Anybody care to disagree?

Funny thing about politics -- I learned a long time ago never to count anyone out completely.

It ain't over till it's over.
Who would have thought 6 months ago that McCain would come back from the dead and win the Republican nomination.

The veil is slowly being pulled off of Barack. I can't see him winning. I can't believe this country would ever do that.

Sought out this bigoted church on the south side of Chicago to gain black-street creed. 20 years of spiritual guidance by one of the most racist people in this country. Married by the guy. Kids baptized by the guy. Wrote a book inspired by one of his sermons. Donated $20,000 in 2006. Has made millions in the last couple of years and yet Obama is not considered a rich man.

And the MSM is just gonna ignore this and sweep it under the rug?

Not me. I'm shouting from the rooftops ya-all.

No- I'm not a secret Muslim, I go to church......
doh!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VUbUBTlmAiA

Barack is going to get Swift Boated. I'll see to it.

He is not gonna hide behind the MSM.

Another Obomination...

So in 2006 whilst Obama's wife Michelle is getting a 'promotion' and $250,000 pay raise to continue her current job as community affairs director for a Chicago hospital, along comes a $1,000,000 earmark for that same hospital in 2006. Guess which Senator's name was on the earmark?

If you guess it, go to the head of the class.

Can't wait for all the changes Obama promises.:(

what happened?

Can't wait for him to bring his scorn to all of God Damn America!

I think Barack just took major damage but he's not out because Hillary is in. If Barack can satisfactorily explain why he decided to continue to be a member of a church with a nutjob militant Afrocentrist preacher then his political career may survive. I tend to think Mrs. Obama is the truly militant one in the family and Barack probably continued to stay and listen to the nutty preacher because the wife likes the nut and Barack has to satisfy the militant wife. Then again, maybe Barack is also a closet Afrocentrist militant.

maybe Barack is also a closet Afrocentrist militant.

Ya think? Barack claims in 20 years that he never heard or even heard anybody repeat what his good pal, the minister (insert snicker here), said, and if he had, of course he would have repudiated it at the time.

This is almost better than Clinton's 'I smoked it, but I didn't inhale'.

Gotta luv lefties.

Ya think? Barack claims in 20 years that he never heard or even heard anybody repeat what his good pal, the minister (insert snicker here), said, and if he had, of course he would have repudiated it at the time.

This is almost better than Clinton's 'I smoked it, but I didn't inhale'.

Gotta luv lefties.

It certainly is a problem for Barack. How a person can be a semi-regular member of a church for nearly 20 years and know the reverend over 20 years and not hear the reverend's controversial/radical views is beyond belief. We could easily quote Hillary and say to believe Barack would required the “willing suspension of disbelief.”

We could easily quote Hillary and say to believe Barack would required the “willing suspension of disbelief.”
In their denial of admitting what Barack really is, his supporters defend him by saying 'guilty by association' is not a fair yardstick.

The whole Rezko affair is one that Barack says was a series of bad judgements. Now he says his minister used bad judgement.

But he wants us to believe he used 'good' judgement on Iraq and that is why he should be President.

Man, I wish I could debate the guy. An empty-suit panderer and hate monger. Nothing more to see here folks, just move on.

I guess Bill Kristol summed it up better than I....

"Bill Kristol distills the essence of Obama:

The more you learn about him, the more Obama seems to be a conventionally opportunistic politician, impressively smart and disciplined, who has put together a good political career and a terrific presidential campaign. But there’s not much audacity of hope there. There’s the calculation of ambition, and the construction of artifice, mixed in with a dash of deceit — all covered over with the great conceit that this campaign, and this candidate, are different."

Even if he becomes president, I doubt he will stay in office very long. I just hope he picks a good vice president.

Jeremiah Wright (Obama's "former" pastor) is to the white community what Fred Phelps ("Reverend" of the Westboro Baptist Church) is to the gay community.

http://img.villagephotos.com/p/2002-3/16079/sorry.JPG

I heard excerpts of Barack's speech and some commentary today. Why do I have a problem believing him? Oh...that's right...despite his condemnation of Reverend Wright's diatribe of hate and false statements he continued to be a member of the Reverend's church--Why? The Reverend made many speeches condemning the U.S. and blaming white America for the many problems in black communities, including claiming that the U.S. government deliberately targeted blacks with the HIV virus. This unfounded and ridiculous accusation should have been sufficient in and of itself to cause Barack to leave the church. Instead, he refers to the Reverend as being liken an "uncle".

Since Barack has a close friendship with the Reverend then I would think he would have tried to counsel him long ago in a loving Christian way in an attempt to discourage him from making such scurrilous and unfounded accusations. But apparently he did not. This begs the question as to whether Barack is lying when he claims he doesn't agree with the Reverends bigoted and anti-American views. One thing for certain, Barack met with the Reverend last year and they discussed the possibility that Barack would have to distance himself from the Reverend if and when the Reverend's militant views became public. So again, is Barack being honest when he says he doesn't agree with the Reverend's militant views?

Further, I certainly wouldn't subject my children to the Reverend's hate messages, and I think most average Americans (black, white or otherwise) would find another church. But apparently Barack feels it's acceptable to subject his family to the Reverend's errant messages to the point that he is willing to forge a strong friendship with him.

If Barack was a leader he would have attempted to counsel the Reverend, certainly in light of their close friendship, concerning his many untruthful statements. If Barack is truly an average American who loves his country his remaining at this church in light of the many anti-American speeches given by the Reverend makes me wounder if he really love his country.

Not me. I'm shouting from the rooftops ya-all.

That says it all. Pull out that Confederate flag while you're at it.

I heard excerpts of Barack's speech and some commentary today. Why do I have a problem believing him? Oh...that's right...despite his condemnation of Reverend Wright's diatribe of hate and false statements he continued to be a member of the Reverend's church--Why? The Reverend made many speeches condemning the U.S. and blaming white America for the many problems in black communities, including claiming that the U.S. government deliberately targeted blacks with the HIV virus. This unfounded and ridiculous accusation should have been sufficient in and of itself to cause Barack to leave the church. Instead, he refers to the Reverend as being liken an "uncle".

Don't care. Wouldn't vote for that creep McCain who takes money from a bible thumping nut who hates Catholics. I'm a Catholic, McCain isn't getting my vote period.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VUbUBTlmAiA

Barack is going to get Swift Boated. I'll see to it.

While you're doing that I'll take care of Catholic hating McCain, the fake veteran.

the fake veteran.

Link Please to prove your comment.

That says it all. Pull out that Confederate flag while you're at it.
While I agree that McCain hates Christians and as such (among other reasons) does not deserve my vote, your stealth accusation of racism of Bryan is uncalled for and unwelcome.

I like Allahpundit's take on Obama's latest speech:

Nothing here you haven’t heard before, for the simple reason that even a third-grader can grasp the basic issue. Obama’s a craven liar who tolerated racism for years and then suddenly decided it was intolerable, not when he first started running for president but when ABC News finally crammed this verbal feces down his gullet, thereby warranting an “historic,” ass-saving speech to preserve his candidacy. Liberals are only too happy to believe it’s all part of his grand strategy to heal America by accruing power to himself. Gingrich thinks otherwise. Why? Because he’s a racist, silly, that’s why.
http://hotair.com/archives/2008/03/18/video-gingrich-lowers-the-boom-on-obama/

I like Allahpundit's take on Obama's latest speech:

Oh that's nice I think the take is full of crap.

Oh that's nice I think the take is full of crap.

Why?

Why?

