I like Rev. Wright.

[Smith_3]

For a preacher, he really seems like an intelligent man.

[PDJane]

1. I like him too.......

a thinking man.

[0007]

2. bttft and recommend with many kudos for a great post.

[seabeyond]

3. i only heard him once, and it was damning america? but i thought he had a point. n/t

[goclark]

7. You must see the Moyers interview

[seabeyond]

10. i watched two parts of 5... and barring missing something, he sounded

of value to me. i have been harping that the black community needs exactly this to help heal their community. further, help heal a nation.

i wasnt bothered with the man prior either, though. i am not one that needs to listen. but i may need his answers to the pieces that will be harped on in the campaign so i can counter when talking to that many closed minded here in the texas panhandle. maybe then i will have to go back and listen to all he is saying

thanks

[Galway girl]

4. I am White Catholic and Male I like Wright.

I like Rev Wright . he calls it as he sees it . He fought for his country and he has a right (forgive the pun) to free speech and he has the right to damn America for crimes it has commited against others . America is not perfect and it deserves criticism for some the things it has done and praise for some of the others .

[Preston120]

12. It was nice to hear the full sermon instead of bites by Big Media.

Wonder why Fox News, NBC, ABC, didn't bother to carry the whole story? Everybody has a right to "call them as they see them", and I happen to agree with him.

[MADem]

5. I think his pride goeth before his fall.

If he wanted to repair or assure his "legacy," he might have waited until AFTER a key series of primaries, until after NOVEMBER, if Obama won the nomination--if he really wanted to help his protege. I don't get why the guy couldn't just step BACK for a few months.

I think he puts himself in front of his candidate, and I also think he has screwed BO a bit. Only a bit, though, because Wright isn't all 'that' famous. And I'm not the only one who sees it that way.

After all that talk about "change" that Senator Obama seeded the ground with, his pal the PASTOR tells us that well, he's just a "politician." With friends like that, who needs enemies?

If I were cynical, I'd say Bill Clinton or John McCain paid the guy to go on Moyers! He couldn't have screwed his candidate any better if he'd tried.

Now, I know that BO supporters, who are already "invested" in their candidate, won't have too much problem with Wright. But for those "weak" supporters, or undecideds who are "leaning" well, this isn't helpful.

[panAmerican]

6. You're wrong, imho. Any undecided/weak supporter who bothered to watch would understand.

In this country we have a tendency to postpone hard discussions because we're just too sensitive to handle whatever the discussion is. Other countries face much greater, and REAL hardships, and we are not adult enough to have a conversation?

There's no reason for Rev. Wright to go "into hiding" after the media itself pulled him into the spotlight. I'm as strong an Obama supporter as you get, but I believe Pastor Wright deserved a forum in which the whole man and his views could be assessed. What we have been subjected to so far are bits and pieces of 3 different sermons fused together to give an impression of an irrational man.

We wage war, yet are too squeamish to allow its bloody and gory details to be broadcast into our living rooms. Instead we are willing to give our rulers a pass for another 6-9 months at a time to keep doing what they're doing, as long as they give us an after-action report.

We neglect public infrastructure because our taxes are already high, then our fellow citizens experience the ravages of Rita and Katrina, or plunge to their peril when bridges collapse. All of a sudden, the price to fix it has skyrocketed, and we're even willing to spend money we don't have, attaching ourself harder to the China spigot.

We question the electability of a Black man or a woman because we're in unchartered territory with the economy, homeland security, housing market etc. Why take a chance on the unknown "in the middle of the game"?

No, my friend, the time to have this discussion is now.

[il_lilac]

13. should be it's own op

"In this country we have a tendency to postpone hard discussions because we're just too sensitive to handle whatever the discussion is."
You hit the nail on the head here. We don't want to feel uncomfortable. Rather believe the spin than admit some complicity. Unless we stand up and fight what is wrong with this country- We are responsible. That means speaking truth to power. Thank you for your thoughtful post.

[MADem]

14. No, they wouldn't "understand. " And they don't "understand."

You're shooting the messenger, here. I flip through my tee vee, I see everyone saying pretty much what I've said--that Wright, explaining away Obama's "repudiation," said (nudge, wink) oh, he's a POLITICIAN. In other words, he HAD to say that, to keep votes, but he really doesn't repudiate a damn thing. That was all about fooling those voting tools who don't "get" his church and philosophy and preaching style.

