Jeremiah Wright's 2003 "War on Iraq IQ Test" underscores that the now-infamous Wright clips playing on television were neither isolated outbursts nor mere efforts at being "provocative," as Obama described the post-9/11 tirade to the New York Times last April. (People didn't much note this at the time because a) the Times didn't directly quote from the sermon and b) seeing/hearing the rhetorical power--and anger--of Wright's rhetoric takes it to a different and jarringly visceral level.) It's also clear that the question of whether Obama was present for those particular sermons now in the news isn't really the issue. Wright's oft-iterated political worldview, which apparently includes the belief that the US created AIDS to keep the Third World in poverty, should be quite apparent to anyone who knows him as well as Obama does.

Where does this leave us? There are two separate issues here. One is political, and that one's not too ambiguous: This is really bad news for Obama, both in the primary and if he makes it to the general. He's worked successfully to escape the image of the "angry black man," and here he is linked to that image in the most emotionally searing way.

The second issue is how we should feel, normatively, about the fact that Obama maintained ties with Wright, even after presumably realizing that he held views Obama now calls deplorable. I'm not prepared to render judgment on that here. But I do worry that this lays bare a very grim truth: That even middle-class black American culture is more angry and alienated than most whites understand, and that our country is simply not yet at the point where even an ostensibly post-racial black candidate can escape that dynamic entirely. (Indeed not only was Wright perfectly acceptable to Obama and his Chicago circle, but it seems likely that it would have been difficult for Obama to separate himself from the preacher had he wanted to, lest he be accused of not being an "authentic" member of the south side black community.) In other words, what's happening here is far bigger than the particulars of Obama and Wright, it's about cultural dissonance that was going to bubble up one way or another. And as a colleague put it to me today, in terms I hope are too pessimistic: "It makes me think it's going to be at least another generation before we see a black man elected president." If Obama can prove him wrong then he really may be a world-historical figure.


P.S. On the Clinton campaign conference call this morning, her team refused to touch the Wright story. I assume the Clintonites feel the story is causing Obama  plenty enough trouble without their encouragement; nor do they want to risk being accused of further race-baiting.

Meanwhile a pro-Hillary friend wrote me today saying this is why calls to force Clinton out of the race are premature. In politics, lighting can always strike.

Photo: Trinity United Church of Christ

I'm with Senator Obama on this one. I want to move beyond the issue of race and focus on getting our troops out of Iraq and fixing our damaged economy.

It's time to move forward and make some real progress. Let's move beyond the Clintons and the Bushes. I'm suffering from Clinton/Bush fatigue big time.

This is good news, I think. I hope that Obama can bring intelligence and reason into this discussion on race. I also hope the speech is frank and to the point. Race relations in America remains a hot button issue. We all need to deeply reflect on this issue and come to the ultimate conclusion that we all going through the same ups and downs as a nation, regardless of race!

Hopefully Obama can explain why he belongs to a racist and separatist church, and how he didn't know what was going on in that church. Hopefully he can also explain why his pastor, good friend, and mentor seems to think all of the blacks problems are because of "Whitey". Once done with all that, maybe Obama can explain why he says he believes his judgment is better then other peoples, even though he can't even figure out what's doing on in his own church.

Good for him. I'm sure it will be a very eloquent speech filled with substance and heart-felt passion. Can you imagine Hillary giving a speech about race, lol. She could bring Bill and they could both do a real screw up job of it.

Its about time that he brought up the dialogue.

He has not spoken of race and yet it has been a factor used against him. It is a constant factor that has existed as taboo in this nation for hundreds of years. If he can lay the issue to rest by exposing it into the light, this could truly be a new chapter in the American Story.

ATTENTION OBAMA: No body believes you anymore.

Drop out now.

How stupid do you think we are?

you expect us to believe that for 20 years you didn't know about your pastors views?It wasn't until you decided to run for president that you found out?

If its true that you didn't know then we don't need a President that is that Stupid.

I definately think that the issue needs to be addressed. I think many people fear the unknown and want to know what can be done to keep this country moving in the right direction in regards to our 'melting pot' vs. 'mixing bowl' culture. I hope that Mr. Obama will also be sensitive to the fact that race does play a role in this election - it is not a non-issue. It is an issue that affects us all and one that we should embrace. I think many of Obama's supporters are doing this already - some putting more emphasis on this than on the issues at hand - by supporting his candidacy with such vigor and emotion due to the desire to show the rest of the world that we have, in fact, overcome racial divides in this country.

I predict this will be a master stroke for the Senator. A turning point of sorts.

OMG more WORDS from the the guy with zero judgement!