Because the critics of the speech don't really get the gist of what Obama said and completely ignored his reaching out to whites who feel slighted by affirmative action. We can't deny the race problem in the country and we're never going to get over this problem until we can come together and realize at the end of the day that we're all Americans and in the same boat. Obama wasn't the guy playing the race thing. He's a black candidate, not The Black Candidate. I don't even blame the race thing on the Republicans, this was another dirty Clinton trick.

We can't deny the race problem in the country and we're never going to get over this problem until we can come together and realize at the end of the day that we're all Americans and in the same boat. Obama wasn't the guy playing the race thing.

What are you talking about?

Guys like Obama ARE the reason we have race problems.

He talks about uniting? Are you kidding me? He will carve this country up pandering to whites and blacks like he is doing now.

The guy needed to do his house cleaning BEFORE running for President. Now it is too late.

Obama joined Trinity to obtain some 'black credentials' when he was running for the Illinois Senate. That is what started this whole thing.

Obama has been pampered his whole life. He didn't grow up a poor negro. Yes, his p.o.s. dad did leave, but don't most "african-american" dads do that too?

He had the best education in 'whitey' schools and knew that wouldn't fly in Chicago.

Anyway, he needed to look black and Trinity Church provided the hate and bigotry for him to proclaim himself 'black' enough.

But, he bought into the system at Trinity. He fell in hook, line, and sinker. That is what is the most troubling.

Cozying up to the pastor is where his character should really be judged.

After 20 years, Obama is now a product of that enviroment. One only has to look at his wife to see that. She is not as good at hiding it as the "TelePrompter' king.

I was truly offended that on such a momentus occasion, he once again leans on the TelePrompter versus speaking from the heart.

People are enamored with Barack because he is the best TV announcer. Has nothing to do with his positions. And for me, I can't stand the sight of him holding his chin high like he is the Almighty. He needs to be knocked down, not a few, but a couple of dozen notches for sure.

What are you talking about?

Guys like Obama ARE the reason we have race problems

No, guys like the Clintons, Limbaughs, Nixons and strangely enough Lincoln is the reason we have huge race problems.

People are enamored with Barack because he is the best TV announcer.

Obama is a well educated, intelligent Ivy League educated attorney get your facts straight.

Obama is a well educated, intelligent Ivy League educated attorney get your facts straight.Nothing more than a TV announcer. When he loses, he can get a job on NBC Nightly News.:D

Here are the real reasons you love Barack...
· Voted against banning "partial birth" abortion.
· Voted NO on notifying parents of minors who get out-of-state abortions.
· Big affirmative action supporter for Colleges and Government.
· Admitted marijuana and cocaine use in high school and in college.
. Was probably even a dealer which is why he supports a minimum wage street dealer subsidy.
· Religious convictions are murky to say the least.
· Will meet with all tyrants like Chavez, Kim Jung Il and Ahmadinejad.
· Has said that one of his first goals after being elected would be to have a conference with all Muslim nations.
· Opposes the Patriot Act.
· Wants to sue gun manufacturers.
· Universal health-care.
· Big habeas corpus supporter for Guantanamo detainees.
· Supports granting driver's licenses to illegal immigrants.
· Will give welfare to illegal immigrants.
· Voted yes on allowing illegal aliens to participate in Social Security.
· Wants to make the minimum wage a "living wage".
· 96% Dem Party lackey.
· Supports Social Security rate increase.
· Voted No on repealing the Alternative Minimum Tax
· Voted No on repealing the "Death" Tax
· Will raise the Capital Gains Tax.
· Only guy wrong on the Iraq war.

Obama is a well educated, intelligent Ivy League educated attorney.....and a racist socialist.

Nothing more than a TV announcer. When he loses, he can get a job on NBC Nightly News.:D

Here are the real reasons you love Barack...

He is an attorney and professor. How dare you tell me why I support or don't support any candidate. The arrogance. Shows a lot of character in you. I gave you my reasons for supporting Obama and you couldn't stand the fact that I don't fall into your left-right spectrum. Take your prepackaged, distorted, neocon talking points and go join your Catholic hating bible thumper.

Was probably even a dealer which is why he supports a minimum wage street dealer subsidy.

That's out of line to the point of being despicable. Oh sure he was a dealer. Forget evidence, let's just assert a bunch of crap. Bush used cocaine (FACT). Bush was probably a dealer. OK :D

He is an attorney and professor. How dare you tell me why I support or don't support any candidate. The arrogance. Shows a lot of character in you. I gave you my reasons for supporting Obama and you couldn't stand the fact that I don't fall into your left-right spectrum. Take your prepackaged, distorted, neocon talking points and go join your Catholic hating bible thumper.
As soon as you take your Nazi Germany Jew-barbecueing Aryan nation master race self back to your socialist European country.

As soon as you take your Nazi Germany Jew-barbecueing Aryan nation master race self back to your socialist European country.

My my, the hate Fossten, the hate. You belong with Hagee and Hitler, putz.

My my, the hate Fossten, the hate. You belong with Hagee and Hitler, putz.
My my, the stupidity Max, the stupidity. You are definitely the smartest kid on the short bus.

My my, the stupidity Max, the stupidity. You are definitely the smartest kid on the short bus.

Your politics may be s*** but you've got a good sense of humor.

You're politics may be s*** but you've got a good sense of humor.It's "Your," not "You're." No wonder you're unemployed. Maybe you should learn to type with all the fingers on both hands. *owned*

It's "Your," not "You're." No wonder you're unemployed. Maybe you should learn to type with all the fingers on both hands. *owned*

Go back to the trailer park and learn how to take a complement.

Go back to the trailer park and learn how to take a complement.You paying someone a compliment is like the devil quoting scripture.

Because the critics of the speech don't really get the gist of what Obama said and completely ignored his reaching out to whites who feel slighted by affirmative action. We can't deny the race problem in the country and we're never going to get over this problem until we can come together and realize at the end of the day that we're all Americans and in the same boat. Obama wasn't the guy playing the race thing. He's a black candidate, not The Black Candidate. I don't even blame the race thing on the Republicans, this was another dirty Clinton trick.

Um...NO.

From the Los Angeles Times

Obama the 'Magic Negro'
The Illinois senator lends himself to white America's idealized, less-than-real black man.

By David Ehrenstein

L.A.-based DAVID EHRENSTEIN writes about Hollywood and politics.

March 19, 2007

AS EVERY CARBON-BASED life form on this planet surely knows, Barack Obama, the junior Democratic senator from Illinois, is running for president. Since making his announcement, there has been no end of commentary about him in all quarters — musing over his charisma and the prospect he offers of being the first African American to be elected to the White House.

But it's clear that Obama also is running for an equally important unelected office, in the province of the popular imagination — the "Magic Negro."

The Magic Negro is a figure of postmodern folk culture, coined by snarky 20th century sociologists, to explain a cultural figure who emerged in the wake of Brown vs. Board of Education. "He has no past, he simply appears one day to help the white protagonist," reads the description on Wikipedia http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Magical_Negro .

He's there to assuage white "guilt" (i.e., the minimal discomfort they feel) over the role of slavery and racial segregation in American history, while replacing stereotypes of a dangerous, highly sexualized black man with a benign figure for whom interracial sexual congress holds no interest.

As might be expected, this figure is chiefly cinematic — embodied by such noted performers as Sidney Poitier, Morgan Freeman, Scatman Crothers, Michael Clarke Duncan, Will Smith and, most recently, Don Cheadle. And that's not to mention a certain basketball player whose very nickname is "Magic."

Poitier really poured on the "magic" in "Lilies of the Field" (for which he won a best actor Oscar) and "To Sir, With Love" (which, along with "Guess Who's Coming to Dinner," made him a No. 1 box-office attraction). In these films, Poitier triumphs through yeoman service to his white benefactors. "Guess Who's Coming to Dinner" is particularly striking in this regard, as it posits miscegenation without evoking sex. (Talk about magic!)

