I hesitate to say recent news about Barack Obama has Republicans getting close to mirroring this famous magazine cover, but it's getting there.
The steady drip, drip of opposition research in recent weeks is piling up in a way that looks to be quite useful for Republicans in the fall (example here). The rapidly spreading coverage of Obama's controversial pastor, however, is simply amazing.
Hillary Clinton fans are already using it, but the real potential impact would be in the general election. Working class white voters, a critical swing demographic in many competitive states, will head for the exits in droves at the sight and sound of this stuff.
Liberal apologists will try to rationalize it away or excuse the controversy since it involves a minority church. Some secular liberals will even be flummoxed at the uproar since many of them privately assume most churches are similarly controversial. But this just won't wash in much of America.
It's own thing to disagree with a point or two of church doctrine, especially those dating well into the past (see Kerry, John). But highly inflammatory statements from the lead pastor of the church you willingly choose to attend, join, and donate to is not so easy to disavow.
That's not hope being screamed from the pulpit, that's bigotry. And lots of it.
Posted by Eric Earling at March 13, 2008 07:19 PM | Email ThisOh, and the question you've been dodging on other threads still stands WVH...Do you adhere to a "black value" system (as set forth by the TUCC which Obama belongs to), or a "Christian value" system.
Posted by: Rick D. on March 13, 2008 08:36 PMThey may make some pickups in Congress, but think they will be modest - because the absymal rating of Congress since they
(the Dems) became the majority.
"The belief that all members of each race possess characteristics or abilities specific to that race, esp. so as to distinguish it as inferior or superior to another race or races."
Consider that before you go calling the "black value system" racist. Oh yeah, you might wanna read what the black value system actually says, too.
Posted by: noble on March 13, 2008 09:09 PMoh this is going to VERY entertaining.
Posted by: Andy on March 13, 2008 09:24 PM1. My opinion of you hasn't changed.
2. I don't go to Senator Obama's church, I am of another denomination. For the record, the particular denomination to which I belong believes that all people are children of God, even you.
3. Now this is my comment to you from the archives:
March 03, 2008
Terrorists Strike in Woodinville
As reported by KING5, terrorists claiming to be from the Earth Liberation Front have burned down empty homes in Woodinville.
128. Sorry Rick D, you don't get away with misquoting me. The word attributed means exactly what I said and the full cite was given below the quote.
"According to research by Mark T. Shirey, citing Nice Guys Finish Seventh: False Phrases, Spurious Sayings, and Familiar Misquotations by Ralph Keyes, 1992, this quote was first uttered by mid-nineteenth century historian and statesman François Guizot when he observed...."
http://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/Winston_Churchill
You are the one who is dumb as brick. So, to make up for your lack of smarts you have the nerve to call Obama an empty suit. Hatred rots your brain and you are exhibit A.
Now, your question about asking Senator Obama about a Black values system is actually a fair question. I asked the Paul people about Dr. Paul's association with David Duke. If the actual
question you are trying to formulate is how can any leader who promises to uphold the Constitution and represent all people have a philosophy that is exclusionary? You may have actually stumbled upon an issue. By the way, I expect that Senator Obama will do better in his response than Dr. Paul and if he doesn't I will join you in roundly condemning him on the issue, just as I have done with Dr. Paul.
Now, as to you, no my opinion of you hasn't changed one iota.
Posted by: WVH on March 13, 2008 09:41 PMNothing like purposely loosing the Catholic vote because your buddy buddy with a bigot TV Preacher.
Meanwhile,
http://www.republicansforobama.org
Posted by: John Bailo on March 13, 2008 11:07 PMhttp://therealrevo.com/blog/?p=592
Smell That? It is Pure Chicago Politics
March 13, 2008 8:42 pm R.D. Walker Conspiracies, Crime, Politics
The Obama campaign boasts:
"Obama Requested $1 Million For Construction Of A New Hospital Pavilion At The University Of Chicago. In 2006, Obama requested that the University of Chicago receive $1 million to support its Construction of New Hospital Pavilion."
Nice, huh? Obama getting federal money earmarked for a hospital. So what?
Well, it would seem that Mrs. Obama worked as vice president for community and external affairs at the University of Chicago Hospitals at the time. Furthermore, Mrs. Obama�s compensation at the University of Chicago Hospital increased from $121,910 in 2004, before her husband was elected to the Senate, to $316,962 in 2005, just after he took office. That is a 260% raise. Not chump change�
So what does it all mean?
1) Mrs. Obama worked at University of Chicago Hospital.
2) Her salary was $121,910.
3) Her husband is elected to the Senate.
4) She is given a 260% raise to $316,962.
5) Newly elected Mr. Obama brings $1 million in earmarks to the hospital.
You can do the math yourself, but I would say the hospital got their money�s worth out of Mrs. Obama�s raise.
Oh, and don�t forget How Obama Got a $625,000 Yard For Free: http://therealrevo.com/blog/?p=555
Change? Really?
Good luck with that.
Posted by: hinton on March 13, 2008 11:42 PMBut more importantly, the average American can see that one sure way to fail in attempting to eradicate racism, is to turn everything into a racist and classist struggles. Progressives are constantly emphasizing various skin colors, genders, sexual orientations, etc. to extend victim classes, and keep anything divisive front and center.
The race baiting and anti-Americanism won't sell in November.
Posted by: Jeff B. on March 13, 2008 11:50 PMNo they aren't. Please, read them. They say nothing about inherent traits of blacks vs. whites, nothing about superiority or inferiority. I see nothing controversial about Rev. Wright preaching in favor of "black self-determination."
Your answer to criticism of Fauxbama is to play the race card, which you do on every thread that comes through this site. This says more about your character (or lack thereof) than of mine.
