LOL,  So based on that video your conclusion would be that fox is wrong But wait, over the week, even ABC, BBC, CNN and other major networks have pulled up other videos of the same man making other controversal statements. Is it that he never said it but the videos lied Or that all the transcripts of him saying what he was accused of saying are all made up?? Would that not mean Obama himself was stupid for making a statement to tell us all that he does not agree with all the man says

Come On!!! We are not zombies that we need to try everyway we can to excuse what we see is wrong. The man said it, and he has yet to deny he did. He has yet to deny or say that was not what he meant or intended. Why keep trying to make excuses, to try to reduce the man to some idiot who has no idea what he is saying at all and those who are making excuses for him are the ones who know his mind more than he does. If Wright wants to be controversial, he has a right to be. Nothing wrong with him being the way he is. Let us stop trying to create excuses for him. He is a grown man and a "man of god" at it. He knows what he said and if he feels the need to correct us, he will come out and do that himself. If not, he does not need a band of goofballs trying to put words in his mouth and then arguing that context should be considered. Infact, considering context, most of what he says is not biblically sound, if you ask me.

I don't see any controversy in what the pastor said!!!

Americans are so gullible

I don't know why Mr. Wright venting his anger on the pulpit is an issue?

Why is Obama not qualified to be President because of what Mr. Wright said when the Bin Ladens who bombed America are business associates to the current sitting President and his Family??


This is pure distraction and its so shameful the public is buying it after we have seen claims ranging from Obama attending a Madarasa, to Obama wearing a traditional Kenyan attire.

So Obama should be held responsible for all anti-american statements made by all black men that support him?
As far as I am concerned, Obama has not made any anti-american statements
He has been all about changing America to stop thinking this way, and make the country a success for all, whatever colour or gender.

I thought American politics is about issues?
And what happens to the over-hyped American first amendment?
The rev. has the right to his own opinions.
Obama should not be blamed for another man's opinion.

My mother always said that they are looking for reasons not to vote for him. If it's not because he's a muslim which he says he's not, it's because people supporting him are stealing money which he is not or his pastor said something which (Obama) did not support. All the other anti Americans have they be crucified yet? The main reason is because he is half black and no matter how they want to deny it America is not willing to let anything black in charge of the white house whether or not he is half or full. Quite sad really and they cry tolerance and acceptance. Actually those cries remind me of the saying "empty barrels make the most sound." They all pretend and yelp acceptance like dying puppies but will not have action when the time to show comes.

Obama's pastor and close friend made those silly, inflammatory remarks and Obama is rightly taking some heat from i because he's sat through many similar sermons. The pastor's remarks were hate-filled (IMHO) and further reinforce my opinion that many blacks are even more racist than whites in today's world.

wendymanda:

My mother always said that they are looking for reasons not to vote for him. If it's not because he's a a great one which he says he's not, it's because people supporting him are stealing money which he is not or his pastor said something which (Obama) did not support. All the other anti Americans have they be crucified yet? The main reason is because he is half black and no matter how they want to deny it America is not willing to let anything black in charge of the white house whether or not he is half or full. Quite sad really and they cry tolerance and acceptance. Actually those cries remind me of the saying "empty barrels make the most sound." They all pretend and yelp acceptance like dying puppies but will not have action when the time to show comes.

Obama has been sweeping the popular vote in most states. Shouldn't that convince you and your mother that the race issue is abating in the US? Happily enough, Obama appeals to the younger demographics, so that shows that at least going forward race integration shouldnt be more of an issue.
But i can't help feeling that some of y'all are a touch racist here too. We all see how Whites that make anti-black statements are crucified in the media. Look what happened to Don Imus. South Park even came up with an episode called 'Nigger Guy' to show the ridiculous extent America would go to crucify any white guy who used the N-word.
Mel Gibson too was harangued by the media after his anti-semitic rant.
So why the furore when a black man is villified for anti-white rants? WHo then is the racist?

oldie:

So Obama should be held responsible for all anti-american statements made by all black men that support him?
As far as I am concerned, Obama has not made any anti-american statements
He has been all about changing America to stop thinking this way, and make the country a success for all, whatever colour or gender.

Why must people misrepresent their opponent's position in order to make a point? Obama's problems reside in the fact that his so called "spiritual mentor"-someone he made part of his campaign organisation- is a race baiter.