Just Words from the church goer and for 20 years had no IDEA his pastor was a racist.
 Just words!
Only WORDS!
His wife is not  proud to be an American?
What are the WORDS she has heard for 20 years?
We have heard ENOUGH of hope and change and all BO'S EMPTY Words.
Does Deval Patrick have some new words for his friend?
Does Uncle WRIGHT have some new WORDS for OBAMA?

Although I support Senator Obama, I have to question whether this is the right time for him to be making this speech.  Is there any way to play this that doesn’t look like he is criticizing Senator Clinton or that won’t give Fox News another chance to play that unfortunate video of Reverend Wright?  The democrats don’t need any more excuses for divisiveness right now.

I hope Senator Obama is getting good advice on this, and not from Mark Penn.

GOObama!!! Why is that Clinton gets a whole page written on her lies and the only thing you can come up with for Obama is 1 frational sentence??? What the hey??? Although I would like to hear the speech. I hope he can put to rest fears (some) white americans have about him after Rev.Wright got put on blast. although I would like to tell all you good white folks...... Many african American church pastors will speak out about racial inequality in such a way. They get fired up and have wild gestures and firey lyrics while the congregation says amen and jumps out of thier seats. that is what makes black churches so much fun to go to (not the racial stuff just the dramatics of it all.
race needs to be addresses in this country on many levels. We should not run away from the scary dialogue, but ask ourselves what happened to this individual in thier lifetime that they hold such beliefs.
Also twocanpete:
Here are a few of the things that the ‘Reverend’ Wright accused the United Sates of:
1. No. 1 killer in the world.
2. importing of drugs
3. exporting of guns
4. training of professional killers
5. killing women and children
6. put [Nelson] Mandela in prison
7. supported apartheid
8. believe in white supremacy and black inferiority…
9. supported Zionism shamelessly while ignoring the Palestinians
10. care nothing about human life if the end justifies the means
11. started the AIDS virus12. making sure that Third World people live in grinding poverty

Some of what he says has validity. If you take away the angry ranting and insert rational conversation it is kinda ture. America definately executes more people. some of which are innocent. a lot of which are black. We do have hired assasins and lots of htem. We did nothing to go against aparthied and why would we...we were a segregated society. who could argue that america has beleived in white supremacy. This is the nation that called blacks 2/3 of a person for voting purposes all the while enslaving them. America is zionist. Some Jews do not even support Isreal as a stae. And there were people living there for generations when we came in and decided to make it Isreal again. we have killed way more innocent people in Iraq than the terrorist killed in 9/11 and I do beleive that the terrorists did that not just b/c we are america, but b/c our government had done something to piss them off!!! Oh yeah we do import a lot of drugs, America loves to get high and forget that we are a little messed up and we do export a lot of guns. some of which end up in the hands of terrorists.  So maybe we do not like the way REv. Wright speaks, but he speaks the truth.....

Who cares about race anyway! I care about Iraq, the economy, the environment, health care, taxes, etc. But, I know that for some, the only way to win is to play the race card...too bad the Omabamorons are playing right into the race card deck their candidate dealt.

wonder if he'll call Wright before the speech to tell him not to worry about anything he says because it will only be rhetoric.

'..."We all care about children. But does she deserve
credit for SCHIP? No - Teddy does, but she
doesn't."...'

hmmmmmmmm ?


'...The point that I am making is that her claims of
the nature of that experience are overstated. The fact is she did not sit in on national security meetings.
She did not have a security clearance. She did not
attend meetings in the situation room. She conducted
no negotiations. She did not manage any part of the
national security bureaucracy. She did not have her
own national security staff. That's the fact....'

Other than THAT, she had 'experience'



From Huff Post:

'... Bill's Ex-Counsel: Hillary Is "Misleading The
American Public"

Huffington Post
March 14, 2008 12:30 PM


Craig Gregg, former counsel to Bill Clinton and now
Obama supporter, sat down for an interview with
National Journal. His comments reflected more strongly a memo he had penned last week, suggesting that Hillary's claims of experience were overblown. An excerpt from the interview:

Q: But was that experience, do you think, that is --
having a lot of influence with advisers, giving
private advice to her husband -- was that experience
that has helped prepare her to be commander in chief?

Craig: Oh, I don't doubt that. The point that I am
making is that her claims of the nature of that
experience are overstated. The fact is she did not sit in on national security meetings. She did not have a security clearance. She did not attend meetings in the situation room. She conducted no negotiations. She did not manage any part of the national security bureaucracy. She did not have her own national security staff. That's the fact. Now the experience that she did have -- watching and sometimes sitting in the room where discussions were going on and also meeting heads of state and foreign ministers -- that is good experience, and it's invaluable to understanding how the world works when it comes to international organizations as well as international negotiations.