Don't worry though, there are plenty of months left to further expose Barack Fauxbama as the empty suit he is. Sometimes, it takes pulling at that little thread to have the suit come apart at the seams, and now that the thread has been exposed, it's only a matter of time now.
Couldn't help but notice that yet again, you failed to answer the question I posed to you WVH.....just mumbled something about Ron Paul and scurried off. Just a hint of honesty would be a refreshing departure from your usual antics.
Posted by: Rick D. on March 14, 2008 05:41 AMActually, Dr. Wright preaches about Black victimization, not Black self-determination.
Bill Cosby on the other hand tells the truth about the state of the black community and gets roundly condemned for doing so. Until the Black community starts emulating people like Bill Cosby, Colin Powell, Condi Rice, Michael Steele, etc.........and not the slithering "men of the cloth" like Wright, Farrakhan, Jackson and Sharpton, they will sadly continue down the road to self-imposed slavery with government once again in the role of master. (e.g. Hurricane Katrina)
You may not like that reality, but that alone will not change it.
Posted by: Rick D. on March 14, 2008 07:17 AMFranklin Delano Roosevelt
Dwight David Eisenhower
John Fitzgerald Kennedy
Lyndon Baines Johnson
Richard Milhous Nixon
Gerald Rudolph Ford
James Earl Carter
Ronald Wilson Reagan
George Herbert Walker Bush
William Jefferson Clinton
George Walker Bush
Of course, if it comes from Ken Hutcherson, then it's ok.
Posted by: thehim on March 14, 2008 08:07 AMReally.... Geeee when did Ken say that the GOV created AIDS to kill of Blacks? Or 3 strikes and you out was to put nothing but blacks in jail?
As Obama pastor did.
I see you and cato have something in common.
Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on March 14, 2008 08:36 AMHussein Obama has just been captured hiding in a spider hole near Chicago by Army Special Forces.
FLASH!!
Posted by: The Pirate on March 14, 2008 08:53 AMLook at the dem's major problem now. Obama has more delgates then Hillary, except the supers.
Now they want to re-do FL. So if the go to the convention and they give it to Hillary they will have a huge fight on their hands.
As I said before this will make 1968 look like nothing. Bring plenty of pop-corn for this one folks.
Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on March 14, 2008 09:03 AMso if Obama did make it to the Prez..
I wonder what job the dear Pastor would have?
No, if it comes from Ken Hutcherson, then it is not OK either. To date, Hutcherson has not said anything as bad as Wright. However Hutcherson has been roundly criticized for his statements as well, as he should be.
But more importantly, it's not a tit for tat zero sum game. Wright is Wrong, and that should be obvious. And Obama has very clear and lasting ties to Wright.
I agree with Bill H. @25. Sheds new light on where Michelle Obama got her anger.
Posted by: Jeff B. on March 14, 2008 10:13 AMOf course, if it comes from Ken Hutcherson, then it's ok.
Actually the pastor that Rev. Wright reminds me most of isn't Hutch, it's Fred Phelps of the Westboro Baptist Church in Kansas. They both preach that God hates the United States.
Posted by: RBW on March 14, 2008 10:27 AMWhere have you been? Don't ya know that is implies Barack "Saddam" Hussein Obama?
Given the long and bloody history of the Democrat party with regard to enslavement, torture, and oppression of blacks, I am mystified that the black community has been so loyal to that party. The DNC has refused even to offer an apology for the heinous acts commited against blacks under Democrat rule. It seems to me that the black community has purchased a huge bill of goods. How can Obama even think about being a Democrat? Is he there because of black outrage over the DNC's failure to offer an apology? Has he sold out his own people? I wonder.
Posted by: NW Denizen on March 14, 2008 10:40 AMIs English even close to being your first language? The reason you did not get into either Columbia or Harvard Law like Senator Obama is that you can't read for one thing and you have no analytical skills. Now, let's review:
1. You said at post #19:
"WVH~ of course I didn't think you'd have the intellectual capacity or integrity to admit your mistakes about Obama and his pastor/mentor the cretin Jeremiah A. Wright, and you didn't disappoint. As they say, birds of a feather...
Your answer to criticism of Fauxbama is to play the race card, which you do on every thread that comes through this site. This says more about your character (or lack thereof) than of mine."
a. Intellectual capacity,really? You have never answered the question if you even have a high school diploma, both Senator Obama's credentials and mine are on the record, care to discuss yours? Thought so.
b. Really, please list the mistakes so that I can address each. Your only characterization is the continual characteristic of Senator Obama being an "empty suit" because he is a Black with credentials you don't even come close to having. Feeling a little green are we? Now list the mistakes.
c. Now this is an English word and I will define it for you. The word is "comparison" and it means
Dictionary: comparison (kəm-păr'ĭ-sən) n.
The act of comparing or the process of being compared.
A statement or estimate of similarities and differences.
The quality of being similar or equivalent; likeness: no comparison between the two books.
Now let me break it down so that even you can understand. I compared the situation that Senator Obama is in with Rev. Wright to that of Dr. Paul and David Duke. See, post #8 which references an archived post. In your post #1 you asked the same question which I answered in post #8, get it?
2. My opinion of you is the same. You hate those of color who have achieved more than you ever could. Let me throw out another concept. Just because someone disagrees with you on an issue of politics, doesn't make them an "empty suit" when you will not compare your education and background to theirs and put it on the record. Do you have a background similar to Senator Obama's?
If so, care to disclose it? Thought so.
3. Now, list the mistakes about Senator Obama or do you just hate him because of his color.
4. Final question to you, why is it the supporters of David Duke always come across like third grade elementary school drop-outs?
Posted by: WVH on March 14, 2008 11:12 AM"3. Now, list the mistakes about Senator Obama or do you just hate him because of his color."
