or Connect
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Wright in Context - What The Media Didn't Show
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Wright in Context - What The Media Didn't Show - Page 3

post #81 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

I guess the question is if Obama will also find himself under the bus at the hand of Wright's stalwart supporters?
Does this cost him "street cred" among those who are "down for the struggle?"

Who's driving this bus anyway...?

I got the "thrown under a bus" description from my black co-worker. He also believes that this won't hurt him at all.
post #82 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

So anyway, what about Hagee? Why the deafening silence?

McCain actively sought his endorsement (something Obama never sought from Wright), praised him to the high heavens, gave a kind of half-assed "don't agree with everything" when some of Hagee's more colorful remarks came to light, continued to praise him, and now gets churlish if anyone brings it up (which, of course, almost never happens).

Don't seem to recall him using the occasion to make a thoughtful speech on the role of religion in America or what it means to claim God brings his wrath down on the unworthy, or anything like that.

How come? Why is this only a problem for Obama? In seeking his endorsement, McCain tacitly approved Hagee's world view, far more than Obama has ever put his stamp of approval on everything out of Wright's mouth.

I mean, I know it can't be RACIST BULLSHIT because America is long over such things. And it can't be the LIBERAL MEDIA because they are doing everything in their power to repress the Wright story and make a big deal out of Hagee, liberal thugs that they are.

So: I'm mystified. Wait-- let me channel SDW:

THEY ARE COMPLETELY DIFFERENT. OBAMBA SAT IN WRIGHT'S CHURCH FOR OMFG!!!! 20 YEARS, WHEREAS HAGEE AND MCCAIN ARE MERELY BEST BUDDIES FOREVER. OBAMA IS CLEARLY STEEPED IN WRIGHT'S IDEOLOGY OF HATRED, WHICH MAY ERUPT FROM AT ANY TIME IN THE FORM OF SOME KIND OF KILL WHITEY LEGISLATION, WERE HE ALLOWED IN THE WHITEHOUSE, WHEREAS MCCAIN EMBRACED HAGEE'S IDEOLOGY OF HATRED MERELY AS A POLITICAL CALCULATION, WHICH IS ACTUALLY KIND LAUDABLE, WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT IT.

OK, I think I got it. Carry on.

You didn't get it at all. They are not the same in any respect. The relationship is different. The comments and beliefs of the controversial figure are different. It's really a pathetic comparison, even if McCain was wrong to seek Hagee's endorsement.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #83 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by mydo View Post

Wright jumped under the bus all on his own. Obama just watched and commented on it.

Disagree. Obama pounced. He denounced him. He also contradicted himself in two ways. First, he said in Philadelphia:

"[I could no more disown Wright than I could the black community."]

(brackets there because I don't have the exact quote...that was the gist of it).

Today he did just that. Hmmm. Secondly, he said:

Quote:
Now, Ive already denounced the comments that had appeared in these previous sermons. As I said, I had not heard them before.

But previously, there was a different story. He said he had heard them but not been there. Then he wasn't sure if he was there, and then it was he heard some but not others. I don't know.

The pundits I've heard today (admittedly conservative ones) seem to think this vastly increases Hillary's chances. We'll see.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #84 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

So anyway, what about Hagee? Why the deafening silence?

McCain actively sought his endorsement (something Obama never sought from Wright), praised him to the high heavens, gave a kind of half-assed "don't agree with everything" when some of Hagee's more colorful remarks came to light, continued to praise him, and now gets churlish if anyone brings it up (which, of course, almost never happens).

Don't seem to recall him using the occasion to make a thoughtful speech on the role of religion in America or what it means to claim God brings his wrath down on the unworthy, or anything like that.

How come? Why is this only a problem for Obama? In seeking his endorsement, McCain tacitly approved Hagee's world view, far more than Obama has ever put his stamp of approval on everything out of Wright's mouth.

I mean, I know it can't be RACIST BULLSHIT because America is long over such things. And it can't be the LIBERAL MEDIA because they are doing everything in their power to repress the Wright story and make a big deal out of Hagee, liberal thugs that they are.



So: I'm mystified. Wait-- let me channel SDW:

THEY ARE COMPLETELY DIFFERENT. OBAMBA SAT IN WRIGHT'S CHURCH FOR OMFG!!!! 20 YEARS, WHEREAS HAGEE AND MCCAIN ARE MERELY BEST BUDDIES FOREVER. OBAMA IS CLEARLY STEEPED IN WRIGHT'S IDEOLOGY OF HATRED, WHICH MAY ERUPT FROM AT ANY TIME IN THE FORM OF SOME KIND OF KILL WHITEY LEGISLATION, WERE HE ALLOWED IN THE WHITEHOUSE, WHEREAS MCCAIN EMBRACED HAGEE'S IDEOLOGY OF HATRED MERELY AS A POLITICAL CALCULATION, WHICH IS ACTUALLY KIND LAUDABLE, WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT IT.

OK, I think I got it. Carry on.

[CENTER][/CENTER]

In fact he's a whole bunch of ...

