Wash. Post and NY Times published more than 12 times as many articles mentioning Obama and Wright as they did mentioning McCain and Hagee
SUMMARY: A Media Matters for America review found that since February 27, the date that televangelist John Hagee endorsed Sen. John McCain for president, The New York Times and The Washington Post combined have published more than 12 times as many articles mentioning Rev. Jeremiah Wright Jr. and Sen. Barack Obama as they have mentioning Hagee and McCain.
A Media Matters for America Nexis search* found that since February 27, the date that televangelist John Hagee endorsed Sen. John McCain for president, The New York Times and The Washington Post combined have published more than 12 times as many articles mentioning Rev. Jeremiah Wright Jr. and Sen. Barack Obama as they have mentioning Hagee and McCain. The Post published 53 articles during that period that mentioned Wright and Obama, compared with three articles mentioning Hagee and McCain. The Times published 46 articles since February 27 mentioning Wright and Obama, compared with five articles mentioning Hagee and McCain.
Additionally, during the same period, the Post published 40 editorials or opinion pieces that included Wright and Obama while publishing two editorials or opinion pieces that mentioned McCain and Hagee. The Times published 22 editorials or opinion pieces that included Wright and Obama, compared with two editorials or opinion pieces that mentioned McCain and Hagee.
Media Matters has documented (here, here, here, here, and here) other examples of the disparity between the media's extensive coverage of controversial comments made by Wright and other supporters of Obama and their coverage of controversial comments made by Hagee and other supporters of McCain.
Washington Post Wright coverage
|
Headline |
Date |
News or editorial |
|
2/28/2008 |
N |
|
|
3/1/2008 |
E |
|
|
3/3/2008 |
N |
|
|
3/15/2008 |
N |
|
|
3/15/2008 |
N |
|
|
3/17/2008 |
N |
|
|
3/18/2008 |
E |
|
|
3/18/2008 |
N |
|
|
3/18/2008 |
E |
|
|
3/18/2008 |
N |
|
|
3/18/2008 |
N |
|
|
3/19/2008 |
E |
|
|
Invited to Wrestle in a Racial Mud Pit, Obama Soars Above It |
3/19/2008 |
E |
|
3/19/2008 |
E |
|
|
3/19/2008 |
E |
|
|
3/19/2008 |
N |
|
|
3/19/2008 |
N |
|
|
3/19/2008 |
N |
|
|
Tackling a Sensitive Topic at a Sensitive Moment, for Disparate Audiences |
3/19/2008 |
N |
|
3/20/2008 |
N |
|
|
3/20/2008 |
N |
|
|
3/21/2008 |
E |
|
|
3/21/2008 |
E |
|
|
3/21/2008 |
N |
|
|
3/22/2008 |
E |
|
|
3/22/2008 |
E |
|
|
3/22/2008 |
N |
|
|
3/22/2008 |
N |
|
|
3/23/2008 |
E |
|
|
3/23/2008 |
E |
|
|
3/23/2008 |
E |
|
|
3/23/2008 |
E |
|
|
3/23/2008 |
E |
|
|
3/23/2008 |
E |
|
|
3/23/2008 |
N |
|
|
3/23/2008 |
N |
|
|
8 Questions That Will Shape Where the Race for the Democratic Presidential Nomination Goes From Here |
3/23/2008 |
N |
|
3/24/2008 |
N |
|
|
3/24/2008 |
N |
|
|
3/24/2008 |
N |
|
|
3/25/2008 |
E |
|
|
3/26/2008 |
N |
|
|
3/28/2008 |
E |
|
|
3/29/2008 |
N |
|
|
3/29/2008 |
N |
|
|
3/30/2008 |
E |
|
|
3/31/2008 |
N |
|
|
4/1/2008 |
N |
|
|
4/4/2008 |
E |
|
|
4/4/2008 |
N |
|
|
4/8/2008 |
E |
|
|
4/8/2008 |
E |
|
|
4/9/2008 |
N |
|
|
4/12/2008 |
N |
|
|
4/13/2008 |
N |
|
|
4/13/2008 |
N |
|
|
4/13/2008 |
E |
|
|
4/14/2008 |
N |
|
|
4/14/2008 |
N |
|
|
4/15/2008 |
E |
|
|
4/16/2008 |
N |
|
|
4/17/2008 |
E |
|
|
4/17/2008 |
N |
|
|
4/18/2008 |
E |
|
|
4/18/2008 |
N |
|
|
4/18/2008 |
N |
|
|
4/18/2008 |
N |
|
|
4/20/2008 |
E |
|
|
4/20/2008 |
E |
|
|
4/20/2008 |
N |
|
|
4/21/2008 |
N |
|
|
4/22/2008 |
N |
|
|
4/22/2008 |
N |
|
|
4/23/2008 |
N |
|
|
4/23/2008 |
N |
|
|
4/24/2008 |
E |
|
|
4/24/2008 |
N |
|
|
4/25/2008 |
E |
|
|
4/25/2008 |
E |
|
|
4/26/2008 |
E |
|
|
4/26/2008 |
N |
|
|
4/28/2008 |
N |
|
|
4/29/2008 |
E |
|
|
4/29/2008 |
E |
|
|
4/29/2008 |
E |
|
|
4/29/2008 |
E |
|
|
4/29/2008 |
E |
|
|
4/29/2008 |
N |
|
|
4/29/2008 |
N |
|
|
4/29/2008 |
N |
|
|
4/30/2008 |
E |
|
|
4/30/2008 |
E |
|
|
4/30/2008 |
N |
Washington Post Hagee coverage
|
Headline |
Date |
News or editorial |
|
2/28/2008 |
N |
|
|
2/29/2008 |
N |
|
|
3/7/2008 |
N |
|
|
3/11/2008 |
E |
|
|
3/28/2008 |
E |
New York Times Wright coverage
|
Headline |
Date |
News or editorial |
|
3/1/2008 |
N |
|
|
3/14/2008 |
N |
|
|
3/15/2008 |
N |
|
|
With Race Likely to Continue After Pennsylvania, Democrats Court Other States |
3/16/2008 |
N |
|
3/17/2008 |
N |
|
|
3/17/2008 |
E |
|
|
3/18/2008 |
N |
|
|
3/19/2008 |
N |
|
|
3/19/2008 |
N |
|
|
3/19/2008 |
N |
|
|
3/19/2008 |
E |
|
|
3/20/2008 |
E |
|
|
3/20/2008 |
E |
|
|
3/20/2008 |
N |
|
|
3/20/2008 |
N |
|
|
Groups Respond to Obama's Call for National Discussion About Race |
3/20/2008 |
N |
|
3/21/2008 |
N |
|
|
First a Tense Talk With Clinton, Then Richardson Backs Obama |
3/22/2008 |
N |
|
3/23/2008 |
E |
|
|
3/23/2008 |
N |
|
|
3/23/2008 |
E |
|
|
3/23/2008 |
N |
|
|
3/23/2008 |
N |
|
|
3/24/2008 |
N |
|
|
3/24/2008 |
N |
|
|
3/25/2008 |
E |
|
|
3/25/2008 |
E |
|
|
3/26/2008 |
N |
|
|
3/26/2008 |
N |
|
|
3/29/2008 |
N |
|
|
3/30/2008 |
E |
|
|
3/30/2008 |
E |
|
|
3/31/2008 |
N |
|
|
Like the Candidates, TV's Political Pundits Show Signs of Diversity |
4/2/2008 |
N |
|
4/4/2008 |
E |
|
|
Obama's Support Softens in Poll, Suggesting a Peak Has Passed |
4/4/2008 |
N |
|
4/6/2008 |
N |
|
|
4/7/2008 |
N |
|
|
4/7/2008 |
N |
|
|
4/8/2008 |
E |
|
|
4/10/2008 |
N |
|
|
4/11/2008 |
N |
|
|
4/14/2008 |
N |
|
|
4/14/2008 |
N |
|
|
4/14/2008 |
E |
|
|
4/14/2008 |
N |
|
|
4/16/2008 |
E |
|
|
4/17/2008 |
E |
|
|
4/17/2008 |
N |
|
|
Former Friends Weigh Into Debate, and the Former Amity Drains Out |
4/17/2008 |
N |
|
4/18/2008 |
E |
|
|
4/19/2008 |
N |
|
|
4/20/2008 |
E |
|
|
4/23/2008 |
N |
|
|
4/24/2008 |
N |
|
|
4/24/2008 |
N |
|
|
4/26/2008 |
E |
|
|
4/26/2008 |
N |
|
|
4/26/2008 |
E |
|
|
4/27/2008 |
E |
|
|
4/28/2008 |
N |
|
|
4/28/2008 |
N |
|
|
Not Speaking for Obama, Pastor Speaks for Himself, at Length |
4/29/2008 |
N |
|
4/29/2008 |
N |
|
|
4/29/2008 |
E |
|
|
4/30/2008 |
N |
|
|
4/30/2008 |
N |
|
|
4/30/2008 |
E |
New York Times Hagee coverage
|
Headline |
Date |
News or editorial |
|
3/1/2008 |
N |
|
|
McCain Grows Testy on Question About '04 and Kerry Partnership |
3/8/2008 |
N |
|
3/9/2008 |
E |
|
|
3/23/2008 |
N |
|
|
4/8/2008 |
N |
|
|
McCain Goes Where Few Republicans Dare, Deep in Democrats' Territory |
4/26/2008 |
N |
|
4/30/2008 |
E |
As much as you wish it was the same thing, it's not. McCain's hands aren't completely clean of Hagee, but Hagee didn't marry him, baptize his children, pastor his church, etc etc etc etc.
Talking point = dead.
As much as you wish it was the same thing, it's not. McCain's hands aren't completely clean of Hagee, but Hagee didn't marry him, baptize his children, pastor his church, etc etc etc etc.
Talking point = dead.
When he was a young community activist, Barack Obama wanted to connect with the black community, and did so through Rev. Wright's church. In the process, he bacame a Christian, raised a family, and is now running for president.
When Gramps McCain was making one last attempt at the Oval Office, he purtposly sought out the endorsement of two televangelists who spew hatred in Jesus' name - John Hagee and Rod Parsley.
Yup - they're not the same thing. McCain's ties to Hagee and Parsley (and others) need to be blared throughout the media 24/7.
LOL. This is "conservative misinformation"? You've got to be kidding, MM!
Just as dexteritas0071418 said: Hagee was not McCain's pastor. He didn't baptize his children or preside over his marriage. And McCain didn't name a book after one of his sermons. It wouldn't be surprising if the two had never even met (or had only met a couple of times) before the endorsement. (I'll ignore MM's utter ignorance of the centuries-old Protestantism-Catholicism beef.)
Meanwhile, Obama has strived to make his Christianity a central theme of his campaign. The MSM, in its efforts to get Obama the nomination, waited until he got a nearly insurmountable delegate lead before finally reporting about Obama's 20-year relationship with a pastor who espouses such wild-eyed theories like the United States injected the black community with the AIDS virus. (Also: Ameri"KKK"; God d-- America; praises Farrakhan etc.)
Obama has now been busted. He comes across as a big phony.
MM's comparison is beyond ridiculous, IMHO.
Thank you!
Hagee was not McCain's pastor
And Rev. Wright affects you in what way? Your fake outrage makes you out to be an idiot.
So you would rather support a CINO (Christian in Name Only) like Gramps who cozies up to Hagee and their ilk only for votes. Sad, very sad.
No, MMFA's way off on this one.
The analogy between the two is faulty. Obama has a MUCH closer relationship to Wright. And Hagee has not gone around the last few days making very public inflammatory speeches and then bringing McCain into the mixture.
Proof? Where has Hagee been recently? And did Hagee marry McCain,etc.?
One thing though-- this MSM obsession over Wright is starting to seem racially motivated.
Snoop,
Did you hear about some of Wright's antics & the remarks he made about White folks at his NAACP appearance?
If folks are gonna throw around the term racist, better include Rev. Wright.
Personally I'm sick to death of this subject. Obama has addressed the issue. Now it's up to voters to either accept or reject the way it was handled.
Trying to draw a direct parallel between Hagee & Wright is a bit of stretch as has already been explained by several posters here. The fact that McCain said he proudly accepted this endorsement has not gone unmentioned in the media & even though MMFA would like it discussed as often as the Obama-Wright duo it never required similar extensive coverage.
