McCain's pastor a sharp contrast to Obama's

[Christians4LessGvt]

One has to wonder if Wright railed against illegals and homosexuals
whether he would be demogauged as harshly

Are you equating non-american law-breakers to american white males?
Apples to Oranges alert.

But even if you are are, actually I think the uproar would be much,
much worse if McCain had sat at a church for 20 years spewing similar
angry divisive words. In fact when Bush spoke one time at Bob Jones
it was a huge uproar. 20 years vs. 1 time!

[sirs]

His lack of actions as it relates to Wright are a big negative in my book.  That alone does not disqualify him from being president, it's simply another, in a long line of reasons, he would not be getting my vote

So it isn't a deal breaker.

LOL....I never said it was

And that has been my point all along.

Strange that you didn't point that out as your main point, way back when.  If you had, it could of save us both alot of bandwidth   ;-)

[fatman]

Well maybe we should have just surrendered to Hitler that would saved alot
of "maimed Americans, dead soldiers, and Marines" I mean after all what
was that "stupid adventure" of stopping Hitler worth?

The "Islamonazi's" have invaded a sovereign nation?  They've instituted puppet governments?  They've reneged on armament and reparations treaties?  They've killed 6 million (by some counts, others have it as high as 12 million) people in concentration camps?

The only similarites between your Islamonazi's and Hitler is that they both used terror, Hitler with V rockets, the "Islamonazi's" with airplanes.

[BT]

Strange that you didn't point that out as your main point, way back when.  If you had, it could of save us both alot of bandwidth   ;-)

But i did. I said not only was it much ado about nada, but it was a tactical mistake for RW pundits to take the lead on the issue.

[Xavier_Onassis]

I wish that were the case, but that just further exposes how blind you really are.
I think the Islamist will do exactly as they state are their plans.
Infidels will be converted or killed.
Read any paper, it's not hard to find them carrying out their pledge anywhere in the world.
==========================================================================
If one actually DOES read 'any paper',
Most days the totals would be Converts, 0/ Infidels killed 0
Their totals are far, far lower than the birth rate, so the number of living infidels as well as the number of converted infidels grows each and every day.

I cannot recall seeing where they have made even ONE convert.
Benny Hinn converts far more, and he is a very silly person, who has designed his very own personal silly Leisure silly suit.



They are not even modestly successful, except at frightening nervous nellies such as yourself.

[sirs]

Strange that you didn't point that out as your main point, way back when.  If you had, it could of save us both alot of bandwidth   ;-)

But i did. I said not only was it much ado about nada,

See?, you just contradicted yourself.  I referenced that although Obama's severe lack of judgement was an integral reason for my not supporting him for President, it was not the only reason.  You appeared to agree, then turn around and claim it's really "much ado about nada".  It's not.  It's a major ado about something, just simply not the end all be all to him not being presdient

it was a tactical mistake for RW pundits to take the lead on the issue.

They weren't, since RW pundits have been making hay of this for the better part of a year, with no traction what-so-ever.  It was when the MSM took the lead, (and I can only speculate that it's at the behest of the Clinton machine, as her #'s were tanking) that this story developed any legs.  IMHO, Rev Wright is Obama's "blue dress"

[BT]

I see no contradiction. I have said that Wright is not "as you put it Obama's blue dress". You seem to agree that as a stand alone issue that it would not be enough to write Obama off. That other issues, like this voting record need to be thrown into the mix for you to decide against him. That the Wright issue is nothing more than another brick in the wall.

BTW i don't recall that it was Lanya, XO, Brass or even Knute giving the story airplay in this forum.

[sirs]

I see no contradiction.

Ok, then perhaps it was a misrepresentation instead, since when I referenced that the issue about Obama's Judgement was of particular importance to me and his fitness to be Presdient, but wasn't THE issue for me, you agreed that it shouldn't have been, and that was your point all along........but then latter equated that agreement to being "much ado about nada", as if that's what you were agreeing to, with my point.  It wasn't, and judgement SHOULD ALWAYS be a consideration for who you would want leading this country.

That the Wright issue is nothing more than another brick in the wall.

No, it'd be multiple cracked bricks, located near the foundation of the building

BTW i don't recall that it was Lanya, XO, Brass or even Knute giving the story airplay in this forum.

Why would they?  Speaking bad about Democrats takes a back seat, when there's Bush/Cheney to keep bashing, is the hallmark of most here on the left

[Xavier_Onassis]

when there's Bush/Cheney to keep bashing, is the hallmark of most here on the left.
======================
Yeah right. Why bash the starter of endless wars, the personification of the military-industrial complex, the incompetent, the untruthful, those responsible for the deaths of 4000 Americans and the deaths, maiming and exile of thousands more Iraqis and others, when we could be bashing those who listen to sermons we disagree with or those who suggest that they are better at answering the 3:00 AM telephone call?

We should put things in perspective, of course.

[BT]

Why would they?  Speaking bad about Democrats takes a back seat, when there's Bush/Cheney to keep bashing, is the hallmark of most here on the left

There is certainly no need for them to bash Obama, when those on the right are having a field day with it.

[sirs]

Why would they?  Speaking bad about Democrats takes a back seat, when there's Bush/Cheney to keep bashing, is the hallmark of most here on the left

There is certainly no need for them to bash Obama, when those on the right are having a field day with it.

