This may give Hillary Clinton some sway with undecided superdelegates in these final days of primaries. Superdelegates are being pressured into making a decision by the end of next week, and this incident, in my opinion, will hopefully wake them up to pledge their allegiance to Clinton. Furthermore, I hope it will convince those superdelegates who have pledged their support to Obama already to change their support to Clinton, which is permitted under the DNC rules up until voting at the national convention in August.
America needs a real uniter, and if these are the type of people Obama has aligned himself with over the past 20 years, Obama is clearly not that person.
Please share widely!
it’s unlikely that this will have any effect. It’s an aftershock of the Wright earthquake that, by all appearances, Obama has managed to get through reasonably well, though suffering a few bumps and bruises. This guy doesn’t have nearly the close association with Obama that Wright did, so its staying power is correspondingly less.
<
p>I know you like Hillary. I basically like her too, though I continue to think Obama would be the better general election candidate and the better president. But the nomination process for all intents and purposes is over; at this point, it really is a formality until enough supers publicly commit to Obama. I’d guess that that will happen quite soon, most likely almost immediately after the final primaries next week.
Hillary screwed up..bigtime, with her over-the-top behaviour, particularly in the past several weeks.
<
p>McCain is too much of an old warhorse, likely to keep us in Iraq for heaven-knows-how-long, and to possibly get us in yet another war…with Iran. His overall politics are also too rightwing for my tastes, generally, plus he’s got a legendary temper and is too much of a loose cannon. Between all of the above, this man is not to be trusted at the helm, leading our country.
<
p>Barack Obama, on the other hand, while many of his positions are far better than McCain’s, or even H . R. Clinton’s, comes off as too much of a “wonderboy” for my tastes. His charisma seems totally unreal and I think he’s a phony through and through (so’s Hillary, however). Also, he’s tended to broadbrush a little too much for my liking at times, and I’m not comfortable with the idea of advocating college tuition for illegal immigrants. Legal immigrants, however…that’s a much different story. Why should an undocumented immigrant get bumped ahead of a person who has legally immigrated here to and resides in the United States legally, or somebody who was born and raised here in the :United States? This is not such a hot idea, imo, when one stops to think about it. Having 11 million or more illegal immigrants is not in the best interest of the United States, either, but, then again, neither is our 50-year domination of other countries. We’ve got to stop being the world’s big cop and let other countries and their people rule tend to their own affairs and run their own lives.
<
p>Also, here’s yet some another problems with all of the leading Presidential Candidates, including HIllary: Not one of them has ever suggested closing down the Department of Homeland Security, Guantanamo, and Abu Gharib, which are all great threats to Civil Rights and Civil Liberties for all Americans. Also, not one of them has suggested doing something else that’s very necessary to pay for necessary programs in this country; making substantial cuts in our military budget, which, imo, is way , way too high, like it’s always been.
all three of the remaining leading candidates have suggested closing Guantanamo:
See this Globe article which contrasts McCain, Obama and Clinton on the issue.
Thanks, Bean.
This is nothing compared to the Rev. Wright business, so I don’t think this will influence superdelegates in the least. Correct me if I am wrong, but I don’t believe that any delegates have yet to switch from Obama to Clinton so it seems highly unlikely that any will switch over a minor incident such as this.
<
p>Perhaps you are right that Obama is not the uniter that he protrays himself as, but it is crystal clear that Clinton is even less of a uniter than he his, so if you want unity he still looks like a better choice.
And what support do you have for saying that Hillary Clinton is less of a uniter than Barack Obama is? She has actually reached across the aisle in the Senate and gotten things done with Republicans. If you are going to make these baseless, blanket comments about her, at least have the decency to provide even a hint of factual support for them.
Actually, thinking about that subject line, I wonder when people will start asking about the origination of that phrase. But anyway…
<
p>Paraphrasing what I said here, what is the purpose of this diary? What is the positive result you’d like to see as a result of posting this? How does this get us one step closer to a Democratic win for the White House?
My purpose was to put out their yet again how Obama associates with people who hold views that are so skewed from reality you have to wonder why anyone would want their support or give their support to them ever.
<
p>And I also wanted to show the response of Obama’s congregation to Father Pfleger was not that of a group of people who seem to be looking towards uniting the Democratic party (probably would have helped to link to the video I suppose).
