What has been 'exposed' in this black church has been there, out in the open, since forever. Perhaps Wright's anger is partially due to this kind of willful ignorance.

By necessity, blacks have and are undergoing an evolution as to theri cultural and societal views. Before the anger, came the uncle Toms, who admonished their children to avoid making trouble and to just lay low. The children got angry, anyway, and demanded civil rights, thank heavens. Being angry and using peaceful means are not mutually excluisve concepts , as Martin Luther King demosntrated.
But the anger was there, There has to be anger in order to say 'enough is enough'.

Now a new generation, like Obama, have adjusted to new condtitions and are taking yet another cultural turn.

What is so surprising in this is that, that some feel it needs to be 'exposed' rather than understood.
Should Obama spit on the angry generation who got him the footstool on which to stand so that he can reach for the stars?

Your postition is that Obama should be more sensitive to conservartive whites, right?
My position is that conservative shites whould study black history so that they can understand where they fit into the evolution of black society.and our society in general.

I'll be disappointed if Obama takes an apologist stand. His job, instead, is to educate about black history and explain where he persoanlly stands. Today, that's what matters, not how previous generations dealt with their times.. Wright is from that previous generation, who had every reason to be angry.. His message does not serve today's world. That's why Obama is not preaching yesterday's sermons.

George: I can see why it would seem I'm being a concern troll here- I didn't mean it to be an insincere bit of advice for Obama supporters- just a simple comment on the way I see the situation. You asked if it was different than the related issues that McCain faces, and I was making a comparison, that's all.

And as I said in another thread, I do think there's a broader issue here than just Obama's and McCain's campaign. In my view, what's been exposed in Wright's church is that radical left politics are entrenched in certain churches, predominately black ones, just as radical right wing politics are entrenched in certain predominately white churches. I think few people believe that the candidates themselves espouse or endorse those radical views, but we ought to be concerned about whether they give legitimacy and political clout to the pastors/religious leaders who use their pulpits this way, if the candidates won't more firmly denounce them for it.

What is your point, since the post we are disussing is not the Daily Kos?
As far as I know, Obama has never cited the Daily Kos as a souce of inspiration, either.
Where is this intended to lead, since it's o/t?
Should we just submit a list of questionable or funny things people say?
Well, I always enjoy a good laugh, so perhaps that's not such a bad ide.

I deplore the vehemence of the Hillary-Obama fight. gling on among Democrats.
I glory, however, in the fact that they are able to question their own. argue among themselves and don't equate political affiliation with a sacred trust. I would rather see the Democrats lose elections than see them lose their ability to ithink independenly.

Democrats squabble because they have their priorities straight.

While I agree that Obama's distancing himself from some of Wright's teachings should suffice, I find it amazing that Hillary is never allowed such a getaway. She has been pounded since before her candidacy with snippets from her past, and no amount of distancing will suffice for the worlves at her heels. Some we excuse, others are never forgiven.

Jack Grant refers to 'pulling a Ferraro”. I would say that the Obamaites are pulling a Bush:. For him, cooperation means that Congress does all the co-operating and he gets his way 100% of the time. Any and all means to get his way are justivied by him.. For the Obaimaites, aspiring to a new and better standard in poliitcs is similarly required only of the other camp. .. Backing the 'right' guy justifies taking off the polical and rhetorical gloves, and going for jugular. Never mind that Obams's own message gets trampled in the process…

How is this dog fight unifying anyone?
We are in danger of seeing Obama's message of unity go the way of Bush's being the uniiter, not the divider. This post goes a long way to making that happen.

.

(despite what the POSes claimed otherwise in places like the Smithsonian)

Not that this wasn't another excuse for the Usual Suspects to dive into their sewer and savor their own stench again. Evil USA a la Chumsky, et cetera, ad nauseum.

Credit where credit is due…….a strongly worded denunciation.

Interestingly, I do not see it as a normal press release yet.

If not, it strikes me as an interesting piece of political calculus to speak to the nation through a post on the HuffPo. Talk about providing some more fodder for the guilt by association cannon………..lol!

Thanks for only being concerned with Obama's best interests. ; )

[...] Let me repeat what I've said earlier. All of the statements that have been the subject of controversy are ones that I vehemently condemn. They in no way reflect my attitudes and directly contradict my profound love for this country.

With Rev. Wright's retirement and the ascension of my new pastor, Rev. Otis Moss, III, Michelle and I look forward to continuing a relationship with a church that has done so much good. And while Rev. Wright's statements have pained and angered me, I believe that Americans will judge me not on the basis of what someone else said, but on the basis of who I am and what I believe in; on my values, judgment and experience to be President of the United States.

Don't you think non-evangelicals will react negatively to Rod Parsley's call for war with Islam?

Don't you think evangelicals will find it condescending to have John McCain pander to them so obviously?

Not to mention how Catholics might feel?

I hope all that HTML works!