OK, Jeff - thanks for bringing this back to rational discussion - and allow me to apologize for reacting so strongly to Scott's posts (though, by means of explanation, self-rightiousness always does that to me) - so, I hear what you've said, and, using an example that's already come up, let's say a candidate was, you know, a Klansman or a John Birch Society member or something - that would cause me to react a certain way, I agree...

However, in the case of this preacher... here's where there's a difference.  I don't believe that the preachers words, as ugly as they were, were hurting anybody.  They were words of anger, but I feel the preacher was coming from a place of anger - I think the voice he's speaking with is powered by the injustices of our nation.  Sure he's saying some far out things, but I can see where they're coming from, and they're not active or hurtfull, they're reactive and and resentfull.

The fact of the matter is, I'm not offended when a black man voices his concerns about the treatment of blacks in America.   That's not some sort of talk that should be shocking, nor shyed away from; that's part of the problem.  It's like Obama said - he may not agree with the extremes of the pastor's words, but he understands why he would say them, and would like to work to heal these wounds that cause such feelings, emotions - this anger. 

Can we find anyone who was hurt by this preacher's words, other than Obama?  Was a white man thrown out of his home by the black powers that be?  Was a white man lynched by a black mob because of the pastor's words?  Was a white man kept from being able to vote, from taking public office because of this so called "hate-speach"? 

Or do we still live in a nation whereby the power structure is firmly in place supporting whites? 

What's more, are his words so shocking?  Who on this board doesn't love America?  I think we're all pretty smitten over the nation - but who here doesn't look at what we did to the Native Americans, who here doesn't look at the slave trade, and the continued oppression of blacks, who here doesn't see America letting the people in the 9th Ward suffer and drown in their own filth, who here doesn't see people starving to death on the streets of every major city in this nation, who here doesn't see sick people denied health care because it'll cost the insurance companies money, - all these examples and more, and feel anger and disgust?  Who among us isn't sickened by the lack of humanity?  Does this mean we hate America?  Does it mean we're practicing "hate-speach"?   No!  It means we're reacting, as humans do, and want to fix things, and right the wrongs.  And if we didn't love America, then why would we bother?

I really feel that this issue is being exploited for the wrong reasons - we could use this pastor's talk to get a nation-wide discussion going, as Obama suggests, or we could use it to torpedo the political career of the only guy running who can make a difference.

That's my thoughts.

Tell me how this whole preacher incident has affected you.

Not sure why you decided to make this personal and attack me because I have a different opinion of you, but since you finally finished with your own hissy-fit and rant and asked, I'll be happy to answer.

It opened my eyes to the fact that Obama is no better than any other politician.  He's not something different.  In fact, he's worse, because he wants people to believe he is different when he's the same old thing but with less experience.  I'll cover why I feel this way with a few points.

1.  Obama first stated that he had never heard Rev. Wright say any of that before.  That's on tape.  Then he changed his story and said that he did know, but didn't agree.  That is also on tape.  That makes him a liar and a typical politician.  He doesn't tell the truth up front and only tells the truth when the lie is exposed publicly.

2.  He's not willing to stand by his family which calls his family values into question.  He, metaphorically, threw his grandmother under a bus to try to save his own behind by explaining that she was a racist.

3.  He then exposed his own bigotry and racist tendancies by calling his grandmother a typical white person.  So, to Obama, the typical white person is a bigot and a racist.  Since Rev. Wright is unquestionably a racist, does that make him a typical black person using Obama's own barometer of typical?  If any non-black politician had used the phrase "typical black person" in any context at all there would have been a frenzy calling for that person to drop out of the race/office.  It's a complete double standard.

4.  Obama, even though he knew what Rev. Wright preached, continued to let his family go to that church rather than switch to a different church that didn't preach a message of hate.  When I say church, I don't mean affiliation like switching from Baptist to Catholic.  I mean the physical church.  He could have gone to a different location of the same denomination that didn't preach hate.  That says, to me, he doesn't care about his children being exposed to hateful and negative material and possibly wants them to be exposed to it or is at the very least, indifferent about it.  That will influence the way those children see the world before they ever have a chance to form their own opinions and will help foster the continuation a divide between racial lines.  If he's willing to do that with his own family, then he's definitely going to be willing to do the same thing to the country.

That is how the preacher incident has affected me and is also how I have a discussion without stooping to name calling and attempting to denegrate the person with whom I am disagreeing.

Let's say a guy gets his ass kicked - is he not allowed to yell at the guy who beat him up and tell him to go "f*ck himeself"? 

I think I can safely say that no black person alive today in the United States was ever a slave in the pre-Civil War days.  I can also safely say that no non-black person alive today in the United States ever owned a slave in the pre-Civil War days.  I have zero control over something that happened over 100 years ago.  If your great, great grandfather committed murder and killed my great, great, great grandmother 100 years ago, I would never, by any stretch of the imagination hold you responsible and feel entitled to anything special from you.  What happened can't in any way, shape or form be considered acceptable, but it's also in the past.  We can only learn from the past, not change it.

Can we find anyone who was hurt by this preacher's words, other than Obama?

