March 16, 2008
Obama's real problem

I fear some of our liberal friends are a little miffed about the now intense scrutiny being given to Barack Obama's long-time pastor. It seems to me the typical liberal objection to the affair has been to point to controversial utterances and behavior from more conservative-minded preachers. That fundamentally misses the point.

I can find many statements from pastors who are identified with right-of-center politics with which I disagree or wish had been said quite differently, including our local example of the modern day, Ken Hutcherson. Candidly, there are some preachers in that genre I find utterly repellent. I've even heard them from the pulpit of churches I've at one time attended on a regular basis (though thankfully not now!). There is simply no way, however, that I could attend, join, and donate to a church for twenty years if I regularly found the pastor to be as ludicrously over-the-top and outside the reasonable bounds of preaching the Christian faith as Jeremiah Wright. I suspect many Americans of faith find themselves in a boat of similar construction.

Thus, Obama's attempts at distancing and clarification, highlighted by a trifecta of interviews Friday on CNN, Fox News, and MSNBC, ended up creating not just an association problem, but also a glaring credibility problem. Juan Williams explains:

It's a dagger pointed at the heart and soul of the raison d'etre of Obama's campaign. And it may already have drawn blood.

UPDATE: Further proving the point that many liberals have utterly missed the point about this whole story, Obama fan Eli Sanders thinks it makes Obama look better. I guess if this election were going to be decided by urban folk recovering from dalliances with '60's extremism he'd have a point. But, it's not.

Posted by Eric Earling at March 16, 2008 09:56 PM | Email This
Comments
1. With most candidates, regardless of party, their background is well shredded and detailed long before they are 80% of the way to their presidential nomination.

Barak Obama was given a free pass by the liberal media for a long time. Now it is coming around to bite not only Obama, but the Democrat movement.

It just doesn't pay to cut corners, and the liberal press is to blame for being lazy.

I think that the destruction in the Democrat party is just beginning.

Posted by: zDawg on March 16, 2008 08:00 PM
2. The issue is how Senator Obama handles the question of if you repudiate the message now and claim you didn't understand the message, what took you twenty years to come to this point?
If you claim you didn't come to church to hear the sermons, then you didn't go to church that often and are you a Muslim?

So far, he has done better than Dr. Paul in repudiating Rev. Wright. He has to answer the questions listed above.

Now, let's address the issue of "free Pass"

a. Senator Clinton

i Financial dealings of Bubba
ii. Chinese money for campaigns
iii. Charles Pellacano, PI
iv. Fundraisers under indictment

b. Senator Obama

i. Rev. Wright
ii. Rezko
iii. Wife's job
iv. Chicago politics and the general slime

c. Senator Mc Cain

i. Keating Five
ii. Lobbyists
iii. EADS airforce contract
iv. "special" relationship with one lobbysist

All you can say is journalists every where are hedging their bets in hopes of having access to the next prez. Every one is getting not only a free pass, but a free coupon book.

Posted by: WVH on March 16, 2008 08:17 PM
3. With every passing day the Dem party implodes a little further, particularly concerning the delegate embroglio with Michigan and Florida. They are making a complete crock of the entire situation, and the spectacle is not pretty. Totally falling apart, canibalizing each other, flailing. Great prime time viewing.

Posted by: katomar on March 16, 2008 08:32 PM
4. It would not surprise me if the first black to occupy the WH is a Republican. In fact, the first person with that potential was already Colin Powell, not Barack Obama. Any Dem is likely to have problematic alliances like this, while an R probably would not.

I am still hoping that McCain will get Condi Rice as running mate, which could make it come true sooner than anybody might expect.

Posted by: russell garrard on March 16, 2008 08:38 PM
5. Russell,

I partly agree with you. The first "successful" Black or woman who will occupy the White House will be a conservative. I say that because only some one with a conservative philosophy has "permission" as the moonbeams say to say no to a variety of interests and still keep their job. Mrs. Thatcher was a serious kick-ass leader and the nut job in Iran, wouldn't have dared to yank her chain, she would come over there. She prepared the way for Tony Blair's New Labour to squander the resources built-up.

What I see for republicans is that the party is quite capable of snatching defeat out of the jaws of victory. People will vote AGAINST a republican because for so long the party has been viewed as the party of small minded bigots. So, for many in the population of all colors the vote has to be changed from AGAINST any thing republican to let's listen and perhaps give them a chance.

I really like Dr. Rice, but I expect a dem Congress and she will be mired in investigations.

If the republicans snatch defeat out of the jaws of victory, it will be New Labor here, no matter which dem is the candidate. The fix is in, as they say.

Posted by: WVH on March 16, 2008 08:51 PM
6. Libs are in utter denial about how HUGE this is going to be. This is not going away. My guess is Obamination had hoped it'd never surface. The sheer arrogance of that is unbelievable.

Posted by: FreedomLover on March 16, 2008 08:53 PM
7. WVH:

Once the GOP purges all the Denny Hasterts and Don Youngs from the party, the next wave of Sarah Palin, Bobby Jindal and co will resurrect a new GOP starting in 2010. Everything goes in cycles, you should know that as a Democrat. Charlie Crist, governer(FL) has a 73% approval rating.

So it's hardly all bad for good, honest Republicans. It's the old, corrupt Republicans that people are kicking out. Sort of like the old, corrupt Dems people kicked out in 1994(Rosty, Foley, etc...). You're memory is quite short.

Posted by: FreedomLover on March 16, 2008 09:17 PM
8. So where's the outrage over McCain's goofy pastor?

Sigh. You wish the Dems were imploding. And Condi with McCain? A dream come true because all we need do is play that tape of her before a Congressional committee trying to remember what the heading of the paper was about bin Laden -"It was something about bin Laden to strike the US with planes."

Bring her on.

Posted by: westie on March 16, 2008 09:20 PM
9. WVH, I partly agree also. The Republican party right now is somewhat in a holding pattern with the unpopularity of 'big-govt conservatism,' but nothing quite yet to replace it. That is mainly how McCain ended up as nominee.

Nobody really knows what kind of Republican party will emerge after the Bush era.

FreedomLover, note also that Obama should have known that it could surface, and should have had a better strategy ready long ago. If not arrogance, this is incompetence.

Posted by: russell garrard on March 16, 2008 09:23 PM
10. russell:

the faster the GOP purges itself of the Denny Hastert types the sooner it will rise like a phoenix from the ashes. Problem is there are too many old, corrupt Repubs hanging on for dear life. They'll drag the party down to 1974 levels soon enough.

Posted by: FreedomLover on March 16, 2008 09:28 PM
11. FreedomLover,

Aren't there just a huge number of retirements from both parties? I'm not saying all people retiring are corrupt. The question is which party takes advantage of all the retirements. We are in a recession and who knows where the economy will be by election. I expect that there will be a dem congress and who knows about the WH. I do know there are a large number of people of all colors who vote AGAINST parties and candidates. It is not all rosy for the presumed republican candidate.

It would be good to see two-party rule, that is the best hedge against corruption, but we'll see.

I am an independent, formerly a dem. Parties seem to be populated by idiot leaders who have no clue how to expand each party's base beyond loonies and wingnuts. The ranks of indies seem to be growing.

Posted by: WVH on March 16, 2008 09:28 PM
12. Over the past 16 years, the Clintons have been seen pandering to blacks by attending services in black churchs throughout the nation. Based on the rhetoric I heard directed toward the Hill and Bill Show from Obama's admired Reverend Wright; I know one church in Chicago they will quickly speed by in their search for a "pulpit from which to pimp".

Posted by: johnB on March 16, 2008 09:35 PM
13. John B,

I have no problem with a candidate of any party visiting a faith community. What I have a problem with is that when conservative family friendly candidates visit churches of all colors, the church gets an IRS complaint. Church folks have a particular perspective and should be allowed to participate in the political process, no matter who they invite to their house of worship.

Posted by: WVH on March 16, 2008 09:49 PM
14. "There is simply no way, however, that I could attend, join, and donate to a church for twenty years if I regularly found the pastor to be as ludicrously over-the-top and outside the reasonable bounds of preaching the Christian faith as Jeremiah Wright."

What makes you think Wright is "regularly over the top"? There are three clips of him saying things that might be considered "over the top". Do you really believe all his sermons are like this? Half even? A quarter?

Those were rhetorical questions. I think it is fairly obvious that the three examples shown were deviations from the norm. I would say that you missed the point here, Eric, (the point Obama made pretty clearly in his response to this controversy): that Obama never would have attended the church and had a relationship with the pastor if these over-the-topisms had been regular.

Posted by: Noble on March 16, 2008 10:29 PM
15. Juan WIlliams is someone conservatives love to hate, but on issues of race, he really does hold hypocrites' feet to the fire. On a lot of things he is an apologist for the looney left, but it seems like when it's about race he often says "OK, now this is something important, and I won't apologize for you on this."

Posted by: pudge on March 16, 2008 10:33 PM
16. Ha, just read the Slog piece. Right on, Eric. They clearly Doesn't Get It.

Posted by: pudge on March 16, 2008 10:36 PM
17. "What makes you think Wright is "regularly over the top"? There are three clips of him saying things that might be considered "over the top". Do you really believe all his sermons are like this? Half even? A quarter?"

What a crock! I don't care if this was once in twenty years. Clearly the church put this forward to represent the church as they sold his nutty "sermons" on DVD!!!!

NO. EXCUSE. Stop trying to make them up, you merely dig the hole deeper.

Posted by: pbj on March 16, 2008 10:43 PM
18. JUST READ AN ARTICLE BY RONALD KESSLER WHO IS THE CHIEF WASHINGTON CORRESPONDENT OF NEWSMAX.COM HE STATES IN THE ARTICLE THAT OBAMA WAS IN THE PEWS LAST JULY 22 WHEN THE MINISTER BLAMED WHITE ARROGANCE OF AMERICAS CAUCASIAN MAJORITY FOR THE WORLDS SUFFERING ESPECIALLY THE OPPRESSION OF BLACKS.

Posted by: ME on March 16, 2008 10:51 PM
19. It is no wonder that some of the liberal bloggers are going in to little Nutroots tantrums. This is a major blow. And that's two big sonic booms for their party in one week. Thanks Spitzer. Kudos to Juan Williams for really elucidating Obama's attempt to have it both ways. Kristol's expression was deer-in-the-headlights. That was priceless.

It's too bad. Once again, the party that claims to be for tolerance and the advancement of minorities, shoots itself in the foot.

When are these folks going to learn that they are the ones working hard to create two Americans with callous and divisive preaching of hatred by Jerimiah Wright, Jesse Jackson, Sharpton, etc. There are many mainstream Americans of all colors and cultures. We work together and hardly give a thought to that fact that our skin is different. Black is only one of many colors. Yet with Black Power preaching, there is a destructive attempt to keep Blacks from joining their fellow Americans in simply moving on. Were there also embarassing chapters in this country's treatment of yellow people? Yes. But do we see yellow people screaming for Yellow Power? No.

Instead we see a lot of people of all colors working towards a culture of success. Hard work, strong values, academic rigor, personal responsibility. These are the keys to success, not victim shell games where excuses for past injustice dominate personal failure in the present.

Until I heard about Jeremiah Wright, I actually thought Obama might be a bridge out of Democrat racism. But it looks like behind the slick image, he's been playing the same tired game.

God Damn America? No. America Damn Obama.

Posted by: Jeff B. on March 16, 2008 11:04 PM
20. One of the big things about Obama and his spiritual advisor is that it really paints him into a hole no matter what he does.

He is saying he never heard this guy say those thing, but he was his pastor and close spiritual advisor for over 20 years. He either agrees with what the man says or he doesn't. If he says he doesn't and this is all news to him, then it shows what a poor judge of character Obama is.

Wow, if some nutball black speratists can pull the wool over Obama's eyes, then the North Koreans, AQ and China will make him their bitch.

Posted by: pbj on March 16, 2008 11:05 PM
21. There are a lot of pastors who believe that America faces judgement because of her sins. I've seen them cry from the pulpit for "my people, called by my name to humble themselves and pray" and seek God's forgiveness so judgement would be spared.

But they say it with sadness, not anger and hope. That's what makes Rev. Wright's comments to unpatriotic. Even if the sins of America are leading to judgement of God, it should break the hearts of the preacher and his listeners, not see them screaming for God to "damn America" and audience members jumping out of their seats clapping and hooting.

I was shocked and saddened when I saw that. It says something about the culture of Obama's community that he has been a part of for twenty years to see the way they reacted when Rev. Wright made those statements. That's the point and that's why this is a legitimate campaign issue and bares absolutely no resemblence to Haggee and McCain or Ferarro and Clinton.

Posted by: Chad Minnick on March 17, 2008 12:20 AM
22. "But I never inhaled"

Posted by: FLASHPOINT on March 17, 2008 06:33 AM
23. You're spot on Chad.

Posted by: wes on March 17, 2008 06:38 AM
24. Juan WIlliams is an idiot. I don't care if he won't apologize for utter evil. He's still voting for Obamination.

Posted by: FreedomLover on March 17, 2008 06:41 AM
25. Me: It gets worse. Not only does the reporter say he was there on July 22nd when Obama was in attendance, he also states he has video of same, including Obama. If true, does not look good.

Posted by: katomar on March 17, 2008 07:06 AM
26. Isn't it becoming more and more evident that our only real choice is Mrs Clinton :)

Posted by: Duffman on March 17, 2008 07:27 AM
27. Duffman: No.

Posted by: katomar on March 17, 2008 07:39 AM
28. Katomar @25:
The reporter is in error and didn't check his source out. Obama was in Florida that day.

See: http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/03/kristol_bungles_key_fact_in_an.php

Posted by: tc on March 17, 2008 07:57 AM
29. Rev. Wright was on Fox last friday and he made sure he answered NOTHING... He kept saying read someones book???

The interview was quite revealing!

I think he has much to hide.

Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on March 17, 2008 08:08 AM
30. Eric,
I tried posting a response, but it didn't get through. Here is another try.

I disagree with your argument that just because you dislike what a pastor says on occasion that one should leave. David Kuo addresses that argument here.

Here is a different perspective from someone who has studied the black church in America.

Here is Frank Schaeffer, who along with his father started the pro-life movement, view on the subject.

Finally, here is a commentary addressing the Hiroshima and Nagasaki references in Rev. Wright's one speech. I never knew that Dwight Eisenhower, MacArthur, and others were against using the bomb. Their view was that Japan was already defeated and that it was only a matter of months left. This definately runs against the history that I learned that Truman decided against the lesser of two evils and thought that using the bomb would save more lives than it took.

Posted by: tc on March 17, 2008 08:15 AM
31. tc:
By: Ronald Kessler Article Font Size


Obama claims he was completely unaware that the Reverend Wright's trademark preaching style at the Trinity United Church of Christ targeted "white" America.
Clarification: The Obama campaign has told members of the press that Senator Obama was not in church on the day cited, July 22, because he had a speech he gave in Miami at 1:30 PM. Our writer, Jim Davis, says he attended several services at Senator Obama's church during the month of July, including July 22. The church holds services three times every Sunday at 7:30 and 11 a.m. and 6 p.m. Central time (with weekly praise/prayers starting 15 minutes previous to those times). While both the early morning and evening service allowed Sen. Obama to attend the service and still give a speech in Miami, Mr. Davis stands by his story that during one of the services he attended during the month of July, Senator Obama was present and sat through the sermon given by Rev. Wright as described in the story. Mr. Davis said Secret Service were also present in the church during Senator Obama's attendance. Mr. Davis' story was first published on Newsmax on August 9, 2007. Shortly before publication, Mr. Davis contacted the press office of Sen. Obama several times for comment about the Senator's attendance and Rev. Wright's comments during his sermon. The Senator's office declined to comment.

Posted by: katomar on March 17, 2008 08:21 AM
32. you guys are writing about obama's pastor when the financial markets are melting down and the fed is bailing out large financial institutions?

where are the conservatives? you should be screaming about govt intervention in the capital markets. what about the federal deficit? what about govt spending?

there are more substantial issues facing the electorate right now than what a pastor has to say (no matter how egregious).

hacks.

Posted by: dinesh on March 17, 2008 08:37 AM
33. Uh Katomar,
Obama flew from Iowa to Florida (Chicago Magazine was following his campaign and had his timetable: http://www.chicagomag.com/Chicago-Magazine/October-2007/Wheres-Obama/

Additionally, Trinity has services at 7:30 and 11:00 AM. The services last two hours. If Obama was at a 1:30 event in Miami, this would have been 12:30 Chicago time, which rules out the 11:00 am service. It is three hours flying time from Chicago to Miami. This backs the clock up to 9:30. Additionally, you have travel time to and from each airport. Therefore, take away another hour. So, the reporter is stating that Obama got up in the middle of service and left? Was the reporter at the 7:00 am service?

There would be flight logs on the airline. Obama's campaign put out a fact check today that Obama wasn't at church on that day. I am sure they have the flight logs to back up their claim.

It looks like a case of a reporter trying to smear a candidate.

Posted by: tc on March 17, 2008 08:43 AM
34. I see the proponents of free speech in all venues are up and posting. A couple of points.

1. Rev. John Hagee has endorsed Senator Mc Cain and this is what he says in his book Jerusalem Countdown:
"In "Jerusalem Countdown: A Prelude To war" Hagee has stated that Jews brought the Holocaust upon themselves by rebelling against God and that the Holocaust was God's way of forcing Jews to move to Israel where, Hagee predicts according to his interpretation of Biblical scripture, they will be mostly killed in the apocalyptic Mideast conflict Hagee's new lobbying group seems to be working to provoke and which John Hagee believes to be a necessary precondition for the "Rapture" that will lift Christians, but not Jews, bodily into Heaven to enjoy physical immortality amidst paradise."

http://www.talk2action.org/story/2007/3/5/105015/2167/

There is a long theology in certain denominations and among certain preachers of calling the wrath of God against the "enemy" as they define the "enemy."

2. Many progressives agree with Rev. Wright's message, so what Senator Obama has is a base expansion problem. That is the same problem confronted by Senator Mc Cain.

3. No matter who the dem nominee is, what they have going for them is the calculation of who is most likely to have voters voting AGAINST who ever is running. Many republicans voted AGAINST David Duke when he was running for governor.
Many voters of all colors will balance the bigotry of Rev. Wright against what "they perceive" is at times the small minded bigotry of some in the republican party and decide who they vote AGAINST. I sure that people here think that every relevation about Rev. Wright translates into a vote for Senator Mc Cain. Maybe, maybe not. Quotes lifted from this very site will also be useful in directing a host of voters to vote AGAINST the republican party.

Sometimes elections are not about who voters are for, but whom they are AGAINST.

Posted by: WVH on March 17, 2008 08:44 AM
35. Katamor,
Bill Kristol has updated his piece to state:

"In this column, I cite a report that Sen. Obama had attended services at Trinity Church on July 22, 2007. The Obama camapaign has provided information showing that Sen. Obama did not attend Trinity that day. I regret the error."

Posted by: tc on March 17, 2008 09:05 AM
36. Makes him look better?? Only in Savage's mind no doubt because he's a liberal, I guess. Nobody else would get a pass on this kind of stuff. And I'm sorry, I just can't believe that Obama didn't know about any of this while everyone else was able to learn about it for the last several months. Many conservative outlets have known about it for months. I think now that the video is out there and people can see and hear for themselves, it is hard for Obama not to have problems, as he sat under and listened to this for 20 years.

Posted by: Michele on March 17, 2008 09:07 AM
37. dinesh,

So many problems created by Progressive expansionist statism. So little time to address them all.

Posted by: Jeff B. on March 17, 2008 09:13 AM
38. WHEN THE MINISTER BLAMED WHITE ARROGANCE OF AMERICAS CAUCASIAN MAJORITY FOR THE WORLDS SUFFERING ESPECIALLY THE OPPRESSION OF BLACKS.

So the European's never traded/owned Slaves, there were never separate and inferior schools/bathrooms/water fountains for blacks and that white American's never passed Jim Crow laws? And the Dixiecrat party never existed? I'd say history is full of tales where blacks suffered at the hands of caucasians.

When you put American institutionalized racism in America in perceptive it's has not been that long:

Brown vs Board of Education was only 54 years ago
Civil Rights Act of 1964 was only 44 years ago

These events happened within the lifetimes of many people in this country (and even some who post on this board).

Posted by: Cato on March 17, 2008 09:16 AM
39. tc: I simply copied the latest update of what the actual reporter said, who contends he was there and so was Obama, and stands by his story. It may be a hit piece on Obama, made up, and I suppose it will all come out in the wash, particularly if Secret Service were indeed there, of which there will be records. However, I do agree with Michele that Obama cannot not have known, through his 20 year association with Wright, what the man's fiery sermons were about on occasion, and the hateful message contained therein. If you claim the person as your mentor and spiritual advisor, then you kinda, sorta know what he's about, no?

Posted by: katomar on March 17, 2008 09:20 AM
40. Let's cut the crap - there is a fundamental difference between someone who voluntarily CHOOSES to join a church and remains in that church for two decades and another person who is endorsed by someone who has expressed bigoted remarks.

For Obama supporters to seek to equate the two should be reason enough to raise one's consciousness to the likelihood that the Obama camp knows that they have their @ss hanging out a mile and are grasping for anything they can get their hands on to deflect from the fact that Obama is a voluntary follower (and self described "close personal friend") of a man who preaches racial discord and separatism and is a hater of this country.

Obama is finished, thank God this information was made public. There is no way to rescue his campaign especially when his wife has either paraphrased or has parroted the very same views as this degenerate race baiter disguised as a man of the cloth.

If the Democrats have any sense they will not turn their back on Obama and walk away, they will run as fast as they can from him and solidify behind Hillary - she is a flawed candidate, with high negatives, but the last thing the Democrats need is three months of Uncle Jeremiah prior to the November elections.

If they stick with Obama it may well portend the end of the Democrat Party as we know it.