JTR2, the way I see it is that Wright made his statements, then the video appeared...years later. Obama was questioned. Obama gave a speech, denounced what Wright had to say but SOME were not happy with his answers. They demanded an excorcism. Wright appears in person weeks later a the Press Club and awakens the less than sleeping nonsense. People demanded that Obama answer questions. Obama denounces and seperates from someone he called a friend and part of his"family". Immediately, people wanted more, like what. Obama should carry around a cassette tape of his denounciation and pass it out to those who cannot recall what he has done or said.
McCain goes after Hagees' support and gets it. Does the MEDEA ask over and over and over again that McCain denounce Hagee? Seems lopsided to me.
And for those of you that dwell on the baptism and marriage by Rev. Wright, I ask this..what is a pastor to do? Seems that Obama is a good family man, a church goer and someone who has helped people. If this was a "creation" of Rev. Wright well then he did a good job. As I stated in another post, The Republans are screwing up because they are making Obama the victim of overkill. If the Republans want any chance of winning, they better start covering the tracks of McCain because his turn is a-comin'.
Prince,
My initial reaction to those videos was to question Obama's judgment for remaining in a church led by such an inflammatory preacher & actually referring to him as his mentor. After Obama's stirring speech addressing Rev. Wright & race relations in America I began to view it in a different light & to move on.
Not so surprisingly the media wouldn't let it go, though the furor did ebb a bit.
Wright's recent speaking engagements relit the controversy.
Obama has addressed it once again & one would hope that the issue might finally fade into the sunset.
Tonight on David Gregory's program [MSNBC] the subject of Hagee-McCain came up & Pat Buchanan [of all people] remarked that McCain had gotten a free ride from the media on this one. Bet you never figured you'd have an ally in him ;-)
I wrote yesterday that this latest Wright brouhaha & Obama's reaction to it would prove to be a turning point. Good or bad.
Even though I'm not an Obama supporter I would not want this foolish controversy to play a part in being the reason he did not win the nomination, or the Presidency.
"Even though I'm not an Obama supporter I would not want this foolish controversy to play a part in being the reason he did not win the nomination, or the Presidency"
Jeter,
If only others were as objective and smart as you. You give independent political thinking a positive name. Your opinion on this matter is to be admired.
You had to see John Stewart portraying this situaton with Wright on his show last night. He did a brilliant anology of how the media was famished for more Wright Stuff since the subject strarted to wane in recent weeks, giving rise to a depressed, disinterested press. Then, this week, a huge rebirth of enthusiasm for all things Wright, 24/7. And the media was re-energized into asking ridiculous, petty questions about Wright and Obama while ignoring much darker issues about the current administration and our future as a country when Bushco goes back to cutttin' brush and doin' the "hard work" that he's become so famous for doing. Sorry, make that "doin'"
He made the media, whether it's Fox or Not, look like the complete morons they have become. Now, he did use props, like going from spoonfuls of ice cream when it started to a 5 gallon bucket of the stuff this week.
Funny and intelligent. So rare, these days.
He did a brilliant anology of how the media was famished for more Wright Stuff since the subject strarted to wane in recent weeks, giving rise to a depressed, disinterested press.
How true! Leave it to Stewart to expose the sad truth.
Every member of the media I watched couldn't get enough of this latest Wright brouhaha. I thought Matthews was gonna come out of his seat he was sooooo excited.
Did you hear about some of Wright's antics & the remarks he made about White folks at his NAACP appearance?
Great point. The MSM-- with a few exceptions--has been conspicuously quiet about the NAACP speech the night before.
Wright was appalling-- mocking white voices, making ridiculous comments about classical "European" music-- what an intellectual crank. Much much worse than the Press Club speech...
It's ludicrous to compare Hagee with Wright. And I tend to agree with many of Wright's conclusions. But he ain't the same thing to McCain.
What I wonder is how Obama could sit in that pew year after year and listen to all of that--not hatred so much-- but idiocy. He's a Lyndon Larouche of the Left.
"And Rev. Wright affects you in what way? Your fake outrage makes you out to be an idiot."
It isn't "fake outrage" to detest someone who teaches racism. Maybe you haven't noticed, but racism is dangerous. Dangerous to many people. Are you saying you support taking this country back to the days when racism ruled the land?? That's what is sounds like you want. When that happens, what will you call his group of followers? Aryan Nation, KKK, Black Panthers, Christian Identity, Taliban are already taken so you'll have to think of a different one. Try to think of a cool sounding name so your followers will feel pride in membership. What will be your logo? Come on, man. Get with it! If you're going to create a new racist group you have to have a logo.
Phil,
Has Wright been teaching violence? There are HUGE differences between his church and those organizations you listed.
Phil,
I didn't say it didn't concern me, but Obama's disavowal and lack of political involvement with Wright satisfies me. Hagee has been preaching violence. He wants war with Iran badly so the end times can come:
http://www.lewrockwell.com/barnwell/barnwell73.html
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/max-blumenthal/rapture-ready-the-unauth_b_57826.html
Parsley is urging the U.S. to eradicate Islam
http://www.motherjones.com/washington_dispatch/2008/03/john-mccain-rod-parsley-spiritual-guide.html
"Parsley says there is a war and he wants bigger war, as America can only "fulfill its divine purpose" by seeing to it that Islam, "this false religion, is destroyed." Though he spells out no specific strategy, he writes things like, "We find now we have no choice. The time has come" to destroy "this anti-Christ religion," inspired by demons who spoke to Allah."
http://www.christianpost.com/article/20080414/31949_Rod_Parsley_on_Islam.htm
Both advocate war and violence. That is the biggest difference between Wright on one side and Parsley and Hagee, both of whom have appeared at political rallies with McCain, on the other.
I've never heard any of those people mock ethnic voices, or make fun of ethnic traits and traditions, or talk about consonants and Mozart lovers and how they don't like Billie Holliday and how psychiatrists force people to think they are ADD, all in the same paragraph.
Wright's a nutcase.
Carli,
I think he was imitating the accents, not mocking them. You honestly think that Wright is nuttier than a guy who wants pre-emptive war with Iran to force the "end times" and blames the sin level of New Orleans for Katrina? WOW!
What about a guy who is calling for the U.S. to eradicate the world of Islam?
Give me the guy who spouts controversial sermons that some take as "anti-American" over the guys who want to bring the world to an end or call for the genocide of the world's largest religion.
Carli,
Its fine that you think he is a media issue, but when I responded to Phil that Hagee and Parsley advocate violence, your comeback dealt with mocking accents. It sounded like you were equating the two (violence and accents).
Carli,
Who has more influence and a bigger audience, Hagee or Wright?
Phil,
Try again. Use google and try John Hagee in there. Hagee has a group that has an audience with the Senate. Hagee appears on cable television.
It matters because Hagee wants war. Wright does not. Hagee wants the apocolypse and all the death and destruction that comes with it.
" Hagee has a group that has an audience with the Senate. Hagee appears on cable television."
Hilary is IN the senate. Wright has the audience of EVERY black person in America. How does Hagee garner more influence as a "warmonger" (which, BTW, YOU brought into the discussion)?
"It matters because Hagee wants war. Wright does not."
Wright wants war....against the white people, as described in his following and teaching of the black liberation theology. Both are equally nuts. Obama has Wright as a personal friend, McCain does not have Hagee as a personal freind.
"Go ahead find me the links that show Wright wants war on white people."
Ok, you're just playing games now. If you're really serious about finding out about black theology, start here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_theology Then you can click on various links to the interpretation of this from James Cone (which is the aspect Wright teaches). You will also find several references to these teachings by Wright. Look them up yourself.
If you wish to continue blindly parroting what your liberalism is telling you to parrot, then ask solon for advise. But, he quit responding after I showed he was in the wrong for making excuses for Wright.
Phil,
I am not making excuses for Wright. I just think Hagee's ideas are far more dangerous.
Lemoc,
Parsley and Hagee are warmongers. Which is worse?
"Parsley and Hagee are warmongers. Which is worse?"
Does one have to be worse in order to be opposed by liberals/conservatives? Liberals think warmongers are worse, but hilary wants to obliterate Iran and that seems to be ok. I didn't see her listed in your short list of warmongers. Why not? She sounds quite equal to your 'problem' with Hagee.
Phil,
Is Hillary a religious preacher endorsing Obama or McCain? I notice now you at least acknowledge that you were wrong about Hagee and Parsley advocating violence. Are you prepared to invade Iran if those guys get their wish?
You're either telling me that Hagee and Parsley support hilary for president or that one of them suddenly has joined the race. She is the ONLY one of the candidates who publically claims the want/desire to needlessly attack another soveriegn nation simply on the basis of suspected WMD's. Are you saying that McCain, who has the endorsement of warmongers, is more dangerous than hilary, who actually warmongers?? Fried, I know this next question will be very difficult for you to understand but, can you explain how you can rationalize that difference?
Isn't there another president who (as you say) attacked a soveriegn nation simply on the basis of suspected WMD's? Now, you are telling me that since hilary isn't a preacher that it is just fine that she plans on obliterating another nation without any proof of discretion?
Phil,
The topic of the thread was preachers who have endorsed McCain and Obama. You brought Hillary into the discussion on that premise, which is a stretch.
However, to address your point, Hillary said that she would respond to a nuclear attack by Iran on Israel by totalling obliterating them. Now, your post said this:
"She is the ONLY one of the candidates who publically claims the want/desire to needlessly attack another soveriegn nation simply on the basis of suspected WMD's."
That is not true, Phil. In fact its not even close to the truth.
http://www.reuters.com/article/wtMostRead/idUSN2224332720080422
Here is the quote in its context:
On the day of a crucial vote in her nomination battle against fellow Democrat Barack Obama, the New York senator said she wanted to make clear to Tehran what she was prepared to do as president in hopes that this warning would deter any Iranian nuclear attack against the Jewish state.
"I want the Iranians to know that if I'm the president, we will attack Iran (if it attacks Israel)," Clinton said in an interview on ABC's "Good Morning America."
"In the next 10 years, during which they might foolishly consider launching an attack on Israel, we would be able to totally obliterate them," she said.
Yes, its terribly troubling, Phil, BUT where does she say that the U.S. would act pre-emptively attack Iran based on suspected WMD's? Please provide a quote and a link.
You then said this:
"Isn't there another president who (as you say) attacked a soveriegn nation simply on the basis of suspected WMD's? Now, you are telling me that since hilary isn't a preacher that it is just fine that she plans on obliterating another nation without any proof of discretion?"
Bush did attack a sovereign nation on the basis of suspected WMD's. He said it repeatedly. Hillary has made no such threat. If she has, please feel free to prove me wrong with a link.
Thank you.
" Phil, BUT where does she say that the U.S. would act pre-emptively attack Iran based on suspected WMD's? Please provide a quote and a link."
"she said, "I want the Iranians to know, if I'm the president, we will attack Iran." She added that, "Whatever stage they might be in their nuclear weapons program...we would be able to totally obliterate them."
So, she says "whatever stage" their program is in she would attack. She kinda contradicts herself by saying she would wait until they attack Isreal, but there's the quote you wanted. You can find it anywhere, but I got it at: http://en.rian.ru/world/20080501/106339367.html
"Hillary has made no such threat. If she has, please feel free to prove me wrong with a link."
Ok, I did that. Now, why aren't liberals complaining about hilary wanting to attack a soveriegn nation simply because she may suspect they have WMD's, like they have done so about Bush?!? Are you going to be the first one?
PHIL,
From the article you linked:
Iran has sent a letter of complaint to the UN over comments made last week by Democratic presidential hopeful Hillary Clinton that the U.S. would be able to 'totally obliterate" the Islamic Republic if it were to ever launch a nuclear strike on Israel.
Clinton made the remarks in a televised interview last week. Responding to a question about her policy as president should Iran ever attack Israel with nuclear weapons she said, "I want the Iranians to know, if I'm the president, we will attack Iran." She added that, "Whatever stage they might be in their nuclear weapons program...we would be able to totally obliterate them."
Where does she say, anywhere, that she would pre-emptively attack Iran?!?! Your quote leaves off the line "RESPONDING TO A QUESTION ABOUT HER POLICY AS PRESIDENT SHOULD IRAN ATTACK ISRAEL WITH NUCLEAR WEAPONS.
You have to include that in the quote! She NEVER said that she would attack Iran unilaterally.
Are you that committed to smearing Hillary? I'll tell you what, I hate that rhetoric even as she talked about Israel, but Phil, PLEASE, if we are going to debate something you have to deal with facts!
