The wife John McCain left behind

[TexasTiger 13,029]

A caveat-- Ted Sampley, who is quoted in this story is a nut.

But I do wonder why this story hasn't gotten more play. I have to think if a Democrat had behaved similarly, we'd all be flooded with emails about it-- along with considerable embellishment.

But since so many folks want to raise character issues about Obama due to his "associations" with some folks, it seems to me that how one has actually acted may be the better barometer of character.

Guy gets shot down and taken prisoner, wife loyally stands by him for over 5 years, wife has horrible accident, husband returns and dumps her for a much younger, much richer wife. McCain seems to think his character is beyond reproach. The media has largely obliged him so far. But any way you slice it, this looks very sleazy.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-...eft-behind.html

[AURaptor 1,126]

It's a private, personal matter.

[Bottomfeeder 244]

Heck of a guy that McCain, he'll sellout his country just like he did his wife. I'm not voitng for either candidate from of the two party system, so I could really care less. However, if McCain wins in November, I'll bet things won't be different from the way they have been in the past eight years. Higher oil/gas prices which are relected in higher prices for everything else. Wages and salries won't keep up with inflation which will result in a poor local and global economies. Joblessness and homelessness will increase to record breaking levels annually. The Treasury will continue to be looted and inflation will be in the double digits. Oh yeah, and Iraq, well let's say the entire middle East will be at war with the US and her allies. Sounds pretty good, huh. How about $10.00 per gallon gasoline?

[TitanTiger 20,511]

Definitely doesn't speak well of him, at least the kind of guy he was 30 years ago. I'd like to believe he's a better man at 71 than he was at 40.

What has McCain said about his divorce? Does he own up to it? Make excuses? Cast blame?

[TexasTiger 13,029]

Definitely doesn't speak well of him, at least the kind of guy he was 30 years ago. I'd like to believe he's a better man at 71 than he was at 40.

What has McCain said about his divorce? Does he own up to it? Make excuses? Cast blame?

From what I've heard, he accepts most responsibility for it.

Maybe he is a better man at 71, although one could also say that hasn't been tested in the same way-- his current wife is still much younger, beautiful, healthy and wealthy. In other ways, however, McCain strikes me as being a better-- more sincere and honest-- man at 63 than he is at 71.

[TexasTiger 13,029]

It's a private, personal matter.

So is religion and one's relationship with their preacher. Such matters are either windows into ones character or they are not.

I do remember frequent references from the Right in 2004 to Kerry as a gigolo for marrying a wealthy woman years after divorcing his wife. It seems to me that the folks who felt so strongly about that would feel even more strongly about this, if their feelings in 2004 were genuine.

[CCTAU 3,350]

It's a private, personal matter.

So is religion and one's relationship with their preacher. Such matters are either windows into ones character or they are not.

I do remember frequent references from the Right in 2004 to Kerry as a gigolo for marrying a wealthy woman years after divorcing his wife. It seems to me that the folks who felt so strongly about that would feel even more strongly about this, if their feelings in 2004 were genuine.

I don't think McCain's divorce lawyer is cited as one of his mentors.

5 years in that hell hole ruined many relationships for every man who was there.

[autigeremt 6,717]

It's a private, personal matter.

So is religion and one's relationship with their preacher. Such matters are either windows into ones character or they are not.

I do remember frequent references from the Right in 2004 to Kerry as a gigolo for marrying a wealthy woman years after divorcing his wife. It seems to me that the folks who felt so strongly about that would feel even more strongly about this, if their feelings in 2004 were genuine.

But bashing whites and the United States from a pulpit is NOT a religious matter! Talk about the intertwining of Church and State???? Where's the connection between the two????

