OBAMA SPEECH IN FULL: A MORE PERFECT UNION

[MandR 0]

Obama puts his Grandmother who is family on the same page as he does Reverend Wright as per his comment in his speech.

"I can no more disown him that I can my white Grandmother" Oh Lord.... whats up with that ?????

Just shows me even more why I don't want him running this country

Edited March 18, 2008 by MandR

[garya505 2]

Obama puts his Grandmother who is family on the same page as he does Reverend Wright as per his comment in his speech.

"I can no more disown him that I can my white Grandmother" Oh Lord.... whats up with that ?????

Just shows me even more why I don't want him running this country

That's right, Obama is pretty tight with a guy who claims the US government gives drugs to black communities and started the HIV epidemic, ....

[kaydee457 13]

If that's true - then we should be a bit less concerned with candidates associations and things their supporters and put the focus on what they actually stand for.

I've always been a believer in the idea that we get the government we deserve - and nowhere is that more true than in the fact that we've been living for 8 years under a guy who passes himself off as a fool.

The current crop of candidates are simply career politicians trying to be all things to all people. Even so cold-shouldering members of the public is probably the most elitist thing you can do.

I'm not concerned at all about candidates casual associations and things their supporters or endorsers say. But Wright is a man who was Obama's pastor for 20 years, and a man who Obama took the title of his book from. By all accounts, Wright is a man who Obama sees as a spiritual and community leader. Wright is a man who Obama previously admitted to that he might have to distance himself from, so he knew all along about the kind of hate speech Wright spews.

We all know what Obama says he stands for. We're interested to know what he really stands for, and how he would act as President. When we see stuff like this we wonder about that.

I don't disagree - but wondering about it doesn't really give you a whole lot, which is why I wonder why the man isn't judged more on his stated positions and voting record. That's really all there is to go on than trying to psycho-analyse the man through the media - because there really is no answer to those questions.

I think the point would be to "psycho-analyze" to the point that you draw votes away from the man. Create doubts. Yet another Rovian tactic, to give it a more current label.

Sounds like any tactic you don't like the result of is "Rovian".

Could be Clintonian, Obaman, etc, as I date relatively in italics gary.

My point would be to run a campaign on issues and not petty politics. Too much to ask of the gamers, right?

This matter concerns the man's character, and judgement which are very important attributes to be examined of a candidate. Who, whom you associate with, what organizations you belong to, etc. are all fair game to evaluate the man.

The problem here is that Americans are shocked by all this simply because they knew nothing about Obama but clamored to him in a popular movement rooted mostly in superficiality.

The man was never properly vetted by the media early on in the primary process.

[garya505 2]

Obama's error in judgement is this. He liked Wright's good work and he liked his preaching so much that he was willing to overlook the bad side - the anger and hateful words Wright used in his sermons, or as he put it, Wright's "offending sermons about America -- to simplify and stereotype and amplify the negative to the point that it distorts reality". Obama now admits that he had heard some of the "controversial" remarks while sitting in the pews. Obama could have, and should have, found another pastor that did good work without resorting to the sort of stuff Wright did. Failing that, he should have distanced himself earlier, saying that despite Wright's good work in the community, he had found out the bad side of him, the negativity and anger-filled rants, and decided to look elsewhere for his spirtual needs. He could have easily demontrated that he believes what he says about unity. Certainly there are other churches that could have filled that role for Obama.

[Trompe le Monde 1,107]

My guess is that Obama tells the truth when he wasn't at church when those sermons were bad. I don't see him as a particularly religious man and doubt he was in the pews every Sunday and only was a parishioner there because he had to belong to a "black church" to be taken seriously in the 13th District.

[garya505 2]

My guess is that Obama tells the truth when he wasn't at church when those sermons were bad. I don't see him as a particularly religious man and doubt he was in the pews every Sunday and only was a parishioner there because he had to belong to a "black church" to be taken seriously in the 13th District.

Obama:

"Did I know him to be an occasionally fierce critic of American domestic and foreign policy? Of course. Did I ever hear him make remarks that could be considered controversial while I sat in church? Yes. Did I strongly disagree with many of his political views? Absolutely – just as I’m sure many of you have heard remarks from your pastors, priests, or rabbis with which you strongly disagreed."

