Text of Obama's speech today

[RunInRed 16,492]

That isn't what he said. He simply said he wasn't present on the days in question when Rev. Wright's more inflammatory comments were made. He further went on to say that even knowing them, he doesn't agree with them.

Titan, he did say this today:

"Did I know him to be an occasionally fierce critic of American domestic and foreign policy? Of course. Did I ever hear him make remarks that could be considered controversial while I sat in church? Yes. Did I strongly disagree with many of his political views? Absolutely."

Does this not directly contradict what Obama's message was on Friday, saying that he was never present during those speeches, he had no idea, etc.? What I see here is someone backpeddling trying to talk/politic his way out of a situation. He put himself in this bed by being a member of that church for 20 years, using it for his local political gain in Chicago (he's not from there and needed to connect as a mixed race person), tried his damnedest (sp?) to ignore this situation and let it solve itself without him having to do anything, and wanted to "not bring race into this" yet pulls the race card everytime. Maybe Geraldine Ferraro was right, because all Biden said was that Obama was "articulate" and his presidential campaign was over. As moderate as he is, Biden has done an unmeasurable amount more for the Democratic party and this Country than Obama and one word did it for him. It is not working both ways here. The speech sounded great, but reading it reveals a whole lot more in my opinion.

What he said Friday was that he was not in the church when Wright said the offensive remarks that were being played on youtube, cable news, etc. What he said today therefore, is not a contradiction ut rather an agreeance that some of Wright's remarks are controversial.

He also said this today:

"Not once in my conversations with him have I heard him talk about any ethnic group in derogatory terms, or treat whites with whom he interacted with anything but courtesy and respect."

[jw 4 au 526]

That isn't what he said. He simply said he wasn't present on the days in question when Rev. Wright's more inflammatory comments were made. He further went on to say that even knowing them, he doesn't agree with them.

Titan, he did say this today:

"Did I know him to be an occasionally fierce critic of American domestic and foreign policy? Of course. Did I ever hear him make remarks that could be considered controversial while I sat in church? Yes. Did I strongly disagree with many of his political views? Absolutely."

Does this not directly contradict what Obama's message was on Friday, saying that he was never present during those speeches, he had no idea, etc.? What I see here is someone backpeddling trying to talk/politic his way out of a situation. He put himself in this bed by being a member of that church for 20 years, using it for his local political gain in Chicago (he's not from there and needed to connect as a mixed race person), tried his damnedest (sp?) to ignore this situation and let it solve itself without him having to do anything, and wanted to "not bring race into this" yet pulls the race card everytime. Maybe Geraldine Ferraro was right, because all Biden said was that Obama was "articulate" and his presidential campaign was over. As moderate as he is, Biden has done an unmeasurable amount more for the Democratic party and this Country than Obama and one word did it for him. It is not working both ways here. The speech sounded great, but reading it reveals a whole lot more in my opinion.

What he said Friday was that he was not in the church when Wright said the offensive remarks that were being played on youtube, cable news, etc. What he said today therefore, is not a contradiction ut rather an agreeance that some of Wright's remarks are controversial.

He also said this today:

"Not once in my conversations with him have I heard him talk about any ethnic group in derogatory terms, or treat whites with whom he interacted with anything but courtesy and respect."

So he must not have heard the sermons about Jews or the U.S. 'KKK' of A. then either, right? Bill O'Reailly would say "Hey, this is the No Spin zone". And I have some beach front property for sale in Tennessee for you RIR. Some valuable wetlands in the desert of Arizona (wetlands actually are becoming valuable these days with mitigation banks and all).

I have a simple question: What has Obama done to prove to you that he is more honest than all the other politicians out there? More so than Clinton or McCain?

[bojack34 2]

Barack gets how to give a speech, but this is more of the same. Everyone deserves a puppy and a rainbow. He can't expect us to buy his lame excuse, that he knows Rev Wright for 20 yrs, but somehow all these comments escaped Barack's attention until now ? B.S. He's basically telling anyone who'll listen to ignore the Rev's comments, don't ask anymore questions, move on, and if anyone DOES ask questions about this, you're a racist. And that's not what this election is about......blah blah blah.

I couldn't agree more.

[TitanTiger 20,511]

Titan, he did say this today:

"Did I know him to be an occasionally fierce critic of American domestic and foreign policy? Of course. Did I ever hear him make remarks that could be considered controversial while I sat in church? Yes. Did I strongly disagree with many of his political views? Absolutely."

