There were two sad and unusual items in the news yesterday. The most horrifying event happened when an old Neo-Nazi opened fire at the U.S. Holocaust Memorial Museum. The President responded to the shooting by stating “This outrageous act reminds us that we must remain vigilant against anti-Semitism and prejudice in all its forms.” This is a very reasonable thing to say. However, on the same day, Obama’s mentor and pastor of over 20 years, Jeremiah Wright, went on the record with his opinion of the Jews:
“Them Jews ain’t going to let him talk to me,” Wright said. “I told my baby daughter that he’ll talk to me in five years when he’s a lame duck, or in eight years when he’s out of office. …
They will not let him to talk to somebody who calls a spade what it is. … I said from the beginning: He’s a politician; I’m a pastor. He’s got to do what politicians do.”
Unbelievable! Obama surely wasn’t vigilant against anti-Semitism during his 20 years as a member of Wright’s church. To get an idea of how the press has swept this lunatic under the rug, think back to Mel Gibson, who had the nerve to produce a movie about Jesus Christ. Making movies about Jesus requires the full investigative power of the New York Times, while running for president requires the full investigative powers of US magazine into the wardrobe choices of Michelle Obama. My guess is more Americans know that Gibson’s dad is a raving anti-Semite than know that Obama’s mentor is a racist and an anti-Semite. It’s like we’re living in an alternate reality.
What gall to say what he did, and he listened to that pastor for 20 years.
Unless Americans wake up and kick out every democrat in 2010, it will be the end of the once great America. A force for good in the world.
as a Canadian all i can do is shake my head in disbelief at how the man (not god) will dismantle everything that made your country great.
“If you were thinking the Rev. Jeremiah Wright had been tempered by a national backlash that nearly derailed Barack Obama’s trip to the White House, guess again.”
Most polls showed that Obama lost votes because of him. I think Fox News ran 1 million specials on the guy. And since it is one of the most popular media stations, you cannot say the issue was swept under the rug.
Let me explain why this guy was a not an issue for me. First, his church was a mega church with 8,500 members (majority African American). Logically, this would be a good place for a politician trying to make a name for himself in a major city. It was a strategic choice to recruit black voters. It would be completely different if this was an unknown church with a very small congregation that Obama had grown up in. Plus, this guy isn’t a fanatic nut job. He says some outlandish things, but so do many church officials. Bishop Richard Williamson anyone?
The second reason why this was a non-issue for me was what I heard and read about Obama. He has no history of reckless behavior or hating a specific race. I have read nothing that would lead me to believe Obama is a fanatic when it comes to racial issues. At least nothing that is more alarming than previous presidents.
One reason I like this blog is because you take many issues to the next level. You question things and use your intellect to find deeper meanings. I hope sharing my logic will offer you an alternative way to see this issue. Not saying that you have to agree, just saying there are some logical reasons why this may not be an issue for some. And of course there are those who believe anything they see and hear on MSNBC! I too hate those people.
Bobby D: Yes! Our country is the greatest on the planet. I learned that traveling all over the world. No better place than in the US. How about this, the day your country is as awesome as ours I will listen to what you have to say. Until then, pipe down you hoser!
I do love your 19 and over drinking age in Windsor though!
It is fascinating to read how you convinced yourself that Obama started attending a church over two decades ago for purely political reasons (around the age of 30).
You argue that Obama “has no history of reckless behavior or hating a specific race.” Well, except the fact he’s given thousands of dollars and gotten married at a church that even Oprah found unsuitable. Plus, he’s friends with former Weather Underground members. No, nothing at all (no wonder the First Lady wasn’t proud to be an American, she was actually listening to the sermons).
The fact is that if Obama was a white republican with a pastor who made racist remarks for over twenty years he’d be unelectable. It’s intellectually dishonest to believe otherwise.
Bobby D… I admire the enthusiasm but total Republican control would be just as dangerous.