Again, I challenge you, find me a link that says that Hillary wants to obliterate Iran WITH NO MENTION OF IRAN ATTACKING ISRAEL!
Are you trying to lie and be deceptive or did you miss the opening of that article?
I'll try to use small words so you don't get lost. How can Iran attack Isreal with nukes if they are at the beginning stage of building a nuke? How can Iran attack Isreal if they are 4/5ths complete in building a nuclear weapon? Now, pay close attention, this is the tricky part; she said she would attack "AT ANY STAGE THEY MIGHT BE IN THEIR NUCLEAR WEAPONS PROGRAM".
Maybe you think that means whatever stage the missile is in flight. Like is it half way there or all the way there. But, I figured NOBODY could be that dumb. After your response, I have to reconsider that notion.
Phil,
Here are your quotes:
"but hilary wants to obliterate Iran and that seems to be ok"
"Now, you are telling me that since hilary isn't a preacher that it is just fine that she plans on obliterating another nation without any proof of discretion?"
"She is the ONLY one of the candidates who publically claims the want/desire to needlessly attack another soveriegn nation simply on the basis of suspected WMD's."
"How can Iran attack Isreal if they are 4/5ths complete in building a nuclear weapon? Now, pay close attention, this is the tricky part; she said she would attack "AT ANY STAGE THEY MIGHT BE IN THEIR NUCLEAR WEAPONS PROGRAM"."
The question to Hillary was along the lines of: "Would you attack Iran if it attacked Israel with a nuclear weapon?" That question has a false premise because Iran does not have nuclear weapons. There was not a question in any of the articles examined that said what you claim. No one asked Hillary: Will you attack Iran without provocation on the suspicion that they have nuclear weapons? If you can find me that quote, you win. However, every question was in response
Phil, we "could" obliterate any country with our nukes at any time. If she truly means what you say she does, I would absolutely never want her to be President, but until I hear her say that about Iran without the context of a nuclear attack on Israel, I'll take my chances. I hope someone asks her without the attack on Israel, do you want to obliterate Iran pre-emptively?
She did not answer the question well. She should have said Iran doesn't have nuclear weapons, but if they did and they attacked Israel using them.....I would still disagree with her
Otherwise, it would be like me asking you: Have you stopped beating your wife, Phil? Yes or No.
"She did not answer the question well. She should have said Iran doesn't have nuclear weapons, but if they did and they attacked Israel using them.....I would still disagree with her"
I told you she contradicted herself at the beginning (do you remember?), but the FACT remains she said she would attack Iran at any time she felt their nuclear program would be a threat to Isreal. I provided the quote. You, apparently, cannot read or think for yourself. There are plenty of ways she "should" have said it, but she said it ONE way. Live with the fact that she is a warmonger who will not hesitate attacking a soveriegn nation on the basis of 'presumed possesion of WMDs'.
No, Phil, every quote begins with if Iran attacked Israel with nuclear weapons. The other word you don't focus on is "would be able to." We "would be able to" obliterate any country on earth. I told you already I condemn that type of rhetoric, but every quote is in response to a question about Iran attacking Israel with nuclear weapons first.
So, if you think she is into pre-emption, find me the quote that does not mention an attack on Israel as the question. If you can't, you can't.
You really think Wright has more influence than Hagee nation wide too? How is that possible? Please educate yourself on Hagee before answering that question.
Phil,
I will make you a promise right here and now. If Hillary is elected, and I vote for her (if she is the nominee, I probably will), and she starts talking pre-emptive war with Iran, I will call for her impeachment. I'll go further than that: I will protest, I will do everything I can to prevent it. If the war comes with Iran that you think is inevitable if Mrs. Clinton is elected, I will quit my job and enlist. After all, it will be partially my fault that the war came.
Deal?
Would you be willing to do the same thing for a Republican president? If you already are that willing, you have completed numerous tours in Iraq, right? If so, thank you for your service. If not, why aren't you there?
"Deal?"
No deal. I have already spent my time in and am too old to re-enlist. Have you already shown your patriotism to the country that gives you the freedom to dislike the government and post anti-government rhetoric? No, you haven't. Because you won't join.
Anti-government rhetoric? Show me one post where I put anti-government rhetoric in my posts.
Thank you for your service, Phil. I have served my country by teaching in a school district where few teachers would in Teach for America. I have served my country by providing legal services for those would couldn't afford them free of charge. I have served my country domestically with my time and my talents. I did things you wouldn't do to make this country a better place just as you have done things I haven't done. You still have not shown one place where Hillary has said that she would attack Iran unconditionally. I definitely oppose any type of pre-emption.
MM's comparison is beyond ridiculous, IMHO.
What' beyond ridiculous is your position on this, Shoes. here are some John Hagee quotations, courtest of Wikipedia. Do you agree with everything this clown says, or do you see why so many of us feel that John Hagee's comments needs to be publicized at the same level as Rev. Wright's?
John Hagee is a certifiable nut case, and if this is the kind of endorsement Gramps McCain is "proud to have", then he is not qualified to run for dog catcher, IMHO.
“Most readers will be shocked by the clear record of history linking Adolf Hitler and the Roman Catholic Church in a conspiracy to exterminate the Jews.” - Jerusalem Countdown (revised edition, 2007, p. 114)
"Anyone who makes the life of Jewish people difficult or grievous, as did the Pharaoh, as did Hitler, will be cursed by God." - keynote address to AIPAC, (March 12, 2007)
"You will either offend the world and please God, or please the world and offend God." -Faith under Fire broadcast, (September 12, 2005)
"What is the point of having free speech if you have nothing to say?" - "How Free Is Freedom?" (July 2, 2006) [56]
"Jesus did not come to the Earth to start 285 squabbling denominations fighting over the Bible. How like the devil to divide Christians over the Bible." - "How Free Is Freedom?" (July 2, 2006) [57]
"If you live your life and don't confess your sins to God Almighty through the authority of Christ and His blood, I'm going to say this very plainly, you're going straight to hell with a nonstop ticket." October 2006[58]
"All hurricanes are acts of God because God controls the heavens. I believe that New Orleans had a level of sin that was offensive to God and they were recipients of the judgment of God for that." [59].
"Why would you want to be politically correct when you can be right?" -The Revelation Church broadcast (February 2007)
"The most important thing to the Christian community is not the environment but evangelism." "The Fish Gate" September 2, 2007
"Christians don't steal or lie, they don't get divorced or have abortions. If the Ten Commandments were followed by everyone we would be able to fire half the police force and in six months the prisons would be all half empty." "The Fish Gate" September 2, 2007
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Hagee#Quotes
Hagee's a jerk, but he does not have the same relationship to McCain as does Wright to Obama.
The comparison between the two is idiotic, and I'm disappointed in MMFA here. It ain't the same thing.
Whoever thinks getting married by a minister and letting him sprinkle holy water on your children means you agree with all of his personal opinions is a truly dumb mfer
"Whoever thinks getting married by a minister and letting him sprinkle holy water on your children means you agree with all of his personal opinions is a truly dumb mfer"
Not as dumb as those who feel Obama agreeing with the racist Wright is the problem. The problem is that Obama knew the guy for nearly his ENTIRE adult life and hasn't been able to figure out that Wright is a racist teaching racism. That says a lot for how smart Obama is.
"Whoever thinks getting married by a minister and letting him sprinkle holy water on your children means you agree with all of his personal opinions is a truly dumb mfer"
Not as dumb as those who feel Obama agreeing with the racist Wright is the problem. The problem is that Obama knew the guy for nearly his ENTIRE adult life and hasn't been able to figure out that Wright is a racist teaching racism. That says a lot for how smart Obama is.
And the way that people like you continue to beat this dead horse says a lot about how smart YOU are. And how moch right-wing Kool-Aid you've chug-a-lugged over the years.
"And the way that people like you continue to beat this dead horse says a lot about how smart YOU are."
Umm, what's the title of this article?? Just WHO is beating this "dead horse"?? And, how smart are you claiming mmfa is for continually bringing this issue to the forefront?? You may not see beyond your hatered of differing opinions, but I'm just staying on topic. I'm not the one who continually raises this issue...I only give my side of it.
Gosh, you seemed all proud (the other day) when you thought you had won the arguement about Wright's racism, but I haven't seen any further comments since Wright made his remarks this past weekend. What happened to your pride? Lose a little?
What happened to your pride? Lose a little?
I'd ask you the same question about your intellect, Phil - but you had none to begin with.
"Spare us his criticism of the GOVERNMENT that isnt racist."
Have you been breathing too much train exhaust?? You want me to not use the evidence that shows he's a racist. Exactly WHICH government is he claiming caused/created AIDS to create a genocide of black people? Was it the government run by blacks? NO Was it the government run by brown people? NO Was it the government run by red people? NO You're a moron if you can't figure out WHO he is talking about.
What was he insinuating when he complained of how Kennedy spoke the word 'eask' as in 'eask not what your country can do for you, eask what you can do for your country'?
How about Wright's stated premise of following James Cone's 'black liberation theology'? Where Cone writes: ""If God is not for us and against white people, then he is a murderer, and we had better kill him. The task of black theology is to kill gods who do not belong to the black community."?
Cone also says: " Black theology will accept only the love of God which participates in the destruction of the white enemy. What we need is the divine love as expressed in Black Power, which is the power of black people to destroy their oppressors here and now by any means at their disposal. Unless God is participating in this holy activity, we must reject his love."
Wright and his church are on record as saying they follow and teach that theology.
Are you going to say I'm not allowed to use those reasons too? Of course you will, it's the only way you can win this arguement. There is NO way you can convince ANY normal thinking human being that Wright ISN'T a racist. Why do you think Obama is trying to distance himself as far away from him as he can?
"Black liberation theology isn't racist. White racism is."
Hmmm, black liberation theology isn't racist? Umm do you still think the world is flat?
"I understand that you white racists would prefer black people to worship a false white god,"
Where in the Bible does Jesus get descripted as a "white god"?? You show me proof that I am following a white God, then you'll have a point. Until then (and it'll never happen) you will continue to be an equal to Wright. The problem you have is that Jesus is described as a person of color and it pisses you off that everyone gets to enjoy his love. You (generalized black racists) are so greedy that you don't want anyone else to enjoy the goodness we call God, simply because this God (of color) doesn't come down here and hand you everything you need while you sit on your lazy ars watching oprah and feeling sorry for the situation you are in (as if you have NO control over it). What a total and complete hypocrit you are.
"You white racists are really dumb. Every image in your church depicts a false white god"
What kind of dumb person are you? My Bible does not depict God as white. And, God says not to create/worship images of Him. What does YOUR Bible say about that? Maybe, just maybe you've been to my church, but I doubt it, they don't teach racism. So, you are hardly in a position to tell ME what my church has hanging on it's walls.
Sorry heru, you can't do that. The Jesus who is on our cross is bronze colored. It was given to my wife after her mother died. Either way, I don't think you're man enough to follow through with your threat. Like a typical racist, you act tough when you're with a group of 'like-minded people', but when you're alone, you'll be the person you act like; afraid
Solon, I notice you are afraid to post any replies since I shot your punk-a$$ ideals down like a balloon being shot with a bb gun. Come on, where's all your "we're better than you" statements you so proudly come back with? I showed Wright is a racist. Now, be a man and admit you're wrong on this one. How about the rest of you liberals who proudly proclaim Wright as a great orator, where are you now?!?
Nowhere, as I suspected you would be!! You liberal hypocrits!
"Whoever thinks getting married by a minister and letting him sprinkle holy water on your children means you agree with all of his personal opinions is a truly dumb mfer"
True, but McCain has never had Hagee do that to him.
The whole point of this MMFA article is that there is a discrepancy in media coverage that is suspicious. But the analogy between the two figures is inapt. They do not have the same relationship to the candidates.
McCain has no personal relationship with Hagee. He didn't name a book after him. Do Obama-heads not get this?
Carli,
McCain actively sought his endorsement. If you are looking for a strange comparison, you told me that imitating voices was worse than praying for war with Iran. How could you even type that with a straight face? Let me ask you this, if Obama is the nominee, who will you vote for?
Actually the McBush situation IS different from Obama's, it is worse. Obama has denounced Wright but McCain still holds onto his association with a white racist minister.Thats not a political problem in a white racist society but its still wrong.
"McCain still holds onto his association with a white racist minister."
Heru, can you give proof that either pastor is a racist? I can agree that both are warmongers, but can you bring something that shows racism. This may be tough, but can you do it in a way that doesn't show Wright is also a racist? Somehow I get the feeling you are so racist yourself that simply being white makes a person a racist.