How about member of a church that preaches racism and hatred against whites, and our government?
Posted by: NW Denizen on March 14, 2008 11:32 AM1. My response was directed at Rick D.
2. See, Hinton's post at #15, he actually addresses some issues which need a response. That is an example of valid political battling.
3. Now review my post at #8 which is from an archive. I made the following comment:
"Now, your question about asking Senator Obama about a Black values system is actually a fair question. I asked the Paul people about Dr. Paul's association with David Duke. If the actual
question you are trying to formulate is how can any leader who promises to uphold the Constitution and represent all people have a philosophy that is exclusionary? You may have actually stumbled upon an issue. By the way, I expect that Senator Obama will do better in his response than Dr. Paul and if he doesn't I will join you in roundly condemning him on the issue, just as I have done with Dr. Paul."
I made a comparison to Dr. Paul, by the way I call him doctor because it is thought Drs. have more respect from the public than pols and he earned the title, because both have associates with exclusionary policies. I stand by the above remarks.
I believe Senator Obama is going to have to address this issue and my best guess is that if he doesn't have a Sister Souljah moment with Rev. Wright, there is not only a valid campaign issue, but like Dr. Paul's relationship with Duke associates, he should be called to task.
Posted by: WVH on March 14, 2008 11:46 AMCharlie Black (McCain's campaign manager):
"You know what, what Sen. McCain has said repeatedly is that these candidates cannot be held accountable for all the views of people who endorse them or people who befriend them. And fortunately, I heard your report earlier that Sen. Obama has repudiated these very unusual views. But [what] John McCain believes is that Barack Obama or Hillary Clinton should be held accountable for their public policy views, the things we've described before, big government versus smaller government."
You gotta be kidding. Are you calling Rick D a racist because he calls Obama an empty suit? Give us all a break. That term has been used on politicians for a long time. And guess what? They mostly were white. Get a grip lady. Your ultra-sensitivity to this makes your other comments worth less, as they seem to be coming from an unreasonable person. If you were on a different blog site, say Horses Ass, I'm sure you would have a number of people jump on Rick D with you. Please give it a rest. If Rick D decides to try and push your buttons, ignore it and soon he will stop that too.
Posted by: REBEL on March 14, 2008 12:39 PMBottom line for me as a veteran is I will never vote for any senator who refuses to wear an American Flag on his lapel. ESPECIALLY in time of war.
Do we really want a first lady who is ashamed of this nation? Boy that is really uplifiting. Might as well elect Osama Bin Laden as our President.
Posted by: pbj on March 14, 2008 12:53 PMYeah am I'm pretty sure she's black too.
But she was a Rep. So all of that stuff was ok.
WVH, where is the outrage???
Here is your proof:
http://www.gocomics.com/rallcom/2004/07/05/
Indeed the stench from yoyur
Posted by: pbj on March 14, 2008 02:30 PM"Bottom line for me as a veteran is I will never vote for any senator who refuses to wear an American Flag on his lapel. ESPECIALLY in time of war.
Posted by pbj at March 14, 2008 12:53 PM "
My, you have high standards, look who you would vote for!
Rick Renzi
John Doolittle
Randall Cunningham
Bob Ney
Bob Taft
Larry Craig
http://www.balloon-juice.com/?p=9763
Posted by: ExPatBrit on March 14, 2008 02:55 PMPosted by ExPatBrit at March 14, 2008 02:55 PM
WRONG ExPatBrit. My statement only tells you who I would NOT vote for, not who I would vote for. Did you pass your A levels in school?
Don't they teach you chaps basic logic?
Cheers.
Posted by: pbj on March 14, 2008 03:14 PMThey want Captial gains to go from 15% to 28%
Tax rates back up to 60%
12% social security tax unlimited
Sales tax on Internet purchases and access
Earmarks unchecked and spending unchecked
Bushes tas cuts scrapped adding thousands in new taxes to every household
Insane idiots!
Vote Republican!
Posted by: GS on March 14, 2008 03:25 PM
"...I will never vote for any Senator that refuses to wear an American Flag on his lapel."
As a fellow vet I find this repugnant at best. The left calls this "Tin Flag Patriots". I couldn't agree more - if the wearer is some draft dodging, deferment seeking, self-described super patriot speaking person from the left or the right. There are a few who are entitled to wear that flag and most that do have NEVER served or supported the military except when it serves their own purposes. PJB - that kind of statement demeans you.
Posted by: Rocketdog on March 14, 2008 03:28 PMIn answer to your question, it is not just the "empty suit" comment. Mr. D. has a whole body of comments which in my opinion, support the designation.
Posted by: WVH on March 14, 2008 03:30 PMSeems to me when it comes to Iraq and Afghanistan we had the "lapel pins" and the "car magnet support the troops banners (so convenient they don't mark the paint)" covered but the rest of it "not so much".
I will take someone real over a poseur anytime.
Take this statement this afternoon from guess who:
"I must say, I'm a little envious," Bush said. "If I were slightly younger and not employed here, I think it would be a fantastic experience to be on the front lines of helping this young democracy succeed."
"It must be exciting for you ... in some ways romantic, in some ways, you know, confronting danger. You're really making history, and thanks," Bush said.
But I bet he wears a pin.
Posted by: ExPatBrit on March 14, 2008 03:36 PMOne further thing, David Duke types rely on people as you say "giving it a rest." The fact that plenty of people of all colors, mostly religious folks didn't give it a rest is why I am not behind bars and like it or not Senator Obama can run for president. The fact that people didn't give it a rest and were sensitive about bigots like Duke is the reason he is the marginalized idiot that he is. Now, if your opinion of me rests on whether or not I have a favorable opinion of Mr. D., guess what, I care not a wit. I have an opinion and his most recent posts do nothing to change it.
