Posted on Mon, 03/24/2008 - 17:47 — by MikeSar
Recent Videos on Preaching looks like an effort to distract voter attention from The Race Issue. Many seem to prefer to argue about Preachers and Religion (P&R) instead of race, why? To run away from a discussion on racial discrimination and run to a phony debate on religious practices that will not alter, in the least, any Church or preacher, it seems disingenuous. They may not realize that Freedom of Religion is in the Constitution, not just the churches I, personally, approve, not even if they think one is Witchcraft by witches.
It looks like a cheap effort to run away from "the sins of my father" because they include us. It seems like a "cheap" way to avoid facing personal discrimination involvement a search that may be, and ought to be, difficult and painful but, this is not a TV Sitcom, it's reality. Whether Pres. Clinton had Minister Wright at the White House when he wanted the cover of religion for his misdeed, or not. It may be contagious: Sen. Clinton claims that "when I was in Bosnia, I had to run for cover due to enemy fire." But, photos of her reception in Bosnia shows nothing like it and she had to retract her lie.
Sen. Obama set out to end discrimination and he will accept defeat if bigots are the majority of voters and they rather keep the war in Iraq going and do not care who dies, regardless race, color, creed or legal country of residence. Those that promote the switch to P&R issues want to avoid discussing the War in Iraq and ignore Sen. Clinton VOTED FOR THE WAR, why do so many say they believe she will end a war she voted to start; what is more credible Words in a campaign by a politician with a large staff and advice of Master Politician: Pres. Clinton, or her vote in the Senate, which she has NEVER Called it a MISTAKE!
If we want to avoid "CHANGE" based on the "WORDS" political candidates say, openly, while keeping from the public Income Tax Records, papers in the Clinton Library between her committee to devise a national Health Care Program. Why is she hiding all that?
The key issue is that she is demonstrating her lack of compunction in hiding whatever she thinks expedient, WHILE RUNNING FOR OFFICE! She, of course, wants to appear OPEN to the public, her staff even send me an email to tell me she wants to "be my voice" in Washington. Only someone with supernatural powers, saint or witch, can claim to speak for me without ever talking for a long time, with me.
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 69
Report jankoski
Isn't it hilarious how she lied twice in the course of 2 days, and she claims she made an innocent mistake? Yeah right! Just like she didn't know Billy Boy was playing with Monica in the Oval office, when she was in the house! Is this the best that the Demos can offer? Looks like a party in disarray. Too bad we aren't talking about a college party, but an American institution.
This isn't Kennedy's party anymore....
Joined: Dec 2005
Posts: 263
Report madcali4nian
You said, "Sen. Obama set out to end discrimination and he will accept defeat if bigots are the majority of voters and they rather keep the war in Iraq going and do not care who dies, regardless race, color, creed or legal country of residence."
So anyone who doesnt vote for Obama is a BIGOT?
Remember who were the racist bigots that instituted slavery, and who it was that ended it. The issue shouldnt be really about sermons, but the hurtful divisive words of a man who helped shaped the beliefs plus mentored Obama. I dont know about anyone in here but I'm really being entertained by the quasi civil war within the bigoted Democratic party. Its a gas.
Joined: Jul 2005
Posts: 730
Report shays
Voting for someone other than Obama is not bigotry. Voting against Obama by voting for someone else is not necessarily bigotry (or voting against Hillary by voting for someone else is not necessarily sexism), but it could be. But the assumption that a person not voting for Obama is a bigot is false.
The rest of your paragraph is less easy to understand. Slavery is a pretty old institution, so I am not sure just whom you mean when you ask "who were the racist bigots that instituted slavery". Slavery was outlawed north of the Ohio River in this country in 1787, though permitted (by compromise) in designated parts of the U.S. by ratification of the Constitution. The importation of slaves was outlawed in 1808. Though the Democratic Party can trace its roots to Jefferson (Republicans try to do the same, so that should be ample proof that neither party is quite as "old" as it claims to be), it wasn't until the 1830s that "Democrat" became the official name of the current party. Even after that, it has undergone some rather fundamental reorganization ... just as the Republican Party has undergone similar major realignments. We woul all be better off, in other words, discussing the history of individual elections and the people who ran them, rather than the historical positions of current political parties ... all of which have shift over the issues over time.
