Obama Addresses Racial "Anger"

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by ChristopherHall

It's called the benefit of the doubt because I don't know him personally. Do you?

Benefit of the doubt does not declare him one way or another...it just denies guilt. You are declaring for him what he must have really thought...same with the pastor. Im just looking at the facts

Clearly it would be too charged for you. However, I've read quite a bit on black history and America's treatment of the black people. I wouldn't be surprised by it.

Oh brother...yes you alone know about America's treatment of blacks and black history. Good grief.

Obama has to condemn it...but at the same time Obama asked that we understand Jeremiah's generation. Obama claims he never heard it. Again, I give him the benefit of the doubt.

No. He does not have to condemn it. And you did not give him the benefit of the doubt....really what you did was implicate him as a liar.

It's called the benefit of the doubt because I don't know him personally. Do you?

No it is not called the benefit of the doubt. Again the benefit of the doubt simply denies one claim...not make up another one for him. You use terms like most likely.....that is not the benefit of the doubt. That takes knowledge to say most likely.....not a guess. The benefit of the doubt would take an accusation and simply say "well I will hold off on judgement until more facts are presented"...You are using very specific terms that imply knowledge. Again, we have the facts, from his own mouth. This was his church and his pastor. I know what my pastor preaches....even if I miss some services I still KNOW what the man preaches and believes. He is Oneness....I know what Oneness teaches. That is HIS theology. Obama denounced the Preachers words as wrong....those are the facts. Obama is running for office. Those are the facts.

It's called the benefit of the doubt because I don't know him personally. Do you?

Polly want a cracker?

[ChristopherHall]

Look, Jeremiah Wright can remember when the news broke about the experiment on black people. He can also remember the last lynching. Also he can remember the protests for civil rights and the police action that followed. It shouldn't make us faint like little ladies that he would hold such views. And it shouldn't make us wonder abotu why Obama isn't hanging him out to dry.

I also think calling his pastor a racist hatemongerer is just as inflammatory as the statements he made. It's being part of the problem instead of being part of the solution. Would a black racist hate mongerer have a while lady serving in the ministry of his church?

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by ChristopherHall

Look, Jeremiah Wright can remember when the news broke about the experiment on black people. He can also remember the last lynching. Also he can remember the protests for civil rights and the police action that followed. It shouldn't make us faint like little ladies that he would hold such views. And it shouldn't make us wonder abotu why Obama isn't hanging him out to dry.

I also think calling his pastor a racist hatemongerer is just as inflammatory as the statements he made. It's being part of the problem instead of being part of the solution. Would a black racist hate mongerer have a while lady serving in the ministry of his church?

This article by Ann Coulter pretty well sums up the situation, for me.

(excerpt)

Throw Grandma Under The Bus
By Ann Coulter
Wednesday, March 19, 2008

Obama tried to justify Wright's deranged rants by explaining that "legalized discrimination" is the "reality in which Rev. Wright and other African-Americans of his generation grew up." He said that a "lack of economic opportunity among black men, and the shame and frustration that came from not being able to provide for one's family, contributed to the erosion of black families."

That may accurately describe the libretto of "Porgy and Bess," but it has no connection to reality. By Rev. Wright's own account, he was 12 years old and was attending an integrated school in Philadelphia when Brown v. Board of Education was announced, ending "separate but equal" schooling.

Meanwhile, at least since the Supreme Court's decision in University of California v. Bakke in 1978 -- and obviously long before that, or there wouldn't have been a case or controversy for the court to consider -- it has been legal for the government to discriminate against whites on the basis of their race.

Consequently, any white person 30 years old or younger has lived, since the day he was born, in an America where it is legal to discriminate against white people. In many cases it's not just legal, but mandatory, for example, in education, in hiring and in Academy Award nominations.

So for half of Rev. Wright's 66 years, discrimination against blacks was legal -- though he never experienced it personally because it existed in a part of the country where he did not live. For the second half of Wright's life, discrimination against whites was legal throughout the land.

Discrimination has become so openly accepted that -- in a speech meant to tamp down his association with a black racist -- Obama felt perfectly comfortable throwing his white grandmother under the bus. He used her as the white racist counterpart to his black racist "old uncle," Rev. Wright.

http://www.townhall.com/columnists/A...the_bus?page=1

[ChristopherHall]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

This article by Ann Coulter pretty well sums up the situation, for me.

(excerpt)

Ann Coulter's a joke. Who is she to define a man's experiences, opinions, or convictions? Sometimes one doesn't have to experience injustice personally to be moved to conviction on the matter. Many times it's actually the person removed from the injustice, who sees the injustice toward a friend or family member, and discovers there is little they can do about it. And that sends them into what is called advocacy.

You should know that.

[DividedThigh]

i have to say that i respect ann coulters opinion more than the wind, dt lol

[TRFrance]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

This article by Ann Coulter pretty well sums up the situation, for me.

(excerpt)

Ann Coulter (along with Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, etc) is one of the reasons why so many blacks dislike conservatives. She's among many conservative commentators who groan about "political correctness" or "reverse discrimination" against whites, but never seems too bothered by discrimination against people of color.

I find this "selective indignation" to be hypocritical and truly nauseating.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by ChristopherHall

Ann Coulter's a joke. Who is she to define a man's experiences, opinions, or convictions? Sometimes one doesn't have to experience injustice personally to be moved to conviction on the matter. Many times it's actually the person removed from the injustice, who sees the injustice toward a friend or family member, and discovers there is little they can do about it. And that sends them into what is called advocacy.

You should know that.

LOL! Yes, I have to agree. Sometimes her statements are a joke, but her point is that he is acting as though he lived through more than he did. I agree with her on that point.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by TRFrance

Ann Coulter (along with Limbaugh, Sean Hannity, etc) is one of the reasons why so many blacks dislike conservatives. She's among many conservative commentators who groan about "political correctness" or "reverse discrimination" against whites, but never seems too bothered by discrimination against people of color.

I find this "selective indignation" to be hypocritical and truly nauseating.

She still has a point that white people are being more discriminated against for their comments than other people of color. I have to agree with her on those points. Sorry!!!

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by DividedThigh

i have to say that i respect ann coulters opinion more than the wind, dt lol

[CC1]

Originally Posted by ChristopherHall

Obama's pastor isn't "racist". Passionate about his people's struggles? Yes. Focused on issues facing them? Yes. A bit misinformed regarding AIDS and the like? Yes. But a "racist"? No.

.

Chris,

It embarresses me that you would chraacterize someone accusing the Federal Government or CIA of creating the AIDS virus to kill Black people as "a bit misinformed".

That is a ridiculous marginalizing of outrageous statements.

You just refuse to deal with the concepts of personal responsibility and accountibility to truth and rationality that ALL Americans have regardless of their skin color.

When you make excuses for this kind of outrageous hate mongering you are not helping those you seek to help.