Posted by: WVH on March 14, 2008 03:37 PMSorry. I disagree. The question isn't "Does Obama wear the flag enough", it is that he refuses to wear it at all. It disgusts him. I wouldn't vote for a flag burner either.
You demean yourself when you defend that kind of behavior in a United States Senator. You piss on every man and woman that every died for that flag of which I have several friends and relatives.
You PC excuse of the label "Tin Flag Patriots" shows you are more concerned about impressing liberals than anything else. I don't give a damn what they think of me.
Posted by: pbj on March 14, 2008 04:23 PMSeems to me when it comes to Iraq and Afghanistan we had the "lapel pins" and the "car magnet support the troops banners (so convenient they don't mark the paint)" covered but the rest of it "not so much".
I will take someone real over a poseur anytime.
Take this statement this afternoon from guess who:
"I must say, I'm a little envious," Bush said. "If I were slightly younger and not employed here, I think it would be a fantastic experience to be on the front lines of helping this young democracy succeed."
"It must be exciting for you ... in some ways romantic, in some ways, you know, confronting danger. You're really making history, and thanks," Bush said.
But I bet he wears a pin.
Posted by ExPatBrit at March 14, 2008 03:36 PM
Hell, are you even a citizen of this country? Gren Card?
I doubt you have any idea what it means to be an American. Don't even pretend to lecture me "mate".
Posted by: pbj on March 14, 2008 04:26 PMI doubt you have any idea what it means to be an American. Don't even pretend to lecture me "mate".
Posted by pbj at March 14, 2008 04:26 PM
I really don't think I'm your mate as I didn't spend $10 at Target for a Chinese made lapel pin and therefore I am un-American.
Let's hear it "Why don't you go back to your own country if you hate the USA so much?"
Amateur
LOL LOL LOL.
Posted by: ExPatBrit on March 14, 2008 05:14 PMWell by all means WVH, I encourage you to post those outrageous bigoted and racist statements I've posted. Since they are conveniently archived and I've been posting only a very short time, I'm sure it shouldn't be too hard to find some proof of your accusations right? But you can't and you know it, so we can expect you to dodge yet another challenge posed to you. I'm seeing a pattern here WVH.
Now, as for your post at #42, you ask:
"Is English even close to being your first language?"
Thanks for asking WVH. Yes, it is my first language, although unlike yourself, I'm fluent in it.
Now, Back at post #1, I challenged you to answer a simple question- Do you adhere to a "black value" system or a "Christian Value" system.
In your rambling, incoherent reply post @ 8, you said:
"For the record, the particular denomination to which I belong believes that all people are children of God, even you."
...Was that an answer by anyone's standards other than the ignorant and feeble minded?
In your post @ 42, you claim to have answered the question by saying:
"In your post #1 you asked the same question which I answered in post #8, get it?"
Oh I get it WVH, you're even more intellectually comatose than I had previously surmised.
Also, please stop professing to possess a doctoral degree...anyone with an IQ above room temperature that has been reading your inane posts can see that you're education level is on par with your maturity level.
I have to agree with pbj on this one. The question is whether most progressives would have a problem wearing either a red ribbon or pink ribbon. The red ribbon symbolizes the fight against AIDS and the pink ribbon the fight against breast cancer. I imagine candidates of all persuasions would have no problem wearing the ribbons because it shows they support the cause.
You come from Britain where the monarchy still symbolizes the state and the Commonwealth. All wearing the flag is showing besides alliegance to this country is a recognition to the brave men and women who have fought for this country over several wars that their sacrifice is appreciated. The symbolism may seem lame to you and most of the European elite, who in my experience, have a general hatred of America, but the president should have an appreciation of this symbolism. As those who are regular readers know, one of the issues that I had with Dr. Paul was his failure to understand the symbolism of associating with Duke types. In England, the Prime Minister is totally policical and the monarchy is symbolic. Here the president embodies both political and symbolic power. A true "leader" ought to get this.
This is, in my opinion, a valid issue.
Keep posting and I will even get Rebel to agree with me that you are an idiot.
1. I do not belong to Rev. Wright's denomination and have never been to his church.
2. Can you define Black Values System? I have never said that I know what that is, so you define it.
3. Have you ever assumed the alias of Atheist and Pirate because the World's Most Vacuous Human is remarkably similar to the moniker Woman Spewing Venon of those two posters.
Now, you define Black Values System for me and I will comment on it.
Posted by: WVH on March 14, 2008 06:25 PMIf John McCain was a long-time member and attendee of Ken Hutcherson's church then yes, he would likewise enduring his own round of scrutiny. It would be like the coverage around W's speech at Bob Jones University x 100. It would be just as tough on the candidate as what Obama is dealing with right now.
Posted by: Eric Earling on March 14, 2008 06:37 PMCare to answer a question about your education? Thought so. Your basic problem is you are an uneducated boob who has to tear others down to make himself feel better. It must really rankle you that Black people are no longer slaves and can vote and participate in society. because you compare yourself to others in order to maintain your self esteem. The fact that some Blacks have moved ahead, just galls you. Senator Obama, Columbia and Harvard Law, WVH is Dr. WVH and you are, well you just won't say.
Now define Black Values System. As for the Bible, I believe that is the Inspired Word of God and the ultimate authority. I really am curious to see how you define Black Values System.
Now, your education and degrees are, the answer?
Posted by: WVH on March 14, 2008 06:38 PMSuddenly he's not the messiah, but an average Joe politician. And all at once, knocked from his media pedestal, most see him for what he really is, and the hypnotic charisma trance of the Beatles concert like arena gatherings suddenly wears off. Eric is right, I sure hope he is the nominee, because he's got very little change of getting elected in November.
