So in YOUR mind Wright = Ferraro?
Puleeeeze stop the insanity dude.
Wright is not someone Obama sought as a surrogate. That role was falsely foisted on him.
Gerry, not so much.
You need some help, please seek it now.
Posted by chaz at April 29, 2008 06:39 AMChaz,
Hilarious! Suuuuuuuure, Wright was "falsely foisted" on Obama! Obama had no choice but to attend his services, have Wright do his marriage ceremony, baptize his kids, mention Wright glowingly in one of his books, treat him like a family member and donate tens of thousands to Wright's church. Unlike Ferraro who happened to be a fundraiser for Sen. Clinton who clearly was attached to Sen. Clinton's hip since her birth. You bet.
Posted by eriposte at April 29, 2008 06:55 AMObama had no choice but to attend his services, have Wright do his marriage ceremony, baptize his kids, mention Wright glowingly in one of his books, treat him like a family member and donate tens of thousands to Wright's church.
Ahhh. The good old "guilt by association" game.
And the horrors of Wright? The religion of the slave master is different than the religion of the slave, and the United States created the conditions that helped terrorism flourish. Hmmm. I guess those thoughts are too deep for really shallow people. And there is absolutely no difference in being a paritioner than, say, being on a campaign staff. That's pretty deep, too.
Posted by phidipides at April 29, 2008 07:33 AMFerraro Surrogate
Wright Not a Surrogate
It is not that complicated Eriposte just focus a bit more.
eric in austin
Posted by Ericl at April 29, 2008 07:35 AMThe next thing will be she was in Dallas, LA or in Memphis those dreadful days.
Posted by Kefa at April 29, 2008 08:34 AMNewt G. on "The View" wonders if Wright has it out for Obama after he was "disowned". Wright may just have another agenda. He may be very angry at Barry Obama right now. He just may not want this person to attain the office he seeks. They are joined at the hip as Steve has said. What a soap opera Democrats have this year. Two fine people, the Democrats finest, neither one will back down for the good of the people or party.
Posted by peter at April 29, 2008 08:47 AMHe may be very angry at Barry Obama right now. He just may not want this person to attain the office he seeks.
Or, if you watched Moyers, you might find that Wright is a pretty intelligent guy who loves his country yet is willing to say he is dismayed at some of the things his country as done in the past and at some of the things it still does. To me it's more a question of being informed or remaining ignorant. Many, including many Dems, are choosing the latter.
Posted by phidipides at April 29, 2008 09:03 AMA person has to take the bad with the good.
It worked that way for Sen. Clinton and Ms. Ferraro and so it goes now for Sen. Obama and Rev. Wright. In Chicago politics, Rev. Wright and TUCC offered credibility to Sen. Obama and allowed for a clear demonstration of Christian beliefs. The Rev. was also Sen. Obama's spiritual advisor, which one has to believe confers higher order benefits.
It rarely feels fair when the shoe is placed on the other foot.
Posted by QuitFoolingAround at April 29, 2008 09:08 AMAh yes, eriposte once again displays that "some Obama supporters" rigamarole. Now do I get to write that "some Clinton supporters make harsh comments about Obama", and refer everyone to eriposte?
Per Ferraro: Hillary Clinton said that Ferraro did not speak for the Clinton campaign, and you do not question this. In other words, you implicitly reject the idea that Ferraro was a Clinton "surrogate" (I hate that word.). Please define your criteria for what constitutes a "surrogate". Please tell us who is or is not a "surrogate" for both Clinton and Obama campaigns.
Posted by joel dan walls at April 29, 2008 09:46 AMAh, I just realized that this is eriposte's third Obama-bashing piece today (Tuesday). No day job, then?
Perhaps, eriposte, you could write one more really short piece today, reiterating your support, stated previously on this website, for whomever wins the Democratic nomination.
Posted by joel dan walls at April 29, 2008 09:54 AMAchtung, Obamanists! Eriposte isn't talking about Wright, but rather about your Hypocritical double standards. Please think about what's written here.
