I understand where you're coming from Geoff, but I do disagree.  It might be because my support of Obama colors my reaction, but more, my ideas of black/white relations also informs my judgement.

I agree that Obama did not clearly state that the point I was making, but if you look at the part that you quoted, and look at his initial remarks when the scandal broke - that, roughly, he didn't hear the statements in question, you put together the difference and see that the point he's making is that he didn't hear that particular sermon, but heard others that would be objectionable.  A bit of hair-splitting, I suppose, but...

Here's my take on this - and this has come up a few times over the last few pages - it's not the same to equate Wright with a nazi or a Klansman or whatever because the situation between the black and white races are not equal and Wright does not have the same level of power as the aforementioned hate-mongerers.  His words lack the power to hurt anyone.   This is kind of the key debating issue - are we equal?  Do blacks have the exact same oppertunities and benefits as whites?  If so, then yes, Wright's words are harmfull.  Until then, they are impotent.

Also, I see where you're coming from sticking to the teacher angle, but again, going to McCain and Condi Rice and others who have sounded off on this - if Wright is such a "teacher", then why doesn't Obama's words or actions reflect it?  Surely it's possible that you can be exposed to something and not take these traits on?   Otherwise, we all need to stop reading John Byrne comics, else we tie a towel around our neck and try jumping off a roof, or setting ourselves on fire screaming "FLAME ON", no?

No, right, right, I get that, but all evidence shows he wasn't.  Not all people are brainwashed, not all are smart enough to laugh it off, but in this case, evidence shows that, in fact he wasn't.  Despite what they say, Obama is not an unknown candidate - he's been in public office since the late 90s.  His actions and votes are on record. 

And let's say he is a sleeper agent and as soon as he takes office, whites are forced into manual labor or whatever it is that whites fear - so what?  He can't enforce it - he's got a whole white nation, supreme court, congress, etc against him.  It would still be impotent. 

I think we're going to have to agree to disagree on this - I can't find any power in any of this so-called hate talk, and thus, it, like this issue, is meaningless.   That's how I see it.  Until someone is actually physically affected, until someone can show that something other than their feelings have been hurt, I personally, am not buying this.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j-QYIP7o2-A

And here is the message that, with subtle changes along the way, will be shoved in Obama's face until election day.  And, add to that the Reverand Wright adds that the "swift boat" type groups will use as a comparison.

Obama needs to sharpen an argument some time soon.

Oh, and uh, Obama ranks lower on my man-crush scale than, say, George Michael or Bob Simko...

Just saying...

Oh, and Jonathan, this story ( http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080328/ap_on_re_us/siegelman_re lease) is the opening salvo in what's going to be a dark dark time for the Republicans - it's the hot buzz right now - Rove himself was personally involved in this - Gonzales's DOJ hunting political enemies, etc - after this whole story full breaks in the next few weeks, I'd guess it would be hard for a Republican to be nominated for anything more than dog-catcher for a while...

But then, Bush was able to avoid all sorts of serious charges, so maybe this'll flow off like water off a duck's back, but in the end, as much as the average joe likes their politics simple and racist, I think a story of ultimate government corruption will outweigh the fact that a candidate's pastor said something nasty.

But then, that's me the optomist again.