One of the odder aspects of this entire “controversy” has been the “shock” of the media (and I’m sure some non-media whites) at the discovery that there remains a great deal of anger in the African American community. Well, duh. Hasn’t anyone read a history book? Are African Americans supposed to somehow be so noble and good that none of that has left a bitter aftertaste? That’s as condescending as it is stupid.

I hinted at it in my post about the Clinton photo with Wright, but this is a better place to say it and one of the few things I liked about Obama’s speech was his defense of Wright and his church as being more than a few sermons. I was impressed at the time that Obama didn’t just dismiss him, but tried to put things in context (I’ve been less impressed with Obama’s efforts, which seem increasingly flailing, since). It’s very sad and unfair that not only Wright, but his church, would be judged based on a couple of sermons. No one is any one thing and I’ve never doubted Wright was about more than his anger and his church about more than it, too.

This is why I never jumped on the Wright “controversy” bandwagon. My concern is that Obama doesn’t live up to his own standards by doing the Unity schtick and smearing the Clintons as racist.

Heck, the Villagers are crazy as bedbugs, so who cares about Wright, who clearly isn’t?

[x] Any (D) in the general. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.

…….being ’Whitey’ and growing up with the Panthers, Malcolm and SNCC I don’t find Wright’s impashioned sermons unusual, ill-founded or un-American.

I just wonder where all that desire for justice for his people and a recognition that ’Whitey’ still has his boot on colored folks necks, economically and culturally, went when it got to Obama.

This dude is waaaaaaaaaaay different in his outlook than ’Unca’ Wright or at least he says he is.

Bottom line ’Whitey’ ain’t ready to elect an ’Angry Black Dude’ to POTUS. Which means the result of Senator ’Hopey’s’ children’s crusade to take the WH means….

…more of McSame.

Nice work Dead Lose Caucus asswipes

And….

The Villagers will be pleased ’cause…hey….a black dude got his shot.

Too, too bad he blew it.

This just works so well for so many one wonders….

What ’they’ will think of next.

A. Citizen

Peace, Health and Prosperity for Everyone.

This is why I never jumped on the Wright “controversy” bandwagon. My concern is that Obama doesn’t live up to his own standards by doing the Unity schtick and smearing the Clintons as racist.

Heck, the Villagers are crazy as bedbugs, so who cares about Wright, who clearly isn’t?

Which is why you are repeating Fox-and-friends spin points and explaining that the uppity black guy’s disrespect for Archie Bunker’s congressperson has “closed the door” on reconciliation.

i have no idea what “argument” you are making. i don’t own a teevee, i don’t read the mainstream press outside of the fact-based blogfilter of my bookmark’d favs. so tell me again: what is your point? her “crime” or his?

my point was simple: wright is a good man, of service that i can easily prove. he’s not to be compared or contrasted to ~99.9% of the Village, because he makes all of them look so lame, bad, lacking in ethics. it’s sad that he supports a candidate whom isn’t really progressive (by *my* definition) but it’s equally sad that so many cared about what he said on the pulpit. which is…the pulpit. historically, if you don’t say something “controversial,” you aren’t really ’preaching’ at all.

Wright’s a fine man. I have no problem with your post.

I’m referencing Lambert’s post on the “typical white person” remark made by Obama. Essentially Obama pointed out the obvious - that “typical” white people, even ones like his Grandma who loved him, have deeply ingrained racism. And Lambert has been repeating Fox’s idiotic “point” that if Hillary had said something about “typical black people”, she’d be lambasted.

If you look at the post, which of course you do not link to, you will see that I am not quoting FOX, but a Philadelphia radio station, in the Philadelphia Inquirer, that interviewed Obama, and followed up with his campaign.

I don’t watch FOX online or on TV — indeed, I don’t watch any TV at all, since I don’t own one — and so I don’t know if FOX asked the following question, which is the point of the post:

[I]f Hillary Clinton referred to a “typical black person,” would we ever hear the end of it?

I think the answer is obviously yes. Certainly that’s been the tenor of the Obama campaign so far (and thanks to Leah for the link).

Thanks, however, for shifting to your current tactic of concern trolling. It’s certainly more effective than the previous set of tactics you were using, and more pleasant for readers, especially new ones. If you need a reference from me to get yet another round of training from Axelrod, please feel free to ask! It will be my pleasure.

[x] Any (D) in the general. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.

The Phila radio station “point” is the Fox point whether your protestations of innocently repeating Fox points are true or not. And even Mike Wallace balked at this point - but apparently fox bibble that is even unacceptable to Mike Wallace is ok with you as long as it damages Obama.

Even Huckabee has taken this race argument more seriously than you have.

Your delusion that someone is paying me to come here and try to explain that, yes, “typical white people” do harbor some racial stereotypes in American and pointing it out is not horrible, is a sign of how overboard in your Obama-hate you are.
Swim back to the shores of reality before you find yourself becoming a winger.