I know Obama's response has been weak and muddled. I know he's tied to Wright...

[AnarchoFreeThinker]

...too closely to make a delicate separation from him. And I agree this could matter to mainstream media and mainstream America, unless it all of a sudden wants to hear some harsh truths and thoughtfully dissect them from some of the the bullshit in Wright's message instead of sensationalize it. (Fat chance.) So, in short, I agree that Obama could well be in a difficult political position, much of which is his own doing.

But I disagree that a progressive board has to assume that Barack Obama suddenly is something we have plenty of evidence to suggest he's not. And, more importantly, I disagree that a progressive board has to act THIS embarrassed anyway about what's largely a radical leftist message from a black church. That part, frankly, is ridiculous.

[Fredda Weinberg]

1. Did you hear Obama lecture secularists recently? Do you really know

this candidate?

[ellacott]

3. What does that mean?

[Fredda Weinberg]

5. I heard the snippet in this report

When it comes to religion in the public square Barack Obama is no John Kerry (no Michael Dukakis either): Many secular liberals tend to underestimate how significantly Obama’s views on this issue depart from those of his predecessors. The Democratic Party, he noted in The Audacity of Hope, “has become the party of reaction . . . In reaction to religious overreach, we equate tolerance with secularism, and forfeit the moral language that would help infuse our policies with a larger meaning.” Later, he comments: “Not every mention of God in public is a breach in the wall of separation.” And again: “secularists are wrong when they ask believers to leave their religion at the door before entering the public square.” All of this will be church music to Evangelical ears.

http://newsweek.washingtonpost.com/onfaith/georgetown/2008/02/are_evangelicals_obamacurious.html

[azmouse]

2. It's a tempest in a teapot.

More important issues will capture the interest of Americans like gas at $4/gallon and no jobs and the war/occupation. This is only a big deal if we allow it to be a big deal.

[ProSense]

4. Actually, Obama's messge is quite clear:

Obama addresses Pa.'s importance, pastor's remarks

[MADem]

6. Michael Dukakis wasn't a defense weakling. John Kerry wasn't a war coward.

Al Gore didn't invent the internet.

No one with a brain thinks that Obama is "something he isn't" by his association with Rev. Wright. What's at issue is his JUDGMENT. He had to suspect that he'd be scrutinized as a candidate, from his family to his friends to his business associates to his churchgoing habits.

This is a relationship with an angry and intemperate radical, lasting over twenty years. Surely he had to see how it would be viewed. And if he didn't, that speaks to his JUDGMENT.

It's the same deal with Rezko--another unsavory character. He was friends with the guy for eons, he took campaign money from him knowing he was a bit "questionable," but worst of all, he entered into a financial deal (that yard business) when the NEWSPAPERS were saying the guy was under investigation and about to be indicted.

And those old Weatherman fools. Same deal. No one "has to assume" that Obama is anything but what he says he is. But perception has a way of impacting reality.

It's JUDGMENT. His associations demonstrate that he has some serious blind spots.