No more God Bless America?

[Dr. Shane]

Quote:

Obama was trying to use the Trinity church and Wright for political purposes

I don't think Obama choose to attend that church 20 years ago because he was planning to one day run for President.

Quote:

he did not have a connection with the black community. He clearly needed to shore up that weakness in his background

Maybe he felt a calling to be part of the black community and that is why he choose that church. I felt a calling to work among the Hispanic people and thus choose to become a member of a Hispanic church. I get that. Maybe he choose that church because of the work they do with the homeless, poor, imprisoned, and HIV/AIDS victims and he was sympathetic to some or all of those causes. I think it rather unfair to assume his motives were political.

Quote:

they discussed together the fact that the time would come when the Senator would need to distance himself from Wright... Sounds like a political decision, not due to his being outraged or being personally offended.

To me it sounds like he disagreed with someone he respected. Much like he has said. He considers this preacher like part of his family but disagrees with him. I identify with that. This preacher may even be a father figure for Obama that he disagrees with. If this was happening with Hillary Clinton I strongly suspect that she would toss this preacher under the bus and not look back. The fact Obama refuses to do that goes to his character and credibility. This whole scandal makes me think more of him, not less.

[Woody]

Why is this church still selling the racist sermons by this man? IF this is not reflective of this church and pastor ... why do they still sell his racist comments?

[John317]

Quote:

JOHN3:17-- Obama was trying to use the Trinity church and Wright for political purposes

I don't think he necessarily had plans to be president at that time but he did have political ambitions at the time he chose Wright's church. It was good he had political ambitions-- I am not questioning those-- but I am saying that it is apparent that when he chose Wright's church, he chose it with those political ambitions in mind. He needed to build up support in the black community if he was to make a run for office, because he was viewed by some as "not black enough." That is the same way that some blacks see Condeleezza Rice as well as Powell.

According to his biography, "After graduating from law school, Obama returned to Chicago to direct a voter registration drive that resulted in voter registration in Chicago's 19 predominantly black wards outnumbering those in the city's 19 predominantly white ethnic wards for the first time in Chicago's history, and by a substantial 676,000 to 526,000. More than half a million blacks went to the polls in Chicago, and Chicago magazine hailed Obama as "a new political star".

[jasd]

Ahh, the pretty with flags – speech...

“But the anger is real; it is powerful; and to simply wish it away, to condemn it without understanding its roots, only serves to widen the chasm of misunderstanding that exists between the races.”

Yes, there certainly is “misunderstanding” if anyone, (black, white, brown, yellow, or...) is comfortable sitting in respective pews on Sunday, America – participating in [vicious] impassioned demagoguery – without demurrer.

J’accuse, culpable! ;-)

>>...and bleed together under the same proud flag.<<

Really? ...flag pins = false patriotism? Go figure.

Disabuse me should I err, but I’m seeing – déjàs vu all over again – the Socialist Workers Party’s cadres of the 60s, disseminating their, ummm, ‘leftist’ talking points in the streets – now, seemingly, have moved

their venue indoors.

That said, I really suspect that we’re in for a lot of hurt – no matter who is elected; then again... ;-)

Addendum:

It might be nice should the hyphenated community acknowledge the sacrifice extracted from our Union in both blood and treasure during the 1860s to put PAID to slavery. Also, it may be well to remind that:

The 15th Amendment ratified in 1870 gave the emancipated male the vote, Jim Crow notwithstanding.

"...the right to vote shall not be denied or abridged on the basis of race, color, or previous condition of servitude."

It was not until 1920 that the 19th Amendment gave women the right to vote.

“The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any State on account of sex. ...”

[jasd]

>>FOXNews had a body language expert on last night that was evaluating Obama and saying he is being honest and straightforward with what he is saying about his pastor. In other words, he isn't spinning anything.<< [ed.jasd]

Umm...? Expert? Say what!? You want expert? That would be me!

>>Obama has character.<<

And we know this how? because he talks real nice? oiling his way from ballot to ballot... Fact is, we know just about nuthin’ about him ‘cepting that he’ll sit there in his ‘angry’ church and subscribe-to and rationalize that anger...

>>Character matters to me. It means more than experience.<<

Hey! I got character – lots of it. My hip pocket overflows; but – I guaaarrrantee! – you wouldn’t want me as your POTUS. Bet your fundament you wouldn’t!

[John317]

Good place to find out Obama's views: http://www.ontheissues.org/Barack_Obama.htm#Civil_Rights

[jasd]

>>...strongly suspect that she would toss this preacher under the bus and not look back.<<

...and rightly she should.

