11 Responses for "Obama/Wright ‘Bottom Line’"

1. Mike April 29th, 2008 at 7:00 pm 1

   Of course he knew! There is video that shows him listening to a sermon of Wright’s and nodding his head as the guy says one ridiculous thing after another.

   Barry Obama never even had a chance to win the election, once people got to know him for the fraud, ultra liberal, corrupt Chicago politician that he is it was a done deal.

   His candidacy was pushed by the MSM from day one and that is a lot of power behind one man. As it inevitably must, the truth comes out and all the media bias in the world won’t buy this guy a prayer.

2. Langley April 29th, 2008 at 7:36 pm 2

   I agree with you that he knew and is therefore a fraud. I was just pointing out the bottom line in response to Barry’s ridiculous response to all of this nonsense.

3. Mike April 29th, 2008 at 7:47 pm 3

   I wonder if Barry realizes how serious the situation is? He has seemed like a deer in the headlights since this entire thing broke.

4. Langley April 29th, 2008 at 7:59 pm 4

   He was screwed since this whole Wright issue came up, and Barry’s initial response (”I can no more disown Rev. Wright than I can disown the black community”) only made the Senator’s eventual “conversion” on the issue that much more to stomach. Seriously, I’m not rooting for Obama, but it’s just painful to watch this unfolding of events.

   “Deer in the headlights” is right.

5. Ryan April 29th, 2008 at 9:41 pm 5

   Obama is a fool if he thinks the American people will buy this nonsense. Either Obama joined this church to advance his career in Chicago, he is a fool, or he knew about this and sat idlely. No matter how you cut it, Obama is wrong, Wright is wrong, and the Democratic Party will be wrong for allowing this spectacle to continue. If the Democrats have any sense, they will let the superdelegates throw Obama under the bus and try to salvage the race with Clinton.

6. Michael C April 30th, 2008 at 8:42 am 6

   African-Americans will revolt if they do. I hope it happens.

7. DavidShiffman April 30th, 2008 at 9:50 am 7

   “The bottom line: After 20 years of friendship, if Obama didn’t know Wright held these beliefs he’s a moron and if he did know he’s a fraud.”

   Or, he did know, he didn’t share these beliefs, and he was willing to look past some craziness in his friend because of all the good work he does with ministries to the poor.

   Who among us doesn’t have a close friend who is a nutjob? I sure do- working in academia, it’s hard to avoid that- and while I certainly don’t think they’re qualified for public office, I don’t think that their craziness disqualifies me. I choose my friends based on how nice they are, not on their political beliefs.

   This third option does require that Obama lied at first about having heard Wright use speech like this, but this is a poor decision that can be chalked up to relative inexperience. It’s also possible that this lying was to try and protect a friend. When Wright continued to act crazy and not apologize, Obama condemned him far more forcefully (see yesterdays headlines)

   Obama’s latest condemnation of Wright, admittedly a little late, is all I needed to hear. It’s what he should have said at first, but he said it.

   Attending a particular church doesn’t mean you share all the values of the preacher in charge. I have Southern baptist friends whose preacher says things like “Secularists want you to believe that germs are what make you sick, but it’s really the devil punishing you for your sins”. They certainly don’t believe this, but they go to this church because it’s the one that’s convenient to their house. Does this make them less qualified to be a doctor?

8. Langley April 30th, 2008 at 10:39 am 8

   He only threw Wright under the bus now because the nutjob was starting to negatively affect Barry politically, and I’m surprised that a smart guy like you doesn’t realize that.

   He knew exactly what a nutjob this guy was for 20 years, and allowed his children to be exposed to it - why? To get validation in the black community, to further his political career.

   If that’s not the hallmark of “typical” politics that he claims to not be a part of, I don’t know what is.

9. DavidShiffman April 30th, 2008 at 11:43 am 9

   “He only threw Wright under the bus now because the nutjob was starting to negatively affect Barry politically”

   Not inconsistent with what I was saying. It’s possible that Obama didn’t want to throw Wright “under the bus” until now because they were friends, but had to because Wright was starting to negatively affect him politically.

   “He knew exactly what a nutjob this guy was for 20 years, and allowed his children to be exposed to it - why?”

   Again, although Wright says some nutjob things, the church does do a lot of good for the poor in Chicago, and for raising money for HIV victims in Africa. Maybe he liked some things about the church other than that membership gave him “validation in the black community”.

   “If that’s not the hallmark of “typical” politics that he claims to not be a part of, I don’t know what is.”

   It totally, 100% is hallmark of typical politics. I don’t think Obama is the perfect ultimate savior that many of my more liberal friends think he is. I do, however, think that he’s a bright guy with some good things to say.

10. Mike April 30th, 2008 at 1:29 pm 10

    “Or, he did know, he didn’t share these beliefs, and he was willing to look past some craziness in his friend because of all the good work he does with ministries to the poor.”

    Would you sit and listen to 20 years to a guy talk about “[jews] looking down their [shylock] noses” as they helped to crucify Christ?

    Now replace jews and shylock with Italians and garlic and that is exactly what Wright said about the crucification.

    Just because a guy does some good doesn’t excuse his other evils. Hitler rebuilt Germany after WWI and saved the country from poverty, but so the hell what? The guy was a monster despite the good work he did for the poor.

    Obama sat there for 20 years because he agreed with what was being said. If you don’t get that then your take on politicians is a little naive IMO.

11. Ryan April 30th, 2008 at 5:00 pm 11

    Mike… thanks for bringing up the Jewish element of this fiasco. The Democrats need to watch Obama and the Jewish vote. They might lose their monopoly on it with Obama.