The same can't quite be said of Freeman in "Driving Miss Daisy," "Seven" and the seemingly endless series of films in which he plays ersatz paterfamilias to a white woman bedeviled by a serial killer. But at least he survives, unlike Crothers in "The Shining," in which psychic premonitions inspire him to rescue a white family he barely knows and get killed for his trouble. This heart-tug trope is parodied in Gus Van Sant's "Elephant." The film's sole black student at a Columbine-like high school arrives in the midst of a slaughter, helps a girl escape and is immediately gunned down. See what helping the white man gets you?

And what does the white man get out of the bargain? That's a question asked by John Guare in "Six Degrees of Separation," his brilliant retelling of the true saga of David Hampton — a young, personable gay con man who in the 1980s passed himself off as the son of none other than the real Sidney Poitier. Though he started small, using the ruse to get into Studio 54, Hampton discovered that countless gullible, well-heeled New Yorkers, vulnerable to the Magic Negro myth, were only too eager to believe in his baroque fantasy. (One of the few who wasn't fooled was Andy Warhol, who was astonished his underlings believed Hampton's whoppers. Clearly Warhol had no need for the accouterment of interracial "goodwill.")

But the same can't be said of most white Americans, whose desire for a noble, healing Negro hasn't faded. That's where Obama comes in: as Poitier's "real" fake son.

The senator's famously stem-winding stump speeches have been drawing huge crowds to hear him talk of uniting rather than dividing. A praiseworthy goal. Consequently, even the mild criticisms thrown his way have been waved away, "magically." He used to smoke, but now he doesn't; he racked up a bunch of delinquent parking tickets, but he paid them all back with an apology. And hey, is looking good in a bathing suit a bad thing?

The only mud that momentarily stuck was criticism (white and black alike) concerning Obama's alleged "inauthenticty," as compared to such sterling examples of "genuine" blackness as Al Sharpton and Snoop Dogg. Speaking as an African American whose last name has led to his racial "credentials" being challenged — often several times a day — I know how pesky this sort of thing can be.

Obama's fame right now has little to do with his political record or what he's written in his two (count 'em) books, or even what he's actually said in those stem-winders. It's the way he's said it that counts the most. It's his manner, which, as presidential hopeful Sen. Joe Biden ham-fistedly reminded us, is "articulate." His tone is always genial, his voice warm and unthreatening, and he hasn't called his opponents names (despite being baited by the media).

Like a comic-book superhero, Obama is there to help, out of the sheer goodness of a heart we need not know or understand. For as with all Magic Negroes, the less real he seems, the more desirable he becomes. If he were real, white America couldn't project all its fantasies of curative black benevolence on him.

Obama Defends Rev. Wright, Blasts Imus
Wednesday, March 19, 2008 8:47 AM

It took Barack Obama more than a year to repudiate his former pastor's racially charged anti-American tirades, but when it came to denouncing Don Imus for his racial slurs against the Rutgers girls basketball team, it took Obama only a week to demand the shock jock be fired, Fox News notes.

In a major speech Tuesday, Obama condemned the Rev. Jeremiah Wright's shocking verbal assaults against the U.S. dating back to 2001.

But in April of last year, Obama was quick to demand Imus' ouster for making a racially insensitive remark.

“There’s nobody on my staff who would still be working for me if they made a comment like that about anybody of any ethnic group. And I would hope that NBC ends up having that same attitude,” Obama told ABC News in an April 11 interview demanding Imus' resignation.

Obama told ABC in the interview he would never appear again on Imus’ show after Imus set off a firestorm of outrage when he called members of the women’s basketball team at Rutgers University “nappy-headed hos” on his popular morning talk show.

“He didn’t just cross the line,” Obama raged then. “He fed into some of the worst stereotypes that my two young daughters are having to deal with today in America.”

Obama has downplayed Wright for Wright's insensitive remarks, saying he has done good work with the poor and AIDS victims. Yet Obama did not afford the same respect to Imus, who has devoted considerable energy to helping children with cancer, wounded war veterans, and others.

Obama's pastor has blamed the government for HIV, cast the country as institutionally racist, and said God should damn the United States.

But Obama, who Fox recalled has had a 20-year relationship with Wright, claimed in his speech Tuesday that he had no idea Wright had ever expressed such incendiary remarks.

When some of Wright’s remarks were publicized last year, Obama rescinded an invitation for Wright to speak at his Feb. 10, 2007, presidential announcement, but had failed to fully address the matter until Tuesday's speech.

When Fox News asked about the different responses to his pastor and to Imus, Obama spokesman Tommy Vietor questioned the premise of the comparison and defended Obama’s response in each case. “He spoke out both times, so it’s entirely consistent,” he told Foxnews.com Tuesday. While Obama didn’t condemn Wright’s views outright until last Friday, Vietor said Obama had started putting the issue to rest long before now.

“He denounced specific comments months ago and he gave a thoughtful speech today,” Vietor told Fox News Tuesday.

Was probably even a dealer which is why he supports a minimum wage street dealer subsidy.

Forget evidence, let's just assert a bunch of crap. Bush used cocaine (FACT).

Obama snorted cocaine and smoked enough 'pot' to call himself a "pothead". It was one of Obama high school friends that said he sold it. And who didn't? You had a baggie and someone wanted some so for $20, you shared. Right? Makes you a dealer doesn't it? Just like Obama never heard his racist pastor be a racist pastor;(Oh wait, that was Friday. On Tuesday he admitted to hearing his racist pastor. My bad), let us read Obama's own words.

Passages taken from his book.

"Junkie. Pothead. That's where I'd been headed: the final, fatal role of the young would-be black man. . . . I got high [to] push questions of who I was out of my mind."

....In the book, Obama acknowledges that he used cocaine as a high school student but rejected heroin. "Pot had helped, and booze; maybe a little blow when you could afford it. Not smack, though," he says.

Called himself a junkie. What exactly is the definition of a junkie?
Hummmmm....
junk·ie also junk·y (jngk)
n. pl. junk·ies Slang
1. A narcotics addict, especially one using heroin.

Freudian slip perhaps?:lol: :lol:

More for Maxb49 to chew on....

Why do you think Barack supports this legislation? Could it be that he is a sympathizing drug dealer, same as he is a sympathizing closet muslim?

Barack Obama's Meth Menace (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/maia-szalavitz/barack-obamas-meth-menac_b_36706.html) The source is HuffPo which makes it even more delicious.


Search your inner feelings Maxb49.

The almighty Obama, I mean Jesus Christ, er, no Obama, will save your soul.

Obama snorted cocaine and smoked enough 'pot' to call himself a "pothead". It was one of Obama high school friends that said he sold it. And who didn't? You had a baggie and someone wanted some so for $20, you shared. Right? Makes you a dealer doesn't it? Just like Obama never heard his racist pastor be a racist pastor;(Oh wait, that was Friday. On Tuesday he admitted to hearing his racist pastor. My bad), let us read Obama's own words.

Passages taken from his book.

"Junkie. Pothead. That's where I'd been headed: the final, fatal role of the young would-be black man. . . . I got high [to] push questions of who I was out of my mind."

....In the book, Obama acknowledges that he used cocaine as a high school student but rejected heroin. "Pot had helped, and booze; maybe a little blow when you could afford it. Not smack, though," he says.

Called himself a junkie. What exactly is the definition of a junkie?
Hummmmm....
junk·ie also junk·y (jngk)
n. pl. junk·ies Slang
1. A narcotics addict, especially one using heroin.

Freudian slip perhaps?:lol: :lol:
I believe that deserves an *owned*

Is Barack Hussein Obama a racist?
I'll let you decide.....

