...is that you can be friendly with someone and not share his ideals, and that's not from Bill Clinton's perspective it's from Rev. Jeremiah Wright's perspective.
Over the past few weeks, he's been portrayed as a racist. But here he is at a Clinton White House prayer breakfast (a members-only event, I'm sure) shaking hands with not only a white man but with the very subject of some of those snippets that were played over and over and over again.
Assuming that Wright is a racist and not much a patriot, that here he is in this photo being friendly with the white President of the United States reaffirms what Obama has been saying: you can be friendly with someone with whom you don't always agree
And how long one knows another is irrelevant; the only thing that is relevant is if he shares the views and positions of the other. Obama has said that he does not. I reiterate; I have friends whom I do not agree with on every issue. You have friends whom you do not agree with on every issue. So does Obama.
Hold me accountable for what comes out of my mouth. I'll hold you accountable for what comes out of your mouth. And we should all hold Obama accountable for what comes out of his mouth.
The things Wright said didn't and wouldn't come out of Obama's mouth. And no one--not Hillary and not the GOP--believes that it would.
Further, that Wright was invited to the Clinton White House suggests that the clips that we've seen over and over again do not completely represent Wright. I can't imagine that Clinton would invite a racist, non-patriot to a prayer breakfast.
And in all of this, especially now that this photo has surfaced, I'm most disappointed with Hillary for not stepping up and vouching for Obama like Obama and Clinton did for Biden during the Des Moines Register Debate when he faced questions about comments he'd made regarding race.
None of this mess has anything to do with the issues, I see no reason why HRC couldn't say, "I know Barack Obama have worked with him and dealt with him throughout this race to the Presidency. I have no reason to believe that the views of Rev. Wright are the views of Barack Obama."
That's what HRC would do if she were concerned with winning on the issues, but because she's willing to win at any cost, she hasn't.
Shocking.
Friday, March 21, 2008
What This Photo Shows...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
5 comments:
i disagree, this is one photo in 98. He was at a prayer breakfast. He was invited solely because he is a religious leader. Does not mean they are friends and a handshake doesnt equal 20 years.
You are dead on about friends and some times politicians get hit too hard for their acquaintances, but Obama's lack of judgment in Rezko and Rev. Wright are beyond normal. And the GOP isnt the only one hitting Obama on this.
"he was invited solely because he is a religious leader."
what i hear you say is, basically, that the Clinton White House invited any and every religious leader, despite the messages they convey, to this breakfast, including white-folk-hating, non-patriots...
you honestly think they'd do that? if so, i imagine that other racist preacher in that video i posted was invited, too.
i doubt it. i'm sure consideration was giving to what the invitees have done within their communities as well as to what the religious leader represented.
and, again, how long he knew wright is irrelevant; it's only if he shares his views that's relevant. of obama and wright together, we've seen just one photo, just as we've seen but one photo of wright and clinton.
what you suggest is that wright's messages for 20 years carried racist, non-patriot messages when in 1998 he was invited to a breakfast at the white house.
he must have been doing some good to receive this invitation. my pastor has never been invited to any white house dinner. has yours?
all of this assumes that wright only always preached hate and divisivness, which is not true. and if you listen to more of the sermon (which i have conveniently posted) rather than a 10 second sound bite, you will hear at least one of the sound bites that was played over and over again in its context.
and context is everything.
Okay, i misspoke, he was not invited solely for being a religious leader. I don't think anyone doubts he has done a great deal to help communities. But what i meant by that is that he was invited because he was more well known and it was a religious event.
I don't know exactly when he started spewing hate from the pulpit but the bottom line is that Obama chose to associate with him for 20 years.
Even Obama acknowledges how bad the comments are and that he knew he was controversial.
How much influence that has had on Obama, idk, but good judgment would tell someone, especially a politician, to quit the church.
so, you admit that he's done "a great deal to help communities" and that you "don't know exactly when he started spewing hate from the pulpit." yet, while admitting to not knowing much about wright, you demonize the man citing only these sound-bites some of which were conveniently removed from their context.
and you insist that the "bottom line" is that obama chose to associate with him for 20 years" despite, as you admit, the fact that you know nothing of those 20 years outside those 20 seconds.
not to mention you admit to not knowing how much influence wright has had on obama.
one thing's for sure: you sure say a lot to be so terribly uninformed, all while calling into question obama's informed decision to remain in the church.
show me 20 years, not seconds, of filth, of hate, of america-bashing, and then we can talk. otherwise, your argument, riddled with quantum leaps of logic and as uninformed as it is, is one that wouldn't even convince you, minus your agenda, of course.
Post a Comment