<
p>Enthusiastically cheering and applauding a man such as Pfleger makes me seriously question Obama’s affiliation with his own church and what they as a congregation stand for, again.
Matthew 7
<
p> 1 Judge not, that ye be not judged.
<
p> 2 For with what judgment ye judge, ye shall be judged: and with what measure ye mete, it shall be measured to you again.
<
p> 3 And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?
<
p> 4 Or how wilt thou say to thy brother, Let me pull out the mote out of thine eye; and, behold, a beam is in thine own eye?
<
p>—
<
p>Pfleger’s sermon was dumb. Which was disappointing, because there’s a great Youtube video where he just crushes a lowly Fox News reporter here.
One reason that it is constructive to discuss issues like this is because it allows a thorough airing of difficult matters. In turn, that helps us prepare for the general election. The positive result is a more effective response when the GOP recycles these issues in the autumn.
<
p>Moreover, as many on this blog often note, the Democratic nominee has not yet been selected. This is an issue that cuts for some to the appeal of Obama, one of two current candidates: another reason it is worth discussing.
I’d agree with you, Bob, if the post were presented along the lines of, “Here’s a problem we’re going to have to deal with in the general election if candidate X is our nominee. How do we deal with it?” I have a harder time buying in when it concludes with:
<
p>This just looks like another attempt to undermine one of the candidates at a point in time when just about anyone reading this blog will have no more effect on the race. So, to me, no matter what the intent, I think the result is just to harden the positions – those who agree say “way to go!” while those who don’t smolder a bit more. Do we really need to be doing this while we’re sitting here in the stands waiting for the game to end?
<
p>If people are just feeling the need to vent, I understand. But it’s probably worthwhile to take to heart the words of Thom Hartmann (I don’t know if they are originally his, but he uses them): “The meaning of a communication is the reaction you get.”
<
p>Clinton ’08 or Obama ’08. Either would be a good result, everyone. Really.
Michael Pfleger is white. That’s kind of an important detail to note when your headline says that “racism is alive and well.”
I’ve known white people who are racist toward other whites, and blacks who are racists toward other blacks. It’s not a new concept as far as I’ve experienced in my lifetime.
I call on any Catholic who disagrees with Rev. Pfleger to leave the Catholic Church – or at least any Catholic whoever said “If Obama disagreed with Rev. Wright, why did he stay at that Church for so long?”
<
p>————–
<
p>
<
p>Good luck with that.
I’ll remain optimistic until their is an official Democratic nominee.
<
p>I’ve got to have hope in something, right?
It wasn’t that he should leave his faith, but the actual church where this inane ranting was going on. I would certainly attend a different parish if the priest at the one I go to was spouting this crap.
…difference between walking away from your entire religion and leaving a particular church. No one suggested that Obama should have abandoned his faith, just one church. For you to suggest that catholics need to abandon catholicism to avoid hypocrisy is absurd.
…it would not be absurd to apply the same principal to the clergy sex abuse scandal that emanated from thousands of local parishes across America and the globe and whose systematic cover-up radiated up through dioceses and archdioceses, to the Vatican, and ultimately the Pope himself.
<
p>None of those controversial statements preached at Trinity physically injured anyone, or raped anyone, or psychologically tortured anyone, or worked to cover up criminal activity perpetrated against one of its members, let alone thousands of children.
<
p>I know the parish church is the center of spiritual life in the Catholic faith, but the RCC doesn’t have a monopoly on praising Jesus and taking communion.
in your lack of understanding about the Catholic church, the communion ritual and its doctrine. It’s more than a little presumptuous and a bit offensive for you to imply that some other church “will do” because the “RCC doesn’t have a monopoly on praising Jesus and taking communion.” That’s some fine progressive nonsense you’re spouting.
<
p>I’d also like to point out that sexual abuse scandal isn’t limited to the Catholic church. So, what’s the benchmark that to your mind, forces people to separate from their faith? 1? 10? 100? Really – there’ve been a number of scandals in other faiths…so how many priests and/or ministers does it take for you to insist that people should leave their faith all together because some other church will “get it done” for them? Or should it be a population thing – so for every million congregants and 1,000 ministers, should be benchmark be 10? Really – let’s go there.
<
p>
Frankly, I don’t care why anyone stays at or leaves a church.