"I ceased to advertise my mother's race at the age of 12 or 13, when I began to suspect that by doing so I was ingratiating myself to whites"
- Obama's book "Dreams from My Father"

"I found a solace in nursing a pervasive sense of grievance and animosity against my mother's race"
- Obama's book "Dreams from My Father"

"I never emulate white men and brown men whose fates didn't speak to my own. It was into my father's image, the black man, the son of Africa, that I'd packed all the I sought in myself"
- Obama's book "Dreams from My Father"

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
And I really like this one...

"As segregated as Chicago was, as strained as race relations were, the success of the civil rights movement had at least created some overlap between communities, more room to maneuver for people like me. I could work in the black community as an organizer or a lawyer and still live in a high rise downtown. Or the other way around: I could work in a blue-chip law firm but live in the South Side and buy a big house, drive a nice car, make my donations to the NAACP, speak at local high schools.
Source: Dreams from My Father, by Barack Obama, p.254 Aug 1, 1996

Guess Rezko helped him make that decision easy! :lol:

If you think Obama is electable, wait for the 527 ads to smack America right across the face.

Let’s see. His Kenyan father abandons him at an early age yet he worships him because he is black.
His white mommy and grandma are thrown under the bus throughout the book. And yet he is not a racist.

Well I guess the troll has fled, Bryan. Liberals are like dogs - if you kick 'em hard enough, they run off with their tails between their legs.

He is welcome to have as much time to absorb and respond as he likes.
Once in a while it takes time to get a response from the DailyKos-sters to one of your queries.

I am sure he is busy producing arguments in front of the Supreme Court right now arguing our 2nd amendment rights that Obama will uphold.

To be fair, he hasn't been back on since last night so he is not ducking, hopefully he'll be reloading when he does, because right now, he is out of ammo.

I am sure he is busy producing arguments in front of the Supreme Court right now arguing our 2nd amendment rights that Obama will uphold.:lol:

Just from a strategy point, this is really fascinating.

Obama is in a political free fall right now. He's falling behind McCain and Hillary by double digits in most of the recent polls.

Yet he still is the likely nominee of the Democrats based on the delegates.
Hillary now will win Pennslyvania and then argue to the super delegates that only she can win against McCain since Obama has become such a liability.

Frankly, that's the purpose of the super delegates. To correct the decisions of the passionate and ignorant Democrat base and protect the long term interests of the party.

So now they can ignore the primary voters, support Hillary, and alienate and anger a large segment of their voters. And then, she'll probably lose to McCain.

Or they can support Obama, upset the other half of Hillary supporters, and then he's be crushed by McCain.

Maybe they can have a riot like they had in '68 just to make this story complete.

I was going to post something similar.

Here is an election the Dems should have won easily with the media beating on Bush for 7 years now but yet they are poised for another defeat.

It is going to get so ugly because there is not a positive outcome for the Dems.
Either way they go they lose.

They either put up a socialist female hated by half the country or they go with a social racist 'man of color' who carries so much baggage. (sorry for the uncle tom reference).

It is really so enjoyable to watch. I am giddy about the thrashing that is only beginning.

And I totally agree about the SuperDelegates roll but you are about to see a war within the Democrat party over race vs gender this country has never seen. Either way they lose. There is no dream team ticket. There is no winner. Both come out losers.

Sit back, get some popcorn and enjoy!

I was going to post something similar.

Here is an election the Dems should have won easily with the media beating on Bush for 7 years now but yet they are poised for another defeat.

It is going to get so ugly because there is not a positive outcome for the Dems.
Either way they go they lose.

They either put up a socialist female hated by half the country or they go with a social racist 'man of color' who carries so much baggage. (sorry for the uncle tom reference).

It is really so enjoyable to watch. I am giddy about the thrashing that is only beginning.

And I totally agree about the SuperDelegates roll but you are about to see a war within the Democrat party over race vs gender this country has never seen. Either way they lose. There is no dream team ticket. There is no winner. Both come out losers.

Sit back, get some popcorn and enjoy!And when all the dust settles, we're stuck with Insane McCain. The only losers in this election will be the American people, and this time it's guaranteed no matter who wins the election.

And when all the dust settles, we're stuck with Insane McCain. The only losers in this election will be the American people, and this time it's guaranteed no matter who wins the election.It is only 4 years. It really boils down to his VP choice as for how things are going to go.

He picks the right guy and we'll have another 8 years after McCain. And maybe get the House and Senate back after the lefties crucify the Dem leadership.

It is only 4 years. It really boils down to his VP choice as for how things are going to go.

He picks the right guy and we'll have another 8 years after McCain. And maybe get the House and Senate back after the lefties crucify the Dem leadership.Why do you think McCain will only rule us for 4 years?

But....but....Obama is the Messiah, and this is the second coming!!!

Attacking him is sacrilege!! You're all going to HELL!!! God bless the DNC, and the great profits; Marx, FDR and LBJ.

And when all the dust settles, we're stuck with Insane McCain. The only losers in this election will be the American people, and this time it's guaranteed no matter who wins the election.

And if he appoints two more Supreme Court justices like Roberts, cuts corporate taxes, strengthens and supports the military, and controls domestic spending... who loses?

He's made agreements with Democrats that I found offensive in the past. On those issues, that's clearly a negative. But at the same rate, that's also positive. He'll break with the party on issues when he disagrees. And when he believes in something, he'll fight like a mad dog. He's right more often than wrong, so if that means he's going to snap on big-spending Republicans or pacifists Liberals, we might see some positive things happen.

And if he appoints two more Supreme Court justices like Roberts, cuts corporate taxes, strengthens and supports the military, and controls domestic spending... who loses?

1) Homeland Security
2) Supreme Court nominees
3) Foreign policy
4) Whack a terrorist or two million.

All that matters to me.

if that means he's going to snap on big-spending Republicans or pacifists Liberals, we might see some positive things happen.

What is his track record on the spending thing? I have heard him giving lip service to being a fiscal conservative, but what is his track record?

McCain has given no indication that he will appoint justices like Roberts or Scalia. In fact, he's given the indication that he prefers the Sandra Day O'Connor type. Furthermore, he opposed Bush's tax cuts, for whatever reason, and that makes me queasy. He's willing to spend whatever it takes to keep us in Iraq for 100 years, so he's not exactly tight fisted budget-wise. And he's for shamnesty, so he'll pass something that turns us into Los Estados Unidos.

And he's a wacko nutjob.

I'll go ahead and say this up front......label me an extremist racist sexist right wing nutjob if you want, but this is my opinion.

Obama is only getting votes cause he's black. Hillary is only getting votes cause she's a woman. The DNC has no candidate worth two sh1ts. Obama is a muslim racist well educated idiot. (edumacation doesn't mean everything, billy boy showed us that) Sure, Bush's speeches are less than glamorous at times, but the man backs up what he says he's gonna do. He inherited a plate full of crap from billy boy, and dealt with it as best he could. The media has lambasted him since day one, relentlessly. The best comparison on the racist preacher was on the view today (no i don't watch that ever, but I was almost asleep on the couch and the remote was on the other side of the room so I saw some of it) Elizabeth Hasselbeck made a great point, which the black lady was quick to try to negate (whoopi is out sick) She said, Obama was one of the first to call for Imus to resign from his show for his nappy headed hoe's comment, and that he would never be part of anything with anyone who was racist or extremeist. He then gets connected to his preacher he is exactly that, a racist extremeist and vehemently defends him to no end. FLIP FLOP :q:q:q:q:q:q:q! Do as I say not as I do and I want to be president.