This is NOT about

WAR

PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE

or even ELECTABILITY.

It's about sending mixed signals. It's about being honest. About trying to bullshit people.

Wright did the "nudge wink" and told us, in a very conversational, entre-nous tone, that Obama was bullshitting us when he said he repudiated Wright, that he "had" to do that because that's what politicians do. Wright, to help HIMSELF, took Obama's "new politics" and Change/Believe agenda, and ripped it to shit. He basically said "Meet the new bullshitting politician, same as all the old bullshitting politicians."

See, my friend, that's just truth--that IS what people are saying and thinking. It's not about what we "should" be talking about. It's what people ARE talking about.

[panAmerican]

24. If people allow MSM to make up their minds for them, then we deserve the govt we've got

After all these lies blowing up in the Administration's face, aided and abetted by the media, if people still take them at their word it's the people's fault. You can't blame Wright for that.

Did I like the "politician" line? No. But he said what he said, and people will deal with it however they choose.

And I came on board with Obama relatively late in the process. He wasn't on my radar at all; in fact, no Dem candidate was on my radar because I had long ago grown disgusted with the Party and am registered as Independent. I took personal responsibility to learn about the candidates, and by a process of elimination chose Obama and a couple others, then finally settled on him being the best choice.

And though you may not like the other topics I brought up, I just listed them as examples of things we avoid discussing as a nation, and that just reinforces the dumbing down of the American voter. We let the politicians and media decide everything for us and are surprised every time we get screwed.

[MADem]

28. It's not a question of my 'liking' your topics. They matter.

It's a question of what will be covered, and how it will be perceived. My point is only that Wright didn't help his protege. It's almost, to my perspective, as though Wright was, in not entirely subtle fashion, "sticking it" to Obama.

We might not like the fact that the US voter is dumbed down, but that's the reality in which we live.

[goclark]

8. Wrong my friend ~ the interview was all that is right about America

It gave him a chance to speak and MSM only gave him a chance to "holler" for 4 seconds over and over again.

This allowed him due process and it was true Justice.

I'm speaking as an Obama supporter that was afraid to have him interviewed by anyone because I had only heard him badgered like the "Dean Scream" 24/7.

He has the rights as a citizen to speak and clear his name.

He did so with grace and intellect beyond measure.

Rev. Wright, in the years to come will be an American Hero.

[MADem]

15. It gave him a chance to screw his pal, albeit unintentionally.

That IS what happened.

As an Obama supporter, of COURSE you're fine with it.

But to anyone who isn't one, or who is undecided, that guy saying that Obama only had to repudiate him because he's a POLITICIAN pretty much screws the sincerity of that "new kind of politics" argument that the Obama campaign is shopping.

Wright is a frigging FOOTNOTE here--it's not about HIS grace, HIS intellect, or due process or justice or any of that crap. Fine, if you want to write the guy's biography, that might be useful, but the reason he GOT that interview was because he was Pastor to a Presidential candidate, NOT because of anything he's done to date on the national stage.

In being a 'graceful intellectual'-or however you want to characterize him, Reverend Wright SCREWED Obama with that "politician" line. That's the ONLY important line, big picture, in that interview, from the standpoint of this primary contest. You can call him a hero if you want, but your hero screwed Barack Obama on the Bill Moyers show.

Just Another Bullshitting Politician...that's the 'take away' from that interview.

[goclark]

27. I just donated $25 in yourhonor to the Obama campaign

Thanks for the motivation to do it immediately.
:bounce:

[MADem]

29. It's good to support your favored candidate. Congratulations for involving yourself in the process.

No need to "honor" me by so doing, though. That's rather, er, silly.

If you think that causes me some angst or something, you're barking up the wrong tree in that regard. I think participation in the process is good for everyone, no matter who they support.

You might try rereading what I actually wrote, though. And turning on your TV, and looking at what they're covering, and how they're covering it. That was the point I was making, and I see it was lost on you.


May the best candidate win.

[truth2power]

9. ;You must have watched a different show than I did. n/t

[MADem]

17. You're not hearing what I'm saying. I am talking about the national REACTION to the

interview, you're talking about your "personal feelings."

I'm not alone in this view. I turn on my TV, and I don't see ANYONE saying that Wright helped Obama. The only thing they're saying about Wright is that he helped HIMSELF.