..and now you're playing stupid at post # 69 saying you don't know what a "black values" system is? So which WVH am I speaking with? the One who said it was a fair question or the one that can't define it less than 24 hours later?
Nice attempt at a dodge WVH, unfortunately for you, completely transparent. I'll move onto a simpler task for you.
I told you to supply some proof for your accusations of my bigoted and racist comments. Will you be supplying those statements and being accountable for your labels?...or simply scurry away as usual? The archives is located at the bottom of the page with the title "OUR ARCHIVES" with a simple month by month list of blogs. I started posting around January or so.
I await that lengthy list, WVH.
Dude, you have no reasoning ability.
1. You brought up Rev. Wright and the Mission Statement for his Church. It is fair to ask Senator Obama about it as he goes to that church and is a member of that denomination. So, ask him about that.
2. I do not belong to Senator Obama's church or his denomination. So, why would you ask me about a Black Values System, other than the three of us happen to be Black. Oh, I get it, all Black people look alike, bet you wouldn't be able to tell me from Senator Obama. We all look alike, right?
3. I am entitled to my opinion and really why do you care what I think since I am an ignorant, clueless, darkie. Since you don't value any Black person's opinion, does it matter what I think? Again, my opinion of you remains the same.
4. Now, stop evading the questions:
a. Define Black Values System
b. What is your educational background?
Keep posting.
Posted by: WVH on March 14, 2008 07:06 PMOne of the great things about this country is it allows all manner of folks to exist and even run for office. The thing I respect about David Duke is he is honest enough to say he hates all folks of color. You honestly could state that here, few others besides me, would jump on you for it. You should state that you just plain hate Black folks and really think they should stay in their place. Duke doesn't even try to be objective. Since I have zip respect for you, you can just state on the record that you hate Blacks, it certainly wouldn't change my opinion of you. At least, on that point, I would respect you as much as I do David Duke. Did I make any typos on this one?
Posted by: WVH on March 14, 2008 07:15 PM"Dude, you have no reasoning ability."
Translation: I have no valid answers and therefore, I must evade the question by asking a question on top of the one he asks.
I'll just let that last post of yours stand on its own, WVH. I think it speaks volumes to your pathology.
Posted by: Rick D. on March 14, 2008 07:28 PMI'll check back in tomorrow and see if you could scramble up some proof to back up your ignorant labels and assertions, WVH.
Now, Put up or shut up!!
Posted by: Rick D. on March 14, 2008 07:38 PMMy opinion of you stands, care to match David Duke in the manliness department and just admit you hate Senator Obama primarily because he is Black and you hate all Blacks that don't know their place?
Posted by: WVH on March 14, 2008 07:53 PMhttp://tpmcafe.talkingpointsmemo.com/talk/2008/03/obamas-judgment-wright-or-wron.php
Posted by: Umbria on March 14, 2008 08:31 PMI look forward to seeing Ragnar, True Patriot, or Rick D. defending the anti-catholic minister Hagee who has called the Pope a Nazi and said that Hurricane Katrina was God's punishment for the sin happening in New Orleans and that Jesus is not really the Messiah.
I think we all agree on one thing. Hatred is toxic. Whoever becomes president has to be president of all these United States.
Personally, I don't like the theology of any preacher of the Word who sees fit to categorize groups of people, not individuals, but groups. In my mind their interpretation of New Testament Scripture is fairly limited and they don't understand the meaning of the "Great Commission" which is to go forward preaching the Gospel to All the World.
At this point, I find a lot of candidates lacking:
a. Dr. Paul really never repudiated Duke
b. Senator Obama still has to answer if you repudiate the message of hate now, why did it take you 20 years to come to this point?
c. Senator Mc Cain is in a pickle as well because Rev. Hagee calling a major Christian denomination the great religious whore is just as hateful as Rev. Wright.
We live in an age for both parties of coalition and alliance politics which means both parties are reluctant to look hatemongers of all stripes in the eye and tell them I am kicking your lame ass to the curb because I am having none of that.
The real issue is that some of the hateful are "our" buddies and they may be a little hateful or racist at times, but they are my buddy and we have a good time tossing down a couple of brews. They treat me well, it is just this one little flaw that they have about those that are__________.
The principle is hate of any type should not be tolerated. I wonder how many of either party want that standard?
Posted by: WVH on March 14, 2008 10:02 PMYou are correct that Senator Mc Cain does not have the relationship of pastor/congregant with Rev. Hagee. These articles indicate that anyone googling the guy would have come up with some pretty exclusionary theology:
But these Talk To Action | Reclaiming Citizenship, History, and FaithMedia Matters for America wonders whether MSNBC will cover controversial televangelist John Hagee's endorsement of John McCain as much as it did Louis ...
www.talk2action.org/story/2008/2/29/112513/406
McCain Endorsement Angers Catholic League President | The Trail ...John McCain for accepting the endorsement of Texas evangelicalist John Hagee, calling the controversial pastor a bigot who has "waged an unrelenting war ...
blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/02/28/mccain_endorsement_angers_cath.html
Anti-Catholic pastor who endorsed McCain likened to FarrakhanFeb 29, 2008 ... On Wednesday Pastor John Hagee endorsed Senator John McCain's .... I agree that John McCain should renounce Hagee's comments and do it asap! ...
www.catholicnewsagency.com/new.php?n=11947
Here is the point about principle. Pols make bargins with the "devil" to gain votes. I do not excuse the theology of Rev. Wright, I suspect that in the ward system of big city politics, one gains advantage by belonging to an "acceptable" church. Problem is national politics is not ward politics. Many up and comers belong to the "right" faith community because that will help their business and social connections.
