Senator Obama Has Weathered the W(Right) Storm

I was going to click on the link until I saw it was from [edited]MSNBC,,,the most liberal anti-american biased news channel in the world.....sorry

AJ

 

MessNBC is more in the tank for Obama that Faux News was for Bush, in '04. They got rid of Tucker, probably for backing Ron Paul. They're also famous for always having to apologize, retract, & suspend their anchors.

 

I actually think the WSJ is sounding more Keynesian and non-GOP. I read a section to a friend the other day who swore I was reading from the New York Times :laugh:

 

Yes....it must be the White Southerners who are keeping Obama from the nomination, since race is the only reason Obama isn't getting the Dem top slot. It cannot be that people have idealogical differences or are suspicious of lack of experience. I guess the Clinton machine is part of a vast right wing....you know the rest.

 

No question Wright is off the hook now, thanks to the passport breach and Hillary's Bosnia story. No doubt the Obama machine had nothing to do with that last leak, since he is the 4th member of the Trinity and all :laugh:

 

And to think so many republicans thought this story would sink Obama in November. I doubt it last much into April. :laugh:

Remember, it's the economy that drives most elections, and the direction this one is going is a bonus for Obama, should he win the democratic nomination, which I think he will.

 

In the world? Really?

Have you ever read any source outside of the US?

 

Nice sarcasm; good points.

 

And the dems SAID it would be over the same weekend. Now they are hoping April.

God bless! :thumbs:

 

I was quoting you, friend.

From msg 1.

And white southerners aren't part of the Dem party? I'll have to let the ones I know that are and who voted in the recent primaries in TN, SC, & GA and who plan to vote in NC and KY

 

Now Obama says regarding Wright: "What they spoke to was, I think, a brilliant man who was still caught in a time warp back in the ’60s, early ’70s and the ’50s, where he grew up, and had a sense of where America was and didn’t have a good enough sense of how it had changed." Somehow, Wright doesn't come across to me as a "brilliant man" and I think his message is the same "black liberation theology" still being preached by his successors. I think Obama was perfectly okay with this message until it got in the way of getting votes and hence the adjustment in his own "theology". If Wright was truly caught up in an incorrect view of America then that would make the implied need for change - removal of the "rich white man" rule, etc. - to be without merit. Don't hold your breath for that message to fly forth from the pulpits of Obama's church or grandstand on the political trail.

 

If we took several snipets of all you have said, how woud the world judge you?

Can you really determine hsi aptitude based on a few clips? Look at his many accolades, accomplishments and following. I would think you would somehow use that in the formula.

 

I've made a judgment based upon the information I have. That's what we all do. If the point is that we - everyone one of us - might be wrong about our judgments then, sure, that's a possibility since error is a well known characteristic of human beings. If not having that characteristic is a qualification for posting then we must all immediately cease. That brings us back to debating the judgments we each make.

I suppose I could ignore all that's before us regarding Wright in the interest of supporting a fairy tale of purity and righteousness. I choose not to do that. Wright just doesn't come across to me as a "brilliant" man based on his own words. He comes across as as a radical advocate of "black liberation theology" seeking to inspire a willing congregation's thinking towards a mentality of oppression at the hands of "rich white men" verses a Christ-centered theology.

If Obama knows him well enough to think he's "brilliant" then he must know him well enough to be fully aware of his racist comments. That takes us to another fairy tale of purity and righteousness.

 

No, no, my only point was perhaps we shouldn't make judgments about people until we have enough to truly base that conclusion. I don't know the guy so I have no clue. It's not about ignoring anything it's more about not deciding all a person is from a few minutes of snippets.

I do know I preach 3 times most Sundays and if someone were to make snippets from all my sermons....

I am the first to say I have may blunders on the pulpit but luckily the people know me and know my heart...

 

In principle I agree that judgments should be carefully made. In practice all judgments should probably be weighted. Words taken out of context shouldn't count. Words mispoken might not count. Atyical statements might be overlooked. Blunders can be forgiven. But when it's blatant, forceful, repeated, motivates others, is taken in full context, and there's no correction given, retraction made, or forgiveness sought then it should not be ignored. It has to count else we might as well just ignore everything around us.

 

Very solid point... :thumbs: