Barack Obama – His Core Values & Beliefs, Part 2

There is no denying that Senator Obama gave a very good ‘race’ speech with what Political Night Train calls “surface validity”, that is, it looks good on the surface, its when you dig into the core that you find problems.  Political Night Train is now questioning the basis of Obama’s core values and beliefs and whether they are the values and beliefs we want in a President.  Certainly Senator Obama has plenty of “surface validity” to be President, but does he have the inner values and beliefs we want in a President.  Americans do not deserve another President aka Bill Clinton, with an outer persona that looks good to many people (he was bubba to some, a black man to others), but with an inner core that no one knows.  Apparently Bill Clinton had no inner core of moral values, at least none that we would want to pass on to our children.  One wonders then, what core values are Barack and Michelle Obama passing on to their children?  Are they the beliefs and values you would pass on to your children?  There are many parents in this country who were raised in racist households, black and white.  Yet, at some point, as parents, they made the break, and overtly decided that they would not raise their own children in a hate filled, racist family, and church environment.  This is truly where racism begins to die off, and you can see the effects with the twenty-something’s that are now saying “race does not matter”.  Yet, Obama is not offering them the bridge to a racism free society.  No, he’s offering then explanations as to why people like Jeremiah Wright should get a free pass.  Sorry Barack, but I don’t want my children attending Sunday School with your children, because you’ve passed on the wrong set of values and beliefs. Gil Troy is right when he asserts in his article,(my bold) Here, then, remains the Obama campaign’s great mystery. Many Americans want to believe, to trust that he is what he purports to be, that his gift for words will translate into a genius for governance. But the questions cropping up are not simply about his inexperience but his inaction. He never confronted Jeremiah Wright. He sat silently by as the United Church of Christ to which he belongs passed a resolution advocating divestment from Israel.

Obama’s political rise has been launched on the wings of Americans’ hopes that the healers will defeat the haters. His political progress would be more sure if he could point to actions backing up this rhetoric, to moments when he confronted demagogues and healed rifts. Barack Obama is not too young to have had the opportunity to prove whether he stands by his statements. Americans have the right to ask what he has done when facing the world’s Jeremiah Wrights and Louis Farrakhans. Obama’s worst, and best, moments
By Gil Troy   March 22, 2008

On Tuesday, Senator Barack Obama’s speech on race in America tried to quell the controversy over his America-bashing, race-baiting, Israel-hating pastor, Reverend Jeremiah Wright. For days, video clips of Wright spewing his poison threatened to neutralize Obama’s populist magic. Until Tuesday, the controversy showed Obama at his worst. His response to his pastor’s demagoguery was mealy-mouthed and disingenuous. It was impossible to believe Obama’s Clintonesque claim of ignorance, that he never “sat in the pews” during one of Wright’s wrongheaded riffs. And Obama’s failure over a twenty-year relationship to criticize his mentor’s venom stirred doubts about Obama’s judgment, patriotism, and commitment to the unity he celebrates. Yet once again, Illinois’ rookie Senator hit a grand slam with two strikes against him. Obama’s speech was thoughtful, thought-provoking, rich, complex, effective, poetic, and inspiring. Read the rest of this excellent article at http://web.israelinsider.com/views/12729.htm

Obama – All Talk, No Action

There is no denying that Senator Obama gave a very good ‘race’ speech with what Political Night Train calls “surface validity”, that is, it looks good on the surface, its when you dig into the core that you find problems.  Political Night Train is now questioning the basis of Obama’s core values and beliefs and whether they are the values and beliefs we want in a President.  Certainly Senator Obama has plenty of “surface validity” to be President, but does he have the inner values and beliefs we want in a President.  Americans do not deserve another President aka Bill Clinton, with an outer persona that looks good to many people (he was bubba to some, a black man to others), but with an inner core that no one knows.  Apparently Bill Clinton had no inner core of moral values, at least none that we would want to pass on to our children.  One wonders then, what core values are Barack and Michelle Obama passing on to their children?  Are they the beliefs and values you would pass on to your children?  There are many parents in this country who were raised in racist households, black and white.  Yet, at some point, as parents, they made the break, and overtly decided that they would not raise their own children in a hate filled, racist family, and church environment.  This is truly where racism begins to die off, and you can see the effects with the twenty-something’s that are now saying “race does not matter”.  Yet, Obama is not offering them the bridge to a racism free society.  No, he’s offering then explanations as to why people like Jeremiah Wright should get a free pass.  Sorry Barack, but I don’t want my children attending Sunday School with your children, because you’ve passed on the wrong set of values and beliefs. Gil Troy is right when he asserts in his article,(my bold) Here, then, remains the Obama campaign’s great mystery. Many Americans want to believe, to trust that he is what he purports to be, that his gift for words will translate into a genius for governance. But the questions cropping up are not simply about his inexperience but his inaction. He never confronted Jeremiah Wright. He sat silently by as the United Church of Christ to which he belongs passed a resolution advocating divestment from Israel.