I'll be first to admit that McCain is a less than desirable candidate. I don't personally care for the man, and thing that if the Dems had a single decent candidate they would wipe our asses this year, but they don't. People will vote against hillary cause she's a dumb extremeist bitch, and against Obama cause he's a two timing liar racist. McCain is the cleanest of the group. I'd personally vote king george in for 4 more years if I could:D

McCain has given no indication that he will appoint justices like Roberts or Scalia. In fact, he's given the indication that he prefers the Sandra Day O'Connor type. Furthermore, he opposed Bush's tax cuts, for whatever reason, and that makes me queasy. He's willing to spend whatever it takes to keep us in Iraq for 100 years, so he's not exactly tight fisted budget-wise. And he's for shamnesty, so he'll pass something that turns us into Los Estados Unidos.
He has stated repeatedly that he will appoint judges like Roberts, specifically. And repeatedly has said that he will nominated TESTED and CONSISTENT judges, unlike Souter.

He opposed the Bush tax cut because he doesn't appear to be a strong supply-side economic proponent. This might means he doesn't necessarily recognize the "lower taxes always lead to increased revenue" economic model.
But he does support balanced budgets and reduced spending. And he also actively is promising to lower corporate income taxes if elected.

He has never said his goal was to stay in Iraq 100 years, regardless the cost. That's a foolish statement.

And the immigration is far more complicated than just calling it "Shamnesty." Regardless, he has formally and repeatedly explained that the bill he supported is not supported by the public because Washington has lost the trust of the American people. He now does support border protection and enforcement.

And he's a wacko nutjob.
http://badattitudes.com/MT/archives/GoEnglish_com_ThePotCallingTheKettleBlack.gif

...he [McCain] does support balanced budgets and reduced spending. And he also actively is promising to lower corporate income taxes if elected.

That is what I am most concerned with; his spending views. Iraq, I understand. We made a commitment, and we need to stick with it. The taxes thing isn't that big a deal as long as we keep the Bush tax cuts and don't increase taxes. I am mainly concerned with his views on domestic spending. While he says certian things on the campagin trail, I am more concerned with his actual record on that one.

...completely ignored his [Obama's] reaching out to whites who feel slighted by affirmative action.

Yeah, I noticed that. It was a nice change of pace from the Clintons, who would've just demonized anyone who criticized them.

We can't deny the race problem in the country and we're never going to get over this problem until we can come together and realize at the end of the day that we're all Americans and in the same boat.


Actually, "coming together" is not the solution and is just a mindless platitude. We can't fix these race issues until we can have an honest debate about it and deal with reality, not propaganda. We can't have that debate when people like Al Sharpton, Jesse Jackson and Jeremiah Wright set the terms for the debate.


Obama wasn't the guy playing the race thing. He's a black candidate, not The Black Candidate. I don't even blame the race thing on the Republicans, this was another dirty Clinton trick.

Actually, Obama was playin the race card. He was doin the same thing in his speech that Sharpton and Jackson do; mischaracterize the black community as victims due to the legacy of slavery. Then Obama used that to justify Wright's bullsh1t, and his own tolerance of that crap.

Some excerpts from:
http://www.ontheissues.org/Economic/John_McCain_Budget_+_Economy.htm


Q: Have Republicans forgotten how to control spending?

McCain: Absolutely. We let spending lurch completely out of control. As president of the United States, I'd take an old veto pen that Ronald Reagan gave me, and I'd veto every single pork barrel bill that comes across my desk. And we've got to stop it and stop it now. I look forward to it.

Q: How will you be different, in any way, from Pres. Bush?

McCain: I would have vetoed spending bill after spending bill after pork-barrel project after pork-barrel project, in the tradition of President Reagan. The first pork-barrel bill that crosses my desk, I'm going to veto it and make the authors of those pork-barrel items famous all over America. We're going to stop it.

Q: What specific programs would you cut if you were president?

McCain: Line-item veto is the best tool. We need it very badly.

McCain would “maintain status” on spending for:
*AIDS programs
* Environmental programs
* Foreign aid
* Housing projects
* Job training programs
* Medicaid & Medicare
* Student loan programs

McCain would “slightly increase” spending for:
*Education (K-12)
* Law enforcement
* Military & Veterans Benefits
* Border Control

McCain would “slightly decrease” spending for:
* NASA
* Welfare

McCain would eliminate spending for:
* Arts funding

McCain supports amending the US Constitution to require an annual balanced federal budget.

McCain adopted the Republican Main Street Partnership issue stance:

What we offer today are not the precise spending decisions of a given year's budget; rather, we call upon the Congress and the nation to adopt the following guidelines for our fiscal policy over the next decade. This long-term blueprint is essential for maintaining both the immediate public-sector goal of balancing the budget and the private-sector goal of a healthy economy. This can be achieved through the following steps:

* A commitment to maintaining and enforcing existing spending caps in the future, when such discipline becomes more difficult to achieve;
* A careful and considerate re-definition of the federal role in society (what should be the legitimate and proper role of the federal government in the twenty-first century, and how do we prioritize competing demands?); and
* An evaluation of implementing tax cuts based on their social fairness.

Source: Republican Main St. Partnership Issue Paper: Fiscal Policy 98-RMSP5 on Sep 9, 1998

I would bet the farm that McCain will pick Joe Liberman for his vice president.
I really don't think Mc ACain can beat Hillary.
As for the black dude, he is yesterday's news.
If the dems expect to win the white house, they best concentrate in getting Hillary elected, rather than hash over old news concerning the black dude.
Concentrating on the obama campaign is only going to cause more desention in the democratic party.
He is carrying far to much unwanted baggage, and can't possibly expect the voters to belive anything he says in the future.
Bob.

See heres the thing about Oblahma. The democrats don't care what he did as long as they get their change. There is no changing the mind of a liberal voter once its made up.


Okay now we know what McCaint stood for in '98, show us something from 2008.

I would bet the farm that McCain will pick Joe Liberman for his vice president.Tom Ridge is my bet. But I think Lieberman will get a cabinet post. Secretary of State would be my guess.

I would bet the farm that McCain will pick Joe Liberman for his vice president.
No. He's said this, Lieberman has also confirmed this. Other than foreign policy, they have little in common.

Ridge is possible, but he's "pro-chocie" so some pundits think that he'll avoid that choice.

I really don't think Mc ACain can beat Hillary.
The polling says otherwise. Clinton has extremely high negatives.
Many people simply do not want to support the Bush/Clinton cycle since 1980.
And if she "steals" the nomination, many Obama supporters simply won't vote. The more sheep-like who simply like the energy of Obama will likely vote for McCain.

As for the black dude, he is yesterday's news.
That "Black dude" is well ahead in the delegate count and is quite likely to win the party nomination. If he doesn't, it'll rip the Democrat party in two.

If the dems expect to win the white house, they best concentrate in getting Hillary elected, rather than hash over old news concerning the black dude. Concentrating on the obama campaign is only going to cause more desention in the democratic party.
Too late.

He is carrying far to much unwanted baggage, and can't possibly expect the voters to belive anything he says in the future.
Bob.
Well, if you think Hillary is void of any "unwanted baggage" you're sorely mistaken. But it's nearly impossible for Hillary to go to the convention with a delegate lead. Obama has won the popular vote here.

The only way Hillary can win the nomination is if the Super Delegates defy the popular vote and award it to Hillary. No matter what they do, their going to piss at least 30% of their voters off.

McCain is a wacko and a liberal. He is unqualified to be President.

McCain is a wacko and a liberal. He is unqualified to be President.

If McCain is a "wacko" and "liberal", what would that make Hillary and Barack?

If McCain is a "wacko" and "liberal", what would that make Hillary and Barack?

socialist

Just for you Monster... Politics, racism and religion, all in one:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=khuu-RhOBDU

Yes, the pastor is for real.