[CENTER][/CENTER]

Don't vote for ...

[CENTER][/CENTER]
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #85 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

I didn't make a "gross over generalization"- I stated my opinion based on what I have experienced in black churches. Do you get that yet?



If you are trying to "prove" a "fact" that would be a problem. You, after doing that, would have basis for an OPINION. Which is exactly what I have, and shared.



Did you read his comments? The ones that claim that an attack on him is an attack on the black church?



Sure, Sunday morning is still divided in America. That's been long established.



Did you read his comments? The ones that claim that an attack on him is an attack on the black church?



Strawman ho! I never claimed to be an authority on "what black churches think." Rather, I stated that Wright's statements, and continued statements, are not what I have experienced in the 20 or so black churches I have been in throughout the South. I'm framing the discussion as "this is my opinion and my experience"- but you are dead-set on empirical "proof" and "evidence" and "looking correct" in an argument you are having by yourself, not with my statements.


When I encounter a person such as yourself who sees someone who disagrees with them and then fires away, not knowing anything about my views or experiences, you bet I am not going to abide your bellicose and incorrect assumptions. And as far as the screen name thing, shove it. What the hell exactly do you want my personal info for, anyway? You're 55... Grow up.



Spurious claims? I've claimed, truthfully, that in my experience all black churches are not like Rev Wright's. Quite the opposite. And I have experience to back up my opinion. Apparently Sen. Obama agrees with my opinion. You see, frank, I don't have to "prove" an opinion... it's mine, made with loving care over years of experience and cognition.


What again, frank, do you think I am "claiming" that can be proved by fact? And you've gone through this entire thread being an asshole and a troll, all to arrive back where we started, with my up front and honest opinion, which was never claimed to be anything BUT that. You did this same thing in the Darwin thread- took someone's opinion and screamed "prove it" to a point of hilarity.

This makes two. In the future, make sure you make the distinction between someone sharing their personally-informed opinion and someone making an empirical case. Going through long, masturbatory volumes asking someone to "empirically prove an opinion" is simply... dumb. In the future, I'm not going to waste my time taking the bait when you choose to conduct discourse in this way... asking for "proof" of the unprovable and for things that need no proving in the first place.

Now... do you have a single damn thing to add to this thread of substance that does not involve me? Maybe something about Rev. Wright, Obama, HRC, the state of race relations in your corner of the world,... anything?

Do you have an opinion, I'm not sure now.

I heard (live) every word of Reverend Wright's, as well as all his answers to questions posed to him.

Reverend Wright represents an African American, yes?

Reverend Wright was a minister of Trinity United Church of Christ, yes?

[CENTER]
Quote:
Trinity United Church of Christ is a predominantly black church located in south Chicago.

[/CENTER]

Reverend Wright's sermons were taken out of context, via MSM sound bites, yes?

And you are taking Reverend Wright's National Press Club's comments out of context, yes?

Reverend Wright gave as good as he got, yes?
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #86 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

You didn't get it at all. They are not the same in any respect. The relationship is different. The comments and beliefs of the controversial figure are different. It's really a pathetic comparison, even if McCain was wrong to seek Hagee's endorsement.

Good old reliable SDW-- you've never let us down.

Say, do those blinders hurt, bolted to your skull as they are?
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #87 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

You didn't get it at all. They are not the same in any respect. The relationship is different. The comments and beliefs of the controversial figure are different. It's really a pathetic comparison, even if McCain was wrong to seek Hagee's endorsement.

Hagee isn't the only bigoted and intolerant "man of god" that McCain has sought the endorsement from. There are others.
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
post #88 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by franksargent View Post

Reverend Wright's sermons were taken out of context, via MSM sound bites, yes?

And you are taking Reverend Wright's National Press Club's comments out of context, yes?

"Out of Context ?" No. With the NPC Non-apology Tour, that's a dead-end defense as well.

I would say that the "out of context" debate is over. Rev Wright's "clarification" at the NPC was an amplification and reiteration of what the alleged "out of context" comments claimed to mischaracterize. If he was really working to correct how his "out of context" statements had been portrayed, he would not have trotted up there and said, in essence, "here's the same thing, again."

When given the opportunity to "set the record straight" - he did just that- by not backing off his comments one bit. He spoke explicitly regarding his beliefs, much to the chagrin of Sen. Obama.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #89 of 191
Again, news commentators yesterday, "Mischaracterized" Wright regarding the Aids statement.

eg. Fox news's account, was Wright believes the government created it to kill blacks.
The "guest" had to correct that statement, because of the "Tuskegee Study of Untreated Syphilis in the Negro Male"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuskege...Negro_Malealso known
Quote:
as the Tuskegee Syphilis Study, Pelkola Syphilis Study, Public Health Service Syphilis Study or the Tuskegee Experiments was a clinical study, conducted between 1932 and 1972 in Tuskegee, Alabama, in which 399 (plus 201 control group without syphilis) poor and mostly illiterate African American sharecroppers were used as subjects to observe the natural progression of syphilis without medicine.