[truth2power]

21. MADem, I've gone back and re-read your posts in this thread...

First of all - I came, very reluctantly, to support for Obama. Last summer I paid no attention to the talk about candidates. I was sick of it all. Over 2 years before the GE and that's all we were hearing, to the detriment of really important issues.

Well, came 2008 and, shortly before the Ohio Primary, I had a discussion with a co-worker who was supporting Obama. I told this person that I didn't like Clinton and that Obama was making "all-purpose" speeches that said nothing at all. You know, love, hope, freedom blah blah. I was still sick of the whole lot of them. So, came the primary and I sort of held my nose and voted for Obama (since my first choices - Edwards and... well, Kucinich were no longer in the race).

Shortly thereafter it seemed to me that Obama was really hitting his stride, and I started feeling really positive toward him. This is all by way of saying that I didn't "follow the herd". My choice followed a long difficult process.

As to your issues, I have no idea, at this point, what people on TV are saying about the Moyers interview. I seldom turn on my TV anymore because what I see just raises my blood pressure. Maybe there wil be someone with a brain on the Sunday shows who will address this issue. Yeah, fat chance!!

As to the "politician" remark. When Moyers asked that question, I think I stopped breathing for just a moment, because I couldn't see any way Wright could answer it satisfactorily, it being a "Have you stopped beating your wife?" type question. This is not to say Moyers shouldn't have asked it. It has to be addressed.

I think Wright's response was the best anyone could give. If any DUer knows of a better wlay this could have been answered, I'd really like to hear it.

Yes, Wright walked a VERY fine line. You're correct, in one sense it almost sounded like he was saying just what you expressed. But, tell me, how better could he have handled it than to say that clergy handle spiritual things and politicians handle matters of politics.

Let me offer an analogy: The above is similiar to the ID/Evolution debate, in a sense. Scientists have said, over and over, that science has nothing to say about religion. This is framed by fundamentialists as an indication that scientists are opposed to religion. It means nothing of the sort.

The Judge in Kitzmiller v. Dover said it best. Regarding the belief in Intelligent Design, he said, "It may be true, but it's not science." One does not depend on the other.

Similarly, one looks to Wright for spiritual guidance. One looks to Obama (and other politicians) for political leadership. What better answer is there?

[MADem]

32. You do know that Moyers is also UCC? Not Trinity, but UCC? That's part of the reason why the

interview was so gentle.

People are free to support whomever they happen to like. That's not the issue, really. This isn't about who anyone supports, or why. It's how this interview is being PERCEIVED. The people who support Obama are wanting to put a good face on it, because they're invested in their candidate. But people who aren't on the bandwagon are seeing it very differently.

I just thought Wright didn't "help." At ALL. And I am not alone.

Wright could have ducked that whole part of the interview, and gotten away with it. He could have used the "Gee, we have a few points of disagreement, and that's all there is to it. If I can't forgive someone for saying a few hard things, what kind of Pastor am I?" rhetorical remark. Or he could have said "Yes, my language was rough, and brutal, and unvarnished, and it probably was a bit too rough, brutal and unvarnished for anyone who has to answer for my words as a consequence of their public life." See, that's TWO ways to answer without "characterizing" Obama as a say-anything politician. And without forcing Wright to take back his own words, either.

Wright should have stepped lightly, but he didn't. He seemed almost DELIBERATE with that answer--like Pope Benedict, back when he was a cardinal, slapping that ABC reporter for daring to ask about child abuse (that was what came to my mind, that whole deliberateness). I saw it like that, most certainly--I saw it like a dig, a small knife, in his protege's back. As well as a "nudge-wink" aspect, sort of like "Well, we KNOW Obama was just SAYING that stuff in his speech to shut those complainers up--he didn't REALLY mean it. He was just conning the guppies with his 'politician' talk, don't ya know!"

And I am not the only one who sees it that way.

I think Wright screwed his protege, that's my main point. He made the story not about 'the larger message of Reverend Wright' but instead about "INAUTHENTIC OBAMA, the politician who says what politicians say" at an incredibly inopportune time, when he just didn't have to say that.