Does this not directly contradict what Obama's message was on Friday, saying that he was never present during those speeches, he had no idea, etc.?

No, because he didn't say that he "had no idea" or that he never heard him say controversial things. He said he was not present when he said "G-D America" or what he said about Hillary. People can say controversial things but some things are way over the line by comparison.

What I see here is someone backpeddling trying to talk/politic his way out of a situation. He put himself in this bed by being a member of that church for 20 years, using it for his local political gain in Chicago (he's not from there and needed to connect as a mixed race person), tried his damnedest (sp?) to ignore this situation and let it solve itself without him having to do anything, and wanted to "not bring race into this" yet pulls the race card everytime. Maybe Geraldine Ferraro was right, because all Biden said was that Obama was "articulate" and his presidential campaign was over. As moderate as he is, Biden has done an unmeasurable amount more for the Democratic party and this Country than Obama and one word did it for him. It is not working both ways here. The speech sounded great, but reading it reveals a whole lot more in my opinion.

I honestly don't see that. I think sometimes of relatives I have or even some of my friends that I know and love, that I know to be decent people overall and I wouldn't sever my relationship with them...but have said things in private company about blacks or Hispanics that were I to be running for office and came out would be very difficult for me to explain. Relationships are complicated sometimes people we love in many ways have attitudes and beliefs that we don't agree with but we don't disown the person. I guess I can see that being the case here. You actually can maintain a relationship with someone and even admire many things about them but have profound areas of disagreement and not be a hypocrite for not ending the relationship.

I thought it was a pretty stand up speech overall.

[Tigermike 3,055]

Barack gets how to give a speech, but this is more of the same. Everyone deserves a puppy and a rainbow. He can't expect us to buy his lame excuse, that he knows Rev Wright for 20 yrs, but somehow all these comments escaped Barack's attention until now ? B.S. He's basically telling anyone who'll listen to ignore the Rev's comments, don't ask anymore questions, move on, and if anyone DOES ask questions about this, you're a racist. And that's not what this election is about......blah blah blah.

What Raptor, was the speech to long for you to read. I understand it was long, had a few big words in it but if you could give it a go we'd appreciate it, especially your right leaning friends.

He actually said he did hear many of the comments that the Rev. said. He talks about it in the speech. I know you are going to want someone to point it out for you, but this time go ahead and see if you can figure it out yourself. But if you will read it, he actually talks about his relationship with him and his thoughts on what he said.

If not for me do it for TM and DKW, you make them look bad.

TM does not need any help in that department...he throws up all over himself on this board on a daily basis

And you look so good with all that obama bobo juice dripping off you.

It was a pretty good speech. Not great as Obama Boy has said here, but pretty good.

Did Obama succeed with this speech in containing the damage? It depends on the intended audience. The speech appeared to be aimed at 795 specific individuals — Democratic super delegates. Obama needed to show that he can address the racial issues in an inclusive manner, and walk the high wire with Wright by scolding him without alienating the black community.

If you are an Obamaphile, you will be gushing about how great the speech was. If you are an independent it probably will not sway you. If you already had reservations about Obama and disagreed with him on other issues today's speech wont change your mind.

The speech was a non-distancing distancing, akin to the non-apology apology. He excuses Wright’s anti-American rhetoric with a mixture of rationalizations. Wright gets a pass because he served in the military, because he grew up in another generation that apparently hated America, and because he does good work in other areas.

But I have a question concerning this passage about Geraldine Ferraro:

"Some will see this as an attempt to justify or excuse comments that are simply inexcusable. I can assure you it is not. I suppose the politically safe thing would be to move on from this episode and just hope that it fades into the woodwork. We can dismiss Reverend Wright as a crank or a demagogue, just as some have dismissed Geraldine Ferraro, in the aftermath of her recent statements, as harboring some deep-seated racial bias."

Some have dismissed Ferraro? Perhaps Obama needs a reminder that it was his campaign that shrieked for Ferraro’s scalp for pointing out how his ancestry has affected the primary campaign. Ferraro didn't say anything that Obama didn't say in this speech. And yet the Obama campaign demanded that Hillary repudiate Ferraro in exactly the manner that Obama decried in his speech — and that just happened last week. It was the Obama campaign that was screaming for Ferraro to be kicked out. Something Obama said he wouldn't do to Wright.

Hypocrisy? You better believe it and by the truck load.