[TitanTiger 20,511]

Without excusing what McCain did, I can at least understand making some messed up choices in the wake of likely post-traumatic stress disorder that came from his years as a POW. I'm not sure I have a similar amount of understanding for sitting in a church like Trinity for 20+ years. I don't know how often Wright went on the kinds of rants that got this whole brouhaha into the spotlight so that might play into things as well. If Obama felt the good the church was doing in the community outweighed the occasional kooky sermon, then I guess he could make that case. But if this kind of stuff was a regular fixture of the Sunday morning sermons, I have a hard time understanding why someone would willingly sit and listen to it if they want to be a person that reaches across racial and political divides.

[Auburn85 432]

A caveat-- Ted Sampley, who is quoted in this story is a nut.

But I do wonder why this story hasn't gotten more play. I have to think if a Democrat had behaved similarly, we'd all be flooded with emails about it-- along with considerable embellishment.

But since so many folks want to raise character issues about Obama due to his "associations" with some folks, it seems to me that how one has actually acted may be the better barometer of character.

Guy gets shot down and taken prisoner, wife loyally stands by him for over 5 years, wife has horrible accident, husband returns and dumps her for a much younger, much richer wife. McCain seems to think his character is beyond reproach. The media has largely obliged him so far. But any way you slice it, this looks very sleazy.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/femail/article-...eft-behind.html

it's early. it will probably come out to the mainstream soon. it will probably sit until mccain starts talking about values and such. and when i mean speaking of values i don't mean a small speech during a primary campaign stop. I'm talking about a time frame from August on.

[AU alum 2]

Divorce is a very private, personal thing. I doubt we have gotten the complete story, and don't know that we ever will get the whole story, not that it is something we should ever hear. I know it's easier to "blame" the divorce on one person, but that happens rarely. Divorce does take two people. Not that they are necessarily "equal" in the "blame" department. It is too simplistic to say that he dumped his wife for someone else. Maybe he did fall in love with someone else, quickly, and she just happened to be rich. Is being rich a problem? I've been thru a divorce myself, and it has taken years for me to get to the point to say this. And years to admit, that yes, I was part of the cause of the divorce.

Sorry, but I don't seem to have as much of a problem with this as the writers did. To me it was very slanted writing - slanted toward making McCain look as bad as possible. If he was as bad as they seemed to make out, why would his first wife still love him?

[AURaptor 1,126]

It's a private, personal matter.

So is religion and one's relationship with their preacher. Such matters are either windows into ones character or they are not.

I do remember frequent references from the Right in 2004 to Kerry as a gigolo for marrying a wealthy woman years after divorcing his wife. It seems to me that the folks who felt so strongly about that would feel even more strongly about this, if their feelings in 2004 were genuine.

Was Obama sleeping w/ Wright ? I fail to see how the 2 are comparable. Wright preached his racist hatred to 1000's each week, for 2 decades or more. He did this IN PUBLIC, on tape, on dvds..... don't tell me that a couple's marriage is equally public as a preacher's views. It's not even close, not by any stretch of the imagination.

[TexasTiger 13,029]

It's a private, personal matter.

So is religion and one's relationship with their preacher. Such matters are either windows into ones character or they are not.

I do remember frequent references from the Right in 2004 to Kerry as a gigolo for marrying a wealthy woman years after divorcing his wife. It seems to me that the folks who felt so strongly about that would feel even more strongly about this, if their feelings in 2004 were genuine.

Was Obama sleeping w/ Wright ? I fail to see how the 2 are comparable. Wright preached his racist hatred to 1000's each week, for 2 decades or more. He did this IN PUBLIC, on tape, on dvds..... don't tell me that a couple's marriage is equally public as a preacher's views. It's not even close, not by any stretch of the imagination.

Give 20 specific examples of his preaching "racist hatred". Since you claim he did so weekly for two decades-- or over 1000 weeks, that should be easy.

[AURaptor 1,126]

Why 20 ? There's also his anti Americanism. Can't forget that either. But it's all been posted out there already. I fail to see the purpose of doing that all over again.

[TexasTiger 13,029]

Why 20 ? There's also his anti Americanism. Can't forget that either. But it's all been posted out there already. I fail to see the purpose of doing that all over again.