And even the INTERVIEW itself could have waited. He was a bit disloyal, to my mind. A bit prideful, too, as if he's giving that whippersnapper a little lesson. I'd think that he'd exercise a little more grace and kindliness towards a guy who gave tens of thousands of dollars to his church, but instead, he delivers what sounded like, and what, to me, amounts to, a rebuke:

http://www.pbs.org/moyers/journal/04252008/profile.html

BILL MOYERS: Here is a man who came to see you 20 years ago wanting to know about the neighborhood. Barack Obama was a skeptic when it came to religion. He sought you out because he knew you knew about the community. You led him to the faith. You performed his wedding ceremony. You baptized his two children. You were, for 20 years, his spiritual counselor. He has said that. And, yet, he, in that speech at Philadelphia, had to say some hard things about you. How, how did it go down with you when you heard Barack Obama say those things?

REVEREND WRIGHT: It went down very simply. He's a politician, I'm a pastor. We speak to two different audiences. And he says what he has to say as a politician. I say what I have to say as a pastor. Those are two different worlds. I do what I do. He does what politicians do. So that what happened in Philadelphia where he had to respond to the sound bytes, he responded as a politician. But he did not disown me because I'm a pastor.

[seabeyond]

11. but then you are a HUGH clinton fan, lol lol and are using wright as a weapon

against obama right now along with fox, rush and media. really you have little credibility on this subject with your agenda

as you have every right to.

[lonestarnot]

16. Clinton much?

[MADem]

18. Tell ya what, you keep thinking that Wright's characterization of Obama as a "politician"

--and by that I do mean "politiican" in quotes--is HELPFUL to Obama.

"Clinton much?" Like that's going to change perceptions about this interview, as if I am somehow to blame because Wright said what he said, and people are actually TAKING it the way he MEANT it.

:eyes:

[lonestarnot]

19. That's your take on it.

:eyes:

[MADem]

20. You don't understand. That's not "my" take.

I didn't write THIS: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/blogs/sfgate/detail?blogid=14&entry_id=25997

Rev. Jeremiah Wright has begun his mini-tour, climaxing Monday at the National Press Club in Washington, to promote himself and, apparently, to personally destroy the candidacy of his one-time parishioner.

Clips of a PBS television interview with Bill Moyers to be aired tonight have begun their endless cycling through various cable outlets. In them Wright dismisses Obama as a mere politician, and his Philadelphia speech on America's racial divide as a mere political hackery.

"He's a politician, I'm a pastor," Wright said. "We speak to two different audiences. And he says what he has to say as a politician....He had to respond to the soundbites. He responded as a politician." Thanks, Rev.

Oh, but there's more: "He had a political event, he goes out as a politician and says what he has to say as a politician. I continue to be a pastor who speaks to the people of God about the things of God." Like the divine retribution of 9/11 on the people of New York, perhaps, along with Wright's other sundry and famous eruditions....



OR this: http://www.abcnews.go.com/Politics/TheNote/story?id=4724361&page=1

Pennsylvania was Sen. Barack Obama's chance to salt away his lead, answer the demographic questions about his candidacy -- and put the Rev. Jeremiah Wright in his rearview mirror.

It was a nice thought. Make that oh-for-3 -- and objects in that mirror are now uncomfortably close.

Pennsylvania's wake has left Obama arguing that he's still ahead (and doing so on the side of not counting votes in two key states), explaining why he can't close the deal (despite the fact that it's not clear Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton can even make a deal work) -- and coping with the sudden, very public reemergence of that pastor he wished would spend the next six months in East Paraguay.



Or THIS: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/2008/04/25/2008-04-25_wright_when_obama_thought_it_was_over-2.html

Barack Obama's biggest headache is back.

His lightning-rod former pastor, Jeremiah Wright, is poised to reignite one of the most damaging controversies for the presidential candidate by jumping into the spotlight with a PBS interview Friday night and a Washington speech next week.

Wright said the media coverage of his incendiary sermons has been "unfair," "unjust," "untrue" and "devious," according to interview excerpts.

He said Obama responded like a "politician" to the flap.

"I do what I do. He does what politicians do," Wright declared.

"So that's what happened in Philadelphia where he had to respond to the sound bites, he responded as a politician," Wright said.



Or THIS: http://abcnews.go.com/GMA/Vote2008/story?id=4724063&page=1


"If he was a Barack Obama supporter, I think he would pull himself off of the stage at this point," said National Public Radio senior political analyst Juan Williams.

"Nothing good comes of this for Barack Obama," concurred ABC News political contributor Cokie Roberts.

Six weeks after controversial video clips of sermons by Obama's former pastor splashed across the national media, Wright is now speaking out publicly in an interview on PBS. Wright will also be speaking to the NAACP on Sunday and will be in Washington D.C. on Monday addressing the National Press Club.

