My Five Questions For Barack Obama
In my mind, Senator Obama needs to address five key questions, and not dance around them, in order to PROVE he doesn’t at all agree with the radical anti-American positions of Rev. Wright:
1 - How do you feel America is different than al-Qaeda?
2 - Do you believe the US Government created the HIV virus to kill people of color?
3 - Do you believe the 9/11 attacks were at all related to past American foreign policy?
4 - Why did you consider Rev. Wright a spiritual leader and mentor in the past, but not now?
5 - What topics did Rev. Wright preach about on those days you were in the pews?
My bonus sixth question is this: Senator Obama, can you name the times in your life that you were proud of America?
Hopefully he will either answer these in his speech today… or someone in the Obama-lovestruck media will have the balls to ask them.
Magic 8-Ball Says: “Highly doubtful prospects for either scenario.”
-Bruce (GayPatriot)
29 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URI
[...] us to a great piece by Shelby Steele on the Obama/Wright mess. - Continuing on the Obama theme, Bruce has a few questions. - Erick at RedState has the phrase of the day - Demasochist Party. - The American [...]
Pingback by No Runny Eggs » Blog Archive » The Morning Scramble - 3/18/2008 — March 18, 2008 @ 9:50 am - March 18, 2008
I’d expect Obama to give a speech today of pure blather, full of hopey changitude (Ace), implying that we’re all victims of THE MAN, chiding Wright slightly but not on anything specific, and really excusing Wright… and liberals to lap it up like dogs. Especially the media.
Never mind that Wright is, in fact, another Fred Phelps. ("May God damn America!")
Maybe that is what is so creepy about Obama: His having a black Fred Phelps for his mentor, and lately trying to rationalize it. But, we’ll see what Obama says in his new speech.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — March 18, 2008 @ 10:58 am - March 18, 2008
I think an honest person would have to say "yes" to question 3, although a patriotic person would obviously not attempt to use this as an excuse not to fight the terrorists.
Comment by Crow — March 18, 2008 @ 11:04 am - March 18, 2008
The 9/11 Commission Report says "yes" to question 3, mind you.
Comment by Crow — March 18, 2008 @ 11:05 am - March 18, 2008
Crow, I agree question 3 is worded broadly enough that even I would have to say yes!
I think the 9-11 attacks are related to these aspects of American foreign policy:
- Weak American response to the Iranian hostage crisis (1979-80).
- Weak American response to the Beirut bombing (1984).
- Weak American response in Somalia (early 90s).
- Weak American response to Khobar Towers, U.S. embassy bombings, USS Cole, or any number of other pre-9-11 provocations.
As Osama bin Laden said: When people see a strong horse and a weak horse, they will naturally prefer the strong horse. I.e., not the weak horse.
To be clear: I still don’t blame America here; I only blame our craven intellectual, political leadership and media classes. And the terrorists.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — March 18, 2008 @ 11:24 am - March 18, 2008
Just ready the full-transcript…and he basically ignored your (and my own) questions; just a standard speech on "race" with a few footnotes on the Rev. Wright.
Blather, blather, blather…..
Just as Gov. Romney tap-danced around the 800-pound Mormon gorilla in the room, Obama FAILED to directly address the issue. In contrast and to JFK’s credit, Kennedy directly and forthrightly addressed the specific concerns of Protestant America about his Roman Catholicism and hi srelationship then and in the future with his church….and not by platitudes and a heartening story about a South Carolina campaign worker to deflect our attention. I wanted to hear Barack Obama’s story.
Like the Chemistry ad about competitor E-Harmony, "Nope, still gay." Sorry Sen. Obama, still gravely-comcerned.
Comment by Ted B. (Charging Rhino) — March 18, 2008 @ 11:25 am - March 18, 2008
One more:
You said that you believe the vast majority of Americans want us to haul ass out of Iraq giving Iraqis the finger along the way. Could you tell us, please, who this "vast majority" is?
Comment by ThatGayConservative — March 18, 2008 @ 11:33 am - March 18, 2008
Gee, I got the notion not long ago that Macacca was the worst thing you could say.
