Bombshell Obama Pastor Video

[LuvDuke]

That's what I'm wondering. Was it just something stupid she said, or was it common ground she holds with the preacher. I don't think it would be a stretch to see it either way. Unless and until there is more information put forth, we may never know for sure.

She did try to explain.

Ultimately, all we can ever do is take a person at their word and then judge them by their actions.

 

[OceanAnnie]

She did try to explain.

Ultimately, all we can ever do is take a person at their word and then judge them by their actions.

True, but that was before the controversy. This adds another layer to it, IMO. It's good to look at all sides of an issue.

 

[eclectics]

I know you're more cynical than to buy into what political advisors put out there. Unless of course you think they're all splinters off the true wooden cross.

Actually, my comment was from a debate standpoint. For arguments sake, let's say your suspicions are correct. But the fact that you firmly said he lied kinda negates any sort of debate on the subject, right? If SwedishMeatball says he lied, well then, that's that. Everybody go home. Unless someone has proof he lied about his motive, then the subject is still open for discussion, as far as I'm concerned. And for the record, I believe McCain also has had his genuine unscripted moments also. I am cynical, but only up to a point.

 

[SwedishMeatball]

Actually, my comment was from a debate standpoint. For arguments sake, let's say your suspicions are correct. But the fact that you firmly said he lied kinda negates any sort of debate on the subject, right? If SwedishMeatball says he lied, well then, that's that. Everybody go home. Unless someone has proof he lied about his motive, then the subject is still open for discussion, as far as I'm concerned. And for the record, I believe McCain also has had his genuine unscripted moments also. I am cynical, but only up to a point.

It's my opinion that he lied, and all his speech did was to solidify that opinion. I'm not trying to convince you that he did. Keep your opinion if you're comfortable with it. Your argument could easily be turned back against you though. If eclectics says he didn't lie, then that's that. As far as I'm concerned, the responsibility lies with Obama to offer proof. I don't have to take him or his advisors at their word. I interpret his words between Friday in those interviews and today as lies. If you don't, oh well. It's called a difference of opinion and I have no problem with that.

 

[Pigeon]

If a Democrat wins the WH in 08, I just can't see the right wing simply forgetting about the last 8 years of what's been done to President Bush. Some of it was justified and earned by Bush, some of it wasn't and was over the top.

I'm curious. What on earth do you think has been "done" to Mr. Bush? I think he's pretty much gotten a pass, considering the fall out from his actions.

 

[SwedishMeatball]

I'm curious. What on earth do you think has been "done" to Mr. Bush? I think he's pretty much gotten a pass, considering the fall out from his actions.

Is that why he has such low approval ratings, including from many Republicans??

 

[Pigeon]

Is that why he has such low approval ratings, including from many Republicans??

Yeah, he has earned his absymal approval ratings, but nothing has been done to him.

 

[eclectics]

It's called a difference of opinion and I have no problem with that.

Me neither, and that's what it comes down to. As I said, hard to debate a difference of opinion without proof.

 

[disneyfan67]

I'm curious. What on earth do you think has been "done" to Mr. Bush? I think he's pretty much gotten a pass, considering the fall out from his actions.

I'm talking about what has been said in blogs, Internet bulletin boards, websites, etc. If you think everything that has been written and said about him is fair or just, since January 2001, well I don't know what to say. Make no mistake, President Bush has more than earned his fair share of what's been said, but I have seen some pretty over the top stuff, IMO. I don't want to defend the man because I'm disgusted with him and the Republican party in general over several issues. If you think that those who still support him and the GOP, are just going to roll over and play nice with a Democrat POTUS, then you're in for quite the shock in a year from now. Heck, they don't even like who their own GOP nominee is, let alone Obama or Hillary. I used to be part of that world and a member of 2 conservative websites. So I think I might have a little more insight than you do on this, but I could be wrong. Quite frankly, for the sake of this country, I hope I am. Recent comments here and else where lead me to believe otherwise.


I said it before and I'll say it again. The Honeymoon will be short and expect the GOP to mount an aggressive campaign against the Democrat POTUS and to try and recapture the House and Senate later on. My gut feeling tells me this election is going to cost the GOP even more seats now, so I think they will come out swinging in 09. If they capture the majority again, I expect them to return to the form that they displayed in 1994 and up. All bets will be off then. Just my take on it. I don't want my country to further divided, but I just can't see Americans all getting on the same page. Politics sucks. Period.

