Once again, Obama is asking the American public to take a leap of faith and believe him when he says that he never heard Jeremiah Wright say anything that the general public would find offensive. Now that Obama has finally denounced Wright and some of his views, some people want to know why it took so long for him to make the right decision.
I have said it before and I will say it again. I do not have a problem with Wright saying the stuff that he does. If he wants to act crazy and say hateful things then that is his right to do so. Just as it is my right to question the sanity and judgment of the members of Trinity United Church of Christ who continue to sit and listen to Wright. I still have a problem that Obama was a member of this church for twenty years.
Obama continues to say he was unaware that Wright was delusional and controversial, but there is evident that says otherwise. Tom Bevan does a great job of documenting Obama's awareness of how problematic his relationship with Wright could be to the day he announced his candidacy for the presidency on February 10, 2007. According to Wright, Obama called him the night before the announcement to tell him that he no longer could do the invocation.
"Mr. Wright said that in the phone conversation in which Mr. Obama
disinvited him from a role in the announcement, Mr. Obama cited an
article in Rolling Stone, "The Radical Roots of Barack Obama." According to the pastor, Mr. Obama then told him, "You can get kind
of rough in the sermons, so what we've decided is that it's best for
you not to be out there in public."
I have questioned Hillary Clinton's sanity and inability to tell the truth after her "sniper" fantasy played out on national television. Therefore, I also believe it is fair to question Obama's judgment and decision making in regards to Wright. I have come to the conclusion that Obama is either lying about what he knew about Wright's controversial beliefs and sermons or he is a member of a church that he rarely attended. Time will tell what the real truth is, but by then it may be too late for Obama.
Marc Ambinder, an associate editor for The Atlantic has a blog that I enjoy reading on a daily basis. I don't agree with everything that he writes, but I respect his opinion. Yesterday, he posted a short entry on his blog entitled "The Edifice Crumbles?" and he the proceeded to post the following thoughts of an Obama supporter,
"It may be cynical, but I've started to think that Wright sees Obama
as, in a way, a threat to his ministry. It would be difficult for him
to preach that the government systematically destroys the lives of
black people if a black man is sitting in the White House."
Ambinder then writes, "I know that many people inside Obama's campaign share this belief."
If what Ambinder says is true then many blacks will be offended and disappointed that members of Obama's campaign have subscribed to this tired theory on race in this country. First of all, it does not surprise me that there are people in Obama's campaign that believe Wright views Obama's success as a threat to his ministry. I would like to know the identification of those people. I would be disappointed, but not surprised if the Obama campaign members who believe this were black.
This unproven belief of some people in Obama's campaign is based on nothing. These are the same people who will argue that racism is not that prevalent in today's society because a biracial male is on the brink of becoming the Democratic nominee for president.
There are many whites and some blacks who harbor similar thoughts about the media appointed black "leaders" like Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton and Louis Farrakhan. They believe that Jackson, Sharpton, Farrakhan and others do not want racism to go away because its demise would make them irrelevant. I am not a fan of some of their methods and commentaries, but a person would have to be a fool to believe these men want people of color to continue to be discriminated against so they can continue to be relevant in the publics eye. Now if there is a way to make them irrelevant, please let me know.
I do not believe Wright or any other black "leader" is threatened by Obama's success. I am sure there are some people who are jealous of the attention Obama gets and the "easy road" he has traveled to get to this point. I do not believe that Obama has traveled an easier road to his success. I believe Obama has traveled on a road that many members of the "black leadership" are not familiar with. Nevertheless, there does seem to be a disconnect between the civil rights leaders who cut their teeth on the politics of 30-40 years ago and the new vanguard of black "leaders".
The bottom line is this - Wright was revered on the South Side of Chicago before Obama came along and he will be revered when Obama is long gone. Are there people who wish Wright had kept his mouth shut until Obama was elected president? Yes. However, the South Side community in which Trinity United Church of Christ resides is not going to turn their back on Wright. I know they want Obama to sit in the Oval Office, but I guarantee you that they will never trust Obama over Wright. Trust me when I say that Wright's ministry and his legacy is secure with the people that he represents and that is all that matters to Wright.