Have you ever done as 'mary' suggested I do? Attend a meeting in a racist church run by the opposite race? She seems to think if you do that you would learn that racism isn't present in that church.
Fried,
Excellent point. For the life of me I can't understand why people want to conveniently forget that MCcain actively sought the endorsement of a radical idiot like Hagee. This continued argument that Obama secretly agrees with Wright is the same ol' conservative juxtoposition schtick they use every election cycle. They rationalize it by saying one isn't as bad as the other so therefore McCain gets a pass and Obama is a radical racist. Justifying bad behavior by pointing to other bad behavior. Any third grader would be proud, but if you're as smart as a fifth grader you know the reality of the issue.
"This continued argument that Obama secretly agrees with Wright is the same ol' conservative juxtoposition schtick they use every election cycle. They rationalize it by saying one isn't as bad as the other so therefore McCain gets a pass and Obama is a radical racist"
No one is calling Obama a radical racist. And, NO ONE is argueing that Obama "secretly" or otherwise agrees with Wright. I am argueing Obama isn't the sharpest tool in the shed if he's had a close personal relationship with Wright for 25+ years and suddenly claims he didn't know what kind of person Wright was. We've already got one dullard as president, we don't need another. Maybe in a couple years when, after he finally leaves the church that teaches racism, he will be able to try again.
Your complaint that McCain is a dullard because he seeks votes is pretty simplistic when you have the other candidate learning morality from a racist.
Phil,
McCain was claiming he didn't know of all Hagee's statements. When confronted with him, he disavowed them, but was happy to have his endorsement still. What does that say about McCain?
" What does that say about McCain?"
Well, that's a tough one. Let me take a wild guess.... 'he needs votes to get elected president'? Maybe that's why Obama had no problem sticking with Wright all these years....he needed votes to get elected. But, now Obama needs more than a few dumb racists voting for him, so he has to appeal to normal Americans and he can't do that with Wright chained around his neck.
What's a 'normal' American? Let me take a wild guess...white people. So McCain sticks with a wild eyed racist white minister and thats ok because he needs these 'normal' American votes.
Your hypocrisy smells [holding my nose]
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
" What does that say about McCain?"
Well, that's a tough one. Let me take a wild guess.... 'he needs votes to get elected president'? Maybe that's why Obama had no problem sticking with Wright all these years....he needed votes to get elected. But, now Obama needs more than a few dumb racists voting for him, so he has to appeal to normal Americans and he can't do that with Wright chained around his neck.
"Let me take a wild guess...white people. So McCain sticks with a wild eyed racist white minister and thats ok"
That's YOUR statement and belief, not mine. Nor, did I ever say or imply that. YOUR racism is oozing into this conversation and doesn't allow you to have a normal (white-in your mind) conversation about race.
You are only normal in a society that makes white racism the norm.
I'm fine with any candidate as long as they pronounce it "E-rock" (rough translation, but you get the picture) instead of "I-rack." And Nuclear instead of nucular.
Really, the Republicans have set a very, very low bar for how smart a President has to be.
I am argueing Obama isn't the sharpest tool in the shed if he's had a close personal relationship with Wright for 25+ years and suddenly claims he didn't know what kind of person Wright was.
Totally right. Obama-fans are trying to shift the argument.
What I can't beleive is how Obama could sit there and listen to that intellectual crank pontificate about things he knows not of-- such as what 'white folk' think about, or classical music, or what white folk classical music fans like or don't like, etc etc ad nauseum.
People are ignoring the NAACP speech, which was blatantly racist.
Wright's a classic CRANK, that's his problem, and how Obama didn't see this, I don't get it.
Some people change. Are you willing to sit down at dinner with Robert Byrd? Has he changed, in your opinion? Maybe the both of you can sing "Dixie" together.
OH! Gee, you are saying ONLY blacks can change!
It is practically impossible in this society to avoid eating with a white racist once in a while. The hard thing is to avoid vomiting at the table.
Thanks, AChris. Obama made it clear, and so did Wright, that they don't talk politics. On the other hand, McCain sought Hagee's POLITICAL endorsement and appeared at a POLITICAL rally with Parsley, but wonders never cease.
Obama made it clear, and so did Wright, that they don't talk politics.
When did anyone ever say this! They didn't. And it's a preposterous claim, anyway-- gee, I'm the local preacher, but I ain't ever gonna talk politics with my local elected leader....
gimmee a break, you Obama fans. Talk about gullibility.
Carli,
You just said that people who advocate genocide are less nuts than Wright. Seriously?
Wright said they didn't talk politics on his Moyers interview. If Wright is such a bad guy, why did the Clintons invite him to the White House?
http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/03/20/photograph-of-bill-clinton-and-rev-wright-surfaces/
So she could give Bill Cinton BJs. And since Hillary continues her association with him what does that say about her and the intelligence of her fans?
OK--you've convinced me. Membership means diddly.
Membership in a church means more than just the pastor. It provides a connection to the community at large.
I didn't really experience it first hand (since I'm white), but I remember how deeply involved the two black churches in my home town back in NJ were with black community. From outreach programs to afterschool activities to working to make the community a better place, those two churches were VIBRANT, filled with activity, and a bigger part of the day-to-day lives of the people in their community than the Catholic church I belonged to back then.
And I believe THAT is why Barack Obama and his family have been members of that church for 20 years - because of the PEOPLE, and its involvment with the community at large. Since he was a community activist back then, wnat better way to stay connected to the black community than through a church where so many member of the community worship?
The centuries old conflict between the Catholic and Protestant branches of Christianity has nothing to do with anyone calling one Religion a whore.
These is no defense against such words. Anyone who excuses words like that shares in the speakers bigotry.
Anyone who thinks it's OK for this ass clown to wish death and destruction on any city because they allowed any group to have a parade is not only a bigot, but someone with serious psychological problems of their own.
Obama has rejected Wright's comments and his support.
McCain welcomes the support of bigots of all shapes and sizes but of only one color.
I see that Shoes is up to her old tricks again - posting an attack message, calling MMFA stupic, calling one or more posters here stupid, and then slither away so no one can confront her.
I've run into her type on more than one web board - in fact, since her rants sound so familiar, I get the feeling that she and I have battled before on some other web board.....
I know what you mean about how some seem familiar.
Hitch-hiked her way across the u.s.a.
Plucked her eyebrows on the way
Shaved her leg and then he was a she
She says, hey babe, take a walk on the wild side
Said, hey honey, take a walk on the wild side
But you're right maybe Shoes has walked on that "Dirty Boulevard".
And reverend Wright says,
doo d-doo doo doo d-doo doo d-doo doo d-doo doo
McCain welcomes the support of bigots of all shapes and sizes but of only one color.
Yes, but this MMFA article is about discrepancy of coverage. There's a good reason for the difference that MMFA is neglecting to note. The MSM gets a pass on this one-- so far.
Carli,
How long do you give the MSM to pin McCain down and question him on these guys? I agree its not the same thing, but since McCain actively sought these guys, he deserves flak.
Thats mighty white of Carlisle for giving McCain a pass on his failure to denounce the racist endorsements he sought
White racists love to call blacks racist. Thats part of your stupidity.
Wright makes outlandish statements all the time. For Obama to claim that he didn't know Wright was a crank, is a lie.
Or he has no judgement.
"Because that is where Obama would have heard them. Do you have evidence of this because I keep seeing the same three comments over and over."
Small minds think alike. Obama claimed to be friends with Wright. He was NOT simply a congregation member (as YOU claim). That means they would speak to each other away from the church, ie picnics, family gatherings, ect.
So, Phil, all of your friends share your views? That is what I am asking you. Can I impute the beliefs of your friends to you that you have nothing in common with politically?
"So, Phil, all of your friends share your views?"
About time you asked that question! NO, all my friends do not share my views. Dang, I was forced to say it. I'll bet you're beaming now?
However, I DO share my views with my friends and they share theirs with me. I have some extremely liberal friends (one that thinks along the lines that the racist heru does), we even had a long disussion on the subject of the war AND our use of nukes in Japan AND the immigration issue AND how can I support the war being a Christian (he isn't). I've known this friend for almost 20 years so we can talk freely with each other without fear of getting mad at each other.
Now, here's the part you won't like. You better sit down.... I know what his views are on the subjects we talk about. I know he is racist, I know he doesn't like the history of American politics/policies. How, is it that Obama could know Wright for 25+ years and NOT know the same thing?
Phil,
Someone I am very close to in my family and have known my whole life said something so shocking and disturbing a week ago that I would never ever have guessed would have come out of her mouth. I have known her for 32 years. I never ever thought she would say something so disturbing. She had never shown these tendencies, or maybe, because I love her, I never wanted to think she felt that way.
Heru isn't racist by the way. Try googling Hagee and "slave sale"
Hagee on African Americans
In Hagees' church bulletin "The Cluster" there was a fund raiser for their high school seniors. No bake sale here they held a "slave sale" It was announced that 'Slavery in America is returning to Cornerstone" and told the church members to "Make plans to come and go home with a slave."
Note:Once the San Antonio Express-News reported the incident, Hagee stated he would "meet with black religious leaders privately at an unspecified future date to discuss comments he made" Hagee made no apology: just that statement. Funny, there is no record of that meeting happening.
[San Antonio Express-News 3/7/96
http://www.associatedcontent.com/article/638481/does_mccain_support_hate_and_bigotry.html?page=2
"I never ever thought she would say something so disturbing. She had never shown these tendencies, or maybe, because I love her, I never wanted to think she felt that way."
Maybe you have the same problem Obama has with 'knowing' people he's known his entire adult life? Which is MY point; that Obama has a problem being able to judge people he's known for so long. Which would lead me to question his ability to be president. I wouldn't want you as president either.
Phil,
So you must feel the same way about McCain when he didn't investigate all of Hagee's comments before seeking his endorsement, correct?
Phil,
Did you foresee all of McCain's flip-flops too? It must be boring knowing you since you are never surprised or shocked by anything. You must hate Bush who looked into the soul of Putin and misjudged him terribly. You know all your friends so well that nothing that could come out of their mouths would surprise you?
McCain deliberately and purposely sought out Hagee's endorsement, after denouncing the likes of such TV Preachers earlier. He is using Hagee to get elected.
That makes McCain duplicitous AND a bad decision maker.
Obama did not seek and did not want any endorsement or approval from Wright. Obama has severed all ties to Wright.
THAT's the difference. Obama is going in the right direction, Hagee is going in the wrong direction.
Obama did not seek and did not want any endorsement or approval from Wright.
That wasn't true before the you-know-what hit the fan.
Obama guys, give it up. Wright's an idiot, he has a close relationship to Obama (or had), and it raises questions about O's judgement.
Why do you guys bend over backwards to just make these things up? And why are all of you ignoring the NAACP speech?-- which people who know Wright say is a typical example of his rhetoric and style.
"I didnt hear the NAACP speech but it doesnt matter because "....
YOU are not interested in being informed in any discussion you have about any particular subject. YOU just rattle things off the top of your head and expect people to believe you. However, that only works on the liberals (who can't think for themselves). To actually perform a thought out arguement with a conservative you may want to actually know what you're talking about.
Bob the P, I don't think MMFA is so much promoting the Hagee issue as pointing out the disparity between the medias attention to the two candidates and theri respective associations.
And I'm very bitter that I didn't get to post the magical requirement list (marriage,baptism,20 years) that clearly shows how the two are different. You wingnuts are on the job! Kudos!
Congratulations on getting so confused by such a short simple post, Bobthep.I think they are both non-issues as well. the point is that the non-issue of one candidate is getting 12 times the attention of the non-issue of the other candidate.
I wasn't referring to you as a wingnut, I actually meant the first post that used the Sean Hannity mantra, but I see you mentioned the baptism as well. You may not be a wingnut, but you show tendencies.
See, if the GOPpers really believed that a baptism was an essential factor in connecting two people, they wouldn't be squealing about Bill Ayers, as he didn't baptize Obama's children (as far as I know).
Did Haage baptize McCains kids? (Bobthep)
You brought it up.Are you sure you're not a wingnut?
Obama's a MEMBER of Wright's church; McCain's not a member of Hagee's church.
There's a difference.
I'm not entirely sure that is all that significant a difference. I have to admit I have to work up some care for this subjec,t, but didn't McCain call Hagee his "spiritual advisor" or some such truck? Wouldn't that parallel with the idea that Wright was a "mentor" (- not sure if that was actually said either) to Obama?
