1. Cézsar wrote:

GANGSTER!!! You gotta love it!

2. Miss Martin wrote:

OH, I’M IN LOVE WITH IT!

3. Samuel wrote:

I agree. The reverend is a great speaker. But this is just bad timing… very bad timing.

I’m starting to feel like he’s either doing all this in self glory or someone is persuading him on the other side to “speak his mind” in a time where his connection with Obama make his campaign spiral downward.

The press conference was organized by a Clinton supporter (not someone a part of camp) who is against Obama as well. (See link below) So I’m very skeptical of the timing of Wright’s “defending of the Black church”.

Link: http://www.nydailynews.com/opinions/columnists/louis/index.html

Any thoughts?

4. go barack wrote:

“In his prepared remarks, Wright traced the origins of the African American church in a measured tone and academic language. But during the question-and-answer session that followed, he was defiant.” -Washington Post

Amerik…..

5. Garrett wrote:

He’s the gift that keeps on giving. Keep talking, sir, keep talking. Bye-bye, President Obama.

6. Cézsar wrote:

Keep talking indeed sir, the world needs to hear this. The very public fallout of Obama and his pastor only helps Obama make his case that they are not reading from the same script. Dont lose hope so quickly Garrett, the best is yet to come. The game is high stakes CHESS not checkers.

7. Garrett wrote:

Sorry, Cezsar, Obama’s twenty year relationship trumps one hasty press conference. Obama and Wright are tied at the hip.

Next up in the chess match will be more scrutiny on the Obama-Ayers relationship.

Then, when Hillary passes him in the popular vote count, ouch.
This is fun to watch.

The democrats should have waltzed into the Presidency. What a bunch of idiots. I don’t know what’s sadder, the dems, or the fact that some people actually look to them as leaders.

8. Piscean Princess wrote:

Homeboy is on fire!!! I’m glad I took the time to listen to this whole thing.

9. DCI74 wrote:

Is it also sad that Republicans view their politicians as leaders or is just the Dems that are the idiots?

10. Cézsar wrote:

Well of course you are enitled to indulge yourself in a bit of wishful thinking…that they “are tied at the hip”, and borrow lines from Fox “News”’s Neil Cavuto like “He’s the gift that keeps on giving”, but ultimately it’s all just smoke, no fire.

I think you’ll find that when the scrutiny turns on John McCain’s POLITICAL ALLIANCE/relationship with Rod Parsely (not to mention John Hagey and all the others), an extremist religious nut (his spiritual adviser) with whom he has campaigned in the last year, and who has publicly declared that America was founded in part to destroy the religion of Islam – an assertion that bears grave & unthinkable national security consequences if his buddy & POLITICAL ally John Rambo, err, I mean John McCain, with whom he campaigns, is elected President – only two words will come to mind and manifest as the outcome of this race: CHECK and MATE or, you got CHECKED MATEY or, simply CHECK MATE.

Obama’s now defunct relationship with Pastor Wright WAS and never will be political as is the case with John McCain and his loopy friends, it was personal. And in any case Rev Wright’s message is all about reconciliation and unity delivered in the style of unarmed truth, if you’ve bothered to listen to anything he has said recently. And of course Clinton has invited Wright to the White House in the past, which only drives home his message. So you see, it’s all hyperbole on your’s and Fox’s part. You can cease & desist with all that, at once.

Again I tell you my friend, the game is CHESS not checkers.

11. Ash wrote:

This is the truth America needs to face and listen to. The people who are outraged about Rev. Wright’s comments are the same ignorant and mindless people who didn’t even bother to listen to the whole sermon, yet had no problem passing judgment on the brotha. It seems as though some people just want to paint America to be this mecca of ALL things GREAT. No country is perfect.

12. Garrett wrote:

Just because we say something, it doesn’t make it so. You think this issue is going to disappear? You show your political naivite. Just like Obama.

Obama better be worried about those superdelegates supporting Hillary. That’s looking more and more like a reality.

Barack Obama will not be the next President of the United States.

Thank God.