Posted by barrybr at April 29, 2008 10:10 AMWTF ERI?
Everything you said about Wright PROVES MY POINT!
Hill brought Gerry in because she is a political operative.
As you noted, Obama's relationship with Wright has always been a PRIVATE one, till he was "foisted" on him by the press and folks like yourself.
My god man, have you no shame??
Posted by chaz at April 29, 2008 10:22 AMmethinks there be more then a wee bit of angst in obamaland...
Posted by dennis at April 29, 2008 10:31 AMjesus fucking christ, how about a post on how the korporate media continues to ignore McCain's Rev. Hagee (the Catholic Church is the Great Whore) while focusing on Rev. Wright?
Posted by Gay Veteran at April 29, 2008 11:00 AMchaz:
you're wrong in your distinction btw ferraro and wright. obama put wright on his campaign as his spiritual advisor. he yanked him later for political expediency but facts are facts. keep spinning baby.
wright is a pathetic ignorant fool. just as bad as the white versions - falwell, dobson, robertson, etc. he's only getting a pass because it's the 'black church', and somehow, that's supposed to make it different when you spew racist ignorance.
i just looooove the resurrection of the bell curve in modern educational theory, don't you?
Posted by at April 29, 2008 11:06 AMjesus fucking christ, how about a post on how the korporate media continues to ignore McCain's Rev. Hagee (the Catholic Church is the Great Whore)
You mean like this one?
Posted by at April 29, 2008 11:10 AMSo "Facts are facts"?
Yeah right, Wright is "getting a pass"!
Were you under sniper fire when you came up with that "fact"?
Cause that would be about the only believable excuse for such a preposterous statement, fer christ sake.
Posted by Chaz at April 29, 2008 11:18 AMLooks to me that the Obamas will be looking for another church now. What does this say about Barry? Attends there for 20 years and leave because of politics. Now he saying the guy who spoke on Monday is not the guy I sat in church listening to. The only thing that changed is Barry running for president. Or did Rev. Wright change by the exposure?
Posted by peter at April 29, 2008 11:20 AMWhat is it with Hil these days?
You know, the wide eyed frantic look, spewing hysterical nonsense like 'we will obliterate Iran'.
Has she become unglued?? Ya think!
Posted by at April 29, 2008 11:24 AM...spewing hysterical nonsense like 'we will obliterate Iran'.
Maybe someone should ask Obama what he'd do if Iran attacked Israel with nuclear weapons?
What do you think he'd say? Invite the mullah's for tea? Catch the first flight to Tehran for a little face time?
Posted by snark at April 29, 2008 11:36 AMNo Wright came unhinged. "He's the man." He's so full of himself now. Barry Obama now sees that...it took from 1992 to now to see his error. Shame it took so long.
Posted by peter at April 29, 2008 11:41 AMAnd she did not say "we WILL obliterate Iran". She said they need to know that we "can obliterate Iran". There's a bit of a difference.
She said that if Iran attacks Israel she will respond with "massive retaliation".
Obama said he would respond "forcefully and swiftly".
Wow!
Posted by snark at April 29, 2008 11:44 AMSo you're saying Iran doesn't know they could be obliterated??
How insightful!
Posted by at April 29, 2008 11:58 AMSo you're saying Iran doesn't know they could be obliterated??
How insightful!
No, I'd imagine that they do know they could be obliterated which just highlights all your faux outrage over Clinton's comments as the pathetic whining that it is.
saw obama speak on rev wright..he was very good and seemed sincere
Posted by dennis at April 29, 2008 12:05 PMJust a hint snark: somethings are better left unsaid.
Hope this helps out in your tedious daily life!
Posted by at April 29, 2008 12:25 PMJust a hint snark: somethings are better left unsaid.
Like your original inaccurate comment for instance.
