Why did Obama stay in Rev. Wright's church?

DontTreadOnMe wrote:

Foxfyre wrote:
DontTreadOnMe wrote:
Foxfyre wrote:
... Hell, John McCain has been thoroughly trashed for simply accepting an endorsement from a controversial pastor of a mega church when he had absolutely no affiliation with the church or the pastor.

see? there's a very good reason to keep a separation between church and state.

or as the christ said; "render unto caesar what is caesar's and unto god the things that are god's".

But allowing Christians (or other people of faith) to vote is not considered a violation of church and state. ...Nor is it considered a violation of church and state principles for the politician to ask for such an endorsement.

right. any citizen can vote.

politicians can ask for, accept or reject any endorsement. so i guess that it's up to the politician to weigh whether or not, in this case, getting 10,000 votes from someone like hagee could cost him 10,000 (or more) other votes. in which case, his net would be zero from the transaction.

in my view, the overarching injecting of religion (which is what it is, though people like to use the word faith) into the political realm over the last 20 years has severely hurt the country. rather than bring people together it has served more as a source of further division.

there was more than enough of that before with 2 major parties and a couple of viable minors.

but considering that with in the church system there are serious and acrimonious differences (taking the baptist denomination for example), it's not logical that adding religion to the mix would do anything other than create a lack of american unity.

before "in god we trust", there was "e pluribus unum". i just believe that it is a much better way to keep a country together.

Well without getting into the specifics and thus derailing the thread, I agree that it is difficult to find any two people of faith who agree on everything much less agreement on everything within a denomination or single congregation. I disagree that such disagreements and/or the influence of religion has 'severely hurt the country' or hurt the country at all for that matter.

But the point being made here is the double standard that provides Obama 'understanding' and gives him a pass for a 20+-year close association with Pastor Wright including a professed close relationship, large donations, and putting the pastor on his campaign staff. At the same time a John McCain is condemned for asking for and/or accepting endorsement of a John Hagee in hopes of encouraging votes from Hagee's congregation and/or denomination and/or television audience.

(As previously noted, nobody would have thought a thing about it if Obama had no relationship or affiliation with TUCC and had simply asked Pastor Wright for his endorsement. You don't even hear Obama being seriously criticized for getting endorsements from Farrakhan, Hamas, and other dubious characters and/or groups. So it's the 20+ year relationship, not incidental contact, that is raising eyebrows here.)

0 Replies

umm, i'd have to disagree that obama is getting a pass. i actually think that he's getting nailed a little harder than mccain.

0 Replies

DontTreadOnMe wrote:

umm, i'd have to disagree that obama is getting a pass. i actually think that he's getting nailed a little harder than mccain.

On A2K? I don't think so. Look at the results of the poll, though I am surprised that there are as many as there are who think Wright is a problem for Obama.

0 Replies

Rev. Wright's interview with Bill Moyers was proof of what a great man Wright is. And it proves how unfair and unscrupulous the purely political charges against him are. Soundbites taken out of context were used against him by mainstream media and used over and over on A2k shamelessly. Wright's speech given just after 911 was played in length by Moyers and what a great and truthful speech it was. America would be better off learning from the truth Wright speaks. Hillary and her supporters have disgrasced themselves in attacking Wright and asking why Obama did not quit such a blessed church. She pretends to care for the needy but attacks a church with a record of reaching out to the needy in many ways and she does it purely for political reasons. I suspect her attacks will continue until her defeat is finalized. Here's Moyers and Wright in all their glory, http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/04252008/watch.html

0 Replies

The worst Illegal immigant in USA is jesus.
He had orderded Bush to wage war with the ex bed friend like Sadam Hussain .

Be not an informed person to chat about poltics.

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

You don't even hear Obama being seriously criticized for getting endorsements from Farrakhan, Hamas, and other dubious characters and/or groups.

Probably because Farrakhan and Hamas never endorsed Obama.

0 Replies

joefromchicago wrote:

Foxfyre wrote:
You don't even hear Obama being seriously criticized for getting endorsements from Farrakhan, Hamas, and other dubious characters and/or groups.

Probably because Farrakhan and Hamas never endorsed Obama.

Hamas can't vote and therefore can't officially endorse but his campaign has acknowledged an 'endorement' while not actually accepting it.. And though Farrakhan never officiall announced an endorsement, few people would have presumed that his two hour speech extolling the virtues of Obama was anything less than an endorsement. (And this was presumably after Obama had distanced himself from Farrakhan a month earlier.)

But technically you're right that neither was an official endorsement as say an endorsement by the NY Times or a super delegate.