13. james wrote:

garrett, contrary to what many pundit and strategists are suggesting, this issue doesn’t have to disappear. i think that is obama’s point. he’s not trying to make the discussion disappear. he’s accepting the presence of discussion by allowing somebody with different beliefs to speak freely. welcome to the high road. don’t be afraid to look down your nose if the view is beautful.

14. J. Mack wrote:

When else in the history of politics has a candidate been so vilified for the words of another? Whites are just proving that racism is still in full effect! The funny thing is that they aren’t even arguing the validity of the pastors points(because they can’t win that one) so they revert to racism 101 being that the pastor as a black man does not have the right to say these things.(historically and factually true or not)

15. SiskoBell wrote:

There are only three people with a realistic chance of becoming president next year, Barack, Hillary, and McCain. Garrett thanks god it won’t be Obama, so one is left to assume he prefers either McCain or Hillary. I’m curious what makes either of them a better choice.

I watched the Bill Moyers interview with Reverend Wright, I watched Rev. Wright’s NPC speech (thanks Marc for posting it here) and I have yet to hear anything this man has said that is wrong, unpatriotic, or purposefully divisive.

The problem Barack is having with Rev. Wright isn’t the latter’s rhetoric, it’s the former’s skin color. Much, I’m sure, to Senator Obama’s displeasure, his candidacy has been colored by race from day one. The first question asked about Barack was whether he was “black enough” to get Black votes. The media interjected race into this election first and hasn’t stopped since.

There is a double standard being applied to Obama’s campaign, the same double standard that has always existed in this nation. Politicians and their supporters can say any racist, bombastic, or derogatory thing they wish about people of color, but no one, especially a person of color, may ever tell the truth about deficiencies related to white America…as in white heterosexual capitalistic Christian male America.

For example, the media along with Hillary’s campagin and the RNC are attacking Obama for having close ties to Rev. Wright, yet there isn’t any similar vitriol directed at people like George Bush Sr. and “Dubya” for having had close ties to people like Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell, who blamed 9/11 not on the nation’s past policies, but on the people themselves. Why isn’t John McCain being hounded daily about the words of his close political pal Pastor Hagge, who called hurricane Katrina god’s punishment on New Orleans for it’s level of “sin?”

In the instances of Hagge, Robertson, and Falwell, the targets of their attacks are Muslims, homosexuals, women, blacks, the poor, the ACLU, etc. These groups are acceptable targets in the eyes of mainstream America. But because Rev. Wright dared to tell the truth about the past and current policies of the American government, a government controlled primarily by white males, and because he attacked policies that have benefited that same group, he is now a pariah, and so is Obama by association.

The other politicians in this race get a free pass when it comes to the controversial remarks of their religious asscoaites, but Barack is attacked and forced to repeatedly condemn Rev. Wright ad nauseum. Questions are then put forth whether Barack is himself an “extremist,” and there are intimations that Barack’s handling of the situation shows a level of political naivete unbecoming a serious presidential contender. All the while, neither Hillary nor McCain even have their past, and current, relationships with “controversial” figures mentioned, let a lone examined in depth.

Further, one need only look at the “Bittergate” nonsense to see the double standard at work. Barack made an astute, but obvious, observation about the reasons why small town and rural people vote against their economic interests. Yet because he dared to speak about the realities of the political result of the Republican political strategy, i.e. the “Southern Strategy,” he was castigated by both Hillary and McCain, and the media.

I didn’t here any of Barack’s detractors take him to task when he rebuked poor blacks in his Beaumont, Texas speech to a Black audience last March. The speech where he accused Black families of feeding their children cold Popeye’s chicken for breakfast and not having any books in the home as a part of the reason for the medical and educational problems facing many in the “Black community.” Where was the outrage then, the charges of elitism? Apparently it’s OK to castigate Black folk, but turn around and make even a milquetoast critic of rural (white) communities, and suddenly you’re an elitist (read uppity), out of touch politician.

Barack Obama is still leading in the race for the Democratic presidential nomination, and still ties or leads McCain in national polls. I believe he still has an excellent chance to be elected president. However, I am also fully aware of the effect that racism will have on his candidacy and will not be shocked at all if he fails to win with the primary campaign or the general election due to constant hounding by the media and his political adversaries. Hopefully this episode will serve to enlighten those people, of all races, that think Barack’s electoral successes indicate that we live in, or are moving into, a “post-racial” society. America still has a serious race problem and this nonsense about Rev. Wright and Bittergate are just some of the latest examples.