Obama’s political rise has been launched on the wings of Americans’ hopes that the healers will defeat the haters. His political progress would be more sure if he could point to actions backing up this rhetoric, to moments when he confronted demagogues and healed rifts. Barack Obama is not too young to have had the opportunity to prove whether he stands by his statements. Americans have the right to ask what he has done when facing the world’s Jeremiah Wrights and Louis Farrakhans. Obama’s worst, and best, moments
By Gil Troy   March 22, 2008

On Tuesday, Senator Barack Obama’s speech on race in America tried to quell the controversy over his America-bashing, race-baiting, Israel-hating pastor, Reverend Jeremiah Wright. For days, video clips of Wright spewing his poison threatened to neutralize Obama’s populist magic. Until Tuesday, the controversy showed Obama at his worst. His response to his pastor’s demagoguery was mealy-mouthed and disingenuous. It was impossible to believe Obama’s Clintonesque claim of ignorance, that he never “sat in the pews” during one of Wright’s wrongheaded riffs. And Obama’s failure over a twenty-year relationship to criticize his mentor’s venom stirred doubts about Obama’s judgment, patriotism, and commitment to the unity he celebrates. Yet once again, Illinois’ rookie Senator hit a grand slam with two strikes against him. Obama’s speech was thoughtful, thought-provoking, rich, complex, effective, poetic, and inspiring. Read the rest of this excellent article at http://web.israelinsider.com/views/12729.htm

Obama’s Grandmother A “Typical” White Person?

It seems that Senator Obama believes in the “typical white person”, one that harbors deep seated racial beliefs.  Such typical white persons will see a black person and believe the worst, apparently including Obama’s grandmother.  Where do you suppose Senator Obama formed this opinion, that there are “typical” white people, from his grandmother?  Most likely he formed this opinion, not from someone who gave him the kind of unconditional love reserved for one’s children, but from his minister of 20 years, Jeremiah Wright.  When Political Night Train says we must understand the basis of Obama’s core beliefs and values, this is what we are talking about.  We know of no one who would characterize their grandmother, really, in his case, his mother, the way Obama has characterized his grandmother.  If he will characterize his own grandmother as a “typical white person” how does he characterize other white people.  Did he engage in racist dialogues in a back room with Jeremiah Wright at Trinity Church?  Are those his values? 

Sen. Barack Obama called into sports radio 610 WIP this morning, charming the usually rambuctious morning talk show hosts and winning their endorsements.  “The point I was making was not that my grandmother harbors any racial animosity. But she is a typical white person. If she sees somebody on the street that she doesn’t know. . .there’s a reaction in her that doesn’t go away and it comes out in the wrong way.

What Did Obama Know About Jeremiah Wright, & When Did He Know It?

Political Night Train finds it unbelievable that Sen Obama and his wife Michelle were, for more than 20 years, unaware of Jeremiah Wright’s hateful racist sermons.  There are persistent rumors of at least one video of Wright preaching hate and racism where the Obama’s are seen in attendance.  How soon before such a video makes it to YouTube?

Just What Did Obama Know About Wright’s Past Sermons?