The Clinton responded quickly, noting a contradiction
between this statement and other statements. Only last week Gregg claimed:

When your entire campaign is based upon a claim of
experience, it is important that you have evidence to
support that claim. Hillary Clinton's argument that
she has passed "the Commander- in-Chief test" is
simply not supported by her record.
The comments by Gregg come at a time when the Clinton
camp is facing increasing scrutiny over the former
First Lady's record.

The Boston Globe reported this morning that Sen.
Clinton had less to do with the passage of the SCHIP
program in the early 90s, and cites Republican Orrin
Hatch who, with Sen. Ted Kennedy, helped spear the
legislation:

"The White House wasn't for it. We really roughed them up" in trying to get it approved over the Clinton administration's objections, Hatch said in an
interview. "She may have done some advocacy
[privately] over at the White House, but I'm not aware of it."

"I do like her," Hatch said of Hillary Clinton. "We
all care about children. But does she deserve credit
for SCHIP? No - Teddy does, but she doesn't." ...

Excellent idea; might put the whole Wright issue to rest until Hillary brings it up again. Obama will deliver a speech that will help unite people from all races and cultures. He's done it before, he'll do it again. Hope there will be coverage on it.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.

—That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,

—That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.

—Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.


—But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.

Change We Can Believe In
Obama ‘08

This will be a speech for the history books. I look forward to it with respect. BTW, I heard Michelle Obama's speech at Villanova University on TV. She is so impressive.                                        Age:54    Race: white    Voting for: Barack Obama

You couldn't have said it any better Kevin.  

This is exactly what I was hoping he would do. I blogged about this at Daily Kos the other day. http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/3/15/203514/051/358/477634

Glad to see him doing it. :)

DELEGATE UPDATE PLEASE... OBAMA GOT A NEW ENDORSEMENT FROM ILLINOIS....

Oh my God, is Obama trying to clean-up his mess.  The only thing that he could say in his speech is that "I am no longer a member of the Trinity Church and completely dissolved his relationship with Pastor Wright.  If Obama is not able to say that then I recommend he drop-out of the presidential race.  Obama cannot play both side of the aisle.  Obama needs to practice what he preaches.  Obama said “words matter”.  

At this point, I am still worried about the influence this man have with Obama.  This is his pastor for 20 years.  Obama said this is his mentor and that he is like an uncle.  The one thing that I do know is that I would not in any shape or form be associated with that type of pastor; and I am a black woman.  I would not subject my family to that type of pastor, especially my children.  It is very difficult to imagine Pastor Wright coming to the White House for Sunday morning prayer and sleeping in the Lincoln bedroom that is very sick.  Call if you want to talk (916) 616-9536.

This speech better be on the level of a Kennedy or a MLK. This speech better be the best speech of his life.

I have comment to kevin,fl:

the "angry black man" - Who's moniker is this? I do not believe that Obama was ever escaping this raciallu overtoned moniker... I disagree with you when you state that we do not understand the chasm between racial relations. Rev. Wright portrays that civil right generation. He is a man who still bears the scars from this movement, he was part of that movement, on these grounds, I understand his anger and his alignment. I am from a different generation and I think that as each generation comes to pass, this chasm is filled more and more. The problem is that the civil rights generation is still propagating this anger unto future generations. Just as Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, and Alan Keyes, he is nothing more than a peddler of dissention and racial divide. We as a people (We the people) need to move forward, not backward. There has been much progress in filling the void and healing the scars. But we need to do more. Above all, all races, all religions, and all ethnicities in this country need to turn their back on such rhetoric and not perpetuate these pains by legitimizing such speakers, whether they are white, black, or brown.

I am white, male, 51. I read "Dreams of My Father", by Obama. I voted and caucused for him.

Like most black men raised in America, Obama went through an identity crisis, experienced real racism for many years, and finally came to terms with it and moved past it. The racism still exists in America, but I think Obama understands it and knows how to move politics beyond it; and I honestly do not think Hillary or McCain can do that because they haven't been on the receiving end. What they know (and I know, and whites in general know) about racism is the equivalent to the difference between watching a fistfight and being in one.

My vote for Obama has little to do with his race; I am voting for Obama because he is intelligent, his judgement is sound, he understands how to negotiate successfully, and he has given up years of financial security to help others. Hillary and McCain do not hold a candle to him, they are not trustworthy and are both in the pockets of the wealthy and connected.

I can easily forgive Obama his youthful racial angst and anger, I sincerely doubt I could have handled it any better. We will hear what he has to say NOW.

The speech didn't work for Romney.  

Will it just bring unneeded attention to Obama?  