Just for you Monster... Politics, racism and religion, all in one:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=khuu-RhOBDU

Yes, the pastor is for real.

That is funny!!!!

Now, when you motorboat a nice pair of D-size twins, you do so in support of Obama!


EDIT: Just listen to that, a lot of truth in that, especially later on (at least in regards to the black community as a whole)..
Just make sure you don't have the volume too loud

Just for you Monster...

Nice Find.

Couldn't help to not hear all the stomping and cheering.

I think I am going to switch churches. Looks like I'm missing all the fun.:D

Money Quote:

"...and I don't have to compromise with not one of you nappy head people..."

:headbang:

egg shell soup and pigon dropping gravy :)

The comment of mexicans running everything is priceless :)

Just for you Monster... Politics, racism and religion, all in one:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=khuu-RhOBDU

Yes, the pastor is for real.

:eek: :eek: :eek:

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/ThomasSowell/2008/03/19/obamas_speech

Obama's Speech
By Thomas Sowell
Wednesday, March 19, 2008

Did Senator Barack Obama's speech in Philadelphia convince people that he is still a viable candidate to be President of the United States, despite the adverse reactions to statements by his pastor, Jeremiah Wright?

The polls and the primaries will answer that question.

The great unasked question for Senator Obama is the question that was asked about President Nixon during the Watergate scandal; What did he know and when did he know it?

Although Senator Obama would now have us believe that he is shocked, shocked, at what Jeremiah Wright said, that he was not in the church when pastor Wright said those things from the pulpit, this still leaves the question of why he disinvited Wright from the event at which he announced his candidacy for the Democratic Party's presidential nomination a year ago.

Either Barack Obama or his staff must have known then that Jeremiah Wright was not someone whom they wanted to expose to the media and to the media scrutiny to which that could lead.

Why not, if it is only now that Senator Obama is learning for the first time, to his surprise, what kinds of things Jeremiah Wright has been saying and doing?

No one had to be in church the day Wright made his inflammatory and obscene remarks to know about them.

The cable news journalists who are playing the tapes of those sermons were not there. The tapes were on sale in the church itself. Obama knew that because he had bought one or more of those tapes.

But even if there were no tapes, and even if Obama never heard from other members of the church what their pastor was saying, he spent 20 years in that church, not just as an ordinary member but also as someone who once donated $20,000 to the church.

There was no way that he didn't know about Jeremiah Wright's anti-American and racist diatribes from the pulpit.

Someone once said that a con man's job is not to convince skeptics but to enable people to continue to believe what they already want to believe.

Accordingly, Obama's Philadelphia speech -- a theatrical masterpiece -- will probably reassure most Democrats and some other Obama supporters. They will undoubtedly say that we should now "move on," even though many Democrats have still not yet moved on from George W. Bush's 2000 election victory.

Like the Soviet show trials during their 1930s purges, Obama's speech was not supposed to convince critics but to reassure supporters and fellow-travelers, in order to keep the "useful idiots" useful.

Best-selling author Shelby Steele's recent book on Barack Obama ("A Bound Man") has valuable insights into both the man and the circumstances facing many other blacks -- especially those who were never part of the black ghetto culture but who feel a need to identify with it for either personal, political or financial reasons.

Like religious converts who become more Catholic than the Pope, such people often become blacker-than-thou. For whatever reason, Barack Obama chose a black extremist church decades ago -- even though there was no shortage of very different churches, both black and white -- in Chicago.

Some say that he was trying to earn credibility on the ghetto streets, to facilitate his work as a community activist or for his political career. We may never know why.

But now that Barack Obama is running for a presidential nomination, he is doing so on a radically different basis, as a post-racial candidate uniquely prepared to bring us all together.

Yet the past continues to follow him, despite his attempts to bury it and the mainstream media's attempts to ignore it or apologize for it.

Shelby Steele depicts Barack Obama as a man without real convictions, "an iconic figure who neglected to become himself."

Senator Obama has been at his best as an icon, able with his command of words to meet other people's psychic needs, including a need to dispel white guilt by supporting his candidacy.

But President of the United States, in a time of national danger, under a looming threat of nuclear terrorism? No.

THROW GRANDMA UNDER THE BUS
by Ann Coulter
March 19, 2008

Obama gave a nice speech, except for everything he said about race. He apparently believes we're not talking enough about race. This is like hearing Britney Spears say we're not talking enough about pop-tarts with substance-abuse problems.

By now, the country has spent more time talking about race than John Kerry has talked about Vietnam, John McCain has talked about being a POW, John Edwards has talked about his dead son, and Al Franken has talked about his USO tours.

But the "post-racial candidate" thinks we need to talk yet more about race. How much more? I had had my fill by around 1974. How long must we all marinate in the angry resentment of black people?

As an authentic post-racial American, I will not patronize blacks by pretending Obama's pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, is anything other than a raving racist loon. If a white pastor had said what Rev. Wright said -- not about black people, but literally, the exact same things -- I think we'd notice that he's crazier than Ward Churchill and David Duke's love child. (Indeed, both Churchill and the Rev. Wright referred to the attacks of 9/11 as the chickens coming "home to roost.")

Imagine a white pastor saying: "Racism is the American way. Racism is how this country was founded, and how this country is still run. ... We believe in white supremacy and black inferiority. And believe it more than we believe in God."

Imagine a white pastor calling Condoleezza Rice, "Condoskeezza Rice."

Imagine a white pastor saying: "No, no, no, God damn America -- that's in the Bible for killing innocent people! God damn America for treating our citizens as less than human! God damn America for as long as she acts like she is God and she is supreme!"

We treat blacks like children, constantly talking about their temper tantrums right in front of them with airy phrases about black anger. I will not pat blacks on the head and say, "Isn't that cute?" As a post-racial American, I do not believe "the legacy of slavery" gives black people the right to be permanently ill-mannered.

Obama tried to justify Wright's deranged rants by explaining that "legalized discrimination" is the "reality in which Rev. Wright and other African-Americans of his generation grew up." He said that a "lack of economic opportunity among black men, and the shame and frustration that came from not being able to provide for one's family, contributed to the erosion of black families."

That may accurately describe the libretto of "Porgy and Bess," but it has no connection to reality. By Rev. Wright's own account, he was 12 years old and was attending an integrated school in Philadelphia when Brown v. Board of Education was announced, ending "separate but equal" schooling.

Meanwhile, at least since the Supreme Court's decision in University of California v. Bakke in 1978 -- and obviously long before that, or there wouldn't have been a case or controversy for the court to consider -- it has been legal for the government to discriminate against whites on the basis of their race.

Consequently, any white person 30 years old or younger has lived, since the day he was born, in an America where it is legal to discriminate against white people. In many cases it's not just legal, but mandatory, for example, in education, in hiring and in Academy Award nominations.

So for half of Rev. Wright's 66 years, discrimination against blacks was legal -- though he never experienced it personally because it existed in a part of the country where he did not live. For the second half of Wright's life, discrimination against whites was legal throughout the land.

Discrimination has become so openly accepted that -- in a speech meant to tamp down his association with a black racist -- Obama felt perfectly comfortable throwing his white grandmother under the bus. He used her as the white racist counterpart to his black racist "old uncle," Rev. Wright.

First of all, Wright is not Obama's uncle. The only reason we indulge crazy uncles is that everyone understands that people don't choose their relatives the way they choose, for example, their pastors and mentors. No one quarrels with the idea that you can't be expected to publicly denounce your blood relatives.

But Wright is not a relative of Obama's at all. Yet Obama cravenly compared Wright's racist invective to his actual grandmother, who "once confessed her fear of black men who passed by her on the street, and who on more than one occasion has uttered racial or ethnic stereotypes that made me cringe."