The controversial pastor is speaking up as Obama heads into the crucial Indiana and North Carolina primaries.

"If you're with the Barack Obama campaign this morning, you're pulling your hair out," said Williams.

[truth2power]

22. Did you really expect anything else from the Corporate Media? n/t

[MADem]

35. Well, voters are wired into that corporate media.

The entire evolution wasn't helpful.

[Lady-Damai]

23. Why are you stalking positive Rev. Wright threads?

It's quite clear you are not an Obama supporter.
I want McClinton supporters to understand something.

OBAMA SUPPORTERS will always be OBAMA SUPPORTERS! I know who I want as the next president. No person or media will *change* my position on this issue. You can spend all day going around circles spinning Rev. Wright words. It's not going *change* any Obama supporters mind. If you didn't like Obama in the beginning of this campaign nothing will *change* your mind. It annoys me how some Obama supporters are allowing rabid McClinton supporters to bully them. Everyone is entitled to feel certain way about things. But, don't try to push your negativity on me. I don't go around pushing my opinions on McClinton supporters. Obama is not going to win McClinton supporters because of Hillary Clinton. Nice *HOPEFUL* Obama supporters can try to be all *kumbaya* about it but the TRUTH is McClintonites will never join the Obama express.

Obama has to focus on winning support from the undecided voters. I hate to write this....but these ppl are usually the ones who are easily influenced by negativity. Obama's team has to figure out how to reach undecided voters without using negative tactics like Clinton and Granpa McWar.

[MADem]

33. You're on POST Twenty here

and, assuming you aren't a sock puppet, you have a LOT to learn.

And further you have one hell of a nerve calling me a STALKER.

I got news for you Lady-Damai, there's no "rule" about who can participate in a thread. And calling someone a STALKER for so doing is against DU rules.

Get with the program. This is not ABOUT "Obama supporters will always be Obama supporters." You can get THAT shit in the OBAMA forum. GD-P is open to EVERYONE who is a DU member, not just the people you want to "permit."

This is a DISCUSSION board--not an AMEN chorus. If you think it's the latter, you're in the wrong place.

Quit with the gatekeeping, and cut the crap.

[Lady-Damai]

36. If my previous post is AGAINST Du rules...

Please moderator delete it.


No, sir I'm not a sock puppet. I don't need to learn anything from you. Yes, I do have a lot of nerve. ;)

I didn't call you a stalker. I said you were stalking the two positive threads about Rev.Wright. Maybe I *miswrote*....it should have been *trolling* instead of *stalking*. Does that sound better?

Yes, Everyone is free to participate wherever they want. I'm not stopping you. But, could we at least try to be original?


It seemed to me that you were repeating the same things over and over. I just wanted you to know. ;) Since, this is DISCUSSION board.

Dude...take a chill pill.

[MADem]

37. This isn't a "chill pill" issue. Personal attacks are inappropriate.

To use the argument that you used is absurd. It's like me running around yelling that I saw so and so screwing a pig, but heavens-ta-betsy, "I" didn't call so and so a pigfucker!

Distinctions without differences don't fly. You were out of line. Worry about your own issues, make your points, and stop trying to gatekeep content by characterizing other contributors unfairly.

If you don't like what people say, you don't want to actually discuss opposing points of view, and you're looking for a feelgood, groovy, no controversy experience, use that handy LALALALALA I CAN'T HEEEAR YOU IGNORE feature, that enables you to strip any and all opposing views from your screen, to be replaced by subject lines that say IGNORED. It makes for a very pleasant and boring board, too!

[Lady-Damai]

38. Who are you to tell me I was out of line?

I'm confused on how bestiality would be ever used to make a point. :puke:

I never said I didn't like other ppls opinions. I never told you to stop coming to this thread. I only wanted to read original opinions. Is that too hard to ask? Maybe this DISCUSSION board is only for regurgitated opinions? :think:

If you really feel that I ATTACKED you unfairly...bring it up to moderators.

[MADem]

39. The point is, you can be crude, but you can't be PERSONALLY crude.

And you can't PERSONALLY attack. My example was NOT "personal"--go back and READ IT.

When you said I was stalking, without coming right out and using the STALKER word, you did the equivalent of calling me a pigfucker, without directly doing it.

Can't anyone read for comprehension anymore? Are you nuance challenged?