Okay, 10, then. Out of the over 1000 you claim. Your claims have never been substantiated. If they have, a simple link to it will do.

[CCTAU 3,350]

Why 20 ? There's also his anti Americanism. Can't forget that either. But it's all been posted out there already. I fail to see the purpose of doing that all over again.

Okay, 10, then. Out of the over 1000 you claim. Your claims have never been substantiated. If they have, a simple link to it will do.

Helluva argument you got there. In the words of one of our great mods, do a search, you'll find it.

[Tiger Al 0]

I second Tex's motion and would reiterate that if this took place with the regularity that most here claim, then finding ten more examples out of Raptor's claimed hundreds of sermons should be easy.

Put up or shut up!

[AURaptor 1,126]

Why 20 ? There's also his anti Americanism. Can't forget that either. But it's all been posted out there already. I fail to see the purpose of doing that all over again.

Okay, 10, then. Out of the over 1000 you claim. Your claims have never been substantiated. If they have, a simple link to it will do.

My claims have ALWAYS been substantiated, you just simply refuse to acknowledge them. Doesn't mean they're not valid , though. Just shows that you're blind to that what you wish weren't true.

2003 - he lies about what the Gov't is doing to the blacks ( it's the blacks doing to themselves, actually ), damn AMERICA! , calling this country the US OF KKKA, belittling those who don't agree w/ his politics, calling them Clarence, Colin and Condamnleezia.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hwQWuQVE6sw

Wright has spread his hatred to 1000's of PEOPLE each week, through his sermons of 20 yrs and the audio/ dvd sales of those sermons which have been sold. Clearly, not EVERY SINGLE sermon is a screed on his racist , hate filled views, I imagine. But there's been plenty out there which undeniably shows what sort of bigot and hate monger Wright is towards 'whitey'.

All this has been done to death, a couple of months ago. So don't give me this s*** about " put up or shut up ", when the very examples you ask for were shown and played on the nightly news night after night for weeks at a time. Open your own eyes, and stop playing the role of the contrarian here. It's a moot point.

[LegalEagle 22]

I think McCain dumped his old wife for free beer for life!

How can you blame the guy?

[TexasTiger 13,029]

Why 20 ? There's also his anti Americanism. Can't forget that either. But it's all been posted out there already. I fail to see the purpose of doing that all over again.

Okay, 10, then. Out of the over 1000 you claim. Your claims have never been substantiated. If they have, a simple link to it will do.

My claims have ALWAYS been substantiated, you just simply refuse to acknowledge them. Doesn't mean they're not valid , though. Just shows that you're blind to that what you wish weren't true.

2003 - he lies about what the Gov't is doing to the blacks ( it's the blacks doing to themselves, actually ), damn AMERICA! , calling this country the US OF KKKA, belittling those who don't agree w/ his politics, calling them Clarence, Colin and Condamnleezia.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hwQWuQVE6sw

Wright has spread his hatred to 1000's of PEOPLE each week, through his sermons of 20 yrs and the audio/ dvd sales of those sermons which have been sold. Clearly, not EVERY SINGLE sermon is a screed on his racist , hate filled views, I imagine. But there's been plenty out there which undeniably shows what sort of bigot and hate monger Wright is towards 'whitey'.

All this has been done to death, a couple of months ago. So don't give me this s*** about " put up or shut up ", when the very examples you ask for were shown and played on the nightly news night after night for weeks at a time. Open your own eyes, and stop playing the role of the contrarian here. It's a moot point.

You give examples of him claiming racism you say doesn't exist. Okay. You and he disagree on that. But you said

Wright preached his racist hatred to 1000's each week, for 2 decades or more

So you're backing off the "each week" claim-- or are you? . That's progress, I guess . But, you don't even have a single example where he says to hate Whites. Your problem is that he doesn't trust his government and sees racism where you don't. I've never heard him claim Black superiority or white inferiority. I've never heard him say anything that would make me feel unwelcome there because of my race. I've heard him say things I strongly disagree with. But this lie that he was teaching folks to hate Whitey every week is a pure crock driven by something--- your own racism, maybe?

