I'm glad Wayne, our host supports freedom of hate speech that Snowman offers so often. Thanks!

If it's good enough for Rev. Wrong, it's good enough for Snowman!

Paul,
Suggest you should remove the quotation mark beginning your version of what Wright said or did not say. I couldn't find it in the transcript, but maybe I missed it. Help me out here. Otherwise, maybe no one said it or said it like that.

Instead, maybe you should just repeat the words he did say if you want to enlighten us rather than slant his words or to put your own spin on the interview,

As for his comments on 9/11, I was curious about his response and looked. In the interview you "quoted", he didn't use the term "responsible". That's your word. He used the term "culpable" and the reason why. Your report, err your interpretation, err your choice of words doesn't have the same nuance, even without the context in which he said it. So why not just use the same word(s)? I find that a little disengenuous on your part. To be generous, perhaps you don't see any difference.

Next time, I'd rather you provide us the facts to base your dislike for the candidate rather than attributing your words and descriptions to a news organization in order to support your personal opinions or for whatever reason. And for the record, I use the word "news" broadly with the organization they call themselves, FoxNews.

Otherwise, people think the guy really said it and they become greatly disturbed in an OT forum like this."

Sherwood

now we're going to bash asians? geez this is a rough place:D

Rev. Wright thinks he is the Black Pope!


http://forums.pelicanparts.com/suppo.../crucified.gif

So Sherwood, are you taking the position of defending the good rev and his racist, anti-American remarks? Edited - personal attack removed. -Z-man.

I watched a little of his denouncement last night, about freaking time, guess it had to be gradual as this escalated. Wright pissed off Mrs Obama too from what he said.

Island, I didn't take you as a conspiracy theorist before that last comment. Do you really believe what you wrote, or are you just testing the waters?

Sherwood,

I used quotation marks because I was quoting the ARTICLE that I provided a link to. I used the q-marks to indicate that the statements are not mine. The last paragraph is mine and no q-marks are used. You seem pretty hung up on my form. :rolleyes: BTW "enlighten" me on why youd use a set of q-marks at the end of your post?

This entire forum is about "personel opinions". You better get used to it.

Paul

Paul:

I had no problem understanding what you posted, FWIW.

Best,

..

So George, your position is that Mr Wright and Mr Obama have not discussed this since it became an issue? That seems a bit implausible. Mr Wright has not added anything new to his song and dance that I have noticed.

It was okay for 20 years, even after running for the Senate, but when it gets to a national stage it is a problem.

Obama must think people are pretty freakin' stupid, that is my take on this recent stuff.

You just made another observation for me, thanks.

It's Mr. Obama running for President not Mr. Wright.;)

True, but he'd have done way better with Oda Mae Brown as his "spiritual adviser & mentor" than the right reverend Jeremiah Wrong.
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1209568971.jpg

I stopped in to see my dad, 82, and my uncle who's 85. I love them both dearly, they are both intellectual with a broad range of experiences in their lifetimes to pull from. One is a former minister as well. am awed as they discuss Religion, Philosophy, Politics, etc, and the depth of their reading is revealed.

But I would be embarrassed were their views on the different Races be submitted for analysis. I suspect it is the same way for Obama. And it doesn't mean you disassociate from them, you just don't buy into that part of the discussion.

Hardflex, they are men from a different era...times change. I've observed a lot of those "generational differences in perspectives" over the last few decades regarding race.

it is difficult not to dismiss people like that Hardflex. You have an inside view of your dad and uncle which some folks would not bother to obtain.

a good point.

Excuse me? You're going to do what because of my foolishness?

If you read what I wrote, I took issue with the manner in which URY914 seemed to play fast and loose with his quoting the words of Wright through the reporting of FoxNews. It appeared ury914 used his own words instead. If we're going to criticize Wright's position or what anyone is purported to say, we should know what was actually stated and the context in which it was said instead of cherry-picking phrases or substituting words then adding quotation marks to it. Does that sound reasonable or is paraphrasing good enough? Does that sound like I'm defending Wright or criticizing the manner in which someone is telling us what was really said?

You wrote the words about clubbing, and if anyone wanted to quote you, no one would have to refer to this post. The source is good enough. One could assume you wrote that to emphasize your disagreement with my post; either that or it was a blatant threat which is worrisome if not totally irresponsible on your part.

Your response before the moderators spot this clear infraction of forum rules?

Sherwood

Great point! Would you appoint them to your campaign & announce to all what influence they have had on you while defending them & then throw 'em under the bus? Can you say "poor judgment?" That would never be an issue for a president though!

Strange you should say that, he worked for Nixon's campaign in 1972. He was articulate and a huge fund raiser for him.

There was no fast and loose to it! You may have interpreted it as that but as he pointed out, that was just your interpretation. And yes it did sound like you may be catching the rev's slack. My post was to point out how foolish any attempt to defend this racist, socialist, America hating buffoon would be. He is utterly indefensible.