ABC News Senior National Correspondent Jake Tapper

March 15, 2008 6:15 PM<!–

MichaelJames

–>In his Friday night cable mea culpas on the incendiary comments made by his spiritual adviser Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., repeatedly said, “I wasn’t in church during the time that these statement were made. I did not hear such incendiary language myself, personally. Either in conversations with him or when I was in the pew, he always preached the social gospel. … If I had heard them repeated, I would have quit. … If I thought that was the repeated tenor of the church, then I wouldn’t feel comfortable there.”

http://blogs.abcnews.com/politicalpunch/2008/03/just-what-did-o.html

Inside Jeremiah Wright’s Theology

The basis for Jeremiah Wright’s theology

 

It would seem that Jeremiah Wright’s theology is based on core values and beliefs that the white, rich man’s God is different from the poor black man’s God.  This is the basis for black liberation theology, the theology preached by Jeremiah Wright.  If in doubt, go to the website of Trinity Church and checkout the things the church values.  These are the values of Jeremiah Wright, the leader of Trinity Church for the past 30 years.  These must also be the values and beliefs of the members of Trinity Church, and the Obama’s are members in good standing, for the past 20 years.  The liberation theology views the world, and it’s belief in God, on one’s place in the world.  Liberation theology is preached in many black churches as the daily struggle of the oppressed black man, looking to God for salvation, while the white man keeps a foot on the black man’s neck.

 

What liberation theology can not come to grips with is the real world.  On Sunday, ministers like Jeremiah Wright preach racism and hatred.  But then the members of those churches go to work Monday through Friday in a world that now offers fair and equal pay, good education, fair housing, a means to get ahead.  Then on Sunday, they get another dose of how down trodden is the black man. 

 

Most churches ask their members to live what is preached in the church.  If this is the case, is Jeremiah Wright asking the members of Trinity Church, Obama included, to go out and hate, to practice racism?

 

From the Gospel of Luke, Jeremiah Wright seems to have the basis for his theology:

 

The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he has anointed me to preach the good news to the poor. He has sent me to proclaim release to the captives and recovering of sight to the blind, To set at liberty those who are oppressed, to proclaim the acceptable year of the Lord. (Luke 4:18-19).

 

James Cone was also an influence on Jeremiah Wright and this can be seen in many of Wright’s sermons, based on the following from Cone in 1968:

 

“Theologically, Malcolm X was not far wrong when he called the white man ‘the devil.’ The white structure of this American society, personified in every racist, must be at least part of what the New Testament meant by demonic forces…Ironically, the man who enslaves another enslaves himself…To be free to do what I will in relation to another is to be in bondage to the law of least resistance. This is the bondage of racism. Racism is that bondage in which whites are free to beat, rape, or kill blacks. About thirty years ago it was acceptable to lynch a black man by hanging him from a tree; but today whites destroy him by crowding him into a ghetto and letting filth and despair put the final touches on death.”

 

This last sentence from Cone is reflected in many of Wright’s sermons.

Hillary Memo: Lay Off Jeremiah Wright

Political Night Train believes the Clintons have seen the light and may stop trying to make race an issue.  It seems Obama’s minister, Jeremiah Wright is doing a good job injecting hate and racism into the campaign.

Clinton campaign: Yes on Rezko, no on Wright

by James Oliphant

The memo has apparently gone around the Hillary Clinton camp this morning: Lay off the Rev. Jeremiah Wright Jr.

On a conference call Saturday to talk about the state of the race, Clinton campaign officials just wouldn’t go there.

“That’s really for Senator Obama to address,” said chief strategist Mark Penn.

It’s interesting, because certainly, the Clinton folks have shown very little reluctance to knock Obama around like a pinata every time they come across as what they perceive to be a vulnerable spot.

Take, for instance, Obama’s mea culpa on his dealings with Antoin “Tony” Rezko. The Clinton campaign has been calling on Obama for months to come clean about the full extent of his relationship with the indicted developer. Friday, they got their wish to some degree, but that only racheted up the Clinton attacks.

Penn said Obama’s disclosures were part of a “troubling pattern,” in which Obama’s words don’t match the facts. He said Obama’s advisers on foreign policy and trade haven’t always been on the same page as the candidate. And with Rezko, Penn said, Obama waited too long to tell the full story. The theme, as the Clinton folks have been pushing for weeks, is that Obama’s words don’t add up to very much.