Comment by ThatGayConservative — March 18, 2008 @ 11:47 am - March 18, 2008
I listened to Obama (and have read in his book) talking about his grandmother who was once accosted by a black beggar at a bus stop in Hawaii and he now sees it as racist that she was afraid to take that same bus to work the next day. I would like Mr. Obama to address that issue. As a white woman when I walk around Norfolk , Va. at night and feel slightly nervous about a group of young blacks hanging out at a street corner eyeing me does that make me a racist? Maybe if young black men had not just shot two young white women and left them on the streets to bleed to death in N.C. and Auburn….I wouldn’t feel that sense of urgency to get into the place I am going. If he wants to be the race bridging candidate that he claims then he needs to quit telling me that I am being a racist for having these feelings of fear but that nothing should be done to address the thugs that are making me feel that way. Oh ..yeah..I forgot…he and his raving pastor do address that. The thugs would not be hanging out on the corner or killing white girls in college towns to get money for drugs if they had not been "oppressed all these years by whitey and now they have no other choice than to be murderers." That is what I want to hear him talk about if he wants to have an honest discussion about race.
Comment by Linda Strickland — March 18, 2008 @ 1:21 pm - March 18, 2008
you guys are hilarious.
Comment by markie — March 18, 2008 @ 3:28 pm - March 18, 2008
Ace correctly gives Wright - and Obama - what they deserve:
http://ace.mu.nu/archives/258049.php
"Repellent seditionist." Good summing-up.
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — March 18, 2008 @ 4:27 pm - March 18, 2008
Was Uncle Sully watching the same speech?
http://andrewsullivan.theatlantic.com/the_daily_dish/2008/03/the-speech.html
Maybe it’s Obama’s delivery; but reading the transcript it comes-off as issue-avoiding tap-dancing.
Nope, still not buying it….
Comment by Ted B. (Charging Rhino) — March 18, 2008 @ 4:55 pm - March 18, 2008
5: Weak response to 9/11 attacks - wasted time *not* capturing Osama Bin-Laden and turned to Iraq to divert the country’s attention.
Comment by Kevin — March 18, 2008 @ 6:33 pm - March 18, 2008
Thanks, Ted B. I have avoided Sullivan for several years, but I took your link suggestion but got only this far: "But I do want to say that this searing, nuanced, gut-wrenching, loyal, and deeply, deeply Christian speech is the most honest speech on race in America in my adult lifetime."
I have managed to keep my lunch down, but I am in awe of a person so narcissistic that he can write that sentence. Obviously, he assumes the reader will be rendered speechless and overcome with awe.
The Obama full disclosure exercise this morning was the audacity of grope. He stepped up to tee, addressed the ball and we all watched as he described it lofting high and straight and finally arcing right toward the cup. Except the ball never left the tee. So his fans can only remark on the nice swing and follow through. Sorry, Obama, but your showy rhetoric is all tinsel and sparkle and it fails the essential Ivory Soap test: it won’t float.
Comment by heliotrope — March 18, 2008 @ 6:41 pm - March 18, 2008
LOL at Kevin’s template.
Comment by Vince P — March 18, 2008 @ 6:47 pm - March 18, 2008
Another question for the Senator from HOPE:
Were you lying on FOX news when you said you were not present when your preacher ranted against America. And used disgusting language about a former President. Or were you lying today when you said you were present?
Comment by Gene in Pennsylvania — March 18, 2008 @ 6:48 pm - March 18, 2008
9: What if these were white guys, hanging around a corner at night eyeing you? What if it had been young white men who had shot a white woman? or white men who had shot a black woman?
Comment by Kevin — March 18, 2008 @ 6:54 pm - March 18, 2008
Kevin, are there any terrorist threats including Osama that are worth our concern? And shouldn’t we pull our troops out of the Balkans, Korea, NATO and every base around the world? Shouldn’t we quit the farce of a missile defense system and just use the military to protect us in our homeland in the unlikely event we are attacked?
