Stuff
- Nice to see Obama can throw a punch. Wright’s narcissistic remarks about Obama over the last few days are the ultimate dick move considering the lengths Obama has gone to not throw Wright under the bus. While I doubt this will make this trivial, media-fueled “controversy” go away, I love the way Obama can simultaneously underscore his campaign’s unity theme while delivering a harsh ’screw you’ to a friend who stabbed him in the back.
- Okay, I’m officially giving up on Lost. I’ve heard people gush about it. My wife and I sat through two discs of the first season and we came to the realization that this show isn’t going to suck us in. There’s no there there. It’s just Gilligan’s Island with watered-down David Lynchian plot twists. Maybe the mystery would work if I gave a damn.
- Considering how closely intertwined our economic fates are with China (they own our debt, make our consumer goods, etc.), protesting their human rights record by threatening to skip their party (Olympic opening ceremony) sounds about as effective as protesting Wal-Mart’s labor practices by writing “You Suck” on your receipt. Y’know, we’re in the middle of a hotly contested election year in which trade has become a pretty important issue (at least, when it comes to NAFTA), maybe the protesters would have more luck bringing attention to human rights abuses by pressuring Obama, Clinton, and McCain than trying to dump water on a torch.
- This didn’t get enough attention at the time, but Michael Moore is right to point out the shameful way in which Hillary Clinton name-dropped Farrakhan during the last debate. When Russert pulled the same stunt in February, I considered it “vile and reprehensible”. That Clinton would sink so low now is even worse.
- Hilarious :
On the April 28 edition of Fox News’ Special Report, Fox News correspondent Major Garrett noted that Sen. Barack Obama was asked for his “favorite Scripture” at a town hall campaign event. Garrett then asserted: “Obama’s answer not exactly rooted in Scripture, but in the ballpark.” Garrett then aired Obama’s answer: “[T]he Golden Rule. It’s very simple. I mean, it’s a very simple concept. I think what he asks of me is that I treat my brother as — and my sister — as I would have them treat me.” Obama’s answer is, in fact, “rooted in Scripture.” The Gospel of Matthew 7:12 states that Jesus, during his Sermon on the Mount, said, “In everything do to others as you would have them do to you; for this is the law and the prophets” (New Revised Standard Version). This verse is described by the Vatican as the “Golden Rule”: “This saying, known since the eighteenth century as the ‘Golden Rule,’ is found in both positive and negative form in pagan and Jewish sources, both earlier and later than the gospel.”
12 comments »
Copy link for RSS feed for comments on this post or for TrackBack URI
Leave a comment
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>
I’m not going to try and push you into keeping on with Lost. I will say that I thought the second season was by far the weakest. The third season was the first time Lost began delivering on the promise of the first, and the current season, given a finite series length with a reduced number of episodes each season, has worked hard to keep the quality level high.
Comment by Earnest — April 29, 2008 @ 7:40 pm
Yeah, you gotta love how listless and stumbling and passionless Obama’s response to Wright was. Even better that he took a telephone poll the night before to make sure it bugged people, and then decided to do away with him. Six weeks too late.
It’s not a media-fueled controversy because the media doesn’t cover it that much. You, like many elitists, fail to realize that people are actually capable of making their own decisions. That’s why people continue to vote for Hillary Clinton, and that’s why people continue to let Obama’s relationship with Wright speak for itself.
Face it: Obama is a politician just like any other politician. To that I say “So what.” To many of his supporters, it’s a fact that must be denied. Do you not get what’s going on? Do you not understand that it’s not Wright’s comments that irritate people as much as it’s been Obama’s naive and awkward handling of the situation? Seriously–how out of touch are you? It’s no mystery why the Left is losing in this country. It’s driven by people who simply don’t get it.
Comment by Brad Gutting — April 30, 2008 @ 7:14 am
Clearly, Obama needs to denounce anyone black who’s ever said or done anything disagreeable ever.
WHEN IS OBAMA GOING TO DENOUNCE NAT TURNER’S ACTIONS?!
Comment by Vic — April 30, 2008 @ 9:20 am
The Rev. Wright has his own understanding of American history,that is his right,and I defend his right to express these views.If your ancestors arrived here on the Mayflower,perhaps one has a rosey picture of this nation’s history,if your ancestors arrived on a slave ship,this same history maybe seen in a far harsher light.Our phoney leaders,and media jackals,howl for his blood,because he seeks to publicly defend himself,and his church.Speaking on CNN,David Gergen praised Senator Obama’s rebuttal,saying how great it was that the senator had put the Rev. Wright “in his place”.The message here is simple, America should fear black men who refuse to accept the propaganda sanctioned by the goverment,and,their media shills. Welcome to the new plantation,its not your skin they hate,its your right to think,speak,and believe,in those ideas your overseers do not approve of. Some had hoped Rev. Wright would accept his media beating in silence,as yet another example for those Americains who would dare think,or speak,for themselves.The Rev. Wright is told to remain silent so Senator Obama can be elected president,because association with one black man who speaks his mind freely,could frighten feeble minded voters,and ruin Senator Obama’s chance to be the leader of the “free” world.The media hacks are “offended” by the words,passions,and,ideas,of one black preacher,who dared to speak HIS TRUTH,without the sanction of the powerfull,and,in defiance of those who deem themselfs the Masters of “correct” speech,thought,and behavior.The good Revernd Wright has been tied to the public whipping post,and,for those gullible enogh to assist in his lashing,fear,and ignorance,will not wash the blood of his battered freedoms,from your hands.