Sunday, February 24, 2008
Farrakhan endorses Obama
The Associated Press carries Louis Farrakhan's glowing endorsement of Barack Obama.

The 74-year-old Farrakhan, addressing an estimated crowd of 20,000 people at the annual Saviours' Day celebration, never outrightly endorsed Obama but spent most of the nearly two-hour speech praising the Illinois senator.

"This young man is the hope of the entire world that America will change and be made better," he said. "This young man is capturing audiences of black and brown and red and yellow. If you look at Barack Obama's audiences and look at the effect of his words, those people are being transformed."

Farrakhan compared Obama to the religion's founder, Fard Muhammad, who also had a white mother and black father. "A black man with a white mother became a savior to us," he told the crowd of mostly followers. "A black man with a white mother could turn out to be one who can lift America from her fall."
http://ipcc-wg1.ucar.edu/wg1/Comments/wg1-commentFrameset.html

____________________________________________________

Posted: April 17, 2008
10:39 am Eastern
By Aaron Klein
©© 2008 WorldNetDaily

Hamas leader Ahmed Yousef
Barack Obama's campaign said yesterday it is "flattered" that Hamas' endorsement of the Illinois senator compared him to John F. Kennedy, though it objects to any diplomatic contact with the terrorist group.

"I like John Kennedy, too," said chief Obama strategist David Axelrod. "That's about the only thing we have in common with this gentleman from Hamas. We all agree that John Kennedy was a great president, and it's flattering when anybody says that Barack Obama would follow in his footsteps."

Axelrod was reacting to comments earlier this week from Ahmed Yousuf, Hamas' top political adviser in the Gaza Strip, who said Hamas "hopes" Obama will win the presidential elections and "change" America's foreign policy.
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=61852
___________________________________

I am not faulting Obama at all in these two incidents. Politics always picks up a few strange bedfellows during a campaign, some appreciated, some tolerated, some unwanted.

But it does illustrate that those who support a particular candidate are not necessarily indicative of the candidates point of view or character just because they endorse the candidate.

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

DontTreadOnMe wrote:
umm, i'd have to disagree that obama is getting a pass. i actually think that he's getting nailed a little harder than mccain.

On A2K? I don't think so. Look at the results of the poll, though I am surprised that there are as many as there are who think Wright is a problem for Obama.

no, i mean in the media. they keep bringing it up.

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

Barack Obama's campaign said yesterday it ...it objects to any diplomatic contact with the terrorist group..

the interesting thing here, which i also heard on cnn today(out of barack's mouth) is that he wouldn't meet with hamas until they meet certain requirements.

but, i thought that was something that he had criticized clinton about. pre-conditions. "we should talk to our enemies" and all of that.

so he's kinda flip flopped a little there, hasn't he ?

0 Replies

Hamas isn't a legitimate head of state. (In his opinion.) Mahmoud Abbas is.

Quote:

"Sen. Obama does not agree with President Carter's decision to go forward with this meeting because he does not support negotiations with Hamas until they renounce terrorism, recognize Israel's right to exist, and abide by past agreements," a spokesman for the Obama campaign said. "As president, Obama will negotiate directly with the head of the Palestinian Authority, Mahmoud Abbas."

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0408/Carter_and_Hamas.html

0 Replies

OK I'm not sure about the "legitimate head of state" part, I thought I remembered that but if so I'm not finding it back.

What I did remember was the Hamas/ Abbas distinction.

0 Replies

sozobe wrote:

Hamas isn't a legitimate head of state. (In his opinion.) Mahmoud Abbas is.

however, the people of gaza voted for hamas. at least as far as i remember. and gaza is i think, the larger area of palistinian population. could be wrong.

i happen to agree with both hillary and barack about it, though. it's just that he has made blanket statements before, and often that make my question a valid one.

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

Hamas can't vote and therefore can't officially endorse but his campaign has acknowledged an 'endorement' while not actually accepting it.

Well that's about the biggest load of crap I've ever seen. Hamas didn't endorse Obama but did endorse Obama, and Obama acknowledged it but didn't accept it? What rubbish. Yours is a special kind of delusion, Foxfyre.

Foxfyre wrote:

And though Farrakhan never officiall announced an endorsement, few people would have presumed that his two hour speech extolling the virtues of Obama was anything less than an endorsement. (And this was presumably after Obama had distanced himself from Farrakhan a month earlier.)

But technically you're right that neither was an official endorsement as say an endorsement by the NY Times or a super delegate.

I'm not technically right, I'm actually right. Neither Hamas nor Farrakhan endorsed Obama, and to say otherwise is to utter a scurrilous falsehood.

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

DontTreadOnMe wrote:
umm, i'd have to disagree that obama is getting a pass.

