McCaskill: "There is no excuse" for controversial pastor's statements

I've been a Democrat all my life. At the state and local level I've voted for one Republican in the past 50 years (Kit Bond for Governor in '72 and '80, and for Senator beginning in '92. I think he's a good man). I must admit however, I did not vote for John Kerry and Bill Clinton (2nd term). I found them unacceptable. In the upcoming election I find Obama unacceptable. The reasons: his Far-Left politics, the Jeremiah Wright issue, his Rezko connections, and now his lying and subsequent "spin" regarding his association with Wright. The general impression I get is that of a slick talking salesman you really can't trust. I'm guessing there are many white Democrats who share my views.

I think you analysis of BO is right on target Mr. Burns, and I suspect that there are many now who feel the same way you do. Rev. Wright is a "deal killer" for him.

who will most likely be Barack Obama.

There are more important issues at stake than whether or not Obama was in the church when his pastor said some awful mean things about white folks.

And the folks that identify themselves as "White Democrats" (whatever that is) or "White Americans" will no doubt sit on their hands on election day or vote for John McCain.

It's not like the Wright "controversy" has changed much in that regard.

I find it amazing that CNN & CNBC still give Obama a pass for not only supporting this Preacher but the mere fact that they find nothing odd about his 20 year relationship with an admitted racist and hate-monger.

Geraldine Ferraro said nothing inflammatory, yet she was treated as if she had lynched a black man. I'm tired of the double standards and the dancing around everything that is Black. There is no more slavery and at last glance most all of the sports is black and all are millionaires.

Remember, Hitler was a great orator as well!!!

Obama is on a short list of charm school graduates.

But I wouldn't put him in the same category as Hitler because 1920s & 30s Germany was ripe for someone like Hitler.

So I disagree with the poster who included that comparison. But I agree about every other comment that points out Obama's shortcomings.

My take includes this.

I believe he panicked strategy-wise and went with his bread-and-butter. Which is try to give an eloquent speech. I guess he talked his way into America's heart and thought that would work again.

He can't talk his way out of this one. The only thing that's going to save him is no more flub-ups.

He now has to be Captain Perfecto -- super hero extraordinaire.

He was packaged as perfection and the public bought it. Obama strategists may have screwed up. They sold the American public something-bigger-than-life. And it deflated just like that.

The bigger they are, the harder they fall.

...are an indication of how well John McCain is going to do in November. Currently Bush is enjoying a 31% approval rating, a new low for a President. Only 9% of Democrats approve of the job he is doing.
Once the Democrats have a single candidate and begin focussing on John McCain, we should see his positives erode sharply. McCain has clearly stated that he is risking his presidency on the Iraq War. Clearly the indicators are this risky move will explode in his face.
The majority of Americans do not want this war to continue...and certainly they don't want it to go for a hundred years.
I don't quite understand why McCain doesn't present his position with a "fresh" start, distancing himself from the mismanagement of Bush, Cheney, Rice and Rumsfeld?

"I don't quite understand why McCain doesn't present his position with a "fresh" start, distancing himself from the mismanagement of Bush, Cheney, Rice and Rumsfeld?"
McCain has been doing that for a long time.
He has not walked lockstep, he has criticized the management of the war for a while.

Does that include a single vote in opposition to the administration's Iraq policy?

Or is he just full of hot air?

...no fair. You beat me to this response.

But I can handle it. McCain's voting record is about the same as Hillary's (directed at you PM).

What I am referring to is McCain stating that we should have started with more troops, and his critisism of Rumsfeld.

...recognize that when the administration provided false information regarding the dangers that were present in Iraq...many leaders voted to support the war. They (we) had no idea that we would be so terribly misled by the Bush Administration.
It was totally unprecedented to have a President and his staff present such misinformation.
So Hillary made a mistake. She admits to that now. John McCain does not.
He continues to believe this war in valid...although he cannot correctly grasp the tribal issues in this country.

"So Hillary made a mistake. She admits to that now. John McCain does not."

The difference is that McCain is stating that he knew what he voted for and was backing. Hillary is saying that she was either too naive, or not intelligent enough to know what she was voting on. Or that she was dumb enough to be fooled by Bush. That is what you want leading the country?

