A JinC Regular comments with fair questions for Sen. Obama concerning his close friend and Pastor Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s anti-Americanism and racist screeds.
The comment:
If Obama didn't quite catch Jeremiah Wright's meaning when he was a member of his church for 20 years, ya think he's gonna be able to deal with people who want to turn America into a flaming pyre?So what are Obama, his campaign staff and MSM shills doing to respond to those questions and others on the minds of millions of Americans?
So what if Obama meets our enemies and talks with them, like Chavez?
He sat in the pews listening to a man who wants God to damn America!
Does anyone think he'll disagree with Chavez? With Ghadaffi? With the leadership of Hamas? With Ahmadinejad?
If Obama was asleep when Pastor Wright made his infamous commentaries, who thinks he'll stay engaged in staff meetings, in NSC meetings, in meetings with foreign friends and enemies?
Still, anyone who has seen Obama in action on the campaign trail could not possibly believe that Obama was sleeping in the pews, nor misunderstand the character of the commentary!
He bought it, he swallowed it and he believed it: now the chickens have come home to roost - on his own head!
According to the AP , Obama's complaining about the “forces of division.”
The “forces of division” meme will play well with the kind of people who always bash America.
But what’s Obama offering the rest of us besides accusations about “the forces of division?”
Advice to Sen. Obama: IMO Eliot Spitzer has better damage control specialists than you do. Why not give him a call and see if he’ll rent them out for a day or two?
And please stop referring to people like the JinC Regular mentioned here as “the forces of division.”
Such people are standing up for America and truth in the public square.
10 comments:
Can't help but notice a lot of negative Obama entries. I assume you are not going to vote for Obama. How about an endorsement based on the issues?
The economy: Which candidate is going to help the economy the most? From taxes to jobs to spending and trade policies.
Security: Which candidate will do the best job keeping America safe and secure? From Iraq to border security, to fighting terrorism, to immigration issues.
Health Care: Which candidate will help get more people covered that can't afford or get coverage now?
Education: Which candidate can best make some progress towards fixing public education?
To me, the most important thing will be the ability to actually get some helpful reforms into law. Or should I want a leader who is just not going to make things worse? 3 choices at this point between McCain, Clinton, and Obama. I have not decided yet but I will tell you that what Obama's pastor has said means very little to me in influencing my decision.
To mac,
Thanks for the thoughtful response. On health care I believe Clinton is the one that is favoring forcing people to pay for it out of their paychecks, Obama's is more forcing people to pay for it out of tax increases. Either way, it's not going to be 'free', either in payroll taxes or income taxes or a combo of the 2. Some progress in getting more people covered is needed, in my opinion.
McCain and Clinton are both the safer choices in terms of security, probably Clinton more so that McCain (my opinion, which may surprise you. I do like the fact that McCain seems to me to not put security concerns over constitutional rights. Some things are worth the risk or sacrifice, imo.
I also think our economy will not benefit from more tax cuts or an infusion of stimulus payments, I think it is time to redirect spending and to spend less money on things that are wasteful, and more on programs that are needed. I don't think McCain is the best choice as far as the economy goes, but he is willing to compromise if he thinks it is the best bill that can be passed that helps the situation.
Don't give up on improving education, that is our future, it's going to take some risk, radical changes, and hard choices to fix. Doing nothing will continue the downward slide.
I could be comfortable in voting for any of these 3 at this point, it may come down to the choice of a VP, I am not a John Edwards fan, if he is the choice of either Clinton or Obama, I will probably go for McCain. Then again, who is McCain going to pick?
Obama is not the safest choice, but I do think that more changes will take place if he is elected. I don't think digging up dirt on his pastor or former friends and implying that he agrees with what they said or did is going to make a diference in my vote. Clinton has a past as does McCain. I hope that this election will focus more on the above issues. McCain has said he will take the high ground here, I think that this mud-slinging on the part of Obama and Clinton will hurt both in the long run.
Redmountain:
" I have not decided yet but I will tell you that what Obama's pastor has said means very little to me in influencing my decision."
No need to soft pedal it.
What the Rev Wright has said is no different than what many of the extreme left have been saying for years. Its not a big surprise to me.
That Obama has been comfortable with these types of statements over the years is clearly a sign of his political philosophy.
So you haven't made up your mind yet? Oh boy!
Ken
Dallas
Ken,
Well said, without saying who you are voting for and why. Perhaps you can convince me who to vote for, since these many entries bashing Obama's pastor have not convinced me who NOT to vote for.
I think I will be voting for the first person to talk about the social security financial time bomb, the exploding national debt, the ever growing trade deficit, the reason America cannot win or end it's wars and why Congress is investigating Roger Clemmens instead of addressing these issues.
To anon at 5:25
Ron Paul lost. However, I agree those are important issues as well.
Still waiting for someone, anyone to talk about why I should vote for their pick (of the 3 possibles) based on the issues.
Is this a anybody but Obama campaign?
Post a Comment