I remember it wasn't that long ago when most black people wondered aloud if Obama was black enough. Some blacks did not trust him because of his biracial background. He did not have the similar life experience that the majority of blacks have as a result of living in the United States. Blacks who doubted Obama pointed to the fact that he was the son of a Kenyan father and a white mother. He also attended and graduated from some of the best schools in the country. Therefore, some blacks questioned his authenticity on his knowledge of being black in America.
Now approximately 90 percent of the voting black community supports Obama and his quest for the presidency. Even though he is biracial, Obama has allowed everyone (black, white, media, etc.) to say that he could be the first African-American president of the United States. For the record, I respect Obama's decision to identify with his African heritage, but I am of the opinion that Obama would be the first biracial President who happens to identify as a black male. I only say this because I believe when people say Obama is African-American, they totally disregard his white mother and her family. Obama is the man he is because of his white mother and her parents who basically raised him as a young man in a white household.
When Obama won the Iowa Primary, most black people were stunned that a predominantly white state would vote for someone of color. The Iowa victory and his strong showing in New Hampshire gave some blacks the courage they needed to support Obama. For example, Jesse Jackson won 77 percent of the black vote in 1984 and 92 percent of the black vote in 1988. Currently, Obama is getting numbers close to what Jackson got in 1988.
Despite the support he gets from the majority of black voters, Obama has to be careful of his perception in all segments of the black community. There are already rumblings from some members of Indiana's black communities that Obama and Hillary Clinton are basically ignoring them while concentrating on courting the blue collar white voters.
Obama is also being watched to see how he handles the Jeremiah Wright and Trinity United Church of Christ controversies. When Obama denounced Wright yesterday, most people knew he did it for more political reasons than for personal ones. For Obama to have any chance of making inroads into the white blue-collar vote that Clinton has consistently beat him in he knew he had to strongly denounce Wright. However, Obama has to be careful how he denounces Wright so as not lose many members of his black voting bloc. Obama knows that there is a risk that some blacks will think he's just criticizing Wright to appease some white voters. I believe young black voters are more likely then older black voters to understand why Obama had to give the speech he gave yesterday. I think older black voters will understand, but will be less likely to forgive him for it.
Obama has to continue to find the balance that allows him to criticize Wright's views while not making it look like he's selling Wright out to white America because he needs their votes. For example, Obama was allegedly criticized by Al Sharpton for trying to "grandstand for white people" by appealing for calm after the controversial verdict in the Sean Bell shooting trial.
Obama is in a delicate situation but he can overcome it by just being himself. The trouble is I don't know if Obama really knows who he is because I sure don't. The man is being pulled in all directions by all people on a daily basis. This is one reason why most people do not run for President of the United States. I wish him well even though I will not be voting for him in the fall because he's too liberal for my blood. However, I am willing to overlook the flaws or political leanings of any candidate who would be willing to forgive student loan debts over $50,000.
It has been very interesting watching all of the news shows and reading all of the various newspaper articles discussing the the fractured relationship between Jeremiah Wright and Barack Obama as a result of Wright's appearance at the National Press Club on Monday. I have been amused by some of the comments I have heard and I have been confused by others. My perception of the falling out between Obama and Wright is a little different then what is being largely reported in the media. My opinion is based on my life perspective as a black male who grew up in Missouri. My grandfather is a minister of two black churches in west Tennessee, so I have an understanding of the widely discussed and misunderstood black church experience.
Obama could have eliminated the Wright issue years ago when he decided to enter the world of politics as a Illinois state senator. However, Obama did not see Wright as a problem until he announced his presidential candidacy on February 10, 2007. The fact is Obama sought out Wright and Trinity United Church of Christ for several reasons. First of all, as a biracial male living in the South Side of Chicago, Obama needed and wanted the black half of his life to be validated. I did not have a problem with his decision to identify himself as a black male. For the most part, depending on the color of the individuals skin, American society will assume a biracial person is black if one of their parents is black. It is very rare for society to identify a biracial individual as white unless the person's skin is so light that they could pass for white. I digress because this is all a subject that will be discussed on another day.
