Washington Post journalist, author and Washington DC insider, Sally Quinn founded and co-moderates On Faith, a blog from the Washington Post and Newsweek. Co-moderated by Newsweek editor and bestselling author Jon Meacham and hosted by a panel of renowned religious scholars of all denominations, On Faith is the first worldwide, interactive discussion about religion and its impact on global life.
While researching an article about religion in Washington prior to the 2000 presidential campaign, Quinn noticed that while religion had an enormous influence on worldwide politics, it was a taboo subject in our nation’s capital. Following 9/11, Quinn’s interest in religion grew and her passion to understand it from a personal and political perspective took on new urgency and focus.
Over the past decade, Quinn has pursued a religious education with the same drive and rigor she once gave to politics. Leveraging her rolodex from 30 years as a columnist, she sought out spiritual mentorship from religious leaders and scholars such as Archbishop Desmond Tutu, Reverend Jim Anderson, Father Bryan Hehir and John Esposito. To gain emotional and spiritual perspective, she traveled to many of the world’s holy sites in Rome, Jerusalem, Bethlehem, Tibet, Delhi, Cairo, Ethiopia and Istanbul, and began attending several religious services and ceremonies a week at churches, temples and mosques.
Quinn has written four books: “We’re Going to Make You a Star,” about her short-lived experience as a co-anchor for “CBS Morning News”; “Regrets Only,” her first novel; “Happy Endings,” its sequel, and “The Party,” in which Quinn offers an insider’s look at Washington entertaining and a personal view of the value of friendship. She is currently working on a book about religion in Washington.
Close.
Sally Quinn
Washington Post reporter
Washington Post journalist, author and Washington DC insider, Sally Quinn founded and co-moderates On Faith, a blog from the Washington Post and Newsweek. Co-moderated by Newsweek editor and bestselling author Jon Meacham and hosted by a panel of renowned religious scholars of all denominations, On Faith is the first worldwide, interactive discussion about religion and its impact on global life.
more »
I don't know what Rev. Wright or Sen. Obama have to apologize for. Can't a black person in America, especially a community leader such as Wright, be angry with the racism and suffering and nationalistic arrogance happening still with America? Can't they speak out? I don't know what Obama has to qualify in his support. Wright is his personal minister. Obama need not agree with everything Wright says, nor need he explain: they are Wright's words, not Obama's.
As a white guy, I just feel the backlash is ultimately tied to the racist viewpoint of "Oh, we got ourselves an uppity Negro on our hands." Or "My God, maybe Obama actually has black ancestry."
A strong and moral nation should be able to accept criticism (from Wright) and differences of opinion. We should fear slamming down on outspokenness.
The Bible also says not to bear false witness against our neighbor. The repeated, out-of-context mischaracterization of Rev. Wright's remarks does just that. Why doesn't anyone in the media (with the possible exception of Roland Martin) quote Rev. Wright directly following the "incendiary" remarks: "Turn to your neighbor and say 'forgive him for the God damn..."? Did you know they were there? Did you bother to listen to the whole sermon?
As far as Obama goes, it would be un-Christian of him to reject Rev. Wright, the man, whatever he thought of his ideas. It would also be contrary to his goal of reaching out to people who disagree with us on some things in order to act on our common values. Obama walks the talk.
The Bible also says not to bear false witness against our neighbor. The repeated, out-of-context mischaracterization of Rev. Wright's remarks does just that. Why doesn't anyone in the media (with the possible exception of Roland Martin) quote Rev. Wright directly following the "incendiary" remarks: "Turn to your neighbor and say 'forgive him for the God damn..."? Did you know they were there? Did you bother to listen to the whole sermon?
As far as Obama goes, it would be un-Christian of him to reject Rev. Wright, the man, whatever he thought of his ideas. It would also be contrary to his goal of reaching out to people who disagree with us on some things in order to act on our common values. Obama walks the talk.
The Bible also says not to bear false witness against our neighbor. The repeated, out-of-context mischaracterization of Rev. Wright's remarks does just that. Why doesn't anyone in the media (with the possible exception of Roland Martin) quote Rev. Wright directly following the "incendiary" remarks: "Turn to your neighbor and say 'forgive him for the God damn..."? Did you know they were there? Did you bother to listen to the whole sermon?
As far as Obama goes, it would be un-Christian of him to reject Rev. Wright, the man, whatever he thought of his ideas. It would also be contrary to his goal of reaching out to people who disagree with us on some things in order to act on our common values. Obama walks the talk.
Many thanks for your article, Sally. It lends much needed context.
As to those of Pastor Wright's comments that relate to Israel, I hope they might somehow bring about, perhaps for the first time, open and free discussion of the inordinate influence Israel and its American surrogates have, and have had for decades, on American foreign policy in the Middle East. Professor Mearsheimer and Wald did this in their book last year and got "creamed" by the media and others for having dared to do so.
It reminded me of this statement of Sen. J. William Fulbright, then Chrm. of the Senate's Foreign Relations Committee, made in 1973.
"(Unfortunately) U.S. foreign policy, as it relates to the Middle East, is conceived in Tel Aviv and born in Washington."
And so it appears to have continued to this day. (Witness, above all, Israeli and American Zionist influence and pressure to cause America to start its current war against Iraq.)
Moreover, the commments of Nixon and Graham about the inordinately high percentage of Jews in the America media appear to apply even more so today. And that truth is not without effect on the "bent" of the news Americans are given as to events anywhere in the Middle East.
In all, Jews compose 1.8% of Americans. Only about 50% of those Jews consider themselves Zionists, i.e., subscribers to "Israel, right or wrong!" And yet, virtually the entire American Congress of both houses is completely intimidated by "pacs" such as American-Israeli Political Affairs Committee (AIPAC). With all of Israel's brutal land occupations in the Middle East for the last 35 years, any reference to them in Washington, D.C. is a total taboo.
What a blessing it would be for America if these realities were permitted to be freely discussed in America and among its media.
Thank you Ms. Quinn for an honest and telling article. It was also a pleasure to see your conversation with Andrea Mitchell on MSNBC (3\27\08). It's sad to see a "news station" speculate, make assertions, harp on and hold accountable Sen. Obama for statements he didn't make nor, as he clearly stated, disagrees with. Although he clearly said why he remained a member of the Church, he keeps getting asked the same question. It seems some will not be satiated until Obama says what "They" WANT to hear. The hypocrisy of it all is most disturbing. Their agenda is quite clear.
Each time I turn on my computer and just happen onto a site never visited before, just like today, I find the most shocking information.
Your article is the very crucks of the matter. That we are human being first and foremost. Yes, and as you have further documented, the cracks in the armor are very apparent. And, more clearly, the 1st Amendment Right to Freedom of Speech is still not extended to African Americans.
We can only provide the shoulder to cry on. Apparently, we can never be a voice to be heard.
After market surveys showed that confessions in the Roman Catholic Church are down, product designers developed seven state-of-the-art capital vices. They will be powerful creators of new mortal sins for which confessions are a must (if you do not want to be toasted right following your death).
Read the real news in The Times online:
“After 1,500 years the Vatican has brought the seven deadly sins up to date by adding seven new ones for the age of globalisation. The list, published yesterday in L’Osservatore Romano, the Vatican newspaper, came as the Pope deplored the “decreasing sense of sin” in today’s “securalised world” and the falling numbers of Roman Catholics going to confession.”
"Heaven is a spirit state. No physical bodies abide there."
"In three controversial Wednesday Audiences, Pope John Paul II pointed out that the essential characteristic of heaven, hell or purgatory is that they are states of being of a spirit (angel/demon) or human soul, rather than places, as commonly perceived and represented in human language. This language of place is, according to the Pope, inadequate to describe the realities involved, since it is tied to the temporal order in which this world and we exist. In this he is applying the philosophical categories used by the Church in her theology and saying what St. Thomas Aquinas said long before him."
PS: I have been unable to post any comment for the past fifteen minutes. I wonder why. All comments are being withheld for approval, although there is nothing more than an Easter wish. I hope the problem gets fixed soon!
Thank you for this thoughtful and accurate column. It should be required reading for the commentators and panelists on CNN, MSNBC, the network commentators and panelists and, yes, Fox News.
