Obama's Pastor: "God Damn America"

[sirs]

You know, after I posted my response to Bt, I too realized, it's no where near the same thing.  In fact, it reinforces the points already being made.  Hear, Bt references calls by McCain to denounce some minister in Ohio, yet dead silence by any of the MSM outlets for calls by Obama to denounce his own Pastor's clearly hyperbolic (if not racist) rhetoric.  One is Republican the other Democrat.  Guess which one is which

[BT]

Come on BT  Roll Eyes you don't need to pretend this is ok in order
to pacify the left that is threatening to quit 3DHS. Don't worry,
they ain't gonna quit, and if they do it will because they cant
defend the undefendable which is liberalism.

Oh Please. You aren't some superhero suited up to fight the darkside. You are a poster on this forum, same as those with a left leaning persuasion. And they have the same right to express their opinions as you do.

McCain is being slammed because a pastor at some megachurch endorsed him and he won't denounce him. Lanya posted about it. You are demanding Obama do the same. I really don't see the difference.

And i really think the guilt by association gambit is silly.

Obama has no more control over his pastor than i do of you.

Obama probably goes to that church because his wife wants him to. And come pillow time she holds the trump cards.

 

[Christians4LessGvt]

I'm a socialist, not a left-liberal.

Like that really matters in the context of my statement. 

You'd be surprised at where we'd disagree.

I doubt it.

Otherwise you are making blanket charecterizations that are not useful.

yeah sure....btw is that the way you spell characterizations?

Irrelevant. Unlike those that you mention, this pastor has not called for anyone to be hurt or hurt themselves. You are making false parallels.

Nope. I am making the point that it does not matter if someone is making points
for religious reasons or based on religion. They can still be just as wrong....
so saying it was him speaking about his religion is a valueless statement. Again "SO?".

It isn't an "outrageous" question in any way.

It is outrageous to question..... as if there are not many..... if there are many actions that Christ would approve that this country has taken?

That would be an extreme position that only a tiny fraction of the American people would agree with.

But I like for leftist to take extreme positions out of mainstream American thought.

There are countless, countless actions this country has taken that are Christ-like.

But in your rush to "blame America first" you are blinded to reality.

In fact, we know from the Bible that nations are judged by Christ Himself, and judged on how well they treat their poor and their prisoners.

Yes and we treat our poor and our prisoners better than most....but please do not bore me with what you think Christ thinks or what you think Christ makes judgements on.....Obama's preacher thinks he knows what Christ thinks too......so what?.....All the different Christian denominations think they know what Christ thinks and wants too....so what?.....so when you say "we know"......who knows? you know?....LOL....yeah sure.....You may know for you.....but you dont know for me any more than my garbage man does.

How can a question Christ asks ever be outrageous?

Christ didn't ask, you did.

Speaking of racist comments...

Here comes the demonization!
Gosh you guys are sooooooooo predictable.
Disagree with a leftist and get ready for the "ooops you must be a racist".
It shows such a shallow understanding of the issues to have to run to the "you're a racist" tag.

[Rich]

It's nothing at all like McCain and some jerk off who came out in support of him. If that was so bad, we can point to bin Laden endorsing John Kerry and all the terrorists speaking in glowing terms about Obama.

Obama has a big problem here. Democrats are being divided along racial lines. This can't be good for them, and it won't be good for America if Obama is the nominee. I used to think Mrs. Clinton would be the easiest to beat, but now I think McCain can beat either on of them.

[Xavier_Onassis]

I doesn't make one damned bi of difference what Obama's preacher said or didn't say: he is not running for president. Having heard this would have zero difference on how Obama might act if elected.

This is a total non-issue.

I'm a LOT more worried about McCain singing "bomb, bomb, bomb,
                                                                bomb, bomb Iran."

[sirs]

I doesn't make one damned bi of difference what Obama's preacher (& mentor & spiritual leader) said

Well of course.....Obama's a Democrat.   d'uh

[Rich]

Leftist continuously trash Catholics for what the Church preaches. They particularly attack the Church on it's opposition to abortion.

Leftists trash followers of Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell and anyone who they claim follows fundamentalist beliefs

But Rev. Wright's racist, anti-American teachings have no effect on their opinion of Obama.

There seems to be no end to leftist hypocrisy.

[BT]

Obama has a big problem here. Democrats are being divided along racial lines. This can't be good for them, and it won't be good for America if Obama is the nominee. I used to think Mrs. Clinton would be the easiest to beat, but now I think McCain can beat either on of them.

I agree . Hillary is doing a superb job of playing the race card. Even the stories about Wright are probably being bumped to the top of the headlines by her surrogates and friends. Her last best chance is to win PA and she is reminding the blue collars that Obama is not one of them.

I guess it is entertaining watching it but i doubt i'll participate in widening the racial divide. I'll leave that to the dems. They have a long and storied history of it.

[Christians4LessGvt]

I doesn't make one damned bi of difference what Obama's preacher said or didn't say: he is
not running for president. Having heard this would have zero difference on how Obama might
act if elected. This is a total non-issue.

Number one it isn't "said or didn't say".
He did say it, it's on tape.