Interpreting Heru:
If Heru joins a church, the creed or doctrinal statement is just so much BS, and has no meaning even though he says he agrees with it in the induction ceremony.
According to your 'reasoning' people who belonged to a Catholic Church for years only to find out that their priest molested children are also pedophiles by virtue of their membership. Shut up.
Bob the P, I don't think MMFA is so much promoting the Hagee issue as pointing out the disparity between the medias attention to the two candidates and theri respective associations.
There's a good reason for the disparity. They are not the same thing at all.
The exact same thing? 100% identical? No, they're not. But they are both associations with controversial clergymen. McCain's may not be so much connected to his community, nor to his faith,, as much as pandering to a voting bloc,but I don't think Hagee should be scrutinized any less because of the calculated nature of the connection.
Now, the chant:
Marriage, baptism, 20 years,Marriage, baptism, 20 years,Marriage, baptism, 20 years,Marriage, baptism, 20 years,Marriage, baptism, 20 years,Marriage, baptism, 20 years,Marriage, baptism, 20 years,Marriage, baptism, 20 years,Marriage, baptism, 20 years,.......
Repeat until Hannitized.
Col., don't tell them but if they repeat it ten times, the Hannyman will appear and kiss them. They would just love that.
After being Hannitized..wait, that sounds a lot like baptized. I would rather be baptized by Rev. Wright than "goofy"fied by Hannity.
You Obama people are not only sanctimonious and quick to call others names, but you apparently aren't too lucid either.
There is no comparison between Hagee and Wright. They play different roels to the two candidates. Nobody saying Hagee shouldn't be cited, but to be outraged by a disparity in coverage is inane.
You guys aren't used to criticism or harassment, are you? One can only imagine the reaction if Hillary had friends like this...
Excuse me Mr. Guilt By Association. Hilary doesn't need friends like Wright with a husband like Bill. Why didn't she divorce him if she's so righteous? Does her continued association with him mean she approves of adultery or BJs under the desk of the Oval Office? Is she also an adulterer or just a fool?
Did Haage baptize McCains kids?
No, but from looking a Hagee there's a possibility that he's EATEN a few people's children. :-)
Thats silly. We all know he was his pastor who else is going to baptize your kids except your pastor? So sprinkled over a 20 year period Wright says about three nutty things. Obama is supposed to freak out over them? I have NO friends that I agree with 100% of the time. They are entitled to their opinions.
So sprinkled over a 20 year period Wright says about three nutty things.
During the NAACP speech alone he said three nutty things a minute.
Give it up, guys. Your candidate lacks judgement to have been hanging around this crank.
Solon
You have friends? Can you provide the links? Just because you say you have friends does not make it fact. you are being very misleading, and providing no facts to back up your silly statment. Just because you say you have friends does not make it so.
Maybe Wright is 12 times the man that Hagee is.
Jeffrey Dahmer was 12 times the man John Hagee is.
Pete,
The point is, in my opinion, even if the media treated McCain/Hagee the exact same way they treated Obama/Wright, the public would still be far more leary of Wright than Hagee. I am not condoning either's nuttiness, but as I said in another thread, people like Hagee have been clunking around political campaigns for decades, they are more of a thorn than anything. They have been vetted and scrutinized and we are still here.
As for Wright, his anger and bitterness bring a whole new dimension that many find untenable, it's basically unknown, and frankly, scary.
That is why I say liberals that want tit for tat here are just playing with fire and McCain wins, Obama loses.
OOOOH Wright is so scary, so scary that he served in a white racist military for 6 years ... maybe he will convince Obama to enslave the white race once he's elected oh my God
----------------------------------------------------
people like Hagee have been clunking around political campaigns for decades, they are more of a thorn than anything. They have been vetted and scrutinized and we are still here.
As for Wright, his anger and bitterness bring a whole new dimension that many find untenable, it's basically unknown, and frankly, scary.
That is why I say liberals that want tit for tat here are just playing with fire and McCain wins, Obama loses.
Scary? Why?
Because Wright gives raucous sermons?
Put two men in a room, and turn the lights off.
One declares Hurricane Katrina to be God's wrath on homosexuals,
One declares that the government invented HIV to kill blacks.
In complete darkness, what makes one of them more scary than the other?
Pete, I am talking about the electorate, not me personally. I find them both nutty as fruitcakes and have no time for either.
But Wright is far more damaging politically to any candidate than Hagee is, when speaking of a national presidential election. That is why Hagee is getting very little traction because the crap he spouts has all been heard before.
Look at the scary stuff that Falwell and Robertson said and did those they endorsed lose elections? No.
I want them both out of the campaign issue playground, and back to their pulpits, doing what they do.
But Wright is far more damaging politically to any candidate than Hagee is...
Why? Because YOU say so. Because the media says so. Your arrogance knows no bounds.
Which is the topic of this post. This topic is a non-starter, except the right-wing media/noise machine took a hold of it, spun it around a few thousand times, and "voila", we've got a full blown controversy over some idiot reverend.
Mark my words, this will be a non-issue come November. It might be for you, but for 99.99% of the rest of the country it will not.
When did Wright make his statements as opposed to Hagee???
Who ever heard of Wrights' sermons before the election? Would Wrights' sermons have this much noteriety if Obama wasn't running for Prez? How gets to decide which is more offensive? The MEDEA does.
Er, Falwell and Robertson are both white racists in a white racist country...maybe that has something to do with it? Nah it couldn't be...In a white racist country their endorsements would be valuable to a politician...Oh my God I must be living in a white racist country! Surely they couldn't have created the HIV virus though even if they fooled those Black men in Tuskegee into thinking they were receving treatment for syphillis so the govt could see how quickly they could die. Nahhhh thats DIFFERENT and it was oh so long ago....
------------------------------------------------
Look at the scary stuff that Falwell and Robertson said and did those they endorsed lose elections? No.
I want them both out of the campaign issue playground, and back to their pulpits, doing what they do.
I agree with this mini-thread. When you compare Wright to Hagee (or even Robertson and Fallwell), Wright isn't very scary. People who want to see WWIII come about just so they can experience something as violent as armageddon "the rapture", and the arrival of Jeeezus on earth (what a freaking fairy tale that is!) are more scary to me. Get a grip, people!
Wright's words are from his perspective - and mostly used to prove a point. People like Hagee perpetuate a dangerous myth of end times - only to enrich themselves, and spread fear among their congregations to retain power over people. I'd much rather hear a sermon "damning" our country for misdeeds against it's citizens and the world than some fairy tale about a Jewish zombie floating down from the sky.
"Wright's words are from his perspective - and mostly used to prove a point. People like Hagee perpetuate a dangerous myth of end times "
So, in your sensible liberal world, it is worse to carry a sign up that says "the end is near" while holding a cup out for donations than it is to desire an entire race be slaughtered (black liberation theology). Oh yeah, that makes perfect sense coming from someone who thinks like a liberal. And, truthfully, actually I expect that kind of thinking from liberals.
phillib wrote:
>>So, in your sensible liberal world, it is worse to carry a sign up that says "the end is near" while holding a cup out for donations than it is to desire an entire race be slaughtered (black liberation theology). Oh yeah, that makes perfect sense coming from someone who thinks like a liberal. And, truthfully, actually I expect that kind of thinking from liberals.
Oh yes. Wright wants a whole race of people slaughtered. Also, Haggee isn't just holding up a sign talking about the end of the world. He wants to promote it through a war with Iran. But what can I expect from you. "And, truthfully, actually I expect that kind of thinking from conservatives?" (Gee, isn't it easy to create a strawman argument, knock it down, and then insult my opponent? Arguementation like this is easy!)
Fog,
Unfortunately, I think Tommy's right on this one. Wright is more damaging politically because there are more people who fear having discussions about what our government does so much that they dismiss any comments as "anti-American" or "racist." Plus, the sheep of Robertson and Falwell, and many Americans, find it acceptable to ridicule and demean homosexuals so much that their lack of "morality" can lead to God not protecting us anymore.
Unfortunately, Wright's dissenting statements offend more people than gay-bashing, advocating the eradication of Islam from the planet, and hoping for the End Times. I can't believe the country I love so much is wary of those who criticize it and call them "America hating" and embraces those who call for apocolpyse, genocide and blame a segment of the U.S. population for our greatest tragedies (Falwell, Robertson re: 9/11, Hagee re: New Orleans) and they are considered patriotic). The same men who blame Americans for tragedy are revered, but if anyone blames American policies (bases in Saudi Arabia, killing innocent people), they are villified. Preachers who weasel out of military service (Robertson) or didn't serve (Hagee, Falwell, Parsley et al) are looked upon by the right as patriotic Americans, while a man who gave up his student deferment in a time when he was treated as less than human is "anti-American" (Wright). But that's America in 2008 for you.......
I stand corrected. In the black is white, up is down, war is peace world we live in, nothing is as it seems.
Tommy, I guess I give Americans too much credit for seeing through this BS. They've been dumbed down for so long, and assulated with lies from govt. officials and the media that all it takes is a little fear-mongering and flag-waving for them to vote against their best interests.
Fog,
I completely agree with you!
Put two men in a room, and turn the lights off.
If
(sorry - computer glitch!)
If you put John Hagee and Jeremiah Wright in a dark room together, John Hagee will eat Jeremiah Wright. :-)
it's basically unknown, and frankly, scary.
Tommy, didn't you just yesterday dismiss my opinion that Wright scared conservatives as ridiculous? Or were you only saying that you weren't scared?
Gotcha, I wasn't sure. I thought you were dismissing the idea that many people are scared by his words.
Now I have to run down to the material yard, I'm running low on liberal sand.
Kernal,
I'll bet you get the C-33 sand. It meets spec for birdseye.
Why is it when McBain ask for and get an endorsement from a person of dubious character it is no story?
I think it's been a non-story up unitl now because conservatives are uncomfortable with Rev. Wright's rants. Thay're more comfortable with John Hagee's anti-Catholic and anti-gay rants.
I agree with that...but where is the outrage from the Catholics? I haven't seen any - and I'm disappointed that Hagee can get away with bashing large groups of people without reprocussions, but Wright says, "God D-mn America" in a sermon - to make a point - and people start wetting their pants.
It's a head scratcher, that's for sure.
My take on the disparity between Hagee's remarks and Wright's remarks is that the troglodyte bed-wetters have at least a tinge of racism and the whole "fear the black man" mentality, which frankly, makes me sick. At the same time, Evangelicals, who are taught that Catholics and gays are bad, have no problem with it because it's what JEEEZUS wants them to believe - cuz Hagee said so. That makes me equally sick.
By the way, I wonder how Hagee is going to explain his greed and gluttony when he meets his maker?
I agree with that...but where is the outrage from the Catholics?
From the Catholic League's web site:
* * * * * * * * * *
JOHN HAGEE: VETERAN BIGOT
John Hagee is the senior pastor of Cornerstone Church in San Antonio, Texas. Best known for his End-Time writing, Hagee is committed to bringing evangelical Protestants and Jews together. He is also committed to slandering the Catholic Church.
Hagee is no stranger to the Catholic League—we've been tracking his bigotry for some time. But in his latest book, which is a revised and updated account, Jerusalem Countdown, he goes on the attack once again. Though most of his rantings in this book are directed at Muslims, he just can't help but take another shot at Catholicism. In one chapter, "Centuries of Mistreatment," he misrepresents the history of the Catholic Church so badly that it would be hard for any anti-Catholic bigot to beat.
Here's a sample of Hagee's idea of history:
So there you have it—the history of the Catholic Church as seen through the eyes of one of the most popular and influential evangelical leaders today. If you would like to write him a letter, send it to John Hagee Ministries, P.O. Box 1400, San Antonio, TX 78295-1400.
Just so our members understand how the Catholic League sees things, we do not object to those Protestants who express strong disagreement with the teachings of the Catholic Church. As long as the debate is civil, that is all that matters.
But when someone clearly distorts Catholic teachings, or misrepresents its history, that is a different matter altogether. Tone matters as well, and Hagee's tone is nothing but derisive.
http://www.catholicleague.org/catalyst.php?year=2007&month=June&read=2264
To even suggest that it is the same is a joke. Wright, among being a racist, could not wait for his 15 mins. He sought out the media, went on FOX, spoke to The National Press Club, anywhere some one would listen. He was very much a member of BO's family, and as such, the attention from the media was warrented. In the same manner, he will be covered again in 3 months when his book comes out. Wright is an expert at lining his pockets and dividing people for his advantage.
