--- In FairfieldLife@yahoogroups.com, Angela Mailander <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Judy (snipped): > How Obama ever imagined he could sit and listen to > his pastor's sermons for 20 years and still conduct > a campaign in which his race wouldn't become an issue > is a huge mystery. How could he not realize Wright's > tirades would become public knowledge and be thrown > back in his face, forcing him either to acknowledge > their validity and thereby confront America's racism > head-on, or to reject them and deny what blacks still > have to face every day? > > Just this appalling lack of judgment on Obama's part > is enough to cast serious doubt on his qualifications > to be president. He thought he could sneak through the > minefield of race when he himself was responsible for > planting the bomb that has now blown up in his face. > > Me: In the first paragraph of yours that I've quoted, > you ask a bunch of rhetorical questions. In the > second paragraph you assume that these questions have > been answered to the detriment of Obama. But do you > really know that Obama is as unaware and as lacking in > judgment as you claim he is? You have presented no > evidence. Your rhetorical questions are not evidence.
You obviously don't grasp the point I'm making. Read what I wrote again, please. What I'm saying is that the *facts* are evidence of his lack of judgment: He decided to run as a "post-racial" candidate after having been a member for 20 years of the congregation of a pastor who is anything *but* post-racial. And this pastor didn't just lead the congregation of which Obama was a member; he was Obama's close friend and spiritual advisor, according to Obama himself. The title of Obama's book was taken from one of the pastor's sermons. You tell me. How did Obama imagine his association with this pastor wasn't going to come to voters' attention? And if he did realize it was going to come to voters' attention, how did he imagine he was going to be able to continue to present himself as a "post-racial" candidate without disavowing what his pastor had said? And if he disavows what his pastor has said, he's rejecting his pastor's all-too-accurate description of the situation blacks still face in this country. The questions about his judgment *have* been answered. The *facts* are that he's put himself on the horns of a dilemma from which he can't extricate himself without very serious damage to his campaign. How can that be portrayed as anything but *terrible* judgment? I'd be behind him all the way if he wanted to take up his pastor's cause. But if he does, he'll lose a very significant chunk of the white primary voters who now support him based on his "post-racial" campaign, who think his pastor is a Scary Black Man promoting race war. And if he still manages to win the Democratic nomination, he will be responsible for putting John McCain in the White House.