Rev. Wright accuses white people of inventing AIDS to kill black men, but Obama's grandmother -- who raised him, cooked his food, tucked him in at night, and paid for his clothes and books and private school -- has expressed the same feelings about passing black men on the street that Jesse Jackson has.

Unlike his "old uncle" -- who is not his uncle -- Obama had no excuses for his grandmother. Obama's grandmother never felt the lash of discrimination! Crazy grandma doesn't get the same pass as the crazy uncle; she's white. Denounce the racist!

Fine. Can we move on now?

No, of course, not. It never ends. To be fair, Obama hinted that we might have one way out: If we elect him president, then maybe, just maybe, we can stop talking about race.

COPYRIGHT 2008 ANN COULTER

Just for you Monster... Politics, racism and religion, all in one:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=khuu-RhOBDU

Yes, the pastor is for real.

This guy is a black Sam Kinison. :D He made me crack up. :D AAHHH...AAHHH....MAC DADDY....AAHHH :D

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?pageId=59226

Posted: March 18, 2008
by David Limbaugh

The racist, anti-American rantings of Jeremiah Wright, Barack Obama's spiritual mentor and pastor of the church Obama attended for 20 years, raise many red flags about the Democrat's supposedly best selling point: his unique capability for healing societal divisions.

Considering our deep-seated societal disagreements over cultural and political issues, promises by politicians to end societal divisiveness are dubious enough on their face. But when the promiser's personal history contradicts his promises, even further scrutiny is required.

It's difficult to gauge Obama's genuineness in standing on this kind of platform because he has such a short political history to evaluate. Stories have been written, pointing to his extreme liberalism and scant record of reaching across the aisle, which cast serious doubt on his unifying claims. Until now, his lofty speeches have obscured these inconsistencies.

But with reports of his pastor saying "blacks should not sing God bless America, but G-d d--- America," and, concerning the 9/11 attacks, America's "chickens are coming home to roost," the burden of proof has now shifted to Obama. He must demonstrate not only that his claims to offer healing are sincere, but also that he does not actually share his pastor's and, manifestly, his congregation's deeply disturbing views on race and America.

What can Obama say to meet this burden of proof?

Before this story heated up beyond the mainstream media's ability to suppress it, Obama casually dismissed the pastor's tirades merely as "controversial" remarks – as if they had some legitimacy and were not outright indefensible but in any event should not be taken too seriously. Now he appears to be saying he was unaware of the offensive statements. But if Obama's deepest passion in life is to heal, wouldn't it follow that he would make it his business to know – taking the willing suspension of disbelief here to new heights – what driving passions stir his pastor?

We must recognize the double standard liberals typically apply to immunize themselves from accountability for bigotry. When the remotest connection can be inferred between a conservative and a bigoted supporter, there is always hell to pay. No excuses are permitted. Guilt attaches – not even by so much as true association but by passive receipt of an endorsement from anyone the left believes to have bigoted views.

Liberals, on the other hand, can be overtly racist toward conservative blacks like Condoleezza Rice and Clarence Thomas and earn accolades rather than condemnation. And in Obama's case, we have more than passive receipt of an endorsement. We have more than guilt by casual association.

Obama chose this pastor and picked this church, and has been attending for two decades, presumably because he embraced its message and its approach. His wife's curious statements about America, such as when she told the New Yorker that our country is "downright mean," provide further grounds for our skepticism. It will not do for Obama to claim he was unaware of Wright's racism and anti-Americanism.

A brief review of the Wright videos shows that his race-driven spirit was one of the animating forces in that church. We didn't see congregants spilling toward the exits in protest but instead gesturing in participatory approval. It stretches credulity to deny that such vitriol was central to Wright's worldview, or to suggest that Obama was unaware that it was. It is thus silly to quibble over the irrelevant distraction of whether Obama happened to be in attendance at this or that particular hate exhibition.

Viewing all this in a light most favorable to Obama, if he chose this church for political expedience rather than spiritual nourishment, he must tell us what principles he wouldn't compromise in furtherance of his ambitions. If he somehow clears that hurdle, he must next explain how he can possibly deliver on his promises to unite us publicly en route to a post-racial and post-partisan society when he's obviously willing privately to benefit from the energy of divisiveness and racism. This takes the ends-justifies-the-means approach to new extremes.

Democrats, including Clinton supporters, are quick to defend Obama because they realize he is still their likely nominee and they can't afford this issue to have legs into the general election campaign. They insist we should look at "the issues" rather than this side story. Besides, Obama has denounced the pastor's remarks.

The denunciation is hollow, given Obama's long voluntary history with this pastor. And the Democrats' attitude toward character has always been specious. They want it to be an issue only when they are claiming Republicans lack character – as with the falsely alleged lies of Bush, Cheney and Rumsfeld.

We all know that one's character cannot be separated from his actions, as the latter springs from the former. Voters must satisfy themselves about a candidate's character since his character will have an impact on their lives.

Instead of giving us answers to supplement our negligible knowledge of his character and history, Obama has given us only more questions – many alarming questions.

http://www.worldnetdaily.com/index.php?pageId=59504

Posted: March 20, 2008
by David Limbaugh

Barack Obama is nothing if not smooth. He seamlessly turned a would-be apology over his pastor's racism into an indictment against society's racism.

It wasn't, "Jeremiah Wright was wrong, and I was wrong for going to his church for 20 years despite his apparently unforgiving spirit, his racist and anti-American utterances, and his vulgarity, including taking the Lord's name in vain from his very pulpit – the one venue above all on God's sacred planet that such irreverence is inalterably forbidden. No matter what racial injustices have been perpetrated over the years by mankind toward mankind, they are never an excuse for disrespecting God, and especially in His house."

Instead, Obama said, essentially, "I reject many of Rev. Wright's remarks as divisive and perhaps even unfairly critical of America, but you have to admit, he has a point."

You can talk all you want to about Obama's "audacity of hope" theme, but the only audacity I heard in his speech was his lecturing Americans on their racism instead of explaining his longtime intimate relationship with Wright.

Obama's forte is not, as many have suggested, waxing eloquent while saying nothing. His real gift is saying one thing while appearing to say the opposite, so mellifluously and disarmingly that audiences shake their heads in affirmation of the very proposition they oppose. Without changing their minds, they believe they have agreed with him. Amazing – and scary.

In his speech, he needed to condemn and distance himself from his pastor. And he did – sort of. But before he was finished, he had virtually excused his pastor's statements and given us a history lesson in precisely why resentments giving rise to such statements came about – and were justified. In other words, "Sure, Pastor Wright sometimes crossed the line, but don't let his tone obscure the underlying message: Racism is still pervasive in this country, which hasn't come close to making amends for its shameful past."

Reasonable people can debate the extent of the continued existence and effects of racism in both directions today, but in the meantime, we should recognize that Obama ducked the questions his speech was purportedly crafted to answer.

Assuming that not everyone listening to the speech was so mesmerized by Obama's intoxicating spell of lofty rhetoric that they forgot its purpose, Obama is not yet out of the woods on this issue. And that's his own fault.

He needed to speak directly, but he obfuscated with cleverly concealed contradictions and evasions. He said his campaign presents a powerful message of unity, but his words stoked racial unease and divisiveness. While paying lip service to our national motto, "Out of Many, One," he couldn't quit talking about people in terms of their color and ethnicity.

He scolded us for our racism, but he:


encouraged us to keep race-consciousness at the very forefront of our national psyche;



sloppily conflated Pastor Wright's manifest racism and anti-Americanism with his white grandmother's stereotypical remarks and Democrat Geraldine Ferraro's political observation about the effect of Obama's
race on his electability; and



didn't point his accusing finger at the race-hustlers of our time, who fan the flames of racial resentment and hostility.