<
p>What I am saying is: that any church-attending Catholic who chastised Obama for not leaving his/her church over Wright should turn the mirror on themselves – and that goes for any religious institution with a sex abuse scandal; that the transgressions of the individual molester priests and the leadership hierarchy (whether it is the Archdiocese of Boston or the Vatican) are so many orders of magnitude worse than what Wright did that the Chicago preacher’s statements barely register in comparison; and that I know of many people who still consider themselves Catholic although they attend services at an Episcopal or Lutheran church, or they don’t attend any church, because they are upset over the abuse scandal, some even plan on “coming home” to the Catholic church someday.
<
p>I’m not advocating the wholesale abandonment of the Catholic Church. I’m not saying that by sticking with the Catholic Church through that disturbing scandal is akin to supporting child rape. I’m saying if a Catholic thinks a certain way, if a Catholic thinks that Obama should have left Trinity in 2001 because of Wright, then it follows that that Catholic would feel obligated to leave any parish in which child rape happened, leave any parish that housed a known molester priest after he was removed from a parish, leave any diocese or archdiocese involved with the administrative cover up of molestation, and should probably leave the Catholic Church itself since it would be impossible to escape the perview of the Vatican that ordered much of the systematic cover up.
<
p>I’m saying that a Catholic criticizing Obama for not leaving Trinity earlier while steadily attending Mass through the abuse scandal is a conflicting and hypocritical idea. On the other hand, any Catholic who stuck by the Church through that storm should have sympathy for Obama and the very tough spot he found himself in due to his clergy’s controversial statements.
The 2008 primary season has been an engraved invitation for people to say stupid things about race and gender, sexism and racism. Those who speak of such things from personal experience are just dipping into the punch bowl of trouble: different people experience these social forces very differently and very personally. It’s stupid, it’s asking for trouble, but it’s very tempting.
<
p>We can’t expect pastors and priests to be any better at resisting such temptations than pundits and politicians.
have both used religion as a political tool. i don’t have an ounce of sympathy for either when that scheme comes back to bite them in the rumpus. let this be a lesson to all those who follow, and may the next race be free of such crass use of people’s beliefs and superstitions in the civil realm.
feel more free to make completely racist and provocative comments. Is there something about their position which makes them feel like they have some pass here? The thing is if anything these Obama-affiliated pastors usually criticize white America for being racist (which while they overblow the point stems from a sense of oppression), unlike the lunatics who have endorsed McCain – like Hagee -who call the Catholic Church a whore, say Hitler has helped get us closer to the second coming, etc…
<
p>There are enough crazy pastors going around on both sides here that the — boy who cried wolf principle comes into effect. People already know there are some nutty pastors in Obama’s past so its not news anymore and is diminished in impact. That said, both McCain and Obama, while wanting the vote of people of faith, could probably do with some of the more extreme views of faith leaders being kept out of the political debate.
Entitled?
<
p>White Women?
<
p>20-years?
<
p>Not that anyone wanted to make him have to depart from his church. Faith is faith!
<
p>All of our histories are complex. They can’t be explained by sound bite. But, one chooses his or her spiritual advisors!
<
p>Is Barack ready for prime time?
<
p>I support Hillary because she has the experience and will be ready on day one!
<
p>
was in high school rap was the popular music. Well call it backlash, call it any of several things but now she considers it “nigga” music. I am also embarrased at the rantings of both “pastors” and I can us this as well as the pedophile scandal as the excuse for not embracing organized religion. See I pulled my son out of a known pedophile situation mostly due to an expatriot experience. These people were just “not right”, hell America was just “not right”. And the not rightness has accellerated ever since.
Saying that a white person felt entitled is not racism. Racism involves the wielding of a power structure. Racism involves actual harm as the result of that power. Not being shown homes in certain towns/neighborhoods because of your color is racism. Being treated differently in an emergency room because of your color is racism. Being physically attacked because of your color is racism. Getting called out on apperaring to feel entitled? Sorry, that doesn’t make the grade.
<
p>Racially charged? Sure. Expressing a common sterotype? Absolutely. Prejudicial? Probably. But to use a comment like that to say “racism is alive and well” when much more destructive acts of racism happen around us daily just demonstrates why the stereotype of white/elite entitlement persists.