Can Obama show real anger?

Are you kidding? John McCain has the temperment of Sonny Corleone but the McCainsream Media would rather make up stories about Obama? Nice work.

The usual worshipful piffle form Frank James: Obama doesn't lose his temper in public and of course this is because he is serenely holy... and after the press conference he fed the multitude with but 5 loaves and 2 fishes, right Frank?

Or maybe he doesn't lose his temper in public -- no full blown, voice raised, veins bulging episodes -- because he's a smart enough politician to know that more than a display of picque would be a disaster.

Come on man. WHy would he be angry at Wright? Wright is being Wright. THis is how he is and how he has been for 25 years. Wright didnt just start saying these things. He has been saying them for 25 years. Obama never had a problem with it as a member of his church and even called Wright a member of his family. Obama is only upset now that Wright has insulted him. Where was the outrage for 25 years in the pews?

Of course he's not allowed to show his anger. He's a black man. Black men showing anger scares people. Black men are only acceptable in this country if they smile, never complain, and never, ever, show anger. If they do they are labeled "militant" and "dangerous".

I wonder how the tens of thousands of parishners of Hagee, Falwell, etc will feel as republicans disown them for attending these churches?

Barack made clear in Dreams from my Father that "angry black man" was not likely to take him far. Besides, the New York Daily News today has a full page picture of Barack pointing his finger with "FURY!" as a headline. Imagine their response he he behaved in a way you thought showed anger.
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/galleries/april_2008_front_pages/april_2008_front_pages.html

Obama has Presidential temperment. I can only imagine the problems this country is going to be saddled with if Hot Head McCain somehow manages to steal the White House this fall.

McCain can't control his temper and this is a great article documenting just that:
http://rawstory.com/news/2008/McCain_temper_boiled_over_in_92_0407.html

Ummm... yeah, right - Obama showing overt anger. Sure, he can show it - he's from the South Side of Chicago (where I'm from). But you know that if he did the media would focus on a Black Man Showing Anger and then run stories on Blacks and Anger and whether they're dangerous and so on ad nauseam. The media would find something else stupid to focus on, rather than the real issues. Again.

So I think it's wise of Obama to show annoyance but to contain himself. He's doing a far better job than John Kerry did in 2004.

You swine are amazing. If he showed human emotion you would play endless loops on the 24 hour news channels just like Howard Dean's EMOTIONAL reaction. Then you'd invite talking heads to comment on how unPresidential his reaction was. Give us a break. We get it. Your corporate masters want you to make this a circus and you want the establishment candidate to win. Stop ruining America.

Oh. For. God's. Sake.

Somehow I know that if Obama *had* raised his voice and pounded the podium, the headline would have been, "Can Obama control his anger?"

Here's another question instead. Can we, perhaps, start talking about the desperate needs of our country after seven years of the Bush administration and thirty years of nearly unbroken Republican ascendancy?

Obama controls his emotions. This is called maturity. You could tell from the tone of his voice and the choice of his words that he wasn't very happy. The other candidates can't seem to keep a leash on their impulses. Who do we need in the White House?

If Obama was sincere and this had not been a planned, political event we would have seen anger..Politics are politics and he is only showing the public that he is a puppet..There are accepted times for anger and this would have been one of those times. Instead he once again chose to be the stoic, e;itist that he is..King of playing the people..Another bad move for Obama. He will never win. Wright will be his legacy forever..There is not enough damage control in this world to erase 20 years of the Obama Wright devotion...

You are confusing style with substance. But no matter really. I think you just have to write a piece about the Wright/Obama matter and are looking for a different angle. The angle has been covered profusely already. Even in the act of trying to commit journalism, I have no idea how you, or anyone else has the nerve to dictate the appropriate way to demonstrate anger. May I inquire, is there no real news that would be worth covering? This is just a waste of space.

Obama is not "real" in any way, shape or form. He is the ultimate POLITICIAN. Phony as a $3 bill.

I'm tired of macho posturing and punching. Look where it got us.
And what do you say to your minister, when he stabs you in the back? It's not like he's a government official or a foreign head of state. You can say he's wrong and that's about it.

Should a candidate for president decry a persons right to free, if foolish speech?

Will we ever have an election decided on any real issues?

Challenges, challenges! Obama knew what he was getting into the minute he decided to run for America's most coveted seat. To become "The Man" he must act like a man. Wright, as Obama's former spiritual advisor, knows just what strings to pull to upset his former pupil. Now, Reverend Wright is just tugging Obama's chain. In response, Obama is demonstrating his frustration and aggression, perhaps, as his mentor taught him: lash out, openly express your discontentment with your oppressor.
Reverend Wright is, after all, an authority on the oppressed.