16. Tanya wrote:

Well said SiskoBell!

Garrett – I try really hard not to call people names, but you sir, are a fool!

Rev. Wright is a genius. His words are my thoughts. If Wright ran for office he’d surely have my vote. Keep PREACHING Wright, you’re feeding the hungry!

17. Garrett wrote:

I guess Wright must be an “evil genius”. Is he developing a death ray that he’ll blackmail the governments of the world for
“one million dollars”?

The guy is nuttier than a fruitcake.

Obama’s leftist policy stances, while garnering him applause, won’t get him elected.

18. Cézsar wrote:

McCain’s extremist policy stances, while exciting white supremacists, wont get him elected either…not unless America seeks an implosion most spectacular.

19. ChgoSista wrote:

Garrett, what makes Rev. Wright “nutty”?

20. wouldn't you love to know? wrote:

i was thinking the same thing chgosista…i noticed, anything that is remotely to the truth, people love to sweep it under the rug and call it “nutty”….well if he’s nutty, then what the hell do we call these so-called leaders of the new world???

yeah, that’s what i thought “crickets”…

21. ChgoSista wrote:

^5, WYLTK.

22. J. Mack wrote:

I said it before and I’ll say it again…. THIS IS AMERICA YOU FOOLS WAKE UP …THE LAST WHITE MAN STANDING WINS!!! End of story

23. Felecia wrote:

Rev. Wright said NOTHING WRONG. He said nothing that black people don’t already say. Kanye, Jada, Nas all have discussed the government adminstering AIDS in our communities and no one complained…All white people focused on was the word “nigga”, “bitches” and “hoes”. But now that a Rev. points out many things that all people of color believe to be true or remotely possible, it’s an issue. I’m more disappointed in Barack Obama for pretending that Rev. Wright is a bigoted man of hatred, when that could be the furthest thing from the truth. It definitely makes me wonder if we should throw our support out for a man who not only totally denounces the views of not only Rev. Wright but the people who agree with him .

24. John wrote:

I’m surprised Rev. Wright’s “lessons in how blacks learn” comments didn’t create more of a stir.

Do you all really believe that black students can’t sit in their desks because they need to hear a teacher rappin’ the lesson plan to learn? That blacks cannot read a book or listen to a lecture?

Do you really equate accent — the way a word is pronounced — with incorrect grammar?

If so, well …

**

Sisko, you are overlooking some key facts.

Neither Bush nor McCain ever called those nutty white pastors mentors, advisors. I don’t think Jerry Falwell performed the marriage ceremony when George married Laura. I don’t think John McCain wrote a book titled after one of Pat Robertson’s sermons.

The nutty right-wing reverends may have endorsed Republican candidates, but for the most part, the candidates themselves have shied away from close association. And when they haven’t, they’ve been villifed for it (i.e. Bush at Bob Jones University).

Obama made Wright a central component of his “search” for identity. That makes Wright important to people trying to understand what Obama stands for. Obama was a member of that church for 20 years. He gave thousands of dollars to the church. He called Wright a close friend, used a shortened version of his name, Jeremy … joked about him from the podium.

They are obviously close, and Wright has obviously had a tremendous impact on Obama. THAT is what makes all this important. It goes to Obama’s judgment, his character, his belief in the way this country should be governed.

You — and many other African-Americans — may be okay with a Marxist, redistributionist, “god damn America” approach to government but there are a majority of voters in this country who are not.

25. Logic wrote:

John,
I believe that Obama called him his “spiritual” advisor, which is quite different from simply advisor. The real reason why this is even an issue for Barack is that it plays to the underlying fears of white people that Barack might be a closet black nationalist. The possibility, however minute and nonexistent it may be, that Barack would enter into the oval office and only attend to the concerns of blacks is a horrifying idea for whites to wrap their minds around, and so they would rather err on the side of caution and not vote for him.