Kevin, FL
Are you addicted to scandals? If so, read books on presidential history. Don't forget to read about all the white cruelities committed against people of color (Asians, Blacks, Hispanics, Native Americans, etc). Yes, I am not shunning from this statement, plus I am a white graduate student of history. My point is that before you rush to judgment against black Americans (I once sued to call my black buddy the n word when I was a teenager and now I regret for that), you need to understand why those people are doing that and that. Simply being outraged by what one individual of the other social or racial group says but look the other way when one person within our own group says or does the same is something that needs to end. We are living in a world where, as globalization expands, we have to get along with all cultures and seeing them as part of humanity, not something as if they were products of nonhumans.

I am glad to see Obama is confronting this head on.  And knowing Obama he will take this and turn it into a plus.  Doing this also upsets Hillary's plan to split the party along racial lines and to marginalize him.  It will also upset the rabid wingers who want to twist anything a democrat says or does and use it to promote hate.
It's time for democrats to confront the issue as well.  When they begin to use as a weapon in the heat of a primary and turn ugly and bigoted out of anger and passion, then it's time to address this in our own party.  We point fingers at republicans but, in truth, democrats have been behaving alot worse than the republicans and have become shameful in their behavior.

I am and have been a Hillary supporter and will be . But this makes me so sad. I am proud of Hillary for keeping hands off and makeing her supporters to also.I have seen 2 or 3 that were baited to dig in and they outright refused.I really thought we were so beyond this.I was so angry that he was takeing us back decades and have said so.I cannt believe mainstream blacks feel so angry and mean.Maybe he has made this so but I cannt believe they were.I am so mad he could do this to our country. Not to mention our party.I think we can heal this but he needs to step down take a deep breath and think a bit before he tries again. I believ he can try again and will do well but this has to heal first.There is really nothing he can say. He doles out just what he thinks he has to.Just what he thinks has been found out and his wife is so anti american I think he needs to give this country time.I am not mongering or trying to be mean but my lord its been one thing on the other. This is the last straw .At least for me.

WHEN EVERY REPUBLICAN PRESIDENT IN THIS COUNTRY HAS GIVEN A SPEECH AT EVERY RACE,GAY, AMERICAN BASHING INTOLERANT CHURCH ACROSS THIS LAND I DO NOT UNDERSTAND WHAT THE BIG DEAL IS!BOB JONES,JERRY FARWELL,PAT ROBERTSON TO NAME A FEW SEEM TO COME TO MY MIND.OH I FORGOT THEY ARE HEROS ON THE RIGHT AND ARE ASK TO DINE AT THE WHITE HOUSE.

It is more than guilt by association!!  I am a black person and I do not believe Obama's explanation.  Come-on, American people are not stupid.   Obama has been associated with this man for 20 years and he has only heard one or two issues that have been inflammatory.  Okay, say that is all Obama has heard; I would say that even one or two statements is just one or two, too many and should have left the church when he heard the one or two statements.   Obama campaign is based on, out with the old and in with the new.  He has lead this holier than thou attitude for several months.  However, now he is trying to play both side of the table.  Do not take me for a fool.  It is downright insulting.  This goes against everything that I have been teaching my children; and that is be yourself, treat people the way you want to be treated, and do not look at the color of someone skin because this world is not made-up of all black people.   We need to look pass color and be judge based on you as a person.  There is nothing Obama can do that will  make me believe that he has not been influenced by this man.  This comments, this so call preacher has made is by far worse than any comment President Clinton has every said.  This man absolutely condemned American and white America.   I am a black person and I see it, Obama is no different than any other politician.  He is not the person that we think he is trying to portray, which is the so called uniter.  America, don't be fooled.  I voted for Senator Clinton and will continue to support Senator Clinton.

Obama, is continuing to say one thing and does another.  He has shown on several occasions that he lacks judgment.  He had said himself, that words matter!!  Also, do not forget the Rezko issue; remember he said that Rezko only gave about a 100k towards his campaign.  Now, he says that Rezko has raised more money than he originally thought.  What else is going to be-coming out of the closet?  This is just darn right scary.  The media cannot just let this go like they have with other issues with Obama.

This is sad. The media had a lynch style media fest with this issue. Im a white christian male. I will not change my mind in regards to Mr. Obama. He is a honest man. I belive that he will have the best intrest for all Americans. I hope tomarrow he can but this all behind him. Its good to talk about this issue in the open. He is correct when saying we need to bring diologue to solve issues. Barack your wife is a classy example of the human spirit. She is someone with class. I admire her. She is brilliant. And will make a fine first lady.  Barack you will have my vote.