“We tend to learn more in dribs and drabs rather than the kind of transparent candidate and the transparent campaign he says he has been running,” Penn said.

Transparency, of course, is a two-way street. The campaign was asked again whether it would release Clinton’s tax returns, something Obama has been demanding for months. Penn said the returns would be released “around April 15.” When pressed, he pledged they would be made public before the Pennsylvania primary. The Obama camp has been saying returns will shed light on the various sources of income for both Hillary — and especially Bill — Clinton.

Clinton spokesman Phil Singer also wondered why Obama had said he wasn’t aware of Rezko’s legal problems when Friday Obama said that he had indeed read stories about Rezko’s troubles and why Obama said Rezko had raised $100,000 less for his campaign than the developer actually raised.

“Senator Obama needs to answer some basic questions, including why does this story keep changing?” Singer said. He complained that Obama “claims the high ground while attacking Senator Clinton’s character.”

As for staying away from Rev. Wright, it may be that the campaign didn’t want to invite comparisons to Geraldine Ferraro, whose race-based remarks were made seemingly a thousand news cycles ago. Or maybe that talking about race in any context has become such a landmine that they just thought it wouldn’t be prudent.

It certainly wasn’t because there was nothing to say.

Questions Obama Must Answer About Jeremiah Wright & Trinity Church

 Political Night Train believes there are many questions Sen. Obama must answer regarding Jeremiah Wright, here are a few:

I Don’t Believe Obama
By Aaron Goldstein (03/15/08)

Obama has been a member of Reverend Wright’s congregation for nearly two decades. Reverend Wright married Barack and Michelle Obama. Reverend Wright baptized their daughters.

Does Obama really expect us to believe that in nearly two decades he never attended a service where Reverend Wright uttered an unkind word about America? Did Reverend Wright only go off the deep end on the Sundays when Obama wasn’t around?

Does Obama really expect us to believe that in nearly two decades, the man whose sermon inspired his book The Audacity of Hope, never told him face to face he believed the United States was responsible for spreading HIV against people of color? Or what he really thinks about Israel?

Does Obama really expect us to believe he would not demand a white Republican politician disassociate with a church whose pastor denounced African Americans? Not on your life. Even if that pastor’s retirement was imminent.
http://www.americandaily.com/article/21777

Obama Can Not Explain His Support for Jeremiah Wright

Obama must explain how he and his family were able to tolerate Jeremiah Wright’s racist and hateful sermons over the past 20 years.  How could Barack and Michelle Obama sit, with their two young daugthers, through sermon after sermon, with Jeremiah Wright just feet away, spewing racist epithats and hatred for whites and jews?  How could he do this to his family?  Maybe the answer lies in the core beliefs and values of Barack and Michelle, or maybe the answer is elsewhere.  How could Obama give $20,000+ each year to a church that he now says does not reflect his own beliefs and values.  There is something amiss here and it needs to be explained.  The question is, will Obama get a pass from the media, just as Hillary and Bill got passes on their dealings (cattle futures, Whitewater, Travelgate, Monica, billing records).  At least in the case of Bill Clinton, he was impeached by the US House of Representatives, the equivalent of you or I being tried and convicted in a court of law.  He just didn’t receive any punishment, that is removal from office by the Senate (thanks in no measure to Sen. Strom Thurmond, of all people).

Note in Obama’s quotes below, he does not once mention Jeremiah Wright by name.

Obama decries pastor’s inflammatory statements

WASHINGTON (AFP) — Democratic presidential hopeful Barack Obama tried to distance himself from a controversial preacher Saturday, denouncing his allegations that the September 11 attacks were brought on by American “terrorism.”

The Illinois senator acted to quell a controversy over remarks by the preacher, Reverend Jeremiah Wright, who also argued African-Americans should sing “God Damn America” to protest their treatment.

In a blog post on the Huffington Post website, Obama admitted Friday that Wright had “touched off a firestorm” with “some inflammatory and appalling remarks he made about our country, our politics, and my political opponents.”

“I vehemently disagree and strongly condemn the statements that have been the subject of this controversy,” Obama wrote, and said such comments flew in the face of his own “profound” love of America.