[DKW 86 7,441]

Out of the three running for President right now, for my money, it is Obama and some space and then McCain, and no Hillary under any circumstances. We do not need Washington held hostage to only two political families any longer than the 20 years the Bushs and Clintons have been in the White House. I am sorry to beat the dead horse here but I just dont want another four years of SSDD in Washington.

Obama gave good speech today, but he did reverse his comments from Friday on at least 2-3 news shows where he said he had never heard Wright say those things while he sat in a pew. Today he owns up that we are all not idiots and that he did actually hear it from the pulpit himself. Good for him to admit that. Bad that he did lie about it. Hey, a politician lied, so what? I can see not wanting to even discuss this and I appreciate the predicament that BO was in. But he did lie, and has now made good on it. I say forgive the guy, and keep moving forward.

[AURaptor 1,126]

What Raptor, was the speech to long for you to read. I understand it was long, had a few big words in it but if you could give it a go we'd appreciate it, especially your right leaning friends.

He actually said he did hear many of the comments that the Rev. said. He talks about it in the speech. I know you are going to want someone to point it out for you, but this time go ahead and see if you can figure it out yourself. But if you will read it, he actually talks about his relationship with him and his thoughts on what he said.

If not for me do it for TM and DKW, you make them look bad.

Aside from your petty attempts to ridicule me because I disagree w/ you and your desire that we " move on " and put this behind us, you're ignoring the main point. Barack has changed his story as more and more details of the Rev's words have leaked out. First, he wasn't there at the time when the Rev said x, y or z . Then, well, he WAS there, but he didn't agree w/ 'some ' of what was said. Right away ,it's clear Barack is lying. He's known RJW for 20+ yrs, and just NOW he's admitting that there are "some" views he holds which differ from his own. Even if you discount the account from a Newsmax reporter, who said he saw Barack at one of those infamous sermons, and that Barack was even nodding in agreement, it's still a stretch beyond imagination that such a mentor and friend of the family in RJW kept his views so hidden from Barack for as long as Barack would have us believe. Everyone else knew BUT Barack? The guy is lying or he's more naive than Dan Quayle , and either way, not fit for the office, imo.

[TitanTiger 20,511]

I still think you're missing the distinction between knowing someone said some controversial things and hearing some of them and knowing/hearing SPECIFIC exceptionally controversial things.

[jw 4 au 526]

I still think you're missing the distinction between knowing someone said some controversial things and hearing some of them and knowing/hearing SPECIFIC exceptionally controversial things.

Come on Titan, last Friday/Saturday was totally political spin that he got caught up in because of his long standing relationship with the man; thus the need for the speech yesterday. I feel that he did make statements yesterday that cintradict last weeks.

Obama called the statements appearing on television and the Internet "completely unacceptable and inexcusable" in a Fox News interview and said they didn't reflect the kinds of sermons he had heard from the Rev. Jeremiah Wright while attending services at Chicago's Trinity United Church of Christ.

Obama, a member of the church since the early 1990s, said he would have quit Trinity had such statements been "the repeated tenor of the church. ... I wouldn't feel comfortable there." Earlier Friday, Obama responded by posting a blog about his relationship with Wright and Trinity on the Huffington Post. Wright brought Obama to Christianity, officiated at his wedding, baptized his daughters and inspired the title of his book, "The Audacity of Hope."

Obama wrote on the Huffington Post that he never heard Wright say any of the statements, but he acknowledged that they have raised legitimate questions about the nature of his relationship with the pastor and the church. He wrote that he joined Wright's church nearly 20 years ago, familiar with the pastor's background as a former Marine and respected biblical scholar who lectured at seminaries across the country.

He said Wright's controversial statements first came to his attention at the beginning of his presidential campaign last year, and he condemned them. Because of his long and deep ties to the 6,000-member congregation church, Obama said he decided not to leave.

"With Reverend Wright's retirement and the ascension of my new pastor, Rev. Otis Moss III, Michelle and I look forward to continuing a relationship with a church that has done so much good," he wrote.

versus

Did I know him to be an occasionally fierce critic of American domestic and foreign policy? Of course. Did I ever hear him make remarks that could be considered controversial while I sat in church? Yes. Did I strongly disagree with many of his political views? Absolutely.