 

[transparant]

It's my opinion that he lied, and all his speech did was to solidify that opinion. I'm not trying to convince you that he did. Keep your opinion if you're comfortable with it. Your argument could easily be turned back against you though. If eclectics says he didn't lie, then that's that. As far as I'm concerned, the responsibility lies with Obama to offer proof. I don't have to take him or his advisors at their word. I interpret his words between Friday in those interviews and today as lies. If you don't, oh well. It's called a difference of opinion and I have no problem with that.

I completely agree with you on this.

 

[Pigeon]

I'm talking about what has been said in blogs, Internet bulletin boards, websites, etc. If you think everything that has been written and said about him is fair or just, since January 2001, well I don't know what to say. Make no mistake, President Bush has more than earned his fair share of what's been said, but I have seen some pretty over the top stuff, IMO.

Considering what Mr. Bush and Mr. Cheney have done to the country, my heart doesn't really bleed for him over being criticized by bloggers. Waah. And my heart bleeds pretty readily. Now, if the opposition had tried to do something totally "over the top," let's say impeach him, that might be different...

 

[DisneyDotty]

I have to agree and I've been thinking a lot lately about the upcoming election and how it may be a no win for the American people. If a Democrat wins the WH in 08, I just can't see the right wing simply forgetting about the last 8 years of what's been done to President Bush. Some of it was justified and earned by Bush, some of it wasn't and was over the top. Obama will have a short honeymoon period before the attacks begin, if it's Hillary expect it from the get go.

That's pretty much the nature of politics, don't you think? Clinton endured 8 long years of "over the top" attacks, too. Elder Bush (only 4, though) before him. Reagan before him. et al. (And don't even bring up Carter!)
No matter who wins, he/she will have a heckuva time fixing all that's been broken by 8 years of Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld/Rove etc.

 

[disneyfan67]

.

 

[disneyfan67]

That's pretty much the nature of politics, don't you think? Clinton endured 8 long years of "over the top" attacks, too. Elder Bush (only 4, though) before him. Reagan before him. et al. (And don't even bring up Carter!)
No matter who wins, he/she will have a heckuva time fixing all that's been broken by 8 years of Bush/Cheney/Rumsfeld/Rove etc.

What Clinton and Bush 43 went through was far worse than what Reagan, Bush 41, or Carter went through, IMO. It has gotten nastier with every passing year and the bar keeps getting set higher. I was just pointing out that I feel sorry for the next POTUS and our country. It is what is though and out of my control.

 

[Charade]

So what exactly did Wright say that you claim Obama is lying about not hearing?

No odds, specifics.

Yanno, denial is not just a river in Mexico.

 

[SwedishMeatball]

It's a dirty fact of life that politicians pander to many people, including religious zealots. It's not their finer side, but just a reality. I never got all shook up over the Farrakhan flack and Obama reacted just as I would expect a politician to, and that was very carefully try to appease all sides for political gain.

I think Obama's hardcore supporters don't believe his relationship with Wright has a thing to do with political gain, and with that I am in complete agreement with them. However, that is specifically why it is so troublesome to many. Some keep trying to throw up the likes of Hagee to keep the waters muddied, but it's clear to me the stark difference in the willingness of politicians to embrace controversial figures for political gain, versus a man embracing a controversial figure in a private and intimate relationship. That relationship is now made public, and he will have to deal with the fallout for his choice.

Obama's concern is not for his steadfast supporters or for the majority of Republicans, but for the Independents and Reagan Democrats who have been listening carefully to Obama, and many have been quite impressed. All those so intent on defending Obama and poo poo'ing those who would have never voted for him anyway, need to realize that it is imperative for their candidate to focus his attention on those people right now. If they think that his speech solved all the questions and doubts in the mind's of those sort of voters, well then they should take a deep breath and calm down because they have nothing to worry about. Their over the top defense of him though, which includes the ridicule of anyone who disagrees with their beliefs, indicates to me that there exists an underlying and serious concern. I give them credit though for putting on a brave face and never letting us see them sweat.

 

[SwedishMeatball]

Yanno, denial is not just a river in Mexico.

I thought it was in Egypt.

 

[Charade]

It's extremely controversial. No one said it wasn't. The argument here is whether or not that was the controversial remarks Obama was referring to here:



Several here would like to argue (and wishing and hoping) "GD America" was the controversial remark Obama heard while sitting in the pew, but offer no proof.

And that's where we are now.

(coming in late and have not read to the end of the thread...)

So he heard his Rev. say "other" (what would be considered) controversial things. Not just *these* controversial things. Gotcha!

 

[Charade]

I thought it was in Egypt.

Crap!

 

[LuvDuke]

Yanno, denial is not just a river in Mexico.

Same question: So what exactly did Wright say that you claim Obama is lying about not hearing?


Just admit you have no idea and move on.

Btw, I thought it was Eqypt.