Obama, the humanity!

The most recent crisis facing Barack Obama centers on his longtime/former pastor of Trinity United Church in Illinois, Reverend Jeremiah Wright, Jr.

The man who married Barry Dunham and his wife, and who baptized their children, was recently caught on tape blaming America for 9/11; condemning America for supporting Israel; and (my personal favorite) that the American government created/invented Acquired Immuno-Deficiency Syndrome (AIDS) just to punish "people of color."

Wright had been Obama's pastor for approximately twenty years.  Recently, the presidential candidate went on record to say that his former pastor was not overly controversial.

Just last month, Michelle Obama told a crowd of her husband's supporters that "for the first time in my adult life, I am proud of my country...[because] America is downright mean."  These words struck a nerve in many Americans at the time.

However, after hearing typical sermons and messages from Reverend Jeremiah Wright, one can hardly blame her for feeling disgraced by the United States.  When one is brainwashed week after week from a trusted authority, she is liable to make occasional ignorant statements.

Barack Obama today released two statements, including a Live interview with Fox News within the past hour.

Reporter Major Garrett, of Fox News Channel, asked the presidential candidate if he would have quit the controversial church had he attended any of the sermons where Pastor Wright was documented making inflamatory remarks.  After some hemming and hawing, Obama finally answered, "Had he continued to make [such statements], yes, I would have quit."

Obama's first statement from earlier today was even less direct.

"I categorically denounce any statement that disparages our great country or serves to divide us from our allies," said Obama.

If that is true, how long before a reporter asks if he now denounces his wife's comments from last month?

Or even more important, how long before Hillary Clinton and John McCain are asked whether or not they support thegovernment's manufacturing of AIDS for minorities?

In all seriousness, this is a big issue for Obama because he's now balancing on thin ice with not only white voters who have so far supported his campaign in droves during primary season; Obama is also walking on thin ice with the portion of the black community that agrees wholeheartedly with Reverend Wright.

Obama cannot afford to let Hillary Clinton take some of Obama's disaffected black electorate.  And Hillary cannot afford to get too involved in this controversy, either.  She needs to play the high road--but then again, that's never been a Clintonian staple.

The juciest irony of this whole situation is that Rev. Wright's documented sermons basically validate Geraldine Ferraro's recent controversial statement that Obama is a leading candidate because he is black.  After all, Reverend Wright endorsed Obama from the pulpit by repeatedly and deliberately pointing out Barack's black experience.

He just conveniently left out the fact that Obama was raised by a white woman named "mom."

Lord, hear our prayer.

Hillary-ous!

It's 2008... do you know what your Democratic presidential candidates are doing?

First of all, watching the Clinton campaign fight tooth and nail for the nomination has been incredibly amusing.  What's even more amusing is imagining Hillary losing most states; popular votes; polls; and delegates--yet still becoming the nominee. 

That won't cause any riots!

Another fiasco is Florida and Michigan.  Leave it to the Democratic Party to find a way to pussyfoot around the rules to which they themselves agreed.  That Clinton even brags about winning the Michigan primary, a ballot on which she was the only nominee, is a joke.  (But a funny one.)

Equally hilarious is the Clinton campaign's justification for having new elections in FL and MI simply because Hillary won the battleground states like TX, OH, MI, FL, and other big electoral college states like NY and CA.

The major flaw of that thinking, of course, is that those "victories" (FL and MI aside), came against another Democrat.  Implying, as Governor (PA) Ed Rendell did this past week on "Meet the Press," that Clinton is a better candidate because she carried the big states in the DEMOCRATIC PRIMARIES--is laughable.

Unless the Clinton camp says they're implying that McCain isn't very conservative, this strategy makes little sense.  But to say McCain isn't conservative doesn't make much sense, either; plus, it would contradict her other mantra, which is that McCain is just another George W. Bush.

How well a candidate does in a primary is not exactly indicative of how the candidate will do in that same state come general election -- especially when many voters throw their votes during primaries, as was the case in OH and TX recently, where many GOP voters voted for Hillary, just to keep the Dem candidates bloodthirsty for a few more months.

Lastly, another great irony is how Hillary Clinton said Barack Obama would make a great VP candidate -- despite all of the negative things she has to say about him not being ready to serve "on day one."

Apparently, if he'd have to take over as president, it'd at least be on day two.

Keep up the good work!  I'll get the popcorn.