[AURaptor 1,126]

The dude insist that Jesus was 'black', when there's no evidence what so ever for that. BLACK as in from the continent of Africa. That's biblically incorrect, is it not? Oh, and if you've read what Black Liberation Theology is, it's inherently racist.

[TexasTiger 13,029]

The dude insist that Jesus was 'black', when there's no evidence what so ever for that. BLACK as in from the continent of Africa. That's biblically incorrect, is it not? Oh, and if you've read what Black Liberation Theology is, it's inherently racist.

Despite his associations with the Black Power movement, however, Cone was not entirely focused on ethnicity: "Being black in America has little to do with skin color. Being black means that your heart, your soul, your mind, and your body are where the dispossessed are." (Black Theology and Black Power, p. 1)[6]

I wouldn't use this definition, but given this definition, I would agree that Jesus was black.

[AURaptor 1,126]

So, no white folks can feel, " that your heart, your soul, your mind, and your body are where the dispossessed are."

What a load of self delusional crap that is. It's like saying everything good is from the folks I like, and everything bad comes from folks I don't like. Childish reasoning there.

[TitanTiger 20,511]

Let me first say that I don't adhere to Black Liberation Theology. I think it tries too hard to shoehorn the Scriptures through a far too narrow framework.

That said, it's a complicated theology and it's not what it appears to be on the surface. The definition Tex gave above is a good example. All the words used tend of mean something slightly different in that they are representative rather than literal. It comes from the perspective that, historically, white Europeans (all the way back to the Romans and Greeks) were the dominant group that enslaved others while "people of color" (particularly Africans) were on the receiving end of that enslavement and oppression. So when they use the terms "white" and "black", they aren't meant to literally mean "all white people or Caucasians" and "all dark-skinned people." They are representative terms for "the oppressor" and "the oppressed." So anyone of any literal skin color can be lumped in the "oppressor" group (labeled "white") if they participate in ways of thinking, living or governing that perpetuates the oppression, disenfranchisement or keeping down of "the oppressed" (represented by the term "black"). In other words, when reading Cone or some others of his ilk, the idea he's driving at will make more sense if you mentally substitute the word "oppressor" for white and "the oppressed" for black.

Now, I'm not excusing it and I'm not even agreeing with him even with the explanation I just gave. I don't think it's very helpful or responsible to take terms like "white" or "black" that already have well-established (and emotionally charged) meanings and toss them around like he does to represent opposing groups (the oppressors vs the oppressed). It would be akin to me looking at society for the last 30-40 years and the trends that have happened there and discussing blacks intimidating and stealing from whites as long as I "contextualize" it to say that by "black" I mean "young thugs" and by "white" I mean "responsible working folks"? I mean as long as I carefully contextualize it, no one ought to be offended by that, should they? I don't literally mean "African American" when I say "black" and I don't literally mean "Caucasian" when I say "white." The problem is, that's unnecessarily inflammatory and confusing and people would be justified in taking offense if I did that.

So in one sense I get what some BLT folks are saying. The Scriptures show that God does hold a special affection for the poor and oppressed. He takes up their cause in a preferential way because they are often powerless to do so themselves. But where they get off track is when they force everything through that paradigm (Scripture is much, much broader than that) and unnecessarily using emotionally and politically charged terminology to make their case which results in it sounding like blanket stereotyping of entire groups of people.

[autigeremt 6,717]

This thread is getting a little close to the fence line. Let's keep it civil.

In all fairness, it doesn't matter if Jesus was ORANGE (orange and blue, maybe). The vial nature of Trinity and the garbage that spills out of that place is enough to warrant judgement of Barrack Obama (20 years, people). He had his chances to walk away from that theology, yet he embraced it. You can dance around this fire all you want, but the man has a poor sense of judgement.