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

You know what I’m sick of? This.

Where’s your proof that Clinton or highly-placed surrogates decided “expose” this? I would say selling DVDs or posting videos of sermons online doesn’t make it difficult to “expose” anything. Hell, there’s no “exposing” to be done. Nobody raided the UCC HQ and got this tape out.

Same with the “turban” photos. Because Matt Drudge said it came from the Clinton campaign… people believed it. Obama himself first said that he took Clinton at her word when she stated (no doubt after doing the press’ job and finding out if indeed it came from within the campaign) that the pictures did not originate from her campaign, and then a week later he’s saying that the photos were part of the Clinton “kitchen sink” strategy?

Where, pray tell, are the “new politics” Obama and his ilk promise?

I’m going to go out on a limb and say that there are plenty of people not affiliated with the Clinton campaign aren’t big fans of Mr. Obama. Furthermore, I’m going to also say that there are intelligent, fair-minded people who investigate, ask questions, and do a little legwork to find out about the candidates.

Every example of Obama having clay feet isn’t necessarily attributable to the Clinton campaign.

Yeah, well, it’s the kind of thing she WOULD do! That’s close enough!

:smiley:

Okay, I’ll consider this. Wait one second…

Okay, I’m still not seeing how Wright will cost Obama his win. Anyone who is swayed into voting for Hillary because of this probably would’ve been swayed by Ferraro’s comments already, and so the question is moot. And if Hillaryites like The Flying Dutchman have converted to Obama-manism as a result of Obama’s handling of this incident, try as I may, I really can’t see this doing any real harm to him.

It may give Hillary-supporters something to get fired up about, though.

There’s plenty of time left for this to percolate in the minds of the voters of PA and NC and further on. Way too early and way too little basis to brush it off the way you just did. It doesn’t matter a bit what you or I or anyone else thinks the remaining voters *should * think; it matters what they *will * think, agreed?

Meanwhile, bear in mind that Rasmussen has shown a 7-point drop in Obama’s daily lead nationally *already * as of today.

We have how many days left to the next primary? I could understand the doom and gloom if all this was going on the eve before, as previous Obama “gotcha yas” have. But in terms of breaking scandals, I think the timing is off for this to matter much. Especially since this came on the heels of Ferraro and therefore looks like something Hillary’s people dug up to get the attention off of her (not saying this happened, but it does comes out looking that way).

People will think about it, sure, but no doubt between here and PA, someone somewhere will say or do something stupid, and our attention will go there. Things of this size only matter on a cumulative, recurrent basis.

But will people think “Oh, this is just some other stupid thing a staffer or a remote adviser had to quit for”, like the Ferraro flap? Or will the percolated-in thought be “Obama went to this guy’s church for 25 years, and even titled his book after one of his sermons, and this is what his sermons are about? Does Obama perhaps share the same attitudes under that layer of slick talk no matter how much he says he doesn’t?” Remember that what matters is what the remaining voters *will * think, not what they *should * think.

Put that right after his NAFTA weaseling and the Rezko story that isn’t going away, and compare that to Clinton’s invulnerable reputation (as in there are few minds left capable of changing about her), and I think you’re being way too optimistic.

Wow. My Dad, the staunch Republican, who has been sending my emails about Rev. Wright for months now, is part of the “clinton camp.” Will wonders never cease.

Here is an article from American Thinker, a pro-Isreal right wing blog, from mid January all about this. I’m not sure why this is getting so much traction now but it’s been around for quite some time. A lot of people have been concerned about this for a while and most of them are far from the “clinton camp.”

I decided to run over to Rasmussen and check out a few things…Looks like the latest and greatest has Obama ahead of McCain by 12 percentage points Clinton by only three in CT a bellwether state - this up from 8 percentage points over McCain on Friday.
Also, from the latest Statistical noise from your 7 point down cite:

These are people called who actually want to take a survey. Polling data is not a solid case to stand on. You know that.

Sure the data is damned noisy. But for the moment it’s the only data we’ve got - and *none * of it supports an assertion that this is blowing over.

Non of it leads me to think it will get any more legs than the ferraro shit in the clinton camp either. Look, Wright is a wingnut, but I’m an educated white guy from a decent part of CT who hasn’t had any wool pulled over his eyes - and this story when read in any light, doens’t have the traction of a campaign breaker, not even close. And I’m scrutinizing the holy hell out of it, why? Because I want to know what I’m talking about when writing in these threads…instead of sounding like an ignorant fool by regurgitating what I read in online columns that support their view like some of the more colorful brethren on these boards. Not you mind you Elvis - as I see you as a well informed individual…but still, I don’t like this story any more than those in the clinton camp liked the ferraro comments, but I don’t see this thing rolling along and steaming over people.