You ask me to choose a candidate in April? I am open to all the candidates. However, I have decided to rule out Obama. If he is the nominee of the Democrats then I will vote for McCain. I see the bias against the Clintons in the Media. I am not sold on Hillary at the moment either. I had high hopes for Obama. I wanted him to win. I had even sent money to his campaign. But I am now sure after seeing Obama's 'typical white' grandmother and releasing the photo of Wright with Clinton that Obama's campaign is neither honorable nor truthful. I no longer trust anything that comes out of that man's mouth. Hence, I cannot recommend a candidate yet, but I can recommend that Obama is definitely not someone I would like to see the president of my country.
I suggested to quit religion because clergies are exacerbating race hate.
Your response:
“With what will you replace them? Paris Hilton? Britney Spears? A faster BMW? A bigger mini mansion? A nose job? A boob job? A Rolex watch? The modern materialist world is empty enough already.
So no thanks, my friend, I'll keep my religion.”
I believe you do not need to replace “them”. My suggestion was to eliminate the middle people, go direct to the boss.
"Take former Presidential candidate Mike Huckabee, for example."
You take him. The Republicans didn't seem think he was ready to be President.
I think Huckabee is a decent man who has no hate in his heart. Still, I think his idea about amending the Constitution to reflect his particular religion is troubling.
So I like Mike - but not for President.
I think Obama is also a decent man who has no hate in his heart. Still his choice to take his children to this church where hate is taught at least some of the time is troubling.
So I like Barak - but not for President.
Both of these men have much to offer the American political discourse. Neither, in my view, is ready for the Presidency.
"It's time to quit religion. Yes, not your church, denomination, sect or religious group, quit religion."
With what will you replace them? Paris Hilton? Britney Spears? A faster BMW? A bigger mini mansion? A nose job? A boob job? A Rolex watch? The modern materialist world is empty enough already.
It's time to quit religion. Yes, not your church, denomination, sect or religious group, quit religion.
No religious people no market for the Wrights, Fallwells, Jacksons, et all.
For those that quit that still believe in God, can communicate with Him/Her directly, no costly intermediaries.
Do not know in depth the bible, koran, etc. to remember or cite the correct verses? Not to worry, your God, Alah, etc. should be perfectly familiar with the books.
This appears to be the common denominator among some of the cross accusations in the posts so far: your church (pastor, priest, rabbi, imam, minister, padre, etc.) have said worse things than mine.
We all are somehow related to a religion. Depending of your age, you have hear during 10, 20 or more years your religion leaders sometimes say horrible things.
Some agree with this preaching, others do not. Some keep silence, others react and say something. Others simply quit, but not before years and years of silence.
What happens is that first person that preaches religion to us is our mother or other significant relative, at an age that we do not even understand what this loved person is telling to us.
No wonder why is tough to quit, but never is late.
After 20 years of sitting in the pews listening to Jeremiah Wright, calling him your spiritual advisor and mentor, writing a books based on his sermons, allowing him to marry you, and baptize your children, he becomes more than a pastor you hardly know.
What did Obama and his family listen to in those pews for 20 years. Jeremiah Wright spewing the hatred of his own mentor, James Cone.
James Cone's Black Liberation theology
The theologian explains:
Christ is black therefore not because of some cultural or psychological need of black people, but because and only because Christ really enters into our world where the poor were despised and the
black are, disclosing that he is with them enduring humiliation and pain and transforming oppressed slaves into liberating servants.
Rather than viewing God as a sovereign being who does as he wills according to his purposes, Cone insists God must do what we want him to do, or we must reject him.
What the black community wants, Cone says, is for God to assist in its goal of destroying "the white enemy."
Black theology refuses to accept a God who is not identified totally with the goals of the black community. If God is not for us and against white people, then he is a murderer, and we had better kill him.
The task of black theology is to kill gods who do not belong to the black community
... Black theology will accept only the love of God which participates in the destruction of the white enemy. What we need is the divine love as expressed in Black Power, which is the power of black people
to destroy their oppressors here and now by any means at their disposal. Unless God is participating in this holy activity, we must reject his love.
I agree with you; however I do no like any of the other candidates either. Daniel in the Lion's Den's post @ 3/21/08 at 10:38 AM should have asked you "what you like about the other candidates" instead of telling you to stop talking that way about Obama.
No one has the right to dictate to you how to express your views regarding Obama.
The problem is on these forums when you express something that is not in agreement with others they criticize your method of expression with the goal of "shutting you down."
Feel free to continue to use your right of free speech just like they do.
You said a lot of bad things about Obama. You spent alot of effort trying to tear him down. Yet, of the 3 candidates running for President, I like him best, and he is the one that I hope wins.
If you do not want him to win, then why not, instead of going on a rant tearing him down, why don't your promote the one that you like best, and try to persuade people to vote for that person. I would be a little more open to that kind of arguing.
I am always been suspicious of people who seek to build themselves up by tearing other people down. In fact, that forces me take a closer look at the person they are trying to tear down, and seek out the underlying motivations.
Obama supporters cannot get past the fact that it is no longer an issue of what Wright said but it is all about Obama's words and judgment on how he has handled the broadcasting of Wright's words. America invented HIV to kill and subjugate Blacks ... Wright said that among many other things.
How does Obama stand ask for Imus to be kicked off the air a few months earlier, stand and say he never heard Wright say anything "incendiary" four days earlier, and then when the story won't go away about his inconvenient 'uncle', comes out with that he did hear 'controversial' statements and equates the hate and bigotry of a pastor making humping motions at the pulpit with his white grandmother around the kitchen table!!! Only followers can be fooled by such rhetoric, and they clearly are.
Obama lied and politicians lie. So get over it. Obama is a lousy politican, and so start asking what the heck has he done? He wants to be a Unifier ... Okay.. so what did he do to unify his church? He heard all these controversial things at his church, he hear all this hate against the whites at the church, so what did he do?
Obama the politician shows incredible bad judgment at the very few things that are known about him. Rezko .. a bone head decision by his own words.
Wright ... 20 years of calling him 'uncle' and listening to controversial sermons and doing nothing?
Steyn has this at his site and it captures Obama fairly well. And people should simply ignore Obama's words?
****************************
Old Barack:
Don’t tell me words don’t matter.
‘I have a dream.’ Just words?
‘We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal.’ Just words?
‘We have nothing to fear but fear itself.’ Just words? Just speeches?
New Barack:
'God damn America.' Just words.
'US government created Aids, supplied drugs to our community.' Just words.
'US of KKKA.' Just words.
'What we are doing is the same thing al-Qaeda is doing.' Just words.
'Until now, I was never proud of my country.' Just words from my wife.
********************************
Wanna know how to get ourselves past the divisive comments of Obama's pastor?
Easy. Pretend that Obama is a Republican. Many Republicans attend churches that preach divisive hate week after week, and that doesn't seem to hurt them. In the "right" parts of the country, that actually gets them elected.
Sometimes, the candidate himself is a pastor in a hate-preaching religious sect.
Take former Presidential candidate Mike Huckabee, for example.
Huckabee is a pastor in the Southern Baptist denomination. A very high official in the Southern Baptist Convention, Wiley Drake, has actively been praying for the DEATHS of certain religious freedom activists* -- and the rest of the leadership of the SBC refuses to repudiate him.
Here, we have a high official in the SBC issuing, for all intents and purposes, a death fatwa -- yet this hasn't been brought to bear against Huckabee's candidacy whatsoever.
Yes, indeed, the argument can be made that affiliation with a church can be considered a sharing of values. But the argument ONLY seems to be made when you're a Democrat.
If you're a Republican, your pastor or denomination can house the most vile, hateful leaders -- and nobody utters a word.
OK, let's see here. Clinton has been in the Senate for 7-plus years, has basically done nothing for New York, and yet she has a bastion of supporters who feel she'd be a great President. Mindful as I am that they still cannot qualify their reasoning, we now find ourselves on the verge of collapsing Obama's campaign on the basis of some rhetoric which he didn't even speak.
His rebukes weren't to the satifaction of many people, but the same logic does NOT apply to the Hillary camp when calling her accomplishments into question. That is just not unsatisfactory enough.
It is ghastly to witness the brain activity of the common voter in this country. Will a loud, boistrous pastor ruin a possible legitimate candidacy because people cannot (nor are willing) to separate the two? Hasn't anyone a relative who says many obnoxious things at which we roll our eyes? Should we instead rebuke them in front of everyone in the room now? Would that be satifactory?