After all, how is Osama going to get here? And who cares about Jews anyway? And if Iran gets nuclear weapons and uses them, so what? They are a long way off from building a delivery system that could reach us. And if they do, who cares about Georgia or Iowa or Vermont? I’m desperate for a thread that would lead to understanding what you stand for. We are all crystal clear on what peeves you.
Suppose Obama or Clinton takes office after George Bushchimphitler’s term is over. What enlightened change do you expect? Put it out there, Kevin, take a chance.
Comment by heliotrope — March 18, 2008 @ 7:02 pm - March 18, 2008
The liberal answer to your question is: they hope for change, a change that will give them hope that evil America will evolve to a better country. Because til now they think we have been horrible.
Comment by Gene in Pennsylvania — March 18, 2008 @ 7:09 pm - March 18, 2008
The liberal model of perfect government is Sweden or USSR, not America. It colors every debate they have. About crime, poverty, a mission to Mars, road repairs, transit systems, everything. America is always wrong, bad , evil.
Comment by Gene in Pennsylvania — March 18, 2008 @ 7:11 pm - March 18, 2008
Are we going to ask similar questions of all candidates? Does their church believe Catholics aren’t really Christians? Or Protestants? Do they believe Jews will go to heaven? Gays?
Be very careful opening this Pandora’s Box. It is going to bite you in the ass one day.
Comment by Houndentenor — March 18, 2008 @ 7:39 pm - March 18, 2008
I believe it is Mr Obama who is campaigning as the change agent. The perfect one. The different one. The non polititian. With his total lack of experience, if he is in fact like any other polititian and takes positions that are based ion expediency, then what is the reason he should be elected? If you are arguing that he is as tarnished by scandals and associations as other pols, then the end equation is he is the most unprepared, least experienced amongst equals. And frankly a loser when honestly placed side by side others with years of experience. Kind of shocking but his implosion has been stunning, except he has been a media creation from the start. Poof it’s gone.
Comment by Gene in Pennsylvania — March 18, 2008 @ 7:48 pm - March 18, 2008
Houndentenor: Huh? I looked at Bruce’s five questions and put Clinton and McCain in mind and I can not make any sense of your Pandora’s box assertion.
Comment by heliotrope — March 18, 2008 @ 8:10 pm - March 18, 2008
Hasn’t Jesse Jackson himself said he would cross the street if he saw a group of young black men approaching him?
Comment by Tom — March 18, 2008 @ 10:54 pm - March 18, 2008
Weak response to 9/11 attacks - wasted time *not* capturing Osama Bin-Laden and turned to Iraq to divert the country’s attention.
Hey Kevin, here’s a suggestion so you don’t look so stupid in the future. Try Googling Faqir of Ipi. Note how the British weren’t able to capture him in the same area.
And don’t think nobody noticed your overt smear of our soldiers in Afghanistan.
Comment by ThatGayConservative — March 19, 2008 @ 2:28 am - March 19, 2008
"audacity of grope"
Shouldn’t this be the new catchphrase applied to all political sex scandals? It had me chuckling.
Comment by Mike — March 19, 2008 @ 9:04 am - March 19, 2008
18: I’m really clear: I’m for a leader who will be there to serve the people of this nation. I want a leader who will be man (or woman) enough to make decisions and will be strong enough to make changes when the circumstances warrant changes - not to cling to failed dogma that is only held on to by true believers. Also, I don’t think it will be asking much to have a leader who is competent enough to complete a grammatically correct sentence without having to read a pre-written speech.
Comment by Kevin — March 19, 2008 @ 10:21 pm - March 19, 2008
not to cling to failed dogma that is only held on to by true believers
Like high taxes? increased entitlements? more Federal govt enlargement?
Liar.
Comment by Vince P — March 19, 2008 @ 10:27 pm - March 19, 2008
From before: "I’d expect Obama to give a speech today of pure blather, full of hopey changitude (Ace), implying that we’re all victims of THE MAN, chiding Wright slightly but not on anything specific, and really excusing Wright… and liberals to lap it up like dogs. Especially the media."
…and, for the record, I was wright
Comment by ILoveCapitalism — March 21, 2008 @ 10:39 am - March 21, 2008