As you know anger is one of the deadliest of the seven deadly sins. Anger clouds the mental and moral vision and renders too many people incapable of exercising reason and good judgment. It also makes other people put their guard up and respond to the emotion rather to the ideas expressed.

Senator Obama has shown us his most crucial asset - that he is level headed and thoughtful. His dialog is ponderous and plodding rather than shrill and bombastic. We need level headed leaders like him.

Wright will be his legacy forever..
Posted by: kaye m. | April 30, 2008 1:27 PM

I can't understand how the very same people who claim Wright to be an "angry" black racist, bigot or whichever word you choose, now want to see another angry black man. Please.... your bias is obvious. I wonder how the tens of thousands of parishners of Hagees, Falwells, Haggertys' and Robertsons churches will feel about being thrown under the bus because of the hate talk of their pastors? Do you condemn these parishners for attending the churches of these hate talkers also?

Why is it that Barack Obama is the only member of Rev. Wright's congregation denouncing him?
Is Mr. Obama the only member of that church appalled by Rev. Wright's statements?
Of course, Mr. Obama is the only member of that church running for the Presidency.
I wonder if Mr. Obama would denounce Wright if he weren't running for elected office. He spent 20 years listening to Wright. Was this his first opportunity to denounce him?

I would just like to say, both Obama and jeremiah are right they both have goals ,dreams ,jobs to do and people who look to them for leadership.REV. Wright has been preaching the (same word) for years and he has tons of valid points. Barack has attended the church doesn't mean he subscribes to every word. I attend the church and I have had my eye brows raised more than once, but 1 thing REV. Wright preaches is that we are all one people and that when he places blaim it is spread around just so happen the bush administration has really messed the USA up!!!!!!

Maybe he is not showing a lot of emotion because he's not angry. Obama sat through 20 years of Mr. Wrights crazy hatefilled remarks, so what's being said now is probably no surprise. However, Obama should show anger at the fact that his crazy spirtual advisor of 20 years who married him and baptized his kids is now costing him the presidental election.

I think the whole scene was a stage to the American public.

Maybe he is not showing a lot of emotion because he's not angry. Obama sat through 20 years of Mr. Wrights crazy hatefilled remarks, so what's being said now is probably no surprise. However, Obama should show anger at the fact that his crazy spirtual advisor of 20 years who married him and baptized his kids is now costing him the presidental election.

Posted by: John Gates | April 30, 2008 1:51 PM

OR....maybe McCain should show his famous insane, out of control temper by getting mad at himself for seeking out the endorsement of Mullah Hagee?

McCain knew perfectly well what Hagee was preaching and he agreed with him so much that he asked Hagee to endorse him.

Obama is a political wimp. He is very weak and not capable of firm, decisive, and resolute action when the situation calls for it. He does not have the ability to fight agressively.
Because of this, he stood by haplessly by as his spiritual guide slams him in public. He says he's "outraged", but nothing in his mannerisms showed "outrage".
Unfortunately, Obama does not have the ability to speak well without reading a teleprompter. He is reactive reather than in command. Otherwise, he would have denounced Rev Wright more than a year ago when he first made the news.
2008 is not a good year to be running as a WIMP. McCain is tough (5 yrs as a POW) and Hillary seems almost as tough as McCain.
It's probably too late for Obama to change his image.

Mr. James,
You seem to be implying that anger is somehow a requirement for president. Respectfully, I disagree.

We need more level heads in this world. While I agree emotions are fine, natural, and human, and can be beneficial, especially using intuition, I disagree that we need a president that shows anger. We need someone who acts rationally, intellectually (with knowledge), with fairness, integrity, honesty, and knows when to trust instincts and intuition, among other important things.

Mr. James, can you and your colleagues focus on substantive matters for a change?

We shouldn't have to vote based on what someone's reverend said, or whether we think a person can get angry, or any other irrelevant standards, especially after none of these, were applied to the current president, or his party's current candidate.

Please stop with the circus, and try working to improve the dialogue about our political process. There are enough jaded voters, and we don't need to add to the list.