Further, when you accuse people of stalking, you are as much as saying that their opinion is unwelcome on the thread. THAT's the "regurgitated opinions" aspect of your post. You appeared to be desirous of shutting down discussion.

I prefer to confront directly. Why should I fink you out to the moderators? I haven't seen you behaving like an asshole before, to my knowledge, anyway. How could you, since you're "new" here?

I recommend you read the rules -- you can swear all you want, but you can't personally attack people.

[panAmerican]

25. People need to grow a spine instead of being afraid of RW MSM's "take" on things

Yes, that may mean deferred gratification, but we can't be cowards!!!!

[MADem]

34. It's not about spine growing or fear, either. That's not my point.

I'm talking about what "is" in the context of upcoming primary contests. You're talking about a sunny future and a brighter day.

You're not going to shift perception in a week or two.

[Djinn]

43. why should people censor themselves

in case it hurts some politician? Wrights words suggest that while he might be personally fond of Obama, he sees little difference between war and oppression under a Democratic administration and the same under Republicans.

Why should he temper what he says?

I'm not sure I get why you're so worked up about it?

[Dhalgren]

45. Excellent point, Djinn! Spot-on!

I wish I could Rec posts!

:applause:

[MADem]

48. Well, he hasn't has he? But if it were me, and I supported someone, and

my presence became "problematic," I'd do the "team player" thing and not become THE STORY a week or two before a key primary.

That's just me. He didn't feel he had to do that. That's his call. He's certainly not censoring or tempering.

He's doing his thing, and we'll see how it plays out. I don't think he's HELPING.

See, your queston I'm not sure I get why you're so worked up about it? is why I just don't bother with this place much lately. I'm not "worked up." I see something, and I'd like to discuss it. Instead, I get "You're worked up, you hate Obama, you're a racist, fuck you, invective, invective, invective." Now, I'm not saying YOU are the one tossing the muddy chunks of crap, but that's what I get whenever I want to discuss an issue--there IS no discussion. You are either a Rah Rah Cheerleader, or an Asshole. There's no debate, discussion or conversation anymore.

[Jed Dilligan]

26. One of the few good things about this primary season

has been the opportunity to learn about this great American.

:patriot:

Rev. Wright, the little finger on your left hand has done more for your country than all of your detractors combined.

[jesus_of_suburbia]

30. I don't. I don't like many preachers though. Most are full of sh*t

Organized religion is for idiots who can't deal with life.


I expect idiot Republicans to worship their religious leaders,,,, but it's really embarassing for Dems to embrace a religious nut.


Have a good day.

[Lady-Damai]

31. Thanks for your enlightenment ......

Well, I find it embarrassing that another human being is forcing his life choices on me. If you don't believe in organized religion then good for you. Just because others don't share the same views as you....doesn't make them idiots.

[DB1]

40. So do I.

[bleever]

41. Feed the hungry, assist the poor, fight oppression...

Hannity would be leaping to decry Jesus's "anti-Roman" statements.

The slander of Rev. Wright (who was quoting a Republican about "chickens coming home to roost") is a despicable thing, and I hope that the internet allows us to shine light on the dark motives of people who want to use this against Obama.

[Djinn]

42. I find the primaries

a ridiculous circus that pits 2 identical positions against each other for the right to fight against an ever so slightly different position. It's like a party with really expensive decorations, a great band, fine food that someone forgot to invite guests to.

That said I clearly haven't paid much heed to any news item that mentions HC or BO so perhaps I missed something pertinent but I'm at a total loss as to what was controversial in the Rev's words.

It is only the peculiar unquestioning belief in American supremacy that casts his words in a negative, racist or demagogic light.

Had Obama backed the Rev's words, if he openly acknowledged that YES the US has bombed the absolute crap out of innocent people ALL OVER THE WORLD FOR DECADES whilst never "batting an eye". That YES the US has been the world's greatest terrorist for decades, then I'd actually believe he deserved the aura of change he has assumed.

[texasleo]

44. He can't fuck off quickly enough.

[Karenina]

47. Why do you say that?

:shrug:

[Dhalgren]

46. I like Reverend Wright a hell of a lot more than I like

either Obama or Clinton. Wright is talking about real American history, in line with Howard Zinn. How can anyone have a problem with Wright's opinions if they admit that Zinn's history is correct? I support Rev. Wright above either Democratic candidate; he's telling the truth, the other two - not so much...