>>The fact Obama refuses to do that goes to his character and credibility.<<

Oh. That would translate to: if I were a day late and a dollar short - it would be pointless to do other than appear to be taking the high road. He should have

'come clean' a long, long, long, time ago. The arrogance.

[Dr. Shane]

A man driven to a political career will consider politics in everything he does from the kind of car he buys to the kind of suits he wears. I don't mean to imply that Obama did not consider his political future when he choose his church. My point is that I doubt that was is only or primary purpose in choosing it.

[Dr. Shane]

>>...strongly suspect that she would toss this preacher under the bus and not look back.<<

...and rightly she should.

It sounds as if this preacher played a major role in Obama accepting the Christian faith. He has repeatedly referred to this pastor like a member of his family. That is Christian lingo. He is not throwing a brother in Christ under the bus even though it is costing him politically not to do so.

This tells me that Obama has as much character as G.W. Bush. Bush has done what he has believed is right regardless of what the polls said and often at a cost to his own political popularity. Now Obama does what he believes is right even though he continues to suffer in the polls because of it. That tends to make me believe I can believe what Obama says.

[John317]

Do you know if Senator Obama ever confronted Wright about his views that he now says he finds so offensive? Did he ever try to show Wright his error?

If he did, I could be convinced by his statement that he is offended by Wright, but otherwise it sounds like something he is just saying for political reasons. People don't wait for years before they react to something they genuinely feel offended by.

[Dr. Shane]

Again, I have had pastors say things that offended me. I have had pastors say things like we cannot keep the Ten Commandments. I have heard them question the Genesis account of creation. I have heard them justify divorce for reason clearly not Biblical. But I didn't confront them. I just blew it off. Let it go in one ear and out another. Many people don't feel it is their job to confront preachers.

That said, if indeed Obama did discuss "together the fact that the time would come when the Senator would need to distance himself from Wright," that sounds like he made his disapproval known.

[John317]

Again, I have had pastors say things that offended me. I have had pastors say things like we cannot keep the Ten Commandments. I have heard them question the Genesis account of creation. I have heard them justify divorce for reason clearly not Biblical. But I didn't confront them. I just blew it off. Let it go in one ear and out another. Many people don't feel it is their job to confront preachers.

None of the things you mentioned are on the same level as the things that Wright was teaching and preaching. Wright was lying about the United States and teaching hatred. Obama admitted this in his speech this evening, yet Obama did nothing and said nothing until he was forced to by the media. He gave his support as a Senator to that kind of talk and those lies by sitting in that church and listening to it and not saying anything.

At first Obama said that he did not know that Wright was teaching those things, but today he admitted that he did know it. When first asked about it, he said he wasn't in the church to hear it, but now we know that he did hear it. He knew what Wright was teaching and preaching.

You say that you have heard pastors say things you did not like. And you have mentioned some of those things. But none of those are like saying "God d--- America," "The US invented the HIV virus to kill millions of its citizens," and that the US got what it deserved on 9/11. And you didn't continue to sit and listen to those pastors say those things year in and year out. Nor did you take your children to hear those pastors teach those things, as Obama did with his children. Wright told those lies on video and then made Compact Discs of them to sell to the school.

The reason a comparison between yourself and Obama is not valid is that Obama is a US Sentator, and as such, when he sits in a church where the preacher is teaching these lies, Obama's position lends power and stature to what Wright was saying. Obama had to have realized this. If Obama did not realize this, and if Obama did not know what Wright believed or taught, there has to be serious doubt that Obama has the judgment necessary to be president of the United States, making judgments about character and decisions about appointing Supreme Court Justices, etc.

Doesn't the fact that Obama would subject his children to that kind of preaching week in and week out for years, and then make it sound as if he did not understand that Wright was teaching those things, show that he lacks good judgment?

I think something is wrong with the way Obama compared what Wright preached in public in his church all those years with what his grandmother said in private. Why did he need to tell the world what his grandmother said in private anyway? I find that disturbing.

Something else that seems wrong, too, is that Obama compared what Wright preached with what I might hear my pastor say. But this is not true. I have never heard my pastor say the kind of outrageous things that Wright preached and taught in his church. And furthermore I wouldn't sit and listen to it for years, either, as Obama did.

