Vile, Filthy RACIST Remarks-by Obama's PASTOR?

Great Debates
181

[QUOTE=tds1273]
Maybe I missed the links, but could you cite these within their full context? I can’t speak for the man any more than you, or my neighbor’s second grade teacher could.

[/QUOTE]

I do not have a links with the full context. But watch this video:

What context do you think would make his statements on HIV and Pearl Harbor anything other than ignorant and delusional? The only thing that would make the comments anything else would be if Wright was quoting someone’s statements in a negative light, but then the congregation’s reaction would not make sense. And you think that Wright or Obama would have pointed out that Wright does not think that the government invented HIV or that the government knew about 9/11 beforehand and that Wright was only quoting someone else.

182

[QUOTE=Magiver]

You have completely missed the point. Obama knew about the earlier statements and was forced to disavow them. He then continued the relationship. This isn’t a case of the Reverend sticking his foot in his mouth yesterday. The material you’re now hearing came from the church’s website. This is what they put out to represent themselves. Wright is nothing but an urban hillbilly who doesn’t like white people. People don’t want an ethnic-centric president, they want a president who represents everybody. He has a 20-year close-relationship with an afrocentric nutjob.
[/QUOTE]
No I haven’t missed the point, you have.

  1. Obama knew about these statements a year ago, and disavowed them a year ago.

  2. I have continued my relationship with my now-known-to-hold-racist-opinions father for the 3 years since I heard him make a racially offensive remark. Shall I sever my relationship with my father, let alone my entire family, who are no more responsible for his words than I am?

  3. I don’t read my synagogue’s website. If there are potentially offensive things posted there, should I be held responsible for knowing that?

  4. What evidence do you have that Barack Obama would be an “ethnic-centric President”? Please provide cites.

183

[QUOTE=Shayna]

  1. I don’t read my synagogue’s website. If there are potentially offensive things posted there, should I be held responsible for knowing that?

[/QUOTE]

If your Rabbi started screaming that the government created HIV and knew about the attack on Pearl Harbor beforehand do you think that everyone in the synagogue would cheer the Rabbi on? Do you really think you could be a member of synagogue like that and not know it?

184

[QUOTE=Phlosphr]
Ok to all three of you - The catholic church was under a lot of pressure to get all the pedophiles out of the churches, of course priests didn’t preach the merits of pedophilia, but people did know it went on and supported the very church that held it’s tongue and covered things up for so many years.
Just because Obama and many, many other educated people went to that church, they went there as I understand it to have God in their lives. They don’t flock there to simply see one man they flock there to learn about their God. Wright was a wingnut no question, and people should have asked him to temper his shit down. But people weren’t there to simply listen to him and his conspiracy BS, they were there for other reasons.
[/QUOTE]

But this is a misinterpretation of what’s happened. It wasn’t a case of the church having a certain ideology that people have an issue with. And if Black folks in Chicago make their decisions on where to go to church like they do everywhere I’ve ever lived, the pastor’s message matters. If there are ten UCC congregations in a community, how else do people decide where to attend? The charisma, oratory, and message matters. And of course there is probably much more to Pastor Wright’s ministry. But this is certainly part of it.

If you think Wright is a wingnut, here’s the trouble: Obama has a very close relationship with a wingnut. That’s the issue. I don’t think this has anywhere near the legs if Obama just went to this church and one of the pastors said crazy stuff. The fact that this particular pastor is the one that you consider to be a mentor and an adviser to your campaign makes it that much more stickier. The first rule of politics is the company you keep matters. Unfair and unreasonable in most walks of life, but the logic is that this is a person the president might consult with on matters of great importance.

185

[QUOTE=Shayna]

  1. Obama knew about these statements a year ago, and disavowed them a year ago.
    [/QUOTE]
    disavowing a racist and continuing to support him are contradictions. There is no explanation that can be given for this. NONE. Not only did he support him he used him in his campaign.

[QUOTE=Shayna]
2. I have continued my relationship with my now-known-to-hold-racist-opinions father for the 3 years since I heard him make a racially offensive remark. Shall I sever my relationship with my father, let alone my entire family, who are no more responsible for his words than I am? Not relevant to the discussion.
[/QUOTE]
You can’t choose your parents but you can choose your preacher. That choice carries with it financial support. So in your case you weren’t financially supporting a spiritual leader (of your choice) for 20 years who clearly doesn’t like white people, you were the child of your father.