It sort of like "I did not have sexual relations with that women." is still a true statement if you are only talking about intercourse. Political spin, certainly in my opinion. He is a politician just like the rest of them and that is all I am trying to say. To see some of the people falling all over themselves around Obama and to read some of his supporters in this forum, you would think the guy is the only "honest politician" (I know, that is an oxymoron) with "completely honest advisors" in Washington. That's simply not true. I have always seen him as a very good politician using his assets (race, underdog, speaking abilities) for gain. So to me, it is about the issues, and I personnaly find very few things in common with the guy on political issues.

[TitanTiger 20,511]

I think you're splitting hairs because you're predisposed to be against his candidacy. I have a feeling that if this were a candidate that was more in line with your overall views and that you planned on voting for in the fall, suddenly the differences I'm pointing out would magically stand out to you.

And I say this as someone who will not be voting for him.

[AURainman 6]

I'll say this again...

Saying, "Oh that's just Grandma" when she calls someone the N-word is not the same as not confronting a pastor who preaches hate from the pulpit. By pretending it didn't happen, allowing it to continue unchecked, and continuing to attend that church, you are endorsing that sort of rhetoric.EVEN IF Obama wasn't in the pew that day, something THAT controversial is bound to create some stir in the congregation. I do not think for a SECOND that Obama heard these comments for the first time on Fox News.

Either Obama is a coward by not standing up to a man in authority above him, or he is completely ignorant to the hate festering around him week-to-week. OR even worse, he buys into the hate, but is handy enough with a pen and a pad to write a flowery speech that backs him out of his shady past. I don't think there is another explanation that fits.

That said, I think Obama delivered his apology/non-apology so eloquently, that I think many people will completely miss this oversight in Obama's speech.

[jw 4 au 526]

I think you're splitting hairs because you're predisposed to be against his candidacy. I have a feeling that if this were a candidate that was more in line with your overall views and that you planned on voting for in the fall, suddenly the differences I'm pointing out would magically stand out to you.

And I say this as someone who will not be voting for him.

I could say you are splitting hairs by saying he didn't exactly hear "those" comments. I've said it several times, I like Obama as a politician, just not as President. Dare I say this in a public forum, but I voted for Clinton twice, and I still didn't believe what he was saying at the time. That was just whom I thought was the better candidtate at the time. I am an Independant, and think that if the Dems put a Moderate Democrate on the ticket, I would have had more than one choice and they probably would have won the Office in a landslide. But they give us the most leftist thinker in the entire Senate. I just think as a party, they played this completely wrong. That's my frustration.

[DKW 86 7,441]

Matthew 18:15-17 (New International Version)

A Brother Who Sins....

15"If your brother sins against you,[a] go and show him his fault, just between the two of you. If he listens to you, you have won your brother over. 16But if he will not listen, take one or two others along, so that 'every matter may be established by the testimony of two or three witnesses.' 17If he refuses to listen to them, tell it to the church; and if he refuses to listen even to the church, treat him as you would a pagan or a tax collector.

Shouldnt Obama, having heard what RLW said in his sermons, have done exactly what scripture said here?

That is an important question. I sat with a pastor that in retrospect said some incredibly bad things about the Catholic Church that I totally reject today. but at the time, having read that passage, I should have confronted him about it. I guess I am just human after all. Confronting an authority figure, especially one so close to your family is very hard. Now, after 20 years, I think I could go straight tio him and talk directly to him about this kind of craziness. Why Obama didnt may be the question. Does he really support this stuff at some level?

[OldNewby 27]

A different take on the speech.

Obama Merely Changes The Subject

By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY | Posted Tuesday, March 18, 2008 4:20 PM PT

Election '08: Rather than break ties with his demagogic, anti-American pastor, Barack Obama used a speech on race to excuse his behavior and sweep the controversy under the rug. Passing the buck is not very presidential.

Link: http://ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=290732552237836

[DKW 86 7,441]

Thanks newby. Others are seeing my point too.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/horserace...mas_speech.html

The essential problem of the speech is that it gives no answer to these queries. Obama recognizes the problem with Wright's viewpoint, feels strongly that it is part of a problem in society that needs to be corrected, but offers no evidence of his work to correct it. Instead, he says, "Did I strongly disagree with many of his political views? Absolutely - just as I'm sure many of you have heard remarks from your pastors, priests, or rabbis with which you strongly disagreed." But there are many ways to "disagree." Did he merely shake his head quietly in the pews and complain to Michelle on the drive back to Kenwood? Or did he do something about it? Many parishioners in many churches or synagogues would do something if their pastors, priests or rabbis went astray on an important issue. Many more would expect a future president to do something.

