows and earmarked money for a charity for said some controversial stuff. Compare that to McCain seeking the support of the right wing conservative preachers and NcCain comes off far worse.
I’ve already clearly stated how we discover any candidates beliefs. We listen to their words and compare them to their actions. I agree people should take in all factors and evidence available. That means making an effort to look for more information rather than settle for what’s being handed out by the talking heads on TV doesn’t it? After I saw the Wright clips I made an effort to find out more about the church and the man. I watched the sermons those clips were taken from to hear them in context. Seem reasonable? Am I considering all factors and evidence as you suggested? I discovered that the conclusions drawn about Wright and the adjectives being bandied about based on those clips were a false one dimensional caricature. It was a political ploy and media sensationalism that doesn’t reflect reality.
In what way is that debatable? You’ve offered nothing. If you’re going to come into GDs and start a thread and make some points then perhaps you’d have the guts to defend them with the actual evidence you just mentioned. So far you haven’t.
No he said that the politically expedient thing to do would have been to disown Wright when the videos surfaced and started getting looped endlessly in the media. He still tried to hold onto Wright and the church at that point.
That works for me.
There are no other “factors” or “evidence.”
No it isn’t. Name one “negative” thing Trinity has done to its community.