Senator Mc Cain made a calculation, I suppose that he needed conservative religious leaders. Dr. Charles Stanley is a conservative type of religious leader who is fundamentalist, but not a hater.
My point is this no matter the length of the relationship, both parties are not at a place where they are willing to stand for the principle we don't want the hate-mongers. In the minds of the pols, they simply represent too many votes.
Posted by: WVH on March 14, 2008 11:08 PMMaybe, but Sen, Obama was forced to "denounce and repudiate" Farrakhan. The difference is McCain gladly accepted the nomination from Hagee by standing next to him and thanking him during a press conference. Obama has distanced himslef from Wright, why won't McCain do the same from Hagee?
I could spout off hate as much as you envision, and then endorse McCain, and he still would have no connection with me.
Are you a TV preacher with a long record of hate speech? If so do you think it's OK to call a press conference to show your support for McCain and have him publicly thank you in person for your endorsement? Maybe you should watch the video.
Irony meter = pegged.
Posted by: jimg on March 15, 2008 10:51 AMNo, he said he did not agree with all of his views (did not specify which). He did not "denounce and repudiate" like Sen. Obama had to do with Farrakhan. Nor did he do anything which Sen. Obama had to do for his pastor.
How are my education specs relevant to this discusson? Am I running for President? Should I lie like you and claim I have a doctoral degree, WVH?
Now that I've exposed you as a liar with your false claim of racism , what is your next move?....I've led you by the ear to the archives section and you haven't been able to find one utterance that backs up your claim?
Time to put up or shut up WVH.
Which choice will you make?
Posted by: Rick D. on March 15, 2008 02:38 PMThe TV preachers so many of you hate, often have programs teaching love for and obedience to our American Consititution.
If your hatred for TV preachers is because they preach against sin....
Which theologies can a politician engage it??
Answer: any one he wants. Then we get to vote.
The TV preachers so many of you hate, often have programs teaching love for and obedience to our American Consititution.
If your hatred for TV preachers is because they preach against sin....
Which theologies can a politician engage it??
Answer: any one he wants. Then we get to vote.
Wright is not preaching hard against sin, Rev wright seems, from the footage we've seen, to hate America.
If your hatred for TV preachers is because they preach against sin....
Which theologies can a politician engage it??
Answer: any one he wants. Then we get to vote. That's America.
I really feel sorry for you, you are pathetic.
1. You said:
" Should I lie like you and claim I have a doctoral degree, WVH?"
I bet you $5,000 dollars that I have a doctorate from a local university. Here is a hint, I don't know if Bruce Gutherie has graduated yet, but he was a Masters Degree student at the same university. I will make it easy on you, the $5,000 will be paid to five of my favorite charities.
Care to put your money where your mouth is?
I don't like to call people liars as that is tacky and shows a complete lack of class and breeding. Let's just say you are hopelessly uninformed.
2. You said:
"How are my education specs relevant to this discusson?"
You said:
"Electing Obama would be like bringing on a new janitor at a fortune 500 company and hiring him as your CEO within the month because he has "good communication" skills. I hope the electorate isn't this vacuous, but given some of the results tonight, you can't help but wonder.
I don't like our chances with either of these two candidates on the Democrats side with the weak nominee we've selected on the GOP side.....I guess sometimes, as a party, you reap what you sow.
Posted by: Rick D. on February 5, 2008 09:03 PM
I'm sure I don't have to quote you on the "empty suit" remarks as you will no doubt acknowledge that you made those remarks.
a. You education or lack thereof becomes relevant not because you are running for higher office, but your education addresses the issue what weight, if any, is to be given your opinion.
b. Let's compare you, vita, unknown to Caroline Kennedy. Graduate with honors from Radcliffe, Columbia Law, accomplished author, world traveler, opportunity to meet 1000s of people of all walks in life, member of several boards, yada, yada with you, vita unknown. To my knowledge this women has never publically called anyone with Senator Obama's achievements either a janitor or "empty suit." Guess what, if she did, I would take her opinion over yours.
3. My opinion is that and it is based on your continual rantings and the way you marginalize individuals from particular groups while hiding your background, don't happen to have any sheets in the closet, do you?
So, should I let the charities know the money is coming or will you?
I dislike, not hate, you because you are simply a hater. You can't honestly evaluate issues and policy because you can't see beyond color.
My opinion of you hasn't changed, so as they say, pay-up or shut-up.
Let's make the 5,000 payable in Euros, not dollars as I want the charities to get the most out of this.
Posted by: WVH on March 15, 2008 07:40 PMWhile it certainly benefits conservatives to be able to see the D's claw each other's eyes out and even coax them on a bit, 'Hil is trying to weaken Obama so he'll get in line behind her. This has Arkansas' dynamic duo's fingerprints all over it. It's their modus operandi. Any takers for a unfriendly $10 wager that that Obama announces he'll accept the VP slot in a few weeks?
Posted by: samuel huntington on March 15, 2008 09:39 PMWell, we know from early in the campaign which theologies are NOT ok for a politician to engage in: Mormonism. (a.k.a: The Church of JESUS CHRIST of Latter-Day Saints)
Posted by: Dave on March 15, 2008 09:49 PMI see you've done neither. Either back up your assertions or be outed as the liar we both know you are.
Posted by: Rick D. on March 16, 2008 10:08 AMTesty aren't we.
1. You didn't say if you want to take up my 5,000 Euro bet. Is that a yes? I have five charities in mind.
2. Put up or shut-up about what? You haven't disclosed your educational background, now what is it.
So, are we on for the 5,000 Euro bet?
Now Sounder, talking to the wall, really.
Perhaps you can assist Rick D in answering the following two questions:
1. Is the 5,000 Euro bet on?
2. What is his education background that provides him what the platform to call another person an "empty suit" Do you know his background?