Many times I find the collection of responses to a column to be depressing: people are ranting, don't know what they're talking about, miss the point of the column. That sort of thing. But comments I've read in response to the "Obama needs to show anger" piece are really all right on the mark. It's not the anger you should be looking for. It's the inner strength and the willingness to act on that strength (not to be confused with Hillary's so-called "toughness" -- an almost meaningless word when applied to her behavior) -- that's what you should be talking about, not anger.

Obama's a Jedi. He knows that anger brings you to the Dark Side. John McCain however allows anger to consume him. If he has the force he's working for the Dark Side. He needs to learn to control his anger.

I think you need to revisit your priorities as a "journalist". Your posts should have a few crumbs of either news (and by that I mean NEW information, not rephrasing old info ad nauseum) and/or analysis (consisting, idealy, of an actual argument studying a subject with support in the form of a scrap or two of research/quotes).

This post, like several I've seen here lately, distills down to a rambling insult, masquereding as analysis, on a so-called news site.

Disgusting and lazy journalism. Might want to use your skills as a lobbyist or running for office?

It's like the Seinfeld episode where Jerry can't be angry. Obama doesn't show anger because he's not really angry. He still likes Wright and likes to associate with him. No way in heck Obama as in the same church as Wright and he never heard Wright go-off, especially after 9-11. Obamanites: Get a clue? Your guy is a fraud.

"McCain's Temper May Become an Issue"

By Scott Thomsen

PHOENIX –– While rising in the GOP presidential polls, Sen. John McCain is facing questions about what some Arizona political leaders view as his quick temper – and whether it might hinder him as president.

In a front page article and separate editorial Sunday, The Arizona Republic said it wanted the nation to know about the "volcanic" temper McCain has unleashed on several top state officials.

This guy has no business whatsoever being President:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/aponline/19991031/aponline183823_000.htm

You people need to give it up. When does it start to seep into your thick skulls that we need to understand the candidates solutions to the myriad problems this country is facing?

Does Obama show enough anger...you have GOT to be kidding me... get real dude.

Obambi can't get angry. That's his charm. If he turned into an angry black man, it's game over.

Now this from those who helped kill Howard Dean's run for the White House because he rolled up his sleeves.

To the writer of this piece, I say, "Seek help.:

Obama feels that his role in life is to heal division and as such he can enjoy the release of anger. That may in fact make him a good healer which after years of Bush is needed.

Obama could have done lashed out without devaluing his values because Mr Wright, the former Rev Wright slung mud at Sen Obama while wearing his vestments. Wright devalued his office and in so doing should have received Obama's full anger. I believe in time we will see that anger, he may have still been suffering from shock.

Wright was reprimanded in Obama's Philadelphia speech and I can't help but believe Obama has expressed disagreement with Wright in the past.

Obama's nature is to emphasize the positive in people and overlooked a part of Wright's theology which characterized the behavior of a government only by it's worse deeds and not its totality. Obama emphasizes the part that Wright ignores. That would be a source of animosity whether Obama realized it or not. Apparently he did not.

The Philadelphia speech that was widely acclaimed offended Wright's vanity. He chose arrogance and ego preservation over fulfilling his obligation to his church and his position. I suspect retirement will be very difficult for this once revered man. He has fallen, even by his own standards.

McCain was asking for an endorsement - he never called Hagee his mentor. Don't all politicians ask for endorsements? As for Obama, he's fine in a staged event as he's been trained to do, but when he's not in control he shows anger and frustration. With Wright being his mentor - he probably knows Obama better than anyone and according to his mentor - Obama will say what he has too - not what he truly feels because he's a politician. Which I interpret as - he cannot be trusted! Maybe Wright is right!

Obama is a Wimp, Wimp, Wimp!
The actual policies and ideologies of Clinton & Obama are essentially the same.
Therefore, the main difference is character and personality.
Obama told Fox News Sunday that he considers Wright fair game, as long as you don't quote him out of context.
Fair enough. Wright is every bit as radical as the conservatives say he is. But now Obama denouces Wright for repeating what his pastor has said for years.
Therefore, the Rev Wright is a valid issue. Obamaniacs need to get a clue. Obama's lack of judgement in selecting Wright as a close advisor makes him look unqualified for Prez.

He looked defeated. What a wuss.

I saw anger, where were you?

And if he went off on people like McCain did, he'd be unfit because he can't hold his temper.

Bill Clinton got slammed for going off on the super delegates.

So now Obama doesn't get mad enough. Just how mad can he get before he gets too mad?

Why don't you people report on REAL news or stop pretending you're journalists, just admit you're no more than bloggers and the rest of us can move on.