I look forward to what Obama says. Hopefully he will inspire us to rise above this. Race issues drag this country down and it's time to focus on the war and the economy or were going to be in a depression.

This is a very delicate matter, and I have faith in him to address it properly.

It is well documented that Obama was advised by Wright to distance himself from him for the purposes of the campaign.  Obama chose not to do this.  No speech about race, after his campaign has labeled critics racist, is going to matter at this point.  He made his choices.  Now he has to live with them.  

I wish Senator Obama the very best on his speech Tuesday. However, after watching so-called commentators all weekend, I just don't know.

Again, we're hearing the same trash, especially from the right. My they are nasty, hateful people. And they have the audacity to call someone a racist?

David Gergen seems to be the only thoughtful one with a bit of perspective on this issue.

It's called maturity.

I'm very happy that Sen. Obama will be addressing these issues tomorrow.  

I think we all knew that the clips showing the theatrics of Rev. Wright were going to affect the polls, somewhat. Sen. Obama has denounced Rev. Wright's views- not only by stating so, but by his "ACTIONS" in regards to his benevolent leadership in the community and thru his legislative votes, his devotedness and commitment to his country, friends and family. Sen. Obama has not and does not live his life as an angry African American man who gloats at our tragedies, and wishes destruction to our country. I would like everyone who doubts the integrity of Sen. Obama to go back and read up on his history. I think you will come to the conclusion that Sen. Obama is a man of utmost character. I also think after the MSM stops plastering Rev. Wright's rants over and over again, people will calm down, reality will set in, and level heads will prevail. Sen. Obama is still the best candidate to be President of the "UNITED" States of America.

YES WE CAN!

Perhaps Obama will explain why he dis-invited Wright to his presidential announcement last year telling him his sermons “can get a little rough” and could cause him controversy.

Yet he pretended as if he’s never heard him spew this hatred when he appeared on the cable news shows on Friday.

Not only he is (obviously) lying, you really have to wonder why he would subject his young daughters to the ranting and raving of such a hateful and divisive force as Wright.  Maybe he should have them re-baptized to expunge the hateful influence of a nut like Wright.

He also needs to explain to Jewish voters why a man who endorses the views of Louis Farrakhan is his spiritual mentor.

So much for the uniter - Obama has actually widened the racial divide against Americans with this sorry, pathetic story.

My GOP friends are absolutely giddy about this situation because they know that Obama is now completely un-electable against McCain.

Reality Check... That is what I also found out and am glad you did fact checking.
I have been posting asking readers to wake up and do their own reality checks, but I still read  on First Read  very ignorant and hateful posts. I was especially astonished by people calling one of the candidates "racist" or "terrorist" (no, Hillary and Obama are neither racists nor terrorists or linked to any terrorists). It is a sad reality that bigots still lurk within the Democratic Party (I am an independent) but are very visible on the Internet. Perhaps they should found their own party to represent their ignorant and hateful views.
In light of all the scandals with the Catholic church and even all denominations of Christianity itself (my friend teaches Greek history and western religions), I could not comprehend the Rev. Wright issue, which overshadows the very fact that there are thousands of scandalous and highly controversial religious leaders. The statements and/or views of other church members or leaders of the house of worship of which you are a part should not be determinants of your true selves.

kevin,fl (Sent Monday, March 17, 2008 2:44 PM):

kevin:

The Clinton camp has nothing to say about the Rev. Wright issue due to the many ghosts in their closet and the fact Hillary can't really criticize another for the company a person keeps, past or present, when she is keeping very close company to a person who looked you straight in the eye on national television and as a Presdient of the United States lied to you when he stated "I did not have sex with that woman".

So spare us your long dissertations and your comments that this country is not ready for a Black President. Do whites have the exclusive rights to this office, those who who remain close, and who use as the closes of advisors another who violated the trust of the Amecian people. Perhaps this country is not yet ready for a white female President who is married to and seeks counsel from a white male who violates trust and lies when he/she feel there is a political advantage to be gained. Wherein lies the biggest disadvantage. Being connected to a minister who makes outlandish and divisive comments, or being married to a person who will be part of that office and who looks you straight in the eye and lies to you?

Be careful about playing to loudly the "judging another based on what company they keep" arguement. You just may be digging a hole for Hillary's candidacy.

The 12 Step Obama Cult Withdrawal Program has just opened. From where I am, I can see thousands of people lined up. They look dazed and confused.

Other than the AIDS thing, everything he said is true.  Too bad so many can't accept the truth.

Our actions in the middle east over the last two decades is what fueled the anti-American hatred that led to 9/11.  Bin Laden's main hatred of the US was our continued presense in Saudi Arabia (our military bases).  