[Trompe le Monde 1,107]

My point is - it was politically expedient to belong to this church when he was running for the state legislature

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Obama's error in judgement is this. He liked Wright's good work and he liked his preaching so much that he was willing to overlook the bad side - the anger and hateful words Wright used in his sermons, or as he put it, Wright's "offending sermons about America -- to simplify and stereotype and amplify the negative to the point that it distorts reality". Obama now admits that he had heard some of the "controversial" remarks while sitting in the pews. Obama could have, and should have, found another pastor that did good work without resorting to the sort of stuff Wright did. Failing that, he should have distanced himself earlier, saying that despite Wright's good work in the community, he had found out the bad side of him, the negativity and anger-filled rants, and decided to look elsewhere for his spirtual needs. He could have easily demontrated that he believes what he says about unity. Certainly there are other churches that could have filled that role for Obama.

Well the focus so far has been specifically on Wright - there hasn't been much discussion of the Liberation Theology that he actually represents. Wright isn't a particularly unique individual when it comes to this - and I'm not sure that his comments can be pulled up for scrutiny without giving at least some consideration to the ideological movement behind them.

[MandR 0]

The man flip flops, is wishy-woshy with just about everything he says and LIES !!!!!

People are following Obama for what he talks, but they have no clue who he really is. They think a man who cannot disown Wright can lead them into the Garden of Eden. He talks the talk and that all folks.

PLEASE...... people

WAKE UP !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! smell the roses, do some reasearch on this guy before you send him to the Oval office.

Edited March 19, 2008 by MandR

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

With that much public, media and political scrutiny on what you say - I think its near impossible for any candidate to talk about anything remotely controversial in their past without being perceived as a liar.

[Nessa 23]

.

[Don_Joy's Prince 0]

I agree, this man was not vetted properly. Any man that belongs to a church 20 years that teaches its members the things that this one does, cannot be our President.

There is only two ways to look at it:

1. He goes to this church, idolizes this man enough to put him on his spiritual leadership counsel, so that he must believe in what he says. In which case we cannot allow him to be President.

or

2. He belongs to the church for the political connections and expediency. Meaning that he is a fake and a fraud, with no real convictions except empower himself anyway he can. In which case this we cannot allow him to be President.

I watched every video that I could find and it was all the same. I would never belong to a church that allowed such things to be said about any race.

It was pure racism and hatred. I thought this was what we were trying to defeat, not empower.

[kaydee457 13]

Obama's error in judgement is this. He liked Wright's good work and he liked his preaching so much that he was willing to overlook the bad side - the anger and hateful words Wright used in his sermons, or as he put it, Wright's "offending sermons about America -- to simplify and stereotype and amplify the negative to the point that it distorts reality". Obama now admits that he had heard some of the "controversial" remarks while sitting in the pews. Obama could have, and should have, found another pastor that did good work without resorting to the sort of stuff Wright did. Failing that, he should have distanced himself earlier, saying that despite Wright's good work in the community, he had found out the bad side of him, the negativity and anger-filled rants, and decided to look elsewhere for his spirtual needs. He could have easily demontrated that he believes what he says about unity. Certainly there are other churches that could have filled that role for Obama.

Well the focus so far has been specifically on Wright - there hasn't been much discussion of the Liberation Theology that he actually represents. Wright isn't a particularly unique individual when it comes to this - and I'm not sure that his comments can be pulled up for scrutiny without giving at least some consideration to the ideological movement behind them.

I'm not sure what ideological movement you're talking about, however you're right in that this fellow Wright's not unique.

He follows in the footsteps, and parallels the likes of Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton and lesser notables of similar race baiting, and "black victimization" rhetoric used to separate the races rather than unify.

This is exactly what some senior blacks in the U.S. community have railed against for years, most notably Bill Cosby.

Bill postulates that it's counterproductive to continue a dialog of victimization, mostly not relevant in modern times, as a primary way to indoctrinate children into what it means to be a black child in the U.S.A.

It's certainly not hard to imagine black children on a regular basis, and at a very young age, being indoctrinated , or conditioned, by being told that they're on the losing end of the "dream" from the get-go.

In fact, subjecting children to such conditioning probably should be considered abuse.

It's not hard to understand why some blacks you casually encounter in life are hyper sensitive to race.

[Nessa 23]

.

[Marlita 0]

Obama puts his Grandmother who is family on the same page as he does Reverend Wright as per his comment in his speech.

"I can no more disown him that I can my white Grandmother" Oh Lord.... whats up with that ?????

Just shows me even more why I don't want him running this country

Whats wrong with that?

he's probably known Wright longer than his grandmother....she passed away. You don't have to be blood related to be family.

Obama puts his Grandmother who is family on the same page as he does Reverend Wright as per his comment in his speech.

"I can no more disown him that I can my white Grandmother" Oh Lord.... whats up with that ?????

Just shows me even more why I don't want him running this country

That's right, Obama is pretty tight with a guy who claims the US government gives drugs to black communities and started the HIV epidemic, ....

Well heck...they could have.