Because apparently, being a Senator for over 7 years and accomplishing NOTHING is not worthy of the same rebuke.
As an Indian-Australian I will not respond to the political implication of the issue being discussed.
But I will try to respond as a general theme: am I to be held responsible for what somebody else says or does? NO! NO! NO! I do not even want to be held responsible for what my mother thinks or says or does, nor do I want her to be held responsible for my thoughts, words or actions. On judgement day each one of us will have to answer only for our own lives, our actions and non-actions, not that of others. It is hard enough taking responsibility for our own wrong doings...
Am I to be held responsible for the views and life of my parish priest? God forbid!
If your pastor says something you don't agree with is one thing, to listen to his opinions in agreement for 20 years and repudiate it only after it becomes public is different.
The idea that Wright is like a "crazy uncle" is the most manipulative argument I ever heard, because everybody has one and it seems so innocent. The difference is that you can't choose your family but you can choose your church.
What was the question? I agree with Rev. Wright and I am an Atheist. Why do the theists get all upset when their leaders tell them the way it is. Do they go church shopping to find the kindest soft soaping churches and their leaders? Someone must tell them that preaching and the bible is not about nicey nicey it is about going to hell if you don't think the way we tell you to think!
What was the question? I agree with Rev. Wright and I am an Atheist. Why do the theists get all upset when their leaders tell them the way it is. Do they go church shopping to find the kindest soft soaping churches and their leaders? Someone must tell them that preaching and the bible is not about nicey nicey it is about going to hell if you don't think the way we tell you to think!
What was the question? I agree with Rev. Wright and I am an Atheist. Why do the theists get all upset when their leaders tell them the way it is. Do they go church shopping to find the kindest soft soaping churches and their leaders? Someone must tell them that preaching and the bible is not about nicey nicey it is about going to hell if you don't think the way we tell you to think!
What was the question? I agree with Rev. Wright and I am an Atheist. Why do the theists get all upset when their leaders tell them the way it is. Do they go church shopping to find the kindest soft soaping churches and their leaders? Someone must tell them that preaching and the bible is not about nicey nicey it is about going to hell if you don't think the way we tell you to think!
What was the question? I agree with Rev. Wright and I am an Atheist. Why do the theists get all upset when their leaders tell them the way it is. Do they go church shopping to find the kindest soft soaping churches and their leaders? Someone must tell them that preaching and the bible is not about nicey nicey it is about going to hell if you don't think the way we tell you to think!
What was the question? I agree with Rev. Wright and I am an Atheist. Why do the theists get all upset when their leaders tell them the way it is. Do they go church shopping to find the kindest soft soaping churches and their leaders? Someone must tell them that preaching and the bible is not about nicey nicey it is about going to hell if you don't think the way we tell you to think!
What was the question? I agree with Rev. Wright and I am an Atheist. Why do the theists get all upset when their leaders tell them the way it is. Do they go church shopping to find the kindest soft soaping churches and their leaders? Someone must tell them that preaching and the bible is not about nicey nicey it is about going to hell if you don't think the way we tell you to think!
What was the question? I agree with Rev. Wright and I am an Atheist. Why do the theists get all upset when their leaders tell them the way it is. Do they go church shopping to find the kindest soft soaping churches and their leaders? Someone must tell them that preaching and the bible is not about nicey nicey it is about going to hell if you don't think the way we tell you to think!
I've been an Episcopalian for many, many years and until recently I have never encountered a Priest that included politics into the sermon. We had a new Priest who was injecting his political leanings which had overtones of "it's all America's fault for whatever is wrong in this world, or possibly Israel's". I spoke to the Priest and told him how offended I was by his sermons and that I didn't come to church to hear politics from either the left or the right. I did finally leave the church. We have a very small congregation and when 40 other members left I guess the priest saw the light and went back to preaching the Gospel. I have returned to the church. Obama could have done the same.
I've been an Episcopalian for many, many years and until recently I have never encountered a Priest that included politics into the sermon. We had a new Priest who was injecting his political leanings which had overtones of "it's all America's fault for whatever is wrong in this world, or possibly Israel's". I spoke to the Priest and told him how offended I was by his sermons and that I didn't come to church to hear politics from either the left or the right. I did finally leave the church. We have a very small congregation and when 40 other members left I guess the priest saw the light and went back to preaching the Gospel. I have returned to the church. Obama could have done the same.
I've been an Episcopalian for many, many years and until recently I have never encountered a Priest that included politics into the sermon. We had a new Priest who was injecting his political leanings which had overtones of "it's all America's fault for whatever is wrong in this world, or possibly Israel's". I spoke to the Priest and told him how offended I was by his sermons and that I didn't come to church to hear politics from either the left or the right. I did finally leave the church. We have a very small congregation and when 40 other members left I guess the priest saw the light and went back to preaching the Gospel. I have returned to the church. Obama could have done the same.
Barak Obama's speech was good. And do you know why? Because he actually said something.
When most public officials speak, they are just running out the clock, talk, talk, talk, words, words, words, any words will do, a recipe from Julia Child's cook book will do as well as anything, just anything, to run out the clock, to get to the end, without making a mistake.
So, it sounds extra-special good, to hear someone give a speech in which they actually say something. I think even the Obama-bashers have to agree, it is nice to hear someone say something, in this, the hollowest and most empty of times.
probably the best and most rational discussion of this. it is so funny how many people who are talking about this are doing so from such fragile glass houses.
First they said Obama was a Muslim. Now they don't like his Pastor or his church.
But, hey, guess, what?
It IS a church, and the pastor there IS a Christian.
What do all the Obama-bashers expect? That Obama should be a Southern Baptist? I think that outfit is just a little too white, too redneck, and too racist for someone like him.
Yes! Time For A Change of a Better DEMOCRATS, Time For Hillary! YHEA!
Mr. Obama simply pointed out a generational difference in the experience of his grandmother and his pastor. That does not explain to me why he is willing to continue to attend a church and listen to sermons that damn the United States.
Mr. Obama's attempt to place this issue within the broader context of generational change in race relations is political manipulation at its worst. Shame on you, Barack Obama.
Both your grandmother and your pastor deserve better from you. Shame for accepting 'secret' help from the Anti-America "Nation of Islam" , in fact, without your Grandmothers knowledge all this time, until you have been exposed.
Now you are 'Situationaly lying' through your mesmerizing unique & powerful (hence your secret manipulator ) 'Baratone Voice & using slick selection of Words through Psychology experts, like Oprah‘s Mr. PHIL’s advice on what to say to “The People” etc.., with intent to trick "THE PEOPLE", is a poor oss lame excuse, regardless if Your Polygamous Black Islamic Poppa Abandoned you & your White Momma for another Black Woman(s)! Like Father, like Son!
Obama, you stinck too much of Islam, an Anti-American System!????
SHAME on OBAMA who received passed support from the Nation Of (anti-U.S.A.) Islam!
Shame on Oprah Winfrey who has hired Nation Of Islam Guards! Shame on Luis Farrakhan!
Shame on REV. WRIGHT who's name should be changed to Rev Wrong!
Shame on N.A.A.C.P. For secretly working with Nation Of Islam!
Mr. Obama simply pointed out a generational difference in the experience of his grandmother and his pastor. That does not explain to me why he is willing to continue to attend a church and listen to sermons that damn the United States. Mr. Obama's attempt to place this issue within the broader context of generational change in race relations is political manipulation at its worst. Shame on you, Barack Obama. Both your grandmother and your pastor deserve better from you. Shame for accepting 'secret' help from the Ant-America 'Nation of Islam."
This entire "issue" surrounding Barack Obama and his "former" pastor is ridiculous and is not even worthy of being an issue. Come on, people! Married couples don't always agree. Does one leave her husband because their opinions differ on certain matters? Or because he used a word that she found unsavory? Do best friends part forever and end a friendship because one has said something that was troubling to the other? I was myself a member of a church for 13 years where the pastor's sermon was sometimes in direct opposition to my own position. Did I leave the church? No. Did I confront the pastor? At times. But was that a reason to sever all ties because we sometimes saw things differently? Absolutely not. We are ALL mortal beings, subject to the same mistakes, foibles and missteps in judgment. Pastors are NOT exempt. I found myself so very proud of Barack Obama yesterday for -- first of all -- not abandoning someone who has given him good guidance and counsel throughout many years of his life; and second, for being man enough, and indeed, presidential enough, to talk in substantive terms about a subject that is too often skirted over, swept under the rug, and ignored. This Union is NOT perfect, and if we don't follow his advice, it will never even come close.