You know, here we have a candidate who may be the smartest and most articulate person that's run for President in our lifetimes, and you have ninconpoops like this writer trying to find faults that aren't there. None of us are perfect, but wouldn't it be nice to have someone who's a decent person with a brain in the White House?

Can Obama show anger?

Here's a better question: are today's self-styled journalists capable of writing about real issues? The answer, apparently, is no.

Obama has no ability to evaluate those around him. He is shallow. He repudiated Wright not when he says he learned how odd Wright was, but when he and the press could no longer ignore Wright's absurd claims. Obama has no moral compass, and no concept of anything beyond himself.

he will show his anger/true colors once he is elected but wouldn't risk it at this point. He is smart enough to know what he is doing.

McCain was asking for an endorsement - he never called Hagee his mentor. Don't all politicians ask for endorsements? As for Obama, he's fine in a staged event as he's been trained to do, but when he's not in control he shows anger and frustration. With Wright being his mentor - he probably knows Obama better than anyone and according to his mentor - Obama will say what he has too - not what he truly feels because he's a politician. Which I interpret as - he cannot be trusted! Maybe Wright is right!

Posted by: nosolution | April 30, 2008 2:34 PM

You're right, McCain called Rod Parsley his "mentor" and Parsley is worse than Mullah Hagee.

"Reverend Rod Parsley of the World Harvest Church of Columbus, Ohio -- whom Sen. John McCain hails as a spiritual adviser -- has suggested on several occasions that the U.S. government was complicit in facilitating black genocide."

"In speeches that have gone largely unnoticed, Parsley (who is white) compares Planned Parenthood, the reproductive care and family planning group, to the Klu Klux Klan and Nazis, and describes the American government as enablers of murder for supporting the organization".

"If I were call for the sterilization or the elimination of an entire segment of society, I'd be labeled a racists or a murderer, or at very best a Nazi," says Parsley. "That every single year, millions of our tax dollars are funding a national organization built upon that very goal -- their target: African Americans. That's right, the death toll: nearly fifteen hundred African Americans a day. The shocking truth of black genocide."

Full story here:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/03/21/mccain-spiritual-guide-ac_n_92757.html

What a stupid commentary! Looking for the next news distraction, are we?

You want to see anger? Here it is: STOP WASTING THE ELECTORATES TIME WITH THIS NONSENSE!!!!

Haven't you anything better to do, Frank? Maybe a little investigative journalism might be more appropriate in the midst of a presidential election. You might actually find a real story, instead of having to stretch your meager imagination for suitably low brow material. Because we all know what comes next with this kind of story. The press whines, "Show us you can get angry!" "Show us you can cry!" "Show us your tough side!" And once that happens, the headlines read, "McCain's got a dangerous temper. Will he push the button in a fit of rage?" "Will Hillary cry when that phone rings in the middle of the night and Bill is on a road trip?"

Is it any wonder no one has any use for you so called reporters? You report nothing but what is handed to you on a press release. Then you root around in the muck and the mire you blithely create at the behest of Rovian political machinations for even more demeaning unprofessional stories. Edward R. Murrow (a real broadcast journalist) would be appalled at the behavior of the press today. As for me, I'm utterly disgusted and about to cancel my subscription to your paper.

I can show my anger. How can Obama sit in that church for 20 years and not know what was being said. Obama is a liar for telling us that and thinks we will all believe him. That makes me angry!

First the media gets down on Hilary for crying now they are after Obama for not getting mad. You people call this news?

Here I thought the weatherperson had an easy job, as long as s/he was right some of the time. Whoever is writing the headlines for these blogs, must have been held back in grade school a few times. How else can you account for such a nonsensical question!!! Do human beings get mad? Of course, they do, what planet does that writer come from, Pluto!!
SUPPORT OUR TROOPS, BRING THEM HOME, ALIVE. NOW.

I feel this topic is off point. Leadership and toughness isn't measured by lashing out, but the ability to operate at or above one's normal capacity.

For example, when everyone counted Clinton out (twice in the past 4 months), she worked harder and more tirelessly. I was very impressed with her interview with Oberman (big Obama supporter) a few days before PA. She knew she was going to asked tough questions, but she melted Oberman like butter in a microwave.....all the while, the walls were closing in on her.

Obama on the other hand, seemed less energetic and a bit confounded during yesterday's Q/A. We will see how he deals with his first real crisis over the next few days.

BTW, does anyone sense that Obama avoids media during crisis times (no unplanned stops). Where as, Clinton will take every opportunity to get in front of a camera in similar situations (even during Lewinski episode).