On A2K? I don't think so. Look at the results of the poll, though I am surprised that there are as many as there are who think Wright is a problem for Obama.

A little less than half of respondents saying they "can see why he would stay, even if he didn't agree with everything Wright said" means Obama is getting a pass?

0 Replies

real life wrote:

It is rather odd to hear Dems still defending Wright's remarks when Obama himself has denounced them.

The question is not: 'were Wright's statements wrong? '

They clearly were and even Barack has said so.[/u]

Odd only if you automatically assume that every Dem or even every Obama supporter necessarily agrees with everything Barack says.

It could just be that, you know, some people disagree with Barack about this.

There's plenty of people to the left of Obama, you know..

0 Replies

nimh wrote:

Foxfyre wrote:
DontTreadOnMe wrote:
umm, i'd have to disagree that obama is getting a pass.

On A2K? I don't think so. Look at the results of the poll, though I am surprised that there are as many as there are who think Wright is a problem for Obama.

A little less than half of respondents saying they "can see why he would stay, even if he didn't agree with everything Wright said" means Obama is getting a pass?

No Dear. The A2K poll is virtually meaningless in the grand scheme of things, but was just interesting to me based on the dynamics and demographics of those who post on A2K. I do not see A2K is a microcosm of the general population and was surprised that the poll is not really lopsided on this this particular issue. (I was surprised at the same phenomenon on my immigration thread that was finally permanently locked I suppose because some people were incapable of discussing that issue civilly.)

I think the media got as much mileage as they could out of the Jeremiah Wright thing though there is no doubt the issue will remain to some extent. But they have been mostly framing it as inconsequential for Obama for some time now. In the general election I think you will see most of the emphasis shifted to "Republicans trying to make an issue of it" rather than any emphasis focused on whatever it means that Obama was a member of that congregation--the Huffington Post describes it as a 'nontroversy'.

The media has also given far less attention to Obama's associations with Tony Rezko and Bill Ayers than I think would have been the case with a Republican. These too will no doubt be more prominent in the general election but again will be mostly framed as "Republican smears" even though John McCain says he wants no part of that kind of politicking. (McCain is also vulnerable re some of his past associations too of course.)

That's my best guess of the way the media trend will be in the future.

(P.S. I think the Moyers/Wright PBS interview isn't going to help much as it provided few sound bites that will be useful to Obama and it was mostly a 'puff piece' with a whole lot of social religious speak and mostly avoided the most controversial aspects of Jeremiah Wright's message.)

0 Replies

nimh wrote:

real life wrote:
It is rather odd to hear Dems still defending Wright's remarks when Obama himself has denounced them.

The question is not: 'were Wright's statements wrong? '

They clearly were and even Barack has said so.[/u]

Odd only if you automatically assume that every Dem or even every Obama supporter necessarily agrees with everything Barack says.

It could just be that, you know, some people disagree with Barack about this.

There's plenty of people to the left of Obama, you know..

A lot of people to the left of Obama? Who here in the USA do you think is left of Obama?

0 Replies

Quote:

Who do you think is left of Obama?

Could that be the Hyde Park property the Syrian sold him?

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

A lot of people to the left of Obama? Who here in the USA do you think is left of Obama?

howz about kusinich? there's even a few here on a2k.

foxy, don't fall for the same ol, same ol "most liberal senator" routine again. last time, it was kerry. now they say it's obama. but, kerry is still there.

so which one is it? can't have it both ways.

0 Replies

Foxfyre wrote:

A lot of people to the left of Obama? Who here in the USA do you think is left of Obama?

Well, I'd guess about a third of A2K Dem voters for one. Just see how the vote broke down when I asked who would have voted (again) for Jesse Jackson's policy platform in my thread.

Out in the real world, in the meantime, a lot of Hillary supporters, for one. I know you're buying into the whole "Obama the radical" meme, but many of the people who prefer Hillary over Obama, remember, do so because she is the one who's more combative, more of a fighter, has vowed to take the Republican machine on. Because they're sceptical about Obama's incessant talk of bipartisanism and reaching across the aisle, his consistent pragmatism.

Dont you remember the flack he got for saying something superficially positive about Reagan? More substantively, dont you remember how Hillary's main policy platform, on health insurance, is clearly to the left of Obama?

In many ways, Obama's platform is to the left of Hillary's, but in many other ways, hers is the more traditional liberal one. Thats probably why Obama does better than her among those who are very liberal, but also among Independents and cross-over Republicans. Obama is a pragmatist. He is no Bernie Saunders.

0 Replies

Why did Obama stay in Rev. Wright's church?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know