“I categorically denounce any statement that disparages our great country or serves to divide us from our allies.

Appearing on CNN television later that same day, Obama said Wright’s comments “didn’t reflect my values, and didn’t reflect my ideals.”

More On Michelle Obama and Her Values

Political Night Train found the following interesting, especially when compared to Michelle Obama’s Princeton thesis.  In her thesis Michelle seemed to struggle with whether to go for the “white” value of a high paying corporate job, or to work to support her black community.  She went on to conclude that the more a black is educated at a white institution such as Princeton, and exposed to white values, the more likely a black person is assume those values and place less value on helping lower class blacks.  Michelle seemed quite disappointed when her thesis supported the notion that blacks graduating from Princeton pick up many white values.Looks like Michelle picked up some of those white values, but now, in Oprah-style, wants everyone else to abandon their hopes for a good education and a high paying job.  Liberals always know better than you what’s best for you.As Political Night Train has said, ones values are largely fixed by the age one typically graduates from college.  Now, how many of Michelle’s core values are reflected in those of Trinity Church and the Rev. Jeremiah Wright?Michelle’s thesis can be found here at Political Night Train.Michelle Obama: “Don’t Go Into Corporate America”   [Byron York]I have a new story today about Michelle Obama’s visit to Zanesville, Ohio, where she met with a group of women at a local day care center.  According to the U.S. Census, Muskingum County, where Zanesville is located, had a median household income of $37,192 in 2004, below both the Ohio and national averages.  Just 12.2 percent of adults in the county have a bachelor’s degree or higher, also well below the state and national averages.  About 20 percent don’t have a high school degree.  Nevertheless, Mrs. Obama urged them to foreswear lucrative professions like corporate law or hedge fund management and go into the helping industry, even if the sacrifice is great:As she has many times in the past, Mrs. Obama complains about the lasting burden of student loans dating from her days at Princeton and Harvard Law School. She talks about people who end up taking years and years, until middle age, to pay off their debts. “The salaries don’t keep up with the cost of paying off the debt, so you’re in your 40s, still paying off your debt at a time when you have to save for your kids,” she says.“Barack and I were in that position,” she continues. “The only reason we’re not in that position is that Barack wrote two best-selling books… It was like Jack and his magic beans. But up until a few years ago, we were struggling to figure out how we would save for our kids.” A former attorney with the white-shoe Chicago firm of Sidley & Austin, Obama explains that she and her husband made the choice to give up lucrative jobs in favor of community service. “We left corporate America, which is a lot of what we’re asking young people to do,” she tells the women. “Don’t go into corporate America. You know, become teachers. Work for the community. Be social workers. Be a nurse. Those are the careers that we need, and we’re encouraging our young people to do that. But if you make that choice, as we did, to move out of the money-making industry into the helping industry, then your salaries respond.” Faced with that reality, she adds, “many of our bright stars are going into corporate law or hedge-fund management.”

What she doesn’t mention is that the helping industry has treated her pretty well. In 2006, the Chicago Tribune reported that Mrs. Obama’s compensation at the University of Chicago Hospital, where she is a vice president for community affairs, jumped from $121,910 in 2004, just before her husband was elected to the Senate, to $316,962 in 2005, just after he took office. And that does not count the money Mrs. Obama receives from serving on corporate boards. She would have been O.K. even without Jack’s magic beans.

Mrs. Obama also bemoaned the amount of money she has to spend — nearly one-third of the median household income in Zanesville — on piano, dance, and other lessons for her two children.  But she was grateful for the concern her husband’s supporters have shown for her. “Everywhere I go, no matter what, the women in the audience, their first question for me is, ‘How on earth are you managing it, how are you keeping it all together?'” she told the women.

 

http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=OTViZjhhNGI1Y2QxYjE0ZDc0YmMwMjJiNmUyZjQ3MmU=

 

Michelle Obama’s Princeton Thesis – Her Black Values Revealed?

Michelle Obama’s senior thesis at Princeton was on the attitudes of black Princeton alumni and attempted to examine the following issues:

 

>Extent to which black alumni are comfortable interacting with black and whites

>Extent to which black alumni are motivated to benefit black communities in comparison to other things, such as themselves, their families, etc.