John Hagee, OTOH, has a TV show on which he can spew his venom regularly. As a televangelist, he's been lining his pockets and dividing people for years. A strong light needs to be shone on this human cockroach.
Careful! Doing so might bring to light some dirty, nasty deeds, such as anonymous trysts in bathrooms with undercover policemen. Oooops...
I'm not saying that Hagee is doing this, but you never know what you'll find when you shine lights in dark corners.
and McCain only pandered to the "agents of intolerance" to court their vote.
I, for one, am wearing my sandals today...
"Wright is an expert at lining his pockets and dividing people for his advantage."
And Hagee does not fit this description?
Great job here by Media Matters...
Total double standard. The media give McLame a free pass--simply because he's a conservative, and that's their preferred candidate.
They've grown accustomed to allowing the right wing-nuts to play this game. But, Wow!!, they found a couple of strange comments by Obama's pastor, and it was off to the races. Let's get him!!
Total hatchet job by the corporate media. The bias is amazing.
they found a couple of strange comments by Obama's pastor..........
are you serious.........could you even type that with a straight face? It is not a double standard.......not even a close one here
POV, are we weighing who said what how many times or is everyone equal when it comes to being an idiot with a pulpit?
P.S. It was nice to see Hagee in the above link telling everyone that he has done the same things as Rev. Wright and his church. Think they should team-up?
The lack of inquiry HERE into Black Liberation Gospel Doctrine (Wright's) is remarkable.
Look into it if you want to intelligently discuss the issue.
POV,
When did Obama appear at a campaign rally with Wright? McCain has appeared with Parsley at one and said he was happy to have Hagee's endorsement despite Hagee's comments. Hagee specifically has said that New Orleans's level of sin caused its peril with Katrina. To me, he is basically saying that God "D!mned" New Orleans, is he not? Where was this story when McCain was in New Orleans? McCain has denounced any of Hagee's statements that were "anti-anything," but is still proud to have his endorsement. Doesn't that equate to at least SOME press coverage?
Bottom line is this, McCain sought the endorsement of an anti-Catholic bigot and is "proud" to have it though he denounced his speech. McCain has not denounced, as far as I know (please prove me wrong), Parsley and appeared at a political rally with him. Wright is Obama's pastor and the two of them have both said they don't talk politics together. Obama has strongly denounced Wright's speeches, yet, Wright is still a story, while Parsley and Hagee are still ok with the media. Why?
"Obama has strongly denounced Wright's speeches, yet, Wright is still a story, while Parsley and Hagee are still ok with the media. Why?"
Besides the fact that this favors the Republicans electorally? The P's far outnumber the C's. And the P's are protesting the C's.
And also, don't forget that Hagee has a huge following, nationally. Pissing him off means no evangelical vote...
vs.
Wright, who has a church and now 30 minutes of fame - and then we won't hear much about him. My guess is that by summer, Wright will be irrelevant.
Total hatchet job by the corporate media. The bias is amazing.
Not in this case. Actually, this is about the first time O has faced Hillary-like scrutiny from the MSM.
If the MSM were really harassing O, they'd be showing the NAACP speech, where Wright is mocking white people. But it is so inflammatory and racist they won't.
Wright has a long history of doing this. It's not pick and choose time. Wake up, O fans. The emperor might not have clothes.
POV - I'm still waiting for examples of Wright's "racism" you keep talking about. It's been shown that his remarks are not racist. Why do you perpetuate lies?
Oh, that's right. You're a conservative. Silly me.
I completely agree with Obama's take on Wright's past weekend activities.
It was a performance.
POV,
If that is a racist statement, do you believe that the government is entirely controlled by white people?
Of course it was a performance. Wright gave, what, three speeches in the span of three days, to three different organizations? Wright knows the press is interested in him - and he's taking advantage of it. It's his "fifteen minutes of fame" which has turned into at least a half-hour.
I don't have a problem with Reverand Wright. I don't agree with some of the things he's said, but that doesn't mean I (or anyone else, for that matter) have to dislike him. Some of his speeches are bombastic. However, if you listen, he causes you to think about what he's saying. He causes you to consider the point he's making. Sure, he uses imagery and puts forth ideas that some may call outrageous - it's to make a point.
How many of you have had a preacher/minister/priest give a sermon in which you might not have agreed with all of the content? I'd venture to guess that most of you who are church-goers, or those of you who at least listen to some sort of religious teaching, understand that you might not agree with what the minister is saying, but it doesn't always make you consider leaving the church.
A church is a family of sorts. People stay with their home churches for many reasons, (1) for traditional reasons (i.e. "I've been a member of this congregation for 30 years"); and (2) the family-like ties which are made with other members of the church. Yes, Obama was a member of Wright's church for 20+ years. Maybe being a member of that church for tradition and family's sake was the reason for staying. Who knows why Obama remained a member for so long. You don't know. I don't know. Only Obama knows. So again, I ask, what's the big deal? Wright's words are causing controversy, not Obama's.
How many of you have had a preacher/minister/priest give a sermon in which you might not have agreed with all of the content?
I've never heard any of those people mock ethnic voices, or make fun of ethnic traits and traditions, or talk about consonants and Mozart lovers and how they don't like Billie Holliday and how psychiatrists force people to think they are ADD, all in the same paragraph.
The guy's a nutcase.
Fried
Two points. 1. Aids would have been created in the 70's.....and at that time...most high ranking govt officials were in fact white.
2. You can be black and a racist. That is what is giving so many people here a problem. They feel that because he is black, he could not possibly be a racist. I dont believe that.
"1. Aids would have been created in the 70's.....and at that time...most high ranking govt officials were in fact white."
The first documented cases of AIDS was a man in the Congo in 1959.
POV,
The biggest difference, to me, between Hagee/Parsley and Wright, is that McCain has either appeared with (Parsley) or sought the political endorsement of (Hagee) both men. Wright is Obama's pastor and both of them have said they don't talk politics with the other, but McCain's crazies are both political voices, not private ones.
I guess its scarier to talk about race in this country (not to you, POV, I mean the electorate here) than to talk about the eradication of the world's largest religion or God throwing natural disasters at gays. Sad.
Fried
I understand your point, but Wright was supposed to appear when BO kicked off his campaign. He was left behind at the last min. Mostly likely because they feared all of his comments would come out.
But he was left out. McCain, knowing of the speech and beliefs of Parsley and Hagee, sought their endorsements politically and not personally. The fact that McCain, only 8 years ago, called Falwell and guys like Hagee and Parsley "agents of intolerance" and is now sucking up to them is far more newsworthy than any diatribes by Reverend Wright.
Ok......good point, but ya cant leave the guy out.......defend him.....distance yourself a little.......have that level of personal involvement, and then be shocked when it blows up.
BO did the right thing yesterday, but it was still a legitimate story. IF BO wins, Wright would have been the Presidents Pastor. With what we know about him now......that is a very scary thought
POV,
Since McCain has sought the endorsements of Falwell, Hagee, and Parsley, do you attribute their beliefs to McCain? McCain went out of his way and spoke at Liberty U. whose founder blamed America's "secularization" for 9/11. Hagee hates Catholics and hopes for war with Iran. Parsley wants to rid the world of Islam, yet McCain sought these guys out and calls Parsley a spiritual guide.
I guess John McCain blames America first and thinks that God is no longer protecting America because of gays, abortionists and the ACLU, wants to start a war with Iran to begin the end times, hates Catholics, and wants to rid the world of Islam. He has only renounced Hagee's "anti-anything" quotes, but is proud to have his endorsement. He no longer thinks people like Falwell are agents of intolerance and calls Parsley a spiritual guide, all things he sought. To me, the minds and influence of those three far outweigh any sentiments expressed by Wright, who unlike those three, put his life on the line for our country.
Since W has spoken so highly of Billy Graham helping him find Jesus, I guess you believe that W is anti-semitic, correct?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Billy_Graham#Controversy
I can't believe that anyone who supports McCain and tolerates his sought-after endorsements is scared of the influence of Rev. Wright. By the way, since religion is now public domain, who will ask McCain why he recently changed his?
Fried.
In my view, it is more than fair to ask McCain about the views of his spiritual advisors. It is more than fair to bring them up and demand that he answer. Then anyone can determine if that is a problem or not. I do not think McCain is or was as close to Hagee and others as BO was to Wright, but it is more than fair and valid to ask the questions and expect answers.
POV,
Then why hasn't the MSM done this? Why haven't soundbites of these guys flooded the airwaves at least to some extent?
I didn't see or hear anything from Wright worse than what I've heard from Billy Graham (the anti-semite). Billy Graham has been pastor to several presidents - and he gets a pass? The guy hates Jews, but we're willing to let him by?
It's all such BS. And the right-wing would have you believe that Billy Graham is the nation's pastor. The man will be passing on soon - and I'm willing to put money on the line that some, especially on the right, will make a statement to the effect that "Billy Graham was the nation's pastor". Well, he's not mine - and definitely doesn't speak for me.
You can be black and a racist.
No, you cannot. Racism involves exercising power or control over people of a different race. Since blacks have never been in a position of power in this country, only whites can be racists.
And most racists nowadays are members of the Republican Party - they used to be Democrats, but they followed Strom Thurmon to the GOP after the Civil Rights Act was passed in 1964.
wzwriter
Of course you can be black and racist. Are you telling me no black person holds power over a white person? That no black employer ever fired or discriminated against a white person based on race? Are you really going to claim that there are no black people who discriminate against asians or any group based on race. Are you kidding me. Anyone can be a racist....it is a belief, a mindset, a thought and action process.
It is time to leave 1950 behind.
It is time to leave 1950 behind.
And it's time for you to get your head out of your posterior.
Surprise surprise...You see scary 'black racists' [sic] everywhere and white racism nowhere. Peculiar since there is a 500 year record of white racism. Where is the record of blacks enslaving whites, colonizing Europe, where are the whites named Kwame instead of John because blacks annihilated their culture and made them speak African tongues....? You remind me of David Duke, the ideological 'champion' of the reverse racism school. He doesn't think of himself as a white racist either.
You can be black and a racist. That is what is giving so many people here a problem. They feel that because he is black, he could not possibly be a racist. I dont believe that.
He isnt dumb but you are unbelievably stupid. Criticising the government is NOT RACIST even when you are wrong. It was a stupid statement but not a racist one. Yes you have said it many times WISHING it would magically become true. The only thing you show is that you are a complete and utter moron.
Solon
Welcome back. You are late on this thread. I really missed your loony lfet wing, no sense making, name calling, acting like a child, shwoing the world what a dumb a$$ you really are comments.
I have noticed you seem really fired up over your racist buddy Wright having some problems, and it looks like you really need your mommy. You are crying more than ever. So, since you have responded to numerous postings of mine, I will deal with all of them here.
1. Wright is a racist, and it is clear.
2. Black people can be racist.
3. You prove the absence does make the hear grow founder.....i missed you and I needed my moron fix. Everytime you are away, and I hear reasonable, smart people talk, I wonder if it is possible that McCain might actually lose. AHHH....but then you come back, and remind me how dumb the lft can really be, and all is good. I sleep better knowing that people like you are out talking to others....so then can make fun of you to.
For two days, I've been waiting for you to point out examples of Wright's racism; yet you continue to perpetuate the myth that Wright is racist, without even giving any examples. Isn't it high time you give some examples, instead of just throwing around the term "racist"?
I've noticed that people on the right who use the word racist often, tend to use it like a boomerang...it's thrown out there, but it always comes back to it's owner...
You're hung up on the dictionary specifics of RACIST. The word is, by that standard, recklessly misused by most in referring to hateful, bigoted speech and conduct. Don't be so legalistic; you know the intent of the user.
And if Wright isn't guilty of hatespeech, I can't wait to hear your explanation...
Is that all you can come up with?
Still no examples of Wright's racism?
You jerks are really transparent.
I know conservatives like to change the definition of terms to suit their needs, but in this case, you still cannot back up your argument that Wright is a racist. He said nothing racist - even by your change in the definition of the term "racist".
If we're not to use the definition of words, then what benchmarks do we have for vocabulary and exchange of ideas? Your argument sucks.
Here's an opportunity for one who wears his Liberal pin on his lapel:
Give a concise, direct answer to this concise, direct question: Is Jeremiah Wright guilty of hatespeech?