Posted by: JDH on March 17, 2008 09:29 AM
41. "If the Democrats have any sense they will not turn their back on Obama and walk away, they will run as fast as they can from him and solidify behind Hillary.."

Wiser words were never spoken. :)

Posted by: Duffman on March 17, 2008 09:34 AM
42. Cato: You're right. Many who post here were probably alive then. And many who post here were probably politically active in the 60's, as young people, and took civil action to ensure those kinds of injustices would not continue, helping to bring about Civil Rights Legislation, enacted by a Republican House and Senate, and opposed by the Dems. Considering the majority of posters here are conservative, that says something, yes?

Posted by: katomar on March 17, 2008 09:38 AM
43. there is a fundamental difference between someone who voluntarily CHOOSES to join a church and remains in that church for two decades

Would you vote for a local Republican who attends Rev. Ken Hutchinson's church?

Obama is a voluntary follower (and self described "close personal friend") of a man who preaches racial discord and separatism and is a hater of this country.

OK, so in your view it's fine to preach against Gays and Catholics but not good when preach about racism and blame white people for placing blacks into Slavery?

There is no way to rescue his campaign especially when his wife has either paraphrased or has parroted the very same views as this degenerate race baiter disguised as a man of the cloth.

Got proof? You referring to Michelle Obama's out-of-context comment about being proud to be an American? Do you have any experiences being a black man/woman in America? Doubt it.

Look at Dubya who had everything handed to him on a silver platter I bet the only suffering he ever had was when he couldn't find the nearest fly-boy bar to the Texas National Guard base.

If they stick with Obama it may well portend the end of the Democrat Party as we know it.

A Conservative Republican claiming that the end of the Democrat Party over a single Presidential candidate's church association?

Yeah, that's about as likely as saying that Dubya's brand of Big Govt. Conservatism is the end of the GOP as we know it.

Posted by: Cato on March 17, 2008 09:48 AM
44. Katamor,
I did look at the original author's post and Newsmax has add a clarification, but still stand by the story. You are right. There would be secret service records, flight records and other documents outlining where Obama was. The Washington Post did have him stopping in Chicago on the 22nd (didn't state whether morning or evening). Also, in addition to the morning services there was a 6:00 pm service, but the Obama campaign also has his actual schedule for the day, which if it was wise would post the whole day's events including flight times, stops, etc. The fact that Kristol backed down, to me, means that the Campaign did show the NY Times convincing evidence. I don't think Kristol would have agreed to the clarification without hard evidence.

Regarding the sermon itself, if the Church and pastor were smart, they would post the whole sermon on line, along with the speech the Pastor gave at the college following 9/11. All we have heard is an excerpt. To me, I would prefer the whole context of the speech. Why? Because, I could think of several ways the excerpt could dramatically be used for a larger message that would not be as blatant as it sounds. What Rev. Wright actually states in the message isn't necessarily untrue. God often struck down the Isrealites for not following his laws. He caused Babolyn to invade and wipe out almost all the Isrealites (except for those who they took captive). If the context was in reference to some of these old testament passages, I can envision a scenario where the excerpts could apply.

Posted by: tc on March 17, 2008 09:53 AM
45. Civil Rights Legislation, enacted by a Republican House and Senate, and opposed by the Dems.

Let's see, the Dem's had the South in 1964, the GOP has the South in 2004.

Was there some sort of mass migration of white people to the North that led to the Dem's taking those states while the GOP got the Southern states? I'm betting the a lot of the same voters who voted for segregationist Dem's in 1964 are the same voters who voted for GOP candidates in 2004.

The people didn't move, the voting base changed sides as the Democrat's values shifted to being more liberal and the GOP put emphasis on Christian moral values.

Posted by: Cato on March 17, 2008 10:03 AM
46. tc,

I bet you would. Because blaming America for 9/11 would sound a lot better in the context of a typical Christian sermon with forgiveness, remembrance of the dead, etc. Would you also like the full text of some of Hitler's speeches to help put some of the more extreme remarks into perspective?

Posted by: Jeff B. on March 17, 2008 10:03 AM
47. Juan Williams may be a liberal, but his honesty is refreshing. His views on the Jeremiah Wright controversy is good reminder to partisans on both sides that reality triumphs rhetoric.

Posted by: deadwood on March 17, 2008 10:06 AM
48. Cato: Wow. Nothing like flying in the fact of historical fact,is there? Must be very gratifying. Stupid, but gratifying.

Posted by: katomar on March 17, 2008 10:12 AM
49. Because blaming America for 9/11 would sound a lot better in the context of a typical Christian sermon with forgiveness

Let's see who else blamed America for 9/11, maybe Jerry Fawell?

"I really believe that the pagans, and the abortionists, and the feminists, and the gays and the lesbians who are actively trying to make that an alternative lifestyle, the ACLU, People For the American Way, all of them who have tried to secularize America. I point the finger in their face and say 'you helped this happen." - Jerry Fawell on whose to blame for 9/11.

Who claims Hurricane Katrina is God's wrath for New Orleans sin?

"New Orleans now is abortion free. New Orleans now is Mardi Gras free. New Orleans now is free of Southern Decadence and the sodomites, the witchcraft workers, false religion -- it's free of all of those things now, [...] God simply, I believe, in His mercy purged all of that stuff out of there -- and now we're going to start over again." - Reverend Bill Shanks (pastor of New Covenant Fellowship of New Orleans)

"New Orleans flaunts sin in a way that no other places do. They call it the Big Easy. There are 10 abortion clinics in Louisiana; five of those are in New Orleans. They have a Southern Decadence parade every year and they call it gay pride. When you study Scripture, it's not out of the boundaries of God to punish a nation for sin and because of sin. When I look at our country, at what's happening, and what's happening in New Orleans in particular, it's not beyond the realm of possibility." - Rev. Dwight McKissic, (senior pastor of Cornerstone Baptist Church)

I'm sure you agree that these are all great examples of a typical Christian sermon" with forgiveness".

Posted by: Cato on March 17, 2008 10:18 AM
50. Sorry for the typo. Should have been fly in the "face" of...

Posted by: katomar on March 17, 2008 10:18 AM
51. Jeff B,
If you listen to the excerpt, even, Rev. Wright doesn't blaim America, but America's actions that we have taken throughout history. I don't agree with the statement, but if you parse what he stated it isn't incorrect. It is simply a point of view. It is also a point of view that many other countries had at the time and have even more today (i.e., America's arrogance). Rev. Wright was a marine. Was he degrading America in this statement or was he calling us to repentence and acknowledgement for our past sins, which then is also a call to action to not let it be the future?

We did support dictators. We supported Sadaam in the 1980's. We helped to train Bin Laden. How do you justify Iraq and yet Burma exist? How do we as a nation allow Dafar to continue? How do we as a nation allow poor to exist in our own country? We have all the wealth we need to address poverty and to address Aids in Africa. Yet, we are an arrogant and selfish people. In the Black Theology, I could very well see the context being one that calls America to action and not to sit in our comfortable homes.

OBTW, I did post in a previous post a link to an article that highlighted the fact that many high ranking officials did not agree with Truman that we needed to bomb Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Those two actions killed many times more civilians than acts against our country. Look at the statements. The dissenters included Eisenhower, MacArthur, Einstien, and if FDR had lived, possibley FDR.

Posted by: tc on March 17, 2008 10:21 AM
52. katomar,
Stupid is right, this Cato displays the iq and depth of intelllect of a sardine tin. He even lacks what it takes to set up a straw man and then knock it apart. I won't respond to him any more. Did you see the one about the preaching against Catholics - what do I care if someone preaches (argues their point) against Catholicism, I am secure in my faith. What I object to is the KKK which in it's hayday was a wholly owned subsidiary of the Democrat Party preaching hate against Catholics. As I have often pointed out in this forum the Democrat Party is the only vaiable Party in this country that welcomes (elevates to leadership positions) "former" KKK members. Can you say Robert KKK Byrd - who I am not so sure does not remain a crypto-Klansman to this day. Or how about BJ Clinton's two mentors, or even Al Gore's own father.

Posted by: JDH on March 17, 2008 10:25 AM
53. Cato: There are many extreme church leaders who spew hate. I condemn all of their messages. However, there is only one I know of that up until a couple of days ago was an official advisor to the campaign of a gentleman who aspires to be our President.

Posted by: katomar on March 17, 2008 10:26 AM
54. It's not just racism as expressed by Jeramiah Wright that defines the modern democrat Party. There is no other group as closely aligned with the Democrat Party as Planned Parenthood - now consider the information in this article and I would agree that black people do have sometthing to to worry about but it sure as hell isn't coming from the Right in this instance. Nor do I know of a single instance of any mainstream right wing group that accepts donations to ensure that there are less blacks in the future.

http://www.idahostatesman.com/newsupdates/story/308723.html

"It turns out that blatant racism is alive and well in Idaho, but it's not coming from the Aryan Nation types - it's coming from way-left organizations like Idaho's own Planned Parenthood," Fischer said. "They should have stridently rebuked that donor for being a racist and a bigot and refused to take that money."

The call to Idaho came in July to Autumn Kersey, vice president of development and marketing for Planned Parenthood of Idaho.

On the recording provided by The Advocate, an actor portraying a donor said he wanted his money used to eliminate black unborn children because "the less black kids out there the better."

Kersey laughed nervously and said: "Understandable, understandable. ... Excuse my hesitation, this is the first time I've had a donor call and make this kind of request, so I'm excited and want to make sure I don't leave anything out."

Posted by: JDH on March 17, 2008 10:38 AM
55. Wow. Nothing like flying in the fact of historical fact,is there?

The record is there, the Republicans passed the 1964 Civil Rights act. I'm not disputing that. Yet you seem to be using it to claim that this action reflects the views of the current Republican Party which I don't believe to be the case (especially since many of the Democrat Senators who voted against it came from states now represented by Republican Senators).

Considering the voter base from those states objecting to the Civil Rights Legislation have changed all that much in 40 some years, maybe it's the party platforms changed causing those same voters to change party affiliation?

Posted by: Cato on March 17, 2008 10:38 AM
56. Cato: No, I believe it was the actual legislation that finally convinced many folks they were WRONG in their vocal support of racism, at least politically, although they still do support it in a much more quiet, insidious manner nowadays, i.e. Welfare, Affirmative Action, etc. I believe it was the Civil Rights legislation that enabled many people of color to have the opportunity to prove their worth and make a lot of bigots eat their words. I don't think they changed parties. They just shut up and many conservatives were exceedingly grateful to hear the silence, finally.

Posted by: katomar on March 17, 2008 10:54 AM
57. However, there is only one I know of that up until a couple of days ago was an official advisor to the campaign of a gentleman who aspires to be our President

Do you know what John Hagee's role is in the McCain campaign? McCain seemed quite proud of his endorsement when he got it. At present time McCain has not renounced the endorsement, he's only said that he disagrees with some of Hagee's views. Maybe Hagee is on McCain's council of religious advisers.

How about McCain calling Rev. Ron Parsley a spiritual guide? Despite Parsley's claim that Christians should have a moral obligation to wage war on the "false religion of Islam"? Is he an official advisor or just a spiritual one?

Posted by: Cato on March 17, 2008 10:56 AM
58. Cato: Have you read Rev. Wayne Perryman's book "Unfounded Loyalty"? Republicans have done more for blacks in American than Democrats have by far. This includes giving their lives and fortunes to stop slavery. Perryman believes that the Dems only became interested in the black community in the 60' because Dems saw a large voting bloc. It is ignorant to say that Republicans have adopted the racist attitudes of the old time Dixicrats. I read that, since the 60', we have spent several trillion dollars and programs to help people in the inner city, yet Perryman says that the black community is worse off today than it was before the 60s. Why do you think that is? Perryman believes that it is because many blacks have turned away from God and the Christian church and placed their faith in the Democrat party. One can only wonder why Barack Obama is where he is.

Posted by: NW Denizen on March 17, 2008 11:10 AM
59. No, I believe it was the actual legislation that finally convinced many folks they were WRONG in their vocal support of racism, at least politically

With Trent Lott being the exception to that? I mean he was all for the known racist Strom Thurmond being President.

although they still do support it in a much more quiet, insidious manner nowadays, i.e. Welfare, Affirmative Action,

Welfare and Affirmative Action, as what racism against white people?

Welfare and Affirmative Action advances "the idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others"? I look forward to seeing you explain that.

I don't think they changed parties.

Why not? The voter base is the same, the party platforms are not. I think my argument is more sound than yours which claims the bigots shut up yet continued to vote Democrat.

Posted by: Cato on March 17, 2008 11:13 AM
60. Spin, spin, and more spin. Cato, cut the crap.

Posted by: FreedomLover on March 17, 2008 11:20 AM
61. Seems to me Cato is somewhat selective here, I haven't heard a defense of this yet:

"It turns out that blatant racism is alive and well in Idaho, but it's not coming from the Aryan Nation types - it's coming from way-left organizations like Idaho's own Planned Parenthood," Fischer said. "They should have stridently rebuked that donor for being a racist and a bigot and refused to take that money."

The call to Idaho came in July to Autumn Kersey, vice president of development and marketing for Planned Parenthood of Idaho.

On the recording provided by The Advocate, an actor portraying a donor said he wanted his money used to eliminate black unborn children because "the less black kids out there the better."

Kersey laughed nervously and said: "Understandable, understandable. ... Excuse my hesitation, this is the first time I've had a donor call and make this kind of request, so I'm excited and want to make sure I don't leave anything out."

Posted by: JDH on March 17, 2008 11:21 AM
62. Cato-
This thread isn't about McCain. Trying to justify black seperatism of Wright and Obama by throwing out McCain doesn't change anything about Obama one whit.

Now please show me PROOF McCain attended any of those churches for 20 years, was married by one of the crazy pastors.

"How about McCain calling Rev. Ron Parsley a spiritual guide? Despite Parsley's claim that Christians should have a moral obligation to wage war on the "false religion of Islam"? Is he an official advisor or just a spiritual one?"

I call BS on this! First off your "source" is Wikipedia. I could write that CATO was his spiritual guide as far as that goes. Secondly, the footnote on the spiritual advisor citation rrefernces a Mother Jones article , hardly a nonbiased source of information.

Lastly the quote from the Mother Jones article:

"McCain, with Parsley by his side at the Cincinnati rally, called the evangelical minister a "spiritual guide."

Calling someone A spiritual guide and MY spiritual guide are two different things. I hereby today declare that the Reverend Jeremiah Wright is A SPIRITUAL GUIDE. Not MY spiritual guide, but A spiritual guide.

Posted by: pbj on March 17, 2008 11:22 AM
63. Cato: Wow, nearly 50 years later, and the voter base is the same? You should be really dizzy by now. Yes, Welfare and Affirmative Action have harmed the black community. Kept them as a needy voter base, rather an encouraging them to attain their potential, which is great, by making them believe they could not succeed on merit or intelligence, destroyed the black American family, set up too many for failure in our universities, and generally demoralized an entire segment of the population of our country by forcing them to remain victims and look to the Dem party for a payout. I'd call that pretty destructive.

Posted by: katomar on March 17, 2008 11:27 AM
64. Furthermore, that Mother Jones article is dated March 12, 2008. It was a hastily written propaganda piece to allow liberals like Cato to try to counter the bombshell revelation of the black seperatist Wright and his closet seperatist follower Obama.

Posted by: pbj on March 17, 2008 11:29 AM
65. Spin, spin, and more spin. Cato, cut the crap

You cut the crap and defend your BS argument.

Have you read Rev. Wayne Perryman's book "Unfounded Loyalty"?

I have not.

Perryman believes that the Dems only became interested in the black community in the 60' because Dems saw a large voting bloc.

Was he in the Democratic leadership in the 60's? Is this a theory or an argument based up with supporting evidence from senior Democratic officials at the time? Or is it just a theory?

It is ignorant to say that Republicans have adopted the racist attitudes of the old time Dixicrats.

Why, do you evidence to the contrary? Something like evidence of southern white voters flocking to the states that are currently represented by two Democrats in the Senate? States like Washington, California, New York, or Massachusetts? I'm betting the voters stayed put and switched parties as the party platforms changed over time.

Perryman says that the black community is worse off today than it was before the 60s

Says Rev. Perryman who apparently lives in a nice house on . I'm sure as a member of the poverty stricken black community that lives on Mercer Island I'm sure he's truly suffering.

Perryman believes that it is because many blacks have turned away from God and the Christian church and placed their faith in the Democrat party.

How does he know this? Does he question every blacks relationship with God? Does he see lots of people praying at the alter of the Democratic Party?

Posted by: Cato on March 17, 2008 11:50 AM
66. In using the Dem's own words.

( What did Obama hear, and when did he hear it?)

Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on March 17, 2008 11:54 AM
67. Cato @ad infintum above -

Thank-you for conceding the point by attempting to change the subject. Another prime example of the logical fallacy known as ignoratio elenchi.

Posted by: ewaggin on March 17, 2008 11:57 AM
68. Cato is fast becoming the David Matthews of current events and politics. What a hoot!

Posted by: katomar on March 17, 2008 12:03 PM
69. Yes, Welfare and Affirmative Action have harmed the black community

Again, you said it was racist. By harming the black community black voters somehow get the "idea that one's own race is superior and has the right to rule others". Do share how that works.

demoralized an entire segment of the population of our country by forcing them to remain victims

I'd argue that there are more minorities in American University's than ever before. I'd also say that more minorities occupy top positions in America than ever before (Condi Rice, Colin Powell, Michael Steele, Orpah Winfrey, Barack Obama, Tony Dungy, etc). I don't see these people as victims, do you?

look to the Dem party for a payout

As opposed to large businesses that look to the Govt. for a bailout every time they make bad business decisions (like the current credit/banking crisis)?

First off your "source" is Wikipedia.

1) Yes it is.
2) The endorsement article comes from Fox News. Which cites many of the same statements as the Wikipedia article. Is Fox News to liberal for you?
3) I did not know the Wikipedia article was linked to a Mother Jones article. I used Wikipedia only as a reference to the individual.

Posted by: Cato on March 17, 2008 12:21 PM
70. Cato is fast becoming the David Matthews of current events and politics. What a hoot!

Sweet, how long till I get banned like DM did? God forbid anyone disagree with the "factually correct" postings of conservative postings here at SP. =P

Posted by: Cato on March 17, 2008 12:30 PM
71. "1) Yes it is.
2) The endorsement article comes from Fox News.Which cites many of the same statements as the Wikipedia article. Is Fox News to liberal for you?
3) I did not know the Wikipedia article was linked to a Mother Jones article. I used Wikipedia only as a reference to the individual."


First off, that is a second hand source. Show me video of McCain saying that and video of Parsley saying that. I have video of Wright saying that. Obama's church is so proud of his America bashing , they sell it on DVD.

Secondly, the fox news source you cited also has this to say (which you convenitnetly omitted):

"A campaign official disputes that argument, adding that any comparison between the Wright and Parsley situations is "totally absurd." The official notes that Rev. Wright married Obama, baptized his children and has served as his spiritual adviser for 20 years, whereas McCain received Parsley's endorsement at one event and has never attended his service."


As to the wiki to MJ reference, that is why you don't cite from Wikipedia. I could write Cato has the third nipple for all that matters.

Posted by: pbj on March 17, 2008 12:31 PM
72. Cato,

Wayne Perryman has experience as an inner-city pastor, journalist, talk show host, and investigator, and he is a black man. He is certainly more qualified to speak of the black experience than either you or I. On two occasions, he requested a formal apology from the DNC for their part in slavery. All he got from the DNC was the middle finger, so he filed a lawsuit on behalf of the himself and all African Amercans against the DNC.

"Why, do you evidence to the contrary?"

You show the evidence. You brought it up. Show me all the instances where Republicans have moved to enact Jim Crow or Black Codes.

So what if Perryman lives on Mercer Island. I guess to you, a black is not a black unless he lives in a slum. Are you a racist Cato? Isn't Perryman black enough for you? Perryman has achieved a degree of success in life and has demostrated that blacks don't need handouts from the Democrat party.

Why don't you try reading the book, then pose your questions to the Reverend himself. You can come back here and dazzle us with your enlightenment.

Posted by: NW Denizen on March 17, 2008 12:34 PM
73. Cato, you have been given more freedoms here than ANY conservative ever gets on any liberal blog. Over at HA, you are forbidden to cite any evidence with links (eg proof). Over as DemocratUndergournd if you disagree with ANYTHING, you get banned and your account deleted along with all your posts.

Posted by: pbj on March 17, 2008 12:35 PM
74. This is an interesting conversation. In many ways it is about my bigot is better than your bigot. It seems every candidate has their own personal bigot. Let's review:

a. Dr. Paul has David Duke and a collection of other crazies.

Let's vote, good bigot or bad?

b. Senator Obama has Rev. Wright

Good bigot or bad?

c. Seantor Clinton has Bubba,

Girlfriend gets a pass, just having to deal with this idiot on a personal level, which is different from the others, no vote here.

d. Senator Mc Cain has Rev. Hageee

Good bigot or bad?


When I was routinely getting lambested for bringing out the fact that Dr. Paul under his byline had written bigoted material, posters here wanted to give him a pass because he was their candidate and his bigots were good. One poster even went as far as to make the lame and stupid statement that he didn't have a racist bone in his body. Is he a jellyfish?

The issue is that Dr. Paul, Senators Clinton, Mc Cain, and Obama are pols. They would rather beg foregiveness than ask permission. They each have their own bigot. Why do they have their own personal bigots, because at this date and time bigots have followers and followers equal votes. So, folks how do we vote on the bigots, are their good bigots or bad bigots? Who is the best bigot in your opinion?

Posted by: WVH on March 17, 2008 12:38 PM
75. Cato, getting banned at this site is like being on Nixon's enemies list. Later on people held parties and formed associations.