Wright said in essence, anything is possible.
The commentator waved it off as if to say, what's the difference.

One eg. of many out of context and mischaracterizations repeated all day yesterday.
post #90 of 191
Jenice Armstrong:

Enough, Rev. Wright

Quote:
OK, REV. WRIGHT, we've heard enough out of you.

Thanks to your untimely speechifying and your appearance on Bill Moyers' PBS show, Americans have gotten more than enough opportunity to hear what you have to say. We've listened to your unfounded theories about the spread of the AIDS virus, the 9/11 attacks, and your views on the differences between how black and white children learn. We've been patient as you've defended your patriotism; we've nodded as you've insisted that critics need to hear your speeches in their entirety and not just in sound-bites. And now it's time to say "enough."

Rev. Wright, you are a complete and total distraction.

Because of you, we have been sucked into a sideshow that has been all about you. Instead of remaining in the background, as an honorable man would have, you thrust yourself into the national spotlight, posing as a defender of the "black church." Well, I'm black, and I go to church. But you do not speak for all black people.

Your remark that "Barack is doing what he needs to do as a politician and I'm doing what I need to do as a preacher," was an insult to Sen. Barack Obama and what he stands for. Either you are willfully ignorant of the meaning behind your words or you are no longer in Barack's corner.

Your emergence just a week before the Indiana and North Carolina primaries suggests that you are no longer even his friend. What you have done in the last several days has hurt Barack more than all the other mudslinging of this campaign. Whose side are you really on? I say, "Et tu, Jeremiah? Et tu?"

Really, can we move on here? The only ones that are whining and complaining now are the ignorant few.
post #91 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by @_@ Artman View Post

The only ones that are whining and complaining now are the ignorant few.

You do realize, if Obama is the nominee, this won't go away.
.
post #92 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by screener View Post

You do realize, if Obama is the nominee, this won't go away.
.

Do you realize that if Obama is elected the nominee, those voters that did, don't give a fuck.
post #93 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by @_@ Artman View Post

Do you realize that if Obama is elected the nominee, those voters that did, don't give a fuck.

Hard core Democratic Obama supporters won't "give a fuck".
Undecided, Independents, are the voters needed to win a Presidential election, right?

The 2008 version of right wing swiftboaters won't let this go, along with whatever else they can dredge up.

Do you really think US voters are smarter this time around?
Do you think Obama is tough enough to deal with the onslaught?
Do you think a kinder, gentler approach will work?
post #94 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by franksargent View Post

Do you have an opinion, I'm not sure now.

I heard (live) every word of Reverend Wright's, as well as all his answers to questions posed to him.

Reverend Wright represents an African American, yes?

Not necessarily.

Quote:

Reverend Wright was a minister of Trinity United Church of Christ, yes?

Yes



Reverend Wright's sermons were taken out of context, via MSM sound bites, yes?[/quote]

Except in this case the context didn't make it much better.

Quote:

And you are taking Reverend Wright's National Press Club's comments out of context, yes?

Please. PLEASE.

Quote:

Reverend Wright gave as good as he got, yes?

That's the problem. At least for Obama.

Northgate:

Quote:
Hagee isn't the only bigoted and intolerant "man of god" that McCain has sought the endorsement from. There are others.


Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

Good old reliable SDW-- you've never let us down.

Say, do those blinders hurt, bolted to your skull as they are?

Gentlemen: Let's go through this one more time. The situations are objectively different. Obama had a long-standing relationship with reverend Wright for 20 years. He didn't just attend church. Wright was working on his campaign. He baptized his children. The nature of the relationship was far more intimate. Comparing the McCain and Hagee situation is simply invalid. Even the comments in question are different.

I realize you both want the situations to be comparable. After, MCCAIN DID IT TOO! AND IT'S BEING IGNORED! WTFW#^@#$^^ But they're not. If you feel otherwise, I'd really like to read why that might be.


Quote:
Originally Posted by screener View Post

Again, news commentators yesterday, "Mischaracterized" Wright regarding the Aids statement.

eg. Fox news's account, was Wright believes the government created it to kill blacks.
The "guest" had to correct that statement, because of the "Tuskegee Study of Untreated Syphilis in the Negro Male"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tuskege...Negro_Malealso known
Wright said in essence, anything is possible.
The commentator waved it off as if to say, what's the difference.

One eg. of many out of context and mischaracterizations repeated all day yesterday.

So he's saying it's possible that the US Government introduced AIDS to kill blacks, not that they actually did. Yeah, much better. Much.


Quote:
Originally Posted by screener View Post

Hard core Democratic Obama supporters won't "give a fuck".
Undecided, Independents, are the voters needed to win a Presidential election, right?

Right.

The 2008 version of right wing swiftboaters won't let this go, along with whatever else they can dredge up.[/quote]

First, I'd like to address what's not being said in your post. The Left will have it's own swiftboaters, so let's not pretend they won't. but on that topic...can you show that the claims of so many of Kerry's fellow soldiers were untruthful? Were the clips of his congressional testimony fabricated? The fact is that the swifties were not discredited.