Comment by pogo — April 30, 2008 @ 9:42 am
That may be a part of it, but the real reason Obama needed to cut Wright off is because the Reverend has been on a media tour making Obama look like a political phony. Obama had already distanced himself from Wright’s more controversial views. The fact that Wright seemed intent on milking his fifteen minutes of fame to throw his friend under the bus by not only reiterating the statements that caused so much controversy, but then implying that Obama agrees with them and is lying to voters.
While I definitely agree that there’s been a racist subtext to this whole Wright mess since day one, he’s been acting like an asshole for the last few days and threatening Obama’s chances to become president in the process. As much as I hate this “guilt by association” crap that our media obsesses over, Wright’s statements about Obama really did need to be addressed.
Comment by greg — April 30, 2008 @ 9:58 am
I think you’re putting a little too much hurt on the Olympics protestors. Considering that the Chinese government has relocated millions of people just to build the facilities for it, and jailed thousands of protesters, specifically for the Olympics, not to mention all the pet murdering that’s going on, I think attending the games would be a big “fuck you” to all the people who are suffering becuase of China’s brutality. That’s not even including the treatment of Tibet and, indirectly, Darfur by the Chinese government. And that’s, I think, the point behind the protests of the torch. We don’t want to allow China to have their own 1934 Berlin Olympic triumph while standing on the backs of brutalized people.
You’re also implying that because people are involved in grassroots protests, they are not focusing on electoral politics, but I’ve never met a protestor who does not also email and call their representatives on a regular basis. They also tend to vote with their dollars and not support organizations or advertisers who are on the conservative side.
Comment by orangehairboy — April 30, 2008 @ 5:51 pm
Don’t be surprised if Wright gets his own talk show out of all this.
Comment by Doobie — April 30, 2008 @ 10:30 pm
Er, my comment above should say “1936 Berlin Olympic triumph.”
Comment by orangehairboy — May 1, 2008 @ 1:37 am
I won’t fault Senator Obama for explaining how his views differ from Rev. Wrights,the idea that people believe everything their pastor believes,is just wrong to begin with.I don’t believe Rev. Wright ask for fifeteen minutes of fame,he has every right to speak out in his own defence.He has expressed his anger against systematic exploitation,oppression,and murder,one can argue the details,but the fact that these evils existed,and still exist,in America,is undeniable.The Rev. Wright is not alone,tucked away in America’s ghettos,reservations,churchs,and prisons,there are many who share his views.This media extravaganza was created as a tool to discredit Seantor Obama,perhaps voters will see thru this “issue”,and seek to understand,and address the very real issues presented by the Rev. Wright.This is not about Senator Obama,it is about the brutality,and injustice,practiced on generations of American citizens.It is about an unfair demand,that those victims,continue to suffer,past,and,present atrocities,in silence.
Comment by pogo — May 1, 2008 @ 8:33 am
[...] 1, 2008 by orangehairboy I love love love Greg over at The Talent Show, but he has an aversion to public protests that I simply do not share. Here’s a not atypical example: Considering [...]
Pingback by the efficacy and purpose of protest « Nuclear Rays From My Halogen Haze — May 1, 2008 @ 11:00 am
We had this discussion before, but again, I don’t see why you claim the protests are ineffective. I wouldn’t say they’re amazingly effective, but they’re at least as effective as anything else. You say that “the protesters would have more luck bringing attention to human rights abuses by pressuring Obama, Clinton, and McCain than trying to dump water on a torch.” But none of those three are going to care about human rights abuses in China unless those abuses are in the news, giving them a political reason to care about them. Dumping water on a torch is silly, but if it get’s the attention of the national and world media (which it did), it’s accomplished it’s purpose.
Considering how closely intertwined our economic fates are with China. . ., protesting their human rights record by
threatening to skip their partywriting a politician . . . sounds about as effective as protesting Wal-Mart’s labor practices by writing “You Suck” on your receipt. Both versions of this statement are probably equally true.Comment by Autumnal Harvest — May 2, 2008 @ 5:26 am
Is this a joke?
Comment by Autumnal Harvest — May 2, 2008 @ 5:29 am