Posted by: WVH on March 17, 2008 12:41 PM
76. 'Senator Clinton has Bubba'
Just had to throw that in didn't you, even though it makes absolutely no sense and there is no basis to it. But to 'carry your invalid' theme you had to include it. ergo, you make no sense. Alas, not the first time, tho. :)
I believe folks are on to you!...thus you're pretty much discounted. But, continue to spew forth as you undoubtedly will. :)

Posted by: Duffman on March 17, 2008 12:47 PM
77. I am still waiting for you to answer my question about Mr X and your educational level bigotry.

Do you think being an educational level bigot is better than other bigotry? Please answer the question. I am not going away.

Posted by: pbj on March 17, 2008 12:48 PM
78. Cato's red herrings about McCain and supposed bigot preacher connections ignores one point. Democrat's adhere to the meme that Republicans are the bigots and Democrats are the all inclusive, diversity embracing uniters. Obama's relationship with the black seperatist violates that meme.

Posted by: pbj on March 17, 2008 12:53 PM
79. Parsley's endorsement at one event and has never attended his service

It's the GOP equiv of having a more mainstream Louis Farrakhan endorsing your campaign and welcoming the individual with open arms.

Speaking of endorsements PBJ, didn't you say the other day that Sen. Obama's ties to Farrakhan proved the Obama was a racist? Should the same standard be applied equally to both sides?

Show me video of McCain saying that and video of Parsley saying that.

Apparently these quotes are from his book "Silent No More" which I have not read.

Fox News is reporting it, I'm sure they researched the individual quotes and would not just go parrot the Mother Jones article like a typical "leftist news organization" would. =P

which you conveniently omitted

I would never do such a thing. =P

Posted by: Cato on March 17, 2008 12:56 PM
80. So for a Democrat to claim indignance at something they already expect of them while giving a pass to their diety like candidate is the ultimate in hypocrisy. Kind of like the anti-gay bible thumper being caught in bed with a gay prostitute.

Posted by: pbj on March 17, 2008 12:57 PM
81. Cato,
The link I provide above is to an article which provides DOCUMENTED acceptance of cash donations for the EXPLICIT PURPOSE OF RACIAL GENOCIDE RIGHT HERE IN THE USA, which you might recognize by the name "the United States of KKKAmerica," but I assure you that I do not.

Furthermore it is not an isolated instance of acceptance of cash donations for the EXPLICIT PURPOSE OF FURTHERING RACIAL CLEANSING RIGHT HERE IN THE USA, it is one of seven documented instances from accross the United states in which this organization accepted CASH DONATIONS FOR THE EXPLICIT PURPOSE OF PROMOTING RACIAL CLEANSING RIGHT HERE IN THE USA. This was in 2007, not 50 years ago.

Can you one good reason why I should believe that a political Party that not only tollerates the happy recipients of these same cash donations but will feature speakers representing the organization that was happy to accept CASH DONATIONS FOR THE EXPLICIT PURPOSE OF PROMOTING RACIAL CLEANSING RIGHT HERE IN THE USA at their National convention should not be considered the modern home of racism?

Posted by: JDH on March 17, 2008 01:01 PM
82. Duffman said:

':)
I believe folks are on to you!...thus you're pretty much discounted. But, continue to spew forth as you undoubtedly will. :)

Posted by Duffman at March 17, 2008 12:47 PM

Should I be banned for saying that Duffman?

You might want to read this piece written by Armstrong Williams:

The Clinton Brand of Racism
by Armstrong Williams

Posted: 02/01/2008

http://www.humanevents.com/article.php?id=24768&page=1#continueA

or the following articles:

a.Is Bill Clinton a Racist?
By MDefl

http://www.rightpundits.com/?p=1059

b.
Bill Clinton and Liberal Racism

There is nothing like a conservative voice...lol. I don't always agree with what most conservatives...classic conservatives...say. However this conservative had some very interesting points to raise about Bill Clinton and Racist Liberals.

First Black Prez Turns out to be a Bigot

http://hellonegro.com/2008/01/30/bill-clinton-and-liberal-racism/


Now, Duffman, do you wish to add your voice to that of Pudge's and demand that I be banned?

Posted by: WVH on March 17, 2008 01:01 PM
83. Cato... quit your crying and no you won't be banned.

And you know damn well why DM was kicked. He would post so many times or just copy & post where no one else could get in.
Or take over the thread.

Grow a spine.

PS HAS anyone tried to kick you????

Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on March 17, 2008 01:03 PM
84. Cato, you have been given more freedoms here than ANY conservative ever gets on any liberal blog.

Am I complaining about those freedoms? No.

Please stop tying to associate me with the same individuals who run HA or DemocratUndergournd. I am not associated with those individuals in any way. How many times do I have to tell you that I only speak for myself and that I do not represent any party/organization/blog that you happen to have issues with.

Posted by: Cato on March 17, 2008 01:11 PM
85. No Cato, I associate you with people who are on record accepting cash donations for the expressed purpose of being exclusively used used "to eliminate black unborn children" because "the less black kids out there the better."

Posted by: JDH on March 17, 2008 01:17 PM
86. See the "=P" at the , I was being sarcastic. I quite enjoyed the comparison to a banned poster.

Furthermore it is not an isolated instance of acceptance of cash donations for the EXPLICIT PURPOSE OF FURTHERING RACIAL CLEANSING RIGHT HERE IN THE USA

That's like saying the entire GOP party is a racist organization because a single GOP Presidential Candidate took money from members of a known racist organizations and that David Duke is a true representative of the GOP. (FYI, don't believe this to be the case.)

JDH, as you can see I too can make a similar argument against the GOP using similar vast associations. My argument about the racist GOP doesn't hold water, nor does your absurd argument about the Democratic Party

Posted by: Cato on March 17, 2008 01:28 PM
87. "Now, Duffman, do you wish to add your voice to that of Pudge's and demand that I be banned?"

No. But I would like you to be honest about the Clintons'; they don't belong in ANY conversation about 'bigot' or 'racist' PERIOD! Despite spin attacks by the right.

Posted by: Duffman on March 17, 2008 01:35 PM
88. No Cato, the entire Democrat Party will host a National Convention later this year and at that Party Convention there will be featured speakers who represent an organization that was founded by one Margaret Sanger. Margaret Sanger, through Planned Parenthood, advocated abortions on Afro-Americans in order to eliminate what she called "socially undesirable people".

"We do not want word to get out that we want to exterminate the Negro population"
Who spoke these words? The Klu Klux Klan? Aryan Nations? The National Socialist (Nazi) Party? These are the words of Margaret Sanger, Founder of Planned Parenthood.

Now fastforward to 2007 and we have documented evidence that Planned Parenthood routinely accepted donations for the express purpose of furthering the stated aims of Margaret Sanger - and yet there is a political Party right here in the USA who will host this organization, feature this organization and stand and cheer speekers from this organization at their National Convention a few months from today.

Posted by: JDH on March 17, 2008 01:40 PM
89. I associate you with people who are on record accepting cash donations for the expressed purpose of being exclusively used used "to eliminate black unborn children"

Then by the same absurd logic JDH I will associate you to David Duke, Ron Paul.

Posted by: Cato on March 17, 2008 01:40 PM
90. Look moron, you have advanced the case that the modern Democrats left their avowed policies of racism in the 1960's and have moved on and that the Republican Party now fills the roll that the Democrat Party filled up until the 1960's when democrats abandoned their "formerly" explicitly racist positions. I have shown you that your assertion is bull crap. I have pointed out the connections and you cannot refute that they exist. You are an idiot. You are pathetic. You are a failure. Those I can excuse, what I cannot excuse is that you support a Party that will welcome and cheer a group that continues to support racial cleansing at their Nationl convention this fall.

Posted by: JDH on March 17, 2008 01:57 PM
91. "It's the GOP equiv of having a more mainstream Louis Farrakhan endorsing your campaign and welcoming the individual with open arms."

But I thought you told us all there was nothing wrong with Farrakahn, that he is just a regular guy.

"Speaking of endorsements PBJ, didn't you say the other day that Sen. Obama's ties to Farrakhan proved the Obama was a racist? "

No I don't think I did. Why don't you provide the link?

"Fox News is reporting it, I'm sure they researched the individual quotes and would not just go parrot the Mother Jones article like a typical "leftist news organization" would. =P"

I don't know about that. Some liberal told me it was "Faux News".

You have already told us about the Southern Strategy and how all Republicans are evil racists bigots and Democrats are tinkerbell unit4ers embraces the diversity of humanity to live happly ever after.

So when you excuse Black Seperatist Obama with "well Republicasn do it" (even though they don't), you are basically admitting he is guilty.

Why should any white man vote for a black seperatist?

Posted by: pbj on March 17, 2008 02:15 PM
92. Wayne Perryman has experience as an inner-city pastor, journalist, talk show host, and investigator, and he is a black man.

Wayne Perryman is a black man living on Mercer Island (which is 1.14% African American) with a theory that says about inner city blacks (where he doesn't live) turning away from God to worship the Democratic Party. (BTW, I have never seen a Democratic Party church, have you?)

So if WVH, a black woman with a PhD, has a theory that says the exact opposite does that make it true? WVH clearly has more experience being a black woman than you and I ever will. She also has a PhD which means she is well educated (in contrast to the Rev. Wayne Perryman who's degree/qualifications are not listed on his website).

One can only wonder why the Rev. Wayne Perryman is where he is (a successful black man living in a high income community full of affluent white individuals while preaching at an inner city church).

Posted by: Cato on March 17, 2008 02:16 PM
93. You know my analogy to David Matthews was wrong. I think it's more like James Carville, who never stops, except James Carville is funny, has a certain charm. At least Mary likes him.

Posted by: katomar on March 17, 2008 02:17 PM
94. Duffman,

I gave you those three cites because guess what, they were written by Blacks. So, you said:

'No. But I would like you to be honest about the Clintons'; they don't belong in ANY conversation about 'bigot' or 'racist' PERIOD! Despite spin attacks by the right."

So, if some Blacks find that in certain instances the Clintons have acted, in their opinion, in a bigoted manner. Then, those Black folks are being dishonest, right? I get it, whenever Blacks go off the plantation, they are dishonest, right?

Posted by: WVH on March 17, 2008 02:25 PM
95. Look moron

Your point is so much more valid when you call me names.

you have advanced the case that the modern Democrats left their avowed policies of racism in the 1960's

I have argued that, I have not advanced anything.

I have shown you that your assertion is bull crap.

You showed that one individual of one organization that the Democratic Party invites to their convention is somehow proof that the entire Democratic Party (an origination of thousands of individuals) is somehow out to murder black babies and therefore racist.

You are an idiot. You are pathetic. You are a failure.

I see, so because I showed that your argument is completely absurd you have no choice but to call me names which somehow makes your argument all the more credible.

cannot excuse is that you support a Party that will welcome and cheer a group that continues to support racial cleansing at their Nationl convention this fall.

Fine with me. I'm not asking for your sympathy or your vote here. I'm just an individual who's willing to question the logic behind your argument.

Now JDH, having proven that you cannot handle any level of scrutiny like a mature individual I see no reason to continue our discussion.

Posted by: Cato on March 17, 2008 02:34 PM
96. Cato,

My take on Rev. Perryman is just slightly different than yours. His research is not as thorough as it can be sometimes:

Republican reverend ignored recent history in condemning only Democrats for atrocities against African Americans

http://mediamatters.org/items/200407010003

There are points that he makes I feel are absolutely correct.

1. Blacks have given their loyalty to the dems and have little that is tangible to show for it in terms of economic advancement or education achievement.

2. Blacks need to be open to a variety of political choices. The problem is that the perception whether it is correct or not is that republicans leaders are a bunch of minor league bigots. So, in the Black community there is an element of voting AGAINST as much as voting for.
The thing that will save dems every time is that many republican leaders while they may not be bigots, are idiots.

3. He, Dr. Bill Cosby and a host of other Blacks too numerous to mention do agree with this statement from his book:

"Perryman also says of African Americans, "Many no longer put their faith in God, instead they put their faith in government and those representing government. The shift from God to government has resulted in behavior unheard of and problems unprecedented."


I do not see the shift to other parties happening soon. If the people that post here are examples of republican leadership, not only Blacks, but moderates will either go indie or stay in the dem camp. There is simply too much intolerance of any other idea and in cities, moderate ideology will prevail.

I like Rev. Perryman because of the above quote, but like us all, he is human.

Posted by: WVH on March 17, 2008 02:43 PM
97. If one stands and cheers an organization that is on record as having gleefully accepted donations for the express purpose of furthering racially motivatede abortion as evidenced by their finding "the less black kids out there the better" - "Understandable, understandable." Then it naturally follows that one is accepting of this organization. Remember this same thing happened at seven (7) different Planned Parenthood locations and it is entirely consistent with the founder's express goals when she founded Planned Parenthood. It's as simple as that.

Posted by: JDH on March 17, 2008 03:14 PM
98. I don't know about that. Some liberal told me it was "Faux News".

Hehe, you actually believe something a liberal told you? That's a first. =)

But I thought you told us all there was nothing wrong with Farrakahn, that he is just a regular guy.

I said he had not committed any crimes. There is a difference. Farrakhan has made a lot of disparaging remarks much like Parsley and Hagee. Sen. Obama was forced to denounce him as an individual and I believe both parties should be held to the same standard.

how all Republicans are evil racists bigots

I did not say that. I said that the voters who were against the Civil Rights Act of 1964 likely became Republicans as the platform of both parties changed.

So when you excuse Black Seperatist Obama with "well Republicasn do it" (even though they don't), you are basically admitting he is guilty.

Separatism implies that the individuals who go to Sen. Obama's church want to live in their own segregated neighborhoods and practice apartheid.

I seriously doubt this is the case, it sounds to me Rev. Wright wants his flock to invest in the black community so that the individuals who live in that community can be positive role models who turn around and inspire others to do the same.

You know, get off welfare, don't sell drugs, become a positive member of society, give back to the community to help others do the same. Seems to me this is a message you as a conservative would support.

Posted by: Cato on March 17, 2008 03:57 PM
99. My take on Rev. Perryman is just slightly different than yours.

I had never heard of Rev. Perryman before today, so my argument was based on what I found in a 5min Google search. It sounds like you have a much more informed take on him and his views.

It's as simple as that

So one person is wholly responsible for the views of Planned Parenthood and therefore the entire Democratic Party. Nice to know David Duke represents the views of the entire Republican Party because he happened to run as a the official GOP candidate for one election in one state. Yeah, that's real solid logic there JDH.

Posted by: Cato on March 17, 2008 04:07 PM
100. "You know, get off welfare, don't sell drugs, become a positive member of society, give back to the community to help others do the same. Seems to me this is a message you as a conservative would support."

Funny I didn't hear that one. I heard "God Damn America, US of KKKA etc..."

"White America got its wakeup call on 911"

Sounds pretty sepratist or racist to me.


I did not say that. I said that the voters who were against the Civil Rights Act of 1964 likely became Republicans as the platform of both parties changed.

ANd who were the voters that were against the Civil Rights Act of 1964 ...um let's see well the Grand Kleagle fillibustered that one...non other than Dem Sen Robert KKK Byrd.

YOu know damn well you mean to imply that Republicans are racists. Well CATO, the CHICKEND .....HAVE ....COME ....HOME (twirlws waving hads in air aka Dr Wright) TO ROOST fro MR Obama.

Keep Clucking Cato...keep clucking.


Posted by: pbj on March 17, 2008 04:11 PM
101. Well Cato, Hitler just wanted wants his flock to invest in the German community so that the individuals who live in that community can be positive role models who turn around and inspire others to do the same.

Posted by: pbj on March 17, 2008 04:14 PM
102. Guess what Cato? You have been punked. You have been schooled. You have been used up, my man. And the hilarious part to me is you won't know it until you read this.

I have been illustrating exactly why the message in churches such as the one Obama attends resonates with the congregation. It is because these people have seen the leftwing of the Democrat Party mouth the words yet they have witnessed, this past summer, planned Parenthood accept donations at seven (7) unique Planned Parenthood facilities and the response was as typified by Autumn Kersey, vice president of development and marketing for Planned Parenthood of Idaho when an actor portraying a donor said he wanted his money used to eliminate black unborn children because "the less black kids out there the better." Autumn Kersey, vice president of development and marketing for Planned Parenthood of Idaho replies while audibly laughing "Understandable, understandable. ... Excuse my hesitation, this is the first time I've had a donor call and make this kind of request, so I'm excited and want to make sure I don't leave anything out."

This is entirely consistent with the avowed purpose of Margaret Sanger, who through Planned Parenthood, advocated abortions on Afro-Americans in order to eliminate what she called "socially undesirable people" when she founded Planned Parenthood and you have not heard nor will you hear ANYONE within the Democrat Party disavow this.

I mean is it any wonder there are blacks who think terrible things about this country when the Democrats will have as featured speakers at their NATIONAL CONVENTION who represent this group.

Posted by: JDH on March 17, 2008 04:49 PM
103. One point that is not being discussed in all this is how one-color Obama's church is. You could count on one hand the white faces seen in his church as the camera pans to the audience. How is that representative of the "UNITED States of America?"

As we've heard before, 10 AM on Sunday morning is the most racially divided hour of the week in America. If integration and unity was important to Obama, why wouldn't he attend a church that had a congregational complexion of inclusion...like Hutcherson's church?

Posted by: Chad Minnick on March 17, 2008 04:52 PM
104. The bottom line it this. Words have meaning. When one says white people invented aids to kill black people, there is NO explaining that away. To not object, whether one be black, white , yellow or brown, is to be complicit in this racism.

Just as I won't back hypcrits like Larry Craig who rail against gays and then go for gay sex in the bathroom stall, I won't tolerate hypocrites like Obama who says he is for unity, but embraces for 20 years....

embraces for 20 years....


embraces for 20 years....


embraces for 20 years....


embraces for 20 years....


embraces for 20 years....

A man who accuses white people of creating the AIDS virus to kill black people and seems to be a magnet for every black nut out there like Louis Farrakhan who tells us "White people may one day be human , they just haven't evolved yet."

That kind of crap is wrong no matter whom it is directed at. You liberals refuse to see it because you are too partisan to be able to stand up and say "that is wrong, I will not vote for you".

Reverse discrimination against white people will not assauge your liberal white guilt, nor will it satisfy people like Dr Wright, whose heart only has room for hate.

Posted by: pbj on March 17, 2008 05:03 PM
105. "White America got its wakeup call on 911"

Take out White and you have Jerry Fawell preaching against the Liberals, Gays, and ACLU.

ANd who were the voters that were against the Civil Rights Act of 1964

Powerful White people. Which sounds like what Rev. Wright was talking about...funny how that works. How many black senators were the in 1964?

YOu know damn well you mean to imply that Republicans are racists

No I didn't. There are a lot more people in America and the GOP now than in 1964. I'm sure a lot of older individuals who vote for the GOP who used to be Dixiecrats (followed Strom across).

If integration and unity was important to Obama, why wouldn't he attend a church that had a congregational complexion of inclusion...like Hutcherson's church

Haha, Rev. Hutchison preaches in the white suburbs. A better example of controversy with true diversity would be Mars Hill.

Posted by: Cato on March 17, 2008 05:08 PM
106. PBJ says:
Catholic is NOT a race. Jewish is not a skin color.

Jewish is a race. Hitler tried to exterminate us? remember? So if I'm Pro-Israel and choose to shop at a Jewish Deli, buy only Kosher food for Passover I'm a racist for giving back to my community.

Nice try PBJ, face it you're a anti-semite bigot.

Posted by: Religious Roots on March 17, 2008 05:11 PM
107. pbj is right, words do have meaning and actions also have meaning and when there is a group out there that is collecting money for the expressed purpose of seeing to it that a stated desire to have "less black kids out there" is implemented one can see why the message of Jeremiah Wright resonates.

Especially so when the group accepting the money will be featured at the National Convention if one of our major political Parties.

This is no "fringe" element, they are mainstream and they took donations LAST YEAR at seven (7) independent locations to implement the avowed purpose of Margaret Sanger, who through Planned Parenthood, advocated abortions on Afro-Americans in order to eliminate what she called "socially undesirable people" when she founded Planned Parenthood.

Posted by: JDH on March 17, 2008 05:20 PM
108. Cato is a David Matthews sock puppet. You heard it here first! Frist!

Posted by: FreedomLover on March 17, 2008 05:28 PM
109. Give it a rest! This Obama's preacher's story is already stale. Let's move on.

You Republicans would do well to concentrate on how you're going to get Rossi elected. That's more important to you than Obama's preacher.

Posted by: Politically Incorrect on March 17, 2008 06:56 PM
110. Obama's real problem is the Slimball Clinton Machine, which will stop at nothing to destroy their party.

It's almost too fun to watch, they are being eaten up from the inside out.

Posted by: GS on March 17, 2008 07:02 PM
111. PBJ,
First off, I would like to apoligize for my tone on the other thread. I did take offense to your comments, but that is no reason to come back the same. Your basic argument is that the church is racist because it decided to minister to the black community where it is situated. This argument, supposedly, is reinforced by its stated values and its retiring minister. Ergo, since Obama is a member and I assume supports this church financially, he in fact validates the values stated.

It should be no guess. I don't agree with this logic. I don't view the values stated as being racist because they don't exclude whites. They simply focus the church's mission. It should be noted that the congregation is a mixture, not black only. I know that church's do have specific mission's they are called to and that not every church is called to the same mission.

This still doesn't answer your underlying question, however, if one substituted "white" for black in the value statements would they be racist. I would answer a qualitative no. There is nothing in the values that state only a certain race, so they don't exclude other races (as opposed to White Supremist groups that do exclude). So, one way I would view the word "racist" is whether it excludes a race.

Thinking about it however, I felt that still didn't adequately cover your question. So, totally excluding the context/location of the church, I applied the 12 values to my own overwhelmingly white, middle-class to upper middle class church, located in the highest median housing market in Pierce County. How would my church fair.