When Obama made the decision to identify himself as a black man he basically needed a "reference". Wright and Trinity provided Obama with his "ghetto pass" that he knew he needed if was going to succeed in the Hyde Park area of Chicago. This "pass" allowed him to do a lot of good work in the South Side neighborhoods. Wright made Trinity into an institution in Chicago. It became the thing to do to become a member of the Trinity congregation. Therefore, Obama became a member of Trinity and began making the political connections he needed to make it in the Chicago political wars.
Obama did not have to hide or worry about his relationship with Wright while running for the Illinois State Senate or the U.S. Senate. The majority of the people in his district do not disapprove of Wright or his message. Obama and his campaign team knew that Wright would be problematic when he made the decision to run for president. However, what the Obama camp curiously underestimated was how the content of Wright's sermons was going to negatively impact the majority of Americans. This is why the Wright cloud has continued to hang over Obama's campaign. Obama was also helped by the fact that the mainstream media kept a reasonably tight lid on issues regarding Wright because they did not think the Wright problem was newsworthy and they did not want to be viewed as racist for harming Obama's presidential march.
Obama finally addressed the Wright issue in Philadelphia with his much ballyhooed speech on racial relations in America. He eloquently discussed the issues of race in this country in a way that John McCain or Hillary Clinton could not. Obama also said that he did not agree with what Wright's comments, but that he could not disown him. The speech satisfied his supporters, but it did not resonate with his detractors. The speech may have helped him with some undecided voters, but not enough to help him win the Pennsylvania primary. The Obama campaign was feeling pretty confident that they handled the Wright fiasco and now they were focused on winning Indiana and North Carolina. Little did they know that a storm was coming down the road.
Wright is an intelligent and proud man. I cannot imagine how Wright felt having the entire world view snippets of his sermons without the full context of the respective sermons. He was being blasted by the national media on a daily basis as a racist. To make matters worse, a member of his congregation for 20 years, decided to go in front of the national media and make a point to say that he didn't know of Wright's previous comments and did not agree with those that he heard. There was no way Wright was going to stay silent and allow himself to be made into some sort of racist caricature by the national media. He was going to fight back and he was going to do it the only way he has known how - he was going to speak his mind. I do not believe Wright was trying to intentionally hurt Obama's campaign by going on his talking tour that began last Friday on the the Bill Moyers Journal show. However, I do believe that Wright was not going to continue to allow himself to be misrepresented to the American public without defending himself. He did not care about the negative effect it would have on Obama's campaign. Political campaigns come and go. If you look at the transcript from Wright's Moyer's appearance, this fight was about how his life's work was being portrayed.
Wright's speech and comments made the National Press Club forced Obama to do what he should have done a long time ago. Obama was forced to cast aside a man (Wright) who he looked up to and held in high regard. If you look at Obama's speech below, it is obvious that Wright's comments have upset him and he is saddened that he has to have a public breakup with a man who he saw as a father-figure.
Before I go on any further, I want to make it clear why Obama supporters are mad. It is not what Wright said during his appearances. Wright did not say anything new; he just repeated the same old controversial comments he has said for many years. Obama supporters, especially the approximately 90 percent of black voters who support Obama are mad about the timing of his speaking engagements.
Please understand that the majority of blacks are not mad about what Wright has said in the past or will continue to say in the future. They are mad that Wright did not wait until Obama was elected president before he started defending himself. Obama's quest for the presidency is very personal for the majority of the black community. They see Obama's candidacy as their chance to finally get to the White House where he can change the way the game is played in Washington. If Obama is elected president that would be a dream come true for many blacks, especially older blacks like my parents and grandparents who lived during the Jim Crow days in the south. This is why there is this almost naive belief among blacks that President Obama will make it easier to be black in America and this is why so many blacks are currently upset with Wright.