Obama on the other hand, seemed less energetic and a bit confounded during yesterday's Q/A. We will see how he deals with his first real crisis over the next few days.

BTW, does anyone sense that Obama avoids media during crisis times (no unplanned stops). Where as, Clinton will take every opportunity to get in front of a camera in similar situations (even during Lewinski episode).

Posted by: Andrew | April 30, 2008 3:01 PM

Yeah, I was especially impressed with Billary when she went out in front of the media and claimed that she wasn't lying about her Boanian sniper story fairy-tale, at least two or three times before she finally admitted that she was "tired and misspoke"..i.e. lied:

This video sums up the Billary campaign:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=exsmFDYyK4U

Obama is angry at Wright, not the whole world. He has no justification for freaking out over it, and he knows it. The Clintons, on the other hand, seem to be perpetually angry at everything and everybody.
Let Obama be the measured, thoughtful gentleman that he is. He will make a brilliant caretaker of the presidency, which is a symbol of the American people, not one man's showcase.

Anyway, Obama works out every day and blows off the toxins that way, unlike Hillary, who is getting fatter and meaner by the day.

Wait a minute. For the past 15 months the media has been fervently trying to paint Barack Obama as the "angry black man" and failed, so now they want to paint him as Mr. Spock? And you say that the pacat that he is slow to anger is hurting his campaign? What are you, schizophrenic?

It seems ironic that Clinton, who in the past has been criticized for her ultra-rationalist approach to politics, is now the candidate with emotion. And Obama, the candidate with the inspirational message of "the audacity of hope," is now the robot? Furthermore, of all the emotions to pick as indicator of how "passionate" a candidate is, why pick the (potentially) most dangerous: anger?

Obama is too arrogant to really care about anything other than what will propel him toward more power and wealth. He thinks he's above it all -- and above us too. The process of him crashing hard to earth is underway.

It is called diplomacy.

If Obama is always buttoned down, it is a HUGE positive. Anyone in a position of responsibility should be restrained and measured in their responses to events.

By displaying anger, Clinton and McCain display great immaturity and lack of self-control. That is hardly what you want in a president, who is the diplomat-in-chief.

As for fighting terror, you do not have to get mad...you just have to get even. You have to decimate Al-Qaeda, not talk angrily about it.

My, my. The Obama Pom Squad is angry today. Where has this concern about fairness and dignity been the last year as the media ripped Clinton to shreds for everything from her clothing or her hairstyle to her laugh. Grow up, kids. This is the presidential election and everything is fair game, regardless of what your messiah Obama tries to convince.

Many Obama supporters here are trying to deflect the impact of the hateful Wright by mentioning Hagee, Falwell, etc.. If Falwell or Hagee has been the pastor and close friend of a presidential candidate for the 25 years, it's a campaign issue because it speaks to the judgment and character of that candidate. If Falwell/Hagee married the candidate and his or her wife, it's a campaign issue. If Falwell/Hagee baptized the candidate’s children, it's an issue. However, if Falwell, Hagee or another controversial preacher has merely endorsed a candidate, big deal. Obama CHOSE to spend the last 25 years aligned with the hateful Wright and the Black Nationalist movement. Big, big difference between a voluntary 25-year relationship and being the recipient of one of thousands of endorsements for president. Nice try Obama supporters, but no cigar.

Do you condemn these parishners for attending the churches of these hate talkers also?

Posted by: bill r. | April 30, 2008 1:43 PM

When they run for president of the country on a platform of hope and change, then try to fake people out with his "we need a dialouge on race" speech that made some lib media's leg's tingle- then yes.

Until then- probably not.

BTW - are you agreeing that wrights rhetoric is now hateful, or is it still an "out of context" issue?

Prior to this Wright episode, Obama was "teflon coated" by the media. Some people complained about that and some in the media finally woke up. Obama is now under the same amount of scrutiny as are the other candidates. When you run for office your life is an open book.

The political season is too long in the U.S. The media think voters will get bored if they keep questioning candidates about the issues, so they investigate every facet of a candidates life.

We could do better if we borrowed a few rules from England's playbook and have a 3-4 month primary season (to determine the candidates) followed by one month of coast-to-coast campaigning, then election. Two years is 18 months too long.