Posted by muckcat at April 29, 2008 12:31 PM"I got to give a special shout-out to my pastor. The guy who puts up with me, counsels me, listens to my wife complain about me. He's a friend and a great leader, not just in Chicago but all throughout the country. So please, everybody, give an extraordinary welcome to my pastor, Dr. Jeremiah Wright Jr."
Posted by barry at April 29, 2008 01:06 PMJust so we're clear, my comment was not
ON THE WORLD STAGE.
What next, a chorus of "Bomb Bomb Iran"??
How presidential.............
Posted by at April 29, 2008 01:26 PMJust so we're clear, my comment was not
ON THE WORLD STAGE.
Yes, I guess that was fortunate for you. Imagine the embarrassment.
The weird thing about Ferraro was that her comment was almost exactly what Obama had said about himself when he first came to the Senate. Time magazine, I think it was. He said he wouldn't be anything 'special' if he wasn't black, in that he wouldn't have a book deal, wouldn't be interviewed a lot, wouldn't be getting any attention. Would just be another freshman Senator, one of nine.
Racist bastard.
Posted by dark1p at April 29, 2008 01:48 PMWow it took me about 10 minutes before I could actually start to post something here. Even now I'm still giggling after reading the posts. It seems some people will do just about ANYTHING to avoid discussing the actual BLOG. It's not only hilarious, it's actually a tragically sad when people believe their candidate is so godlike, that they can do no wrong. Obama could shoot someone in the head, and I'm sure some of his supporters would say that he was trying to cure the man's headache.
As to the topic at hand, its not unusual that people will find a way to blame Clinton for the latest Wright controversy, they did that from the beginning when the story first broke. When you apply the Clinton rules in politics, regardless of what occurs or who it involves, it's always the Clinton's fault.
Posted by kacey at April 29, 2008 02:44 PMYo kacey, you give as good as you get LOL!
Got a link to the head ache story.
Oh wait, "back and to the left".
Take this out for a spin:
"As for Jeanette Mac’s claim that Hillary has no such baggage, she is seriously ignorant of the facts. Billy Graham, Hillary’s close personal friend and spiritual advisor of 20 years was recorded on tape ranting about , “the malevolent influence of the Jews” in a conversation with Nixon. He actually has a laundry list of things that are every bit as bad as anything Wright ever said or did including efforts to impede MLK’s civil disobedience. This is all well documented in Asheville author Cecil Bothwell’s book on the subject.
Even more disturbing is Hillary Clinton’s 15 years of association with the Family, a Nazi-influenced, theocratic, conservative religious organization that tries to sway world leaders behind the scenes. Clinton has participated in their prayer meetings for 15 years and was even promoted to the highest cell of the organization. Doug Coe, the Nazi-sympathizing leader of the Family has been one of Hillary’s close friends and spiritual advisors for many years."
And for a full throated belly laugh, google
Hill's buddy Doug Coe.
Why is it that Obama supporters can't accept the fact that just perhaps Obama may get some bad press from time to time since he is not the second coming? From the way that his supporters always want to blame everything on Clinton as if she is the all powerful one, then why aren't you electing her President if she is that important? You can't get it both ways saying she is pitiful one day and all powerful the next the way the wind blows for Obama. Even I am getting to the point I don't even like hearing him on TV anymore because of the behavior of his followers. And yes, I said followers. AmericaBlog and Huffington seemed to avoid the bad press of the first round of flack and only concentrate on how great Obama was in throwing him under the bus or that a Hillary supporter is somehow to blame for him being there. or other contrived nonsense that Hillary is antigay because the Governor of NC said the word pansy. It is indeed getting pitiful following this trivial back and forth of Obama can do no wrong and Hillary can do no right and the hate and sexism along with false racist rants spewed against her is beyond belief while she is brandished the negative one. No wonder so many Hillary supporters say they might have to think twice about voting for Obama....Go Hillary!! If you can stand up to the Obama supporters you can stand up to the Republicans with no problems.