So when Snowman says something, it is hate, but whe wright says much worse, it isn't hate, but OK:rolleyes:http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1209574012.jpg

Paul,
You started your post with a quote as if what followed was attributed to FoxNews. The link you posted was sufficient to know the source. However, none of the words you "quoted" were in the FoxNews article nor in Wright's transcript, just your own. You don't see that or don't care? The thread you started developed and grew. People who took your quotes for face value assumed it came directly from Wright. Wrong (sort of a pun).

You call it your "personal opinion". So be it. From now on, I'll be sure to understand quotes in your posts as your personal thoughts. I'd prefer you be more credible than that.

You asked why I ended my post with an end quote. For effect, basically. Same reason why I asked why you used a beginning quote in your post. But since you asked, did you think I was quoting someone on the internet?

Sherwood

Unless the Fox article referenced by Paul was modified since he posted the thread starter here, which is very possible and done frequently by the media, Paul's quoted text is not exactly like the referenced article, but it is materially the same.

Paul quoted:

The first two paragraphs from the referenced link ( http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/04/28/rev-wright-takes-his-message-directly-to-the-media/ ) are, IMO, materially similar to Paul's quote:

FWIW, I did notice that the last paragraph of Paul's post lacked quotes and was his own words:

Looks like Fox just updated the original story.

I don't understand what the big deal is, but I have been known to miss obvious stuff before. :)

Sherwood,
the first two quoted paragraphs were directly from the article in the link. I just looked at the link and the article has been changed and my quoted paragraphs are not there. You can believe me or not, I don't care. You are really making a big deal out of my quotes. Here is another quote for you.

"Get over it"

I agree. :)

Is Nixon running? Did they dig him up. Please allow me to summarize the comments of you & all the other lefties out here:
Whaaaaaaaaaaa!
http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1209577667.jpg

These left wing dead enders have gone so long without a point that desperation is setting in.

Speaking of hatred and venom...can you try to avoid going down the road of threats like that? Let's try to keep if somewhat out of the gutter.

btw nice channeling of Mulholland with the crying baby graphic...

Somehow I'm not surprised that you class that as venom & hatred. Let me take this time to formally apologize to any and all that may have been offended by or actually perceived a threat of real violence. My intent was to emphatically make the point that rev Wright and his racist hate filled statements are indefensible. Additionally my intent was to imply that I consider rev Wright a pariah to America anv that I would vigorously take issue with any attempt to defend him or his statements. At no time did I actually consider "clubbing" any one or any seal. The statement was meant metaphorically. No left wingers or baby seals were harmed in the making of either post.

Ya' gotta admit, the crying baby has never been more appropriate than now.

I heard several callers on talk radio today saying the the Obama/Wright dug-a-war has been a complete set up by the Obama camp. I think this whole thing has been too much for someone to set up and have it play out and work as someone would want it to. Too many things could go wrong and blow up.
Way too risky to be a set up.

Some folks think that everything that happens is a set up by someone.

...You mean the baby seals? I mean come on, the baby seals would have a more defensible position than those who would support “Reverend” Wrights' hate-for-profit. ;)

Apparently some on the left are uber-polite to the point where my crassness offended.

I was supporting Kurt Starnes wise observation.

Again, considering that Wright said in an interview last April, that he saw that ... he had told Obama that the time may come when Obama will have to distance himself, for political gain . . . it is hardly a reach to consider that this IS EXACTLY what is going on here. Obama seems rather slow on the up-take here. Obamas initial response to Wright was weak as hell. -- CLEARLY something more (politically) had to be done. After all, this is chess they are playing ...not checkers. A whole lot of power is on the line, and both Obama and Wright are presenting with measured steps, as they try to paint a Presidential contender in a different light(ness). I have no doubt that Wright is guiding/influencing Obama in his moves. If you want to call that "conspiracy" feel free. But keep in mind, Wright had made these chess moves public about a year ago ...so it's not exactly a secret --which absence of would have helped you in support of your labeling me a "conspiracy theorist." :)

Very insightful of you to share that with us:rolleyes:

I see why you like these guys, they don't respond to direct questions either
Todd, how exactly would he club someone to death with the venom and hatred that spews from Mr Wright's mouth? It is offensive, but unless he really yelled it in your ear, it probably would not hurt.

couldn't resist

http://forums.pelicanparts.com/uploa...1209594672.jpg

LOL!

and remember: "I can no more disown him [Wright] than I can disown the black community" --Obama

.. but hey that was a few weeks ago . . beFOR Obama had ANY IDEA... ;)

words are important and it's a fair point that Paul's quote may have been off a bit.

however given his history here i would trust Paul when he says that he quoted the article directly. he is not prone to hyperbole and trash talking. his conduct on this board is deserving of the benefit of the doubt.

Thankyou, berettafan.

I feel vindicated. (a little;))

I am giving you all an observation from a generation that recognizes a N when one sees it. IT is not about hate, its just a FACT about Wright, and quite possibly Obama. Both are communists. The term, N when used in a non biased, non racial way, is a description that any reasonable white or black would assign to such a so called person. It is a derogatory term meaning that the thing being described is lower than life and their views would not be accepted by any rational person. Similar terms can be applied to whites. The term as applied here, to these specific individuals, could be used in mixed company without fear of reprisal. Why? Because its true beyond a shadow of any doubt.

Excepting the "lower than life" part, are you describing yourself?