When Senator Barack Obama publicly announced his ‘appalled’ reaction to the statements made by his former pastor and “spiritual adviser,” Rev. Jeremiah Wright on Tuesday, did he do so because he felt political pressures forcing him to react, or was his response a heartfelt and sincere one?
By distancing himself from the public remarks given by Rev. Jeremiah Wright in Detroit over the weekend and then at the National Press Club, Senator Obama set himself up for another media sound-bite, roller-coaster. All the major cable news channels, with their so-called election ‘experts’ and ‘analysts’, still continued their angry mob rants and raves against Senator Obama and questioned his sincerity and honesty.
So, by coming out against his ‘family friend’ and ‘spiritual adviser’ and presenting the face of shock at Tuesday’s press conference, Senator Obama opened himself up to more criticism and debate. Now, the question is: Why didn’t Barack distance himself from Rev. Wright years ago? Why did he see it necessary at this point to end a relationship with Rev. Wright, a man that Obama himself labeled an ’Uncle’?
As Rev. Wright mentioned at the National Press Club, he believed that Senator Obama is guilty of ‘political posturing.’ It would seem that even though Senator Obama took offense of this critique on his persona, in all likelihood, this is the case. How do you end a relationship with such an important person in your life simply because you don’t agree with their politics?
Another key issue to note is that the Obama campaign did not have to dignify or signify anything that Rev. Wright mentioned in either of his speeches. An issue that doesn’t hold merit should not be quantified. This is where the Obama campaign made their fatal error. Believe it or not, Senator Obama lost a significant amount of the African American vote when he denounced Rev. Wright. His ‘political postering’ was evident in his denouncement. To gain the vote of White America, Senator Obama ‘postured’ brightly and radiantly.
But will that be enough? And will African American voters whom supported Obama up until yesterday, throw their weight over to Hillary Clinton’s campaign?
Senator Barack Obama publicly denounced his former pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, on Tuesday, saying that the pastor’s message on Monday to the National Press Club “contradicts everything that I have been saying during this campaign.”
“I have been a member of Trinity Church since 1992. I have known Rev. Wright for almost twenty years. The person I saw yesterday is not the person I met twenty years ago,” Obama stated at a press conference on Tuesday.
In an attempt to do some serious damage control, Senator Obama publicly denounced Rev. Wright by calling his remarks “appalling.”
Thank God the Pennsylvania primary is over and done with. This particular end of the campaign was long, tiring and bloody. But the Clinton campaign train pulled ahead of Senator Barack Obama’s Tuesday with a ten percent edge. Senator Clinton received 55% of the total vote to Senator Obama’s 45%.
What does this victory mean for Hillary Clinton? It means that she can continue forward with her campaign until the Democratic convention in August, where it will be officially decided who the Democratic Presidential candidate will be. So all of the mud-slinging and down-low tactics of the Clinton campaign paid off. But with what long-reaching consequences?
The New York Times Editorial Board, who endorsed Senator Clinton early on in her campaign bid, has published a stinging rebuke on the way Hillary Clinton ran her Pennsylvania campaign. In an editorial to run today, the board claims “that the Pennsylvania campaign which produced yet another inconclusive result on Tuesday, was even meaner, more vacuous, more desperate, and more filled with pandering than the mean, vacuous, desperate, pander-filled contests that preceded it.”
The New York Times Editorial Board also made it clear that Senator Clinton’s campaign tactics could very will “hurt her, her opponent and her party.”
The next primary state is Indiana. The drama continues.
Has former BET Chairman Bob Johnson deluded himself into believing that the African American community really gives a care what his sentiments are regarding this Presidential election?
Thanks to him, there’s a whole generation of African Americans who don’t even have a clue that there is a historical election going on. Bob Johnson and his BET have systematically brainwashed a whole segment of Black America. Capitalizing on overt sexuality and materialism, BET is a major role-player in the continuous obliteration of the subconscious of young African Americans.