Rather, Obama fed into feelings of racial distrust by playing to his leftist base and wrongly castigating Reaganism and conservative commentators for their alleged racism. He legitimized the noxious notion that conservative opposition to welfare and affirmative action are born of racism by saying we must "realize that your dreams do not have to come at the expense of my dreams." He implied that conservative resistance to throwing endless money at public education is rooted in a "cynicism that tells us that these kids can't learn, that those kids who don't look like us are somebody else's problem." These are misguided and damaging words.

Conservatives promote school choice precisely because they want to deliver disadvantaged children from their confinement in inner-city schools. Conservative opposition to affirmative action and unbridled welfare is not based on greed, selfishness or racism but on a philosophical difference over how best to solve problems while preserving the dignity of all individual human beings.

It is certainly Obama's prerogative to make his campaign about race while saying it transcends it. It is his right to duck the question of his intimate connection to Wright, and he may take the offensive by deftly turning the charges of racism back on conservatives.

But it is up to the voters to evaluate his cultural analysis, his evasiveness and the wisdom of his proposed big-government solutions for our problems. I am unconvinced that his eloquence has successfully masked the deep problems that have begun to haunt his driving presidential ambitions.

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/WalterEWilliams/2008/03/26/is_obama_ready_for_america

Is Obama Ready For America?
By Walter E. Williams
Wednesday, March 26, 2008

Some pundits ask whether America is ready for Obama. The much more important question is whether Obama is ready for America and even more important is whether black people can afford Obama. Let's look at it in the context of a historical tidbit.

In 1947, Jackie Robinson, signing a contract with the Brooklyn Dodgers, broke the color barrier in major league baseball. He encountered open racist taunts and slurs from fans, opposing team players and even some players on his own team. Despite that, his first year batting average was .297. He led the National League in stolen bases and won the first-ever Rookie of the Year Award. Without question, Jackie Robinson was an exceptional player. There's no sense of justice that should require that a player be as good as Jackie Robinson in order to be a rookie in the major leagues but the hard fact of the matter, as a first black player, he had to be.

In 1947, black people could not afford a stubble bum baseball player. By contrast, today black people can afford stubble bum black baseball players. The simple reason is that as a result of the excellence of Jackie Robinson, as well those who immediately followed him such as Satchel Paige, Don Newcombe, Larry Doby and Roy Campanella, there's no one in his right mind, who might watch the incompetence of a particular black player, who can say, "Those blacks can't play baseball." Whether we like it or not, whether for good reason or bad reason, people make stereotypes and stereotypes can have effects.

For the nation and for black people, the first black president should be the caliber of a Jackie Robinson and Barack Obama is not. Barack Obama has charisma and charm but in terms of character, values and understanding, he is no Jackie Robinson. By now, many Americans have heard the racist and anti-American tirades of Obama's minister and spiritual counselor. There's no way that Obama could have been a 20-year member of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright's church and not been aware of his statements.

Wright's racist and anti-American ideas are by no means unique. They are the ideas of many leftist professors and taught to our young people. The basic difference between Sen. Obama, Wright and leftist professors is simply a matter of style and language. His Philadelphia speech demonstrated his clever style where he merely changed the subject. The controversy was not about race. It was about his longtime association with such a hatemonger and whether he shared the Reverend's vision.

Obama's success is truly a remarkable commentary on the goodness of Americans and how far we've come in resolving matters of race. I'm 72 years old. For almost all of my life, a black having a real chance at becoming the president of the United States was at best a pipe dream. Obama has convincingly won primaries in states with insignificant black populations. As such, it further confirms what I've often said: The civil rights struggle in America is over and it's won. At one time black Americans did not have the constitutional guarantees enjoyed by white Americans; now we do. The fact that the civil rights struggle is over and won does not mean that there are not major problems confronting many members of the black community but they are not civil rights problems and have little or nothing to do with racial discrimination.

While not every single vestige of racial discrimination has disappeared, Obama and the Rev. Wright are absolutely wrong in suggesting that racial discrimination is anywhere near the major problem confronting a large segment of the black community. The major problems are: family breakdown, illegitimacy, fraudulent education and a high rate of criminality. To confront these problems, that are not the fault of the larger society, requires political courage and that's an attribute that Obama and most other politicians lack.

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/ThomasSowell/2008/03/26/the_audacity_of_rhetoric

The Audacity of Rhetoric
By Thomas Sowell
Wednesday, March 26, 2008

It is painful to watch defenders of Barack Obama tying themselves into knots trying to evade the obvious.

Some are saying that Senator Obama cannot be held responsible for what his pastor, Jeremiah Wright, said. In their version of events, Barack Obama just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time -- and a bunch of mean-spirited people are trying to make something out of it.

It makes a good story, but it won't stand up under scrutiny.

Barack Obama's own account of his life shows that he consciously sought out people on the far left fringe. In college, "I chose my friends carefully," he said in his first book, "Dreams From My Father."

These friends included "Marxist professors and structural feminists and punk rock performance poets" -- in Obama's own words -- as well as the "more politically active black students." He later visited a former member of the terrorist Weatherman underground, who endorsed him when he ran for state senator.

Obama didn't just happen to encounter Jeremiah Wright, who just happened to say some way out things. Jeremiah Wright is in the same mold as the kinds of people Barack Obama began seeking out in college -- members of the left, anti-American counter-culture.

In Shelby Steele's brilliantly insightful book about Barack Obama -- "A Bound Man" -- it is painfully clear that Obama was one of those people seeking a racial identity that he had never really experienced in growing up in a white world. He was trying to become a convert to blackness, as it were -- and, like many converts, he went overboard.

Nor has Obama changed in recent years. His voting record in the U.S. Senate is the furthest left of any Senator. There is a remarkable consistency in what Barack Obama has done over the years, despite inconsistencies in what he says.

The irony is that Obama's sudden rise politically to the level of being the leading contender for his party's presidential nomination has required him to project an entirely different persona, that of a post-racial leader who can heal divisiveness and bring us all together.

The ease with which he has accomplished this chameleon-like change, and entranced both white and black Democrats, is a tribute to the man's talent and a warning about his reliability.

There is no evidence that Obama ever sought to educate himself on the views of people on the other end of the political spectrum, much less reach out to them. He reached out from the left to the far left. That's bringing us all together?

Is "divisiveness" defined as disagreeing with the agenda of the left? Who on the left was ever called divisive by Obama before that became politically necessary in order to respond to revelations about Jeremiah Wright?

One sign of Obama's verbal virtuosity was his equating a passing comment by his grandmother -- "a typical white person," he says -- with an organized campaign of public vilification of America in general and white America in particular, by Jeremiah Wright.

Since all things are the same, except for the differences, and different except for the similarities, it is always possible to make things look similar verbally, however different they are in the real world.

Among the many desperate gambits by defenders of Senator Obama and Jeremiah Wright is to say that Wright's words have a "resonance" in the black community.

There was a time when the Ku Klux Klan's words had a resonance among whites, not only in the South but in other states. Some people joined the KKK in order to advance their political careers. Did that make it OK? Is it all just a matter of whose ox is gored?

While many whites may be annoyed by Jeremiah Wright's words, a year from now most of them will probably have forgotten about him. But many blacks who absorb his toxic message can still be paying for it, big-time, for decades to come.

Why should young blacks be expected to work to meet educational standards, or even behavioral standards, if they believe the message that all their problems are caused by whites, that the deck is stacked against them? That is ultimately a message of hopelessness, however much audacity it may have.