I was not suggesting Obama simply joined the church for political reasons. My point was that your argument begins and ends with those two relationships. It’s not like Obama has come across as a culturally insensitive bigot. So yes he has a sketchy past with those two people. And yes we should keep that in mind. But unlike Mel Gibson’s drunken comments about Jews, Obama has not come across as judgmental or filled with racial rage.
Maybe I am missing your point. Are you worried that Obama secretly hates white people and will create policies that reflect this hatred or an issue you have with media coverage?
The point is there isn’t a great deal known about Obama other than two books (that he authored) and the people he associated with in Chicago. Obama’s personal story, political abilities, and the fact he’s a Democrat gave him a free pass from the mainstream press (NYT, Time, Wash. Post, NBC, ABC, CBS, CNN). I’m not sure what’s so difficult to grasp here.
Inexperienced candidates are defined by their “sketchy” associations.
“Inexperienced candidates are defined by their “sketchy” associations.”
True. But people are also judged by their actions. And the fact that Rev Wright does not believe Obama is doing the right things and has no communication with him since becoming president should also be considered. If you want fair and balanced reporting, the media should also cover how Obama has done what the people have asked and severed all ties with him.
Until you find some evidence suggesting Rev Wright is influencing Obama’s political decision making then you have no argument. If anything the evidence points toward Obama making a conscious effort to distance himself and is proving that he can make decisions that the Rev disagrees with. Even if your skeptical about his motives, Obama has not shown any allegiance to Rev Wright beyond that of his younger years.
Here’s what’s killing me in this debate… The fact that Miss California and Mel Gibson have received more scrutiny than the President of the U.S. about their views, associations, and past. Then, when Obama’s hidden views are turned into “action”, the press still covers for him. Has anyone in the so-called mainstream media asked Obama or his press secretary if it’s true that there’s a moral equivalence between the Holocaust and the “occupation” of the West Bank/Gaza? Obama’s approach to the Middle East is basically a softened version of Rev. Wright’s views about the Zionist entity. Obama’s approach to economics, education and the role of government in general are also soft-pedalled versions of Bill Ayers and the other super left-wing wingnuts he associated with for political purposes. Instead of saying, as Rev. Wright does, that it’s the Jews’ fault, he hides it in empty rhetoric that makes the Jihadists, Hollywood, the emotional, and the press feel good. It’s apparent by his actions so far that he basically believes the same things as the wingnuts, so these were more than simply politically-expedient relationships.
I’m not aware of any actions that prove or even come close to illustrating racism. I imagine you are talking about his recent speech in Cairo, since that’s what your channel has been so fed up about. The same speech that will cause us less harm overall in the Afghanistan and Iraq wars by actually winning the hearts of the middle east. Obama’s approach to the Middle East has been a thoughtful and unique one. He mentioned the sacrifices and struggles on both sides and he’s actually putting pressure on the people who matter. What a welcomed change!
There has been more action out of this president than we’ve seen in a long time. It may not be the action you want, but your empty rhetoric line falls on it’s face.
http://tiny.cc/6byNn
I have nothing against people who are skeptical of Obama and his motives. We always need that. But to imply that our president is consciously deceiving the public and carrying out agendas set forth by Ayers and Wright cannot be defended on gut feelings alone.
I grow tired of the media bias argument. Fox News is just as biased and is blowing all other news channells out of the water in ratings. So that means the majority of people watching tv are watching the right leaning Fox News.
“It’s apparent by his actions so far that he basically believes the same things as the wingnuts..”
Did you read what Wright said? Both you and nemov are missing the fact that Obama’s actions are the reason why Wright is pissed. He blames the Jews for this, but he clearly disagrees with how Obama is handling the situation. How can you say that Obama’s actions show they believe the same thing when Wright’s comments are speaking about their differences?
It is driving me crazy that this point is being completely ignored.
What does the link from the Post have to do with what you just wrote? Was that an accident?
Sorry about that. I forgot that was there. It had something to do with presidential motives, but honestly I have no idea what I was thinking. As you may have noticed, I can sometimes be fragmented in my thoughts. Please disregard that link. Thanks!