His campaign is predicated on his ability to transcend race and unite the nation yet he is so closely associated with a man and church that hardly represents those unifying ideals.

And what happens to the over-hyped American first amendment?
The rev. has the right to his own opinions.

Has he been indicted or prosecuted for it? Nobody is saying he can't legally say what he is saying.His entitled to his views and people are entitled to say what they want about those views.

The funny thing about these Obamaniacs is that these were the same people that tried to tarnish Hillary for Ferraro's comments-they are not even in the same league. Obama was at the forefront in the bid to get Imus fired for saying "nappy headed hos".

What would they say if Hillary's "spiritual mentor" was found saying similar things from a Caucasian or Latino perspective?Imagine the uproar if Hillary attended a church for 20 years whose main pastor engaged in such incendiary remarks.

McKren:

Why is Obama not qualified to be President because of what Mr. Wright said when the Bin Ladens who bombed America are business associates to the current sitting President and his Family?

Mr Redford,you plumb new depths of illogic everyday. The Bin Ladens didn't bomb America,Osama Bin Laden did. Now,you just condemned the politics of "guilt by association" while engaging in some of that yourself.Suddenly,every member of the enormous Bin Laden family is somewhat guilty of OBL's actions.

These tenuous business links-for instance,a relative of Osama had a US representative who invested in a Bush business concern-are suddenly held up as the logical equivalent of Obama's relationship with Rev Wright.

If one were looking for something similar with Obama's situation,I can think of Bush speaking at Bob Jones University,a University that at the time,prohibited inter-racial relationships.

texazzpete:

Obama's pastor and close friend made those silly, inflammatory remarks and Obama is rightly taking some heat from i because he's sat through many similar sermons. The pastor's remarks were hate-filled (IMHO) and further reinforce my opinion that many blacks are even more racist than whites in today's world.

Obama has been sweeping the popular vote in most states. Shouldn't that convince you and your mother that the race issue is abating in the US? Happily enough, Obama appeals to the younger demographics, so that shows that at least going forward race integration shouldnt be more of an issue.
But i can't help feeling that some of y'all are a touch racist here too. We all see how Whites that make anti-black statements are crucified in the media. Look what happened to Don Imus. South Park even came up with an episode called 'Nigger Guy' to show the ridiculous extent America would go to crucify any white guy who used the N-word.
Mel Gibson too was harangued by the media after his anti-semitic rant.
So why the furore when a black man is villified for anti-white rants? WHo then is the racist?

@texazzpete,

1. How does speaking out against the evils that America has created, supported, sustained, and defended equivalent to being "anti-American"?
2. Are you saying that America has not supported, perpetuated, sustained and defended evil?
3. How does being "anti-American" equivalent to being "racist" or "anti-White"?
4 If "anti-American" = "anti-White", does it then mean that "American" = "White"?

RichyBlacK:

@texazzpete,

1. How does speaking out against the evils that America has created, supported, sustained, and defended equivalent to being "anti-American"?
2. Are you saying that America has not supported, perpetuated, sustained and defended evil?
3. How does being "anti-American" equivalent to being "racist" or "anti-White"?
4 If "anti-American" = "anti-White", does it then mean that "American" = "White"?

Exactly!!

Even a slowpoke would know that the man was not plainly anti-american, he is a racist as well as well.  That is quite clear from his own words. No matter what context you want to put it, the man was not just voicing his opinion about america but about white america. Anyone who wants to deny it can continue to live in that hole and flourish but to claim that American's misrepresented the man is rubbish. If this where not the case, why did obama try to go as far as describing his own grandmother as being the same sort of person as this man is Obama felt the need to state that that mind set does exist and that he did not share the same, and I believe it is very possible that it is hard to swallow for some.

I mean any adult who knows the saying "Show me your friends and I will tell you who you are" or "Birds of the same feather flock together", will understand how ridiculous it is to condemn people for deciding to judge this man by the words of his close friend and spiritual advisor. These are people making a judgement following what they know to be the wise way to do so. If you have your own way of judging things, feel free but that does not mean you are any better than those who do it the old way of wisdom. LOL

I'm still waiting for all those "America must not be criticized" people to answer my question. One more question:

5. Can someone point to me where Reverend Wright was racist or "anti-White"?

RichyBlacK:

@texazzpete,
1. How does speaking out against the evils that America has created, supported, sustained, and defended equivalent to being "anti-American"?