Thank you. It's about time. I and everyone I know have long thought Obama was a flat, smug, dullard who has created a false "intellectual" front to hide behind. His robotic, guarded, poll-tested demeanor is entirely contrived and not at all appealing. Other than liberal guilt spilling into the streets, I have never understood what is even remotely appealing about this inexperienced bad actor and Manchurian Candidate.

Posted by: Beth Rogers | April 30, 2008 3:56 PM

Beth, before I can discuss your positions, I need to know what the pastor who married you and baptized your children thinks on the following issues: Iraq, gay rights, abortion, aids and the Pastor Wright issue.

Please tell me in great detail everything thay have said on those issues, both in and out of your presence. Since the person married you and baptized your children, I will then know that your views are completely identical to theirs, and will be able to judge you accordingly.

Obama's persona is, indeed, very tight, controlled and almost cult-like. His speechwriters and the teleprompter have propped him up with personality, but this guy's grasping, halting, confused speech pattern when answering questions and speaking off the teleprompter tells me a great deal about his lack of depth and substance. He's an actor in a role and is lost and uncomfortable without a script.

I don't want a president that gets angry in public. Obama is presidential material. He starts off the end goal in mind. If here were angry, imagine what the press would do with him. HIllary has already accused Obama of 'blowing up'.

Can Obama show anger?
Can Obama control his anger?
Is he black enough?
Is he too black?
Is he too tall?
Is he too short?
Does he wear briefs?
Does he wear boxers?
Clearly there are too many unanswered questions about this man.

Please tell me in great detail everything thay have said on those issues, both in and out of your presence. Since the person married you and baptized your children, I will then know that your views are completely identical to theirs, and will be able to judge you accordingly.

Posted by: Pastors08 | April 30, 2008 4:23 PM

You are way off the mark- Pastor08.

A better question for your analogy would be;

Has your pastor ever blamed the US gov't for intentionally spreading the AIDS virus to african americans?

or

Believes that black kids have different brains and thinking processes than white kids?

Mine hasn't- has yours?

Posted by: heartburn | April 30, 2008 4:44 PM

Possibly. I don't get transcripts of everything he says out of my presence. Do you? Can you testify as to the exact views of your Pastor on those questions?

Are your views identical with your Pastor on every single issue? If your pastor says something outrageous, is that your responsibility?

Obama choose to go to that church . He knew well about his Pastors rhetoric, why did he not invite him to the announcement of his candidacy, except met with him on that day in the basement of the Capital for his blessing. Afraid of his rhetoric. But once, brought out in the public and hurt Obama's campaign did Obama disown him. That Church gave Obama access to influential people. Politics gave him access to the Illinois/Chicago political arena and money. Obama is not naive, he has poor judgment and zero integrity.

I like Obama for being a rational human being not an emotional one. I read a lot of emotional responses in this blog. Those responses are often not well thought out and often seem to want to just hurt people who disagree with them. When your angry, facts, fairness and logic often are ingnored.

"Of course he's not allowed to show his anger. He's a black man. Black men showing anger scares people. Black men are only acceptable in this country if they smile, never complain, and never, ever, show anger. If they do they are labeled "militant" and "dangerous"."

NO prez candidate should show anger or stress on the campaign trail.This is the litmus test.It won't be any easier in the White House.

Possibly. I don't get transcripts of everything he says out of my presence. Do you? Can you testify as to the exact views of your Pastor on those questions?

Are your views identical with your Pastor on every single issue? If your pastor says something outrageous, is that your responsibility?

Posted by: Pastors08 | April 30, 2008 5:13 PM

My Views, your views, our pastors views, are not the issue. The issue is the messiahs judgement- which we all need to consider when he is this close to the white house. And his judgement is clearly suspect...

His judgement was horrible in attending the church where this maniac would spout these views for 20+ years.

But lets look past that-

A year ago- Obama ( from the Trib) "What I value most about Pastor Wright is not his day-to-day political advice. He's much more of a sounding board for me to make sure that I am speaking as truthfully about what I believe as possible and that I'm not losing myself in some of the hype and hoopla and stress that's involved in national politics."

Would you say positioning Wright as a "day to day " political advisor is good judgement?

Lets take his most recent spin on face value- that Wright's latest "sermon" is a Wright that Obama didn't know or recognize...

Would you say that Obama shows good judgement of character by not recognizing the type of person that wright is/was? What will he do when he meets with leaders in Iran, Venezuela North Korea as promised- do you trust his judgement to do the right thing ?

Stop defending this guy with your specious arguments.
He gave it a good run- turns out he was trying to be something he wasn't. Seems like a nice enough guy- not a president though.