It will be interesting to see how Wright will respond to Obama's forceful public denunciation of him. Is Wright going to be quiet and lay low in Chicago because he has said what he had to say? On the other hand, is Wright going to return to the podium to respond to Obama's remarks about him and his beliefs? This is a difficult time for those people in the black community who support both of these men. They do not want to see Wright or Obama fail.
Obama and Wright are playing a game neither man can win. They have both already lost in ways that they could not have imagined a year ago. Obama has lost his shine as the candidate who can lead this country to a new place and help heal the racial divide. Wright has lost the respect and admiration of some blacks because they feel he has irreparably damaged Obama's campaign. You would be hard pressed to find a black person who does not think that Wright should defend himself. However, I would also venture to say that you would find it difficult to find many blacks who support Wright's defending himself at the expense of Obama's campaign for president.
Like I said - neither Obama or Wright can win this game.
I have finally viewed the controversial television ad sponsored by the North Carolina Republican Party. What's the big deal? I just don't get what the uproar is all about. Why are so many people upset over the content of this weak 40 second ad? The North Carolina GOP is using the incedinary clip of Barack Obama's former pastor, Jeremiah Wright spewing hateful words about America. A clip of the ad is shown below.
The Republicans are trying to tie the Democratic candidates for governor to Obama and Wright saying that they are "too extreme" for North Carolina. The Republicans are also trying to raise some money too. John McCain and the Republican National Committee have criticized the ad, but that has not stopped the North Carolina Republican Party from trying to air it.
I have viewed the ad several times and I still don't get the uproar. I have finally come to the conclusion that this ad is about more than the inclusion of the clips of the Wright sermon. Even if the clip of his sermon is taken out of context, it is still Wright's words coming out of his mouth. I believe that more people are upset that the ad shows a picture of Obama with his arms around a white woman - Democratic candidate for governor, Bev Perdue.
If this is what people are upset about than I think that says more about them than it says about the ad itself. Now, I will admit that there are still a lot of people who still cringe at the sight of a black man any where near a white woman - so what. What happened to the new mythical post-racial generation that was supposed to be taking over the United States?
If Obama believes this ad is racist then he needs to say so and explain why he feels this way. However that is not what Obama and his campaign team likes to do. They like to let their media supporters stir the racist accusations, so Obama never has to explain anything. This is one of the things that has always annoyed me about Obama. He could easily come out and say that the ad was stupid and the Wright clip was taken out of context again. Obama could also do a lot of good by saying that he did not believe the ad was racist because he was pictured with his arm around a white woman. He could continue to say that he has a lot of white supporters who he has given hugs to and there is nothing wrong with that.
I need someone to tell me - a black man - how this ad is racist. I thought it was weak, but not racist.
McCain better be careful about his criticism of this ad. Before he starts apologizing for everything a Republican says that may or may not put Obama in a bad light. McCain better go talk to his buddy Hillary Clinton about what happens if you run a campaign that is overly sensitive towards Obama. McCain and the GOP better wake before they find themselves in the same losing position Clinton finds herself in.
The campaign between Obama and Clinton and now Obama and McCain is funny too watch. Clinton, McCain and their supporters are so afraid to say any thing about Obama out of fear of being called a racist. Their actions remind me of the Seinfeld episode where Elaine had a biracial boyfriend and no one really was comfortable talking about him. Once again, Obama has got another candidate on the defensive when he has no reason to be.
It seems like the name of Louis Farrakhan will continue to be a part of the presidential campaign until election night. I believe in giving credit where credit is due. Barack Obama and his campaign staff have done a great job of handling the Jeremiah Wright controversy. To his credit, Obama did not cower behind press releases and anonymous statements made by aides. He came out in front of the American public and gave a speech on race relations that was well received in most corners of the country. Obama's top adviser, David Axelrod, even got one of the top public relation firms in Chicago to help Trinity United Church of Christ handle the overwhelming crush of media attention it was getting on a daily basis.