1) The first question is akin to phrasing a question in this manner:How does speaking out against the stupidity of RichyBlack . . . . . . . .,amount to being anti-RichyBlack? Unless we have a consensus as to the supposed stupidity of RichyBlack,the question is fundamentally flawed.

Lets take one instance of this evil America is supposed to have created according to Rev Wright-HIV/AIDS.In the absence of any evidence from Wright to validate his accusation,his comment must be taken as a manifestation of ill-will against his country.

2. Are you saying that America has not supported, perpetuated, sustained and defended evil?

Which country has "clean hands"? It depends on what these "evils" are.You are free to speak up against the evils of your country but you shouldn't invent "evils" like the HIV rant,just to make your point.

3. How does being "anti-American" equivalent to being "racist" or "anti-White"?4 If "anti-American" = "anti-White", does it then mean that "American" = "White"?

How do the 3rd and 4th questions arise when you have queried in the 1st,the notion that Wright's comments were anti-American?

When Wright said,"The government lied about inventing the HIV virus as a means of genocide against people of color",he is referring to the US Govt from a racial perspective.Is the US Govt all white? Wright himself framed the issue from a color perspective by constantly referring to what White America has done to people of color.

When he says the US Govt is distributing drugs to African Americans,is he saying only the whites serving in the US Govt know about this plan.How come none of the Latinos,Blacks or Asians serving or who have served in various administrations know of this drug distribution?

4 Play:

1) The first question is akin to phrasing a question in this manner:How does speaking out against the stupidity of RichyBlack . . . . . . . .,amount to being anti-RichyBlack? Unless we have a consensus as to the supposed stupidity of RichyBlack,the question is fundamentally flawed.

Na wa ooo.

Does railing against 4plays's pomposity and arrogance. . . .constitute being anti-4play.?

And on this I-man, there is a landslide consensus.

The question is 'protected'.

@Doyin

Where and when was the consensus reached?

Richy is asking a loaded question that assumes the presupposition to be true-like asking,"Have you stopped beating your wife"?

He will make a good PDP politician. He should come back to Nigeria instantly.

Some people seem to be ignorant of the many evils that America, as a country, has carried out against Blacks post-slavery. Let me give just one notable example:

[size=16pt]The Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment[/size]
For forty years between 1932 and 1972, the U.S. Public Health Service (PHS) conducted an experiment on 399 black men in the late stages of syphilis. These men, for the most part illiterate sharecroppers from one of the poorest counties in Alabama, were never told what disease they were suffering from or of its seriousness. Informed that they were being treated for “bad blood,”1 their doctors had no intention of curing them of syphilis at all. The data for the experiment was to be collected from autopsies of the men, and they were thus deliberately left to degenerate under the ravages of tertiary syphilis—which can include tumors, heart disease, paralysis, blindness, insanity, and death. “As I see it,” one of the doctors involved explained, “we have no further interest in these patients until they die.”

RichyBlacK:

Some people seem to be ignorant of the many evils that America, as a country, has carried out against Blacks post-slavery. Let me give just one notable example:

[size=16pt]The Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment[/size]
For forty years between 1932 and 1972, the US. Public Health Service (PHS) conducted an experiment on 399 black men in the late stages of syphilis. These men, for the most part illiterate sharecroppers from one of the poorest counties in Alabama, were never told what disease they were suffering from or of its seriousness. Informed that they were being treated for “bad blood,”1 their doctors had no intention of curing them of syphilis at all. The data for the experiment was to be collected from autopsies of the men, and they were thus deliberately left to degenerate under the ravages of tertiary syphilis—which can include tumors, heart disease, paralysis, blindness, insanity, and death. “As I see it,” one of the doctors involved explained, “we have no further interest in these patients until they die.”

Rev Wright spoke of,"The government lied about inventing the HIV virus as a means of genocide against people of color"

I might be wrong but unless the famed Tuskegee experiment amounted to "inventing of HIV virus as a means of genocide against people of color",this is completely irrelevant.If Wright simply chronicled these known cases,there won't be this hoopla,what Wright did further was to fabricate conspiracies.

What has the Tuskegee experiment do to with the supposed invention of the HIV virus by the US Govt?

@RichyBlack

Stop insulting people's intelligence.Where is the justification for Wright's claim that the US Govt invented the HIV virus? If Wright was merely reciting known cases such as the Tuskegee experiment,there won't be this furore because he will be stating the truth.