This is not about Wright or about Wright's right to say what he does. Neither is it about race in America. This is about a man who is running for the president of the United States and about how he sat for years in church where hatred and lies about the United States are taught on a regular basis. This is about a probable candidate's inability to use good judgment in his associations and in his choices. Finally, this is about Obama's leadership abilities and whether he can tell the American people the truth about what happened and why.

[Bravus]

Quote:

Wright was lying about the United States and teaching hatred.

Hang on. What hatred? Chapter and verse please.

And, aside from the HIV/AIDS claim, what lies? Was what he said about US power internationally empirically untrue? It might be a perspective on things that doesn't fit yours, but let's see evidence of factual falsehoods before such claims are made.

[Neil D]

Quote:

In a lengthy address that touched on race and faith, Obama denounced incendiary fragments from the sermons of his longtime pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright. Obama also deftly contrasted the distasteful sentiments in Wright's recently circulated "greatest hits" sound bites with the pastor's three decades of hard work uniting religious and ethnic groups, and materially helping the sick, outcast and despairing.

Quote:

This is not about Wright or about Wright's right to say what he does. Neither is it about race in America. This is about a man who is running for the president of the United States and about how he sat for years in church where hatred and lies about the United States are taught on a regular basis. This is about a probable candidate's inability to use good judgment in his associations and in his choices. Finally, this is about Obama's leadership abilities and whether he can tell the American people the truth about what happened and why.

I have black friends...They see the race problem in a different light than I do. They occassionally make reference to the problems of race as they see it....Sometimes, I disagree with thier perspective. I suspect that the race issue goes much deeper and has much more of an element of hatred in it than most white folks suspect. I know, from my experience, it's deeper than what I suspect.

John, you make a good case...But so does Obama. He doesn't gloss over his friends, and appears not to have abandoned them, but rather takes the time to cause us to look at a problem that we have had for over 140 years...He takes the man that is his pastor, and makes the man more complex than what the media projects. We see ONE side of Jeremiah Wright...the sensational side.. We forget the other side. And you have complained of the Media in the past and said that we should never trust the media...And yet, you are listening to the hatred and it is causing you consternation....

I have found that the truth/reality of any situation is always much more complicated than what many boil it down to. Obama made the man much more complicated. The media is talking about the sensational side of Jeremiah Wright. But Obama is talking about the nurturing side of Jeremiah Wright as well and factoring in that into his personality.

I don't require that my president be a truthful man. In fact, I know there are times, for the good of the country, that a president NEEDS to lie to his country. But I do require that the canidate be principled...And Obama is principled and not giving up his friends...

[Neil D]

Here is a few other things that you might want to consider-

But you&#8217;ve got to wonder how and why this ever became an issue? Why is Obama being scrutinized more closely than other candidates? The double standard is appalling. Conservative televangelist Pat Robertson has been a close direct advisor to Republican Presidents as well as GOP candidates on all levels of government. But Robertson&#8217;s the guy who went on national TV (his own 700 Club), not once but twice, and said that the State Department should be bombed because of then-Secretary of State Colin Powell&#8217;s approach to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Robertson (along with the late Jerry Falwell and many other incendiary right wing preachers) said infamously that Hurricane Katrina and the September 11 terrorist attacks were God&#8217;s punishment for America&#8217;s sins. Hmmm. Sounds a whole lot like Rev. Jeremiah Wright&#8217;s &#8220;chickens coming home to roost&#8221; statement about 9/11. Yet, nobody asked Rudy Giuliani about that when he accepted Robertson&#8217;s endorsement for President early in the primary season.

I could go on, but you get the point. Conservative preachers and politicos get a pass for their outrageous statements, but Obama and Rev. Wright get pilloried in the national media. It&#8217;s not insignificant that this whole brouhaha about Rev. Wright started with right wing muckraker Sean Hannity. Editorial Source

I have said this before, and I am gonna say it again...ANYTHING done by Sean Hannity is to be suspect. ALONG with Ann Coulter, Rush Limbaugh, Micheal Savage, and even Bill O'Reilly.

[lazarus]

Addendum:

It might be nice should the hyphenated community acknowledge the sacrifice extracted from our Union in both blood and treasure during the 1860s to put PAID to slavery

are you still sore that your side lost?

Quote:

The 15th Amendment ratified in 1870 gave the emancipated male the vote, Jim Crow notwithstanding.

"Jim Crow notwithstanding" you're a card!

[lazarus]

This whole thing is turning out to really be about hypocrisy.

All those who now scream and rail against Obama and Wright are strangely silent when it comes to Falwell, Robertson, Haggie et al. Why?

Simply because they either agree with their foolishness or its simply serves their political purpose to be silent.