Posted by foreigner at April 29, 2008 04:03 PMYo foreigner, project much??
Posted by at April 29, 2008 04:29 PMHillary on Billo in thirty mins.
Start spinning the news!!
Posted by at April 29, 2008 04:30 PMPhidipides,
You said:
Obama had no choice but to attend his services, have Wright do his marriage ceremony, baptize his kids, mention Wright glowingly in one of his books, treat him like a family member and donate tens of thousands to Wright's church.I'm trying to be polite here, but my entire post is about why it is wrong to tar Obama with Wright's beliefs. My comment is sarcastic and if you couldn't figure that out I don't blame you because you have repeatedly chosen to interpret my posts in the most negative way possible. But my point was that Obama entirely HAD A CHOICE on whether he picked Wright as his pastor or as the person who would baptize his children or ...My comment was a sarcastic response to "chaz" who claimed "Wright is not someone who sought as a surrogate". Obama sought Wright out in his life and then sought him out to play a role on his campaign committee (which Wright has since resigned). Anyone who claims Obama did not seek out Wright is delusional.Ahhh. The good old "guilt by association" game.
Despite all of that I stated clearly that Wright's views are not automatically Obama's views. I do know however that I can depend on people like you to distort what I write. So carry on.
Posted by eriposte at April 29, 2008 05:57 PMJoel dan walls,
You said:
Please tell us who is or is not a "surrogate" for both Clinton and Obama campaigns.The term "surrogate" is overused and I use it loosely to refer to people associated with any campaign - whether or not they speak for the campaign. Ferraro was previously on Clinton's financial committee as a fundraiser. Wright was previously on a religious advisory committee of Obama's campaign. That doesn't mean every word they say is a reflection of what their candidates think.
If Ferraro is a surrogate then so is Wright. If Wright is not a surrogate, then Ferraro isn't either. Take your pick.
I believe that in the real world we would not be using the word "surrogate" at all unless there is proof that the person actually is speaking for the candidate. However, the way the word is used in common parlance - in the media and blogs - often has little to do with the real world definition. I would prefer not to use the word at all - certainly in the loose way in which it is now used - but the word has been used very loosely in this campaign.
Posted by eriposte at April 29, 2008 06:07 PMJoel dan walls,
You said:
Ah, I just realized that this is eriposte's third Obama-bashing piece today (Tuesday). No day job, then?Thanks for making it clear you don't actually really read my posts but go straight to bashing them without reading them. Posted by eriposte at April 29, 2008 06:11 PM
In response to:
"Yo foreigner, project much??
Posted by at April 29, 2008 04:29 PM "
Do you have a problem with signing any of your posts? At least I said I was not American up front and gave you my honest opinion of what I think. If you don't like it, that is your perogative. However I don't have to follow the lead of either side and can watch from afar. If you don't think that the supporters of Obama appear to be more fanatics than supporters, I feel sorry for you. At the beginning I was hoping either one would win the Presidency over the republican nominee. Now, after no longer being able to go read the daily blogs I used to because of the blind hatred towards Hillary, or seeing that one side wants to claim the other side is negative and they aren't is laughable. For a campaign who claims to want to change the tone of the way your politics has been carried out and wants change, Obama supporters are fighting dirtier than I have ever seen. I could go on but you don't want to hear that there are some of us non Americans who feel that Clinton would make the better President and what Obama represents are the same promises of Bush 8 years ago and we all know how well he changed things. I am getting tired of people saying that the world is waiting to be changed by Obama. Sorry, this individual is not. Perhaps in 8 years when he has more experience under his belt and can be respected for what he has done and not what he says, then fine. I will take him at his word when he said before entering the Senate that he would not run for President in 08 because he felt you needed to be experienced for the job you applied for and he wasn't. So be it!