Number two, so it's not an issue?
I am sure if Tom Delay was running for President it would not be an issue if his close mentor and pastor was Pat Robertson.
Like you would'nt bring that up?
Yeah sure XO. 

.

[Xavier_Onassis]

Leftist continuously trash Catholics for what the Church preaches. They particularly attack the Church on it's opposition to abortion.

Leftists trash followers of Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell and anyone who they claim follows fundamentalist beliefs

But Rev. Wright's racist, anti-American teachings have no effect on their opinion of Obama.

There seems to be no end to leftist hypocrisy.

-=================================================
I think there is a BIG difference between trashing someone for THEIR wacko beliefs and trashing them for their supposed supporters wacko beliefs.

You say "spiritual leader and mentor" as though this were some sort of official position, but you know damn well that it isn't.
Watch and see what the people say on election day-- that's the only really important issue.

As for Tom Asshole Delay, the guy is so effing corrupt it hardly matters what his preacher says. He is scum already, one does not need to explain how his "spiritual leader and mentor" might contaminate him with more scum.

Hillary has a perfect right to say whatever the poo she wishes. The voters will decide how to interpret it.

99% of this election horseshit is totally unrelated to how the person will serve when elected, and it isn't worth the electrons to blather on about it.

[BT]

Number two, so it's not an issue?
I am sure if Tom Delay was running for President it would not be an issue if his close mentor and pastor was Pat Robertson.
Like you would'nt bring that up?
Yeah sure XO.  Roll Eyes.

And if he did? Is that how you defend your actions or condemn his?

Wright really isn't an issue. he's an opportunity.

 

[_JS]

Yes and we treat our poor and our prisoners better than most....but please do not bore me with what you think Christ thinks or what you think Christ makes judgements on.....Obama's preacher thinks he knows what Christ thinks too......so what?.....All the different Christian denominations think they know what Christ thinks and wants too....so what?.....so when you say "we know"......who knows? you know?....LOL....yeah sure.....You may know for you.....but you dont know for me any more than my garbage man does.

I don't belong to a church with "all the different Christian denominations. I belong to The Church. Otherwise it pays to pick up your Bible every once in a while if you really want to know what Christ teaches and read the Gospels. There's no point in discussing it if you don't bother to take that initial step.

Christ didn't ask, you did.

Read Matthew.

Speaking of racist comments...

Here comes the demonization!
Gosh you guys are sooooooooo predictable.
Disagree with a leftist and get ready for the "ooops you must be a racist".
It shows such a shallow understanding of the issues to have to run to the "you're a racist" tag.

I'm not going to get into this as I want to show some support of Bt's call that we make this place about substantive debate.

[_JS]

Leftist continuously trash Catholics for what the Church preaches. They particularly attack the Church on it's opposition to abortion.

Leftists trash followers of Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell and anyone who they claim follows fundamentalist beliefs

But Rev. Wright's racist, anti-American teachings have no effect on their opinion of Obama.

There seems to be no end to leftist hypocrisy.

I find that the right wing is just as quick to condemn Catholicism as the left, if not more so. This is especially true of extreme free market capitalist folks and evangelical Protestants. Remember that the life ethic is not only concerning abortion, but contraception, capital punishment, euthenasia, and any other attack upon human dignity, which includes torture.

[Xavier_Onassis]

It is of absolutely NO importance whether any future president denounces or refuses to denounce any preacher or whatever. Being a leader is not based on who one denounces.

Bill Clinton was in no way a better or worse president because he publically disagreed with the long-forgotten hiphop rapper known as Sista Soljah. Nor was Olebush one bit better or worse because of his dumbass attacks on the ACLU in 1988.

Once these presidents were elected, Sista Soljah and the ACLU as actual politically important issues vanished, which ois precisely what should have occurred.


All this, especially including the demented suggestion that in some alternate zombie universe Tom DeLay would run for president and (horrors!) I would presumably denounce him for agreeing with his preacher (did he even have a preacher?) is just so much mindless idiotic puerile blahblahblah.

[_JS]

It is of absolutely NO importance whether any future president denounces or refuses to denounce any preacher or whatever. Being a leader is not based on who one denounces.

Bill Clinton was in no way a better or worse president because he publically disagreed with the long-forgotten hiphop rapper known as Sista Soljah. Nor was Olebush one bit better or worse because of his dumbass attacks on the ACLU in 1988.

Once these presidents were elected, Sista Soljah and the ACLU as actual politically important issues vanished, which ois precisely what should have occurred.


All this, especially including the demented suggestion that in some alternate zombie universe Tom DeLay would run for president and (horrors!) I would presumably denounce him for agreeing with his preacher (did he even have a preacher?) is just so much mindless idiotic puerile blahblahblah.

I agree. I think a lot of it stems from these two notions:

1. If X does not denounce Y, then X = Y.

2. I think Sirs made the statement that "there must be a lot of churches in the community." The notion of "church hopping" until you find a church you agree with is a modern (primarily Protestant Christian) idea. It is born from individualism where a moral philosophy must be acceptable to the individual and not where the individual must be challenged by a moral philosophy.

The problems are these:

#1 is simply false logic. If XO is silent about CPUSA, it doesn't mean he automatically is a member. Nor does it mean the opposite, i.e. that he hates everything about them. Neither is a logical conclusion without more detail.