Hitlary would know what to do!

I saw the video of the press breakfast Q & A with Wright. He was acting like it was a standup act on The Tonight Show. Obama needs to come out and smack down the Rev. or B.O. will be seen as a believer of Wright's BS. A lot of people and the media are watching to see how B.O. will repond.

Reverend Wright is not the Boogey man he has been made out in the primary snippets. In fact the more I see, shows he has a point of view not far from the average black man in America. Many popular black comedians are way beyond Rev. Wright. Let us understand the whole man here.
Any one of us could be made out as something we are not if subjected to the same treatment.

He would be sleeping with the fishes.:D

you guys are killin' me here
yeah, Todd did not derail anything here, he is stirring the pot. He said nothing about the holes I poked in his perspective is reality bit.

Difference is, popular black comedians are trying to be funny, clearly not the case with "Reverend" Wright. Read up a bit, there is a statement of purpose, or whatever you would like to call it, for his "church". A white man would probably go to jail for running an outfit like that, or at the very least have to start paying income taxes

So he's not out of line. All perfectly justifiable things to say, and completely appropriate for a church sermon, to boot. Remember, God commands us to love God, and love each other. Seems to me his sermons definitely advance this message.

GAFB.

Why would anyone feel the need to defend this tool? And, I wonder what a search of these defenders posts would reveal regarding their views on say....Pat Robertson?

What would the Reverend King have to say about this fellow, I wonder?

I agree...

ps: I do not agree with the likes of Robertson, Falwell, etc. either, but they too are misrepresented in the media a LOT.

"Reverend Wright is not the Boogey man he has been made out in the primary snippets. In fact the more I see, shows he has a point of view not far from the average black man in America. Many popular black comedians are way beyond Rev. Wright. Let us understand the whole man here.
Any one of us could be made out as something we are not if subjected to the same treatment."

What horse*****. You're obviously a white person telling us what the "average" black man thinks- how the h*ll do you know what anyone thinks?

If there are any "average" black men (or women) on this board I would love to hear their perspective. I would strongly suspect they believe that the Reverend is in the same league with Falwell, Coulter, Maher, Olbermann and all the white idiots out there.

you didn't poke any holes, you just don't get (or don't agree with) my point. You are of the opinion that there is one objective reality. I maintain that this "reality" has no meaning for someone without their own perspective.

I can extend the elephant metaphor if you'd like to explain my point. While it is true that a blind person who feels only the tail might think it is something else, their "reality" is that if they stand there long enough they'll get ***** on. If someone tells them "it is an elephant", their reality becomes that an elephant is something that feels like a tail and *****s on me.

And just because *your* senses say it is an "elephant", how do you know you are correct? I'll again point to the "multiple versions of a single incident."

We have "an elephant" because some number of people have agree to call it such. The "reality" of an elephant is very different to someone watching it in a zoo vs someone getting stepped on it in the wild. So if you then talk about "America", you have the same issue. What is the reality/meaning of that for different individuals and groups? My argument is that different cultures and groups will have different versions of the American "reality." But some here seem to think there is only one "America" and that this guy is outrageously whack in his version of it.

Here's what Newt said this morning:

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalradar/2008/04/gingrich-wright.html

The "blind men describing the elephant" story is supposed to be about how people attempt to understand, (or believe that they understand), the totality of something when they only know a small portion of it. At least that's the way I've always heard it used. YMMV, but it shouldn't. ;)

Hey dtw, what is the last word in "GAFB"? Get a freakin' (what)? :)

Further proof that the draft is a BAD idea.

Yep. Our version of the Bataan deathmarch. One could point to Sherman's "March to the Sea" in Georgia as another example. Want a modern example of the US Gov't commiting mass murder?

Waco

Interesting Kurt. But Wright said in an interview, about a year ago, that if Obama runs, he expects that Obama will have to significantly distance himself from Wright. So, just wondering out loud, why would Wright be miffed w/ Obama? ..is he miffed? ...If it is Wights' interest in his self-importance" . ..wouldn't he just chill until Obama get's that higher power? --Obama has only distanced himself from select words of Wright . . .not Wright himself. --perhaps Wright believes Obama is going to lose, and time is running out for coat-tail-riding incendiary-Reverend air-time.

When each perspective is different, how can there be a single, right perspective?

Just because you see what someone else doesn't does that make them wrong?

Take it a step further.

How do we know what we know?

How do we know that we know anything?

These kinds of statements are designed to draw attention away from the subject at hand and instead force people to start to argue (unsuccessfully) that they have any knowledge or that their perspective is the correct one. It is a technique designed to derail a conversation and distract from the subject at hand.

Instead of people being able to say that Wright is a nutbag (which he is), they now have to explain how their perspective trumps his perspective without stating that some perspectives are better than others.

Bravo Todd. Now explain how someone who claims that the CIA invented AIDs to kill black men isn't lying.

Some people are just naturally self-destructive. It defies logic.

Let the guy continue to be a lightning rod for controversy. He's playing right into McCain's hands. The Republican Party couldn't have paid him enough to damage Obama as bad as he's doing for free. Gratuitously.

Fine with me. Now if only there was a counterpart for Hillary, we'd be all set.

The guy is just a bigmouth blowhard. Typical pulpit-pounding preacher. Powerful speech with little content, trying to get his flock whipped up in a zealous fervor because it keeps the pews full and the donations rolling in.

Preachers and "shock jocks" like Howard Stern are really one and the same when you think about it.

Todd, my perception of reality does not impact it, unless I am looking at quarks or something and the very act of observing significantly impacts the object.

Reality never changes, how it is perceived does, I will grant that is a valid point. What someone in Canada, or wherever, perceives America to be, for example, does not change what America is. Obviously my perspective colors my perception as well. I would perceive Osama bin Laden as a murderous lunatic, or Louis Farrakahn as a racist POS and both as anti-American Muslims, but there are those who would disagree.

This isn't about "perspective" it's about a loud, mouthed blowhard that is ripping off his congregation and now sees an opportunity to rip off a few more people. The only religion Wright believes in is the religion of money.

Who; Obama? :cool:

Seriously, Obama has learned well, in how to make a string of money raising speeches. --he has absolutely no, zip, zero, experience in getting anything else accomplished. Wright taught him well.