Wright's tune has a familiar ring

ZigmunnDroid wrote:

Another American success story. A man uses the podium to spread his hate filled message, now sees his chickens coming home to roost. A fine house provided by his flock.
I guess freeloaders will always find someone to take care of them if they spew the Wright message.

African4 wrote:

Big difference. None of their cronies are the aspiring president of the USA.

Chuck Zimmerman wrote:

The LTE writers have selectively lynched The Honorable Rev. wright. They only used a tiny fraction of what he said to tie him with other people they detest. This is beyond dispiccable.
Personally I Agree with the Rev. Except that it should be GD conservative Calvinist trinitarrians.
They would have US believe that a preacher of the Trinity is somehow connected with those God-awful Islamists and that Obama is a Muslom which is an outright lie.
They should be ashamed of theirselves.
I am not amused that my password does not work today.

yona wrote:

<quoted text>
I have given that "only a little snippet" argument some real thought. Here is what I think of it.
If I were to say the "N" word just once in a public place. Whether amoung those thet held that sentiment or not. Wouldn't I be considered a racist by the public once it was known I had said that nasty word?
Remember I said, only said it once. In a long life, I would still be considered a racist.
So that having been cleared up. Doesn't it make sence that even in a long career, if Rev Wright said those racist things just a few times, that he is still a racist?
By default, if Obama sat idlely by and did not protest, leave, or at least not return to the church. Isn't it fair to assume complicant racism?

Chuck Zimmerman wrote:

<quoted text>
No. This was settled long ago. We are to be judged seperately for OUR faults.
My preacher when I was a kid, took off with the church funds and the secretary. She left behind three kids, one less than a year old. He left his wife & kids behind. Was I complicit in his folly?
Were you complicit in the folly of the woman at Marshal? You were there too, weren't you?
Words are just speech.
Action requires judgement if it causes harm to someone & they, of age, complain.

Chuck Zimmerman wrote:

The LTE writers have selectively lynched The Honorable Rev. wright. They only used a tiny fraction of what he said to tie him with other people they detest. This is beyond dispiccable.
Personally I Agree with the Rev. Except that it should be GD conservative Calvinist trinitarrians.
They would have US believe that a preacher of the Trinity is somehow connected with those God-awful Islamists and that Obama is a Muslom which is an outright lie.
They should be ashamed of theirselves.
I am not amused that my password does not work today.

Fred wrote:

<quoted text>
Whole different situation. A comparable situation is if your former preacher preached that it was OK to steal the church money, run off with the secretary, & leave the kids behind and you continued to go listen to him preach that. That is what Obama did. Your analogy is NOT RELEVANT to what ACTUALLY HAPPENED in the REAL WORLD.

Fred wrote:

<quoted text>
Of course Rev? Wright explained his 'snipits' at the National Press Club and made SURE that everyone understood that the 'snipits' were EXACTLY WHAT HE MEANT AND PREACHED.

MLH wrote:

<quoted text>...sort of like Jim Bakker of the North Carolina PTL(Pass The Loot) Network....oh, I guess that was different, wasn't it?....how about Reverend Hagee or Jerry Falwell, or Pat Robertson...or do you not know how they said that 9/11 was America's fault?...oh, I guess that was different, wasn't it?

Chuck Zimmerman wrote:

<quoted text>
No. This was settled long ago. We are to be judged seperately for OUR faults.
My preacher when I was a kid, took off with the church funds and the secretary. She left behind three kids, one less than a year old. He left his wife & kids behind. Was I complicit in his folly?
Were you complicit in the folly of the woman at Marshal? You were there too, weren't you?
Words are just speech.
Action requires judgement if it causes harm to someone & they, of age, complain.

MLH wrote:

<quoted text>....uh...check out who's endorsing McCain....Hagee...nice try, though...

MLH wrote:

<quoted text>....uh...check out who's endorsing McCain....Hagee...nice try, though...

ZigmunnDroid wrote:

<quoted text>
You would be accepting of that behavior if the preacher came back, did it again, came back, did it again, etc, etc.
You may say talk is cheap. I bet 6 million Jews would not say that of Hitler.
We are always judged by the people we hang with.
Especially after we discover the man behind the mask.
If you continued to hang around with a man convicted of multiple child molestation, what would the neighbors think?

Chuck Zimmerman wrote:

<quoted text>
I don't hang with hardly anyone.
I don't care what my neighbors think.
Action ain't opinion.
Conservative evangelicals gave US bush. It could be said that bush has "damned America". Will the conservative evangelicals accept the responsability of their vote, or will they blame the Honorable Wright?

yona wrote:

<quoted text>
I have given that "only a little snippet" argument some real thought. Here is what I think of it.
If I were to say the "N" word just once in a public place. Whether amoung those thet held that sentiment or not. Wouldn't I be considered a racist by the public once it was known I had said that nasty word?
Remember I said, only said it once. In a long life, I would still be considered a racist.
So that having been cleared up. Doesn't it make sence that even in a long career, if Rev Wright said those racist things just a few times, that he is still a racist?
By default, if Obama sat idlely by and did not protest, leave, or at least not return to the church. Isn't it fair to assume complicant racism?