If you give a concise and direct answer to this question, CommonSense, you will be the first Liberal to do so, to any question ever! You could even start a trend.
But...you won't.
Hey Col
Look how good he did when he spoke to the press club. The man acted like an idiot. Where was this brilliant man I kept hearing about. Where was this thoughtful person. All I saw was a fool and a racist.
Boy, you're one up one me - I had no interest in watching his speech because IT IS IRRELEVANT!
You, on the other hand, grasp and CLING like grim death to the irrelevant because all the relevant topics that really affect this country simply exposes your parties' greed (war profiteering), corruption (lies about Iraq), and ineptitude (My Pet Goat).
Col
you keep ignoring the fact that he was in that situation because OF HIS OWN WORDS!!!!
POV,
Out of curiousity, how much of the speeches in question did you watch by Wright. I did not see the press club one, I watched the entire Moyers interview and the entire NAACP speech.
Fried
I watched both.......PBSwas real softball...a conversation.......but that is where he bgane to claim the BO was just doing what a politician does........The press club was real bad in my view.
Fried
I will agree to a point yes....but in context, he is still making attacks on this country based on a 1950's view of America. He is still making terrorist claims....(which we have discussed a little already) against America, and he is still, in my view, distorting America, while giving no credit to this country for making him a very very wealth man.
POV,
If he owes the country thanks, does the country owe him apologies?
Fried
Who exactly would apologize to him? I am sorry, but I just dont feel that sorry for some one who is now wealthy beyond what most people could ever hope to obtain. He is not the first nor the last to have a hard life. I would simply like him to acknowledge what this country has done for him.
RT
You are right on both points, and both are good points
POV,
He grew up in a country that treated him less than human for at least 23 years, yet, he stood up, gave up his student deferment for that country. Let me ask you this, if you lived in a country that treated you like that, would you put your life on the line for that place unless you believed in it and its ideals?
PBSwas real softball...a conversation.......(POV)
A conversation??? No! Not that!!!
POV, if you ever settle down a little, get beyond the "anti-American" and "racist" ideas you've been fed, you should try listening to that conversation.You might be amazed at the exchange of ideas and the information that's communicated when there's not some idiot screaming talking points and shutting down microphones.
COL
Had it been a republican in that position.....pick a Christian like Mel Gibson.....he would have never ever been treated with kid gloves like that. PBS is so liberal.so far to the left, that all you will ever get from them is just what ya saw........no substance........no follow up........no tough questions. It was a joke....and shows the liberal tax funded media is alive and well.
POV wrote:
>>Had it been a republican in that position.....pick a Christian like Mel Gibson.....he would have never ever been treated with kid gloves like that.
Talk about speculation! If you have not listened to the interview, how are you even qualified to make that judgment? The rest of your post is just a rant.
Solon
Handing you a tissue.....PBS is one of the most liberal, biased, "news" orgaizations out there. I suppose an idiot like you thinks the NY times is moderate as well.
My mistake......you are not capable of thinking.
You nailed it. Darned if you do...Darned if you don't. I personally believe conservative duplicity on that point indicates they really don't care about a solution. Just the opportunity to mindlessly and irrationally criticize.
I have heard some black and white conservatives point out haughtily that blacks disproportionately receive welfare and commit crimes, but one group tries to change that in the black community and look how the conservatives treat them. Just shameful.
My black brother-in-law thinks that characterizing Wright's doctrinal positions and preaching as "empowerment speech" is ridiculous.
Day number 2, waiting for examples of Wright's racism from POV.
I'm glad I'm not holding my breath.
Wright is not a racist just because you keep saying he is as part of your hivemind assignment. SKWWWAAKKk
Propaganda parrot POV Wright is racist
Normal Human, what has he said that is racist?
POV SKWWAWAAAKKKK Wright is racist.
Normal Human can you cough up something racist he said?
POV SKWWWAAAAAKKKK Wright is racist
NH so you cant?
POV he criticised the GOVERNMENT
NH That isnt racist
POV SKWWWAAAKKK Wright is racist
NH you are repeating yourself but not within miles of showing Wright is racist
POV SKWWWAAAKKKKk Wright is racist the government is made up mostly of white people
NH So is the NHL if I criticise hockey does that make me racist
POV SKWWWAAAAKKKKK Wright is racist
Give it UP. You can repeat this hivemind stupidity till the cows come home you have not shown a SINGLE THING Wright has said that is racist. You THINK repeating this idiocy will magically make it true but it WONT.
Solon
You are really focused on Hockey. Let me guess...you wanted to be a figure skater, then realized your 300 hundred pounds of stupity made that unlikely. I know.....liberal on ice.......
You could skae in a little skirt while crying......right wing conspicary.....ann coulter bad.......rush is a meanie....hannity evil. I might even go to see that performance. Idioits on ice sounds like a nice family activity....my 4 year old could talk to you, and know that she was smarter than you.
"Actually I was the star of my schools wrestling team but I dont like ice, I have that thin California blood."
I always figured you would enjoy rolling on the mat with guys. Now, you admit it. That explains a lot about your thinking patterns and why you always get mad and start namecalling when you lose an arguement.
"It isnt our fault you are the stupidest poster in the history of this site."
Hey, that's MY title and I don't plan on losing it to anyone!
phillib wrote:
>>I always figured you would enjoy rolling on the mat with guys. Now, you admit it. That explains a lot about your thinking patterns and why you always get mad and start namecalling when you lose an arguement.
Wow! We have phlilib here who makes a 7th grade gay joke. Ha ha ha! You are gay, Solon, and that is why you get mad!
It would seem to me that anyone who has to make such a lame gay joke is the one losing the argument.
Here is the difference: Obama was a member of Rev Wright's church for 20 years. Obama calls him his Spiritual Adviser! McCain does not have this close relationship with Hagee.
Hagee has at least tried to explain and respond. Take a moment and look at this link.
Wright has done litte to explain his anti-American, ridiculous conspiracies, and downright racist remarks and has in fact, made things worse by denying he ever said it.
Come on...its a much bigger story with Obama
Okay...see this UPI article: McCain: Hagee comments 'nonsense'
GF,
He told ABC George that he was still happy to have Hagee's endorsement though.
GG,
McCain sought Hagee's endorsement!
It looks like even Goodfellas is demonstrating the double-standard further. Both Obama and McCain have called the comments of their "spiritual advisors" "nonsense", but only Obama is hammered for it.
I don't think conservatives have much of a sense of fairness at all these days.
Loyalty is more important to them.
OPEN, I sense that the Republans are getting antsy over their chances in November. The Rightwing radio/talk/print nuts get these controlled minds to parrot and ape whatever they say. I would bet that 90% of them never knew of Hagee or Parsley until the good guys brought it to their attention. Now, they don't have an answer except Baptism/Marriage.
Non-thinking is the basic foundation of the Republans. Repeating what they have been told is the only THING.
John McCain has never referred to Hagee as a 'spiritual adviser'. Never.
That's the difference. That's why Obama is in deeper with Wright than McCain is with Hagee. simple
Really? He didnt? Mother Jones said he did
Senator John McCain hailed as a spiritual adviser an Ohio megachurch pastor who has called upon Christians to wage a "war" against the "false religion" of Islam with the aim of destroying it.
http://www.motherjones.com/washington_dispatch/2008/03/john-mccain-rod-parsley-spiritual-guide.html
"Really? He didnt? Mother Jones said he did".- Solon
I read the David Corn article in Mother Jones and you're wrong about one thing: The "Ohio Magachurch pastor" Corn is referring to is Ron Parsley, not Hagee. But, hey - easy mistake.
Also, just because David Corn says Parsley is McCain's 'Spiritual Adviser' doesn't mean McCain actually ever said it, or believes it to be so; about Parsley OR Hagee.
And after doing some research, I have also found that Obama has denied that he ever referred to Wright as "Spiritual Adviser". SO we're BOTH wrong.
Whether its conservative or liberal media, we should always question EVERYTHING.
GF,
Then why isn't the media questioning McCain over these ties?
Then why isn't the media questioning McCain over these ties?
Because Obama has had a closer, more longterm relationship with Wright. Look, McCain sought the endorsement of leaders in the evangelical Christian church in order to win over the religious right (which he desperately needs). I don't think he had any idea of some of the things Hagee had said, and has indeed tried to address those things. I think if he know of some of the things Hagee had said, he would not have sought his endorsement.
GF,
You really think that McCain doesn't have a computer? How on earth can you excuse McCain here? If you noticed on ABC, McCain tried to deal with some of the controversial things, but then said he was keeping the endorsement and he was happy to have it! I guess bigotry against gays, Catholics and prayers for war with Iran are ok, as long as they're not said?
How can you be happy to have someone's endorsement and renounce their platform?
Hagee the Hut wants to start WWIII so that Jeeeeezzzzzzusssssss will come back before he croaks.
I'm hoping that John Hagee croaks real soon, so he can share a room in hell with Jerry Falwell and D. James Kennedy.
You sound as if you were raised fundy, and have a big chip on your shoulder for some legalists.
Get over it and try for objectivity.
You are obviously unfamiliar with Hagee's apocolyptic views. I didn't grow up going to one of these churches, but I have several childhood friends who did. You should catch Hagee's show sometime when he really gets frothy about Bible prophecy and all. It's really something else.
No room for objectivity with these guys. Purely binary logic - evil or holy.
Solon
As usual with your posts.....so much stupity..so little time. Instead of answering you again, I am searching on line GED programs for you. Perhaps an education would do you well. I doubt it, but it is worth a try.
I know that would mean you would have to get a job, get off food stamps and govt programs, but really solon, fat drunk and stupid is no way to go through life son. I will let you know what I find out.
Come on...its a much bigger story with Obama
-----------------------------------------------
Not really. Obama didn't ask Wright for his endorsement in order to gain votes. The media turned Wright's comments into a circus, trying to deflect conversation about real issues (like Iraq, healthcare, etc.) to stupid reports of a minister in Chicago. McCain can't win without the evangelical vote, so he begs for Hagees support. McCain is just Hagee's fluffer.
His remarks to the Beemer Bolsheviks in SF demonstrated his uppityness.
After his coronation, do we call him "Your Uppityness" or...
This ain't a floggin, this is testifying.
Usual deal, no conservative missinformation, you don't show up here.
Hagee just repeated his claim, last week, that god caused Katrina because of a schedualed gay pride parade. Support your statement. Besides saying it must be true bacause I believe it is.
There is eveidence on this very thread on his views of Catholics. You are falling into an idendity I would label serial liar.
As a practicing surrealist, defaming my very descrite sense of proportion, is fightin words. I'll spot you a four point perspective and still wup your sense of proportion!
80P
Thank you, you get points for a sense of humor.
Certain other details leave me suspicious. However I give you what some will not. The benifit of doubt.
oh, i am incorrigible, it's true.
McCain's association with Hagee goes back beyond Hagee's recent endorsement of McCain and their public embrace. Last July McCain was invited by Hagee to attend and address Hagee's CUFI(Christians United for Israel) conference in Washington. McCain accepted and addressed the conference as an honored guest. During that address, McCain told Hagee's organization:
"It's very hard trying to do the Lords work in the city of Satan and I'm very grateful to have all of you here. "
Hagee will hold another CUFI conference this coming July in Washington. Last year, the CUFI conference included groups of Hagee's followers calling on members of Congress to oppose the creation of a Palestinian state and to consider a military preemptive strike against Iran.
Media Matters (very little),
I'd say the effort here to make Hagee the same as Jeremiah Wright's influence over their candidate is laughable! Using the premise of this story, I'd say Hagee was maybe 1/1000th rather than 1/12th the connection that Rev. Wright has with Obama.
By the way, still waiting for Nancy (the Pinapple Princess) Pelosi's and the democrat's "common sense" plan for lowering oil prices........
PC,
What do you make of a man who actively sought the endorsement of religious bigots? I'll tell you what, PC, when Bush lives up to "Mission Accomplished" and "major combat operations are over" and shows it by bringing the guys home who fought a war YOUR PARTY so desperately wanted, maybe we will have the money to start looking at more common sense strategies, deal?
time does not permit me to comment in full at this hour, however, i saw hillary on the factor and heard her plan. what a bunch of poppycock.
she is against more drilling, like in anwr and off the coasts, and she is against nuclear.
she is in favor of taking money from the oil companies because of their windfall profits. she says, they don't need them. i read recently that to recover the oil from the brazil finds will be a challenge. they are at such depth, have such salt protective layers, that the equipment necessary does not even exist yet. certainly, the equipment will be created, but who is to do it and pay for it. not hillary or pelosi. the oil companies.
then she wants to change the laws so individuals can sue opec countries for antitrust violations. has she taken leave of her senses. there is in the law a maxim as old as the hills that a country cannot be sued for sovereign acts. its' called sovereign immunity. so she is going to change the law so i can sue saudi arabia. and then some individual in saudi arabia will sue the u.s. for whatever. IT WILL NEVER IN A THOUSAND YEARS HAPPEN. she is so full of b.s. she doesn't know which way is up.
o'reilly is so dumb he was unable to follow up on any of these points. geez, i can't stand him.