I won't go through each point by point, but just substituting the work wouldn't make the statements necessarily sound racist. It makes them sound extremely foolish because they would be all out of context. If however, instead of substituting the word "white", I reworded the statements to make sense to the community the church resides in, most all are applicable. The only one that would need to take a different focus would be value 8 (disavowel of the pursuit of middleclassness). This is a specific issue to blacks. A substitute for the predominantly white middle to upper-middle class community I live in is disavowel of the pursuit of social status. In my community, there are the rich with their waterfront homes and the buying of their kids brand new Lexus or Porsche. The social economic disconnect in the community is most evident in the schools, especially High School. It isn't enough to have a good looking coat, it has to be a North Face Denali. Purses have to be Coach or DB. Kids that have normal cars and normal clothes are not the "in" kids. It seems like everyone else is striving to be the rich families and live their lives spending 110-150% of their income so that their kids can keep up.

So, in summary. Given the context of the church's mission field, I do not find their value system racist. Substituting the word "white" for "black" in the stated values wouldn't make them racist, it would make the statements non-sense. Substituting ones one community makeup into the values does lend some credence that they may be a values system to consider. Shouldn't Church's really focus on their call and mission? Shouldn't they address the needs of the community they reside in?

Just my thoughts.

Posted by: tc on March 17, 2008 07:39 PM
112. Chad Minick said this:

103. One point that is not being discussed in all this is how one-color Obama's church is. You could count on one hand the white faces seen in his church as the camera pans to the audience. How is that representative of the "UNITED States of America?"

As we've heard before, 10 AM on Sunday morning is the most racially divided hour of the week in America. If integration and unity was important to Obama, why wouldn't he attend a church that had a congregational complexion of inclusion...like Hutcherson's church?

1. The quote about church segregation is correct.

2. Don't know why this particular church was chosen, but I have a couple of theories:

a. Unless one has spent time in a large city like Chicago, Philly, and Boston one does not begin to understand just how segregated the neighborhoods are. In this area segregation results more from income and who can afford to buy the house. In big cities segregation results from the fact that each racial and ethnic group has their own neighborhood.

b. There are certain churches that "up and comers" go to in each neighborhood. So, if one is developing a business, political career, or wants to meet the "right" people you go to this faith community.

c. Charismatic leaders establish insitutions that mirror their personality. Rev. Hutcherson of Antioch is Black and I forgot the name of the founder of Mars Hill, but he is Caucasian. Both are charismatic personalities and both have had controversy, Rev. Hutcherson about gays and the leader of Mars Hill about the role of women. What is different about their ministries is that this area, with the exception of some of the posters here, is more tolerent of races mixing for worship and social events. Except at the elite levels in Chicago where money is the great equalizer, middle class and lower middle class groups tend to mix only with their own ethnic group. That is my best guess as to why this particular church was so Afro-centric.

In this area, a pastor preaching an exclusionary philosophy would probably be condemned. Mt. Zion Baptist Church, the major Black church has members of all colors, former Governor Mike Lowery was a member there and it is heavy on membership from politicians here.

There are so very real differences in what it takes to survive in the wards and the ward politics of a city like Chicago.

Posted by: WVH on March 17, 2008 07:51 PM
113. Wow, you really know that the libs are worried when you have a bunch of libs posting to this blog saying "there's nothing there", and that "it's an old story". If that was the case they wouldn't even bother posting.

Yeah, this won't faze the core kook people in this country. The ones who really, really hate America.

But that's not enough to win an election. What this does is cuts the Jewish support down by about 35 percent, and I would say cuts the blue collar white union voter support down by at least 70 percent.

The last several elections have been won/lost by the smallest of margins (Clinton never got majority support) (Bush lost the popular vote in 2000 won by a close margin in 2004). So this probably throws it to the liberal Juan McCain.

Not that this is necessarily a good thing. It is hard to say. On the good side for the next generation or more the kooky left will forever complain how the Democrats and Clinton sabotaged Obama. They love conspiracy theories as we all know. And they will blame the Democratic "White KKK" establishment for bringing them down.

But with Juan McCain we have basically a Bill Clinton that Republican Congresspeople and the rest of the republican Party establishment will feel compelled to support. SO, it could mean the end of the Conservative movement, whereas either a Hillary or Obama Presidency could have given the Conservative movement the needed momentum we needed to succeed, just like BJ Clinton led to a Republican Congress and George W. Bush (for all the good that did).

So, yeah, this ends it for Obama. Not in the primary, mind you but even in the general election. It will be closer than we think though because lots of long time conservative grassroots people are committed not to vote this year, but Obama will put the necessary scare on about half of them. Obama will put the scare on the beer drinking blue collar males too and and the extremely liberal but care about the survival of Israel Jewish vote as well (but not the extent you might think as from reading some blogs from some people in Israel there really are many "self hating Jews" who do things that actually hurt their chances for survival).

Posted by: Steve on March 17, 2008 07:51 PM
114. Steve,

I am going to throw Duffman a bone. I said a couple of weeks ago never count any candidate out of anything. I still don't count out Billary.

1. You assume that people only vote FOR someone, people often vote AGAINST some one. There is a lot of time between now and after the conventions. No one knows what will happen between now and August. You might be correct and Senator Obama could be the one they vote AGAINST. Maybe, may not.

2. The Louisiana governor's race between Edwin Edwards, an admitted womanizer, gambler, drinker, crook and who knows what else and David Duke is the prime example. Edwards kept his mistress on the payroll and later went to prison. People voted for the crook.

Most people who post here wouldn't vote for Senator Obama if they were paid. Voters are often not as strident in their dislikes. Some elections come down to vote for the crook, I don't know if this is one of those elections. There is a long time between now and August.

Posted by: WVH on March 17, 2008 08:03 PM
115. Hell, I might even vote for Obama (well really AGAINST JUAN McCAIN).

God, if someone would tell me I would be saying this even 3 years ago I would call them insane but I am really hoping that Hillary will pull things out.

I really think that her Presidency would be in the best long term interest of this country.

Jorge W. Bush has nearly destroyed the Conservative movement. Juan McCain will gladly pound the nails into our coffin.

But yeah, you are right there are so many things between now and Nov it is hard to say if this will finish Obama off. I think it will but McCain and Kemp (his running mate?) has promised that they will run this campaign in the Dole style. So part of me thinks that I should take them at their word and not underestimate their skill in losing even when victory seems so easy.

Posted by: Steve on March 17, 2008 08:27 PM
116. Steve,

You proved my point, You would not be voting for Senator Obama, you would be voting AGAINST Senator Mc Cain. I have to wait until election day to decide if I am voting AGAINST the nominees of both parties, not FOR Ralph Nader.

Posted by: WVH on March 17, 2008 08:43 PM
117. The original topic of Eric's post addressed Obama's real problem, which in Eric's eyes was credibility based on what his Pastor has stated in the past.

I have viewed all the posts both here and on Don's post, and I don't think that this is Obama's real problem. His problem is that people want to believe spin and the ugliest about candidates. His problem is overcoming the politics of negativity. His problem is overcoming the Rove/Clinton oriented politics of divide and discredit your opponent. His problem is our problem. For if this is what politics must be, then we all fail. This is a negative world view that I for one am not willing to surrender to.

For a change, why doesn't everyone listen to Obama's own words on his faith, instead of the spin meisters. Below are a few links:

Interview with Christianity Today in January

Interview with Beliefnet

Text of his sermon at Ebenezer Church in Atlanta in celebration of Martin Luther King Day

Barack's speech at the Call to Renewal Conference, June 28, 2006

Posted by: tc on March 17, 2008 09:23 PM
118. Yeah, I admit you are right about that, WVH.

But to compare this to a Hagee endorsement is totally wrong.

Remember I am totally against Juan McCain. But Hagree isn't the pastor of Juan McCain's iglesia. He just endorsed Juan McCain. He wasn't the pastor who married his wife, bathized his children. Juan McCain has never credited Hagree with "bringing him to Christianity". McCain never took the title of a book he wrote from a speech that Hagree gave.

But all that is true about Obama and Hatewright. You condemn Juan McCain for one endorsement, but with Obama he attended Hatewright's church for 20 years. We are not talking about an endorsement, we are talking about someone who has had a long term substantial effect on Obama and his family.

And what this does, is it fills in some of the questions that has been popping up. Like why was B Hussian's race for the Presidency the FIRST time his wife has ever been proud of America. Why doesn't he put his hand on his heard for the flag ceremony when even Hitlary could bring herself to. Of course with Hatewright as their "spiritual adviser it all makes sense now doesn't it.

If Romney's Mommonism was an issue, which it was, and I believe it should have been, then why not the man who B. Hussian sees as his spiritual advisor? Especially when it answers so many of the questions that has been coming up about him.

Of course if he loses that means Juan McCain will win. Unless Hitlary can pull it out "Go Hitlary Go!". Whoever wins this fall, America will come out the poorer for it.

Posted by: Steve on March 17, 2008 09:28 PM
119. WVH: I would vote for Obama were he CONSERVATIVE! In fact, I have voiced my support for Michael Steele as VP many times. I think Obama's church is no different from most of the extreme left today, spewing America hatred. It's what they teach in schools, universities, sell in the movies and in rap music. What else can we expect, really? And the most outstanding point is that this hatred of American is voiced from the urban metropolises, where Democrats rule, and where the black community is most egregiously manipulated as a voter block, and by the media.

Posted by: katomar on March 17, 2008 09:45 PM
120. tc and Steve,

Regarding the Hagee endorsement, it was not so much that Hagee was velcro buddies with Senator Mc Cain. It is the fact that he is a bigot. Rev Wright is a bigot. David Duke is a bigot. To make Duffman happy, Bubba is an idiot that plays the role of a bigot on TV. None of the candidates supports the principle that bigots will not be tolerated, no matter their color, religion, or creed.

Senator Obama will need all of his eloquent rhetoric tomorrow night to explain why he didn't do sprints out of Rev. Wright's Church. Senator Mc Cain's staff could have googled Rev. Hagee and found that this dude was going to be trouble.
The problem is both were giving lip service to the principle that bigots will not be tolerated.

I have been threatened and called every name in the book because I was relentless against Dr. Paul for his support by David Duke and the Duke clones. People that supported Dr. Paul are shocked, I tell you shocked that Rev. Wright is a bigot, like their pal, Duke. Really. Guess they were late on coming aboard the anti-bigotry train. The bought tickets so they could show their disgust of Rev. Wright.

tc, I think you are correct that campaigns are nasty and of the slime and dirty the opponent variety.

On another note, I hope that Senator Mc Cain chooses a Jack Kemp type, if not Jack Kemp. The man has a lot of class.

Posted by: WVH on March 17, 2008 09:52 PM
121. k@28 newsmax says they stand by the reporter and the church has three services ithink it said 7.30 and 11 am and at6pm.it said he could of attened the early one and still make it to florida to give his speech.he also said the the secret service was there so it should be easy enough to see who is telling the truth.

Posted by: me on March 17, 2008 10:20 PM
122.

No, you are a racist if you start spouting crap like "White people created aids to kill black people"

You are a racist if you say "US of KKKA" and rant on about people of a certain race and crazy conspiracy theories.

You are a racist if you state that white people aren't human, they haven't evolved yet.

"Nice try PBJ, face it you're a anti-semite bigot."

Wow I guess I will have to tell that to my Jewish brother in-law. He will be surprised to hear that!

Posted by: pbj on March 17, 2008 10:24 PM
123. "No I didn't. There are a lot more people in America and the GOP now than in 1964. I'm sure a lot of older individuals who vote for the GOP who used to be Dixiecrats (followed Strom across)."

Yes you did. It it one of your Democrat talking points, Southern Strategy, racism all that. Broad brush every Republican as a racist.


Please start your education of your Democrat party by watching this.

Posted by: pbj on March 17, 2008 10:48 PM
124. tc - newsflash - POLITICIANS LIE.

But with the real personal decisions such as who is choosen to marry you and who is to bathize your children, sometimes the truth is revealed.

And this all ties in with what we already have learned about B. Hussian and his family. He has shown his hatred of America in his refusal to put his hand on his heart during the pledge when all the other socialist (democratic) candidates did. His wife saying that this was the first time she felt something other than shame for America. Of course she would feel that way with Hateswhites as her family's spiritual advisor.

Now, one even two of these things alone, perhaps, perhaps, could be explained away. But now taken with what we all now know about Rev Hatewhite, the pattern is just all too clear to ignore.

So, yeah, I really don't give a damn about what B Hussian puts out for public consumption. I have seen his heart of darkness and its racist to the core.

And, no the following wasn't approved of by the Juan McCain campaign. From what I hear he is in London raising money. How he can raise money from Londoners I haven't a clue. Perhaps he is exploiting a loophole in his anti-first amendment campaign law.

Posted by: Steve on March 17, 2008 10:50 PM
125. This little video sums it up pretty well.

Click Here

Posted by: pbj on March 17, 2008 10:56 PM
126. "why he didn't do sprints out of Rev. Wright's Church"

The man brought Obama to "Christianity" or so Obama has said in the past.

Wright was the man who married Obama and his wife. Wright was the man who baptisted his children. To whatever extent Obama now considers himself a Christian it is due to Rev Hatewhites.

Do you understand the degree of involvement that this man has had in the life of Obama?

This doesn't just happen to be some guy of whose church Obama had stopped by once or twice. This isn't just some guy who endorsed Obama. This is the guy Obama credits with bringing him to Christianity. He dedicated a book to the man. He spend 20 years in the guy's church.

He choose to have his family's spiritual life revolve around the guy. Was that just for show? Well perhaps it was, but still it seems from comments his wife has made and his own behavior that some of it still rubbed off on him. And even if it was all for show, what does that still show about Obama that he wanted to be shown to be connected with that man (at least until he realized he had a chance to win the presidency).

How can any person be an "uniter" when he has for whatever reason filled his family full of so much rage by them attending this church.

And no, I don't speak for the Juan McCain Campaign. Like I said he is in foreign countries right now raising campaign funds so you would have to go to London or wherever he may be right now. I wonder if he will be going to China anytime soon. I hear those Monks can raise lots of funds.

Posted by: Steve on March 17, 2008 11:07 PM
127. WVH, by the way, Jack Kemp, he is a loser. And if McCain runs the campaign he claims he is going to then they don't have a chance!

You are right. I am quite likely counting B. Hussian out far too soon. Never underestimate the ability of the Republicans to lose. 1996 should have taught us that.

Juan McCain/Jack Unkemp 08. Please God, America needs Hiltery. Never thought I would say that. Never thought it would be true but Hiltary is of all the current options the best option for America in the long-run.

Posted by: Steve on March 17, 2008 11:20 PM
128. Broad brush every Republican as a racist.

Your words, not mine.

Thanks, I know the history of both parties. You proved in the Rossi thread that you can't even do basic arithmetic without blaming the Dem's for something.

I think Obama's church is no different from most of the extreme left today, spewing America hatred. It's what they teach in schools, universities, sell in the movies and in rap music.

You might as well be against free market capitalism with that broad of a statement. People buy what they want, people buy music cause it sounds good. Some people buy music for the message (see Christian music or the Sun City song ). I doubt anyone buys music because they hate America and what it stands for.

People spewing America hated? Last I checked that's still covered by the 1st Amendment.

And the most outstanding point is that this hatred of American is voiced from the urban metropolises, where Democrats rule

Why don't you just come out and say how you really feel instead of dancing around the issue.

Here Katomar, let me do it for you:
Vote Democrat = You Hate America (and all it's Freedoms).

and where the black community is most egregiously manipulated as a voter block, and by the media.

Again Katomar stop dancing around your point, you think black people are stupid and can't think for themselves.

With people like Katomar representing the GOP it's no wonder sane people are leaving the party in droves.

Posted by: Cato on March 17, 2008 11:22 PM
129. You can vote Democrat and still love America.

But you can't vote FOR a Democrat and still love America.


It's like what I read in a tag line from someone at free Republic.

God's not a Republican but Satan certainly is a Democrat.

Posted by: Steve on March 17, 2008 11:35 PM
130. Steve,

Oprah once belonged to Rev. Wright's church. She left. Senator Obama has to explain why he continued the relationship. I don't count him out and he may be able to overcome questions the same way that Bubba and Hillary went on 60 minutes to discuss bimbo eruptions and saved their campaign for the presidency.

I disagree that former Rep. and Veep Candidate Jack Kemp is a loser. He just doesn't appeal to you. I suspect the candidates that would appeal to you probably have a snow ball's chance. This election is about getting indies like me to vote for the nominee.

Like it or not, there is a huge negative perception about republicans and race. I said perception and sometimes perceptions may not be fair. There are some republicans that have credibility in working with all types of people, Jack Kemp is one of those. It might be the experience he gained with a NFL team. I believe his son ran or still runs a family values foundation in Bellevue. Senator Obama's problems with the bigotry of his pastor does not erase the very serious issues many voters of all colors have with some republicans on race. Just read a few posters here, they are helping to contract the republican base and eliminate hope of gaining indies. Cato is not right about Katomar, but he is on target with others including some of your "leaders."

I don't know how much time you have spent in Europe. Billary is like New Labour. Google New Labour and start reading about what is happening in Britain. Be careful what you wish for, you might get it in a number of ways.

Posted by: WVH on March 17, 2008 11:44 PM
131. "Thanks, I know the history of both parties. You proved in the Rossi thread that you can't even do basic arithmetic without blaming the Dem's for something."

I don't think you do. And I can do basic arithmetic, geometry, algebra, linear equations, calculus, probability and statistics (calculus based, not the pansy version for non-science majors) and differential equations just fine thank you. Is it my fault you were trained by a union teacher and can't to simple division? Oh and there are approximately 300 million people in the US, not 3.3 million as you stated in the Rossi thread.

Posted by: pbj on March 17, 2008 11:46 PM
132. No, you are a racist if you start spouting crap like "White people created aids to kill black people"

Monkeys had AIDS long before it jumped to Humans. Reagan ignored it because it's was a disease that afflicted homosexuals in large numbers.

What if you claimed that AIDS was God's punishment for Homosexuals? Who would ever think the person who said those kind of remarks would be considered a trusted Spiritual Advisor? None of the past Presidents would ever invite Jerry Fawell or Pat Robertson to the White House.

You are a racist if you state that white people aren't human, they haven't evolved yet.

What if you claim a certain race is stupid and easily manipulable like Katomar did @ 119? Would that be racist?

By your very definition certain members of my race are racist. The Hasidic population purposely excludes themselves from "normal" society, they show allegiance to God (not America) by wearing certain clothing that separates them from "normal" society, Hasidic's constantly invest money back into the Jewish community and in some cities the Hasidic community even have their own hospitals.

Hasidic Jews eat only certain kinds of foods that are blessed by a member of their own religion, they shop at stores owned by other Hasidic Jews, and they exclude the non-Hasidic community from attending their services. Up until the 1948 we as a race did not even have a homeland.

Tell me what's the difference between the Hasidic Community and a Black Community that does similar things?

Posted by: Religious Roots on March 17, 2008 11:49 PM
133. And I can do basic arithmetic

Geez, then how did you ever figure it was the Dem's who passed Safeco Field when it clearly had votes from BOTH parties in order to make the numbers you quoted [House: 66-24; Senate: 25-16].

Oh and there are approximately 300 million people in the US, not 3.3 million

According to the US US Census Bureau there are 303,655,947 people in the US and climbing.

I must be wrong because the US Census Bureau is somehow run by a bunch of liberals who can't count. Will that be your excuse this time PBJ?

Posted by: Cato on March 18, 2008 12:04 AM
134. How come it didn't take Oprah Winfrey 20 years to learn of the Racist Reverend's vitriol and leave?

Apparently there was something there that drove Oprah away. How does one reconcile this fact with Obama's 20 year relationship with the racist reverend and not conclude he is either lying or is incredibly naive?

OK lib spinmeisters, set that top a spinning. This ought to be rich.

Posted by: pbj on March 18, 2008 12:04 AM
135. Religious Roots,

I truly applaud the fact that you are attempting to be fair-minded. The difference is this, most Hasidic Jews quietly practice their faith where Rev. Wright has a very public stance which was made even more public by the fact that one of his congregants is running for the top job. Oprah rcognized the dangers to her brand and left this congregation. We are unfortunately not at the point in this country where candidates don't have to be aware of the minefields of not fitting in with majority culture if one seeks to represent the majority of people. I like Senator Lieberman and know that there could have been issues with some, not me, because he is an Orthodox Jew and must observe the Sabbath. This country has come along way and will go further as long as there are fair-minded people from all communities. Senator Obama should have addressed this issue earlier.

Posted by: WVH on March 18, 2008 12:09 AM
136. In a sick twist of irony Billary could be our best hope. She doesn't seem very popular even in her own party. And we stopped Hillary Care at the height of BJ's popularity, and no doubt we could again.

I really, really believe that liberalism is bad. I believe it doesn't work. I believe it causes bad things to happen.

The problem is that both Billary and Juan McCain will promote liberal policies. As one person I heard say Hillary/McCain that's no contest, that's a TICKET.

So regardless of who wins liberalism will be promoted, and things will get worst. Regardless of the outcome. The only question is then who do you want to get the blame? The Republicans or the Democrats.

Also I feel that while both Juan McCain and Billary will promote liberalism, Billary will do it in a more obvious manner while Juan McCain will be more subtle. So in the whole "Frog in Pot" analogy Billary will turn up the heat too quickly and hopefully the frog will jump out while Juan McCain might be subtle enough to turn it up just slow enough for the frog to cook alive without even knowing it. Hell the heat has been rising for eight long years and we haven't done anything yet.

And of course there is the problem with what a Juan McCain presidency would do to the Republican party itself. Republicans will support liberal policies under Juan McCain that they would strongly oppose if the same policies were proposed by Billary or B. Hussian.