Now, let's take Obama. I mean...imagine...someone doing opposition research to see what kind of company the man keeps! Oh, but that's not fair! We can only do that to McCain. IOKIYAD.

Quote:

Do you really think US voters are smarter this time around?

Ahhh. See, Kerry only lost because people were stupid and bought the lies of the swifties. It's not that they didn't like what they saw with him, that they thought he was a flopper of grand proportions, that he presented no real alternative to Bush anyway, and that his voting record was exceptionally liberal. They were just too dumb.

This is the kind of thinking that has lost your party elections for 30 years. The American people have a funny way of getting what they want eventually. They are no smarter or more dumb than they were in 2004, 2000 or at time before.

Quote:

Do you think Obama is tough enough to deal with the onslaught?

No. And Obama, like you, doesn't think he deserves the onslaught (read: actual scrutiny of someone seeking the nation's highest office). You know why? Because, Barack is special. Even his wife says so.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #95 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

"Out of Context ?" No. With the NPC Non-apology Tour, that's a dead-end defense as well.

I would say that the "out of context" debate is over. Rev Wright's "clarification" at the NPC was an amplification and reiteration of what the alleged "out of context" comments claimed to mischaracterize. If he was really working to correct how his "out of context" statements had been portrayed, he would not have trotted up there and said, in essence, "here's the same thing, again."

When given the opportunity to "set the record straight" - he did just that- by not backing off his comments one bit. He spoke explicitly regarding his beliefs, much to the chagrin of Sen. Obama.

Reverend Wright's words have been taken "out of context" by the MSM, endlessly, and that's just a cold hard [Ufact[/U]. Now I know you don't appear to like discussing facts for some odd reason.

In fact, you took my post "out of context" by just "addressing" two of my five questions. So clearly you don't understand the phrase "out of context."

But here let me help you with a NYT link to the transcript of Reverend Wright's speech (including the question and answer session at the end) at the National Press Club;

Reverend Wright at the National Press Club

Now here comes the funny part, Reverend Wright mentioned "black church" twenty-five times, in total. w00t! Whoops, I just took Reverend Wright's words "out of context."

So instead of calling me out on Reverend Wright's usage and/or meaning in his mind of the phrase "black church" a gift as it were, you instead engage in justifying "out of context" rhetoric and sloppy semantics.
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #96 of 191
Hard core Democratic Obama supporters won't "give a fuck".
Undecided, Independents, are the voters needed to win a Presidential election, right?

The 2008 version of right wing swiftboaters won't let this go, along with whatever else they can dredge up.

Quote:
Originally Posted by screener View Post

Do you really think US voters are smarter this time around?

I think that a majority are aware that this election has much more to do with the economy, jobs and the Iraq fiasco this time than ever before.

Quote:
Do you think Obama is tough enough to deal with the onslaught?

From what he has done so far, yes. I really can't wait for the Obama/McCain debates.

Quote:
Do you think a kinder, gentler approach will work?

Not at all, again, Obama had to come on the offensive with Wright's ego trip this weekend.

Though at first I thought Obama was wrong in responding to Wright's current rants, I believe that this was (and will be) the final nail in the coffin for this. Though the press (and the ignorant blowhards) will keep pounding sand with it forever, the voters have had enough of it.
post #97 of 191
I can't seem to edit my posts...keep getting an invalid link...
post #98 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by franksargent View Post

Reverend Wright's words have been taken "out of context" by the MSM, endlessly, and that's just a cold hard [Ufact[/U]. Now I know you don't appear to like discussing facts for some odd reason.

In fact, you took my post "out of context" by just "addressing" two of my five questions. So clearly you don't understand the phrase "out of context."

But here let me help you with a NYT link to the transcript of Reverend Wright's speech (including the question and answer session at the end) at the National Press Club;

Reverend Wright at the National Press Club

Now here comes the funny part, Reverend Wright mentioned "black church" twenty-five times, in total. w00t! Whoops, I just took Reverend Wright's words "out of context."

So instead of calling me out on Reverend Wright's usage and/or meaning in his mind of the phrase "black church" a gift as it were, you instead engage in justifying "out of context" rhetoric and sloppy semantics.

Frank, let's take a step back here. Even if the MSM has taken Wright "out-of-context" over the past two months, do you think that changes what the man really believes?

Doesn't he believe it's possible the government unleashed AIDS to kill blacks?

Doesn't he believe the United States is a racist and unjust nation?

Doesn't his church promote the Black Value System and not American values and culture, but a African culture (and a "commitment to Africa") above all else?

Didn't he call the country the United States of KKK A?

Didn't he say "God Damn America" for killing innocent people, for treating her citizens as less than human....? Is this not a straight up anti-American thing to say?

Doesn't he believe Louis Farrakhan, the man who called "Zionism" (read: Judaism) a "gutter religion"---is a great American and important historical figure?