Barack has said over and over, and over again, that he does not agree with Rev Wright on his positions yet he keeps being called to answer for Wright’s comments. Its nonsense.

26. Garrett wrote:

“What I value most about Pastor Wright is not his day-to-day political advice. He’s much more of a sounding board for me to make sure that I am speaking as truthfully about what I believe as possible and that I’m not losing myself in some of the hype and hoopla and stress that’s involved in national politics.”

That quote indicates more than a pastor/parishoner relationship. While there are no doubt some people worried about Obama agreeing with Wright’s philosophies, most anti-Obama voters are worried about his leftist policy positions.

27. CLM wrote:

Folks, the speech and the answers to the question were given by Dr. Wright.

I don’t think that Senator Obama had anything to do with this speech. The speech was about the “Black Church”, its history, traditions, and the trajectory of its future. Let’s stay focused.

To critique Sen. Obama using Dr. Wright’s words is ridiculous to me. But, things being as they are, it’ll happen. For some, it is enough reason not to vote for Sen. Obama. Many of those wouldn’t have voted for him at ANY price! They’ll use their brief engagements with sound bites from Dr. Wright to justify not voting for Sen. Obama. That is ridiculous. And, for a lot of those voters, it’s a decision motivated and informed by their racism and disdain for African (Black) people.

The speech focused on prophetic theology and the Black Church. The haters, and not a few of the questioners, focused on the pastor’s theology and the Black candidate. Folks lost focus.

It was a great speech! The Q&A session was, well, not great.

Let’s focus. Let’s all take several collective deep breathes and FOCUS.

28. james wrote:

actually, garrett, that certainly indicates a pastor/parishioner relationship. that same article, a profile of dr wright, goes on to say that obama didn’t really talk to wright that often.

29. SiskoBell wrote:

” You — and many other African-Americans — may be okay with a Marxist, redistributionist, “god damn America” approach to government but there are a majority of voters in this country who are not.” – John

Uh John, what part of anything Rev. Wright said in the speech was was Marxist? Are you saying it’s Marxist to accept each other’s differences? It is redistributionist to point out that the US government has committed state terror against others? Rev. Wright didn’t mention anything about socialism or economic policy. It’s telling that in an attempt to discredit Rev. Wright you have to make stuff up.

Instead of tossing around meaningless epithets, perhaps you might re-listen to Wright’s words and try to understand what he was saying. He was telling the truth about the nature of this country, while at the same time calling for reconciliation.

But Logic made the point. The media, Hillary, and McCain are going to try to use the Rev’s fiery delivery style to scare white Americans. I hope and suspect that Barack will whether this storm.

Oh and one more thing, Barack Obama is not a Marxist. I know what a Marxist looks like, and it ain’t Obama. Again nice try in trying to, in your mind, smear Obama and Rev. Wright.

30. sendschie wrote:

Influx of Africans from the other TWO Americas? How many fucking Americas does the guy think that there are? Damn! Obama should have gotten out early.

31. Samuel wrote:

This Jeremiah Wright “controversy” is such a joke. The timing is impeccable. Clinton and McCain riding the high horse and just watching the media tear it down is what they’ve wanted since Obama’s been in this race. But it still has not effected his numbers and Hillary is pulling her hair out as she loses Democratic support.

Garrett, taking that quote out of context, as you’ve done, is just what the media has done this entire time. Also, in your quote, Obama even states he does not seek “political advice” from Wright. Most of the views that Wright has been blasted for have been… political! They may not have the same views but Obama has admitted that Wright has helped him speak truthfully about what HE believes. That does not necessarily mean they believe the same thing.

The pastor of my church who is also my “spiritual mentor” and has been there for me in regard to the focus on my family and making sure I’m strong on my own beliefs and making the right decisions for my family. He also married my wife and I. Our views on politics, the Bible, church on Sundays and many conspiracy theories are different and we accept those differences. Do you have the exact same views as your “spiritual adviser”? If your pastor/priest was a racist, would you be a racist to? If yours was a catholic priest that was your spiritual adviser for 20 years and he/she then molested little boys, would that mean that you are capable of doing the same? There is a term called “individuality” that we all have that you should consider looking up to better understand.