I think OReilly has been given the task of not taking on Clinton so the right won't take focus on Obama.
Clinton really is out there. The only thing I really agree with Clinton on is ANWR. As of a few years ago, according to some Bush admin advisors, even the oil companies did not want to drill there. It turns out, no one has any guess as to how much oil is there or not there. It is a crap shoot. Another federal giveaway that the Alaskan congressional delegation wants on the blind hope it will bring jobs to Alaska at the expense of the taxpayer.
As for nuclear, I am only for it if they build the reactors in tourist attractions in the reddest parts of red-states. Seems like a good compromise to me.
I demonstrated elsewhere how stupid the gas tax holiday is from both McCain and Clinton. It more than likely won't even change the price of gas.
This morning a former Clinton appointee switched from Clinton to Obama, but all Fox was talking about were some nationwide poll numbers that looked favorable to Hillary. They called them a "major shift". There can't be any doubt what Fox is trying to do here.
Why any Democrat would play into the Republicans' hand is beyond me.
Pelosi is smarter on her worst day than a moron like you will EVER be. Just because you want to give ALL the money in the country to the richest and starve children to death doesnt mean those of us with a normal IQ think that makes sense.
The richest....we can assume you mean all overpaid people...ones with zero financial risk in their lives...therefore, those with zero street-cred....
doesn't that describe YOU? By the way, Solon, are you paying your car wash guy thirty bucks a wash yet, or are you starving him? How 'bout your paper boy?
OK, I leapfrogged you cons with the Jingometer®, but now you seem to have an instrument that precisely measures the connection between a politician and a clergyman. Seems to have some bugs, as I've seen ratios of 1:12 and 1:1000, but that's more accurate than most of your stuff, so I may want a franchise.
Whaddya call it? pontificator-calibrater? Parsonograph? Pietentiometer?
Solon
Of course you are insane, and of course you think the McCain issue should be bigger.......but it it not. Why? Because most of the country is not part of the loony left as you are, and most of the country can spot a racist when they see one. Maybe someday you will wake up and relaize what an idiot you are.
How you could think BO could go to the "pastors" church for 20 years and not know what he was is insane, and no one believe it. No one but you of course. You claim he siad only a few, controversial things. He has a greats hits album of hate filled, racist, anti american rants. You even admitted you did not see the ultra liberal PBS interview. So, as usual, you have no idea what you are talking about. You just make it up as you go along. According to you, the NYT times, PBS, and the democratic party are moderate.......not flamming left wing propogand machines. hat an idiot.
I really liked that one......althought I have to admit....i do not know what simpering means. I would like to know what kind of baboon I am. Please expand.
i
I will wait for further clarification before we get back to the insults
POV,
Let me ask you this: Whose rhetoric is more damaging: Parsley/Hagee or Wright?
Who has a bigger following in this country: Parsley/Hagee or Wright?
Wright seemed to blame American policy for 9/11, the Religious Right (Falwell/Robertson) blamed Americans and pointed out which ones. Which, in your opinion, is worse? Hagee blamed the behavior of New Orleanians for Katrina. Again, which is worse?
Wright has never called for genocide. Parsley has. Hagee is advocating a pre-emptive strike on Iran. So has Parsley.
Whose teachings advocate war? Why, in your mind, is Wright more dangerous than Hagee/Parsley?
Fried
Not sure I can answer who has the bigger following. My guess would be Wright, but I dont know. I consider myself a pretty hard core, knowledgeable conserative, and I had never heard of the guys McCain got in trouble with. I am also pretty religious, but I also tend to tune out and not like most national religious figures.
As far as a pre-emptive strike on Iran.....I think that may very well become necessary. I am sure you wont like that answer, but it is honest. If we can prove that they are building nukes at some point, I simply dont think we have a choice. I do not think we had a choice with iraq either. Sadam kicked the inspectors out. He did not have the weapons we feared, but he did want the world to think he did. If it comes down to an attack on iran, or risking a nuclear stike on the us or israel, I choose the attack in iran every time.
POV,
You absolutely must be kidding that Wright has a bigger following than Hagee! Use Google!
Hagee is broadcast on 160 channels in this country! He has a lobby that meets with Congress! This one isn't even close! Hagee has influence that stretches far beyond his congregation. I am surprised being a hard-core conservative that you didn't know of this guy and for McCain to claim ignorance is laughable.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Hagee
I completely and totally disagree with you on Iran. We had a choice with Iraq. Even if they had WMDs there was no way for them to reach our country.
If, in your mind, POV, we have to attack Iran pre-emptively, when does the draft start? Are you going to volunteer? We simply don't have the forces to attack a country that large unless everyone who is for these wars signs up. We were terribly, terribly sloppy with Iraq and never had any business there. Bush never listened to the advisors he said he did. One general wanted 300,000 troops, Bush fired him. If they threaten Israel, I am quite certain Israel can take care of itself. An attack on Iran would absolutely be insane at this point or any in the near future with our military strained past the breaking point already.
Fried
As I said, the Hagee Wright thing was just a guess. I had hineslty never heard of the man, but as I said, I have never been into the televanglaist or tv ministry thing. Perhaps I just thought Wright was bigger due to his recent coverage.
As far as Iran goes, we just see it different. I simply thing the risk is to great. But to be fair.....my premis was based on them having or about to have a necular weapon. In that case, I say we take them out, plain and simple.
So, are you enlisting if we attack Iran? Where are we going to find the forces? I really don't think we need more enemies at this point. I hope you now see the following that Hagee has and I hope it frightens you as much as it frightens me. Those people have a Congressional audience. Think about that.
Funny that the "liberal" media could make people think that Wright had a bigger following than Hagee, isn't it? When do you think the media will play Hagee's sermons and videos? When will the media replay the Falwell Robertson interview about 9/11 and then show McCain speaking at Liberty? If you believe the media is liberal, why aren't they all over this? If the media is liberal, how would anyone think that Wright and Hagee are even in the same ballpark? What about Parsley? McCain has called him a spiritual guide and he is calling for the eradication of Islam. McCain sought these guys! If anyone claims McCain didn't know what they stood for, isn't it time McCain got on the internets?
Even though there is no proof that the American govt created HIV there is plenty of proof that America has conducted secret biological experiments on Black men. Exhibit A: Tuskegee Syphillis Experiment. Thus we know what America is capable of even if you flag pinheads want to act like it didnt happen.
A preemptive slap on the face to anyone who whines that that was oh so long ago.
Heru, that's been my point on Wrights AIDS comments. While I don't personally believe it, and haven't seen any evidence of it, there is a precedent that makes it at least plausible.
Being in the non-religious minority myself, that's a lot more backup, IMO, than what comes with a lot of stuff said from the pulpit. I've invited the wingnuts to provide transcripts of their clergymen's material from the last 30 years for scrutiny, but no volunteers yet.
Bottom line is that because McCain is the Republican nominee, any potential devastating story about him will not be PLAYED OVER AND OVER AGAIN by any major media whatsoever. That will only be done to a Democrat. There will never be a pummelling repetitious campaign in any mainstream media outlet that tries to damage McCain. Never. All significant criticism of McCain ended when he became the nominee. Yet somehow people still delude themselves that the mainstream media is liberal.
Either both Obama and McCain stories are big or neither are.
If Wright had never baptized Obama's children or married Obama to his wife, THE WRIGHT STORY WOULD STILL BE ALL OVER CABLE NEWS EVERY DAY.
I rather enjoy the extra coverage of Jerry. The more damage to Obama the better.
Go Hillary!
How does it make you feel that so many people vote Republican based on distorted perceptions of reality?
You seem to actually know the truth that your conservative ideology is so bankrupt that only by a massive campaign of repeated distortions and lies can your party hope to ever get elected. If it wasn't for these lies and distortions, Democrats would always win.
It doesn't bother me in the least because I don't believe that Republican's, conservatives and Libertarians vote based on distored perceptions of reality. And the reason Democrats don't always win, believe it or not, is because a whole lot of us disagree with liberal ideologies. The big difference is that I am ok with you having a different political viewpoint. Do you feel that I should have that freedom too?
Lets see. The 8hr day and 40hr workweek. Rural electrification, Social Security, Medicare, Osha. As for your delusions they are precious. Very few liberals want your gun. Most of my liberal friends love their guns. It was BUSH who let Osama go, he is the one who lost interest in him and SAID SO. As for your comment that Clinton let him go its just a hivemind talking point with no validity. You really never know what you are talking about do you?
Mainstream media is influencing the American democratic process by mis-informing, clipping and doctoring information, choosing what ought to be put on perpetual loop and what must go under the radar ultimately, providing a tainted version of the truth to the American people. What we hear over and over does influence how we perceive issues.
The media is driving their own self-interests...namely ratings at the expense of our entire democratic process. This above all else, is an outrage and we had better quickly realize the huge impact this will have on the decisions we make regarding the future of this country.
And do you mean that they haven't been playing that Catholics Are Whores" comment by Hagee while also showing Hagee endorsing McCain in an endless loop, 24/7?
If that's the case, then why doesn't the media just come out of the closet and "WEAR THEIR ELPHANT LAPEL PINS" for all to see who they really are?
Or ARE they WEARING THEM under their television or newspaper suit collar - just to make it "seem" like they are playing their coverage "even"???
Both Wright and Hagee are bigot pigs. I deplore both of them.
The larger question is not whether they are both lunatic nutters (they both are). I give Barack Hussein Obama the benefit of the doubt that he does not agree with the racist reverend.
The question is Obama's judgement. He sat in the pew for twenty years and listened to this garbage. He never objected until he was running for President. He can not say he did not know. Why else would he disinvite Wright to the opening of his Presidential campaign? He knew Wright was a foaming at the moth babbling racist nut.
Despite this, he chose to expose his two young daughters to this anti-American anti-white garbage. It is no wonder why his wife hates America.
McCain was dead wrong to accept the endorsement of Hagee. Hagee is in the same league as Wright and Farrakhan. Obama rejected Farrakahn - and McCain should reject Hagee.
However, McCain did not select Hagee as his personal pastor and spiritual leader for twenty years. He did not expose his family to Hagee's garbage as Obama subjected his family to Wright's garbage.
It is not a question to whether Wright or Hagee is the bigger bigot. It is a question of judgement. Barack Hussein Obama has a closer connection to Wright than McCain to Hagee. It is fair to question the judgement of a candidate (Obama) who has such a thin resume. This is why the Wright issue is relevent.
Are you still beating that drum? Jeeezus, dude, grab a ticket and get on board. Obama's middle name isn't the main issue now...it's Wright/Obama and Hagee/McCain.
You worthless troglodytes are, again, living the very definition of "insanity"; doing the same thing over and over again, hoping to get a different, favorable result. Guess what? It doesn't work.
Obviously, the best part of you trickled down your mother's leg.
You worthless troglodytes are, again, living the very definition of "insanity"; doing the same thing over and over again, hoping to get a different, favorable result. Guess what? It doesn't work.
Well, yeah, it does work. It's a rational view. I have similar questions and if questioning whether the best part of me went down my Mother's leg makes you feel better about it and that's all ya got, well, that kind of speaks to you moreso than it does to your intended target. Many rational, thoughtful people are questioning this relationship and Obama's reaction to this issue. If you don't agree, just say so. Crude, personal attacks aren't the answer, but whatever.
SC,
Why did McCain pursue the endorsements of Hagee and Parsley?
I don't see the correlation for a couple of reasons. Primarily, the relationship between Wright and Obama appears to be a very close, enduring relationship that has gone on for 20 years. The relationship between Hagee and McCain is.....what? I mean other than an endorsement. Hamas endorsed Obama and it's not in the news simply because an endorsement isn't the same level of connection as there appears to be in the Obama/Wright relationship.
This seems to be a bit of a stretch and seems to be more to detract from the real issue, which is the troubling relationship between these men.