Falwell has said the same crazy stuff about America but you'll give him a pass because he's right wing and he's white. Its that simple.

[Woody]

Good place to find out Obama's views: http://www.ontheissues.org/Barack_Obama.htm#Civil_Rights

Oh MY. That was good for a few laughs. Talking about hypocrisy. That was disgusting.

[Woody]

This whole thing is turning out to really be about hypocrisy.

All those who now scream and rail against Obama and Wright are strangely silent when it comes to Falwell, Robertson, Haggie et al. Why?

Simply because they either agree with their foolishness or its simply serves their political purpose to be silent.

Falwell has said the same crazy stuff about America but you'll give him a pass because he's right wing and he's white. Its that simple.

The point IS .... I would never vote for a president who took his daughters to hear Falwell and gang for 20 years and had Falwell marry he and his wife ... and who sat in the pews for 20 years and never spoke out against Falwell and/or gang for 20 years OR who had Falwell and/or gang baptize his family and never spoke out against him. And then lied about hearing the hate of Falwell before a national audience. I would never vote for someone who did all of that.

[olger]

To Laz:

Falwell is just as wrong as Wright. Why defend either one?

indeed,

olger

[Amelia]

This whole thing is turning out to really be about hypocrisy.

All those who now scream and rail against Obama and Wright are strangely silent when it comes to Falwell, Robertson, Haggie et al. Why?

Simply because they either agree with their foolishness or its simply serves their political purpose to be silent.

Falwell has said the same crazy stuff about America but you'll give him a pass because he's right wing and he's white. Its that simple.

I have never supported Falwell or Robertson. They are dingbats. I not familiar with Haggie.

[John317]

It isn't about Wright, though. Wright has a perfect right to say what he does, just as do those other men you mentioned. The problem is what Obama did in giving his prestige and financial support to Wright by sitting there for 20 years. It's not even a question of whether Obama had a right to sit there. Of course he had that right. The question is, did it show good judgment for a U.S. representative and Senator to do it? And why did he do it? Was it because Obama agrees with Wright's Black Liberation Theology? Obama has said he searched for a church that represented his views. So we can assume that he found one in Wright's.

Some have said that Obama did not know what Wright's beliefs were, but I find this even more of a serious problem because it begs the question why he didn't know something that was common knowledge and that Wright made no effort to hide? After all, the sermons in which he said these things were made into Compact Disks and sold to the public and to the school. Does his ignorance about this show that he is ready to be president of the United States?

As we look at the sermons of Wright, we find that he often spoke negatively about America. These controversial things were not spoken in a vacuum but were part of a pattern. So, the real issue is, why did Obama sit there year after year and listen to those lies, things that he himself now acknowledges were wrong and bad for the country? He still has not really answered that question.

Wright's approval rating is at 8%, so there are also a lot of blacks who disapprove of what he teaches.

As for Falwell and Robertson, Haggie, etc., I wouldn't defend their political beliefs one bit, and I certainly wouldn't sit in their congregations and listen for two decades to things I know to be wrong. Remember that Obama and his wife also took their children to listen to Wright's wrong, harmful ideas.

[John317]

...I have black friends...They see the race problem in a different light than I do. They occassionally make reference to the problems of race as they see it....Sometimes, I disagree with thier perspective. I suspect that the race issue goes much deeper and has much more of an element of hatred in it than most white folks suspect. I know, from my experience, it's deeper than what I suspect.

What you say is perfectly true. As you may know, I've worked for 20 years primarily with blacks, and I've had very good black friends since I was a kid and still have them today. Of course they see the race problem from a different perspective than we do. I agree. But the question about Obama is not about race per se. I have no objection to Wright's preaching what he does. The question is whether Obama was right to lend the prestige and support of his political office to Wright's teaching.

It's significant that Wright's approval rating is at 8% which shows that there are also a lot of blacks who disapprove of what Wright teaches. The extreme views of Wright, which are at the center of the controversy, are no more common with blacks than they are with whites.

Quote:

John, you make a good case...But so does Obama. He doesn't gloss over his friends, and appears not to have abandoned them,

No one is asking him to abandon the pastor as a personal friend, but as a state representative, a Senator and as a man running for the office of President of the United States, he should not be giving his support and prestige to that kind of wrong teaching by sitting in Wright's church year after year. It's a question of his whether he has good judgment or not. It would be like a President sitting year after year in a church taught by a known white racist who says wrong and harmful things about black people.