Posted by foreigner at April 29, 2008 06:22 PMI'm leaving now, this site is nothing but a fucking cat fight. Hillary would stab someone right in the back if it gave her the nomination. Eriposte, your a fucking loon
Posted by Joe at April 29, 2008 07:38 PMYo Eriposte,
Might be time to work on a post about Peter Paul.
Looks like the ball is heading to your side of the court.
NEXXXXTTTTT!!
Posted by chaz at April 29, 2008 07:39 PMOh, and as for
"Thanks for making it clear you don't actually really read my posts but go straight to bashing them without reading them."
You still going to LGF looking fer some balance and insight??
Goosey Goosey Gander, dont'cha think!
Hillary not only has adopted Rovian politics she now has her own kool-aide drinkers. Now I won't claim that the Clinton campaign is controlling Wright but I don't doubt for a minute they are taking full advantage of him.
Posted by Ron In Portland at April 29, 2008 08:12 PMRon, just for the record, are you saying that ST. Obama never took advantage of Clinton's bad media coverage? So did he lie to the American people at the last debate when he said this:
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Senator Obama, your campaign has sent out a cascade of e-mails, just about every day, questioning Senator Clinton's credibility. And you yourself have said she
hasn't been fully truthful about what she would do as president.
Do you believe that Senator Clinton has been fully truthful about her past?
SENATOR OBAMA: Well, look, I think that Senator Clinton has a strong record to run on. She wouldn't be here if she didn't. And you know, I haven't commented on the issue of Bosnia. You know, I --
MR. STEPHANOPOULOS: Your campaign has.
SENATOR OBAMA: Of course, but --
SENATOR CLINTON: (Laughs.)
SENATOR OBAMA: Because we're asked about it.
But look, the fact of the matter is, is that both of us are working as hard as we can to make sure that we're delivering a message to the American people about what we would do as president.
Sometimes that message is going to be imperfectly delivered, because we are recorded every minute of every day. And I think Senator Clinton deserves, you know, the right to make some errors once in a while. I'm -- obviously, I make some as well.
I think what's important is to make sure that we don't get so obsessed with gaffes that we lose sight of the fact that this is a defining moment in our history.
NYTIMES
Seems the Obama Campaign says one thing but does another
Obama Campaign Memo(s)"
----
The Rude Pundit spells it out for you.
"The Lewinsky Nuke, or How Bill Is Hillary Clinton's Reverend Wright:
Let us say, and why not, that surrogates for the Obama campaign, aided and abetted by the RNC and the media, decided to go after Hillary Clinton in relation to the Monica Lewinsky scandal (and, to be clear, no matter what you think about impeachment, the President of the United States getting blown by a White House intern qualifies as a scandal). Let us say, and, indeed, why not, that in order to gain some ground lost by the interminable focus on Jeremiah Wright, Obama's surrogates decided it was time for a little refresher course in the shit people put up with in their personal lives.
It would be so fuckin' easy to take down Hillary Clinton, and the RNC knows it and can't wait for the chance to do it. Obama hasn't, and probably won't. Here's the one-two-three of how, if the Obama campaign truly wanted to go negative, the Clinton campaign would be over. Follow the bouncing ball of a logical progression to the nuke:
Where did the liaisons between Lewinsky and Bill Clinton take place? In the White House, especially in the Oval Office or a study off the Oval Office. So where the President of the United States holds meetings with the leaders of the world, as well as his cabinet and members of Congress, as well as photo ops with we the ordinary people, in a space that is paid for by the taxes of the people of the United States, Bill Clinton placed his cock in the mouth of an intern for no better reason than he was bored and her mouth was willing.
What exactly are the problems with Reverend Wright as they relate to Barack Obama? Wright said some not so nice things about the United States and he spouted a couple of conspiracy theories. At church. Of what is Obama guilty in his connection to Wright? Well, as Hillary Clinton and the North Carolina Republican Party have asserted, he didn't get up and leave and break from his church of 20 years.
