Hitchens Indicts Obama

[IchabodPlain]

Of course, you are unable to quote him saying that, or you would.

From http://video.aol.com/video-detail/ba...ight/763572789:

I wasn't in church during the time that these statements were made. Now I think it's important Keith to point out that he's been preaching for 30 years, he's a man who was a former Marine, who served this country, a biblical scholar, somebody whose spoken at theological schools all across the country, and is widely regarded as a preacher. That's the man I know, that's the person who was the pastor at this church. I did not hear such incendiary language myself, personally, either in conversations with him or when I was in the pew.

My emphasis in bold.

 

[WildCat]

Is it?

If you tally up his good decisions, in order of importance, on one side and his bad decisions, in order of importance, on the other, how do they match up? Where does Wright or even Rezko place in those lists? Where does Iraq?

How bad is his judgment, really, when you aren't just cherry-picking the stinkers?

A POTUS will have to pick a cabinet, yes? Will Obama pick competent experienced experts, or will he select people hoping to use him for their own personal gain (such as Rezko), or incompetents whom he feels loyalty towards for past favors so he rewards them with a job and power (making Wright part of his campaign)? I've seen this act before among Illinois politicians, and Obama is looking more like an Illinois politician where loyalty and clout and the ability to raise money trump all other things than a reformer who makes decisions based on principles and ideals.

 

[Chaos]

I don't care for Hitchens all that much. He's a dogmatic crank that I just happen to agree with on a few issues.

Don´t you know that "dogmatic cranks" are only those who say stuff you disagree with? Those who say stuff you agree with are "outspoken skeptics".

 

[Sefarst]

Quotes, I want quotes. And I've asked for them about a zillion times on various different threads. Now I'm wondering if they exist.

Here's an exercise in critical thinking for you. I provided a link to an aol video in which Obama says all the things you're denying in the first five minutes. Look around on your screen. You'll probably see an arrow somewhere that we call a "cursor". I want you to move your cursor over the blue, underlined words in previous post and click it. The rest takes care of itself. Isn't technology wonderful?

 

[WildCat]

Quotes, I want quotes. And I've asked for them about a zillion times on various different threads. Now I'm wondering if they exist.

Read the transcript yourself: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23648883/

 

[Darth Rotor]

http://www.slate.com/id/2187277



More eloquent than I could hope to be.

While Hitchens has a way with words, I have to ask if any of you have considered a simpler choice.

You take people as they come, the bitter with the sweet. The Rev and his rhetoric certainly have their downside (I picked up on the black bunker mentality message the first time I opened his church's web site, some months ago) but as a center of community activity and activism, it seems to have been very effective. There is more than one dimension to the Rev Wright, and for that matter, Obama, Hillary, Ron Paul, and all the rest. This narrowly based carping is a convenient venue in which to forget that.

Wright is who he is, warts and all. Maybe Obama recognized that, and accepted that people with imperfections can still be useful, generally capable, and able to do some greater good in some endeavors.

Maybe, just maybe, it wasn't cold and calculating, and was more a matter of dealing with the associates you have, dancing with the girl that brung ya, and weighing the pros and cons, and finding the final balance good enough. Few of us are blessed with friends and associates who are flawless, perfect, or otherwise the avatar of all that is right with the world.

Then again, Obama is a politician, and Hitchens may have guessed correctly is his faux ESP attempt.

DR

 

[CHF]

I find this whole Obama-Rev. Wright controversy completely bizarre.

Obama was the only candidate with enough brains to vote against going to war in Iraq, yet his ability to make wise decisions is now being called into question because of some remarks made by his pastor???

Are you friggin' kidding me?

 

[T.A.M.]

What I find bizarre is the need of many people to keep this going.

Actually I think they want the man out of the race, plain and simple, and will harp on this until it happens.

TAM

 

[WildCat]

Obama was the only candidate with enough brains to vote against going to war in Iraq

When was this?

 

[Sefarst]

I find this whole Obama-Rev. Wright controversy completely bizarre.

Obama was the only candidate with enough brains to vote against going to war in Iraq, yet his ability to make wise decisions is now being called into question because of some remarks made by his pastor???

Are you friggin' kidding me?

Obama was not in the Senate when the Iraq war started so he didn't vote to do anything.

 

[TriskettheKid]

What I find bizarre is the need of many people to keep this going.

Actually I think they want the man out of the race, plain and simple, and will harp on this until it happens.

TAM

That ain't going to happen.

Even Clinton's own aides thought they had a 10% chance of winning, and since no re-vote is taking place in either Michigan or Florida, her chances are even slimmer.

Good read about it:

http://www.nytimes.com/2008/03/25/opinion/25brooks.html?_r=1&ref=opinion&oref=slogin

 

[T.A.M.]

Obama was the only one of the three Candidates to publicly come out against the Iraq War before it was executed.

Oh, and before you go there, Once the bus is in the ditch, you can't stop providing the people getting it out food to survive while they do so...

TAM

 

[SDC]

What I find bizarre is the need of many people to keep this going.

Actually I think they want the man out of the race, plain and simple, and will harp on this until it happens.

TAM

This won't nuke his candidacy. The Democratic candidate will be Obama or Clinton; Repub will be McCain.

This is, of course, barring accidents, acts of god, sudden death, Oliver taking over the world, etc.

Was it Sen Earl Long of Louisiana who said that his re-election was assured as long as he wasn't caught in bed with either a dead girl or a live boy? Whether or not it was Long, please note that he didn't say anything about his pastor's statements. And he was right not to do so.