What about the man that advocated the spread of slavery into the American West? That was Thomas Jefferson.
What about the man who vowed that no black man would ever be the political equal of any white man? That was Abraham Lincoln.
What about the man who opined that it would take at least two hundred thousand years of evolution before blacks had the mental and emotional capacities that whites have today? That was Teddy Roosevelt.
Dear Sally: It is truly long past the time when you should end your column. Your attitude is a conflation of politics with religion added in to make things confusing.... Hey, when do you want to publish a photo of Jon Meacham....is he as good looking as you? But really, the column is not worthy of print, and again really, what people believe or say they believe defines them as persons, not things. Obama's beliefs what ever they are - and right now who could define him in a worth while way - will be espoused by him in the oval office if he is elected....right?The secular creed of separation of church and state is a type of urban myth of the devour secular religious believers. Come to think of it, years ago Secularism...of the type you use to interpret religion was judged a religion by the Supreme Court. Perhaps you can seek out agreement for yyour secular beliefs rather than pontificate on what you don't know. Best wishes.
Dear Sally: It is truly long past the time when you should end your column. Your attitude is a conflation of politics with religion added in to make things confusing.... Hey, when do you want to publish a photo of Jon Meacham....is he as good looking as you? But really, the column is not worthy of print, and again really, what people believe or say they believe defines them as persons, not things. Obama's beliefs what ever they are - and right now who could define him in a worth while way - will be espoused by him in the oval office if he is elected....right?The secular creed of separation of church and state is a type of urban myth of the devour secular religious believers. Come to think of it, years ago Secularism...of the type you use to interpret religion was judged a religion by the Supreme Court. Perhaps you can seek out agreement for yyour secular beliefs rather than pontificate on what you don't know. Best wishes.
Dear Sally; it really is long past time when you should end your brutally confused column. It appears clear you fail to have the faintest idea of the nature of belief.
NOTICE: iNTENT To SUE after failing to heed me et al humble request:
ATTENTION: WAPO, N.Y. Times, N.Y.Post, et al:
Ye have used "Bad Judgement" and Ye have openly Discriminated against Us and ye are also in out-right (wrong) "ViOLATION" of This Holy Cosmic Nations U.S. CONSTiTUTiON, Federal Law(s) (i.e., FCC Rules etc..) Federal Court Order.. etc..
"i" Warned ye!
NOTE BLOGGERS Of The WORLD, here on CYBER-SPACE et al:
"i" , WE, will Post , On O.U.R. APOCALYPTIC WEb Site, the Status of THE LAW SUTE AGAINST the Party's mentioned Above, i.e. NEWSWEEK, et al! Thank You!
Note: Please do not click on blue, simply key-in black the letters, thanka shame!:
HELLO WORLD!
Please HU {MATE} S, not HUMANS, Visit Us from time to TiME. Thanka Shame!
E=eponymousECLATi, iS The NEW-SONG & e=mc2, iS FiAT-LUX!
Barack Obama's gave one of the most powerful political speech in recent politic history. The topic happened to be on the racial issues. The speech was inspirational, described in details the modern racial issues from an historical perspective, and will help unit more americans: not all americans, but more. He laid a big step in the good direction. I would like to hear this type of speech (inspirational, historical and unifier) more often from politicians. I think that Obama would be a great president. He has already a positive impact on America and elsewhere in the world, serving as role model for many people, independently from the race, gender and religion.
Please do not tar all white people with the same racist brush. Not all of us are racists and haters. This kind of thinking is the same as Rev. Wright's. Like Sen. Obama said earlier, we need to move past this if we're going to make a better America.
This 40-something white Pagan woman from the 'burbs certainly appreciates your viewpoint. But let's try to move past saying "all blacks" or "all whites" (or "all Hispanics/Asians/Indians, etc." Not all white people want to fly the Confederate flag and burn a cross on your lawn. Not all Christians want to drag me out and burn me at the stake. (I'm sure that, if they ever do show up on my front lawn, Spiderman2 will be leading them.) Not all Muslims are terrorists.
For my part - yeah, the "God d**n America" was cringe-worthy. I'm sure that a lot of people in the pews cringed at those words, too. Did they leave the church as well? No. In Alcoholics Anonymous, they have a saying, "take what you like and leave the rest." I'm sure that's what Obama did WRT Rev. Wright's sermons. Took what he liked, then left the rest. Besides, who's to say that he or other members of the congregation didn't say, "hey Rev, tone it down a little" and Wright refused?
Does Barack Obama love America? Undoubtedly. He proved that today, by calling us to make a better America. It doesn't take a (made in China) flag pin to show your love of country. Does Michelle love America? I'm sure that she does, or she wouldn't be subjecting her family to this kind of public scrutiny. She may not be proud of some of the things that have been done in the past, but neither am I. Does Pastor Wright love America? He fought for it, in the Marines and Navy. Are his words any more damning than several white preachers, who say that America is damned because we allow gays, abortion, etc. and that want to overthrow the Constitution and establish a theocracy? I'd take Rev. Wright over the Dominionists any day. At least he could find common ground with Pagans - and I'm sure that I have some friends who could tell him more about African religion.
White people are so stupid - they refuse to see that their bigotry and that Dubya is more anti-American than Obama
Whites are so ignorant to proclaim -that simply because one loves the potential America more than the America of the past and present - that one is a bigot.
Whites are bigots because they expect blacks to be patriotic and to love a America - that is dysfunctional and racist.
Who can be love an America that has not been good to black people?
All Comments (278)
I don't know what Rev. Wright or Sen. Obama have to apologize for. Can't a black person in America, especially a community leader such as Wright, be angry with the racism and suffering and nationalistic arrogance happening still with America? Can't they speak out? I don't know what Obama has to qualify in his support. Wright is his personal minister. Obama need not agree with everything Wright says, nor need he explain: they are Wright's words, not Obama's.
As a white guy, I just feel the backlash is ultimately tied to the racist viewpoint of "Oh, we got ourselves an uppity Negro on our hands." Or "My God, maybe Obama actually has black ancestry."
A strong and moral nation should be able to accept criticism (from Wright) and differences of opinion. We should fear slamming down on outspokenness.
April 13, 2008 11:43 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on April 13, 2008 11:43
The Bible also says not to bear false witness against our neighbor. The repeated, out-of-context mischaracterization of Rev. Wright's remarks does just that. Why doesn't anyone in the media (with the possible exception of Roland Martin) quote Rev. Wright directly following the "incendiary" remarks: "Turn to your neighbor and say 'forgive him for the God damn..."? Did you know they were there? Did you bother to listen to the whole sermon?
As far as Obama goes, it would be un-Christian of him to reject Rev. Wright, the man, whatever he thought of his ideas. It would also be contrary to his goal of reaching out to people who disagree with us on some things in order to act on our common values. Obama walks the talk.
March 27, 2008 8:05 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 27, 2008 20:05
The Bible also says not to bear false witness against our neighbor. The repeated, out-of-context mischaracterization of Rev. Wright's remarks does just that. Why doesn't anyone in the media (with the possible exception of Roland Martin) quote Rev. Wright directly following the "incendiary" remarks: "Turn to your neighbor and say 'forgive him for the God damn..."? Did you know they were there? Did you bother to listen to the whole sermon?
As far as Obama goes, it would be un-Christian of him to reject Rev. Wright, the man, whatever he thought of his ideas. It would also be contrary to his goal of reaching out to people who disagree with us on some things in order to act on our common values. Obama walks the talk.
March 27, 2008 4:41 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 27, 2008 16:41
The Bible also says not to bear false witness against our neighbor. The repeated, out-of-context mischaracterization of Rev. Wright's remarks does just that. Why doesn't anyone in the media (with the possible exception of Roland Martin) quote Rev. Wright directly following the "incendiary" remarks: "Turn to your neighbor and say 'forgive him for the God damn..."? Did you know they were there? Did you bother to listen to the whole sermon?