[autiger4life 3]

Aside from your petty attempts to ridicule me because I disagree w/ you and your desire that we " move on " and put this behind us, you're ignoring the main point. Barack has changed his story as more and more details of the Rev's words have leaked out. First, he wasn't there at the time when the Rev said x, y or z . Then, well, he WAS there, but he didn't agree w/ 'some ' of what was said. Right away ,it's clear Barack is lying. He's known RJW for 20+ yrs, and just NOW he's admitting that there are "some" views he holds which differ from his own. Even if you discount the account from a Newsmax reporter, who said he saw Barack at one of those infamous sermons, and that Barack was even nodding in agreement, it's still a stretch beyond imagination that such a mentor and friend of the family in RJW kept his views so hidden from Barack for as long as Barack would have us believe. Everyone else knew BUT Barack? The guy is lying or he's more naive than Dan Quayle , and either way, not fit for the office, imo.

First of all, I riducule you because of your ignorant statements that usually don't make logical sense. I don't mind if someone disagrees and this forum wouldn't be interesting if people didn't disagree with people. I recognize that people can disagree and still have intelligent arguements to back up their views. You rarely show this ability though, you simply find something and stick with it whether it makes sense or not, and that is why I ridicule you.

Second, as usual you put words in my mouth. Not only did I never say we should "move on"(that was DKW) I instead praised Obama for not moving on and instead bring attention to it, but stuff like that has never stopped you before.

Third, the way I understood Obama was that he was never there when the Rev. said "God**MN America" or "Whites caused AIDS" or "America caused 9/11" and then in his speech he said he has heard the Rev. make controversial statements and he disagreed with them. It does not mean he heard those statements, and I think today he would say he didn't hear those but he did hear other controversial statements.

As far as the Newsmax reporter. Is that a joke? Which sermon was it? Was it the one in 2001 or 2003. You know, where he would have to remember Obama being there for about 5 to 7 years, and couldn't have possibly gotten that confused with one of the many other times he say Obama there. And then, he remembers seeing Obama nodding. Now why would he be watching Obama so closely? He wasn't a US Senator at that time, so I don't understand why the reporter would care so much to be watching him every Sunday. I don't remember a single person nodding and I am at church every Sunday. I guess I am just not paying attention to people on whether they are nodding or not. So yea, I would believe Obama long before I did a news reporter who remembers a state senator nodding at a sermon 5 years ago.

[CCTAU 3,349]

I don't remember a single person nodding and I am at church every Sunday. I guess I am just not paying attention to people on whether they are nodding or not. So yea, I would believe Obama long before I did a news reporter who remembers a state senator nodding at a sermon 5 years ago.

If your preacher said all freaking negros must freaking die, you wouldn't look around and see who agreed with him. I would. When the preacher says something I don't agree with, I make note of those I may have to confront later.

If a preacher like Wright said something strong, wouldn't you think somebody would notice if an important person in the community agreed with him or not? So it's not that far fetched.

I don't know what happened there, but I suggest you quit sleeping through your services or at least go to a church where there is a little more fire and brimstone being preached.

[autiger4life 3]

If your preacher said all freaking negros must freaking die, you wouldn't look around and see who agreed with him. I would. When the preacher says something I don't agree with, I make note of those I may have to confront later.

If a preacher like Wright said something strong, wouldn't you think somebody would notice if an important person in the community agreed with him or not? So it's not that far fetched.

I don't know what happened there, but I suggest you quit sleeping through your services or at least go to a church where there is a little more fire and brimstone being preached.

Fair enough. And you're right, not much fire and brimstone at my church. I don't fall asleep though. I guess it is plausible, but I would lean towards a news guy wanting someone to pay attention to him over him specifically remember seeing Obama there and nodding at a specific sermon. I guess I would just take Obama's word over his.

[CCTAU 3,349]

If your preacher said all freaking negros must freaking die, you wouldn't look around and see who agreed with him. I would. When the preacher says something I don't agree with, I make note of those I may have to confront later.

If a preacher like Wright said something strong, wouldn't you think somebody would notice if an important person in the community agreed with him or not? So it's not that far fetched.

I don't know what happened there, but I suggest you quit sleeping through your services or at least go to a church where there is a little more fire and brimstone being preached.

Fair enough. And you're right, not much fire and brimstone at my church. I don't fall asleep though. I guess it is plausible, but I would lean towards a news guy wanting someone to pay attention to him over him specifically remember seeing Obama there and nodding at a specific sermon. I guess I would just take Obama's word over his.