At present, BET is still at the forefront of intelligence-challenged programming. Yet, Bob Johnson, with these credentials, opted to comment on the voting habits of African Americans. His comments make the implication that African Americans are asleep at the wheel. In strong agreement with Geraldine Ferraro, Bob Johnson affirmed:
“What I believe Geraldine Ferraro meant is that if you take a freshman senator from Illinois called ‘Jerry Smith’ and he says I’m gonna run for President, would he start off with 90% of the Black vote? And the answer is probably not.”
Now, what poll or latest voter research proved that 90% of African Americans are voting for Barack Obama? Not a one. Where is Bob Johnson getting his facts? Then to conclude, Bob Johnson said that “this campaign has such a trigger on anything racial…it is almost impossible for anybody to say anything.”
No, Mr. Johnson. There isn’t a problem with folks vocalizing how they feel about their candidate. This is part of our democratic process and our right to free speech and assembly. Elections bring out the passion and fervor of voters and candidates alike. However, what Americans and African Americans in particular are resentful of, is the back-biting and the demagoguery of the campaigns. To assume that African Americans are block voting for Barack Obama simply because he is ’family’ is an out and out insult to us all.
In fact, there is a tremendous number of African Americans who support Senator Hillary Clinton. To say that African Americans only vote African American in 2008 is ridiculous and unfounded. We are a diverse group of people with varied needs and expectations. Despite what Bob Johnson is insinuating, African Americans are intelligent enough to reason diplomatically whom to cast a ballot for.
How about this Mr. Johnson? If you can take the idea of formulating a cable network that is African American focused and turn it into a multi-million dollar enterprise, why is it difficult to recognize that your ‘bretheren’ can use the same intellect in choosing a candidate?
Do you suppose that Barack Obama read my recent rant about Wednesdays televised Democratic debate on ABC? How sick and tired I am of the political bashing and the act of ‘throwing someone under the bus to get a vote’ strategy that seems to be the norm lately?
I don’t know, but a day after the debate, Senator Barack Obama made the implication that perhaps he too, is getting weary of these debates. Obama went as far as suggesting that he doesn’t even see the point in having another debate with Senator Hillary Clinton.
“I’ll be honest with you,” Senator Obama stated to the press, “we now have had twenty-one (debates). I could deliver Senator Clinton’s lines…she could I’m sure deliver mine.”
Then making a specific reference to the Democratic debate held two nights ago, Senator Obama made the admission that “it took 45 minutes before we even started talking about a single issue that matters to the American people.” This is a true fact because Senator Clinton was on her soapbox acting self-rightous about Barack Obama’s former spiritual leader, Rev. Jeremiah Wright.
I think that the American public will agree with Barack Obama. We are tired of the pettiness and mud-throwing. If there is to be a debate, it should be about what the candidates can accomplish if elected to the highest office in the country.
Not about what church they should or should not belong to.
Or whether they were the target of sniper fire in Bosnia.
Senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama were at it again in another long, seemingly endless debate on Wednesday night. After a string of debates that has made this election season seem like a Michigan winter, Senator Clinton and front-runner Senator Obama, debated about the same ole same ole.
But with a slight twist.
Senator Clinton couldn’t wait to pop off at the mouth about Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s comments after 9/11. To tell the truth, that is really the only solid issue with Obama she could sink her teeth into. Of course, Senator Obama had to once again refute and rebuke what his beloved Rev. Wright said that fateful Sunday after 9/11. He used the word ‘disown’ which almost got him into trouble when one of the moderators thought Senator Obama was implying that he had ‘disowned’ Rev. Wright. Senator Obama cleaned that up real quick by explaining that what he ‘disowned’ was the retorict behind Rev. Wright’s sermon.
It is a shame that so much time has been wasted on the words of one man who is not even in the Presidential race! Senator Clinton must rise above these infantile tactics if she wants to win the primary in Philadelphia.
The funny thing about the whole attack on Senator Obama about his allegiance, loyalty and affiliation with Rev. Wright, is that the moderators turned the tables quickly on Senator Clinton by bringing up that “misremembered” trip she made to Bosnia. The trip where she was under suppossed gunfire and was hiding under tanks and stuff.