Jasculca-Terman and Associates says that their public relations crisis advice is being conducted as pro-bono work on behalf of Trinity. I am also sure that they advised the church that it would be in their best interests to remove any web site links to material that could be considered controversial. Now if you go to Trinity's site, their is no available link to their Trumpet Newsmagazine. In January, I had made mention of the November/December 2007 edition of Trumpet that contained the article about Farrakhan receiving the church's Lifetime Achievement Award.
I don't know who made the decision to remove the magazine from the internet. It could have been Obama, Axelrod, Jasculca-Terman or the church itself. It was the right decision to make - I don't care who made it. Nevertheless, the reason, I am even talking about the magazine again is because during a Pennsylvania campaign stop yesterday, Obama was asked, once again, to address the subject of his church giving the award to Farrakhan according to the Political Radar. However, Obama's response to the question was, in my opinion, a well thought out fabrication. Obama said,
"This was done by a magazine that was connected to the church. I would
have never done it. It was primary focused on the rehabilitation work
that they do for ex-offenders in Chicago. That doesn’t excuse it, that
just explains it."
I read that article several times and I still cannot remember any mention of rehabilitation work done by the Nation of Islam. I wish I had kept the pdf version of the article; since it has been removed from the church's site, I could not read it again. I even tried searching the Internet for it, but I could not find it. Maybe I'm wrong about the article, but I don't think so. I would like for someone would have to show me a copy of the old article and show me where the word "rehabilitation" is located in the article.
My point is that Obama has crafted a good explanation for his church giving the award to Farrakhan and it has tested well thus far. The Nation of Islam does do good work with ex-convicts and other issues in inner-city neighborhoods. But in this instance, Obama's explanation is not true. However, no one will be able to prove it unless they kept their downloaded copy of the Trumpet Newsmagazine.
Well it seems like everything is settling down after the Jeremiah Wright debacle. Barack Obama in his strongest language to date has renounced the controversial statements that his spiritual mentor made and cut his political ties to Wright. It should be noted that Obama will not cut his personal ties to him.
This controversy is not going to help Clinton beat Obama. It is too late for that to happen. Obama will be the Democratic nominee for president, but can he win in the fall against John McCain? For Obama to beat McCain, he needs the undecided voters to
take a huge leap of faith in him. Obama needs for voters to believe that he did not know about Wright's beliefs during
his time as a member of the church. The media is already digging around and asking, "what did Obama know about Wright's past sermons?"
Obama claims he never knew that Wright made inflammatory comments like those in his sermons. This is almost unbelievable. During his time at the church, Obama was a community activist in the South Side of Chicago community. He was among the people of the community on a daily basis and he wants the public to believe that he never knew of Wright's beliefs. I know that is not true.
Obama also says that he has not been at a sermon where where Wright made hateful remarks. Maybe he's telling the truth, but a lot of people do not believe him. For example, Newsmax wrote an article last year that claims they saw Obama in person at the church during one of Wright's sermon's in which he made comments regarding whites. This is what Obama is going to face in the fall - a growing segment of the public who thinks that he is lying. To win the presidency, Obama is going to have to convince people like this blogger at The Autonomist that he is telling the truth. That is going to be hard to do.
If enough people can take that leap of faith and believe
what Obama says then he is your next president. On the other hand, if people
think he is being a normal politician and is full of B.S. then McCain is your next
president. Do you believe Obama is telling the truth.
I always thought it was strange that Barack Obama had already written two memoirs and he was not even 50 years old. After reading this article about a transitional period of his life, I now know why he wrote two books. "Dreams From My Father" was published in 1995 before he entered politics. In that book, Obama made some comments regarding the subjects of race and white people that would surprise and offend some people.
When Obama was recruited and convinced to run for president, he had to write a second book to refute and change some of his controversial passages in the first book. Obama even admitted that fact when he said,“Certain passages have proven to be inconvenient politically". "The Audacity of Hope" was published in 2006. I believe at this time he knew he was going to run for president.
The controversial passages in the "Dreams" book could not prevent Obama from being elected to the Illinois State Senate representing the South side of Chicago. This area includes the home of the Nation of Islam and Trinity United Church of Christ. The passages may have caused him problems in the U.S. Senate race if people had really paid attention. The Republican's in Illinois were so consumed with their own internal mess that they were just consumed with fielding a candidate in the Senate race.