As far as Obama goes, it would be un-Christian of him to reject Rev. Wright, the man, whatever he thought of his ideas. It would also be contrary to his goal of reaching out to people who disagree with us on some things in order to act on our common values. Obama walks the talk.
March 27, 2008 4:22 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 27, 2008 16:22
Many thanks for your article, Sally. It lends much needed context.
As to those of Pastor Wright's comments that relate to Israel, I hope they might somehow bring about, perhaps for the first time, open and free discussion of the inordinate influence Israel and its American surrogates have, and have had for decades, on American foreign policy in the Middle East. Professor Mearsheimer and Wald did this in their book last year and got "creamed" by the media and others for having dared to do so.
It reminded me of this statement of Sen. J. William Fulbright, then Chrm. of the Senate's Foreign Relations Committee, made in 1973.
"(Unfortunately) U.S. foreign policy, as it relates to the Middle East, is conceived in Tel Aviv and born in Washington."
And so it appears to have continued to this day. (Witness, above all, Israeli and American Zionist influence and pressure to cause America to start its current war against Iraq.)
Moreover, the commments of Nixon and Graham about the inordinately high percentage of Jews in the America media appear to apply even more so today. And that truth is not without effect on the "bent" of the news Americans are given as to events anywhere in the Middle East.
In all, Jews compose 1.8% of Americans. Only about 50% of those Jews consider themselves Zionists, i.e., subscribers to "Israel, right or wrong!" And yet, virtually the entire American Congress of both houses is completely intimidated by "pacs" such as American-Israeli Political Affairs Committee (AIPAC). With all of Israel's brutal land occupations in the Middle East for the last 35 years, any reference to them in Washington, D.C. is a total taboo.
What a blessing it would be for America if these realities were permitted to be freely discussed in America and among its media.
March 27, 2008 2:20 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 27, 2008 14:20
Thank you Ms. Quinn for an honest and telling article. It was also a pleasure to see your conversation with Andrea Mitchell on MSNBC (3\27\08). It's sad to see a "news station" speculate, make assertions, harp on and hold accountable Sen. Obama for statements he didn't make nor, as he clearly stated, disagrees with. Although he clearly said why he remained a member of the Church, he keeps getting asked the same question. It seems some will not be satiated until Obama says what "They" WANT to hear. The hypocrisy of it all is most disturbing. Their agenda is quite clear.
March 27, 2008 2:08 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 27, 2008 14:08
thank you so much, Sally, for your contribution to putting this issue in its proper context.
March 27, 2008 1:47 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 27, 2008 13:47
A wonderful article and perspective.
March 27, 2008 1:17 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 27, 2008 13:17
Clinton says she would have split with Obama's pastor
http://www.iht.com/articles/ap/2008/03/26/america/NA-POL-US-Elections.php
Hillary's Nasty Pastorate
http://www.thenation.com/doc/20080331/ehrenreich
March 25, 2008 10:54 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 25, 2008 22:54
Good Morning,
Each time I turn on my computer and just happen onto a site never visited before, just like today, I find the most shocking information.
Your article is the very crucks of the matter. That we are human being first and foremost. Yes, and as you have further documented, the cracks in the armor are very apparent. And, more clearly, the 1st Amendment Right to Freedom of Speech is still not extended to African Americans.
We can only provide the shoulder to cry on. Apparently, we can never be a voice to be heard.
A 60 Plus African American Female
March 25, 2008 12:07 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 25, 2008 12:07
i didnt see any murder in the Bible. but i did see who didnt study its language.
March 22, 2008 12:58 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 22, 2008 12:58
it is not in the Bible, it is not USA that murders innocent people, it is the Presidency system. why do USA elect a President?
could You make Presidency like United Nations and European Union? nations, countries, states in turn? and from each state may there be a council.
can You take a Californian Yatcher to speak for in the council?
March 22, 2008 12:48 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 22, 2008 12:48
After market surveys showed that confessions in the Roman Catholic Church are down, product designers developed seven state-of-the-art capital vices. They will be powerful creators of new mortal sins for which confessions are a must (if you do not want to be toasted right following your death).
Read the real news in The Times online:
“After 1,500 years the Vatican has brought the seven deadly sins up to date by adding seven new ones for the age of globalisation. The list, published yesterday in L’Osservatore Romano, the Vatican newspaper, came as the Pope deplored the “decreasing sense of sin” in today’s “securalised world” and the falling numbers of Roman Catholics going to confession.”
See http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/faith/article3517050.ece
Peace to all and best wishes.
JAC
March 22, 2008 8:39 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 22, 2008 08:39
Words with very important theological impact:
"Heaven is a spirit state. No physical bodies abide there."
"In three controversial Wednesday Audiences, Pope John Paul II pointed out that the essential characteristic of heaven, hell or purgatory is that they are states of being of a spirit (angel/demon) or human soul, rather than places, as commonly perceived and represented in human language. This language of place is, according to the Pope, inadequate to describe the realities involved, since it is tied to the temporal order in which this world and we exist. In this he is applying the philosophical categories used by the Church in her theology and saying what St. Thomas Aquinas said long before him."
http://eternal-word.com/library/PAPALDOC/JP2HEAVN.HTM
The Vatican quickly embellished this story with a lot CYAP.
March 22, 2008 6:11 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 22, 2008 06:11
Dear Sally
I wish you a wonderful Easter 2008!
Best wishes
Soja
-------------
PS: I have been unable to post any comment for the past fifteen minutes. I wonder why. All comments are being withheld for approval, although there is nothing more than an Easter wish. I hope the problem gets fixed soon!
March 22, 2008 5:27 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 22, 2008 05:27
Thank you for this thoughtful and accurate column. It should be required reading for the commentators and panelists on CNN, MSNBC, the network commentators and panelists and, yes, Fox News.
March 22, 2008 3:08 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 22, 2008 03:08
Daniel,
You ask me to choose a candidate in April? I am open to all the candidates. However, I have decided to rule out Obama. If he is the nominee of the Democrats then I will vote for McCain. I see the bias against the Clintons in the Media. I am not sold on Hillary at the moment either. I had high hopes for Obama. I wanted him to win. I had even sent money to his campaign. But I am now sure after seeing Obama's 'typical white' grandmother and releasing the photo of Wright with Clinton that Obama's campaign is neither honorable nor truthful. I no longer trust anything that comes out of that man's mouth. Hence, I cannot recommend a candidate yet, but I can recommend that Obama is definitely not someone I would like to see the president of my country.
March 22, 2008 12:31 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 22, 2008 00:31
To JAR,
I suggested to quit religion because clergies are exacerbating race hate.
Your response:
“With what will you replace them? Paris Hilton? Britney Spears? A faster BMW? A bigger mini mansion? A nose job? A boob job? A Rolex watch? The modern materialist world is empty enough already.
So no thanks, my friend, I'll keep my religion.”
I believe you do not need to replace “them”. My suggestion was to eliminate the middle people, go direct to the boss.
Peace for you JAR and other posters and readers.
JAC
March 21, 2008 9:44 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 21, 2008 21:44
ChurchStateWall:
"Take former Presidential candidate Mike Huckabee, for example."
You take him. The Republicans didn't seem think he was ready to be President.
I think Huckabee is a decent man who has no hate in his heart. Still, I think his idea about amending the Constitution to reflect his particular religion is troubling.
So I like Mike - but not for President.
I think Obama is also a decent man who has no hate in his heart. Still his choice to take his children to this church where hate is taught at least some of the time is troubling.
So I like Barak - but not for President.
Both of these men have much to offer the American political discourse. Neither, in my view, is ready for the Presidency.
March 21, 2008 9:42 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 21, 2008 21:42
Just a comment:
"It's time to quit religion. Yes, not your church, denomination, sect or religious group, quit religion."
With what will you replace them? Paris Hilton? Britney Spears? A faster BMW? A bigger mini mansion? A nose job? A boob job? A Rolex watch? The modern materialist world is empty enough already.
So no thanks, my friend, I'll keep my religion.
March 21, 2008 9:13 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 21, 2008 21:13
Religion exacerbating race hate in America ?
It's time to quit religion. Yes, not your church, denomination, sect or religious group, quit religion.
