Showing nearly eternal patience, Democrat Barack Obama after twenty years of biting his tongue finally said he was outraged and saddened by the comments of his former pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright.
Obama regretfully said,
“I am outraged by the comments that were made and saddened by the spectacle that we saw yesterday…The person I saw yesterday was not the person that I met 20 years ago…But when he states and then amplifies such ridiculous propositions as the U.S. government somehow being involved in AIDS. … There are no excuses. They offended me. They rightly offend all Americans and they should be denounced.”
“What became clear to me was that he was presenting a worldview that contradicts who I am and what I stand for…And the fact that Rev. Wright would somehow think it is appropriate to command the stage for three or four days in the midst of this major debate it not only makes me angry but it saddens me.”
“I want to make it absolutely clear that I do not subscribe to the views that he expressed…I do not expect those views to be attributed to me…I don’t think anyone could attribute those ideas to me.”
Many experts think Obama’s twenty years of silence reflect his Job-like patience. (Not that he knows who Job is) And it is this patience, according to voters across the country, which would make him one of the greatest Presidents the country has ever seen.
Said one anonymous voter: “Do you know how many politicians would just immediately get angry if their pastor said G%#Damn America? They’d probably get up and walk right out of that church. But not Barack Obama. He listened to it for twenty years before finally losing his patience. He’s amazing.”
It is this same kind of patience that Obama seems willing to extend to terrorist countries like Iran by sitting down and talking with them despite their constant threats of marching Jews into the sea or attacking America.
One Democratic consultant said he felt bad for Obama because of this experience. “That poor man was obviously in pain listening to Rev. Wright for all those years and he never said a word,” he said. “He’s my hero.”
Wright’s incendiary comments have dogged Obama’s presidential campaign and he still waited almost two months before rejecting his former pastor.
But some recalcitrant obnoxious right wing Christian conservatives like Patrick Archbold of CMR continue to attack Obama, even after this display of saintly patience. “Hey look, originally Obama said that he could no more disown Rev. Wright than he could the black community or his white grandmother. As he is now disowning Rev. Wright, I would like to put out an Amber alert for Obama’s grandmother. She probably shouldn’t be expecting a Christmas Card this year.”
April 30, 2008 at 2:16 pm
“It is this same kind of patience that Obama seems willing to extend to terrorist countries like Iran by sitting down and talking with them despite their constant threats of marching Jews into the sea or attacking America.”
What’s the alternative? Going to war with them? The people of Persia and Abyssinia have seen one conquerer, one world power after another. You don’t think they come away with learning a thing or two?
As I have written more than once at my own blog, you have to do one of two things. Either you beat them into total submission (as in, back to the Stone Age), or you stay the hell out of their business, and draw a line that they dare not cross (otherwise known as secure borders). What you do NOT do, is go into the enemy’s home territory that they know like the back of their hand, and dig in for the long haul. Short of nuking them, the enemy will wear you down every time. You don’t tolerate sedition in your own country by your own citizens without arresting them as traitors, which is what would have happened in World War II. We won that war, if you remember. Anybody wonder why we turned tail and ran in Vietnam? Anybody???
Now, if you go with number one, you have to ask, can we pay for it? Is this nation ready to give up its prosperity, its Hummer SUVs, it’s 3000-square foot homes with three car garages, to help with “the war effort”?
On the other hand, if you go with number two, and pursue a “non-interventionalist” policy (which is not the same as isolationism), you have to give up getting into everybody’s business. Are we as a people ready to do that?
Not if we elect any of the clowns running for President right now. Their foreign policy statements are all more alike than different. (Yes, even Obama.)
Discuss.
April 30, 2008 at 2:34 pm
I would just worry about Obama saying that he would sit down at a table to negotiate with Iran. That kind of thing gives these crazy dictators a lot of credibility that they wouldn’t have. It puts them on a big international stage.
And what does that say to those interested in freedom in those countries if America essentially gives its imprimatur to lunatic dictators by meeting with them and having their picture taken with them.
April 30, 2008 at 7:02 pm
David,
You said “you have to do one of two things. Either you beat them into total submission (as in, back to the Stone Age), or you stay the hell out of their business, and draw a line that they dare not cross (otherwise known as secure borders).”
The world is not as black and white as you believe. it’s this kind of thinking that led George W. Bush into War.
There are good and bad people everywhere, even Muslims.