he was aware of Pastor Wright's controversial comments, and had personally heard "remarks that could be considered controversial" in Wright's church, but denied having heard the particular inflammatory statements that were widely televised during the campaign.

archduke

so Obama was ok with attending the church of a pastor that preached hate for years after he became aware of the preaching. Except until it became a political liability.

so you're equating "controversial remarks" with hate speach? And then I noticed you had to quote Wright after Obama had left his church....

Hmm.

I think the thing is Archduke, is that Obama hasn't been tagged with the label of being racist, nor has he been tagged with the label of tolerating a racist. At least not by most of the public. I realize that for a hard core Obama is the devil incarnate, and Muslim to boot...
But, if he hadn't successfully dealt with Wright, and he has whatever recycling of the internet Steve and you do, he wouldn't have been elected. Nor would he be doing well at the polls. Espeically in the "battleground states".
Romney's problem is that he's being tagged as a "bully". who isn't all that empathetic with , well most people. But especially not minorities. His response to that has been inadequate. So he's probably going to have to deal with that during the whole election cycle. (Look he's already lost the dog lover fanatics becasue he never dealt with the car top haling episode.... My ;point being, he can't seem to make things go away.

danivon wrote:I know what Black Liberation Theology is. I know what Liberation Theology is. I know you see both as heretical, which is perhaps clouding your position on whether it's also 'hateful'

There's a difference between talking about race and being racist.

When everything evil is the White Man's fault, that is racism.

rickyp wrote:

he was aware of Pastor Wright's controversial comments, and had personally heard "remarks that could be considered controversial" in Wright's church, but denied having heard the particular inflammatory statements that were widely televised during the campaign.

archduke

so Obama was ok with attending the church of a pastor that preached hate for years after he became aware of the preaching. Except until it became a political liability.

so you're equating "controversial remarks" with hate speach? And then I noticed you had to quote Wright after Obama had left his church....

Hmm.

Not correct.

Hmmm.

rickyp wrote:But, if he hadn't successfully dealt with Wright, and he has whatever recycling of the internet Steve and you do, he wouldn't have been elected.

Nonsense. He was running against someone who was a "maverick" and became "Mr. Vanilla" for six months. McCain was as bland (and, frankly, a bit bewildered) as he could have been.

Plus, there was Bush Fatigue and Bush Derangement Syndrome, poor debate performances, a belly flop during the economic crisis, and excitement about the first Black candidate.

Nor would he be doing well at the polls. Espeically in the "battleground states".

Actually, he's not "doing well." He's not doing poorly, which is a far cry from "doing well." He's even or close in most polling. That's great, since Romney has less name ID.

Talk to me on Labor Day about the polls.

Romney's problem is that he's being tagged as a "bully". who isn't all that empathetic with , well most people. But especially not minorities. His response to that has been inadequate.

Says you.

On the other hand, most "normal" people understand that an alleged prank/act of bullying in high school, 47 years ago is not necessarily determinative.

So he's probably going to have to deal with that during the whole election cycle. (Look he's already lost the dog lover fanatics becasue he never dealt with the car top haling episode.... My ;point being, he can't seem to make things go away.

Wanna bet?

According to Democrats and you, he's lost Blacks, Hispanics, Women, the working class, dog lovers, homosexuals, and anyone who has ever been bullied.

Well, he's still got his wife and kids. So, that's what? Six votes?

I'm pretty sure Russell himself acknowledged that most of the quotes he presented in that post were after Obama left the church. 'Hmmm' indeed.

And I don't get that Wright was saying that all evil is the White Man's fault (but hey, I'm white) because he's white. Or even that all evil is the White Man's fault. But that a lot of evil in the world, and that which has plagued black people, does stem from white people, given that it happens to be white people who are dominant in the world (particularly in the USA), and that a large part of the history of race in America and elsewhere is dominated by things like slavery, segregation and prejudice against blacks by whites.

It would be lovely to believe that race in the USA was no longer an issue, that merely by electing a half-African man as President that 200+ years have been wiped away, but that's frankly not realistic.

Not that there are not problems in all communities when it comes to racism, but there is a difference between acknowledging racial politics while encouraging black people to raise themselves up and out-and-out racism.

danivon wrote: but there is a difference between acknowledging racial politics while encouraging black people to raise themselves up and out-and-out racism.

I agree with this completely. What Bill Cosby does is the former. What Jeremiah Wright does is the latter.

The basic difference is that Bill Cosby says yes we as a race have problems but it is incumbent upon the individual to rise up and over come them and be the better person.