No religious people no market for the Wrights, Fallwells, Jacksons, et all.
For those that quit that still believe in God, can communicate with Him/Her directly, no costly intermediaries.
Do not know in depth the bible, koran, etc. to remember or cite the correct verses? Not to worry, your God, Alah, etc. should be perfectly familiar with the books.
Peace and best wishes to all.
March 21, 2008 7:48 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 21, 2008 19:48
This appears to be the common denominator among some of the cross accusations in the posts so far: your church (pastor, priest, rabbi, imam, minister, padre, etc.) have said worse things than mine.
We all are somehow related to a religion. Depending of your age, you have hear during 10, 20 or more years your religion leaders sometimes say horrible things.
Some agree with this preaching, others do not. Some keep silence, others react and say something. Others simply quit, but not before years and years of silence.
What happens is that first person that preaches religion to us is our mother or other significant relative, at an age that we do not even understand what this loved person is telling to us.
No wonder why is tough to quit, but never is late.
Peace to all and best wishes.
JAC
March 21, 2008 7:09 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 21, 2008 19:09
After 20 years of sitting in the pews listening to Jeremiah Wright, calling him your spiritual advisor and mentor, writing a books based on his sermons, allowing him to marry you, and baptize your children, he becomes more than a pastor you hardly know.
What did Obama and his family listen to in those pews for 20 years. Jeremiah Wright spewing the hatred of his own mentor, James Cone.
James Cone's Black Liberation theology
The theologian explains:
Christ is black therefore not because of some cultural or psychological need of black people, but because and only because Christ really enters into our world where the poor were despised and the
black are, disclosing that he is with them enduring humiliation and pain and transforming oppressed slaves into liberating servants.
Rather than viewing God as a sovereign being who does as he wills according to his purposes, Cone insists God must do what we want him to do, or we must reject him.
What the black community wants, Cone says, is for God to assist in its goal of destroying "the white enemy."
Black theology refuses to accept a God who is not identified totally with the goals of the black community. If God is not for us and against white people, then he is a murderer, and we had better kill him.
The task of black theology is to kill gods who do not belong to the black community
... Black theology will accept only the love of God which participates in the destruction of the white enemy. What we need is the divine love as expressed in Black Power, which is the power of black people
to destroy their oppressors here and now by any means at their disposal. Unless God is participating in this holy activity, we must reject his love.
March 21, 2008 4:39 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 21, 2008 16:39
A. Kafir, @ March 20, 2008 11:28 AM
I agree with you; however I do no like any of the other candidates either. Daniel in the Lion's Den's post @ 3/21/08 at 10:38 AM should have asked you "what you like about the other candidates" instead of telling you to stop talking that way about Obama.
No one has the right to dictate to you how to express your views regarding Obama.
The problem is on these forums when you express something that is not in agreement with others they criticize your method of expression with the goal of "shutting you down."
Feel free to continue to use your right of free speech just like they do.
March 21, 2008 3:38 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 21, 2008 15:38
A Kafir
You said a lot of bad things about Obama. You spent alot of effort trying to tear him down. Yet, of the 3 candidates running for President, I like him best, and he is the one that I hope wins.
If you do not want him to win, then why not, instead of going on a rant tearing him down, why don't your promote the one that you like best, and try to persuade people to vote for that person. I would be a little more open to that kind of arguing.
I am always been suspicious of people who seek to build themselves up by tearing other people down. In fact, that forces me take a closer look at the person they are trying to tear down, and seek out the underlying motivations.
March 21, 2008 10:38 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 21, 2008 10:38
Obama supporters cannot get past the fact that it is no longer an issue of what Wright said but it is all about Obama's words and judgment on how he has handled the broadcasting of Wright's words. America invented HIV to kill and subjugate Blacks ... Wright said that among many other things.
How does Obama stand ask for Imus to be kicked off the air a few months earlier, stand and say he never heard Wright say anything "incendiary" four days earlier, and then when the story won't go away about his inconvenient 'uncle', comes out with that he did hear 'controversial' statements and equates the hate and bigotry of a pastor making humping motions at the pulpit with his white grandmother around the kitchen table!!! Only followers can be fooled by such rhetoric, and they clearly are.
Obama lied and politicians lie. So get over it. Obama is a lousy politican, and so start asking what the heck has he done? He wants to be a Unifier ... Okay.. so what did he do to unify his church? He heard all these controversial things at his church, he hear all this hate against the whites at the church, so what did he do?
Obama the politician shows incredible bad judgment at the very few things that are known about him. Rezko .. a bone head decision by his own words.
Wright ... 20 years of calling him 'uncle' and listening to controversial sermons and doing nothing?
Steyn has this at his site and it captures Obama fairly well. And people should simply ignore Obama's words?
****************************
Old Barack:
Don’t tell me words don’t matter.
‘I have a dream.’ Just words?
‘We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal.’ Just words?
‘We have nothing to fear but fear itself.’ Just words? Just speeches?
New Barack:
'God damn America.' Just words.
'US government created Aids, supplied drugs to our community.' Just words.
'US of KKKA.' Just words.
'What we are doing is the same thing al-Qaeda is doing.' Just words.
'Until now, I was never proud of my country.' Just words from my wife.
********************************
March 20, 2008 11:28 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 20, 2008 11:28
Wanna know how to get ourselves past the divisive comments of Obama's pastor?
Easy. Pretend that Obama is a Republican. Many Republicans attend churches that preach divisive hate week after week, and that doesn't seem to hurt them. In the "right" parts of the country, that actually gets them elected.
Sometimes, the candidate himself is a pastor in a hate-preaching religious sect.
Take former Presidential candidate Mike Huckabee, for example.
Huckabee is a pastor in the Southern Baptist denomination. A very high official in the Southern Baptist Convention, Wiley Drake, has actively been praying for the DEATHS of certain religious freedom activists* -- and the rest of the leadership of the SBC refuses to repudiate him.
Here, we have a high official in the SBC issuing, for all intents and purposes, a death fatwa -- yet this hasn't been brought to bear against Huckabee's candidacy whatsoever.
Yes, indeed, the argument can be made that affiliation with a church can be considered a sharing of values. But the argument ONLY seems to be made when you're a Democrat.
If you're a Republican, your pastor or denomination can house the most vile, hateful leaders -- and nobody utters a word.
http://churchstatewall.typepad.com/
* More info: http://blog.au.org/2008/02/19/the-diabolical-dr-drake-sbc-official-had-more-power-than-sbc-flack-admits/
March 20, 2008 11:09 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 20, 2008 11:09
OK, let's see here. Clinton has been in the Senate for 7-plus years, has basically done nothing for New York, and yet she has a bastion of supporters who feel she'd be a great President. Mindful as I am that they still cannot qualify their reasoning, we now find ourselves on the verge of collapsing Obama's campaign on the basis of some rhetoric which he didn't even speak.
His rebukes weren't to the satifaction of many people, but the same logic does NOT apply to the Hillary camp when calling her accomplishments into question. That is just not unsatisfactory enough.
It is ghastly to witness the brain activity of the common voter in this country. Will a loud, boistrous pastor ruin a possible legitimate candidacy because people cannot (nor are willing) to separate the two? Hasn't anyone a relative who says many obnoxious things at which we roll our eyes? Should we instead rebuke them in front of everyone in the room now? Would that be satifactory?
Because apparently, being a Senator for over 7 years and accomplishing NOTHING is not worthy of the same rebuke.
March 20, 2008 9:50 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 20, 2008 09:50
Dear Sally
As an Indian-Australian I will not respond to the political implication of the issue being discussed.
But I will try to respond as a general theme: am I to be held responsible for what somebody else says or does? NO! NO! NO! I do not even want to be held responsible for what my mother thinks or says or does, nor do I want her to be held responsible for my thoughts, words or actions. On judgement day each one of us will have to answer only for our own lives, our actions and non-actions, not that of others. It is hard enough taking responsibility for our own wrong doings...
Am I to be held responsible for the views and life of my parish priest? God forbid!
Soja John Thaikattil
Sydney, Australia
March 20, 2008 5:37 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 20, 2008 05:37
If your pastor says something you don't agree with is one thing, to listen to his opinions in agreement for 20 years and repudiate it only after it becomes public is different.