You see where this is going? You getting that acidy feeling in your stomach? Well, gird yer loins, motherfuckers, 'cause it's time for this ride to go into the dark parts.
Applying the standard set for Obama in his relationship to Jeremiah Wright to the marriage of Hillary and Bill Clinton, do we not have every right to ask why Clinton did not divorce her husband. Oh, sure, you can say, "Well, that's crazy, it's a personal decision, it's a family thing," but Hillary Clinton chose to stay married to a man who not only repeatedly betrayed her, which we could interpret in lots of ways about her character, both good and bad, but to a man who spewed adulterous semen at the White House on America's dime. No, Bill Clinton might not have said, "God damn America," but he sure believed that American could pay for a place for him get his dick sucked. So it ain't that far a leap to say that he betrayed America, too.
You may ask, "What about Chelsea?" Chelsea was eighteen around this time. She was heading off to college. And the marriage was 22 or 23 years long at the point of intern penis insertion.
So there's your ad, your talking point, your goddamned spin: Hillary Clinton chose to stay married to a man who defiled the Oval Office and insulted America by trying to convince us that it wasn't sex. Why didn't she "get up and leave"?
And we could add: And this man is now her main campaign representative and will be returned to the White House he defiled, filled with interns. (Cue the ominous music and the slow-mo of Bill wagging his finger at us, like we did something wrong. Oh, fuck, that's the final insult, no?)
How do you feel after reading that? Feel like throwing up? Wonder why the fuck any of this shit really matters when it takes fifty bucks to fill your gas tank? Feel spattered with Scaife jism? Got Rove jam in your eye?
Is the idea for the ad just ludicrous? Fuckin' A, it is. But, really, is it qualitatively less ludicrous than the continued uproar over Reverend Wright? Barack Obama didn't say, "God damn America." His pastor did. That one time, as far as we know. Frankly, it's elitist and snobby to think that someone can just walk away from his church because the pastor said a couple of "bad" things. And, frankly, it seems that if your husband is constantly fucking around, it's a bit more of a leap to say that it's cool you stayed with him.
And let's use another Clinton talking point against her: do you think the GOP ain't gonna bring up Lewinsky if she's the nominee? You think that the threat of Bill wild and free in the White House ain't gonna be an issue?
So how about this: why doesn't Hillary Clinton condemn the uproar over Wright for the good of her party and her country instead of fanning the flames? Or would that seem too presidential?"
Posted by chaz at April 30, 2008 05:34 AMSo how about this: why doesn't Hillary Clinton condemn the uproar over Wright for the good of her party and her country instead of fanning the flames? Or would that seem too presidential?"
She has. But that's not what you want to hear so, apparently, you haven't
Posted by snark at April 30, 2008 05:53 AMSo how about this: why doesn't Hillary Clinton condemn the uproar over Wright for the good of her party and her country instead of fanning the flames? Or would that seem too presidential?"
Posted by chaz at April 30, 2008 05:34 AM
Since when does Hillary have to answer for her sins and Obama's? And she hasn't fanned the flames. Her statement of saying, "He wouldn't have been my pastor." Fans nothing. And as someone else said, she has said and her campaign have said there are more pressing issues.
You Obama people want Hillary to champion Obama's cause without him championing hers.
Ridiculous.
She has to look out for herself, her sins. Obama should look out for himself and his sins.
Posted by Miss Malevolent at April 30, 2008 09:20 AMI made it clear the post was from the Rude Pundit
so you'll have to ask him.
But you miss the point entirely.
Imagine that.
In the given context (Rev Wright) I think the point is clear and valid.
You think Rove hasn't made the commercial already??
Have at it though, its all fair game.
We'll get to Hillary and her sordid "spiritual past" soon enough.
Posted by at April 30, 2008 11:37 AMhttp://themoderatevoice.com/politics/john-mccain/19262/what-of-obamas-assertion-that-wright-was-his-pastor-not-his-spiritual-mentor
Posted by at April 30, 2008 11:38 AM