Do I "wish for" Billary? It's not something that I look forward to indeed. But looking at all the other options out there it might be the "lesser evil" and in a twist of sick irony perhaps our last hope.

Remember because of Carter we got Reagan

Posted by: Steve on March 18, 2008 12:14 AM
137. "Geez, then how did you ever figure it was the Dem's who passed Safeco Field when it clearly had votes from BOTH parties in order to make the numbers you quoted [House: 66-24; Senate: 25-16]."

Because the Democrats controlled the Senate and the Governor's mansion at the time you idiot. The governor (Mike Lowry) held a special session to force it on the people AFTER they had gone to the polls to reject it. If the Governor hadn't wanted to crush the will of the people as expressed at the ballot box, he wouldn't have held the special session. He would have vetoed the bill.

Stop lying about it. Democrats forced Safeco Field on the public.

"According to the US US Census Bureau there are 303,655,947 people in the US and climbing."

Yes, and that is approximately 300 million, not the 3.3 million that you stated on the Rossi thread.

"I must be wrong because the US Census Bureau is somehow run by a bunch of liberals who can't count. Will that be your excuse this time PBJ?"

No, you are wrong because you cannot tell the difference between 300 million (I stated) and 3.3 million (which is what you stated in the Rossi thread). Go ahead. Tell me you didn't write that in the Rossi thread, I am just salivating waiting to go and quote you on it!

Once again, you are caught in a lie.


Posted by: pbj on March 18, 2008 12:15 AM
138. From Cato, post 82 ROssi Thread:

"Again, we figured it out. A driver in a nation of 3.3 MILLION ..."


Once again Cato, you are caught in your lie.

Posted by: pbj on March 18, 2008 12:20 AM
139. "Like it or not, there is a huge negative perception about republicans ..."

That is due to George Bush Jr and his liberal policies.

There was a huge favorable perception about Republicans after Reagan.

If you want there to stop being a negative perception about Republicans then have Republicans actually enact conservative public policy. They work. And liberalism doesn't work. It doesn't matter if the liberalism is promoted by someone calling him or herself a Republican liberalism just as assuredly falls is it does when tried by a Democrat.


Juan McCain is a liberal. If he becomes president his liberal policies will fail just as they would if done by the Democrats. The only difference is that when his liberal policies fail, Republicans will be blamed.

The next president will be promoting liberal policies. So the only question left for us to decide is who will get the blame when they fail.

Posted by: Steve on March 18, 2008 12:23 AM
140. Cato. BUSTED!

Posted by: pbj on March 18, 2008 12:23 AM
141. Hey perhaps Juan McCain thinks HE is New Labour. That would explain why he is doing his campaign fundraising in LONDON!

Posted by: Steve on March 18, 2008 12:31 AM
142. pbj this just goes to show that RINOS give liberal policies the illusion of bipartisanship so when they become unpopular the Democrats can go "don't blame us, members of both parties supported it. It had 'bipartisan' support."

That is why when given a choice between a RINO and liberal Democrat I vote against the RINO. Makes the blame more clear when the liberal policy inevitably falls.

Yeah, you can vote democrat and still not hate America. But you can't vote FOR a Democrat and not hate America. God's not a Republican but Satan is certainly a Democrat.

Posted by: Steve on March 18, 2008 12:41 AM
143. "It might be the experience he (Jack Kemp) gained with a NFL team (why he would be qualified to lead our country)", says WVH.

Heck, why even have elections? Every four years just take the NFL quarterback with the best stats and make him President.

Look I really like Football, but when all is said and done IT'S JUST A GAME. Just because they can pass the football doesn't mean they have the experience necessary to be responsible for the Nuclear football.

Gosh, some people really do deserve the "Bubba" label.

(Sad thing though perhaps this would give us a better result than we seem to be getting now).

Jack Kemp has been a proven LOSER when it comes to Presidential politics and from recent interviews he seemed to only have gotten worse with age.

Posted by: Steve on March 18, 2008 01:05 AM
144. Steve,

I suspect that you are bitter because any candidate you would probably support is unelectable. Go ahead and vote AGAINST whomever, the Supreme Court that is appointed, a couple of the judges are just hanging on, will ensure there will be no Reagan for you. Your party has a problem with race and some of its "leaders" are bigots. Now, the NFL experience at least gives him close contact with those of other races. Here is his bio:

JACK KEMP

Jack Kemp has enjoyed considerable success and longevity in all three of his careers - first professional football, then politics and now business. Mr. Kemp served from 1993 to 2004 as Co-Director of the public policy institute Empower America, which he founded with former Secretary of Education Bill Bennett and former U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Jeane Kirkpatrick. Today, Mr. Kemp serves on a number of corporate boards and travels extensively in the U.S. and around the world for lectures as well as business. He is a nationally syndicated columnist focusing on economic issues, trade and foreign policy, while also appearing on a variety of political talk shows. Throughout his career, Mr. Kemp has been one of the nation's leading advocates of economic growth, free markets, free trade, tax simplification and lower tax rates on both work and investment. He is also the first and strongest advocate for revitalizing our inner cities by establishing Enterprise Zones to encourage entrepreneurship and job creation and expanding homeownership among public housing tenants. Both in and out of public office, Jack Kemp has been an important contributor in nurturing democratic capitalism not only in the US , but also throughout the world. Mr. Kemp, who ran for President in 1988, gained further prominence in the national spotlight in 1996, when he was selected to be the Republican Party's candidate for Vice President of the United States .

Prior to co-founding Empower America, Mr. Kemp served four years as Secretary of Housing and Urban Development under President George H.W. Bush and proved to be one of our nation's most innovative leaders in that role. Before his appointment to the Cabinet, Mr. Kemp represented the Buffalo area and Western New York for 18 years in the U.S. House of Representatives. Among his many accomplishments in Congress is the 1981 Kemp-Roth tax cut bill, the impact of which is still felt today. A Director for Oracle since 1995, Mr. Kemp has become intimately involved in many facets of the technology economy. He was a founding Director of Proxicom in 1995. Additionally, Mr. Kemp has been a key strategic advisor to many corporations and serves on the Board for Hawk Corporation, InPhonic and IDT. He also is an advisory board member of Toyota's Diversity Initiative, Thomas Weisel Partners, a merchant banking firm in San Francisco, Thayer Capital Partners in Washington, DC and Westbury Partners of Westbury, NY.

Mr. Kemp co-founded the AFL Players Association in 1964 and was elected president for five terms and currently serves as the Vice-President for NFL Charities. He is also the Chair for Habitat for Humanity's "More than Houses" campaign, serves as a Board member for Howard University, as well as for the Schools of Public Policy at Pepperdine and UCLA. Ambassador Andrew Young and Jack serve as Board members of Young's Goodworks International.

http://www.kemppartners.com/principals-jk1.htm

The great thing about this country is we are free to vote FOR or AGAINST any candidate.

I suspect that you will never be for a candidate in the future because this is a watershed election. Just as New Labour sucked the air out of Britain, Billary will suck the air out of here. Brits are leaving in droves. Go ahead and vote your theory.

The electorate just doesn't seem to be with you.



Posted by: WVH on March 18, 2008 01:23 AM
145. O-my. Mr Wright just keeps putting his foot into the (crapper)

Obama, why do you follow this man?

http://www.mindfully.org/Reform/2003/Iraq-IQ-Test-Wright23feb03.htm

Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on March 18, 2008 06:22 AM
146. JUAN WILLIAMS: Of course, it says something about him. He joined this church, really, to solidify his credentials as authentically black and authentically a part of that South Side Chicago community, because it's the largest church there and Reverend Wright is well known not only in Chicago, but nationally, and he's known for making these outlandish comments. It's very key here that, unlike the notion that Barack Obama wants to advance that he didn't -- or wasn't aware of it, I find that unbelievable, or that this is a crazy uncle speaking out, he -- he -- this is a man who he chose to be associated with. It's not a family member. He chose to be associated with Reverend Wright and saw advantage in it. It speaks to his character and it speaks to the judgment, which is the basis on which Barack Obama has been running this campaign.

Posted by: JDH on March 18, 2008 07:34 AM
147. "Obama, why do you follow this man?"

Because Obama, his wife, and most likely his children are racists who hate America with a passion.

All that said I might be forced to vote for him as opposed to Juan McCain.

I can't say whether B. Hussian will be the first Black President but I can say if he is elected he will be the last Black President for quite some time. With him as an example no one will even think of electing a black president for several generations to come. Sad, because race shouldn't mater --- but it does.

Look there is no good outcome that could arise from this election. The only hope is that with B. Hussian the frog will finally jump. They say those who get the nearest to the cliff takes the greatest step back.

I am surprised that some enterprising developing country doesn't start advertising itself as a place Americans can stay in exile under things get better here.

http://www.escapeartist.com/efam/97/efam97.html

Posted by: Steve on March 18, 2008 07:52 AM
148. Sen Obama's speech today is a powerful one. If you've not heard/read it - you should. While it may not totally get him 'out of the woods' (so to speak) in regard to his Pastor, it certainly will help and I believe will reverberate to all. He IS an incredible orator, I'll give him that. :)

Posted by: Duffman on March 18, 2008 07:52 AM
149. Duffie

Dude Obama is spinning and NOTHING more.

Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on March 18, 2008 07:55 AM
150. Duffman (named for a character on the Simpsons who promote the sale of Beer) I really hope that you don't survive occupied America.

You really do remind me of a Nazi. Yeah, Hitler was indeed an incredible orator as well.

For the rest of us perhaps indeed the time has come to think about what to do when the Nazis take control of your country. Where will we go? I believe talk shows would do a great service in having on guests who can give us ideas on how to survive the coming onslaught.

Posted by: Steve on March 18, 2008 07:59 AM
151. Duff.

Look even now Obama is admitting he heard Wrights sermons of hate. First he said he didn't, now he say's O-yeah I did.

Now he knew this was going to come up and either he didn't care and supports what Wright say's, or he's not as smart as everyone say's he is!

Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on March 18, 2008 08:01 AM
152. Thanks Steve for your encouraging words, exceeded only by your inate ability to further the cause for 'hope' and 'change' in this Country. I will pray for you my friend. :)

Posted by: Duffman on March 18, 2008 08:03 AM
153. Cato and Religious Roots:
Wow, what I said was:
"And the most outstanding point is that this hatred of American is voiced from the urban metropolises, where Democrats rule, and where the black community is most egregiously manipulated as a voter block, and by the media."
and you have morphed that into:
"What if you claim a certain race is stupid and easily manipulable like Katomar did @ 119? Would that be racist?"
Once again, you display the liberal mind set of "If you're not liberal, you are racist". Unlike liberals, I am damn mad about what is happening to our youth's education in inner cities. Does that make me racist? No, it makes me conservative. I agree completely with WVH that if the GOP and conservatives don't start paying attention to and become more active in the great urban centers, we have no hope of winning elections. Does that make me racist? No, that makes me conservative, but I guess it's all the same diff to you.

Posted by: katomar on March 18, 2008 08:05 AM
154. This election reminds me of the election Germany faced during the 1930s.

Who do you want to win? The Nazis or the Communists.

And now America faces a similar situation.

B. Hussian or Juan McCain. Pick your poison. The only thing I can hope for with B. Hussian in charge is that things will get so bad so quickly the frog will indeed jump. With Juan McCain our destruction is just as certain, perhaps even more so, it just will happen a little, just a little later.

Posted by: Steve on March 18, 2008 08:10 AM
155. O great.. ONLY WHITE men will vote for McCain... Great one Obama.

Hey Duff keep talking about that hope thing!

Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on March 18, 2008 08:10 AM
156. AM/V: As someone once said (and I detect you would probably understand) -

"Hope sees the invisible, feels the intangible, and achieves the impossible."

:)

Posted by: Duffman on March 18, 2008 08:22 AM
157. Hope is very good. Unless evil hides within!

Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on March 18, 2008 08:27 AM
158. "Wayne Perryman is a black man living on Mercer Island (which is 1.14% African American) with a theory that says about inner city blacks (where he doesn't live) turning away from God to worship the Democratic Party. (BTW, I have never seen a Democratic Party church, have you?)"

Why do you keep focusing on Perryman's success? I guess my analysis of you is correct. Your only view of black people consists of those blacks who join gangs, sell drugs, abandon their children, and live in the ghetto. This is liberal crap. Wake up, whether you like it or not, there are many successful black people in this country. Condoleesa Rice, and Colin Powell quickly come to mind. Ted Rall liberals dismiss Rice as Bush's "House Nigga" because she chose not to buy into liberal bullshit. Who are the racists here? Conservatives? You got to be kidding.

Who said anything about blacks "worshipping" the Democrat party? The point Perryman is trying to make is that many blacks have turned to the Democrat party for solutions to problems in the black community, where before the 60s, it was the Christian church that helped fullfill that role.

You cannot intelligently comment about Perryman unless you read his book. I can only show you the door. You have to walk through it. Stop gobbling the blue pill and free your mind.

Posted by: NW Denizen on March 18, 2008 08:34 AM
159. Part of me thinks that "Bubba" will never bring himself to vote for Obama. It's not so much that they would never vote for a black man but they know at the most basic level how it feels to be discriminated against because one is a blue collar white male. All they want to do is put in a honest day's work, be able to pay the mortgage and braces for the kids teeth and have just a little bit, just a little bit left over to go to the bar and have a few beers with their friends (which believe it or not include black people).

They are tired of hearing that they are racist and sexist, and how all the historical ills are THEIR fault. No they are not racist but they have learned that there are good reasons to fear people like Obama.

So, I really don't see Bubba voting for Obama. At least not most of them.

But at the same time McCain has said that he is planing to run a campaign doom to failure. And I can't underestimate the skill that McCain and Kemp and the Republican Country Club establishment has in losing elections.

Oh, Duffman, Hitler knew lots about "hope" as well. If you want to connect your future with a Jim Jones, Adolph Hitler type why don't you just find yourself a commune somewhere. SO when you do drink the kool-aide the effects will be isolated and you won't take the nation down with you.

Posted by: Steve on March 18, 2008 08:35 AM
160. What an absolute enlightened world you live in. :)

Posted by: Duffman on March 18, 2008 08:41 AM
161. I didn't get the reference Wright had in his rant when he talked about Clarence Thomas and Condoleeza Rice until Glenn Beck pointed it out this morning.

Obama did not disavow Wright in his speech. It was like saying that Hitler did some bad things, but I still like him. I may not like that Hitler killed 6 million Jews, but hey he was my mentor.

Posted by: pbj on March 18, 2008 08:55 AM
162. We could all vote for Obama and no matter what in the liberal mind, we are all racists. We will always be racists in liberal's mind because that is their knee-jerk reaction when confronted with inconvenient truths. They won't admit this publicly, but that is what they think. It seeps out in their talking points when they speak of the "Southern Strategy" and such. And heaven foribid a person of color should choose not to follow liberal dogma and think for themselves, then they become "colons" according to Mr Wright.

Posted by: obj on March 18, 2008 09:01 AM
163. Duffman,
I read the speach and even in reading, it was powerful. I will listen tonight.

Unfortunately many here have bought into the politics of the past. The are "slaves" to the politics of division. It is unfortunate they have closed their minds.

I don't care to banter with PBJ and Steve. What they state doesn't make sense. It is emotion without a rationale logic on why what they are stating makes any sense. I don't understand their outrage. I want to hope, like Barack stated today, that we can overcome this race struggle. We have so much to do as a country and should be focusing on which side has the best plans to fix the many messes the Clintons and Bushes have created for us. I sure hope we can have a McCain versus Obama general election that focuses on issues instead of the politics of division. Go McCain! Go Obama!

Posted by: tc on March 18, 2008 09:04 AM
164. "Again, we figured it out. A driver in a nation of 3.3 MILLION ..."

Once again Cato, you are caught in your lie.

I'm sorry, 303,655,947 people is 3.6 million...that makes the total percentage even lower. 20,000 into 303,655,947 is 0.0065%. Now 901 deaths last year out of 150,000 US Troops(most recent troop count I could find) is 0.60%. You would be an idiot to argue that 0.60% is somehow a smaller number than 0.0065. Even if I bump that number up to 42,636 out of 303,655,947 I get 0.014% that's still way better than 0.60%. Get a clue already.

Unlike liberals, I am damn mad about what is happening to our youth's education in inner cities.

I'm live in an inner-city location, you think I like people peddling drugs down the block, on our street? You think I like the fact a small business owner was shot last month for reporting drug activity that happens across the street from his location? I don't one bit but why the hell is that the Democrats fault? The GOP has seven years to remedy some of the problems of the inner city, yet they have not given a single enticement or tax break for investing in these communities.

GOP and conservatives don't start paying attention to and become more active in the great urban centers, we have no hope of winning elections.

Maybe you should start by living in urban centers instead of gated suburban communities. According to the Huffington Post donation tracker only one person in my entire zip code donated to a Republican candidate this election. It's was to Ron Paul.

Posted by: Cato on March 18, 2008 09:06 AM
165. "I'm sorry, 303,655,947 people is 3.6 million..."

Bzzzzzt. Nope it is not. 303,655,947 is 303.655947 million, NOT 3.3 million.

Please go take a math course.


Posted by: pbj on March 18, 2008 09:10 AM
166. "You would be an idiot to argue that 0.60% is somehow a smaller number than 0.0065"

Wow, did you even finish high school?

0.6% = .0060

And YES, .0060 IS less than .0065.


BUSTED! AGAIN!

Posted by: pbj on March 18, 2008 09:15 AM
167. Oh, Duffman, Hitler knew lots about "hope" as well.

I'm going to invoke Godwins Law here. Anyone who goes around comparing two people who have never killed or advocated killing another person in their life to a man who killed 6 million Jews you really have lost it.

I think Steve, Katomar, and PBJ have all clearly illustrated the point that bigotry and racism is alive and well in the Republican Party.

Posted by: Religious Roots on March 18, 2008 09:16 AM
168. TC
Barack stated today, that we can overcome this race
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

By having a 20+ year Pastor who is a racist is ok? Your spinning too.
Obama was caught and he's trying to sweep this under the rug.

Don't tell me he didn't know this was coming about his Rev.
Have you noticed even Obama's wife have been very quiet.

I noticed that the great Rev hates Jews too. "eye opening"

Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on March 18, 2008 09:21 AM
169. BUSTED! AGAIN!

You're clearly a moron, let's put it in a simpler form so you can wrap your mind around it:

0.60% > 0.014%


Posted by: Cato on March 18, 2008 09:21 AM
170. Sorry tc, I just don't buy into the hypcorisy of a man claiming to be a uniter and then embracing a man who says white people invented AIDS to kill blacks.

His rhetoric sounds as sweet as the words of a messiah, I will agree. Germans were similarly awe struck on Hitler. Go back and lok at old news reels and how the Germans listening to Hitler speak look like they are in a trance.

But words have meaning and I find his words don't match his actions. Now you can certainly mention lots of Republican hypocrits, but that doesn't change the fact of Obama being one.

Posted by: pbj on March 18, 2008 09:25 AM
171. An excerpt from Obama's speech today:
"In fact, a similar anger exists within segments of the white community. Most working- and middle-class white Americans dont feel that they have been particularly privileged by their race. Their experience is the immigrant experience as far as theyre concerned, no ones handed them anything, theyve built it from scratch. Theyve worked hard all their lives, many times only to see their jobs shipped overseas or their pension dumped after a lifetime of labor. They are anxious about their futures, and feel their dreams slipping away; in an era of stagnant wages and global competition, opportunity comes to be seen as a zero sum game, in which your dreams come at my expense. So when they are told to bus their children to a school across town; when they hear that an African American is getting an advantage in landing a good job or a spot in a good college because of an injustice that they themselves never committed; when theyre told that their fears about crime in urban neighborhoods are somehow prejudiced, resentment builds over time."

This is gut-wrenching honesty and one of the reasons why I like Obama. You don't hear politicians tell people the truth. You don't hear politicians address issues head on. Obama today raises the ugly issue of racism and classism to the forefront. It is something we as America have to deal with. To let the Wall Street barons destroy this country with their greed, or the corporate execs that make 50-100 times their workforce destroy this nation, it is time for us to say enough. To let politics as usual go on with spin meisters and media controlling our thoughts, it is time for us to say enough. It is time for change. It is time for frank discussions. It is time for all of us to get involved. I believe both John McCain and Barack Obama believe this. It is time for the race to be settled and for those two to debate how the best way is for our country to have a frank discussion and really address how should we move on.

Posted by: tc on March 18, 2008 09:28 AM
172. Religious Roots

You may wish to look up what Rev Wrights thinks of Jews.

By the way, Wright and Ferekan are the best of friends and we know what he thinks of jews.

Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on March 18, 2008 09:30 AM
173. I noticed that the great Rev hates Jews too. "eye opening"

So is it OK to say the same thing about Muslims then?

Hey Army A/V, everybody hate's the Jew's, we've been persecuted for the last I dunno 3000 years or so. This is nothing new.

The GOP even elected an anti-semite President, maybe you remember Richard Nixon don't you?

Posted by: Religious Roots on March 18, 2008 09:30 AM
174. I should add that as great a speech as I think this was - the beneficiary of Sen Obama even 'having to give it' is Mrs Clinton. :)

Posted by: Duffman on March 18, 2008 09:32 AM
175. I am honest in my wanting Obama in it through November, after the 527's finish mining Wright's material for juicy tidbits and juxtaposing them with the words from Obama's wife then airing them for three straight months - we won't have to deal with the Democrat Party for some time.

Posted by: JDH on March 18, 2008 09:32 AM
176. Not every sir! I don't and all good people I have for friends don't.

Poor excuse.

Maybe you and Rev Wright and one in the same.

Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on March 18, 2008 09:38 AM
177. JDH@175
I find your statement truly sad. Its tone is almost sadist. It is like the only way for you to have joy in your life is at the misery of others. I hope this isn't the case.