Has your pastor ever blamed the US gov't for intentionally spreading the AIDS virus to african americans?

or

Believes that black kids have different brains and thinking processes than white kids?
Mine hasn't- has yours?

Posted by: heartburn | April 30, 2008 4:44 PM

Yeah, my pastor has said that and so has the man that McCain calls his "spiritual guide", Rev Rod Parsley.

"This past week, Sen. Barack Obama's former pastor Jeremiah Wright has come under heavy fire in part over comments that suggested the U.S. government had introduced AIDS into black communities."

"But it turns out he's not the only religious confidant to a presidential candidate who thinks the state has targeted black populations with death and disease."

"Reverend Rod Parsley of the World Harvest Church of Columbus, Ohio -- whom Sen. John McCain hails as a spiritual adviser -- has suggested on several occasions that the U.S. government was complicit in facilitating black genocide."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/03/21/mccain-spiritual-guide-ac_n_92757.html

Issues!!! Can Barack show anger...give me a break. The guy has self control unlike to other presidential candidates I could name. HRC & J Mac.

Two other candidates.Sorry for the typo John D.

I'm sure it was a vast left wing conspiracy.

The problem is that Obama has not been sufficiently angry with his pastor.

Now we understand by saying that people were "bitter" at the problems and cling to their religion, is enough see his Shepherd.

Obama is young and really don't know how is his real character ...
He smokes ... and fails to do so in public, that means that always has something hidden.

I don't trust much of the calm waters, I prefer to know the waters brave ...

Go Hillary!!!

I too was surprised by the lack of conviction in the tone of Senator Obama's speech last night. Is this how he argued cases in court? If so he probably didn't win too many. I thought he seemed tired or depressed but he certainly seemed to drone on and never get to the point. He reiminded me of teachers I had in school that jusat lectured students but never did anything about it. Just gave you a lot of time to stare at your shoelaces while you were waiting for the lecture to end. I

You want anger, vote for McCain. Personally, I don't want a hothead leading this country. The fact that Obama can stay cool in the face of the heat the Clintons have been pouring on him proves he's the most qualified candiate. No temper tantrums, no tears.

Okay just think for a minute:
Bill Clinton "feeling our pain" and tearing up for the cameras whenever he was in a jam...
HRC crying in NH on cue to prove she was human, and then threatening to obliterate a foreign nation on national television in order to prove she was tough. McCain's problems controlling his anger. HRC's swearing like a sailor (sorry, Dad, no offense to the USN) which is reported in all the bios on her, and Bills now all too well documented inability to keep his johnson in his pants...

To this observer, admittedly an unflappable yankee, Obama's reserve is exactly the kind of dignified demeanor the highest office of our country demands.

Obama has discipline and self control, and no matter how much gutter stuff gets heaped on him, he apparently really does have an even and measured temperment.

I don't think that's a liability, even if it makes it harder for reporters to pay attention and cover him, accustomed as they are to shots and beers and now assignments watching HRC pump gas.

Really, I NEVER want a president that ANYONE wants to drink a beer with. Ever since Reagan, I swear we've confused presidents with movie stars. But even Reagan, who was a true gentleman, was hardly the guy an average person would expect to find in a bar.

I admired Obama's restraint through all the weeks of Wright drama. I have lived long enough to have to close a few doors on people and it is not something I relished. I am fortunate to never have had to do this on national television. But I also think Wright's escalating spotlight lust was calling out for the mercy.

Why must the media keep playing the car crash in slow motion, after everyone knowsalready what happened?

The country is in trouble. Can we talk about that?

Foremost and important. When the need for a "Statesman", is necessary to promote and insure, the Democracy of The United States, the people, must divorce themselves, from the Battle of Faiths. What has occurred, from the mouth of a religious leader, can not be
construed, ever, as the nor activist, rend asunder.

Obama cannot win in a knife fight vs. McCain. Hillary can, but her nomination by superdelegates would split the party and ensure McCain's election. Either way, a lose-lose situation for the Dems---ha!!!! Meaning no nationalized, poor quality healthcare, lower corporate and personal taxes, a strong military and a RESPECTED USA IN THE WORLD, not one that is "liked" (although many of you crave that), in short be smart Dems: don't give your hard-earned $$ to Obama/Hillary because it's like peeing $$ down the drain.

DEBATE! DEBATE!! DEBATE!!!

