Islandman, yo might find this interesting

[Karl]

Rev Right is not just Obama pastor as you said he was on his political team. Now watch and see how McCain, Clinton them use it against him to say this was part of the reason for him not to support the Iraq war in the first place. As I said the spinner out deh a wait wid them Googley. It is going to be a tough and devisive political season.

Not supporting the Iraq war is a different kettle of fish. I also did not support the Iraq war from the beginning.

Why?
The same reason Hillary did not - The Inspectors were not allowed to finish their inspections and report.

Obama was not in the Congress and not previleged to the "Intelligence". He made his decisions based on the same outside information I had. Is that how we want our Members of Congress to made decisions on less than complete findings...

....or after briefings from the Intelligence arms of the government and other top government officials who have expertise in shifting through the various 'secret' and 'sensitive intelligence reports'?

...besides when the Secretary of State (it was then Collin Powell), the National Sucurity Advisor, Head of the CIA and the PRESIDENT of the United States came out and made a credible case for 'allowing the Inspectors to conclude their mission' and gave their word that 'use of force' was a last option - force would not be used until it became a last option...do you vote on the basis of the evidence laid out before you by the US authorities and go along with the word of the President of the UNITED STATES and OUR advisors or you do not?

...Do you go with 'gut feelings' of someone (Obama, me and any other person or set of persons outside of the loop) who had no knowledge of the information provided by those who are experts on these things...our Intelligence Advisors and Committees and the word of the PRESIDENT of the United States?

The truth is Obama's "I was against the war from the beginning..." is in my opinion a position based on 'gut feelings'. Nice sounding but for persons who think - NONSENSE base/no solid reasoning base.

It is true that at times our instincts are correct...but a guess...guess...feel about pushing or not pushing the red button, for me is not the way to go! I would like decisions based on cold hard facts presented by the competent US authorities and having a truthful trustworthy President.

We all know Bush broke faith with those who voted to give him the final say on whether or not to use force...but if you cannot trust the PRESIDENT of the United States...then which office holder are we going to trust...is the CONGRESS going to trust?. Are we going to expect our Members of Congress to turn their backs on, say a President Obama...or on the next person sitting in that office when that person presents "competent authories findings" and gives solemn word on the way that presidential Congress approved direction on actions will be implemented?

Obama cannot have it too ways. - 1. Do not accept Hillary's vote made on acceptance of the 'trusted' US officials and the word of the president of the US of A...

...accept his Obama's "gut decisions"!

...but ...2. ...when he is in office we must acccept the word of the security advisors and a president Obama and not "gut feelings"!
Nutten cyaan guh suh!


If his #1 makes sense he cannot expect #2 once he wins the presidency!

[Islandman]

The image was fragile because for the most part it was still being molded. Obama always knew that Rev Wright was going to be a problem for this image, thats why he told him at the last minute that he couldn't invite him to his announcement to run for President. You see, Obama is a politician too.

The Rev Wright can and should say whatever he wants to say, but Obama has to expect that people will question his message if the company he keeps does not seem consistent with it.

Your Rumsfield/Powell argument is as faulty an analogy as I have ever seen. Did Powelll ever suggest that Rumsfield was like an uncle , or a spriritual advisor to him or vice-versa? They were co-workers, that is all.

A proper analogy would be if Bush had a spiritual advisor similar to the Wright/Obama relationship who said publicly it is OK to be gay. We know Bushes uncompromising position on gays and it is guided by his spirituality, so one should expect his spritual advisor to share similar views.

[Assasin]

If Rev Wright did a Muslim he would be deported or in Jail somewhere.

[Yuttie]

again, the ppl who look at it from that perspective are the ones who had no intention to vote for the man.....stop cherry picking island man..

of course Obama is the typical politician...

[Yuttie]

islandman, i hope u don't believe the stuff you type... and rather your expressing the conservatve myth... sounding like Hannity to me...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aNTGR...eature=related

[Muadib]

You raised the issue of advisors... it is not unusual to have advisors that have different philosophies, covering different ends of the spectrum on certain issues.

You keep raising dis spirituality ting.. if Jesus did come back, yuh nuh tink him would trace off America tuh wheddah him born yah suh or not ??

Sound like is only di Religious Right have a seh.. ah suh it set ?

Is di Pharisees ah run tings ?.. well.. maybe is time somebody challenge dat... again...

[Islandman]

It is not what I believe that is important in the context of the discussion, it is what Obamas potential swing voters believe.

If the people who I refer to were not going to vote for him anyway, please explain the hit that he has taken in the polls?

[Islandman]

Again, it seems that unno think I am arguing wether Rev Wright had some valid points or not. I am not arguing that.

I am saying that you CANNOT expect to win an election for President of the US with people around you who publicly support those views. The mainstream American voter simply does not want to entertain the argument that thier foriegn policy may have something to do with the way they are viewed in the world. Yes there are pockets of US society like black Americans, the SA Bay Area and university communities that do take that argument seriously, but on a national level in 2008 it is not marketable in any shape or form.

[Muadib]

LOL !

If the mainstream American voter is in such denial as you are intimating, how would someone like Obama get elected and not be a hypocrite ?

That would be an impossible task.. forget Reverend Wright... all Mcain would have to do is ask Obama if he thinks current American foreign policy has something to do with how the are viewed in the world.

I would love to see Obama say no !

By your reasoning.. Game, Set, Match.. don't need Rev Wright for that.

[Muadib]

Mi seh is time to separate the Men from the Boys.. If not now, when ???

Actually might be tactical genius.. if him survive this attack now it might neutralize it as an effective weapon come di real War.

[Islandman]

You right. We will surely see if the US ready for real change or not. I suspect not.

[Islandman]

What Obama wouldl do to get around such a question is make it a Bush/Iraq war thing as opposed to a general US policy thing that has been going on for decades. He has already denouced the Revs comments about bombing Hiroshima, supporting terrorism against black SA, Palistinians, etc etc.

The Rev Wright wasn't talking about Bush in particular. Him was talking bout the policies of every US administration the last 100 years, Bill Clinton (who bombed the empty Sudan factories) included! I bet Obama wouldn't go there though.

Anyway, mek we watch the ride. As I predicted months ago before most people here had heard of Rev Wright, this would be one of the two most difficult issues he would face. Maybe he will prove me wrong in his ability to recover from it and still be able to sell his message successfully.

[Mosiah]

Karl, Obama had to go by the information that was available to him. What's wrong with that? Stands to reason that he might have supported the war if he had more information. Or maybe not! But to say it's a gut feeling, I think that's wrong! He had enough information to know that it was foolishness!

I agree, however, that Obama and Clinton were quite likely examining two different scripts and so he should not berate her for her decision since he didn't have a similar "evidence" in front of him at the time.