So really...let's hear more about he was "taken out of context." The man is an effing racist lunatic.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #99 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by @_@ Artman View Post

I can't seem to edit my posts...keep getting an invalid link...

Same here.

HELP! \
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #100 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Frank, let's take a step back here. Even if the MSM has taken Wright "out-of-context" over the past two months, do you think that changes what the man really believes?

Doesn't he believe it's possible the government unleashed AIDS to kill blacks?

Doesn't he believe the United States is a racist and unjust nation?

Doesn't his church promote the Black Value System and not American values and culture, but a African culture (and a "commitment to Africa") above all else?

Didn't he call the country the United States of KKK A?

Didn't he say "God Damn America" for killing innocent people, for treating her citizens as less than human....? Is this not a straight up anti-American thing to say?

Doesn't he believe Louis Farrakhan, the man who called "Zionism" (read: Judaism) a "gutter religion"---is a great American and important historical figure?


So really...let's hear more about he was "taken out of context." The man is an effing racist lunatic.

... nonsensemeister itself. \

But I tell you what I will do for you, I promise to read the following list of Reverend Wright's writings, if you promise to do the same.

[CENTER]
Quote:
Wright, Jeremiah A. Jr. and Jini Kilgore Ross, What Makes You So Strong?: Sermons of Joy and Strength from Jeremiah A. Wright, Jr., Judson Press, November 1993, ISBN 978-0817011987

Wright, Jeremiah A. Jr. and Colleen Birchett, Africans Who Shaped Our Faith (Student Guide), Urban Ministries, Inc., May 1995, ISBN 978-0940955295

Wright, Jeremiah A. Jr. and Jini Kilgore Ross, Good News!: Sermons of Hope for Today's Families, Judson Press, December 1995, ISBN 978-0817012366

William J. Key, Robert Johnson Smith, Jeremiah A. Wright, Jr. and Robert Johnson-Smith, From One Brother to Another: Voices of African American Men, Judson Press, October 1996, ISBN 978-0817012502
Jawanza Kunjufu and Rev. Dr. Jeremiah Wright, Jr., Adam! Where Are You?: Why Most Black Men Don't Go to Church, African American Images, June 1997, ISBN 978-0913543436 (also African American Images, 1994, ISBN B000T6LXPQ)

Frank Madison Reid, III, Jeremiah Wright Jr. and Colleen Birchett, When Black Men Stand Up for God: Reflections on the Million Man March, African American Images, December 1997, ISBN 978-0913543481

Wright, Jeremiah A. Jr., What Can Happen When We Pray: A Daily Devotional, Augsburg Fortress Publishers, June 2002, ISBN 978-0806634067

Wright, Jeremiah A. Jr., From One Brother To Another, Volume 2: Voices of African American Men , Judson Press, January 2003, ISBN 978-0817013622

Iva E. Carruthers (Editor), Frederick D. Haynes III (Editor), Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. (Editor), Blow the Trumpet in Zion!: Global Vision and Action for the 21st Century Black Church, Augsburg Fortress Publishers, January 2005, ISBN 978-0800637125

Ernest R. Flores and Jeremiah A. Wright Jr., Tempted to Leave the Cross: Renewing the Call to Discipleship, Judson Press, November 2007, ISBN 978-0817015244

Wright, Jeremiah A, Jr. (2004), "Doing black theology in the black church", p 13-23, 213-214. In Linda E. Thomas (Ed.), Living Stones in the Household of God: The Legacy and Future of Black Theology, Minneapolis: Fortress. ISBN 0-8006-3627-9

Wright, Jeremiah. "Here I am, send me". In Awakened to a calling: reflections on the vocation of ministry, Ann M. Svennungsen and Melissa Wiginton (Eds.), Nashville: Abingdon Press, c2005. ISBN 0687053900

Wright, Jeremiah. "In the lord's house, on the Lord's day". In Awakened to a calling: reflections on the vocation of ministry, Ann M. Svennungsen and Melissa Wiginton (Eds.), Nashville: Abingdon Press, c2005. ISBN 0687053900

Jeremiah A. Wright, Jr., "Music as Cultural Expression in Black Church Theology and Worship," Journal of Black Sacred Music 3, 1 (1) (Spring 1989).

[/CENTER]

Deal or no deal?

[CENTER][/CENTER]
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #101 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by franksargent View Post

Same here.

HELP! \

Do yourself a favor, stop feeding SDW on this subject. He's the only one left on the forum that's still riled up about it.
post #102 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by @_@ Artman View Post

Do yourself a favor, stop feeding SDW on this subject. He's the only one left on the forum that's still riled up about it.

... else a favor if I stopped my "nonsense?"

Actually, when dealing with SDW, I have found it best to answer in a single incomplete sentence, that way it's left to parsing every single word "out of context."
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #103 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by franksargent View Post

... else a favor if I stopped my "nonsense?"

Actually, when dealing with SDW, I have found it best to answer in a single incomplete sentence, that way it's left to parsing every single word "out of context."