However, Obama and his political backers knew that those very same passages would prevent him from winning the Democratic nomination and maybe the presidency. This is why he wrote "Audacity". He may have been inspired by his minister's sermon, but that's not why he wrote the book. He wrote that book to clean up the mess he made in the first one. This is what politician's do.
As I have said many times, I like to read and listen to different opinions on a wide range of subjects. The Obama and Clinton campaigns each had to endure controversies last week. Well, I wanted to see how the supporters of each candidate responded to the media's coverage of Wright and Ferraro's comments. Clinton supporters were predictably upset over the response to Ferraro's comments about how lucky Obama is that he is black. This was the reaction I expected to see. On the other hand, Obama supporter's were very also upset with the media coverage of the Wright sermon's. The message board on Obama's site was littered with people blaming the right wing media and Clinton for making this a big deal. I also thought their emotions were predictable.
What I found unsettling was how many of the Obama supporters think that electing Obama is the answer to all of our country's problems. There were a couple of supporters who wrote that Obama is our last hope. As I read that posting, I started shaking my head in amazement. My wife asked me what was wrong as I started laughing out loud. I turned to her and said, "Some people act as if Obama is a Jedi Knight - like he's the last hope."
Wake up people - all of these candidates are politicians - nothing more and nothing less. They are not special except for the fact that they are willing to expose their private lives to be examined by the whole world.
Please take the time to read this interesting article that was written by Boyce Watkins, an African-American professor at Syracuse University. Watkins is discussing the racial overtones of the campaign and the ramifications of Barack Obama being branded the "black candidate". I want you to pay particular attention to the part of the article where Watkins starts to discuss his brother's campaign to be student body president. Watkins goes on to say the following about his brother:
"My brother’s campaign for student body president was a strong one, as he gave one stirring speech after another, met with all sororities and fraternities, produced innovative ideas and inspired tremendous energy from the students. All the while, he spent very little time discussing racial politics and worked deliberately to find common ground with the non-black students on campus. The black students, less than 10% of the student body, knew he was “playing the game”, and felt that he would support them once elected".
I have alluded to this "game" before when I talked about how Obama handled the questions regarding Farrakhan. Black people know that Obama is eventually going to have to verbally cast aside racists like Farrakhan and his spiritual mentor, Jeremiah Wright. They know he is going to have to denounce their views and renounce his relationships with them in a very public manner. However, they also know that in his heart, Obama will not mean any of the things he is saying about Farrakhan and Wright. Obama is "playing the game" and doing what he has to do to get elected president and that is all that matters to the majority of black people.
Fox News has released taped recording of sermons delivered at Barack Obama's church by recently retired minister, Jeremiah Wright, Jr. It will be interesting to see how his lunatic ravings made at the Trinity United Church of Christwill be interpreted by the IRS. There are people who believe that the church should lose its tax exempt status because of the content of some of the sermons that have been delivered there. I don't think Trinity will lose its tax exemption, but that's not my main concern. Watch the following video and you will see what really should concern everyone.
The problem I have is the words that have been spoken by Wright on a regular basis. His conduct is unbecoming of a minister. Maybe, I'm too old fashioned, but I didn't think ministers were supposed to give sermons that were fueled by racist, hateful, language laced with profanity.
Do you need more evidence that the man is a nut? I found this video on YouTube. It's from another sermon Wright gave to his congregation which includes the Obama's. You can hear the sermon in the background of the video.
It still surprises me that an intelligent married couple like the Obama's would be members of this church. In fairness to Obama, his campaign did release the following statement:
"Senator Obama has said repeatedly that personal attacks such as this
have no place in this campaign or our politics, whether they’re offered
from a platform at a rally or the pulpit of a church,” said Bill
Burton, a campaign spokesman. “Senator Obama does not think of the pastor of his church in
political terms. Like a member of his family, there are things he says
with which Senator Obama deeply disagrees.”