Jeremiah Wright says blame whitey and the jews.

This is a more fair treatment of the issue re Romney. http://www.thedaily.com/page/2012/05/11 ... ngway-1-2/

steve

Nonsense. He was running against someone who was a "maverick" and became "Mr. Vanilla" for six months. McCain was as bland (and, frankly, a bit bewildered) as he could have been

Totally unlike the incredibly exciting, dynamic and constant Governor Romney....

rickyp wrote:Totally unlike the incredibly exciting, dynamic and constant Governor Romney....

Almost funny--congratulations!

On the other hand, we've had Mr. Excitement in the Oval Office for 3+ years. He's so exciting . . . and clueless.

This is THE issue for this election, whether you like it or not. A majority of Americans will not vote for the guy who is all sizzle and no steak twice. Fool us once; shame on you. Fool us twice; shame on us.

Btw, people see through the President's "leadership" on gay marriage. Not only has he done a 360 on the issue, but Biden came out on Sunday. Sunday and Monday, the President's spokesman, Jay Carney, said President Obama's position was unchanged and that Biden was speaking of his personal conviction.

Tuesday, the President went from "bigot" to "hero."

67% in one poll think the move was political.

Courage? Conviction?

Nope.

steve

67% in one poll think the move was political.

SO? He's a politician.
Does that make those who like the move less or more likely to support him? Or have they been envigorated by the move.... The interesting thing is that the issue is NOW a strength according to Dem strategists and to a large number of GOP strategists...
If he had endorsed gay marriage in 08 it would have hurt his chances. Now, he's calculated that it helps his chances. It has seemed to have raised him a lot of money in the short run.
Obama is resorting to GOP tricks of playing cultural wedge issues that can help him...because the economy is tough. He'll also play wedge issues economically and that one should also continue to benefit him.... Romney is a large target when it comes to the issue of income inequality and how that plays amongst those who've not seen their lives improved over the last couple of decades .

Like Rove they are now going after Romneys perceived strengths. When the PACs are done few voters will not know that Romney was 47th in job creation as a governor and that Bain capital generally ended more jobs then they created .

rickyp wrote:steve

67% in one poll think the move was political.

SO? He's a politician.

But, he promised to be something else, something better. The more he presents himself as just another pol, the less attractive he's going to be as a candidate. The soaring rhetoric, the many promises--replaced with "SO? He's a politician."

Does that make those who like the move less or more likely to support him? Or have they been envigorated by the move.... The interesting thing is that the issue is NOW a strength according to Dem strategists and to a large number of GOP strategists...

Uh-huh. That's not what the polls say. That's not what the leaders of black churches say. If you've not spent time with homosexuals, particularly those from black and hispanic background, you have no idea how this issue grates against them. While as blocs, they tend to vote for socialism economically, they are not liberal socially. This will cause some to change their votes and others to stay home. If it changes the vote even as little as 1%, it's not helpful.

Let's put it another way: President Obama won North Carolina by 14,000 votes in 2008. Think he's going to repeat that?

Besides that, if he was in favor of gay marriage (he was) and then changed to opposing it (he did in 2008) and now is changing back, what does that say about credibility? Values?

If he had endorsed gay marriage in 08 it would have hurt his chances. Now, he's calculated that it helps his chances. It has seemed to have raised him a lot of money in the short run.

Boom. That is the main reason he did it. That is not the move of a transcendant candidate.

Obama is resorting to GOP tricks of playing cultural wedge issues that can help him...because the economy is tough.

True--and that will cost him. Watch what happens between now and the GOP convention. I think you are going to be shocked.

Like Rove they are now going after Romneys perceived strengths. When the PACs are done few voters will not know that Romney was 47th in job creation as a governor and that Bain capital generally ended more jobs then they created .

The first stat is one you can try and use. I think there are other metrics that argue for him. The second stat is not going to work. The first anti-Bain ad Obama produced was feeble and covered Bain AFTER Romney left.

Ultimately, people are going to decide if President Obama deserves (merits) a second term. He better hope for the mother of all recoveries to suddenly pop up.

steve

But, he promised to be something else, something better. The more he presents himself as just another pol, the less attractive he's going to be as a candidate. The soaring rhetoric, the many promises--replaced with "SO? He's a politician

You're right. for those who thought he was a paragon he's disappointed. Thats why he can have a majority disappointed in his performance as President, and yet have a maority of the vote. There are those on the left who can't move to Romney who had those misty eyed expectations of Obama.

steve

Let's put it another way: President Obama won North Carolina by 14,000 votes in 2008. Think he's going to repeat that?
Besides that, if he was in favor of gay marriage (he was) and then changed to opposing it (he did in 2008) and now is changing back, what does that say about credibility? Values?