Posted by: tc on March 18, 2008 09:38 AM
178. JDH we will just have to deal with the Republican Party (if what you say will happen actually does happen).

Do you have a plan for that as that scares me in some ways even more that B. Hussian?

Posted by: Steve on March 18, 2008 09:46 AM
179. TC
I find your statement truly sad.
______________________________________

As I do with your statement on Wall street. So you don't like what they get paid..Hmmm you and Leinn/Stailn would be best friends,

How come you haven't said zip about Obama's wife and the money & raise she is getting! (from a hospital no less) How many poor could 300.000 help.

Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on March 18, 2008 09:46 AM
180. "Politics ain't beanbag: 'tis a man's game, and women, children 'n' pro-hy-bitionists had best stay out of it."

Posted by: JDH on March 18, 2008 09:49 AM
181. Cato,

Clearly you are an idiot. Go read your own post at 164:

"You would be an idiot to argue that 0.60% is somehow a smaller number than 0.0065"


YOU wrote that sentence Cato, not me.


Posted by: pbj on March 18, 2008 09:51 AM
182. Army Medic/Vet we do need to find a way to corporate executives accountable. Even when they screw up big time they get "golden parachutes" and make out very well. And if things get very bad for a corporation then they can expect a big fat Federal bailout.

I am a capitalist but how can we ensure that CEOs interests and that of their corporation are more entwined?

Posted by: Steve on March 18, 2008 09:52 AM
183. "I think Steve, Katomar, and PBJ have all clearly illustrated the point that bigotry and racism is alive and well in the Republican Party."

And the knee-jerk epithets come out. Thanks RR for proving my point!

Posted by: pbj on March 18, 2008 09:53 AM
184. I do think this 7th-Grade-type bickering among us is inane. :)

Posted by: Duffman on March 18, 2008 09:56 AM
185. Steven..

Do you really want the gov running this? Really.
If a company should fail I agree that NO -Gov bail out and if the Ceo broke a law string him up.

A company is of many stock holders and set the CEO pay. (votes)

But really, you want some fool like Kennedy writing a law on big biz...
Scary.

I share your concerns though.

Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on March 18, 2008 09:59 AM
186. "In fact, a similar anger exists within segments of the white community. Most working- and middle-class white Americans don't feel that they have been particularly privileged by their race. Their experience is the immigrant experience as far as they're concerned, no one's handed them anything, they've built it from scratch. They've worked hard all their lives, many times only to see their jobs shipped overseas or their pension dumped after a lifetime of labor."

And that is the one reason why Bubba might vote for Obama despite the fact that Obama hates America and the white race.

The Republicans have ignored blue collar Americans for too long. Something that Pat Buchannan has brought up time and time again.

Posted by: Steve on March 18, 2008 10:01 AM
187. "In fact, a similar anger exists within segments of the white community. Most working- and middle-class white Americans don't feel that they have been particularly privileged by their race. Their experience is the immigrant experience as far as they're concerned, no one's handed them anything, they've built it from scratch. They've worked hard all their lives, many times only to see their jobs shipped overseas or their pension dumped after a lifetime of labor."

And that is the one reason why Bubba might vote for Obama despite the fact that Obama hates America and the white race.

The Republicans have ignored blue collar Americans for too long. Something that Pat Buchannan has brought up time and time again.

Posted by: Steve on March 18, 2008 10:01 AM
188. I am honest in my wanting Obama in it through November.

A person who compared Hitler to Obama wanting Obama, there's a new one.

Maybe you should ask yourself "Are you better off today than you we're four years ago?"

I can imagine most people in this country are not. I don't know if the Dem's will win or not but with the recent influx of new Democrat registrations in the US it seems likely once you start examining McCain's flip flop streak and his liberal voting record it could be a possibility.

Posted by: Cato on March 18, 2008 10:01 AM
189. Steve please don't bring Pat Buchannan into this.
He is a racist.

Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on March 18, 2008 10:04 AM
190. "This is gut-wrenching honesty and one of the reasons why I like Obama."

No it isn't. He was trying to offer up an excuse for Wright , basically "well whites do it too."


"You don't hear politicians tell people the truth. "

And we didn't today either. You are just too awestruck with the man like a giddy rock star groupie.


I have heard black preachers angry at past discriminations and frankly I don't have a problem with it. But when it crosses into crazy racial conspiracy theories, that is where it crosses the line. To draw an equivalence between people upsetabout outsourced jobs and accusations of inventing a virus for racial cleansing is illogical and absurd.

Posted by: pbj on March 18, 2008 10:05 AM
191. Cato, Obama is a demagogue the likes we have rarely seen in American Politics.

We have though seen in elsewhere in America. Jim Jones, Charles Manson, the guy who was the head of the Heaven's Gate Comet cult, Bhagwan Shree Rajneesh, David Koresh to name a few.

It's called "Cult of Personality" and it rarely ends well.

Posted by: Steve on March 18, 2008 10:07 AM
192. "Steve please don't bring Pat Buchannan into this.
He is a racist."

It seems that the drive bys in the media has succeed again in demonizing a good man.

No, Pat Buchannan isn't a racist. That is absurd.

Posted by: Steve on March 18, 2008 10:12 AM
193. Steve is right about the cult of personality. Anybody remember "Mr Clean" Elliot Spitzer?

Posted by: pbj on March 18, 2008 10:14 AM
194. And the knee-jerk epithets come out. Thanks RR for proving my point.

Let's see here, katomar said black people were stupid and easily maniputable, PBJ (you) and Steve both broke Godwin's law by comparing Rev. Wright and Sen. Obama to Hitler.

I don't see how calling you out as the ignorant individuals you are is a knee-jerk epithet. You are not doing yourselves or the political party you are affiliated any favors by continuing to post ignorant comments.

Speaking of which, it looks like the moderators took down PBJ's "white guilt/two-fer-one" post from the other thread. I wonder why? Could it be that it was the epitome of that individuals ignorance?

Posted by: Cato on March 18, 2008 10:16 AM
195. "PBJ (you) and Steve both broke Godwin's law by comparing Rev. Wright and Sen. Obama to Hitler."

You mean like your absurd comparison of McCain/Hagee to Obama/Wright?

Like I said, it is all about PC. You liberals are going to be mighty disappointed on election day. You think brow beating people with epithets will force them to vote for your candidate. It won't


Posted by: pbj on March 18, 2008 10:24 AM
196. "A person who compared Hitler to Obama wanting Obama, there's a new one." Show me where I have ever compared Hitler to Obama. Cato, paging Cato, step away from the bong. And yes I do want to see the democrats nominate Obama, there is nothing anyone can do to stop the 527s from running all the adds they want and by November the Democrat Party will be exposed as the race baiting hatemongers they are. I don't believe that Obama is goning to be the nominee though, I am willing to bet that Hillary is still in it because she has a little something she has been holding back and I am waiting for the eve of the Democrat convention to see what it is.

Posted by: JDH on March 18, 2008 10:31 AM
197. No, Pat Buchannan isn't a racist. That is absurd.

Oh, this should be good.

Yeah, let's all defend a man who wrote in his book that "Hitler presented no threat to the United States after Nazi Germany's initial victories of World War II." - NY Times

Posted by: Cato on March 18, 2008 10:31 AM
198. I don't believe in "Godwin's law". I have found in the past that comparing someone to Hitler has been quite effective in demonizing an opponent. Far more successful than comparing someone to Stalin which is in a way sad.

And it isn't without merit that I do compare Wright and Obama to Hitler. All of them use the "cult of personality" to gain themselves followers who would obey them unquestionably.

The common line is that what happened during WWII was all Hitler and not the German people. Hitler somehow hypnotized the Germany population and bent them to his will. Now I don't totally buy that and think to a large degree Hitler acted in line with the will of the German people, but still there is much to be said about how Charismatic Hitler was.

To us he seemed like a bad joke when you see his speeches and wonder how he could influence anyone. But to the German people they did idolize him in a messianic sense. People were willing to turn their will over to him.

Look, I liked Reagan and he was a good speaker, but never did I give over my will to him. When he was wrong, I saw that he was wrong and spoke out.

Obama, on the other hand has moved beyond the political to make his movement practically religious in nature with him as their messiah. And you don't question a messiah. Never. Wasn't it the liberals who warned us about such a political figure? Indeed his followers do take on a cult like mentality. I really believe that if he asked them to drink poisoned kool-aid, just like the followers of Jim Jones, a good portion of his followers would do so.

So, yeah he is Hitler, he is any other cult leader you may name. His whole campaign is based upon a cult of personality and that rarely ends well.

Posted by: Steve on March 18, 2008 10:33 AM
199. "Yeah, let's all defend a man who wrote in his book that "Hitler presented no threat to the United States after Nazi Germany's initial victories of World War II."

That is not a racist statement. It is a geopolitical opinion that you can agree with or disagree with but it's not a racist statement. Nowhere in that statement did he say that Hitler was a good guy.

Posted by: Steve on March 18, 2008 10:36 AM
200. Cato, if you want to quote the NYTimes how about we discuss the NY Times' and in particular Walter Duranty's complicity in the murder of millions.

Posted by: JDH on March 18, 2008 10:37 AM
201. Steve.
Buchannan blamed Jews for most of the worlds problems. A very stupid stamement.

Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on March 18, 2008 10:45 AM
202.
You gave me fortune
You gave me fame
You me power in your gods name
Im every person you need to be
Im the cult of personality
Look into my eyes, what do you see?
Cult of personality
I know your anger, I know your dreams
Ive been everything you want to be
Im the cult of personality

Posted by: Steve on March 18, 2008 10:46 AM
203. Duffman, Cato, Religious Roots, and ArmyMedic Vet

Thanks for being fair-minded.

Army Medic Vet said this:

"189. Steve please don't bring Pat Buchannan into this.
He is a racist."

Here is some background on Pat Buchanan:

Presidential Candidate Pat Buchanan - The Dark SideRacism Sources. Memo from Pat Buchanan to Richard Nixon dated August 26, 1971, reprinted in "From the President: Richard Nixon's Secret Files", ...
www.realchange.org/buchanan.htm

Opinion-Columns.com: Pat Buchanan, Racist ExtraordinaireSo far as can be seen and so much as can be surmised, only Pat Buchanan (among the foursome teeing off on American tradition) is an out-and-out racist. ...
www.opinion-columns.com/praguewriter/2006/08/pat_buchanan_ra.html

Think Progress » Blog Archive » Buchanan Argues For Immigration ...The entire anti-immigration movement is just like Pat Buchanan. I am for secure borders, but I do not share the racist paranoia of these nativist whackos. ...
thinkprogress.org/2006/08/22/buchanan-white-dominance/

Pat Buchanan Again Cites Racist Sources on Black Crime | HatewatchMSNBC commentator and former Reagan aide Pat Buchanan is citing racist sources again -- and mislabeling them as "right-leaning." ...
www.splcenter.org/blog/2007/08/22/pat-buchanan-again-cites-racist-sources-on-black-crime/

SPLCenter.org: Hawking RacismHawking Racism Pat Buchanan's latest book is a white nationalist screed. But that hasn't stopped it from climbing the best-seller charts. ...
www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?aid=718

OrcinusBuchanan's racism Sunday, October 08, 2006. How much longer, one has to wonder, will our mainstream press continue to pretend that Pat Buchanan has not gone ...
dneiwert.blogspot.com/2006/10/buchanans-racism.html

There is a common thread between some of the posters here and Rev. Wright, David Duke and Rev. Hagee. That thread is that they HATE so much and so completely, they cannot be objective about anything.

Steve says this:

"And that is the one reason why Bubba might vote for Obama despite the fact that Obama hates America and the white race."

What proof do you have for this statement other than the fact that you HATE Senator Obama. I think you have more proof that Rev. Wright is a HATER, like Rev. Hagee and David Duke. I expect just as you HATE in your words "Juan" Mc Cain, you HATE those who have created the situation you describe here:

"In fact, a similar anger exists within segments of the white community. Most working- and middle-class white Americans don't feel that they have been particularly privileged by their race. Their experience is the immigrant experience as far as they're concerned, no one's handed them anything, they've built it from scratch. They've worked hard all their lives, many times only to see their jobs shipped overseas or their pension dumped after a lifetime of labor."

Dude, it is not just white folks who are getting kicked to the curb by the fact that the rust belt is being turned into a dustbowl. Most of the folks at Bear Stearns who were making the big bucks weren't people of color. But, people of all types will suffer as the dollar plummets and it costs more to just exist.

The true culpret is HATE. HATING the political opposition does nothing but make one bitter. It was right to call Senator Obama on the fact that for whatever reason he sat there listening to a primo HATER. I suppose he made a political calculation. Guess what, Senator Mc Cain made the same calculation with Rev. Hagee, I don't consider him either a HATER or racist, just a pol.


Posted by: WVH on March 18, 2008 10:48 AM
204. Army Medic/Vet can you back up that statement or do you believe just making such a broad general statement makes it true?

I do think we have too close a relationship with Israel due to a large part the influence of the Israeli Lobby. No foreign lobby should have such influence over the decision making of our politicians.

Posted by: Steve on March 18, 2008 10:51 AM
205. WVH your sources have little credibility. I have listened to Buchannan and he is anything but racist.

But this just shows that the drive-bys still have influence in warping people's perception of political figures.

Posted by: Steve on March 18, 2008 10:56 AM
206. Show me where I have ever compared Hitler to Obama

Did I mention your name in that post, JDH? I don't think so but I'm happy to add you to the list of ignorant individual posters if you want, I'm sure you would qualify.

You mean like your absurd comparison of McCain/Hagee to Obama/Wright?

1) I'd say a McCain/Hagee to Obama/Farrakhan is a much better comparison.

2) Let's look at the absurdity of your belifs shall we:

People who speak out against individual gropus of people they don't like (Hagee/Catholics, Wright/White People)

vs.

An individual who is responsible for killing over 6 million people he didn't like. Actions vs Words, there is a HUGE difference.

Comparing the two just shows everyone how ignorant you really are, especially after your white guilt/Two-fer-one comments yesterday.

I think this discussion is now over. I feel no need to debate people who will happily compare individuals they don't like to Hitler. You're clearly just as ignorant as Wright & Hagee.

Thanks for playing.

Posted by: Cato on March 18, 2008 10:57 AM
207. Again, Rev. Hagee isn't Juan McCain's spirtual mentor.

And trying to say he is just proves to me how desperate you are.

Posted by: Steve on March 18, 2008 11:01 AM
208. Steve said:

"WVH your sources have little credibility. I have listened to Buchannan and he is anything but racist.

But this just shows that the drive-bys still have influence in warping people's perception of political figures."

So, now we get to what is really bugging you, dude. The world is not exactly as you would want.

"I" have listened to and based upon "my" conclusion these are the facts. So, as the phrase goes, who died and made you king? Your opinion of the world is the only one that matters. Actually, there are reems of research on Buchanan and his racist remarks. Whether "you" accept those cites is up to you, others have no problem coming to a conclusion.

Posted by: WVH on March 18, 2008 11:06 AM
209. I believe that if Rev. Hatewhites could he would behave much in the same way as Mugabe has.

Racism is racism. It is just that some are in a better position to put their racism into action.

Posted by: Steve on March 18, 2008 11:08 AM
210. One further thing, Steve,

I have been relentless in attacking the racist associations of Dr. Paul. as posters here know.
I have been called every name in the book and threatened. You are now attacking Rev. Wright as racist and Senator Obama as well. Have you always been on the anti-bigotry train or did you just buy a ticket for this trip, so you could attack Senator Obama?

Posted by: WVH on March 18, 2008 11:11 AM
211. You haven't shown me any of Buchannan's racist statements.

You have shown me people characterizing Buchanan's statements as racist but that's two different things.

Posted by: Steve on March 18, 2008 11:13 AM
212. The entirety of this thread has been wasted in trying to decide who is the biggest, baddest racist. Enough already! It astounds me that most liberals just cannot understand that conservatives don't want to vote for either Hilary or Obama because they are too liberal. Why is that so hard to understand? I will vote for the most conservative candidates out there, be they white, black, purple, or yellow. Much more knee jerk reactions like what we have read so far, and the emergency rooms ought to be filling up with broken noses!

Posted by: katomar on March 18, 2008 11:16 AM
213. Cato,

Oh puhleeeze. Get over yourself already! I never said either was Hitler. I did use a Hitler example to demonstrate the level of personality cult some have with Obama. Perhaps an Elvis metaphor is more appropriate?

FOR THE RECORD: Obama is not Hitler. I don't believe I ever said so and for anyone who has any question in their heads, Obama is not Hitler.

No amount of claiming pc righteousness will change those facts. I am happy to never correspond with you as well. You show yourself to be an ignorant hack for the Democrat party. When confronted with facts, you resort to your base instincts of hurling epithets.


"I feel no need to debate people who will happily compare individuals they don't like to Hitler."

How hypocritical for a liberal such as yourself coming from a belief system where every day Bush = Hitler is the refrain.


Posted by: pbj on March 18, 2008 11:20 AM
214. Steve... All of these words came from P Buchanan.
(And there is a bunch more)

1990: "The problem is: Diesel engines do not emit enough carbon monoxide to kill anybody."

- NY Post, March 17, 1990 (from a column about the trial of accused Nazi war criminal John Demjanjuk)

1990: "Whatever Rudolph did during World War II, his quarter century of service to the United States entitles the old man to a public hearing before he goes to his grave."

- NY Post, July 14, 1990, on Arthur Rudolph, Nazi rocket scientist investigated by OSI who aided the American space program

1983: "Perhaps this endless search for Nazi war criminals, these endless re-enactments, on stage and screen, of Hitler's concentration camps are good for the soul. To what end, however, all this wallowing in the atrocities of a dead regime when there is scarcely a peep of protest over the prison camps, the labor camps, the concentration camps operating now in China and Siberia, in Cuba and Vietnam."

- Washington Times, August 24, 1983

1977: "Those of us in childhood during the war years were introduced to Hitler only as a caricature...Though Hitler was indeed racist and anti-Semitic to the core, a man who without compunction could commit murder and genocide, he was also an individual of great courage, a soldier's soldier in the Great War, a leader steeped in the history of Europe, who possessed oratorical powers that could awe even those who despised him. But Hitler's success was not based on his extraordinary gifts alone. His genius was an intuitive sense of the mushiness, the character flaws, the weakness masquerading as morality that was in the hearts of the statesmen who stood in his path."

- St. Louis Globe - Democrat, Aug 25, 1977

Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on March 18, 2008 11:20 AM
215. Steve,

Here is Buchanan on Jews. Read it and weep:

"ON JEWS:

Buchanan referred to Capitol Hill as "Israeli-occupied territory."
(St. Louis Post Dispatch, 10/20/90)

During the Gulf crisis: "There are only two groups that are beating
the drums for war in the Middle East -- the Israeli defense ministry and
its 'amen corner' in the United States." ("McLaughlin Group," 8/26/90)

In a 1977 column, Buchanan said that despite Hitler's anti-Semitic and
genocidal tendencies, he was "an individual of great courage...Hitler's
success was not based on his extraordinary gifts alone. His genius was an
intuitive sense of the mushiness, the character flaws, the weakness
masquerading as morality that was in the hearts of the statesmen who stood
in his path." (The Guardian, 1/14/92)

Writing of "group fantasies of martyrdom," Buchanan challenged the
historical record that thousands of Jews were gassed to death by diesel
exhaust at Treblinka: "Diesel engines do not emit enough carbon monoxide
to kill anybody." (New Republic, 10/22/90) Buchanan's columns have run in
the Liberty Lobby's Spotlight, the German-American National PAC newsletter
and other publications that claim Nazi death camps are a Zionist
concoction.

Buchanan called for closing the U.S. Justice Department's Office of
Special Investigations, which prosecuted Nazi war criminals, because it was
"running down 70-year-old camp guards." (New York Times, 4/21/87)

Buchanan was vehement in pushing President Reagan -- despite protests
-- to visit Germany's Bitburg cemetery, where Nazi SS troops were buried.
At a White House meeting, Buchanan reportedly reminded Jewish leaders that
they were "Americans first" -- and repeatedly scrawled the phrase
"Succumbing to the pressure of the Jews" in his notebook. Buchanan was
credited with crafting Ronald Reagan's line that the SS troops buried at
Bitburg were "victims just as surely as the victims in the concentration
camps." (New York Times, 5/16/85; New Republic, 1/22/96)

After Cardinal O'Connor criticized anti-Semitism during the
controversy over construction of a convent near Auschwitz, Buchanan wrote:
"If U.S. Jewry takes the clucking appeasement of the Catholic cardinalate
as indicative of our submission, it is mistaken. When Cardinal O'Connor of
New York seeks to soothe the always irate Elie Wiesel by reassuring him
'there are many Catholics who are anti-Semitic'...he speaks for himself. Be
not afraid, Your Eminence; just step aside, there are bishops and priests
ready to assume the role of defender of the faith." (New Republic,
10/22/90)

http://www.mtsu.edu/~baustin/buchanan.html

Posted by: WVH on March 18, 2008 11:23 AM
216. The hypocrisy in which you attack Dr. Paul is amazing but I guess not surprising.

If we can say that Urban Blacks have legitimate concerns despite the hateful and illegitimate ways they choose to express them, why can't we say that white racists despite their racism also have some legitimate concerns as well.

What really makes me mad is that you have former Black Panthers, Weathermen, etc who are allowed to move beyond their hateful radical past and they are allowed to chalk it all up to youthful indigressions. But someone who joins a white racist group but later moves away from their radical views are not allowed to mainstream themselves like the black Panthers and weathermen are.

We have politicians, professors, with some of the most hateful pasts imaginable, but we still allow them to get beyond that and become legitimate. But god forbid someone steps into a white racist meeting in an misguided act of youthful anger and passion. They are condemned for life regardless of how they might have later evolved.

Mind you I have nothing but contempt for real racists. But for me that isn't a selective racism but instead includes all racists, white racists, black panthers, weathermen, etc. But you qualify your racists and former violent radicals into "good ones" and "bad ones".