It's time for everyone to face the truth. Barack Obama has no real chance of winning the national election in November at this time. His crushing defeat in Pennsylvania makes that fact crystal clear. His best, and only real chance of winning in November is on a ticket with Hillary Clinton as her VP.

Hillary Clinton seemed almost somber at her Pennsylvania victory speech. As if part of her was hoping Obama could have proved he had some chance of winning against the republican attack machine, and their unlimited money, and resources.

But it is absolutely essential that the democrats take back the Whitehouse in November. America, and the American people are in a very desperate condition now. And the whole World has been doing all that they can to help keep us propped up.

Hillary Clinton say's that the heat, and decisions in the Whitehouse are much tougher than the ones on the campaign trail. But I think Mr. Obama faces a test of whether he has what it takes to be a commander and chief by facing the difficult facts, and the truth before him. And by doing what is best for the American people by dropping out of the race, and offering his whole hearted assistance to Hillary Clinton to help her take back the Whitehouse for the American people, and the World.

Mr. Obama is a great speaker. And I am confident he can explain to the American people the need, and wisdom of such a personal sacrifice for them. It should be clear to everyone by now that Hillary Clinton is fighting her heart out for the American people. She has known for a long time that Mr. Obama can not win this November. You have to remember that the Clinton's have won the Whitehouse twice before. They know what it takes.

If Mr. Obama fails his test of commander and chief we can only hope that Hillary Clinton can continue her heroic fight for the American people. And that she prevails. She will need all the continual support and help we can give her. She may fight like a superhuman. But she is only human.

Sen. Hillary Clinton: "You know, more people have now voted for me than have voted for my opponent. In fact, I now have more votes than anybody has ever had in a primary contest for a nomination. And it's also clear that we've got nine more important contests to go."

Sincerely

Jacksmith... Working Class :-)

Perhaps Obama should simply start being honest with the public instead of this ongoing "denoucement" (**wink, wink**) campaign, which is clearly not convincing the masses. New Rasmussen poll: "Obama is now viewed favorably by 49%, down three points from yesterday’s total. His unfavorable ratings are up three points to 48%. Those figures include 33% with a Very Unfavorable opinion of Obama. In the race for the Democratic Presidential Nomination, it’s Obama 47%, Clinton 43%. Daily tracking results are collected via nightly telephone surveys and reported on a four-day rolling average basis. Today’s update shows the race as close as it has been since the Pennsylvania Primary. Results from the past two nights of tracking are even closer. If this tightening continues, it would suggest that the issues surrounding Reverend Jeremiah Wright are having a significant impact on support for Barack Obama."

To: Frank James at Chicago Tribune
Your evaluation of Jeremiah Wright’s comments, “former pastor Jeremiah Wright's histrionics at the National Press Club…his former pastor, essentially calls Obama an opportunistic, say-anything-to-win politician and appears intent on doing everything he can to sink his former congregant's chances.” is unfounded, and the tragedy is that to some extent Obama seems to be in agreement with you. But the main focus of Rev. Wright’s comments was on the themes of Liberation, Transformation, and Reconciliation as The Prophetic Theology of the Black Church! Themes surely consistent with Barack Obama’s goals.
Church member denies Wright dissed Obama
—Manya A. Brachear in Chicago Tribune, April 30, 2008
Rev. Linda Thomas, a longtime member of Trinity United Church of Christ, said Tuesday that she sat in the National Press Club audience Monday and did not hear anything disrespectful toward Sen. Barack Obama.

She said Obama is "being oversensitive" if he is offended by Rev. Jeremiah Wright Jr.'s statements. She agrees with Wright that Obama is posturing himself as a politician.

"It's the truth," said Thomas, a seminary professor who is not on staff at Trinity. "He is a politician. They have different jobs."

Thomas said she hopes Obama's relationship with Trinity does not change and does not expect it to. Trinity still loves and supports its most famous member, she said.
"It's a relationship with a people," she said, "not just with the pastor."

Through a church spokeswoman, the church's new pastor, Rev. Otis Moss III, declined to comment Tuesday.
—Manya A. Brachear

It's called maturity; complaining or flying off the handle is what children do (and there's a lot of that going around).

In case it had escaped your notice, the level of public indignation and repudiation that now passes for leadership is at an all-time high. In fact, there has been a marked decline in courtesy and civility among elected officials and public figures in general.

A country of children...our very own "Lord of the Flies."

So a candidate for the Presidency who, for a change, chooses NOT to wear his emotions on his lapel--as if that's some kind of proof of electability--is indeed something we'd expect an ADULT would do.