Posted by: WVH on March 16, 2008 10:33 AMNow you're playing stupid again?? or is this the real WVH? You claim I'm a racist and haven't been able to find any proof of it.....I've led you by the ear to the archives and all you can find is a comparison to a janitor at a fortune 500 company?? Please tell me you aren't that vacuous WVH.
Unfortunately for you, it appears you are.
WVH~ on-line gambling has been made a felony by the Democrats in the Washington state legislature....
Next stupid question?
Posted by: Rick D. on March 16, 2008 11:08 AMWhat is your education background and will you be transferring the funds to the charities of my choice?
Posted by: WVH on March 16, 2008 11:23 AMHere is the defintion of gambling:
gam·ble (gmbl)
v. gam·bled, gam·bling, gam·bles
v.intr.
1.
a. To bet on an uncertain outcome, as of a contest.
The bet is that I don't have a doctorate from a local university. 5,000 Euros to five worthy charities. The key is the ourcome is not uncertain.
What is your education background?
Posted by: WVH on March 16, 2008 11:33 AMAre you asking me to commit a crime as outlined by the Washington State legislature?
SB6613
Now, unless you want to call me a liar, one more time for stating I have a doctorate, let's move on to the next issue what is your education background?
Posted by: WVH on March 16, 2008 11:49 AM@ 115 "My very real doctorate is in education. Too, bad I didn't get to you earlier."
Posted by: Rick D. on March 16, 2008 12:40 PMAnd with Obama, it isn't just a pin with him. It is a culmination of subtle signs, whether is be he wife saying she is ashamed of this country, his refusing to wear an American flag pin, when customary. The small subtle signs of his true feelings slip out no matter how much he tries to hide them.
Small things, such as refusing the pin, denouncements by the wife, and refusing to put hand over heart during the national anthem all add up.
Posted by: pbj on March 16, 2008 02:18 PMFirst off we have his associations with terrorists Farrakhan and William Ayers. First off, many liberals need convincing that Farrakhan and Ayers are nuts, even though one supports terorrist enemies and talking about killing white people in a race war and the other belonged to a terrorist group from the 60's that set bombs, killed two cops and a security guard and unrepentently stated he regrets he didn't set more bombs. Liberal will say he refuted Farakhan. Ok fair enough. Though I haven't heard him repudiate Ayers, a donor to his campaign, he will probably say the same thing once the media blackout on ayers is penetrated.
Next we have the wife, who stated the "for http://youtube.com/watch?v=0SiShk433H4the first time in my adult lifetime I am really proud of my country". You can watch the video here.
ANd then we Obama refusing to wear "that pin" as shown from his own mouth. Now we all recall what happens to white people when someone talk about blacks and say "you people". "THAT PIN???" That pin with the beautiful flag that represents freedom and democracy. "THAT" for which countless Americans dies and suffered, including John McCain. He refuses to wear "that" pin.
Apparently he also refuses to put hand over heart for THAT national anthem . Of course we lnow, according to liberals, only "tin flag patriots" and jingoistic naitonalists wear flag pins and put hand over heart for the national anthem. Probably nothing short of spitting on a vet returning from war and burining a flag will ever convince liberals you are a "real" American.
Next we have the very Ameri-hating speeches of Obama's self admitted spiritual advisor of 20 years. A man who talks of "White America, USA of KKKA". See for yourself, in his own words, not someone quoting him. This is a man who was on Obama's campaign staff until only recently when YouTube video's and the independent media were able to pierce the media blackout on anything negative about Obama.
It is not one thing with Obama, it is everything.
"Let's try this, take Rev. Wright's sermon...swap White People for Homosexuals, swap Jewish for Catholic, swap USA for Sin and you have the exact same except white TV preacher named Rev. Hagee."
Is that the best you cam come up with? Nowhere did Hagee say Catholics were the KKK, unlike Jerimiah Wright who says just that about white people. Nowhere in your video at 85 was the word homosexual even uttered.
Finally Cato, please post the link to McCain's book where he says Hagee is his "spiritual advisor", where Hagee has offiated at McCain's wedding and where McCain has been attending Hagees church for 20 years. There is no comparison of hage vs Wright, for none of those things just mentioned can be said about McCain and Hagee while in contrast that close relationship, that intimate bond, that sharing of ideology does exist between Obama and Wright.
You are just throwing out straw men and knocking them down again.
Posted by: pbj on March 16, 2008 02:54 PM
I'm sure I don't have to quote you on the "empty suit" remarks as you will no doubt acknowledge that you made those remarks.
a. You Your education or lack thereof becomes relevant not because you are running for higher office, but your education addresses the issue what weight, if any, is to be given your opinion.
b. Let's compare you, vita vitae (vita is an IRS program), unknown to Caroline Kennedy. Graduate with honors from Radcliffe, Columbia Law, accomplished author, world traveler, opportunity to meet 1000s of people of all walks in life, member of several boards, yada, yada with you, vita vitae unknown. To my knowledge this women has never publically publicly called anyone with Senator Obama's achievements either a janitor or "empty suit." Guess what, if she did, I would take her opinion over yours.
3. My opinion is that and it is based on your continual rantings and the way you marginalize individuals from particular groups while hiding your background, don't happen to have any sheets in the closet, do you?
So, should I let the charities know where the money is coming or will you?
I dislike, not hate, you because you are simply a hater. You can't honestly evaluate issues and policy because you can't see beyond color.
My opinion of you hasn't changed, so as they say, pay-up or shut-up.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
WVH,
How can anyone really believe a PhD would write that way? Especially in part A above, you associated the displayed intelligence of a poster, via their writings, with their education and the weight that should be given to their opinion. Do you realize the irony?