I don't know what you think you have on Ron Paul, whose support seemed to have come across a wide spectrum of people. But I do know that although I condemn their racism, the white racists do have a legitimate concern when they talk about immigration. They have a legitimate concern when they talk about globalization. And again, while you give urban blacks slack when talking about their concerns in an illegitimate way, you fail to give white blue collar and rural poor the same slack.

Posted by: Steve on March 18, 2008 11:30 AM
217. "But someone who joins a white racist group but later moves away from their radical views are not allowed to mainstream themselves like the black Panthers and weathermen are."

That isn't ture. Democrat Racist Sen Robert Byrd is one example.

Also, William Ayers is white. He was a bomber for the weathermen and now aprofessor at the University of Chicago. And even though his group (the Weathermen) were responsible for killing two cops and a security guard, liberals like Cato don't consider them terrorists at all.

Posted by: pbj on March 18, 2008 11:35 AM
218. It astounds me that most liberals just cannot understand that conservatives don't want to vote for either Hilary or Obama because they are too liberal.

No one is disputing that point.

What PBJ/Steve are disputing is guilt by association. They seem to be claiming that by electing Obama we are electing the ideology of his pastor and his endorsements. Steve and PBJ have gone as far as to say that if America elected Obama would somehow institute ethnic cleansing of white people/Jews/etc like Hitler did.

As a Jewish individual I don't feel Obama is racist, his pastor clearly is. Clearly the man has had an influence on his life and evolution from community organizer to Senator to Presidential Candidate. I personally do not feel that Obama represents/holds the same views or will somehow bring them with him into the White House. I think he's a fine individual with interesting thoughts on how to bring the nation forward in this time of crisis.

Clearly the GOP has held the reigns of the Govt. for that last seven years and have made some irresponsible choices. I'm not sure the Dem's could have done much better, but that time has passed. Come November I will personally examine both candidates as individuals and their positions and decide which one has a better plan for the future of this country.

It's only March, it's still a long way to November 4th.

Posted by: Religious Roots on March 18, 2008 11:37 AM
219. Does Ron Paul go to a church where the pastor spreads hateful anti-black rhetoric?

I am guessing No.

Posted by: Steve on March 18, 2008 11:39 AM
220. Buchannan doesn't hate Jews. But he does hate the fact that many American Jews put the interests of Israel ahead of that of America.

What's wrong with that?

Posted by: Steve on March 18, 2008 11:41 AM
221. "Whatever Rudolph did during World War II, his quarter century of service to the United States entitles the old man to a public hearing before he goes to his grave."

So now you are against due process? You are against a guy telling his side of the story?

It seems that you are the Nazi here.

Posted by: Steve on March 18, 2008 11:45 AM
222. "Whatever Rudolph did during World War II, his quarter century of service to the United States entitles the old man to a public hearing before he goes to his grave."

So now you are against due process? You are against a guy telling his side of the story?

It seems that you are the Nazi here.

Posted by: Steve on March 18, 2008 11:45 AM
223. Steve,

1. Do you have a response to either the posts by Army Medic Vet or me on Buchanan? Thought so.

2. You can go back in the archives, but TNR did a couple of articles on Dr. Paul

Angry White ManThe New Republic Angry White Man by James Kirchick The bigoted past of Ron Paul. Post Date Tuesday, January 08, 2008 ...
www.tnr.com/politics/story.html

American Thinker: The Ron Paul Campaign and its Neo-Nazi SupportersNov 14, 2007 ... On October 26 nationally syndicated radio talk show host Michael Medved posted an "Open Letter to Rep. Ron Paul" on TownHall.com. It reads: ...
www.americanthinker.com/2007/11/the_ron_paul_campaign_and_its.html - 63k

You seem to be letting your real feelings out with each subsequent post.

You said "The hypocrisy in which you attack Dr. Paul is amazing but I guess not surprising."

Really, why didn't you just out yourself as being a Paul supporter from the beginning. You are bitter because the type of candidate you are likely to support has a snowball's chance. Oh, news flash the US Supremes just upheld WA's top two primary. So, you will be even further from the goal.

Now, do you have the guts to answer either me or Army Medic on Buchanan?

Posted by: WVH on March 18, 2008 11:46 AM
224. Doubly impressive is the fact that Sen Obama apparently wrote that speech himself. Mrs Clinton needs to (& I'm sure she will) counter that somehow for Penn and the supers. :)

Posted by: Duffman on March 18, 2008 11:48 AM
225. (X-posted at the Blog with no middle name ...)

0535 - Kirby Wilbur, KVI, talks to a tool from NewsMax. First question is about the NewsMax story placing Obama in Wright's pew on 22 July 2007, a typically incendiary day at TUCC in Chicago. The NewsMax tool slides past Wilbur's question and discusses, instead, red herrings. Yesterday's Slog reports that Kristol of the Jayson Blair Times ran the NewsMax story, thereby repudiating Obama's assertion that he never witnessed a Jeremiah-Wright-wing rant. Then Kristol repudiated the repudiation. The impossible happened: NewsMax got it wrong.

0610 - Wilbur, KVI, was host to a Fox News tool who discussed the economy. The tool said we should "beat the Bushes" and open the windows and yell into the void that, doggone it, we're glad to be Americans who can buy things and that we should go out and buy things to show the economy who's boss.

0825 - Senator Obama admitted that he had indeed been present at TUCC in Chicago when the Reverend Wright of the Religious Left melted down into Wright-wing rants.

0850 - Stephanie Miller of Air America (0600 - 0900, our time) gave props to a caller who said that Limbaugh was off the air today, having swooned for Obama's speech. Miller said that Limbaugh brought in a back-bench sub to do his show while Limbaugh subsided into an Oxycontin stupor.

0910 - Limbaugh opened his show at the usual time, our time, and wasted time discussing Obama's excellent speech, about which Limbaugh had nothing useful to say. Would have been better if he'd stayed home in an Oxycontin stupor. (Rush Hour Crap/content ratio has been heavily skewed to crap since 1995.)

0912 - Dave Ross (dross@bonnevile) began translating and deconstructing 'black' for white people. Interrupted, again and again, the replay of Obama's excellent speech to tell us what Obama said.

1035 - Dave Ross (dross@bonneville) put out the APB for black people to explain themselves to white people. Got a white woman from Carolina. Got an Asian from Asia. Got two authentic black people. Got one inauthentic black person, a Pentacostal minister, who condemned the vicious and vile hate speech of Reverend Jeremiah Wright from the Religious Left and who questioned the complicity of TUCC parishoners who listened to him for, say, 17 years without walking out.

Posted by: Obamanation on March 18, 2008 11:50 AM
226. Duffman, Obama will set race relations back 30 years.

But then again, perhaps that is what you want.

Posted by: steve on March 18, 2008 11:50 AM
227. Steve,

Apparently, our posts overlapped. Your answer is loud and clear, you simply HATE so no wonder you attempt to defend Buchanan. Katomar is correct, this thread is pretty much exhausted and you have been outed for what you are, a primo HATER who just bought a ticket on the anti-bigotry train so you could HATE Senator Obama, you'll be getting off at the next station.

Posted by: WVH on March 18, 2008 11:51 AM
228. It is simply sad that posters here and the media, especially Fox, stoop to the level they do. I glad to see we still have people who see the truth and aren't afraid to voice it, like Frank Schaeffer. Here is his latest on the topic and it hits the nail on the head. If Jesus was alive today and spoke the things he spoke, he would be called the same things that people are calling Rev. Wright and Obama here. In this Holy Week, it is good to remember that the crowds screaming for his execution, still live today. I don't know much, yet, about Black Theology, but the one statement about Blacks understanding the cross because of their own suffering and lynching strikes me as quite a vivid image this week. The cross and the rope. How true. How true also that even though all wanted to execute Jesus, he forgave them all on the cross.

Posted by: tc on March 18, 2008 11:53 AM
229. "White Racists Bad, Black Pathers good"

They are both bad you racist Nazi!

WVH has now clearly shown the true racist hatred in his heart.

You are a bad, evil man WVH!

Posted by: Steve on March 18, 2008 11:54 AM
230. WVH, it's pointless to argue with people who don't want to listen.

Steve is never going to believe that Ron Paul is happy to take money from racist organizations or that Nixon & Buchanan hate Jewish people. You could provide mountains of evidence showing it to be true but he'll argue to the ends of the earth that your evidence is somehow biased or untrue.

The best option is to walk away since Steve is only fooling himself.

Posted by: Religious Roots on March 18, 2008 11:56 AM
231. #226: No (obviously you haven't kept up), what I want is for Mrs Clinton to be our next POTUS (and to that end, I'm trying my best).
However, I do recognize the talents of Sen Obama; I don't believe he's been vetted enough and he is still young enough to gain some background and try again in four or eight years. :)

Posted by: Duffman on March 18, 2008 11:56 AM
232. I think what the Leftist posts have shown is what hatred and racism are in their hearts and their fear that now with the Hatewhite tirades exposed people will see them for the hateful people they really are.

Posted by: Steve on March 18, 2008 11:59 AM
233. How true also that even though all wanted to execute Jesus, he forgave them all on the cross.

TC, excellent post @228. I never thought of it that way. Very enlightening.

Posted by: Religious Roots on March 18, 2008 12:06 PM
234. 'They seem to be claiming that by electing Obama we are electing the ideology of his pastor and his endorsements. Steve and PBJ have gone as far as to say that if America elected Obama would somehow institute ethnic cleansing of white people/Jews/etc like Hitler did."

No, in fact, I did not say that, but thanks for the outrageous hyperbole. It is par for the course when liberals debate.

What the Wright situation shows is Obama's lack of judgment. I haven't heard Obama personally utter those words Wright shouted. And I have to take his word when he say he never knew his pastor thought such things as became apparent when the video's of Wright came out.

Was Wright's allure so enticing that one could simply not have seen his hate? Apparently not, as Oprah Winfrey was able to see this. Even after 20 years Obama could not see this in Wright.


Posted by: pbj on March 18, 2008 12:06 PM
235. Jesus might have forgiven all those who wanted to execute him.

But I doubt even Jesus could forgive all the evils the Left has done.

Posted by: Steve on March 18, 2008 12:09 PM
236. Religious Roots,

Thank you for your thoughtful comments. There is a group of extreme HATE posters who post at sites attempting to get their message of HATE accross. I wouldn't be surprised if our poster pal isn't one of the recruits. One of the tactics of David Duke is called mainstreaming. That is attempting to be conservative, mainstream, but not racist. The idea is to attract the 18-40 demo to the cause.

What worries me at this point is that Dr. Paul collected millions from his Internet fundraising. How much is left and where will that money go?

I really do appreciate your thoughts. I hope that we will be able to work together to make this a better country for all people.

Posted by: WVH on March 18, 2008 12:11 PM
237. It is par for the course when liberals debate.

Why does it always come back to Liberals with you? Do you believe Conservatives do no wrong?

Looks like you executed a perfect example of bait and switch. When you can't come up with a decent reply just blame someone (liberals in this case) and change the subject.

Posted by: Religious Roots on March 18, 2008 12:17 PM
238. Tc,

Nice reference, Huffington Post, a left wing propaganda site. Anyway, let's look at your link shall we?

He writes:

"If you lust after any woman grab a knife and gouge out your right eye and throw it in the trash. And if you're going to use your hand for masturbation cut it off or you're going to hell. I haven't come here to make peace but to bring war. I'm here to set a man against and his father and a daughter against her mother and the daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law. Anyone who loves their father or mother more than me and who doesn't want to get killed for me is damned. You mess with my people and you'll wish you'd hanged a stone around your neck and drowned yourself before I'm done with you!"

Except, Obama's pastor didn't say any of that -- Jesus did.

Where is the reference to where Jesus said this? I don't believe it is an actual quote of Jesus, the wording is all wrong. It reads like it was just made up. C'mon libs, show me the reference to this before I will believe it.

All bible quotes have references.

Posted by: pbj on March 18, 2008 12:19 PM
239. " America elected Obama would somehow institute ethnic cleansing"

I think our governmental structure would prevent that from happening, but I don't think we can rule out him giving out "repatriations".

He might also apologize to Japan for Hiroshima and Nagasaki.

Israel is probably toast. He will look the other way as Iran nukes it.

Posted by: Steve on March 18, 2008 12:20 PM
240. Ah come on ya'all Shall We All Kiss and make up? . :)

Posted by: Duffman on March 18, 2008 12:27 PM
241. Go to hell Duffman.

You are evil. And you can't make up with evil.

Posted by: Steve on March 18, 2008 12:29 PM
242. "Why does it always come back to Liberals with you? Do you believe Conservatives do no wrong?

When it is a liberal making up things about me, it has to do with liberals. I ahven't yet met a conservative that throws out knee jerk accusation of racism in place of factual responses.


Looks like you executed a perfect example of bait and switch. When you can't come up with a decent reply just blame someone (liberals in this case) and change the subject."

Not a bait and switch. It was a direct confrontation with someone trying to use mischaracterization to demonize and opponent in a debate in which they lack any factual support for their position.

Posted by: pbj on March 18, 2008 12:29 PM
243. #237 RR
Why does it always come back to Liberals with you?
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Libs want big gov for fix all needs. From what we have seen big gov is pretty much worthless. Say health care, welfare, schools, SS and on & on.

No Con are far from perfect.

Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on March 18, 2008 12:35 PM
244. "Steve and PBJ have gone as far as to say that if America elected Obama would somehow institute ethnic cleansing of white people/Jews/etc like Hitler did."

If I changed the word say to imply would that make you feel better PBJ? That is what you were implying back here when you said:
"His rhetoric sounds as sweet as the words of a messiah, I will agree. Germans were similarly awe struck on Hitler. Go back and look at old news reels and how the Germans listening to Hitler speak look like they are in a trance."

Looks to me like you are implying that if America elects someone who is an eloquent speaker (like Obama) we will essentially be electing Hitler.

As a Jew I find the very insinuation of this to be very disturbing.

Posted by: Religious Roots on March 18, 2008 12:41 PM
245. Obama asks Americans to move beyond race

http://www.upi.com/NewsTrack/Top_News/2008/03/18/obama_asks_americans_to_move_beyond_race/2063/

Uhm, pardon the hell out of me dumbshit but I'm not the one with the racist problem your pastor is.

Talk to him about this? You know - so he can move forward...?

And while you are at it perhaps I might suggest that you throw a couple of words in Planned Parenthood's dirrection as well.

http://www.idahostatesman.com/newsupdates/story/308723.html


Posted by: JDH on March 18, 2008 12:42 PM
246. pbj said this:

"When it is a liberal making up things about me, it has to do with liberals. I ahven't yet met a conservative that throws out knee jerk accusation of racism in place of factual responses."

Really, your pal Steve said this:

"White Racists Bad, Black Pathers good"

They are both bad you racist Nazi!

WVH has now clearly shown the true racist hatred in his heart.

You are a bad, evil man WVH!"

Obviously, you are from out-of-town, Louisiana, maybe? Most folks know I am not an evil man.

So, is Steve the latest to do battle in the mainstreaming effort? Point out specifically my racist statements. You can't.

Now, Steve said this:

"America elected Obama would somehow institute ethnic cleansing"

I think our governmental structure would prevent that from happening, but I don't think we can rule out him giving out "repatriations".

This is from the New Republic about David Duke's thoughts on Senator Obama:

"To be sure, it's no challenge to unearth racist invective about the man. One bilious anti-Obama blog's URL, for instance, seamlessly conjoins his name with the N-word. Elsewhere, Obama is cast as a covert black-power agent. An essay by a David Duke compatriot compares Obama to Malcolm X and likens his slogan of "Si Se Puede!" to chanting "Kill the whites!" There are rumblings about mass slavery reparations (even though, in 2004, Obama said he opposes "just signing checks over to African Americans"). And some even see hints that Obama may be leading a national black uprising. "Are blacks becoming more hostile towards whites?" asked a recent entry at the white supremacist Council of Conservative Citizens website. The author, citing the early February rampage by a black gunman near St. Louis, Missouri, advised that "the success of the Obama campaign might be emboldening blacks to be more aggressive towards white[s] on a national scale." (No word on whether such hostility subsided after Hillary's New Hampshire and Nevada victories.)

http://www.tnr.com/politics/story.html?id=907272c4-54db-4fba-9149-e95b7293d6a0

I wonder if some here are "mainstreaming?"

Posted by: WVH on March 18, 2008 12:45 PM
247. Conservatives have rarely done wrong. Now Republicans have done wrong but not conservatives.


God' isn't a Republican but Satan is certainly a Democrat.

Posted by: Steve on March 18, 2008 12:46 PM
248. JDH
Obama asks Americans to move beyond race
_____________________________________________

Yep have to move-on right now, because I've been caught in something I can't defend!


LOL.
Can you even think what would have happened if say Bush or McCain had a pastor for 20 years who went around saying this about blacks. 0-:

Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on March 18, 2008 12:50 PM
249. I believe that the comparison between Obama and Hitler is most apt since they are/were both political leaders who wanted to control/did control a nation.

But if you prefer comparing Obama to Jim Jones or Charles Manson, or David Koresh so be it.

Posted by: Steve on March 18, 2008 12:51 PM
250. Let me make it perfectly clear I have never said what Mr. mainstrain alluded to in this post:

229. "White Racists Bad, Black Pathers good"

They are both bad you racist Nazi!

WVH has now clearly shown the true racist hatred in his heart.

You are a bad, evil man WVH!

Point out where I said "White Racists Bad, Black Pathers good"

Now, Steve are you mainstreaming for the hood in Louisiana?

Posted by: WVH on March 18, 2008 12:51 PM
251. Do you really believe that David Duke has but the smallest of following? Heck I didn't even know if he was dead or alive.

It's evil Leftists like you who is the real threat to America WVH.

And what do you have against Louisiana? They just recently elected a very good Governor down there.

Posted by: Steve on March 18, 2008 12:57 PM
252. PBJ @238-
Uh, it is one of the most common passages in Scripture. It is from the Sermon on the Mount. The specific reference is Matthew 5:27-30 NIV version of text provided below:
27"You have heard that it was said, 'Do not commit adultery.'[e] 28But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart. 29If your right eye causes you to sin, gouge it out and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to be thrown into hell. 30And if your right hand causes you to sin, cut it off and throw it away. It is better for you to lose one part of your body than for your whole body to go into hell.

Posted by: tc on March 18, 2008 01:00 PM
253. My comment @252. My mistake. I went back and looked at the text in Frank Shaeffer's article and he actually used several different versus tied together. When I get a chance, I will look up all the versus.

Posted by: tc on March 18, 2008 01:04 PM
254. "Can you even think what would have happened if say Jorge Bush or Juan McCain had a pastor for 20 years who went around saying this about blacks."

Can you imagine what would have happened say they even visited a church one time where the pastor went around saying this about blacks.

We certainly are seeing a double standard here by those who say this shouldn't matter. Romney's Mormonism mattered, so this should too.

Posted by: Steve on March 18, 2008 01:04 PM
255. Steve,

Governer Jindal is a very gifted man and the first hope that Louisiana has had in a very long time.

You have no clue what my political philosophy is. You have said it all with this statement:

"It's evil Leftists like you who is the real threat to America WVH."

No, Steve, it is the evil followeres of David Duke and others like him. You are one of his tiny band called "mainstreamers." Welcome to the Pacific Northwest. People here fight bigots. Oh, we just had our primary upheld, it will be tougher for you to plant your seeds of hate and have them grow. You are right in this statement
"Do you really believe that David Duke has but the smallest of following?" That why you are mainstreaming. People of good will hope to keep you and your ilk, small marginalized and out of the mainstream.

Posted by: WVH on March 18, 2008 01:09 PM
256. There are no followers of David Duke.

But there are followers of Obama.

You can't fool me. This is a common Leftist tactic. The fact that you are resorting to this proves that you are a Leftist.

Posted by: Steve on March 18, 2008 01:15 PM
257. Update to my post at @252 and 253:

First sentence in quote: Matthew 5:29

Second sentence: Interpretation (for literal effects) of Matthew 5:30 (note: Bible doesn't use the word Frank uses, but it is a common Southern Fundamentalist interpretation of this passage)

Third sentence: Matthew 10:34 NIV Version "Do not suppose that I have come to bring peace to the earth. I did not come to bring peace, but a sword." Frank's version is slightly different

Fourth sentence: Matthew 10:35 NIV Version "For I have come to turn " 'a man against his father, a daughter against her mother, a daughter-in-law against her motherinlaw� "

Fifth sentence: Matthew 10:37 NIV Version "Anyone who loves his father or mother more than me is not worthy of me; anyone who loves his son or daughter more than me is not worthy of me; 38and anyone who does not take his cross and follow me is not worthy of me. 39Whoever finds his life will lose it, and whoever loses his life for my sake will find it."

Final sentence: Matthew 18:6 NIV Version "But if anyone causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a large millstone hung around his neck and to be drowned in the depths of the sea. "

Source for quotes: bibleresources.org (NIV Version)

Posted by: tc on March 18, 2008 01:16 PM
258. Oh, and if you know anything you would know that the term "Mainstream" is a term that Leftist Republicans (RINOs) use to describe themselves even though the truth is they are really the upper crust country club elite that are as far away from the average citizen as you can get.

Posted by: Steve on March 18, 2008 01:20 PM
259. "Looks to me like you are implying that if America elects someone who is an eloquent speaker (like Obama) we will essentially be electing Hitler."

I insinuated no such thing. Not at all. How DARE you say such as thing. Get off your judgemental high horse. My brother in law is Jewish and he has a word for Jews like you, but I won't repeat it here.

Posted by: pbj on March 18, 2008 01:24 PM
260. I believe that the comparison between Obama and Hitler is most apt since they are/were both political leaders who wanted to control/did control a nation.