[QUOTE=Shayna]
3. I don’t read my synagogue’s website. If there are potentially offensive things posted there, should I be held responsible for knowing that?
[/QUOTE]
Claiming ignorance for 20 years won’t fly in the court of public opinion.

[QUOTE=Shayna]
4. What evidence do you have that Barack Obama would be an “ethnic-centric President”? Please provide cites.
[/QUOTE]
I don’t have to prove a darn thing. Obama does. He has to explain why he continued to support Wright, even using him in his campaign, AFTER he admitted in the past that he didn’t agree with his racial garbage. Why should someone vote for a person who claims not to believe in this kind of behavior but continues to sponsor it and subject his family to it

186

[QUOTE=Hippy Hollow]
And if Black folks in Chicago make their decisions on where to go to church like they do everywhere I’ve ever lived, the pastor’s message matters. If there are ten UCC congregations in a community, how else do people decide where to attend? The charisma, oratory, and message matters. And of course there is probably much more to Pastor Wright’s ministry. But this is certainly part of it.

[/QUOTE]

And there is no way to explain the congregation’s reaction to Wright’s statements other than the members choosing to attend a church that has something to with the views expressed in the statements. Otherwise, you would not hear the screaming approval of the congregation in the videos.

187

[QUOTE=Hippy Hollow]
But this is a misinterpretation of what’s happened. It wasn’t a case of the church having a certain ideology that people have an issue with. And if Black folks in Chicago make their decisions on where to go to church like they do everywhere I’ve ever lived, the pastor’s message matters. If there are ten UCC congregations in a community, how else do people decide where to attend? The charisma, oratory, and message matters. And of course there is probably much more to Pastor Wright’s ministry. But this is certainly part of it.

If you think Wright is a wingnut, here’s the trouble: Obama has a very close relationship with a wingnut. That’s the issue. I don’t think this has anywhere near the legs if Obama just went to this church and one of the pastors said crazy stuff. The fact that this particular pastor is the one that you consider to be a mentor and an adviser to your campaign makes it that much more stickier. The first rule of politics is the company you keep matters. Unfair and unreasonable in most walks of life, but the logic is that this is a person the president might consult with on matters of great importance.
[/QUOTE]

By in large I agree. But there are two people who know the exact charactorization of the relationship they have with one another, and that’s Obama and Wright. I agree this is going to have some legs, but it’s not going to cost him the ultimate nod. Why? Because Obama has stated as clear as day on just about all the networks in personal interviews what his exact relationship with Wright is. After listening to those interviews I respect the man even more as his answers where direct and to the point. And I don’t see a puppeteer and marrionette show I see a man who attended a church where the preacher has some radical views, further it was not those views that kept Obama attending that church, it was the community connection and vibrant community bonds, NOT, radical conspiracy theories that held that church together.

188

[QUOTE=Magiver]
You have completely missed the point. Obama knew about the earlier statements and was forced to disavow them. He then continued the relationship. This isn’t a case of the Reverend sticking his foot in his mouth yesterday. The material you’re now hearing came from the church’s website. This is what they put out to represent themselves. Wright is nothing but an urban hillbilly who doesn’t like white people. People don’t want an ethnic-centric president, they want a president who represents everybody. He has a 20-year close-relationship with an afrocentric nutjob.
[/QUOTE]

I think it’s you who are missing the point friend. You and others are allowing a few sound bytes provided by the media to think that gives you enough material to characterize the entirety of this particular man. {Wright} That’s unrealistic and immature at best.

What exactly did you find so awful about the churches website?

They focus on black issues but relate the gospel to all people.

You’re also insinuating that if Obama knew about certain outlandish views he should have stopped associating with this man completely. I don’t see any reason for any public figure to do more than Obama has done.
Strongly disagree with certain statements and refuse to allow the media shit storm dictate who he can have for friends.

oh and this comment

is a bit of a joke considering our political history

189

[QUOTE=Phlosphr]
By in large I agree. But there are two people who know the exact charactorization of the relationship they have with one another, and that’s Obama and Wright. I agree this is going to have some legs, but it’s not going to cost him the ultimate nod. Why? Because Obama has stated as clear as day on just about all the networks in personal interviews what his exact relationship with Wright is. After listening to those interviews I respect the man even more as his answers where direct and to the point. And I don’t see a puppeteer and marrionette show I see a man who attended a church where the preacher has some radical views, further it was not those views that kept Obama attending that church, it was the community connection and vibrant community bonds, NOT, radical conspiracy theories that held that church together.
[/QUOTE]
He can disavow Wright’s message until the cows come home and it won’t matter. Saying he was there for the fellowship isn’t going to fly.