I can accept that. the other argument was not the same IMO. I tend to notice when something inflamatory gets said. Maybe it's just because someone other than me said it......

[Tigermike 3,055]

I have a question. Is there just a little hypocrisy in the fact that Obama was one of if not the first politician to demand that Imus be fired for racist statements? But then Obama stands behind his pastor of twenty years? Wright didn't get in trouble and resign until it became a problem for Obama's campaign.

[autiger4life 3]

I have a question. Is there just a little hypocrisy in the fact that Obama was one of if not the first politician to demand that Imus be fired for racist statements? But then Obama stands behind his pastor of twenty years? Wright didn't get in trouble and resign until it became a problem for Obama's campaign.

Actually Wright resigned before all of this came out. But yes, I would say there is a little hypocrisy in it. But we can't make him re-resign.

[jw 4 au 526]

I have a question. Is there just a little hypocrisy in the fact that Obama was one of if not the first politician to demand that Imus be fired for racist statements? But then Obama stands behind his pastor of twenty years? Wright didn't get in trouble and resign until it became a problem for Obama's campaign.

Actually Wright resigned before all of this came out. But yes, I would say there is a little hypocrisy in it. But we can't make him re-resign.

No, but you could probably vote for a moderate Republican who has actually worked both sides of the isle rather than vote for an extremely liberal Democrat who says he can work both sides of the isle but has no experience in doing so and his voting record doesn't much support.

[AURainman 6]

I have a question. Is there just a little hypocrisy in the fact that Obama was one of if not the first politician to demand that Imus be fired for racist statements? But then Obama stands behind his pastor of twenty years? Wright didn't get in trouble and resign until it became a problem for Obama's campaign.

Actually Wright resigned before all of this came out. But yes, I would say there is a little hypocrisy in it. But we can't make him re-resign.

ESPECIALLY considering that Imus is a blowhard with a really loud microphone, while Rev. Wright is a leader of a whole congregation of supposed Christians. Rev. Wright should be held to a MUCH higher standard than Imus.

[CCTAU 3,349]

I have a question. Is there just a little hypocrisy in the fact that Obama was one of if not the first politician to demand that Imus be fired for racist statements? But then Obama stands behind his pastor of twenty years? Wright didn't get in trouble and resign until it became a problem for Obama's campaign.

Actually Wright resigned before all of this came out. But yes, I would say there is a little hypocrisy in it. But we can't make him re-resign.

ESPECIALLY considering that Imus is a blowhard with a really loud microphone, while Rev. Wright is a leader of a whole congregation of supposed Christians. Rev. Wright should be held to a MUCH higher standard than Imus.

But it's OK to talk disparagingly about white folks. They are already in the majority, own everything, and get all the breaks. SO it's OK to preach against them. Oh wait. He wasn't against the whites, he was only preaching unity among the blacks.

Let a white man give the same type of speech and he would be crucified. We have a group of people wanting equality, but preaching inequality. Yes. Racism is alive and well in this country, but it's not necessarily the white man carrying it out. A black co-worker of mine said yesterday that he did not like Wright's comments but could "understand" where he was coming from? What the hell does that mean? If I my family were former slave owners and lost all of there fortunes when slavery went away, would it be understandable for me to campaign for slavery and be mad at black folks because their ancestors left me?

There is no "understanding". The man is hateful and has been advising achmed for years. This is where the rubber meets the road. Many, many Americans are disappointed and those on the edge are drawing back.

What I find disappointing is that Americans have been duped by this guy and his message of hope. Hope for who? Black? White? I guess it don't matter just so long as their is HOPE.

Yes. I wish there was a really strong republican candidate who would make all of this a moot point. But this country needs to be more in the middle instead of extreme right or extreme left. And right now, achmed is extreme LEFT.

By the time we get to the general election, he's gonna need a whole team of baggage handlers.

[WinCrimson 61]

I wish there was a really strong republican candidate who would make all of this a moot point. But this country needs to be more in the middle instead of extreme right or extreme left. And right now, achmed is extreme LEFT.

No offense, CCTAU, but would you not agree that you're pretty extreme in your views?

I disagree with probably every one of them, but I have no problem with them being out of the mainstream. All I'm saying is that I'm a little surprised to hear you advocate centrist candidates when your beliefs, or at least the ones I'm aware of, are anything but.