 

[President Bush]

I find this whole Obama-Rev. Wright controversy completely bizarre.

Obama was the only candidate with enough brains to vote against going to war in Iraq, yet his ability to make wise decisions is now being called into question because of some remarks made by his pastor???

Are you friggin' kidding me?

People getting their fundamental interests wrong is what American political life is all about.
-Thomas Frank

 

[Upchurch]

A POTUS will have to pick a cabinet, yes?

Of course.

Will Obama pick competent experienced experts, or will he select people hoping to use him for their own personal gain (such as Rezko)

Is there any reason to think he would pick anything other than competent experienced experts? Rezko raised money for Bush and didn't land any cabinet positions from that.

or incompetents whom he feels loyalty towards for past favors so he rewards them with a job and power (making Wright part of his campaign)?

Wright was one of a 170 members of Obama's African American Religious Leadership Committee. Hardly an influential part of the campaign with policy setting power.

I've seen this act before among Illinois politicians, and Obama is looking more like an Illinois politician where loyalty and clout and the ability to raise money trump all other things than a reformer who makes decisions based on principles and ideals.

So, before these two controversies were brought to light, were you were open to voting to Obama? Was it only this that closed him off as an option for you?

 

[Sefarst]

While Hitchens has a way with words, I have to ask if any of you have considered a simpler choice.

You take people as they come, the bitter with the sweet. The Rev and his rhetoric certainly have their downside (I picked up on the black bunker mentality message the first time I opened his church's web site, some months ago) but as a center of community activity and activism, it seems to have been very effective. There is more than one dimension to the Rev Wright, and for that matter, Obama, Hillary, Ron Paul, and all the rest. This narrowly based carping is a convenient venue in which to forget that.

Wright is who he is, warts and all. Maybe Obama recognized that, and accepted that people with imperfections can still be useful, generally capable, and able to do some greater good in some endeavors.

Maybe, just maybe, it wasn't cold and calculating, and was more a matter of dealing with the associates you have, dancing with the girl that brung ya, and weighing the pros and cons, and finding the final balance good enough. Few of us are blessed with friends and associates who are flawless, perfect, or otherwise the avatar of all that is right with the world.

Then again, Obama is a politician, and Hitchens may have guessed correctly is his faux ESP attempt.

DR

While most of that is true, I think what's at issue here is that it seems Obama knew all long that he would one day have to distance himself from Wright.

Obama has been built up by many to be a quasi-Messiah and praised for his good judgment and honesty. Along comes the first juicy scandal and that house of glass is getting pummeled. The bigger they are, the harder they fall. I'm sure Clinton just wishes this had happened sooner.

 

[Upchurch]

Don´t you know that "dogmatic cranks" are only those who say stuff you disagree with? Those who say stuff you agree with are "outspoken skeptics".

Perhaps, but I like to think I can make the distinction when necessary. I've said as much about at least one prolific "skeptic" around here.

 

[T.A.M.]

While most of that is true, I think what's at issue here is that it seems Obama knew all long that he would one day have to distance himself from Wright.

Obama has been built up by many to be a quasi-Messiah and praised for his good judgment and honesty. Along comes the first juicy scandal and that house of glass is getting pummeled. The bigger they are, the harder they fall. I'm sure Clinton just wishes this had happened sooner.

You say this as if it is a good thing. We should be ashamed of ourselves that we as humans long for people to be "pummelled" to be "brought down", especially when the person in question's message is such a positive one.

Yes he was revered, put on a high pedestal by some. It has been a long time since the USA had anyone like Obama running, or the message he brings, and the way he brings it. He has come at a time when change is desperately sought after both by your countrymen, and the world. Some people have really bought into it, and made it their own cause...oh how bad of them to lose their cynicism, even for a few moments.

Well if this results in Obama not getting elected, then those who were a part of this story line's continuance will get what they deserve for a leader.

TAM

 

[CHF]

Obama was not in the Senate when the Iraq war started so he didn't vote to do anything.

My bad. He was opposed to the war but didn't vote on it.

Either way my point remains the same: Obama made the right choice on the biggest foreign policy decision of the past few decades.

But none of that matters because his pastor's an idiot

 

[Sefarst]

You say this as if it is a good thing. We should be ashamed of ourselves that we as humans long for people to be "pummelled" to be "brought down", especially when the person in question's message is such a positive one.

I absolutely think it is a good thing. Hero worship of individuals has brought humanity down to some of the lowest depths over the course of our history. We need never forget that our leaders are people, sometimes smarter, sometimes dumber than the rest of us, but people nonetheless.

Yes he was revered, put on a high pedestal by some. It has been a long time since the USA had anyone like Obama running, or the message he brings, and the way he brings it. He has come at a time when change is desperately sought after both by your countrymen, and the world. Some people have really bought into it, and made it their own cause...oh how bad of them to lose their cynicism, even for a few moments.

This is part of the problem and the very attitude I'm trying to combat. People like Obama run all the time (as has been said, he and Clinton are nearly indistinguishable on the issues) and the message he brings is "change," which, I hate to break it to you, is a buzzword used in EVERY election in which an incumbant is unpopular. People shouldn't lose their cynicism or, perhaps more importantly, their skepticism.

Well if this results in Obama not getting elected, then those who were a part of this story line's continuance will get what they deserve for a leader.

Which is what?