Yeah, well that wasn’t the case. Senator Clinton tried her best to get off the hot seat with that blooper. And I am more than sure that when the floor was given to Senator Obama, Hillary just knew she was going to be shredded by Barack. So did I.
But the gracious Senator Obama sidestepped that whole issue by stating that everyone makes mistakes. Huh? I couldn’t believe it! I just knew Barack was going to get in there and tear it up! But no. He further mentioned that the campaign is not about back-biting and party fighting. It’s about winning The White House in the Fall.
I don’t know about the rest of America, but to me, November seems to be a long way from here. What I want is for all of this debating to cease. Voters are very much aware of whom they will be casting a ballot for in August and in November. The constant bombarding of voters with meaningless debates is a waste of time. At this point, the candidates are only debating gossip that is being fed by both campaigns to the media. We don’t need a debate to refute gossip.
If there needs to be a debate, it should be about how the Democrats plan to defeat John McCain in November. You know those crafty Republicans. They are in their workshops right now cooking up something treacherous for whomever comes out victorious in the August.
By the looks of it, the Republicans have already been successful. Didn’t a staff member on John McCain’s campaign find that sermon of Rev. Jeremiah Wright and then put it up on YouTube? Later, that staff member was quietly relieved of his/her duties. Fired.
On Wednesday, Pope Benedict XVI commented for the first time on the subject of the Catholic Church and alleged child sex abuse charges. The Pope said that he was “deeply ashamed” and that the entire situation was “handled badly.”
But then, in what appeared to be an apparent slap in the face to the thousands of victims of these perverted, sexually deviant priests, was when Pope Benedict alluded to the fact that the entertainment industry via violence, pornography and popular culture in general shared culpability in this crime.
Even if this were true, I was under the assumption that ‘men of the cloth’ are held to a higher standard and moral code than the rest of sinful mankind? Isn’t that why they took that oath, that vow of celibacy? To forge an even closer relationship with God than the rest of us? Isn’t that why the Catholic Church, in its’ infinite wisdom, endowed them with all of that pomp and circumstance, fancy titles and attire? These men or former priests were elevated to a position that placed them next to the Christ. Nothing in the secular world matters when you are supposed to be on a higher spiritual plane than the rest of us average sinners.
For Pope Benedict to imply that all of us outside of the Catholic Church have a moral responsibility to curtail our First Amendment rights in order to curb or stop the depraved sexual appetites of sexual predators is downright ludicrous!
As a society, we do bear the responsibility of providing a safe and nurturing world for ourselves and our young ones. The majority of society does. But the Catholic Church is a world unto itself and it is time that the Church start taking responsibility for the actions and practices of its’ members instead of passing the buck. The Catholic Church has no right pointing fingers anywhere else but within. And saying that the sex abuse scandal was “handled badly” is the understatement of the century!
It wasn’t HANDLED at all! These sex offending priests were shuffled from one parish to the next. One city, one state to the next. The proper ‘handling’ of this matter would have came from the simple act of picking up the telephone and dialing 911 for the police! That is what the world outside of the Catholic Church does.
I am sure that all of those innocent children who were victims of these pedophile priests, and are now adults, are absolutely flabbergasted at what they heard on Wednesday. I don’t blame them. A spiritual leader of the magnitude of Pope Benedict is supposed to bring spiritual healing, love and insight to those that look to him for leadership. All Pope Benedict XVI accomplished was throwing more salt into wounds trying to heal.
Right about now, Detroiters across America and abroad, are feeling quite sick to their stomach.
Detroit City Council turned its’ proverbial back on ‘guilty before proven innocent’ Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick today. Thinking that he was about to present his city budget to a united City Council, as soon as Kwame sat his ‘I’m the pillar of truth and virtue’ self down, Detroit City Council President Ken Cockeral announced that the majority of City Council had decided not to hear the Mayor’s budget presentation.
Once again, the look on Kwame Kilpatrick’s soon to be convicted face was priceless!