Some of you are so naive and blind if you don't see the racism and sexism that are still strong in our country.  I just love how all you Hillary supporters are making such a huge deal over this, clearly you are just expressing outrage as a means to win.  Truth be damned.  

Funny thing is that if Hillary was found to have a long time friend that gave speeches on sexism in America, and how men run this country and how women have been treated, how men can't understand what its like to live as a woman in a man's world, blah blah.  You'd all be supporting what that person says and how it's the truth.

Too bad you'd be hypocrites.  BOTH speeches would be true.  But damn the truth.  You love to spout how blacks are racist by supporting Obama in large numbers just because of race, yet neglect to see that large numbers of women support her just because she's a woman.

"Only winning matters" - Hillary Clinton

'...There is something stomach-turning about the
Clintonian strategy for winning the nomination...'


'...precisely the sort of cynical paranoid post-modern solipsism of people who will say anything whatsoever to get what they want and then act stung when called on it. It borders on sociopathy...'

'...Every day, one is struck by the (one-sided)
viciousness in this fight...'

WHAT ?
The CLINTONS ? VICIOUS ?


'...Huffington Post

Character as Destiny: The Clintonian Narcissism of
2008

There is something stomach-turning about the
Clintonian strategy for winning the nomination.
Underneath that which is so disgusting, however, there are little passion plays playing out -- about the state of the nation, and the state of its soul-sick psyche. While there is no overt reason to conclude that they are racists, (if that sentence seems luke-warm, take a look at Hillary's own concession that Obama is not a Muslim), there is every possible reason to label the Clintons opportunists of the very first order. Bill Clinton was not a racist when he mouthed off in South Carolina; he was a desperate power-monger, flailing. Bob Johnson from BET doesn't really think Obama is a drug fiend -- it was just "an opportunity". Albeit a rather disgusting one. Howard Wolfson doesn't really think that Obama is like Ken Starr; it was just the sort of blind ad hominem news-cycle nonsense likely to distract from the actual, the real, the true; in other words -- it was opportunism. That is their true, true heartfelt religion. "Campaign" in Florida and then deny it?

Fine: It's all fair game. Or the cynical suggestion by Senator Clinton that Obama would be a fine VP while at the same time declaring how unready he is seems to me precisely the sort of cynical paranoid post-modern solipsism of people who will say anything whatsoever to get what they want and then act stung when called on it. It borders on sociopathy. And like all opportunists those in Camp Clinton have reached the conclusion that even a scorched earth campaign which devastates the party, vulgarizes the discourse even more than it already is vulgarized, and alienates millions of people who actually have come to hope for real change in this country, is worth the cost of a possible win. Personally, I find it far more likely that the only beneficiary of the Clintonian ugliness
will of course be none other than that half-mad
proponent of hundred-year wars, John McCain of
Arizona, swooping in to the circular firing squad
after the smoke and blood have cleared, so as to
snatch a victory because the Dems cleverly snatched
defeat.

Speaking of half-mad, speaking of snatching defeat --
the Clinton surrogacy of Geraldine Ferraro devolved in to an angry whine on the Today Show this morning. Ms Ferraro seems to think that Senator Obama has been the beneficiary of some sort of post-radical-chic "free-ride", a notion so laughable that it flies in the face of every last bit of information we have about what it means to not be white in America. Every single bit. She doesn't seem like a racist either, actually; merely an embittered ex-candidate and an old school feminist warrior whose legitimate passion has hardened into blindness and bile. (How did the Obama camp play "the race card" when it was she who launched into a dismissal of Senator Obama as "lucky" to be African-American.) I found myself telling the TV that Obama is where he is today in spite of being African-American. Still, Hillary Clinton's campaign seems to tap into something very real in this country
-- the anger that many women carry over the costs
incurred in the fight for gender equality for the last forty years.

Every day, one is struck by the (one-sided)
viciousness in this fight. Six bloody weeks of it to
go? Six weeks of coarsening opportunistic soulless
nastiness. And the effect? Hillary Clinton's
unfavorable rating amongst Obama supporters continues
to rise according to the Wall Street Journal/MSNBC
poll released tonight. The reverse is not true. And
her coalition of white women and white blue-collar
workers is unlikely to surge the way that young people and African-Americans are surging towards Obama. Those Americans -- the African-Americans who have been turned off by politics as usual and by total exclusion, the young who have been so disgusted by war-mongering and corruption so evident in the smug faces of those in power -- finally see in Obama something of the best in themselves, and something to aspire to: Idealism, dignity, hope, matched by strength and stoicism. Matched by a very keen sense of how to work the system.