Uh, uh. You are a wealth of information on all the subjects you argue. More than SDW can comprehend in this matter. Go ahead, I won't stop you. I gave up for now.
post #104 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by franksargent View Post

Reverend Wright's words have been taken "out of context" by the MSM, endlessly, and that's just a cold hard [Ufact[/U]. Now I know you don't appear to like discussing facts for some odd reason.

In fact, you took my post "out of context" by just "addressing" two of my five questions. So clearly you don't understand the phrase "out of context."

But here let me help you with a NYT link to the transcript of Reverend Wright's speech (including the question and answer session at the end) at the National Press Club;

Reverend Wright at the National Press Club

Now here comes the funny part, Reverend Wright mentioned "black church" twenty-five times, in total. w00t! Whoops, I just took Reverend Wright's words "out of context."

So instead of calling me out on Reverend Wright's usage and/or meaning in his mind of the phrase "black church" a gift as it were, you instead engage in justifying "out of context" rhetoric and sloppy semantics.

We can all read the transcripts, and short of posting their entirety here, you're going to claim any reference to them, in part rather than in whole, is "out of context."

Wright was given a chance to rebut anything that was "out of context." He didn't. He held fast with the exact same message. This "out of context" defense is over, because Wright himself said almost exactly the same things in the rebuttal that he did in the original clips. And those are the things that Obama called him out on. As did I. And the objective "fact" that you refuse to acknowledge is that Wright blew up his own claim of "out of context" when he did not correct misconceptions about him.

I really don't care much to keep arguing with you on this, frank. I don't respond to all of your posting because it serves no purpose. You're here to troll personally. Go find someone else.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #105 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by mydo View Post

I'm sure Obama wishes Wright would keep quiet. This thing was gone off the radar and then ... let's do an interview.

I'm pretty sure that the Obama campaign ordered Wright to say something completely outrageous so that Obama could officially kick Wright to the curb in the public eye. And that seems to be exactly what's happened.

It wasn't finished before. It is finished now.
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
Gangs are not seen as legitimate, because they don't have control over public schools.
Reply
post #106 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

I'm pretty sure that the Obama campaign ordered Wright to say something completely outrageous so that Obama could officially kick Wright to the curb in the public eye. And that seems to be exactly what's happened.

It wasn't finished before. It is finished now.

Yea, I'm still trying to make heads or tails of the real relationship between Obama and Wright, post-controversy. I don't know if I believe this is a contrived "under the bus" or a true divergence.

It seems like if it was contrived, Wright would not have said the bit about "Obama is being a politician." On the other hand, unless he is completely loony tunes, why else would he go all-in before the NPC, other than to allow Obama a firm out.

Puzzling things we may never confidently know the truth about, IMHO.
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
"Stand Up for Chuck"
Reply
post #107 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jubelum View Post

We can all read the transcripts, and short of posting their entirety here, you're going to claim any reference to them, in part rather than in whole, is "out of context."

Wright was given a chance to rebut anything that was "out of context." He didn't. He held fast with the exact same message. This "out of context" defense is over, because Wright himself said almost exactly the same things in the rebuttal that he did in the original clips. And those are the things that Obama called him out on. As did I. And the objective "fact" that you refuse to acknowledge is that Wright blew up his own claim of "out of context" when he did not correct misconceptions about him.

I really don't care much to keep arguing with you on this, frank. I don't respond to all of your posting because it serves no purpose. You're here to troll personally. Go find someone else.

Reverend Wright did what he did at the National Press Club because he did it, now get this, on purpose. D'oh!

[QUOTE]"I break with thee. I break with thee. I break with thee. And then throw dog-poop on his shoes" (Steve Martin)/QUOTE]

BTW, please don't tell anyone I told you so, it would just piss Hillary, et. al. off.
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #108 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwinter View Post

I'm pretty sure that the Obama campaign ordered Wright to say something completely outrageous so that Obama could officially kick Wright to the curb in the public eye. And that seems to be exactly what's happened.

It wasn't finished before. It is finished now.

Hey, you stole my line!

I glad there's at least one other intelligent person here on PO.
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #109 of 191
post #110 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by franksargent View Post

... nonsensemeister itself. \

But I tell you what I will do for you, I promise to read the following list of Reverend Wright's writings, if you promise to do the same.



Deal or no deal?

[CENTER][/CENTER]

Wait...so you are claiming that to properly understand Wright's motives, one must read his complete writings? Funny, I don't hear you saying the same about....well, pretty much any conservative you've disagreed with over the years.

The point, Frankie...is that it's clear who Wright is, whether or not the media took things out of context (which I agree--they did). Or are you honestly saying Wright is just misunderstood and that the poor guy is getting a raw deal?



Quote:
Originally Posted by franksargent View Post

... else a favor if I stopped my "nonsense?"

Actually, when dealing with SDW, I have found it best to answer in a single incomplete sentence, that way it's left to parsing every single word "out of context."

I've found it best just to call you on your bullshit.


Quote:
Originally Posted by @_@ Artman View Post

Do yourself a favor, stop feeding SDW on this subject. He's the only one left on the forum that's still riled up about it.