The quasi civil war takes place within the Democratic Party because ... despite propaganda efforts to the contrary ... the Democratic Party represents a broad coalition of unlike-minded people who historically fight amongst themselves almost as much as they will argue with people of differing political persuasion(s). The words of Will Rogers are as relevant today as they were on the day he spoke them ("I don't belong to an organized political party ... I'm a Democrat"). I am not sure what is going to happen when the general election takes place and people are brought to remember that John McCain fathered at least one black daughter out of wedlock, that he was a stoolie for the North Vietnamese during his time at the Hanoi Hilton, that he secretly compromised with other Senators in order to deny health care to Vietnam vets, that Cindy McCain suffered from a serious prescription drug addiction, that John himself was a homosexual.
Watching Bush-supporters falling over themselves to deny those accusations will be a gas, too!
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 192
Report MikeSar
Fine comments. Slavery is ancient, the word refers to "Germanic Tribes" from Scandinavia and nearby regions, derived from "slav". Arabs brought "slaves" to Spain. The first "Ethnic Cleansing" was in Spain, not Bosnia. Aristotle, the Great philosopher, had slaves, as did Jefferson; his descendents had their first integrated Family Gathering, a few years ago.
MikeSar
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 192
Report MikeSar
Your quote: ""Sen. Obama set out to end discrimination and he will accept defeat if bigots are the majority of voters and they rather keep the war in Iraq going and do not care who dies, regardless race, color, creed or legal country of residence." So anyone who doesnt vote for Obama is a BIGOT?"
Would Sen. Obama accept the properly validated election results? I am sure he, a good Democrat that he is, will only offer his support. Sen. Gore set the example, even when there were reasons to wonder, later confirmed, about the honesty of the election. Perhaps, the issue is not whether there are bigots in a party but which party welcomes and supports bigots on the election. We all have in common our faith in the Constitution and will accept the decision of voters, including bigots, and the courts. Sen. Obama has expressed in much finer detail his convictions and, to my recollection, he has never repeated something more than twice, and then backed off and say that he never meant what he said the way it was commonly interpreted or was too tired from lack of sleep. At what time, do you think, will the 3AMRed Phone Call ring? At 10 AM? After the meeting of evaluators has time to decide on the multiple recommendations by the staff of Experts that met to evaluate the call? What if the message was a photo and voice from ben Laden at a cave up in the hills? What they used to call "Actionable Intelligence"? Should we let this criminal get away, again? We already heard what all candidates would do, vote for the one you support. One of them has not yet figured out in which country he is, and wants to continue looking for him in the wrong country, for A Hundred Years? Is there a Merit Badge for Geography?
MikeSar
Joined: May 2008
Posts: 1
Report jandt
When the Rev. William Procanick put his hand on the Bible during his sex-abuse trial in Oneida County Court earlier this year, he swore to tell the whole truth and nothing but the truth. But as the former Clinton pastor was sentenced Friday to three years in prison for inappropriately touching a 7-year-old girl at his home last March, Judge Michael L. Dwyer said Procanick sacrificed his honesty the day he testified.
Okay, so now that Clinton's pastor has been convicted of child molestation, will we see the same furor directed at Hillary that Obama has had to endure these last few days? - M. R.
IF A CANDIDATE IS KNOWN BY THE PASTOR THEY KEEP ...... Then you need to email this article to everyone you know. Here the CLINTON'S Pastor is convicted of child molestation. So, if Obama bears the guilt for his pastor's comments, then Hillary has to be equally tainted by this guy's crimes.
Joined: Aug 2003
Posts: 192
Report MikeSar
Have no doubt the Republicans want Clinton to be nominated. They are probably making the Videos and testing the voice-over in selected groups for emotional impact by key words. If Clinton is nominated, we are all going to see this irreverent Reverend day and night, three minutes at a time. Maybe, the Democratic Convention should be delayed to protect us from all these TV Ads?
MikeSar