If Having A Controversial Pastor Disqualified One For Office, There would be no Republican Officials

[mattclearing]

Let's focus on the real enemy here.

You want bigotry, hate speech, a complete lack of regard for the rights of the individual in American society, you need look no farther than the churches of Republican leaders.

They'll deny rights to gays, deny the proven science of evolution, and claim that God is on their side. A lot of them believe Jesus is coming back with a sword to smite the unbelievers.

Don't be sucked into this nonsense about Obama's pastor. It is the last gasp of a press desperate to pin anything on a politician who is all but totally vetted.

Even John McCain knows that the Republican Faith machine is an instrument of intolerance, and yet we are arguing about a guy who openly welcomed gays into his congregation?

We should all be asking who McCain's priest is, and what nutty things he says, if McCain even has one. Or we can pull out every nutty thing Billy Graham, who is praised by George W. Bush, has said.

What we should not be doing is piling on Jeremiah Wright, who has used some inflammatory rhetoric but ultimately has done more good deeds that most of us combined. That is ridiculous.

[thunder rising]

1. The deadliest person in the world is the American Republican Christian...so affraid of everything

[mattclearing]

2. I don't know about that.

But they certainly don't help matters much.

[thunder rising]

17. I do know about it, and they are as deadly in their affect as any group of terrorists.

[JTFrog]

3. I mean think of Doug Coe and The Family.

Jesus plus nothing.

The covenant. The Family. Like the Mafia, only instead of being bound by honor they are bound by "Jesus shucked of his religious wrappings". Fighting the good fights like how to help Christians beat those Muslims who have too many babies while we kill too many of our own.

Some interesting DINO's mingling in that Republican environment.

[mattclearing]

4. Disturbing stuff.

And you're right, there are some surprising people in these bizarre religious groups.

[SunsetDreams]

5. Wonder who belongs to that group

;-)

[mattclearing]

7. It's surprising that people aren't making a bigger deal out of that.

I mean, being part of an elect group selected by God to lead the people...that's some crazy shit right there, much crazier than anything Jeremiah Wright has said. But I've seen like, one story that mentions it, and it's buried in a religious profile.

[JTFrog]

10. Because the Republicans rarely eat their own and Obama won't stoop to those tactics. n/t

[wndycty]

6. yeah but Repubs are white

So its acceptable. :sarcasm:

[Little Star]

8. We are Dems not Repugs and we expect better from our own.

[mattclearing]

9. And can anyone doubt that we've gotten it?

If this and Rezko are the best anyone can do, that would make Obama the cleanest politician to have a shot at the White House since Jimmy Carter. People need to let this go.

[earthlover]

11. What i see is that we trash our own before the Reps even get a chance!

And blame it on the Repukes! Convenient.

McCain has shown more support for Obama than some Democrats so far

[mattclearing]

14. Well, it's not actually all us.

There are a lot of people here explicitly to throw the mud around who don't give a shit about anything else.

[OHdem10]

12. Not defending ayone--just trying to explain the difference.

Keep in Mind always, the far right and far left always have
two entirely different world views and therefore see the
world differently.

Think about it. The Pators on the Right push "personal sins".
The Pelvic Sins, I call them.

Minister Wright is being criticised for his perceived "attacks on
America Perceived as Anti-American or "HATE AMERICA".

The RR are probably the most nationalistic--AMERICA RIGHT OR WRONG.
Group out there.

This is why the story has legs.

I say this so than making arguments, kunderstand where each side
is coming from.

[mattclearing]

15. Yeah, it's the difference between telling people how to live their lives

and taking issue with the daily killing of innocents that we as Americans are culpable for.

[barack the house]

13. Yep especially Haggard. Besides Barack is half white of course he disavows the comments.

[cloudythescribbler]

16. The OP may be right and logical, but POLITICALLY, Obama must distance himself clearly ...

as they say, a word to the wise is JewFishAnt. I understand that Obama does not want to throw his pastor under a bus (metaphorically). But he will need to draw a clear line b/t himself and his campaign on one hand, and Jim Wright on the other -- and then from that firm ground insist that Obama bashers recognize the obvious points of this OP: Obama is not responsible for what is pastor, or Farrakhan, or Tony Rezko or anyone else say or do. He can only be responsible for himself AND FOR HIS CAMPAIGN. As for the latter, he must draw the kind of clear lines that required Ferraro, a key HRC ally, to step aside from the campaign, even as she continues to speak as she pleases (and I find offensive).

I have little doubt that Obama sees these realities as well as I or anyone else here at DU does, but he may have a reluctance to draw a bright line between himself and his pastor. Just distancing himself from this or that statement however will not do. There should be no ambiguity about the line b/t Wright and the Obama campaign, even if the logic of the OP is correct (which it is).

Obama faces special political problems in that on one hand, he faces attack (not fair attack, just REAL attack) on the grounds that supporting him is supposed by some (eg Ferraro) to be some kind of expiation of the sin of racism for many whites (of course, that's what all those folk out in Alaska and Idaho and Utah were doing, right?). On the other hand, almost anything associated with black public figures in America that can be remotely attached to him is also (generally by the same people) tagged more tightly to him than would normally be the case, eg, between white Democrats OR Repuglicans and other white public figures (such as their pastors). Is it FAIR? OF COURSE NOT! Is it politically necessary to not fall short on this front? Equally valid.

Some people -- including on DU -- have argued that Obama being black makes him less likely to be elected president than a white candidate. Others have insisted that even though it is based on reading the behavior of OTHERS, it is "racist" to argue that. My own reading of the situation is that the personal and particular overall qualities of Obama taken as a whole (which includes his background) make him a strong candidate, stronger than any of the other leading Democrats in this presidential election. But as this campaign with HRC shows, Obama has had to be especially conscious, as he has been, of the various pitfalls -- for example, even as HRC and her surrogates were deliberately and in a patterned way fomenting ('stirring the pot' to paraphrase the Yiddish) the race issue, with OTHERS, in the press and public, reacting as predictable and as intended, Obama and his campaign are accused of 'playing the race card' even as they assiduously sidestepped the issue as much as and as long as politically feasible.

The controversy surrounding Jim Wright, partly related to and rooted in the undeniable issue (in this context) of race, is another case in point. I can only hope Obama will be as adroit in handling this as he has in the past -- knowing full well that NO MATTER WHAT HE SAYS OR DOES the Ferraros of the world will STILL insist he is 'playing the race card'.

------------------------------------------

On edit: I have since read on Huffpo that not only had Obama categorically rejected EACH AND EVERY one of the controversial statements, but also that the Rev has left his position obliquely connected to the Obama campaign.

I had had a different impression from reading the RECENT posts on DU. Maybe I'm just dense or maybe .......