According to one of the stories I read (I don’t remember which one) it was McCain’s campaign that sent the videos to the networks.

I invoke the Elucidian Principle of Democratic Indeterminancy (WTF, for short). Not only is it impossible to determine the trajectory of the people it is equally impossible to determine the current position. Particles are much more predictable than people.

This thing might inflame the white populace in a veritable frenzy of racial resentment. They are just as likely to shrug it off with the same aplomb and disdain that they shrug off Ms. Ferraro. Or not. No way of knowing.

Isn’t that just the coolest thing evah? If nothing else, democracy is just so much more interesting that authoritarianism.

That article is nothing but a bunch of flimsy crap that’s been roundly debunked.

From the above-referenced Philadelphia Jewish Voice:

It’s really unfortunate that you would call attention to such an ugly piece of garbage here.

Have to echo this. A friend of mine is a “moderate” ( and currently vaguely pro-Obama ) Evangelical Christian who until recently attended a very conservative church. He mentioned the perceived “anti-white” nature of Obama’s congregation to me months ago. In fact I initially dismissed this thread as old news.

The only reason I can think of why this has suddenly become a hot potato is that some enterprising young reporter ( or professional character assassin ) has only just now managed to dig up damning video soundbites. Which seems remarkably lazy/inept if you ask me ;).

Funny you should mention that, on the day that the Chicago Sun-Times, the major metro newspaper that’s been gunning for Obama for months, feels compelled, however grudgingly, to admit that there’s no “gotcha ya” there.

Same goes for the Trib.

Oh for Christ’s sake. You think that I don’t know that? I was pointing out that: 1. This Wright nonsense is nothing new and 2. It’s not coming from Clinton.

LOL I love how the Clintons get blamed for everything including Wright. Oh well. Obama, of course as per usual, immediately preemptively blamed the Clintons for assuredly ‘using it as political fodder’ against him. Of course, they haven’t. The full extent of what’s been said by the Clinton camp about Wright has been ‘no comment’ and L. Davis saying he believes Obama. Still, blame Hill and change the subject. So much for ‘new’ politics.

I did enjoy Obama’s statement that he’d **never ** been present when those kinds of remarks were made. It was a categorical statement. Which means it’ll just take one instance proving that he was, in fact, there to make him out as a liar (again).

Said the NAFTA memo never happened, it did. Said full extent of Rezko was $150,000 (which was itself a revision of an earlier number), and it wasn’t ($250,000).

The media will now have a field day finding proof of Obama’s having been there.

That proof, of course, will be deflected by Jesus Obama Christ. But it won’t work.

Someone stick a fork in him. :smiley:

No, I think it takes cumulative hits. Ferraro’s comment was one thing but some folks might’ve been not quite against Obama yet over that since it’s arguable as to whether or not she’s right (she asserted that the Obama campaign folks were the ones playing the old slice and dice politics by falsely accusing her of racism despite 40 years of fighting for civil rights).

“God damn America!” + Michelle “I’m proud of my country for the first time” (she didn’t say proud of politics, she said proud of my country; sorry Obama) + don’t put hand over heart to pledge allegiance to the flag + Hillary was never “called a nigger” + Obama’s choice to not just merely attend his church but PUT him on his spiritual ADVISORY committee AFTER Wright had already said such things before (as someone pointed out, Obama knew a year ago and ‘denounced’ it then…but still kept him on the committee) + Rezko + NAFTA memo + Iraq doublespeak + Weathermen + cocaine +++ more to come.

Ferraro’s comments wouldn’t in and of themselves have the weight of all of that plus more that will no doubt come out.

Being once removed from Farrakhan via Wright isn’t going to sit very well with most. The only folks not bothered by that are those that wouldn’t switch away from Obama no matter what he did or said or associated with.

He associates with the Wrights of the world to be down with black folks and then also wants to be ‘The Magic Negro’ as famously written in the LA opinion article when it comes to playing on white liberal guilt. I think the gig will be up.

And I feel reasonably sure that his “Where’s Hillary’s tax returns?” not-negative-campaigning-because-Obama-is-doing-it tactic isn’t going to be enough to save him in the end.

Truthfully? No, I couldn’t tell that you knew that. Ok, you did. Now other people do, too. Sorry to have offended.

Obama on his former pastor in his in-depth interview with the Chicago Tribune: (bolding mine)