So a guy who has never killed any people, does not advocate hated of any kind, has a racist pastor, is somehow equivalent to being one of the greatest mass murders in History.

A more apt comparision may be Obama to Reagan who was also an inspiring orator who had different political persuasion than Obama.

But if you prefer comparing Obama to Jim Jones or Charles Manson, or David Koresh so be it.

So anyone who is a gifted orator is automatically a cult figure.

Fine then, how about the cult of Reagan then? Did you happen to see his funeral?
During the GOP primaries did we not hear about who was going to live up to Reagan's legacy?
Was Fred Thompson not continuously compared to Reagan?
Did the GOP hold a debate in his Presidential Library?
Did the GOP candidates face questions regarding their approach vs Reagan's policies?
Did they have a huge Reagan love fest during the California GOP debate with each individual trying to be more like Reagan than the other?

Reagan was a good President who accomplished a great number of things in his lifetime but in the end he was still a just a man like any other.

Posted by: Religious Roots on March 18, 2008 01:26 PM
261. "Interpretation (for literal effects) of Matthew 5:30"

I thought so. So really, Jesus never said that. It was an "interpretation". But do I see that ever mentioned AT ALL in the Scheaffer article?

You liberals are such uncritical thinkers swallowing anything that reinforces your world view. I am not a church goer, but I didn't need to be a biblical scholar to smell a rat.

Posted by: pbj on March 18, 2008 01:29 PM
262. Reagan was a great man but I never gave up my free will. Reagan was wrong about immigration. And I said so at the time and I will continue to say so.

This is different than Obama who is not merely commemorated but worshipped.

Posted by: Steve on March 18, 2008 01:32 PM
263. If Obama Was So Troubled by Wright's Words... Why Keep Bringing His Daughters?

Here's the fly in the ointment for Obama's explanation that he heard "remarks that could be considered controversial" and "incindiary language" and "views that denigrate both the greatness and the goodness of our nation; that rightly offend white and black alike", but disagreed with them, and thus should not be judged by the electorate as somehow, perhaps partially agreeing with Jeremiah Wright's words.

To the best of our knowledge, week after week.... Obama took his daughters there.

Maybe Barack Obama could separate Wright's truly repugnant comments from the rest of what he preached. Maybe while offering no word of rebuke for his pastor, Obama was thinking, "there goes Jeremiah again." Barack and Michelle have sufficiently developed minds to evalutate Wright's claims - the government created the AIDS virus, etc. - for themselves. They could separate, as Obama put it, Wright's "profoundly distorted view of this country" from his words "about our obligations to love one another."

The rest is here:
http://campaignspot.nationalreview.com/post/?q=YjFkMDgzN2IwZGE0NWZlY2FmZWEwYzc1YjdjOThjNTc=

Posted by: jdh on March 18, 2008 01:33 PM
264. I insinuated no such thing. Not at all. How DARE you say such as thing.

How about telling me that you did imply instead of getting all judgmental on me.

My brother in law is Jewish

Whoop de do, that doesn't make you any less than of a bigot.

he has a word for Jews like you, but I won't repeat it here.

What is your brother-in-laws word? Does it sound like Bike but with a K instead of a B? Trust me as a Jewish man who used to live in the South I've heard it all. Bring it on!

Posted by: religiouus Religious Roots on March 18, 2008 01:35 PM
265. Eric I believe all substance has been drained from this topic. :)

Posted by: Duffman on March 18, 2008 01:39 PM
266. How about Self-Hating Jew? A that seems to fit you.

Posted by: Steve on March 18, 2008 01:41 PM
267. "How about telling me that you did imply instead of getting all judgmental on me."

"Whoop de do, that doesn't make you any less than of a bigot."

Oh there we go again. The bastion of liberal intellect. Too bad you ability to dabate starts and ends with knee-jerk epithets.

Honestly, I cannot even pronounce it. It is in yiddish. All the other Jewish relatives always laugh when he says it and I am the odd man out because I haven't a clue what it is. I know through the context in which he has used it that is is not a flattering word.


Posted by: pbj on March 18, 2008 01:43 PM
268. Yesterday Obama denied ever hearing those words. Now in his speech today, he admits to having heard them. Was he lying yesterday or lying today?

Posted by: pbj on March 18, 2008 01:45 PM
269. ...does not advocate hatred of any kind,"

We have heard the words of his mentor. So yeah we know the hate he is a part of.

Posted by: Steve on March 18, 2008 01:49 PM
270. Steve said:

"There are no followers of David Duke.

But there are followers of Obama."

So Steve, does that make you a disciple of Duke?

Duke and his disciples are well aware of the terminalogy like this:

Mainstreaming Hate
A key ally of Christian right heavyweight Paul Weyrich addresses a major Holocaust denial conference

http://www.splcenter.org/intel/intelreport/article.jsp?aid=40

I suppose you want to connect the Mainstream Republicans of Washington to hate, you can't.

So, are you far enough up in the Duke organization to get personal e-mail alerts from
der Führer
(Nazi Germany cultivated the Führerprinzip (leader principle), and Hitler was generally known as just der Führer ("the Leader"))

Steve, your first, last, and middle name is HATE.


Posted by: WVH on March 18, 2008 01:53 PM
271. This is different than Obama who is not merely commemorated but worshipped.

Where is this worshiping occurring? Is there an Obama shrine that all who vote for him must pray at?

No it's a dismissal tactic used by people to dismiss others who actually see/listen to Obama's speeches and come back feeling inspired. In this time of great crisis with the economy in recession, two wars abroad, and inflation driving up food prices to the point where certain items may become out of reach for lower & middle class families, it seems like people might want to be inspired so as to take their mind off the troubles at home.

I see nothing wrong with someone being inspiring. I feel that President Bush's speeches recently regarding the current state of the union have not been very inspiring.

Posted by: Religious Roots on March 18, 2008 01:56 PM
272. I'm with Duffman on this one, this thread is way beyond its sell by date.

Posted by: WVH on March 18, 2008 01:58 PM
273. There are no disciples of Duke.

You are just proving your Leftist leanings by using this tired old tactic.

And Yeah the Mainstream Republicans are haters. And some of the biggest racists you will ever run into.

They are also good at stabbing people in the back. I mean the figuratively although there was one of them that it was much more than figurative.

Posted by: Steve on March 18, 2008 01:59 PM
274. "I feel that President Bush's speeches recently regarding the current state of the union have not been very inspiring."

DUH!!! YA THINK?? [That c/be the greatest understatement since Custer's 'I think we may be outnumbered' phrase] :)

Posted by: Duffman on March 18, 2008 02:03 PM
275. Steve,

There are probably some racists in every large organization. As far as I know, the charter of the Mainstream Republicans does not make them an explicitly racist organization unlike those run by Duke.

You are showing yourself to be the irrational HATER that you are with every post. Time to leave this conservation and do some art.

Posted by: WVH on March 18, 2008 02:18 PM
276. Took a quick look at Huffingtonpost to see what the moonbats are thinking. It looks like they are onto this guy's liabilities. Here is a sample:

Just another smooth talking used car salesman trying to sell us a two-toned Caddy with sawdust in the transmission. I didn't buy it.

Posted by: JDH on March 18, 2008 02:19 PM
277. Too bad you ability to dabate starts and ends with knee-jerk epithets.

I'm apologize for calling you a bigot, please do tell what you were insinuating when you said this:

"His rhetoric sounds as sweet as the words of a messiah, I will agree. Germans were similarly awe struck on Hitler. Go back and look at old news reels and how the Germans listening to Hitler speak look like they are in a trance."

Looks to me like you equate Obama's speeches to Hitler's.

One man inspires other by saying we need to unite as Americans and move beyond Red/Blue State politics to solve the problems we face, the other inspires a nation by saying the cause of all their problems is the Jews and the country must unite to eliminate the problem. Then promptly proceeds to wipe out 6 million people.

I can't imagine why anyone would want to compare any possible similarities between the two men unless they were morally confused or inclined to dismiss the deaths of millions of people as trivial.

Posted by: Religious Roots on March 18, 2008 02:20 PM
278. I don't get it. Obama's grandma once or twice used some stereotypical comments about blacks, but she's an old lady, from a different culture. Well, she's just an old lady. Jeremiah Wright is not an old man. He is a man who holds tremendous power not only with his congregation, but with the black community in Chicago. I understand they do good work, but does that outweigh the hate? So what was Obama thinking for 20 years? As posted earlier, first he says he didn't hear the comments, then he says he did. Which is it? I think I know. He did, but ignored it because it was politically expedient to do so at the time. Now it's embarrassing.

Posted by: katmar on March 18, 2008 02:30 PM
279. I'm with Duffman on this one, this thread is way beyond its sell by date.

They had to close the other thread because PBJ's racist arguments were spewing out of his/her mouth like s**t into a sewer.

Posted by: Cato on March 18, 2008 02:32 PM
280. Rather than account for his relationship with a hate-monger, Obama will enlighten you, as your teacher, why you are either confused or too ill-intended to ask him to disassociate himself from Wright.

The Obama apologia was a "conversation" about moral equivalence. So the Wright hatred must be contextualized and understood in several ways that only the unusually gifted Obama can instruct us about->->

Read the rest here:
http://article.nationalreview.com/?q=YWVkMThjN2RjNDU2N2EzODE1YWRmZmQwMTE0YWFkMzg=

Posted by: JDH on March 18, 2008 02:54 PM
281. WVH Said this:


"When it is a liberal making up things about me, it has to do with liberals. I ahven't yet met a conservative that throws out knee jerk accusation of racism in place of factual responses."

Really, your pal Steve said this:

"White Racists Bad, Black Pathers good"

They are both bad you racist Nazi!

WVH has now clearly shown the true racist hatred in his heart.

You are a bad, evil man WVH!"

Obviously, you are from out-of-town, Louisiana, maybe? Most folks know I am not an evil man.

So, is Steve the latest to do battle in the mainstreaming effort? Point out specifically my racist statements. You can't.

I was referring to myself. Obvisously you pal Steve is in his own world.

Posted by: pbj on March 18, 2008 03:04 PM
282. "Looks to me like you equate Obama's speeches to Hitler's."

Probably a poor analogay as it sounds like you never learned that part about Hitler and his followers. I presumed you knew that, sorry. As I said, an Elvis analogy may have been better received.

Posted by: pbj on March 18, 2008 03:10 PM
283. "They had to close the other thread because PBJ's racist arguments were spewing out of his/her mouth like s**t into a sewer."

Half the comments erased were your CATO. I thought you were pouting off and weren't going to come back. Just liek when liberals promised they were going to move to Canada. Never kept their word either.

Posted by: pbj on March 18, 2008 03:13 PM
284. WVH what is your fixation on Duke?

He is a nobody.

You are using a wornout Leftist tactic. That is how I know you are a Leftist.

Posted by: Steve on March 18, 2008 03:27 PM
285. Most folks know I am not an evil man.

Then why in the world would you compare and contrast a man as a a leader killed millions of people to a man who is running for President?

Since you continue to dodge the question I have no choice but to assume the worst about you. You who casually brush the significance of their deaths aside for a chance to take cheap political shot at an individual who disagrees with you.

I think your statements here show clearly that you are a man who lacks common decency and integrity. Let us not forget to mention your piss poor moral compass that guided you to make such comparisons in the first place.

Posted by: Religious Roots on March 18, 2008 03:34 PM
286. Today's sermon from the mount Obama almost sounded like an appology. However, if it was there would have been a check-in time for rehab.

Posted by: PC on March 18, 2008 03:51 PM
287. 1) My comments are still there, but your "white guilt/two-fer one affirmative action" comment is not. Wonder why?

2) I came back to point that you use this board as a sounding board to spew racist s**t and then deny your a racist.

3) How long do you think it took that Chinese factory to imprint "Made in America" on the back of that American Flag lapel pin you wear?

Posted by: Cato on March 18, 2008 03:59 PM
288. Cato, you are a knee-jerk race baiter. Go away like you promised and like your race baiting comments that were deleted by the moderators.

Posted by: pbj on March 18, 2008 04:06 PM
289. Steve,

Not even pbj wants to claim you as a pal.

'So, is Steve the latest to do battle in the mainstreaming effort? Point out specifically my racist statements. You can't.

I was referring to myself. Obvisously you pal Steve is in his own world.

Posted by pbj at March 18, 2008 03:04 PM"


You denying David Duke, that's how I know you are shilling for him and "mainstreaming."

HATERS of a feather flock together. So, is everyone who doesn't hate Blacks, Jews, Catholics and _________ a liberal?

When you can't get pbj to be your pal, you are toast.

Posted by: WVH on March 18, 2008 04:07 PM
290. On the Don Imus controversy, Obama had this to say:

"I understand MSNBC has suspended Mr. Imus," Obama told ABC News, "but I would also say that there's nobody on my staff who would still be working for me if they made a comment like that about anybody of any ethnic group. And I would hope that NBC ends up having that same attitude."

Source

Posted by: pbj on March 18, 2008 04:08 PM
291. WVH,

Well you run in your own circles WVH, as I recall you thinkl you are better than everyone else because of your (alleged) PhD.

So why don't you answer my quesiton about MR X, the well educated mystery man? Would you value HIS opinion? He is very well educated, a lawyer who represented black in the 1960's in discrimination cases, and won many of them too. PLease tell us all about the value of Mr X's opinion. Or are you and education/class bigot?

Posted by: pbj on March 18, 2008 04:15 PM
292. From the source above:

"Though every major presidential candidate has decried the racist remarks, Obama is the first one to say Imus should lose his job for them."

Ok, so Obama calls for Imus to be fired. So why in blazed shouldn't he dump Wright??? Sounds hypocritical to me.

Posted by: pbj on March 18, 2008 04:23 PM
293. pbj,

Want to claim Steve as your own now? I suppose that you are referring to Malcolm X. How about this, I'll admit I claim Malcolm X when you admit you claim Dr. David Duke as your principle mentor.
That's fair isn't it?


HATERS of as feather flock together, coffee kleven sharers, pbj and Steve.

Posted by: WVH on March 18, 2008 04:24 PM
294. This my dog's bigger than your dog crap is boring. Outta here.

Posted by: katomar on March 18, 2008 04:28 PM
295. "So, is everyone who doesn't hate Blacks, Jews, Catholics and _________ a liberal?"

No, liberals are the ones that hate people. They just try to wrap all their hate up in fluffy happy talk.

Just mention George Bush in a room of libs and watch their heads start to explode.

I don't hate liberals. I feel sorry for them. They will probably spend most of their adult lives, like Michelle Obama, being ashamed of their country. Liberalism is a mental disorder and the afflicted should be able to seek appropriate care.

Posted by: pbj on March 18, 2008 04:29 PM
296. One further thing pbj, I think that I am better than you and Steve not because of education, but because I am not a HATER. Although many people here have disagreements about politics or issues, most here are not HATERS. Most people here do not HATE another person because of their skin color or religion and that is what makes us better than you two Duke clones. Education has nothing to do with it, character does. People who HATE as you and Steve do are of a lower life form simply because you are HATERS. Got it.

Posted by: WVH on March 18, 2008 04:29 PM
297. Like katomar, this thread has run its course. Out of here.

P.S. Eric, please have mercy on us all and close the thread.

Posted by: tc on March 18, 2008 04:34 PM
298. WVH,

I hate discrimination. I hate racism. I hate elitist hypocrits. I hate race baiters. I hate injustice.

On all the above I am glad I am on the opposite side as you.

*** DANGER SARCASM COMING UP*****


**** DO NOT TAKE LITERALLY...DANGER SARCASM ALERT****

Now if you will excuse me, my AIDS virus for ethnic clensing is getting cold.

**** DO NOT TAKE LITERALLY...DANGER SARCASM ALERT****

Posted by: pbj on March 18, 2008 04:35 PM
299.

"HATERS of as feather flock together, coffee kleven sharers, pbj and Steve."

Farrakhan, Wright and WVH.

Posted by: pbj on March 18, 2008 04:39 PM
300. If any of that is true, why do you spew the venom that you do? Why do you HATE? I feel sorry for your brother-in-law,

Posted by: WVH on March 18, 2008 04:41 PM
301. "If any of that is true, why do you spew the venom that you do? Why do you HATE? I feel sorry for your brother-in-law, "

I think you are confused. Though you may stab a knife in my back, though you may burn me at the stake, though you may drag my dead body down the highway, I still love you WVH and so does Jesus, even if the misguided people make up those quotes about him.

Remeber that.

Posted by: pbj on March 18, 2008 04:44 PM
302. PBJ,
Hating individuals and groups is part and parcel of what being a good "progressive" is all about. Go to their blogs and just count the posts wherein the one posting does not explicitly say "I hate _____) and it will be a person's name or a group. The reason I say count the ones that don't explicitly say "I hate _____" or I wish _______ would either die or contract cancer etc are countable. The ones that do are legion. I hit their favorites every once in a while, it's kinda' like a train wreck in it's allure, and let me tell ya' the ones with some intelligence know that the Democrat Party cannot afford to have the 527s running this and a whole lot more that they have been sitting on this fall. They are being attacked by the hoards though. I am hoping for an Obama candidacy for just that reason.

Posted by: JDH on March 18, 2008 04:52 PM
303. No, liberals are the ones that hate people. They just try to wrap all their hate up in fluffy happy talk.

Meanwhile conservatives like you feel that it's a great idea to dismiss the deaths of millions of Jews just to score a cheap political shot on a rival. Good to know you have principles.

Earlier you were extremely concerned about the memories of the security guards who were killed by the Weatherman, yet you have a blatant disregard for the millions of people who died at the hands of an fascist dictator. How's that for irony?

I'm sure your brother in law would be proud.

Now if you will excuse me, my AIDS virus for ethnic clensing is getting cold.

Oh yes, another fine example of a man with a piss poor moral compass.

Posted by: Religious Roots on March 18, 2008 05:09 PM
304. pbj said:

"I think you are confused. Though you may stab a knife in my back, though you may burn me at the stake, though you may drag my dead body down the highway, I still love you WVH and so does Jesus, even if the misguided people make up those quotes about him.

Remeber that."

Well, at least we agree on something. I don't remember if you ever stated your faith, but you have stated the basic tenet of Christianity. On that thought I am with you.

So, dude we may not get along, but at least we both love Jesus.

JDH

I don't think many of the posters here endorse hate and there are progressives that post here. I may disgree with them, but most of them are haters either. This country will never get any where if all we can do is hate the other side and think that ALL of THEM HATE US.

Posted by: WVH on March 18, 2008 05:09 PM
305. Should read:

I may disgree with them, but most of them aren't haters either. This country will never get any where if all we can do is hate the other side and think that ALL of THEM HATE US.

Posted by: WVH on March 18, 2008 05:13 PM
306. Wow, can't believe how 'heavy' this thread got. Lots on the minds of voters, eh? Go back to discussing among yourselves...see ya in yet another provocative topic. :)

Posted by: Duffman on March 18, 2008 05:28 PM
307. WVH,
I'm not talking here, I'm talking about on their own boards. Give it a try, but plan to take a shower afterwards.

Posted by: JDH on March 18, 2008 05:55 PM
308. I know I said I was signing off, but had to come back because something has been nagging at me. Reverend Wright preaches about all the people killed in Wars America engaged in. Got me to thinking. I suspect he forgot about the war in which the nation's losses far exceeded all other wars from the Revolutionary War through Vietnam. That is, of course, the Civil War. The losses in that war are most often estimated at 620,000, but some experts estimate at over 700,000. The loss on the Union side were around 360,000. Those were lives given in a war to end slavery. In fact, quite a few of my predecessors/ancestors died in an effort to end slavery. They were white. Is this not important or valid history?

Posted by: katomar on March 18, 2008 10:15 PM
309. Katomar,
I know I signed off also, but on your comment. I believe you are correct that the Civil War had the most loss of American Lives. However, Reverend Wright did state innocent civilian lives with regards to Hiroshima and Nagasaki. I don't know how the overall loss of lives (civilian and military) compare between the wars. My guess is that the Civil War still will be among one of the bloodiest.

Posted by: tc on March 19, 2008 11:23 AM
310. Those were lives given in a war to end slavery. In fact, quite a few of my predecessors/ancestors died in an effort to end slavery

"Freeing the Slaves" is the 10 second sound bite answer to why the Civil War was fought. The truth is much more complicated and has a lot more to do with regional economic benefits of slavery than actually freeing the slaves themselves.

The reality of the Atomic bombs is pretty grim:
Hiroshima deaths: 90,000-140,000 persons
Nagasaki deaths: 60,000-80,000 persons

Civil War Deaths:
618,000 Americans died

Posted by: Cato on March 19, 2008 12:04 PM
311. Cato:
Today is March 19, 2008.
Go for it. Do your best.

Posted by: katomar on March 19, 2008 01:32 PM
312. Today is March 19, 2008. Go for it. Do your best.

What the heck are you talking about, I proved your point for you:
"My guess is that the Civil War still will be among one of the bloodiest." - Katomar

Posted by: Cato on March 19, 2008 02:55 PM
313. Cato:
My point is that you are compelled to offer counter argument to anything and everything posted here. You have a compulsion to offer counter numbers, counter sites, counter facts to whatever anyone says. If you will notice, I said those numbers are an estimate, basically because NOBODY KNOWS for sure how many died in that conflict. They didn't exactly keep great records. And by the way, that was tc's comment, not mine, "My guess is..." You are becoming a gnat.

Posted by: katomar on March 19, 2008 03:21 PM
314. #303 RR.

Would you give it up. The reference between Hilter & Obama was they both know who to woooo a crowd. Neither was very smart. (no I'm not talking schools here)
They both promised things that neither can give.
Obama say's he can save American, but most of his plans HAVE no Plans... Hilter used the jews and Obama uses Big biz & rich people to cause hate.

Posted by: Army Medic/Vet on March 19, 2008 05:08 PM
Post a comment
Name:


Email Address:


URL:


Comments:


Remember info?