I would also put forth that one's vitae (you seemed to have particular trouble with that word) doesn't necessarily relate to the correctness of their opinion. I can cite many people who are counterexamples to this proposition such as Elliot Spitzer and Bill Clinton. And in logic, all one needs to disprove a thesis is a counterexample.
I am not defending Rick though, so please don't throw out that red herring. I merely, with the utmost humility suggest ever so slightly that it might be more convincing in your self-congratulatory rantings to run the spell checker and the grammar checker prior to posting.
Same bet I made Rick D., care to take me on 5,000 Euros to my five favorite charities. Game?
Now regarding opinion, every one is entitled to an opinion. I might consider opining about whether NASA should go to unmanned space flight. I can give an opinion, what do you think it is worth?
I call it vita, this is the defintion in international usage:
vita - Collaborative International Dictionary of English v.0.48 :
curriculum vitae \cur*ric"u*lum vi"tae\
(k[u^]r*r[i^]k"[=u]*l[u^]m v[imac]"t[=e],
k[u^]r*r[i^]k"[=u]*l[u^]m v[imac]"t[imac]), n.; pl.
curricula vitae (-l[.a]). [L. the course of one's life or
career. See Curriculum.]
A brief biographical summary of the main points of a person's
life, especially one's education and training, the jobs one
has held, and other notable activities one has participated
in, as well as other notable points such as honors one has
received. It is prepared and used commonly by a person who is
submitting an application for a job or position of
responsibility. It is also called a vita or vitae, and is
abbreviated CV.
[PJC]
You said:
"I merely, with the utmost humility suggest ever so slightly that it might be more convincing in your self-congratulatory rantings to run the spell checker and the grammar checker prior to posting."
Really, this is a hobby, are you more interested in content or what is said?
So, now do you want to transfer the 5,000 Euros to my five favorite charities?
Posted by: WVH on March 16, 2008 04:11 PMYou still need to work on objective vs possessive pronouns. Perhaps this will help.
If you are going to beat down anyone that disagrees with you using your PhD and the argument of being better educated, you should at least demonstrate as much in each and every post, don't you think?
Otherwise, leave the PhD out of it. No one knows or really cares what papers hang on your wall. Elliot Spitzer has probably many more fancy pieces of paper on his wall, but would you trust his opinion on prostitution other than where to find the highest priced one? And even that is not based upon his education level, but rather his experience.
"So, now do you want to transfer the 5,000 Euros to my five favorite charities?"
Not quite sure how the fact you cannot demonstrate your level of education in your writing means I owe you 5,000 Euros. But I am sure somehow in your world you have it worked out.
Posted by: pbj on March 16, 2008 05:05 PM1. The original issue began with Rick D. calling Senator Obama a janitor and suggesting he was an "empty suit." I asked Rick D. what his education was and whether it compares with Senator Obama's. To date, I have never received a response. Rick D. asked me about my education, I told him. He called me a liar. So, that brings us to this point and the comparison to Caroline Kennedy. She is a woman of achievement and I am not aware that she has publically called any one an "empty suit" or alluded to their lack of skills. The point is given her background and experiences, her opinion is more valued than some one like Rick D. who won't disclose what in his background gives his opinion credence. I doubt that she would label some one publically as an "empty suit," however.
2. The 5,000 Euro bet was simply a response to Rick D. who said the following at post #95
95. WVH @ 79. "Yeh, you are waiting for proof like I am waiting for your education specs."
Posted by WVH at March 14, 2008 07:53 PM
How are my education specs relevant to this discusson? Am I running for President? Should I lie like you and claim I have a doctoral degree, WVH?
I bet him 5,000 Euros since I have proof of my doctorate, he doesn't want to disclose any education achievement. By the way, he won't take me up on the transfer payment because he can't afford to lose about $8,000. That is the point, I may not like candidate policies, but all are people of achievement.
So, when you come into a discussion that has gone on over several threads, you might want to ask what went on before becoming so judgmental.
Posted by: WVH on March 16, 2008 05:45 PM"I guess you have never noticed any other poster here who has ever misspelled a word or used improper tense, ever, right?"
I have noticed plenty of people posting with spelling errors and such, but not a single one of them that thinks they are better than everyone because they have a PhD.
As I said earlier, there are plenty of people whose CV's would lead you to one conclusion, but their writings and actions another.
Take an infamous man, call him Mr X. Mr X is a college educated man. He earned a law degree from a university 1962. I won't say which one because you will google it before answering. In 1964, Mr X took on several cases on behalf of African Americans for discrimination by school systems and such. He was successful in many cases. Mr X was honored by black organizations for his work.
Now, WVH, given what you know about MR X, if he posted here, would his opinion be worth anything?
Posted by: pbj on March 16, 2008 06:28 PMKnow the use of YOU vs YOUR is not a spell check issue. Just a point of fact FYI.
Posted by: pbj on March 16, 2008 06:36 PMIt is interesting to this day there has never been an answer about the education of the accuser.
Care to call them to task for being better than Senator Obama and care to answer on what basis?
Oh that you/your thing, depending upon the sentence, it could be a typo.
Posted by: WVH on March 16, 2008 06:51 PMPlease answer the question. Is Mr X's opinion worthy? A simple yes or no will do.
This is the internet. Anyone can say they are anything and no one can verify it. That is why no one brought it up. It is too easy to lie on the internet and get away with it. Anyone dumb enough to put their real names and such online are only asking for trouble these days.
Oh that you/your thing could have been a typo. But then there is that missing adverb where later on.
Posted by: pbj on March 16, 2008 07:03 PM
Fine, then get off the education high horse.
Now please answer the question @133.
Posted by: pbj on March 16, 2008 10:08 PM