I'm not riled up at all. Wright is a racist and a lunatic. That's just the way it is.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #111 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Wait...so you are claiming that to properly understand Wright's motives, one must read his complete writings? Funny, I don't hear you saying the same about....well, pretty much any conservative you've disagreed with over the years.

The point, Frankie...is that it's clear who Wright is, whether or not the media took things out of context (which I agree--they did). Or are you honestly saying Wright is just misunderstood and that the poor guy is getting a raw deal?





I've found it best just to call you on your bullshit.




I'm not riled up at all. Wright is a racist and a lunatic. That's just the way it is.

... for Barack?

Because the real point is that the MSM got snookered by Reverend Wright.

Methinks, you are is serious need of replacing that burned out light bulb you call your ...
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
Every eye fixed itself upon him; with parted lips and bated breath the audience hung upon his words, taking no note of time, rapt in the ghastly fascinations of the tale. NOT!
Reply
post #112 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by franksargent View Post

... for Barack?

Because the real point is that the MSM got snookered by Reverend Wright.

That's not hard to imagine.

Quote:

Methinks, you are is serious need of replacing that burned out light bulb you call your ...

I won't respond to that. Not directly. Thanks though.
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #113 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

So he's saying it's possible that the US Government introduced AIDS to kill blacks, not that they actually did. Yeah, much better. Much.

First, I'd like to address what's not being said in your post. The Left will have it's own swiftboaters, so let's not pretend they won't. but on that topic...can you show that the claims of so many of Kerry's fellow soldiers were untruthful? Were the clips of his congressional testimony fabricated? The fact is that the swifties were not discredited.

Now, let's take Obama. I mean...imagine...someone doing opposition research to see what kind of company the man keeps! Oh, but that's not fair! We can only do that to McCain. IOKIYAD.

Ahhh. See, Kerry only lost because people were stupid and bought the lies of the swifties. It's not that they didn't like what they saw with him, that they thought he was a flopper of grand proportions, that he presented no real alternative to Bush anyway, and that his voting record was exceptionally liberal. They were just too dumb.

This is the kind of thinking that has lost your party elections for 30 years. The American people have a funny way of getting what they want eventually. They are no smarter or more dumb than they were in 2004, 2000 or at time before.

No. And Obama, like you, doesn't think he deserves the onslaught (read: actual scrutiny of someone seeking the nation's highest office). You know why? Because, Barack is special. Even his wife says so.

Seeing as what the government has done,
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-.../1498038/posts
Timeline of Secret Government Projects LSD, Esalen, HAARP and the Cosmic Cointelpro
anything is possible.

No one is saying they won't.
Not going to argue about who's telling the truth or not. Point being, Swiftboating someone has become part of the language.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Swiftboating
Quote:
Swiftboating is American political jargon that is used (primarily) as a strong pejorative description of some kind of attack that the speaker considers unfair or untruefor example, an ad hominem attack or a smear campaign.

Take that as you will, but be advised, some of the Kerry Swiftys were also involved in the smear campaign that McCain was treated to in 2004.

Research Obama all you like, my concern is, can he take it.

If I remember correctly, Kerry waited to long to respond, wether it would have made any difference, who knows.
The point again being, Kerry was a weak candidate.

Only those that voted for the president get what they want, maybe.
I would hope smarter, but then their is a large segment of the population that still thinks Saddam was responsible for 911.

I'm not an Obama supporter, I don't think he's tough enough.
I hope I'm wrong, but would really like Clinton to get the presidency.
post #114 of 191
Anywho, back in the real world, there's an NBC/WSJ poll out today.

Obama over McCain, 46/43. That's with the OMG!!!! Scary Negro!!!!! stuff at a fever pitch, and McCain basically hanging out with no opposition at all.

Also, and hilariously, 32% of the respondents have "major concerns" about Obama's association with Wright.

43% have major concerns about McCain's association with Bush.

Bush: more loathed than scary negroes. Heckuva job.
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #115 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

Wright is a racist and a lunatic. That's just the way it is.

Hey, I have news for you. Wright is anti-white and Hagee is a bigot.

Wright is NOT Obama.

Hagee, Pat Robertson and Falwell are not McCain.

Can we move on please?
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
post #116 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

Anywho, back in the real world, there's an NBC/WSJ poll out today.

Obama over McCain, 46/43. That's with the OMG!!!! Scary Negro!!!!! stuff at a fever pitch, and McCain basically hanging out with no opposition at all.

Also, and hilariously, 32% of the respondents have "major concerns" about Obama's association with Wright.

43% have major concerns about McCain's association with Bush.

Bush: more loathed than scary negroes. Heckuva job.

Wait. Are you saying that more Americans disprove of George Bush than Rev. Wright?
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
"The selfishness of Ayn Rand capitalism is the equivalent of intellectual masturbation -- satisfying in an ego-stroking way, but an ethical void when it comes to our commonly shared humanity."
Reply
post #117 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by Northgate View Post

Wait. Are you saying that more Americans disprove of George Bush than Rev. Wright?