The idea that Wright is like a "crazy uncle" is the most manipulative argument I ever heard, because everybody has one and it seems so innocent. The difference is that you can't choose your family but you can choose your church.
March 20, 2008 3:35 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 20, 2008 03:35
What was the question? I agree with Rev. Wright and I am an Atheist. Why do the theists get all upset when their leaders tell them the way it is. Do they go church shopping to find the kindest soft soaping churches and their leaders? Someone must tell them that preaching and the bible is not about nicey nicey it is about going to hell if you don't think the way we tell you to think!
March 19, 2008 5:22 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 19, 2008 17:22
What was the question? I agree with Rev. Wright and I am an Atheist. Why do the theists get all upset when their leaders tell them the way it is. Do they go church shopping to find the kindest soft soaping churches and their leaders? Someone must tell them that preaching and the bible is not about nicey nicey it is about going to hell if you don't think the way we tell you to think!
March 19, 2008 5:21 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 19, 2008 17:21
What was the question? I agree with Rev. Wright and I am an Atheist. Why do the theists get all upset when their leaders tell them the way it is. Do they go church shopping to find the kindest soft soaping churches and their leaders? Someone must tell them that preaching and the bible is not about nicey nicey it is about going to hell if you don't think the way we tell you to think!
March 19, 2008 5:21 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 19, 2008 17:21
What was the question? I agree with Rev. Wright and I am an Atheist. Why do the theists get all upset when their leaders tell them the way it is. Do they go church shopping to find the kindest soft soaping churches and their leaders? Someone must tell them that preaching and the bible is not about nicey nicey it is about going to hell if you don't think the way we tell you to think!
March 19, 2008 5:21 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 19, 2008 17:21
What was the question? I agree with Rev. Wright and I am an Atheist. Why do the theists get all upset when their leaders tell them the way it is. Do they go church shopping to find the kindest soft soaping churches and their leaders? Someone must tell them that preaching and the bible is not about nicey nicey it is about going to hell if you don't think the way we tell you to think!
March 19, 2008 5:21 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 19, 2008 17:21
What was the question? I agree with Rev. Wright and I am an Atheist. Why do the theists get all upset when their leaders tell them the way it is. Do they go church shopping to find the kindest soft soaping churches and their leaders? Someone must tell them that preaching and the bible is not about nicey nicey it is about going to hell if you don't think the way we tell you to think!
March 19, 2008 5:21 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 19, 2008 17:21
What was the question? I agree with Rev. Wright and I am an Atheist. Why do the theists get all upset when their leaders tell them the way it is. Do they go church shopping to find the kindest soft soaping churches and their leaders? Someone must tell them that preaching and the bible is not about nicey nicey it is about going to hell if you don't think the way we tell you to think!
March 19, 2008 5:21 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 19, 2008 17:21
What was the question? I agree with Rev. Wright and I am an Atheist. Why do the theists get all upset when their leaders tell them the way it is. Do they go church shopping to find the kindest soft soaping churches and their leaders? Someone must tell them that preaching and the bible is not about nicey nicey it is about going to hell if you don't think the way we tell you to think!
March 19, 2008 5:21 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 19, 2008 17:21
I've been an Episcopalian for many, many years and until recently I have never encountered a Priest that included politics into the sermon. We had a new Priest who was injecting his political leanings which had overtones of "it's all America's fault for whatever is wrong in this world, or possibly Israel's". I spoke to the Priest and told him how offended I was by his sermons and that I didn't come to church to hear politics from either the left or the right. I did finally leave the church. We have a very small congregation and when 40 other members left I guess the priest saw the light and went back to preaching the Gospel. I have returned to the church. Obama could have done the same.
March 19, 2008 2:02 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 19, 2008 14:02
I've been an Episcopalian for many, many years and until recently I have never encountered a Priest that included politics into the sermon. We had a new Priest who was injecting his political leanings which had overtones of "it's all America's fault for whatever is wrong in this world, or possibly Israel's". I spoke to the Priest and told him how offended I was by his sermons and that I didn't come to church to hear politics from either the left or the right. I did finally leave the church. We have a very small congregation and when 40 other members left I guess the priest saw the light and went back to preaching the Gospel. I have returned to the church. Obama could have done the same.
March 19, 2008 2:00 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 19, 2008 14:00
I've been an Episcopalian for many, many years and until recently I have never encountered a Priest that included politics into the sermon. We had a new Priest who was injecting his political leanings which had overtones of "it's all America's fault for whatever is wrong in this world, or possibly Israel's". I spoke to the Priest and told him how offended I was by his sermons and that I didn't come to church to hear politics from either the left or the right. I did finally leave the church. We have a very small congregation and when 40 other members left I guess the priest saw the light and went back to preaching the Gospel. I have returned to the church. Obama could have done the same.
March 19, 2008 2:00 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 19, 2008 14:00
Barak Obama's speech was good. And do you know why? Because he actually said something.
When most public officials speak, they are just running out the clock, talk, talk, talk, words, words, words, any words will do, a recipe from Julia Child's cook book will do as well as anything, just anything, to run out the clock, to get to the end, without making a mistake.
So, it sounds extra-special good, to hear someone give a speech in which they actually say something. I think even the Obama-bashers have to agree, it is nice to hear someone say something, in this, the hollowest and most empty of times.
March 19, 2008 1:03 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 19, 2008 13:03
probably the best and most rational discussion of this. it is so funny how many people who are talking about this are doing so from such fragile glass houses.
March 19, 2008 12:56 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 19, 2008 12:56
First they said Obama was a Muslim. Now they don't like his Pastor or his church.
But, hey, guess, what?
It IS a church, and the pastor there IS a Christian.
What do all the Obama-bashers expect? That Obama should be a Southern Baptist? I think that outfit is just a little too white, too redneck, and too racist for someone like him.
March 19, 2008 12:32 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 19, 2008 12:32
Yes! Time For A Change of a Better DEMOCRATS, Time For Hillary! YHEA!
Mr. Obama simply pointed out a generational difference in the experience of his grandmother and his pastor. That does not explain to me why he is willing to continue to attend a church and listen to sermons that damn the United States.
Mr. Obama's attempt to place this issue within the broader context of generational change in race relations is political manipulation at its worst. Shame on you, Barack Obama.
Both your grandmother and your pastor deserve better from you. Shame for accepting 'secret' help from the Anti-America "Nation of Islam" , in fact, without your Grandmothers knowledge all this time, until you have been exposed.
Now you are 'Situationaly lying' through your mesmerizing unique & powerful (hence your secret manipulator ) 'Baratone Voice & using slick selection of Words through Psychology experts, like Oprah‘s Mr. PHIL’s advice on what to say to “The People” etc.., with intent to trick "THE PEOPLE", is a poor oss lame excuse, regardless if Your Polygamous Black Islamic Poppa Abandoned you & your White Momma for another Black Woman(s)! Like Father, like Son!
Obama, you stinck too much of Islam, an Anti-American System!????
SHAME on OBAMA who received passed support from the Nation Of (anti-U.S.A.) Islam!
Shame on Oprah Winfrey who has hired Nation Of Islam Guards! Shame on Luis Farrakhan!
Shame on REV. WRIGHT who's name should be changed to Rev Wrong!
Shame on N.A.A.C.P. For secretly working with Nation Of Islam!
Shame on "HYMiE" Hater Jesse Jackson, et al!
Guilt by Association? YES!
March 19, 2008 11:30 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 19, 2008 11:30
Mr. Obama simply pointed out a generational difference in the experience of his grandmother and his pastor. That does not explain to me why he is willing to continue to attend a church and listen to sermons that damn the United States. Mr. Obama's attempt to place this issue within the broader context of generational change in race relations is political manipulation at its worst. Shame on you, Barack Obama. Both your grandmother and your pastor deserve better from you. Shame for accepting 'secret' help from the Ant-America 'Nation of Islam."
March 19, 2008 10:40 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 19, 2008 10:40
LOVEO & LOVEA is arrived. We are Here!
...~~~~~o.... -----___
.~~~~....(♥)...............\
~~~~~................]={|)...) HELLO WORLD!
.~~~~....(♥).......___./
...~~~~~o--------
=
~~~~o ----
..~~~~(♥) \
~~~~~ ]={}..) YA YA!