If you supported a church that said rich jews were holding your people down you can’t turn around and say you don’t agree with the message but you liked to socialize with those who do.

190

[QUOTE=ElvisL1ves]
Note that the Ferraro discussion, with pretty much the same points, has suddenly gone quiet.

Suit yourself, but I don’t trust rants at all.
[/QUOTE]

I’ll admit that my reaction to this, contrasted with my reaction to the Ferraro discussion, has exposed me some what to my own bias. As has the contrast between the msm’s coverage of this, Ferrraro and Clinton, and many similar story lines within the Mccain campaign; should expose us to theirs.

History repeats itself as slander against sexual orientation, gender, religion, and race is excused by the media; while cries of injustice, or criticism of policy, is demonized as some how “hating America”. After the past eight years, have we not grown up at all?

One big difference I see between Ferraro and Wright, is that Ferraro was all over every network, given every opportunity to speak for herself, and help put into context her own words. Wright, otoh, I have only seen appear on one show-- Hannity and Colmes. How do you think that went? Note- I said I saw him on the show, the host didn’t give me much chance to actually hear him.

I think another big difference is the way the respective candidates, themselves and their campaigns, have so far handled the situations.

This is another example of the past versus the future element of this election.

Both Ferraro and Wright can be seen as symbols and products of generations that have lived, and despite all odds, rose through horrible times in the quest for equal rights for all people of this country. In the small clips we are presented of them, you can pick up on the still remaining scars of cynicism and anger.

While all candidates in their own ways, some far firmer than others, have dismissed the divisive words and politics of their supporters. Two of those candidates, Mccain and Clinton, have continued to use their own, though similar, words to further those divisions.

Barack Obama has been the only candidate that has acknowledged the cirrcumstances that breed such words. And, rather than using those words as political tools to tear down his opponents, and has done what he can to rise above them and lift the Nation, as a whole, up with him.
ETA:Ironically following this very TLDR-esque post, your point about trusting rants is a good one and agreed with. I should have picked my words better.

191

[QUOTE=Magiver]
He can disavow Wright’s message until the cows come home and it won’t matter. Saying he was there for the fellowship isn’t going to fly.

If you supported a church that said rich jews were holding your people down you can’t turn around and say you don’t agree with the message but you liked to socialize with those who do.
[/QUOTE]

If Wright had radical views on 9/11, HIV and others do you think he spouted those out every weekend? Because that’s way a lot of you are talking. Wright also spoke about love, committment, child-rearing, honesty, familiar duties…but you guys wouldn’t want to read up on that…I get it.

192

[QUOTE=cosmosdan]
What exactly did you find so awful about the churches website?
[/QUOTE]
The “soundbites” were pulled from the site. This is what the church puts forth to represent themselves.

[QUOTE=cosmosdan]
You’re also insinuating that if Obama knew about certain outlandish views he should have stopped associating with this man completely.
[/QUOTE]
Absolutely, without question. This is a serious mark against Obama’s character that he would associate himself with Wright. He is on record as disavowing the man’s statements. While he only has to justify the time frame after he disassociated himself from those remarks he cannot escape the judgement people will make on the 20 year relationship. This relationship extended into his campaign after he went on record disavowing Wright. He went out of his way to include him.

[QUOTE=cosmosdan]
oh and this comment is a bit of a joke considering our political history
[/QUOTE]
How is it a joke? Do you think voters are going to the polls for a good laugh? Do you think they’re voting in 1960? What could possibly make you think someone wants an ethnic-centric president in 2008?

193

[QUOTE=Magiver]
disavowing a racist and continuing to support him are contradictions. There is no explanation that can be given for this. NONE. Not only did he support him he used him in his campaign.
[/QUOTE]

One more time. People have more than one facet to their personalities and you can still value them and appreciate the contribution they make in certain areas while disagreeing with them in others. It is you and others who are making these few cherry picked comments into the be all end all of Wrights character without sufficient evidence.

There’s a nice white lady on the churches web site that talks about the church being a loving place for everybody. Are you sure Wright doesn’t like her? I haven’t seen the evidence that the black liberation theology that Wright spoke of and from means he and his church have some axe to grind against white people in general.

unfortunately some people will buy into guilt by association. More’s the pity.