Quote:

but rather takes the time to cause us to look at a problem that we have had for over 140 years...

I don't think that was the right thing for him to do, and I think it may prove to be harmful to his campaign. The nation does not need, nor did it want, a lecture from him about race. The problem is not one of race but of a man's judgment. He was answering the question why he continued to sit in Wright's church for 20 years listening to things he says he now knows were wrong and very divisive to the people of this country.

Besides, if he intended to set the nation right on the question of race, he should not have made the comparison of Wright's public preaching to something he heard his grandmother infrequently say in private. Nor should he have compared his listening for years to Wright's wrong and hurtful sermons to hearing one's priest or pastor say things you may occasionally disagree with.

Quote:

He takes the man that is his pastor, and makes the man more complex than what the media projects. We see ONE side of Jeremiah Wright...the sensational side.. We forget the other side.

And by doing so, Obama excuses his action of being in Wright's church and of taking his children to listen to him. In that way, Obama skirts the main issue: why didn't Obama see that he was doing the wrong thing by staying in that church and lending his support and prestige to it?

Would we say, "Well, the President realizes that David Duke is a complex man and that there is a lot more to Duke than the simple fact that he preaches against blacks and is a member of the KKK"? Of course not, because we can see that his complexity and the fact that he may be a personal friend is not the issue.

Quote:

And you have complained of the Media in the past and said that we should never trust the media...And yet, you are listening to the hatred and it is causing you consternation....

Not sure what you are referring to, but the teachings of Wright are on Compact Disks which he himself marketed to the school as well as to the public.

I've never made the blanket statement that one should never trust the media. I have said, though, that one needs to read widely and get ones information from a variety of sources.

I am not at all disconcerted by the hatred. I am disconcerted by Obama's actions and by what I perceive to be a lack of good judgment. A person's friends and associates reveals a lot about an individual.

Quote:

I don't require that my president be a truthful man. In fact, I know there are times, for the good of the country, that a president NEEDS to lie to his country.

Yes, there are times when a president may need to lie to his country in order to protect it, but never in order to protect himself in personal matters.

But that doesn't make a man "not a truthful man." That would be the same if you told someone a lie to keep your wife or child from being hurt or killed. I doubt anyone would say this would make you an untruthful person.

Quote:

But I do require that the canidate be principled... And Obama is principled and not giving up his friends...

Just as it is best for the country for the President to know when he must lie for the good of national security, etc., the president must also know when stop having an individual as a spiritual counselor or pastor to the President. The President has to be ruthless when it comes to these kinds of decisions, and use good judgement, because the security and stability of the nation is at stake. It means putting the good of the country ahead of one's personal friends or associations. In that, I submit, Obama has failed miserably.

[Woody]

The longer that this campaign goes on ... the more we will learn about Obama and his double speak. His words and his actions do not match and neither do his words match his words.

ON the news today they showed clips of his support for the war. Then it compared it to his claims of NO support for the war. He stated that his view on the war were not that far apart from GW Bush.Very inconsistent. I think people are going to believe him less and less as time goes on.

And as John has so clearly indicated .. this man's judgment is very suspect. And if he is elected ... there will be a kind of 'shock n awe' that will really shock you.

All of this and the good news in the war .... are helping the image of GW Bush. The latest poll showed that 56% approved of him. This is good news in the war effort.

[Kountzer]

I look at the issues that have come up in regards to Pastor Wright from several perspectives. First, I've heard all sorts of wild conspiracy theories in the black community, of which I am a part, regarding the government, 9/11, etc. Most of it a disregard as stumbling block nonsense. I've heard similar theories outside of the black community as well. I heard jan Marcussen lecture that Prez Bush, Osamba Bin Laden, the prime min. of england, the pope, et al, were all connected in some world domination ring. Marcussen's proof of this was different masonic hand gestures these leaders were photographed using, allegedly.

From an sda perspective, there are all sorts of mis guided demogogues in popular pulpits around the country, in black churches and white. I mean, how much more of a loose canon can someone be when they preach against the 10 commandments, they go against the word, and the leading of the Holy Spirit.

I mean, the most powerful message I know of is the msg being preached in SDA churches. All sorts of spiritual power accompany that message as it is being preached.

Lots of first day churches don't have that power. they have the numbers, money, worldy prestige, etc, but they don't have a cutting edge present truth message. So, they substitute other messages, other agendas. They resort to political agendas, civil rights issues, etc. All that stuff is well and good, but what good is that stuff if someone is not telling people that the world as we know it is ending, and that Jesus is coming soon?