He might not win NC. But he's got an easer path to 27o then Mitt by far. And he can afford to lose one or two states he won before.
As for his position on gay marriage. It evolved with the attitudes of the electorate at large.... Can't fault him for that.

steve

That is not the move of a transcendant candidate

No. But it is one of a guy who wins elections.

rickyp wrote:You're right. for those who thought he was a paragon he's disappointed. Thats why he can have a majority disappointed in his performance as President, and yet have a maority of the vote. There are those on the left who can't move to Romney who had those misty eyed expectations of Obama.

So, what carried him to victory?

It was all the empty-headed, swooning masses. You know, the people who watched him stand in front of the Greek columns in Colorado and didn't laugh. The ones who thought he was going to pay their bills, stop global warming, bring about peace on Earth.

You might dismiss the failing enthusiasm for him and think those folks have nowhere else to go. Ah, but they do--their couch. The enthusiasm gap swept him into office.

Now, is Romney going to have the enthusiasm generated for him? No, but . . . the anti-Obama sentiment is very strong. As long as Romney does not campaign as Obama-light, he will be the recipient of the anti-Obama fervor.

He might not win NC. But he's got an easer path to 27o then Mitt by far. And he can afford to lose one or two states he won before.
As for his position on gay marriage. It evolved with the attitudes of the electorate at large.... Can't fault him for that.

He won't win NC. He won't win Virginia. He might hang on in Colorado. I have relatives in Iowa who voted for him last time. They are staunchly anti-gay marriage. We'll see what they're going to do later this summer. I don't know if gay marriage will flip a State all by itself. However, coupled with a pretty poor economic record, President Obama is on his way to losing.

Could he win? Yes, but he is daily seeing his chances lessened. One or two more debacles and he's toast. I think his margin for error is not as big as you think it is.

That is not the move of a transcendant candidate

No. But it is one of a guy who wins elections.

Meh. He won in a liberal district. He won in a liberal State. He won the presidency by virtue of a weak opponent and an economic crisis.

This time, he has to convince people to retain him. I think we'll have a pretty good sense before the GOP convention. If he's even, it will be a horse race. If he is behind by any significant margin, he's done. If he's ahead by a significant margin, Romney will have to throw a hail Mary.

I think it's more likely that President Obama will be the desperate man.

One of you is an optimist and one of you is a realist. Beats me who is who.

Actually, you are both optimists. There's no way either of you can argue with such certainty based on what we know right now and what can happen over the next 6 months.

steve

It was all the empty-headed, swooning masses.

Some call them voters...

You might dismiss the failing enthusiasm for him and think those folks have nowhere else to go. Ah, but they do--their couch. The enthusiasm gap swept him into office.

Hence the gay marriage support.... They shall all rise up from their couches after watching Glee and hi themselves to the ballot box.

steve

Now, is Romney going to have the enthusiasm generated for him? No, but . . . the anti-Obama sentiment is very strong. As long as Romney does not campaign as Obama-light, he will be the recipient of the anti-Obama fervor.

Romney's effective campaigning in the primaries wasn't done by Romney but by his television campaigns that went negative against his primary opponents. He was able to out spend them enormously and destroy them by going very negative. (They were a weak bunch with a lot of areas he could attack.) . He won't have that advantage over Obama, and Obama's Chicago team are already going negative over Romney. Attacking him in his suppossed strengths.

Steve

Could he win?

Gracious of you to consider the apocalypse possible...
Realistically, to win he needs win only 27 of the 125 electoral votes in the "toss up" states. If, even you grant him Colorado he would then need only 18. He's ahead in Wisconsin and New Hampshire which would give 14 more.... Mitt would need to sweep the other 7, and he's running behind in 6 of them right now.... Ohio? Obamas up there and with 18 electoral votes that would be it. Something about the success of the auto bailout bouying him there...
I've no doubt that Obama lost some support in red states because of gay marriage support. But so he loses by 20 instead of 12 in Alabama and Texas... And maybe only wins by 6 instead of 10 in California... .... The game is in the increments in the toss up states. And those increments will serve to be amongst the newly enthusiastic young and the minorities in the bag for Obama.

Thats my story and I'm sticking to it.