Yes.  Every child in that congregation who has had those ideas put in their heads, forever influencing how they see the world.  I know when I was growing up, the Reverend at my church had a huge impact on me with his sermons.

My 2 cents on the relevence of what Wright was preaching:  It is exactly the sort of divisive mindset that Obama says he wishes to overcome.  Large numbers of people gathering together in order to reinforce their bitterness and anger at another group of people is the reason we are stuck in the "stalemate" Obama defined in his big speech.

We don't get to a post-racial America as long as the Wright's of the world are influential enough to lead churches that pack thousands of people into them every Sunday.

Am I still voting for Obama?  Yes.  But to outright suggest that Wright's words are not a problem (Obama hasn't done that) and that people aren't justified in being appalled by them is to subvert the message Obama is making.  Discounting one party when they are disgusted at being attacked or labeled is no way to move the dialogue forward.

1. It's entirely plausible that Obama DID know what was said AND didn't hear him say it.  For example, I know Obama called his grandmother a typical white person even though I didn't hear him say it.
2. I love my racist grandmother, too.  I don't think I lack in family values.  Furthermore, I don't recall Obama out-and-out saying his grandmother was a racist.
3. Again, did Obama call his grandmother a racist?
4. So every damn Sunday Rev. Wright trotted out the same message of hate?  It's a few lousy sermons, BIG FUCKIN' DEAL.  We have bigger problems than the words of ANY of the anointed spokesmen of imaginary creatures.
5. This country will be a long time healing.  In some ways we haven't even started yet.  When you uproot a culture and transplant it, then destroy it, then forbid it, and then finally let it loose, it will take a VERY long time to normalize.  Just think, fifty years ago it would not be a stretch for a black man to have to trace his lady love's family tree back a ways to find out how closely they might be related!  Slavery wasn't a thorn that got pulled out and everything was going to be okay as a result.  It was a large rock sending out ripples that are going to reverberate for a long long time.  Haven't you ever looked at a historic site and wondered: did slaves build this?  Imagine introducing yourself as James Washington, say, and wondering what your REAL last name is.  It's a shitty situation and there's no clear answer.  There's barely even a clear question.
6. I would be  THRILLED if Rev. Wright was the worst thing about Obama.  It's THAT much a non-issue with me.  Billy Graham met with every President in my lifetime, and he thought the Jews were damned to hell.  Probably had less-than-nice words about gays, as well.  Or miscegenation.

2.  He's not willing to stand by his family which calls his family values into question.  He, metaphorically, threw his grandmother under a bus to try to save his own behind by explaining that she was a racist.

Scott, you totally missed the point of that portion of his speech.  He used he Grandmother's racism as a means of saying that there are people all around us with controversial opinions that we don't abandon.  How is that not standing by his family?  Did he say that he never speaks to her anymore because of her racist opinions?  Quite the contrary.

I think I can safely say that no black person alive today in the United States was ever a slave in the pre-Civil War days.  I can also safely say that no non-black person alive today in the United States ever owned a slave in the pre-Civil War days.  I have zero control over something that happened over 100 years ago.  If your great, great grandfather committed murder and killed my great, great, great grandmother 100 years ago, I would never, by any stretch of the imagination hold you responsible and feel entitled to anything special from you.  What happened can't in any way, shape or form be considered acceptable, but it's also in the past.  We can only learn from the past, not change it.

The act of slavery is in the past (in the US), but the legacy of racism and oppression is anything but.  It's better, but there is still a long way to go.  Look at the examples in my post on the previous page.  Segregation is not ancient history.  It happened to my parents.  Many institutions through out the south and other regions are still segregated by default.  There are high schools that only recently allowed their proms to be integrated.  There are economic studies that have been done that show that Black cab drivers are tipped 1/3 less than white cab drivers, despite on many occasions the passengers surveyed rated the service received from the Black drivers as superior.  I have a cousin that operates a very successful commercial cleaning business in one of the counties in Virginia.  When he'd show up to bid for contracts he would sometimes be told by potential clients that they were not interested in "taking bids at this time." He got smart and started having one of his white friends go to the same location a  few hours later or the next day and operate as a front man for the bids.  The same companies and government buildings that turned my cousin away would accept bids almost immediately from his white friend.  That couldn't possibly be happening today, it's all in the past.  Right?

On a completely different election-related note...

Is Chelsea now the first member of the Clinton family to have responded to a Monica Lewinsky question with the response that any and all such questions should have received from day one: "Frankly, it's none of your business."?

' Is Chelsea now the first member of the Clinton family to have responded to a Monica Lewinsky question with the response that any and all such questions should have received from day one: "Frankly, it's none of your business."?" '

If Chelsea was "only" the daughter of Bill and Hillary, then the response would be correct.  However, now that she is out there in public openly campaigning for her mother the answer seems to be just more Clinton spin.  The actual question was about if her mother's credibility was damaged by the Monica Lewinski scandal (the vast right wing conspiracy).  "None of your business" is not a good reply.

But, I'm still chuckling over another one of Hillary's excuses about the "Tuzla Sniper Incident".  She claimed that she misspoke because she was sleep deprived.  Is this the person I want answering the phone in the White House at 3am?