I have a problem with this cop out statement and it goes back to what I have been saying all along. There is a double standard in this campaign for Obama, Clinton and McCain. If Clinton and McCain were members of a church like Trinity and their spiritual mentor made comments like this, the media would be clamoring for them to resign from the campaign or to strongly denounce the church.
I have family members who are racist and that I deeply disagree with on many other issues. I do not have anything to do with them. On the other hand, maybe I should not be so hard on Obama. Why should he disassociate himself from his friend? Why should he care about what his mentor says when the majority of the American public doesn't care either? This is what the mainstream media wants the public to believe. The Obama campaign and the media have partnered to create a climate where people cannot even say anything bad about him or his campaign without being called racist.
The bottom line is this - Barack and Michelle Obama have been members of Trinity for years. They have sat and listened to these hateful sermons. People do not continue to go to a church to listen to a minister they do not agree with. I also don't want to hear the "crazy uncle" excuse. If any other candidate went to a church where the minister believes that the U.S. government introduced the AIDS virus onto its own citizens they would be packing up their campaign office. Obama's continued relationship with Wright has validated his racist anti-American rants. Michelle Malkin summed it up well, when she said, "Now we know where Michelle Obama's resentment of America comes from."
When I initially read the following article title, "IRS Investigating Obama's Church", I was intrigued. I immediately thought that the IRS was in the process of investigating Trinity United Church of Christ where Obama is a member. Then when I read the article, it became clear that the IRS is investigating the United Church of Christ, which Obama's church is a member of. The title of the article implies that the controversial Trinity is being investigated, when it is not.
Senator Hillary Clinton should drop out of the race for the Democratic nomination for President. I am not saying this because I believe Senator Barack Obama is the better candidate. I believe Clinton should stop running for the nomination if she is going to continue to run a campaign that is afraid to address the problems with Obama's candidacy.
Obama's campaign, its supporters and the media have put Clinton on the defensive. They have her and husband, afraid to say any thing bad about Obama. The Clinton's seem like they are afraid of being labeled racists. It is not racist to state the facts for what they are if it is the truth. What is the Clinton campaign afraid of?
I will be the first to admit that I am not a campaign strategist and I do not know what is being discussed in the various campaign war rooms. However, I do know this - Clinton will not get the vote of the majority of Blacks as long as Obama is still in the race. Therefore, she should stop campaigning as if she does not want to offend Black voters. Every one knows that the majority of Black's vote for the Democratic party without fail. They are fully vested in the myth that the Democratic Party is the best option for them. In doing so, Blacks have put themselves in a box. This is why Clinton should stop worrying about offending them and attack Obama's candidacy like she has done in her past races against White candidates.
I know the majority of Obama's supporters, Black and White, are sensitive to his candidacy and any criticism of it. They get mad if you ask him about his church and their giving a Lifetime Achievement Award Louis Farrakan, leader of the Nation of Islam. Obama supporters also get mad if you say that he has not offered any specific details on how he is going to implement any of the policies he has mentioned in speeches. Many Obama supporters believe that any one who opposes Obama is racist because that is the only reason a person could have not to support his campaign.
Clinton cannot be worried about offending the Black supporters of Obama. If she were to win the nomination, they would either vote for her or sit at home. The majority of Blacks are not going to vote for the Republican nominee.
Therefore, my message to Clinton is this - play to win. If you are not going to compete to the best of your ability and be true to yourself, do yourself a favor and drop out of the race.
I have always been an independent voter. I have never voted for a candidate because he was a member of a certain party. I also have never gone into a polling place and voted a straight ticket for either party. I have always believed in voting for the individual candidate and his platform. Maybe it is the way my mind works, but I have never been inspired by a politician. Every candidate in every election says the same thing. Some candidates have better oratory skills and project themselves better to an audience, but the script is basically the same. This is why I find Senator Obama's campaign and the popularity of his candidacy very amusing.