In the meantime, the country itself needs to be
repaired from inside out. Anti-intellectual,
increasingly amoral, broke, and self-obsessed, a land
of crumbling roads, crumbling dreams, and crumbling
visions of how to care for the needy. A nation filled
with invective and rudeness. (Have you ever seen how
unmannerly the comments on HuffPost can be? If that is a reflection of how people are brought up today, then what is the point?) At the heart of how to repair a nation -- there is one essential ingredient to examine; and that, of course, is character. Over the next six weeks until Pennsylvania, we must think about that; the character of our leaders, of our nation.

Because as Heraclites stated with total clarity --
character IS destiny.

This is ridiculous he ignores his seperatist background with Wright all this time and now that he got caugh he wants to deliver a speach?  Thats not the issue Obama.  The issue is that you try to slide this to the ammerican people "I have never heard Rev. Wright speaks in those terms before".  That's the issue.  You have  seperatist background and you lied for political expediency and no "hope talking" is going to change that.

The Clinton civil war
by kos
Mon Mar 17, 2008 at 10:25:22 AM PDT

Al Giordano, on the laughable Clinton-supporters "strike" of this blog:

   There was always something incongruous about the self-proclaimed “Hillary Bloggers” trying to use Daily Kos for their purposes. DKos has been defined as a meeting ground not for every Democrat, but for the kind that wants to change the party to be more grassroots oriented, adhere to a 50-state strategy, stop the war in Iraq, and blunt the influence of lobbyists, PACs and the neoliberal Democratic Leadership Council (DLC). That’s the glue that has always held the DKos community together and made it so large and strong.

   Given that candidate Clinton is a member of the DLC, voted to authorize the war, accepts federal lobbyist and PAC money, clearly thinks that a lot (if not most) states “don’t matter,” and epitomizes a 1990s style top-down form of doing politics, it’s no surprise that for all of 2007 Clinton never exceeded 11 percent support in the monthly Daily Kos users straw poll.

I would add one more item to the list above -- this site has also been hostile to the corrosive consultant class that gave us our timid and weak party until Howard Dean shook it up in 2004.

Now I'm willing to stipulate that on the consultant front, there's likely not much difference between the Obama and Clinton campaigns (I don't know if it's true, but I assume it is). But on everything else, Clinton fails the test of the guiding principles of this site, and of my first book, Crashing the Gate.

Clinton isn't just a member of the DLC, she's in their leadership. Obama, by the way, repudiated the organization three times (it's a great story, which I tell in my forthcoming book).

Clinton hasn't just rejected a 50-state strategy, she has openly attacked it. CTG has a great quote from former Virginia Governor and future senator Mark Warner on this very topic:

   The Democratic Party is in the upswing in the Mountain West and the South, in places like Montana and Virginia, because Democrats there have made a serious effort to compete for votes everywhere, rather than make a nominal effort to be an "also-ran" outside the Democratic-density areas. As [former Virginia Gov. Mark] Warner asks, how many more times will the Democrats run presidential campaigns where they abandon thirty-three southern and western states and "launch a national campaign that goes after sixteen states and then hope that we can hit a triple bank shot to get to that seventeenth state?"

Well, given Obama's map-changing 50-state mindset, it's clear that the answer to Warner's question is "one more time" if Clinton is the nominee, and "never again" if Obama is the nominee.

Clinton didn't just vote for the Iraq war and refuse to apologize for it, she voted to give Bush the same authority on Iran.

And if we want to talk about which party is the most grassroots-oriented, it's no contest. We've seen it in the caucuses, we've seen it in the netroots, and we saw it in the Iowa county convention this Saturday. The party's activists are busting their butts for Obama, while Clinton's campaign is counting on low-information Democratic voters selecting Clinton based on little more than name ID.

But I could deal with all of that, really, if Clinton was headed toward victory. I see this as a long-term movement, and I've always expected setbacks along the way. Clinton isn't the most horrible person in the world. She's actually quite nice, despite all her flaws, and would make a fine enough president.

If she was winning.

But she's not, and that's the rub.

First of all, the only path to victory for Clinton is via coup by super delegate.

She knows this. That's why there's all the talk about poaching pledged delegates and spinning uncertainty around Michigan and Florida, and laying the case for super delegates to discard the popular will and stage a coup.

Yet a coup by super delegate would sunder the party in civil war.

Clinton knows this, it's her only path to victory, and she doesn't care. She is willing -- nay, eager to split the party apart in her mad pursuit of power.

If the situations were reversed, and Obama was lagging in the delegates, popular vote, states won, money raised, and every other reasonable measure, then I'd feel the same way about Obama. (I pulled the plug early on Dean in 2004.) But that's not the case.