Where is the evidence for the invention of HIV?Does he or his church have evidence to back up this claim?

@4 Play,

I have presented on example of the many evils of America directed against Black people post-slavery. Do you now understand my questions?

4 Play:

Rev Wright spoke of,"The government lied about inventing the HIV virus as a means of genocide against people of color"

I might be wrong but unless the famed Tuskegee experiment amounted to "inventing of HIV virus as a means of genocide against people of color",this is completely irrelevant.If Wright simply chronicled these known cases,there won't be this hoopla,what Wright did further was to fabricate conspiracies.

What has the Tuskegee experiment do to with the supposed invention of the HIV virus by the US Govt?

I posed my questions [b]without [/b]the constraints of the speeches made by Rev. Wright.

Can you now answer my questions?

4 Play:

@RichyBlack

Stop insulting people's intelligence.Where is the justification for Wright's claim that the US Govt invented the HIV virus? If Wright was merely reciting known cases such as the Tuskegee experiment,there won't be this furore because he will be stating the truth.

Where is the evidence for the invention of HIV?Does he or his church have evidence to back up this claim?

@4 Play, defender of American atrocities,

Stop yarning dust and make a better attempt at answering my questions.

RichyBlacK:

@4 Play,

I have presented on example of the many evils of America directed against Black people post-slavery. Do you now understand my questions?
I posed my questions [b]without [/b]the constraints of the speeches made by Rev. Wright.

Can you now answer my questions?

Your questions will be pointless unless they were being posed in reference to Rev Wright's comments.I believed you posed those questions after texazpette's comments about the Wright issue.

Your question has already been answered:

You are free to speak up against the evils of your country but you shouldn't invent "evils" like the HIV rant,just to make your point.

Without the Wright context,your question is rendered redundant because I believe pretty much every sane individual will agree that merely speaking up against the evils of America doesn't necessarily constitute anti-Americanism.Both right-wing and left-wing do speak up against what they perceive as evil.

What is at issue is what constitutes this evil.Clearly,the "HIV invention" isn't one of them.

The hullabaloo about Rev. Wright's statements stems from the premise by many ignorant White Americans and a few delusional Black Americans that America , as a nation, has always been good and loving and has never perpetrated evil against Blacks. In their ignorant bliss they see slavery as something that was crushed by the all-loving America during the US civil war. To them, nobody has any reason to criticize beautiful America and her policies.

But the truth of the matter is that America has and is still perpetrating evil, both within and beyond her shores. The problem is that America is filled with too many ignorant, lazy people who can only digest sound-bites and video clips no more than three minutes long. The solution is to put sane and good people in power, not the evil cabal currently running affairs in the White House.

RichyBlacK:

@4 Play, defender of American atrocities,
Stop yarning dust and make a better attempt at answering my questions.

@RichyBlack a.k.a Arab Wannabe

I take it you have no justification for Rev Wright's actual comments.Thus,there was no issue to raise with texazpette's comments.

@RichyBlack

Even Obama,for whom you Obamaniacs have an almost homo-erotic passion for,has roundly criticised Wright's comments.There is no defence for the comments per se.

There won't be this furore if Rev Wright had done what you will expect of a Christian preacher-stick to the truth.If he was merely recounting Tuskegee,Jim Crow,slavery,e.t.c Obama wouldn't have faced all that trouble,where he erred was to embark on the wildest conspiracy theories without backing them up with evidence.

4 Play:

@RichyBlack a.k.a Arab Wannabe

I take it you have no justification for Rev Wright's actual comments.Thus,there was no issue to raise with texazpette's comments.

You're still missing the point.

Based on the complexity HIV, saying the US government scientists invented it, will be giving US scientists too much credit.

However, how does making statements relating blacks, the US government and HIV make Rev. Wright racist, anymore than me making statements relating blacks, the US government, and Syphilis make me racist? What in Wright's statements makes him racist?

4 Play:

@RichyBlack

Even Obama,for whom you Obamaniacs have an almost homo-erotic passion for,has roundly criticised Wright's comments.There is no defence for the comments per se.

There won't be this furore if Rev Wright had done what you will expect of a Christian preacher-stick to the truth.If he was merely recounting Tuskegee,Jim Crow,slavery,e.t.c Obama wouldn't have faced all that trouble,where he erred was to embark on the wildest conspiracy theories without backing them up with evidence.