If you ask people why they are voting for Obama, the first thing that comes out of their mouth is "change" or he's a fresh face. In every election, whether it be for the local school board, mayor, governor, or congressional, the candidates say they are for change. What makes Obama's claim to be the candidate of change any different than other candidates over the years?
There is no doubt in my mind that the media has helped shape and sell Obama's presidential bid to the voters. I'm not saying they are working together, but I do believe the majority of the media has got caught up in the hype machine. No one is asking him the tough questions regarding his voting record and his platform. No one is asking him about his church and its relationship with the Nation of Islam's Louis Farrakhan. When Obama is shown on the news channels, the viewer at home gets to see concert sized crowds and some voters near tears after hearing him give a speech.
Unfortunately for Obama, I do not vote for inspiration. If he is the Democratic nominee, he better be prepared to answer the questions that undecided voters like me have. The "Obama Rules" of non-confrontation do not apply with me. If you want to sit in the highest office of the land than you have to address the tough issues. I do not want to hear the same old tired song and dance act that I hear from candidates during each election. Contrary to popular opinion, Obama is no different than Clinton, Romney, McCain, and Huckabee. He sells the same B.S.; he just presents it better.
In light of my comments regarding Senator Barack Obama, his church, Trinity United Church of Christ and its issuance of an award to Louis Farrakhan, I was told of a "fact check" page on Obama's campaign web site. The site addresses inaccurate statements and emails that have been increasingly appearing over time. I may not agree with all of the explanations, but I think people should at least read them and form their own opinions.
What do you think the national media would do if there was a presidential candidate who attended a church that describes itself as "unashamedly White" with a "non-negotiable commitment to Europe". The church goes on to say it has a White worship service and ministries that address the White community. The magazine of the church also gave an award to the leader of a White separatist organization because of his influence in the White community. If the above scenario was true, the media would be all over this story until it had run its course.
Well, it is true and the candidate is Senator Barack Obama. He is a member of Trinity United Church of Christ located in Chicago, Illinois. The church says it is "unashamedly Black" and it has a "Black worship service and ministries which address the Black community".
The church's magazine, Trumpet News Magazine, also gave its Lifetime Achievement Award to the Minister Louis Farrakhan, the leader of the controversial Nation of Islam. The church gave him the award because he "truly epitomized greatness".
Please note the following:
1) I do not have a problem with Obama being a member of Trinity United Church of Christ. He has the freedom to worship where ever he feels comfortable and there is nothing wrong with that
2) Trinity United Church of Christ has every right to establish and believe in their tenets of belief and worship. It is not against the law to have a "unashamedly Black congregation" just as it is okay to have a "unashamedly White congregation". I believe it's tacky and wrong, but it is not against the law.
3) The church has every right to give their award to Farrakhan if that is what they want to do. I respect their right to choose their honorees, but I do not have to agree with their selections.
What I have a problem with is the national media coverage of this issue. If Obama was White, this issue would have been a front page story. Obama would have been forced to disassociate himself with his church and make a public denouncement of Farrakhan and his beliefs. Obama would have had to do more than issue a press release addressing the issue. It seems that the majority of the mainstream press does not want to press Obama on certain subjects because they do not want to be seen as racist.
It is not racist to ask Obama tough questions on racial issues or ideology. I don't care what some civil rights activists would have you believe. What is wrong with asking him questions regarding where he attends church? Republican candidate Mitt Romney is almost questioned daily regarding his being a Mormon. For example, I would like to know why is Obama's church asking its members to boycott Wal-Mart and Sam's Club? I would like to know the answer to that question? Maybe there is a reason I should not shop at those stores.
I just want to see unbiased press coverage of the candidates. Every day, I read about Senator Hillary Clinton's negative issues, which are well documented. However, I want to know about Obama's problems also. I will say this much - Obama and his campaign staff are running a smooth campaign. They have done a good job controlling when he is the "Black candidate" and the "American candidate". Obama does not want a debate about race during the primary campaign because he does not want to scare off some of his racially sensitive White supporters. However, it's okay if he brings up the subject of race to recruit the Black vote, but no one else can do it. These are the "Obama Rules".
