<<I'd rather have four more years of Bush than Clinton.>>

Really? Based on what? I am NO friend or fan of Hillary's, but I could see no circumstance in which I would rather have 4 more years.

Howard Mackie

Obama said when this controversy started:

“The statements that Rev. Wright made that are the cause of this controversy were not statements I personally heard him preach while I sat in the pews of Trinity or heard him utter in private conversation. When these statements first came to my attention, it was at the beginning of my presidential campaign. I made it clear at the time that I strongly condemned his comments. But because Rev. Wright was on the verge of retirement, and because of my strong links to the Trinity faith community, where I married my wife and where my daughters were baptized, I did not think it appropriate to leave the church.”

Then in today's speech, Obama contradicted himself (courtesy of CNN):

Obama admitted he had sat in church and heard his former minister make controversial remarks.

"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."

The remarks that caused the most recent firestorm "were not only wrong but divisive, divisive at a time when we need unity," Obama said.

Obama said that if he knew Wright only through clips played on television and YouTube, he also would see a reason to distance himself from the minister.

"But the truth is that isn't all that I know of the man," he said.

 

I think this flip-flopping and outright lying is not the change we really want or need right now. I am less than impressed.

 

 

Obama never said what statements he heard and what he might have found about on these tapes. Not lying as I see it.

************************

I think that's the crux of it all.  He admits to hearing some comments that could be considered controversial, but not the comments that has caused this firestorm.  I suppose I live in the same fantasy worls as you do, Neil, because I thoroughly believe the man.  But, now that I think about it, if this election is going to be "decided" on "guilt by association", then both Clinton (i.e. Peter Paul) and McCain (i.e. John Hagee) better start creating such speeches as we heard today from Obama. 

Obama has had to overcome a LOT these past 2 weeks, and I think in the long run he's made himself an even stronger potential President.

<< I just meant, as bad as Bush is (and I agree, he mucked up a lot),>>

"mucked up" barely describes what Bush has done to this country in terms of foreign poilicy and the economy.. not to mention pecking away at that pesky Constitution.

<< there are still worse alternative.>>

Again... I can't think of many... unless Rush or some other lunatic fringe arse got into an office that used to mean something.

<<I'm probably at odds with most of you, because I really don't have too big of a problem with Bush's foreign policy.  In my eyes, it's his domestic policy that is a shambles.>>

What foreign policy do you NOT have a problem with? It was, and remains, a complete mess. There seems to be no domestic policy to speak of.

<<My quick evaluation:

Bush:  Muddled, well-meaning, incompetent.
Hillary:  Competent, evil.
Obama:  Competent, idealistic, (but still wrong.)
McCain:  Competent, kinda scary.>>

Please... I really would LOVE to hear the explanation of how HILLARY is evil(and again I do NOT support her) based on evidence/track record/accomplishments or lack thereof... and Bush and his cronies are NOT?

<<I've always thought the best government we can get is an ineffectual, paralyzed one.  God save us from a government that gets things done.  That's why I like having different parties in the Executive and Legislative branch, so that gridlock ensues.>>

Huh?

<<(In every way but national defense.  We need to have a competent military... and we do.)>>

Yes... our military is amazing... the best... but you DO realize that it is NOT the weapon, but the person that aims it and pulls the trigger that does the damage. That whole "Commander-In-Chief" thing seems ot carry SOME weight.

Howard

<<I think this flip-flopping and outright lying is not the change we really want or need right now. I am less than impressed.>>

I think you might want to try paying a little closer attention to the statements he made, adn the speech before pulling out the old "flip/flopper" argument.

Howard

I always enjoyed Howard Mackie, editor and Howard Mackie, writer, and now, I'm happy to say, I really enjoy Howard Mackie, political commentator!