...I've been practicing having a dumb president for the past eight years...so I'm kinda used to dumb.

Obama:
“She didn’t read the National Intelligence Estimates. Jay Rockefeller read it. But she didn’t read it. I don’t know what all that experience got her because I have enough experience to know that if you have a National Intelligence Estimate and the chairman of the national, um, Senate Intelligence Committee says you should read this, this is why I’m voting against the war, that you should probably read it. I don’t know how much experience you need for that.”

White man for Obama!

I'm deeply disappointed by this response from Senator McCaskill. She starts off by saying Rev. Wright's statements are indefensible, then immediately calls for us to compare his remarks in contrast with his "good works".

In ANY context, un-American, race-baiting, misogynist, and anti-Semite remarks made by Jeremiah Wright are indefensible! Senator Obama made a great speech, but it can never erase a 20 year close association with the Rev. Wright.

Senator McCaskill, please reconsider your support for Barack Obama.

Less than 24 hours after admonishing me for not staying on topic, the dweeb short circuits and does the very thing that he says is wrong. Typical Obama prodigy.

McCain's faculties are fine compared to this boy wonder's lapse in memory.

He goes on a Wright thread and talks about whomever he pleases...except for the topic.

to support his candidate. Notice a pattern here? Everything Clinton's criticics say she is, Obama is that and ten times more.

As I pointed out on another thread, Obama has made a bet about the American people: they are smart enough to understand a speech without any sound bites that speak truths about the resentments that both whites and blacks have toward each other.

Some on this thread show Obama has lost that bet. We will be a poorer country if those few here are the majority in the country.

Said Old Drum:

"...Obama has made a bet about the American people: they are smart enough to understand a speech without any sound bites that speak truths about the resentments that both whites and blacks have toward each other."

So tell me Drum. If someone votes for Hillary or McCain -- then they are racists?

The right to vote is the one singular power all Americans have -- and most deserve to go to the polls with power in their hands, not fear.

Quite frankly, if what you imply is true then Obama is trying to get elected by putting white voters on some kind of guilt trip. That constitutes trying to control my vote through fear.

Bad move. Stupid speech, really stupid speech.

By the way, McCain is pushing that same fear with Iraq. And I'm not too happy about it if he keeps harping on that angle.

They both need to "put a lid on the fear game" and do something to show they want to lead.

As of now, the only one not trying to use fear as a way to get my vote is Clinton. And this independent is willing to swing that way.

Jeetz, as a sophisticated observer of the national scene, would you please point out where I said that anyone who votes for Clinton or McCain is a racist?

I missed that part of my last post. I don't think I mentioned either one of them or their supporters, so please point out my racist accusation.

...racism is an undertone in society?

If so, then you know how to point a finger the same way.

If not, then why is it an issue? Because of Ferraro? Baloney. If he panicked because of her, he's weak.

Clinton doesn't have 90% of the white vote. If she did, I might agree with Obama. But he does have an astounding number of black votes, right?

I'd say it's his problem, not mine. And I'm not interested in beautiful speeches.

This isn't a beauty contest, it's an election. He needs to get his head out of the clouds and get back here on Earth.

Because that's where the voters are.

Our Senator has had the priviledge of flying with B. Hussein Obama, gotten time on the media and all at the expense of American taxpayers.

Senator McCaskill is playing both ends against the middle like her other fellow Senators that want to keep their job, benefits and perks at the expense of Americans of all colors. The goal for McCaskill, Obama, McCain and their friends is to bring the country and her citizens to their knees. It is working.

Rev. Wrong and B. Hussein Obama has made their agenda, opinions and beliefs perfectly clear. Hate for America, hate for anyone different and whine, moan and shout about injustice, while keeping their hand out.

"There are good works obviously this man (Wright) has done," McCaskill said; his comments, she said, should be compared in context with those efforts.

No one is entirely good or bad, but ANY public official speaking in defense of this militant "minister" should get some serious questions from those who pay her.

Get McCaskill out of office before she does more damage.