..~~~~(♥) /
~~~~o ----
Please visit :jo:zevz.us: OR
♦.J
♦♦..O
♦♦♦...Z
♦♦♦♦....E
♦♦♦♦♦....V
♦♦♦♦♦♦.....Z.us “WE are DiAMOND-PEOPLE“ OR
:j:
:o:
:z:
:e:
:v:
:z.us:
THANK YE ALL!
March 19, 2008 10:03 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 19, 2008 10:03
This entire "issue" surrounding Barack Obama and his "former" pastor is ridiculous and is not even worthy of being an issue. Come on, people! Married couples don't always agree. Does one leave her husband because their opinions differ on certain matters? Or because he used a word that she found unsavory? Do best friends part forever and end a friendship because one has said something that was troubling to the other? I was myself a member of a church for 13 years where the pastor's sermon was sometimes in direct opposition to my own position. Did I leave the church? No. Did I confront the pastor? At times. But was that a reason to sever all ties because we sometimes saw things differently? Absolutely not. We are ALL mortal beings, subject to the same mistakes, foibles and missteps in judgment. Pastors are NOT exempt. I found myself so very proud of Barack Obama yesterday for -- first of all -- not abandoning someone who has given him good guidance and counsel throughout many years of his life; and second, for being man enough, and indeed, presidential enough, to talk in substantive terms about a subject that is too often skirted over, swept under the rug, and ignored. This Union is NOT perfect, and if we don't follow his advice, it will never even come close.
March 19, 2008 9:49 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 19, 2008 09:49
What about the man that advocated the spread of slavery into the American West? That was Thomas Jefferson.
What about the man who vowed that no black man would ever be the political equal of any white man? That was Abraham Lincoln.
What about the man who opined that it would take at least two hundred thousand years of evolution before blacks had the mental and emotional capacities that whites have today? That was Teddy Roosevelt.
March 19, 2008 9:43 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 19, 2008 09:43
Dear Sally: It is truly long past the time when you should end your column. Your attitude is a conflation of politics with religion added in to make things confusing.... Hey, when do you want to publish a photo of Jon Meacham....is he as good looking as you? But really, the column is not worthy of print, and again really, what people believe or say they believe defines them as persons, not things. Obama's beliefs what ever they are - and right now who could define him in a worth while way - will be espoused by him in the oval office if he is elected....right?The secular creed of separation of church and state is a type of urban myth of the devour secular religious believers. Come to think of it, years ago Secularism...of the type you use to interpret religion was judged a religion by the Supreme Court. Perhaps you can seek out agreement for yyour secular beliefs rather than pontificate on what you don't know. Best wishes.
March 19, 2008 9:23 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 19, 2008 09:23
Dear Sally: It is truly long past the time when you should end your column. Your attitude is a conflation of politics with religion added in to make things confusing.... Hey, when do you want to publish a photo of Jon Meacham....is he as good looking as you? But really, the column is not worthy of print, and again really, what people believe or say they believe defines them as persons, not things. Obama's beliefs what ever they are - and right now who could define him in a worth while way - will be espoused by him in the oval office if he is elected....right?The secular creed of separation of church and state is a type of urban myth of the devour secular religious believers. Come to think of it, years ago Secularism...of the type you use to interpret religion was judged a religion by the Supreme Court. Perhaps you can seek out agreement for yyour secular beliefs rather than pontificate on what you don't know. Best wishes.
March 19, 2008 9:23 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 19, 2008 09:23
Dear Sally; it really is long past time when you should end your brutally confused column. It appears clear you fail to have the faintest idea of the nature of belief.
March 19, 2008 9:00 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 19, 2008 09:00
NOTICE: iNTENT To SUE after failing to heed me et al humble request:
ATTENTION: WAPO, N.Y. Times, N.Y.Post, et al:
Ye have used "Bad Judgement" and Ye have openly Discriminated against Us and ye are also in out-right (wrong) "ViOLATION" of This Holy Cosmic Nations U.S. CONSTiTUTiON, Federal Law(s) (i.e., FCC Rules etc..) Federal Court Order.. etc..
"i" Warned ye!
NOTE BLOGGERS Of The WORLD, here on CYBER-SPACE et al:
"i" , WE, will Post , On O.U.R. APOCALYPTIC WEb Site, the Status of THE LAW SUTE AGAINST the Party's mentioned Above, i.e. NEWSWEEK, et al! Thank You!
Note: Please do not click on blue, simply key-in black the letters, thanka shame!:
HELLO WORLD!
Please HU {MATE} S, not HUMANS, Visit Us from time to TiME. Thanka Shame!
E=eponymousECLATi, iS The NEW-SONG & e=mc2, iS FiAT-LUX!
http://JO][ZE][VZ][.US]
.J
..O
…Z
….E
…..VZ.US
http://JO][ZE][VZ][.US]
.J
..O
…Z
….E
…..VZ.US
http://JO][ZE][VZ][.US]
WAPO, YE SiNNED A GREAT SiN! You will be taught a Great lesson, This is the only Recourse!
March 19, 2008 8:08 AM
March 19, 2008 8:14 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 19, 2008 08:14
Barack Obama's gave one of the most powerful political speech in recent politic history. The topic happened to be on the racial issues. The speech was inspirational, described in details the modern racial issues from an historical perspective, and will help unit more americans: not all americans, but more. He laid a big step in the good direction. I would like to hear this type of speech (inspirational, historical and unifier) more often from politicians. I think that Obama would be a great president. He has already a positive impact on America and elsewhere in the world, serving as role model for many people, independently from the race, gender and religion.
March 19, 2008 3:28 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 19, 2008 03:28
I hope the "race card" does not derail Obama. He is like a breathe of fresh air.
autumn ozog
March 19, 2008 2:48 AM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 19, 2008 02:48
Christian,
Please do not tar all white people with the same racist brush. Not all of us are racists and haters. This kind of thinking is the same as Rev. Wright's. Like Sen. Obama said earlier, we need to move past this if we're going to make a better America.
This 40-something white Pagan woman from the 'burbs certainly appreciates your viewpoint. But let's try to move past saying "all blacks" or "all whites" (or "all Hispanics/Asians/Indians, etc." Not all white people want to fly the Confederate flag and burn a cross on your lawn. Not all Christians want to drag me out and burn me at the stake. (I'm sure that, if they ever do show up on my front lawn, Spiderman2 will be leading them.) Not all Muslims are terrorists.
For my part - yeah, the "God d**n America" was cringe-worthy. I'm sure that a lot of people in the pews cringed at those words, too. Did they leave the church as well? No. In Alcoholics Anonymous, they have a saying, "take what you like and leave the rest." I'm sure that's what Obama did WRT Rev. Wright's sermons. Took what he liked, then left the rest. Besides, who's to say that he or other members of the congregation didn't say, "hey Rev, tone it down a little" and Wright refused?
Does Barack Obama love America? Undoubtedly. He proved that today, by calling us to make a better America. It doesn't take a (made in China) flag pin to show your love of country. Does Michelle love America? I'm sure that she does, or she wouldn't be subjecting her family to this kind of public scrutiny. She may not be proud of some of the things that have been done in the past, but neither am I. Does Pastor Wright love America? He fought for it, in the Marines and Navy. Are his words any more damning than several white preachers, who say that America is damned because we allow gays, abortion, etc. and that want to overthrow the Constitution and establish a theocracy? I'd take Rev. Wright over the Dominionists any day. At least he could find common ground with Pagans - and I'm sure that I have some friends who could tell him more about African religion.
March 18, 2008 11:53 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 18, 2008 23:53
White people are so stupid - they refuse to see that their bigotry and that Dubya is more anti-American than Obama
Whites are so ignorant to proclaim -that simply because one loves the potential America more than the America of the past and present - that one is a bigot.
Whites are bigots because they expect blacks to be patriotic and to love a America - that is dysfunctional and racist.
Who can be love an America that has not been good to black people?
March 18, 2008 11:23 PM | Report Offensive Comments
Posted on March 18, 2008 23:23
Sally Quinn - like many Whites is a bigot.
Why is it that whites like her - don't cause as much furor over racist white conservatives and theri pastors?
Reverand Wright spoke many truths - America is an amazingly corrupt nation - and it is a racist nation.
What is at all incendiary about this?
When Mike Huckabee d