Yet, as much as I loved the ‘in your face’ tactic of Detroit’s City Council today, okay I reveled in it…I took a bath in it, the way Council went about the situation was wrong. Detroit is on the national news media radar. Thanks to Mayor Kilpatrick and former Chief of Staff Christine Beatty. This being the case, whenever and whatever move the Mayor makes, and nine times out of ten lately it has been the wrong one; the major national news outlets pick it up and broadcasts it.
Detroit City Council President Ken Cockeral claims that a majority decision to snub the Mayor didn’t gel until the moment Kilpatrick entered Council chambers. This is hard to believe and highly unprofessional. The Mayor is correct in his statement that City Council could have notified him beforehand.
The City of Detroit is at war. This war is intense. It involves the citizens against City government. It involves citizens against one another. It involves City government against itself. The war is necessary. But in order for some type of resolution to be gained, Detroit herself has to realize that 1. Mayor Kwame Kilpatrick MUST RESIGN! 2. Two wrongs don’t make a right and 3. The nation is watching.
The worst thing a former Detroiter can do is turn on the tv and see Detroit’s City government war broadcast in full on CNN, MSNBC, FOX and Headline News. With a virtual 99% of Detroit government being African American, when Detroit is on tv acting ugly and unprofessional, it makes US ALL LOOK BAD!
And guess what? Instead of Kwame Kilpatrick looking like a stooge, everyone involved looked like a bunch of n****s who have no right to be an elected official. This includes the two councilwomen, Monica Conyers and Martha Reeves who decided to air their discontentment with fellow colleagues publicly.
The whole incident was an embarrassment and another huge blight on the City of Detroit itself. When are Black folks gonna learn?
In part six of the amazing HBO miniseries “John Adams,” viewers are hit with a dose of truth in storytelling that is rare on television. Especially when it relates to African American history. John Adams, the second President of The United States, and his formidable wife, Abigail Adams, arrive at the building site of The White House. They intend to move in as the construction progresses.
Upon arriving at The White House, President and First Lady Adams look on in astonishment and disgust at the near starving and squalor conditions of the workers. Even more so, they are both appalled at who the workers are.
The White House construction laborers are made up entirely of African American slaves. Slaves also make up the house staff, too. The facial expressions of the stellar acting talents of Paul Giamatti and Laura Linney portrayed the heartfelt guttural disdain that John and Abigail Adams more than likely experienced upon their historic arrival at The White House.
President Adams, even though opposed to slavery, went along with and in fact endorsed a passive position to the question of slavery. Upon the completion of the “Declaration of Independence”, John Adams opposed the wording and possible intent of Thomas Jefferson’s penned “Declaration.” Not wanting to offend and possibly lose the support of the Southern states, Adams suggested the removal of the ambiguous language implying that ‘all human beings are equal’ to ‘all men are created equal with certain inalienable rights.’
As we already know, slaves were considered three fifths of a human being. So, the “Declaration of Independence” does not apply to African Americans in its’ original intent and form.
In fact, Thomas Jefferson, the third President of The United States, believed that African Americans and slavery was morally wrong. Yet, Jefferson also held the belief that African Americans were inferior to their Caucasian counterparts and thereby needed guidance and instruction.
However, getting back to the subject of African Americans, slavery and the construction of The White House, it is interesting to note that an American television network would produce and broadcast an obvious piece of American history that many feel is irrelevant in 2008. The United States of America as a whole has never nor plans to address the question of reparations for African American descendants of slaves.
Sveral states have offered apologies. Florida is the latest to do so. But the deep seated wounds of this country’s major involvement in the capital crimes of kidnapping, murder, human trafficking and enslavement, have yet to be healed. The wounds has festered and become infected because of the ignorance and the arrogance of a select group of people who would rather see this criminal record of American history buried and forgotten.
HBO and the executive producers of “John Adams” should be applauded for their inclusion of the truth. It is also interesting to note that in this historic election year, an African American has a strong chance in becoming the first African American President of The United States. Barack Obama has the chance to become the first African American to actually Sit and Reside in a position of authority in the same Oval Office that John Adams and Thomas Jefferson once sat in.
Justice will have then been served.