*snicker*....and why wouldn't they?  Highlighting egregiously bad judgement and character by a wound be Democrat presidential wannabe is ususally a field day event, for the right.  Speaking of which, the latest Hillary debacle about running under sniper fire, could be the nail in her coffin, as it relates to getting the Democrat nomination.  Obama's folks should have their own "field day" with that, as it relates to her supposed experience and ready to take on the job "day 1"

[BT]

*snicker*....and why wouldn't they? 

Because they don't have to.

Let Hillary and the MSM remind everyone that Obama is a Negro and he has been known to hang out with radical Negroes who are non too fond of white folks.

At the end of the day, people not recall hillary and the msm's role in the controversy.

They will remember the RW's role, because it fits in with their stereotype.

That is why i said it was a stupid tactic for the right. They missed a golden opportunity to shed some light on the democrats and their views on race.

[_JS]

*snicker*....and why wouldn't they? 

Because they don't have to.

Let Hillary and the MSM remind everyone that Obama is a Negro and he has been known to hang out with radical Negroes who are non too fond of white folks.

At the end of the day, people not recall hillary and the msm's role in the controversy.

They will remember the RW's role, because it fits in with their stereotype.

That is why i said it was a stupid tactic for the right. They missed a golden opportunity to shed some light on the democrats and their views on race.

Very well said Bt. And note the people on this forum that are supporting the very action you speak of, they are also enthusiastic members of the political right.

I'd add that the Southern Baptists do not have a very good history of race relations and are a denomination born from the tensions just before the Civil War. This was a church whose "Bible beliefs" included the notion that Africans were the descendants of Ham and that "God was the original Segregationist." (They used Genesis 10:32 and Acts 17:26 as proof that segregation was divinely inspired - proof that one can misuse the Bible and defame the Holy Spirit to their own ends). The list of Southern Baptist ministers who made sermons that included phrases like "mongrel races" or "no niggers will ever come to our church" or similar is startling.

Yet, with all the racism that still occurs today to African-Americans, Hispanics, Arabs, etc. It amazes me that if a black minister is outspoken about it, he is immediately attacked by the media, the mainstream left, and the right. Primarily he is attacked by white folks. Logically I even asked one of our members to point out in specific quotes where the racism was. I received no answer beyond a trite cliche. It is useful to attack the black candidate, who was doing well before the Reverend Wright "issue." Further proof that racism is alive and well.

I think that the individual in the original article hit the nail on the head. If Wirght had left "the nation" alone he'd be unknown to most Americans. Many, many people here have a very juvenile view of the concept of a nation and the United States in particular.

[Christians4LessGvt]

"Logically I even asked one of our members to point out in specific quotes
where the racism was. I received no answer beyond a trite cliche"

JS not sure who you asked the earlier question to, but I would consider this a
racist statement "White folks' greed runs a world in need," but before we
get into some long parsing of words over what constitutes a racist, to me it's
not so much that Rev Wright's words fit the exact defintion of a racism, it is more
that Rev Wright is racially divisive.
 
JS the reason it is an issue and I think rightfully so is because one of Obama's
campaign themes appears to be that we as a country need to move beyond race.
That color shouldn't matter. That Obama will in some way bring people of all colors together.

But while Obama is campaigning on "racial harmony" we find out Obama freely chose
to attend a church for the last 20 years with a pastor that screams racially divisive
hurtful things from the pulpit. The guy spewing the racially divisive stuff from the
pulpit was Obama's mentor, he performed Obama's wedding, he baptized Obama's
kids. This was not a casual relationship.

Do these kinds of statements "bring people together" or divide them?

"wants us to sing God bless America. No, no, no, not God bless America, God damn America

The hurricane exposed the hypocrisy," Rev. Wright said,
"protecting white folks' property took priority over saving black folks' lives."

"For every one Condoskeeza [sic] Rice

"The government lied about inventing the HIV virus as a means of genocide against people of color.

So is it really a surprise that a campaign of "racial harmony"
doesn't jive with Obama sitting there for 20 years listening to
the racially divisive rants of Rev Wright? I think it is not out of
the question that people are honestly concerned about Obama's
judgement and sincerity?

As far as I know Obama never once condemned any of the remarks until it
became an issue in this campaign. Now Obama has condemned some of
Rev Wrights views/comments. Obviously Obama thinks something was wrong,
so honestly JS, why did Obama wait so long?

To me you can't have it "both ways".

Those eager to dismiss this I wonder if they honestly can say that if President Bush
campaigned on a pro-gay rights agenda but then at the same time had
attended a church for 20 years, where the preacher performed his wedding,
had the preacher baptize the Bush twins, the preacher was his mentor, but the
preacher spewed divisive, hateful and demeaning things about gays from the
pulpit and you can say it wouldn't be an issue?

btw: JS For the time being I am just going to converse with you
on this particular post since I was answering your post. I know there will be those
that will find some word parsing(define "is") type of stuff they will want to debate
for hours and I just dont have the time to get into 10 different sub arguments of
long word parsing contests with those that enjoy that.

[sirs]

Js wants to largely ignore all the comments and segregation advocacy by the good Reverend as not really racist.  I differ.  I see anything that pushes 1 race greater than another as racist.  I see anything that pushes for segregation by race, as racist.  I see anyone that tries to blame all their trials & tribulations on another race as racist.