You're mistaken. This is not about facts but about some Americans cringing to the reality of someone criticizing beautiful America from the pulpit. The tone and gesticulation (and of course the skin color) of Rev. Wright probably did more to offend some elements in White America than the veracity of what he said.

RichyBlacK:

You're still missing the point.

Based on the complexity HIV, saying the US government scientists invented it, will be giving US scientists too much credit.

However, how does making statements relating blacks, the US government and HIV make Rev. Wright racist, anymore than me making statements relating blacks, the US government, and Syphilis make me racist? What in Wright's statements makes him racist?

Surely,even you can see the glaring difference between Wright's comments about HIV(baseless,without an iota of truth) and making comments comments about Tuskegee(factual,with tons of evidence).

You are asking whether baseless comments about a plot to bring genocide(hardly a modest term to use)by means of HIV against people of color smacks of racism?

Let me ask you a question(and this is based on real life)Supposing a British newspaper ran an article about Africans engaging in ritual killing(a totally false story),would you try to excuse it on the basis that ritual killing has occurred before or does currently occur in many parts of Africa?

Wright fabricated his claims,moreover,he framed his rants from a racial perspective-what the US Govt(which he says is run by Whites)did to Blacks.Not only was the premise false,the way he framed it gives the impression of an all White Govt pouncing on "people of color". Wright himself has framed the issue from a racial perspective.

4 Play:

Surely,even you can see the glaring difference between Wright's comments about HIV(baseless,without an iota of truth) and making comments comments about Tuskegee(factual,with tons of evidence).

You are asking whether baseless comments about a plot to bring genocide(hardly a modest term to use)by means of HIV against people of color smacks of racism?

Let me ask you a question(and this is based on real life)Supposing a British newspaper ran an article about Africans engaging in ritual killing(a totally false story),would you try to excuse it on the basis that ritual killing has occurred before or does currently occur in many parts of Africa?

Wright fabricated his claims,moreover,he framed his rants from a racial perspective-what the US Govt(which he says is run by Whites)did to Blacks.Not only was the premise false,the way he framed it gives the impression of an all White Govt pouncing on "people of color". Wright himself has framed the issue from a racial perspective.

I see your direction but you're still not getting the point. Wright's statement have not generated discussions about the origin of HIV but about race. Why is that so?

RichyBlacK:

You're mistaken. This is not about facts but about some Americans cringing to the reality of someone criticizing beautiful America from the pulpit. The tone and gesticulation (and of course the skin color) of Rev. Wright probably did more to offend some elements in White America than the veracity of what he said.

Then we descend into the realm of psychoanalysis for which we are neither qualified nor in a position to undertake.

Lets stick with the facts in the context of this thread.The facts are that Rev Wright has made a series of incendiary remarks for which the supporting evidence is scarce,often non-existent.Again,not even Obama condoned these comments and eloquently denounced them in a speech you were quick to hail as sublime.

If a white preacher had made such baseless remarks about black people,we will be quick-and rightly so-to condemn them.No amount of sophistry can justify Rev Wright's comments.

RichyBlacK:

I see your direction but you're still not getting the point. Wright's statement have not generated discussions about the origin of HIV but about race. Why is that so?

The reason is simple.Wright's comments about HIV are wholly baseless,so there is no point discussing what is generally considered as baseless.Instead,attention is turned to the overarching theme of Wright's sermons:race relations in America.

A newspaper in,I believe it was Morrocco,once ran a baseless story about African immigrants eating Morrocan babies.The story generated debates about immigration and race and not about the issue of Africans eating babies.Why? Because the story was baseless and inevitably attention turned to the overarching themes-immigration and race.

4 Play:

The reason is simple.Wright's comments about HIV are wholly baseless,so there is no point discussing what is generally considered as baseless.Instead,attention is turned to the overarching theme of Wright's sermons:race relations in America.

A newspaper in,I believe it was Morrocco,once ran a baseless story about African immigrants eating Morrocan babies.The story generated debates about immigration and race and not about the issue of Africans eating babies.Why? Because the story was baseless and inevitably attention turned to the overarching themes-immigration and race.

But Wright accused the US government of something that was fundamentally true, even though he used a wrong example - that the United States has a history of treating Black people unfairly. Is that wrong? That is the real issue. Granted he used an unsuitable example, but that does not change the message - it is difficult living in a country like America as a Black man.