He’s already explained it enough and he’s got my vote. Watch the Obermnan interview about this very subject. You’re blowing the whole thing out proportion IMO. You’re doing the guilt by association thing to Obama and inferring a lot of attitudes in Wright that you have little evidence for.

194

[QUOTE=Two and a Half Inches of Fun]
I do not have a links with the full context. But watch this video:

What context do you think would make his statements on HIV and Pearl Harbor anything other than ignorant and delusional? The only thing that would make the comments anything else would be if Wright was quoting someone’s statements in a negative light, but then the congregation’s reaction would not make sense. And you think that Wright or Obama would have pointed out that Wright does not think that the government invented HIV or that the government knew about 9/11 beforehand and that Wright was only quoting someone else.
[/QUOTE]

A bunch of short cuts edited and pieced together by Fox News huh? Fair enough. Like I said, it’s a good thing Jeremiah Wright is not running for PotUS huh? Maybe he really does need a subscription here.

However, they are strawmen anyway, I have never heard or seen any evidence of Obama doing anything other than strongly disagreeing with distancing himself from these statements.

It has been made clear time and time again, cite by cite, that Barack Obama’s politics are not those of Jeremiah Wright.

He says he enjoys the Minister for the spiritual discussions. Maybe Wright can wax poetic on the metaphysical in a beautiful way.

The clips show some pretty depressing words; obviously there are also messages of peace, love, kindness, and helping your neighbors out in those video archives. Though I know the msm wont pick them up and run them, I do hope that supporters of either Obama or Wright make those available. So that people can better understand and appreciate the full context and scope, instead of just being manipulated by a coporately owned editing room to feel anxious and scared about the black guy on tv.

195

We had a semi-maniacal priest at the Naval Air Station, Patuxent River, MD, many years ago.

He was obsessed with hateful Protestants (every single one in the world :stuck_out_tongue: )and each week he ranted against them. Practically frothing at the mouth, he’d say things like, "Let’s put the accent where it belongs: proTESTants!!

I think I got up and walked out on his sermon just once - the first time I heard him preach.

But few others did. That doesn’t make them sympathetic to the heretical crap that priest dispensed.

All in all, if I were Black, I think I’d be more than moderately angry with the way this country has treated me and my kinsmen.

Take Hillary, for example. She, Bill and her campaign are taking not so subtle racial shots at Obama. And she’s running for the fucking presidency. But it’s okay. She doesn’t really mean what she says. She just wants to win, no matter what.

196

[QUOTE=cosmosdan]
One more time. People have more than one facet to their personalities and you can still value them and appreciate the contribution they make in certain areas while disagreeing with them in others. It is you and others who are making these few cherry picked comments into the be all end all of Wrights character
[/QUOTE]
I didn’t cherry pick the comments to represent Wright. He and his church did. These were the choice words they wanted to share with the world. For you to assume that these were the only remarks along these lines is a huge stretch.

[QUOTE=cosmosdan]
unfortunately some people will buy into guilt by association. More’s the pity.
[/QUOTE]

Really, so if a Republican candidate was friends with David Duke and used him in his/her campaign you would… What…? Tell me.

197

[QUOTE=Shodan]
Maybe Obama wants the news about his associations with hate-mongers out today, to distract from the other news that he lied about one of his other slimy associations.

[black preacher voice]
Can we assume this is a non-trivial speed bump on Obama’s path to beatification?

YES WE CAN!
[/bpv]

Regards,
Shodan
[/QUOTE]

What’s a “black preacher voice?”

Your link says that Obama is now saying that Rezko raised a few more dollars for him than his campaign had initially estimated. BFD. There’s nothing illegal or correupt about any of it and I think your texted blackface routine is beyond the pale.

198

[QUOTE=Magiver]
Really, so if a Republican candidate was friends with David Duke and used him in his/her campaign you would… What…? Tell me.
[/QUOTE]

Wright didn’t really say anything racist so Duke is not a valid comparison, but, as a matter of fact, Republicans align themselves with bigoted scumbags all the time and no one cares.

199

[QUOTE=BarnOwl]
I think I got up and walked out on his sermon just once - the first time I heard him preach.

But few others did. That doesn’t make them sympathetic to the heretical crap that priest dispensed.
[/quote]
It doesn’t? :dubious: Why not?

So Bill isn’t America’s First Black President anymore now?
tds, Here’s the uncut version. Barack = Jesus. :rolleyes:

200

To further clarify things…