Pretty much.

I think there are more people that think like this: "Huh. That Wright guy sounds pretty crazy. Not really going to have any impact on me, though. Bush, though, fucked up the whole country and McCain seems pretty hooked in. That could definitely affect me."

Poor SDW. Wright is the whole enchilada for the slime machine, and they're desperately flogging it. But it's way too early. By the time the real campaign is rolling, it'll be old news. Guess what won't be old news? The economy and Iraq. Guess which candidate is utterly clueless and tone deaf on those issues?
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
They spoke of the sayings and doings of their commander, the grand duke, and told stories of his kindness and irascibility.
Reply
post #118 of 191
Wright is Bill Clinton in a costume and mask.
traveling the globe in an envelope
Reply
traveling the globe in an envelope
Reply
post #119 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

Anywho, back in the real world, there's an NBC/WSJ poll out today.

Obama over McCain, 46/43. That's with the OMG!!!! Scary Negro!!!!! stuff at a fever pitch, and McCain basically hanging out with no opposition at all.

Also, and hilariously, 32% of the respondents have "major concerns" about Obama's association with Wright.

43% have major concerns about McCain's association with Bush.

Bush: more loathed than scary negroes. Heckuva job.


It's a national poll...and it's utterly meaningless. I'm telling you...do the electoral math of McCain/Obama. Then tell me how Obama wins. He simply cannot. Hillary can...IF she can survive having "stolen" the nomination from Obama.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Northgate View Post

Hey, I have news for you. Wright is anti-white and Hagee is a bigot.

To be fair, Wright is more than that, but OK...good point.

Quote:

Wright is NOT Obama.

Agreed...but two points:

1) Obama did have a long standing relationship with him.
2) Obama handled the news of that relationship badly. The first time he refused to distance himself properly....and then he threw him under the bus. Seriously...see the quote from the Philly speech, and then look at what happened two days ago. It was REALLY poorly handled.

Quote:

Hagee, Pat Robertson and Falwell are not McCain.

Can we move on please?

Agreed as well. Again though, these are different relationships.

Quote:
Originally Posted by addabox View Post

Pretty much.

I think there are more people that think like this: "Huh. That Wright guy sounds pretty crazy. Not really going to have any impact on me, though. Bush, though, fucked up the whole country and McCain seems pretty hooked in. That could definitely affect me."

There is some of that thinking, I agree. Anecdotally speaking, I was talking to some colleagues yesterday about this. Several are democrats and not fond of Bush at all. They were just dumfounded by the Wright thing, and quite concerned about Obama as a result of some of his associations. Their feeling was that the Dems have totally screwed themselves in this election. The thing is though...most people I've spoken with...especially middle class democrats (I'm a teacher...their are a lot of those!)...don't agree with McCain on the war but say they will vote for him anyway because of the choices on the other side.
Again..all anecdotal, but interesting.

Quote:


Poor SDW. Wright is the whole enchilada for the slime machine, and they're desperately flogging it. But it's way too early. By the time the real campaign is rolling, it'll be old news. Guess what won't be old news? The economy and Iraq. Guess which candidate is utterly clueless and tone deaf on those issues?

I see...it's the "slime machine." Except guess what...it isn't. Obama has done this to himself through his ridiculously bad management of the issue. All the man really had to do was throw Wright under the bus right away. But he didn't do it, and that really cost him. He could have tossed him under and just said "he doesn't speak for me." There still would have been questions about the relationship, but it could have been explained.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Flat Stanley View Post

Wright is Bill Clinton in a costume and mask.


Sometimes I wonder...is this the Clintons? If it is, I'm sorry...they are geniuses (perhaps just exceptionally ruthless). I mean, why..WHY would Wright possibly believe that speaking out would help Obama?
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
I can only please one person per day.  Today is not your day.  Tomorrow doesn't look good either.  
Reply
post #120 of 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by SDW2001 View Post

It's a national poll...and it's utterly meaningless. I'm telling you...do the electoral math of McCain/Obama. Then tell me how Obama wins. He simply cannot. Hillary can...IF she can survive having "stolen" the nomination from Obama.

First, the majority of national polls show Obama currently leading McCain in the national electoral map. Here's the most recent one I could find. There may be others that show McCain ahead, but that's the only map I could find. I'm certainly not willing, like you, to claim that the D has it all wrapped up or that McCain "simply cannot" win. But I'll say this: Ohio is one of the keys to a national election, and I think just about everyone agrees that Ohio will go to the D nominee this year. If that happens, the R has to run the table on the other close states.

Second, the exact current poll numbers are virtually meaningless right now. The election hasn't even started. The R primary is over, and the D primary is still going on.

I know you know these things at some level, so why are you claiming that it's over right now? And you wonder why people keep bringing up the 50 states Bush thing...
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: PoliticalOutsider
AppleInsider › Forums › Other Discussion › AppleOutsider › PoliticalOutsider › Wright in Context - What The Media Didn't Show