It is Clinton, with no reasonable chance of victory, who is fomenting civil war in order to overturn the will of the Democratic electorate. As such, as far as I'm concerned, she doesn't deserve "fairness" on this site. All sexist attacks will be dealt with -- those will never be acceptable. But otherwise, Clinton has set an inevitably divisive course and must be dealt with appropriately.

To reiterate, she cannot win without overturning the will of the national Democratic electorate and fomenting civil war, and she doesn't care.

That's why she has earned my enmity and that of so many others. That's why she is bleeding super delegates. That's why she's even bleeding her own caucus delegates (remember, she lost a delegate in Iowa on Saturday). That's why Keith Olbermann finally broke his neutrality. That's why Nancy Pelosi essentially cast her lot with Obama. That's why Democrats outside of the Beltway are hoping for the unifying Obama at the top of the ticket, and not a Clinton so divisive, she is actually working to split her own party.

Meanwhile, Clinton and her shrinking band of paranoid holdouts wail and scream about all those evil people who have "turned" on Clinton and are no longer "honest power brokers" or "respectable voices" or whatnot, wearing blinders to reality, talking about silly little "strikes" when in reality, Clinton is planning a far more drastic, destructive and dehabilitating civil war.

People like me have two choices -- look the other way while Clinton attempts to ignite her civil war, or fight back now, before we cross that dangerous line. Honestly, it wasn't a difficult choice. And it's clear, looking at where the super delegates, most bloggers, and people like Olbermann are lining up, that the mainstream of the progressive movement is making the same choice.

And the more super delegates see what is happening, and what Clinton has in store, the more imperative it is that they line up behind Obama and put an end to it before it's too late.

   * ::

Has anyone else noticed that the Clinton campaign has re-introduced race into the campaign ?

PA Gov. Ed Rendell saying a black man can't be elected ?

Geraldine Ferraro's screed about Obama
(coming after the same comments about Jesse Jackson in '88) ?

Now, the Rev Wright issue ?

Look at the paid Clinton posters on this blog....

They're trying to reinforce the race issue

Anything to tear down Obama


The first viable Female candidate for PResident is 'race baiting' the first viable Black candidate for President !!


Hillary Clinton, cold, calculating, dishonest, unethical, deivisive, corrupt and devious

Why is no one in MSM focusing on the fact that Mark Penn of the Clinton campaign and Charlie Black of the McCain campaign work for the same political consulting firm--an obvious conflict of interest that Penn calls "good for business"?

Bush 43 forced Karl Rove to give up such a job in 2000 to avoid precisely this conflict of interest.

Gonna end up as usual, the best presidency lobbyists can buy--and the American people get the shaft.

I love that he's doing the 'Full Romney'.  This has the potential to be one of those 'where were you when' type moments.  And I think it's being done in Philadelphia, a historic city in and of itself.  This is going to be great.  GoBama!

The first comment illustrates the ignorance and bigotry in white society.  As a white, 59 year old male,  I am sickened by those who have such a limited world view.  If Obama is destroyed in this way, I truly hope that McCain is elected.  Our nation deserves to wander in the desert for the evil it is doing to this good man.

The media has shown otself to be nothing more than a bunch of corporate lackeys for fanning the flames of racism in our society.  Where will it end?

What is this nonsense!? Does anyone have any mental capacity left? There is a minister on the staff of the church I attend that I disagree with strongly half the time, but he makes me think, and I respect his right to speak, and what he wants is to make the people of the world better!! It would only be cowardly to distance myself from him in order to "look correct" - but then I don't worry about halfwits raging in self-pious indignation at the stupid idea that whom I associate with means that they and I are EXACTLY alike.

Let me ask what actual EVIDENCE you have to NOT believe Barack's statements that he doesn't agree with everything this man said. Don't tell me what you THINK the association means.

Look at the rest of Barack's life for what he stands for. I want him as my President.

Kevin well said!!!!! As an African-American I do not support the comments made by Pastor Wright, but I wasn't shocked to hear them. That indeed is the underlying issue. White America was indeed shock to hear how a pastor could have a sermon such as that. Growing up in the south..I have heard thru conversations(not at church) similar things voiced in general. I think we are still a ways to go before we elect a African-American to the Presidency. I think to put it bluntly..is that we African-American must lead by example to overcome all forms of prejudices..by not making insane!!!sermons like this one. On the other hand..white America must understand that they are still rooted issues that must be visualized and dealt with..instead of just sweeping it under the rug and saying..."Let's just move on" Doing that is just like when you buy a new rug..and you lift the old rug up and discover you must clean the past dirt up ..be fore you put down the new rug.

Message (please, no HTML tags. Web addresses will be hyperlinked):