>The ideologies black alumni hold with respect to race relations between blacks and whites

>Feelings black alumni have toward the black lower class, such as feelings of obligation that they should help improve the lives of this particular group of blacks.

 

On Page 2 of her thesis, Michelle Obama states that regardless of her education, integration, assimilation into white culture, she will always be on the periphery of society, never becoming a full participant.

 

Michelle goes on to say she has acquired some white conservative values, namely getting accepted at a prestigious graduate school and getting a high paying corporate job.

 

Further along in her thesis, Michelle Obama argues for the Stokely Carmichael, or Black Power position that black must first close ranks, take pride in their blackness and black value system, before entering society as a whole. 

 Carmichael, Malcolm X and the Black Power Movement espoused a black first doctrine.  They wanted nothing less than a black nation within a nation.  This was seen as the means to gain political and economic power equal to that of whites. 

Michelle Obama then goes on to bemoan the separation of black studies from white studies.

 The way black studies were handled by Princeton in the mid-80’s may well have been a function of how the liberal Princeton professors and administrators buying into, and promoting the values of Carmichael and the Black Power Movement. 

On Page 26, Michelle Obama draws the conclusion that the more blacks interact with whites on an intellectual level, the less likely those blacks will value helping poor blacks.

 

Does this mean white values corrupt black values?

 

Michelle goes on in her thesis to say that the more blacks become integrated or assimilated into society as a whole, the less motivated those blacks are to benefit the black community and the less positive their attitudes toward lower class blacks.  She goes on to state that as blacks have become more integrated into white society, the more blacks have lost touch with black culture, with some blacks becoming so removed from their culture that they feel ashamed of that culture.

 

Michelle Obama had hoped that her findings would conclude that as a result of black’s time at Princeton, and despite a high degree of identification with white society, black Princeton alumni would maintain a level of identification with the black community and values.  Her findings did not support this possibility.

 Michelle Obama’s senior thesis would have come at a time in her life when her attitudes, values and view of the world would mostly be fixed.  Is her thesis a reflection of why she was attracted to the Rev. Jeremiah Wright and Trinity Church.  Does her thesis reflect deep seated feelings about whites and society as a whole.  And is this the basis for Michelle Obama not being proud of her country, until now?

Michelle Obama – Basis for Her “Not Proud” Statement

In Milwaukee on Monday, Michelle Obama said: “Let me tell you, for the first time in my adult life, I am really proud of my country. ”

Michelle Obama’s views of her country were shaped first by her experiences in college and law school, but most importantly, by her long-term exposure to the teachings of her church.  Don’t believe her church teachings shape members opinions, take a hard look at the web site for Trinity Church and their values.

The following are directly from the site:

We are a congregation which is Unashamedly Black and Unapologetically Christian… Our roots in the Black religious experience and tradition are deep, lasting and permanent. We are an African people, and remain “true to our native land,” the mother continent, the cradle of civilization. God has superintended our pilgrimage through the days of slavery, the days of segregation, and the long night of racism. It is God who gives us the strength and courage to continuously address injustice as a people, and as a congregation. We constantly affirm our trust in God through cultural expression of a Black worship service and ministries which address the Black Community.

The Pastor as well as the membership of Trinity United Church of Christ is committed to a 10-point Vision:

  1. A congregation committed to ADORATION.
  2. A congregation preaching SALVATION.
  3. A congregation actively seeking RECONCILIATION.
  4. A congregation with a non-negotiable COMMITMENT TO AFRICA.
  5. A congregation committed to BIBLICAL EDUCATION.
  6. A congregation committed to CULTURAL EDUCATION.
  7. A congregation committed to the HISTORICAL EDUCATION OF AFRICAN PEOPLE IN DIASPORA.
  8. A congregation committed to LIBERATION.
  9. A congregation committed to RESTORATION.
  10. A congregation working towards ECONOMIC PARITY.

http://www.tucc.org/about.htm

How Hillary Wins – Open Advice from Political Night Train

How Hillary Wins Hillary Clinton is down, but not out.  Can she be the next Clinton “Come Back Kid”?  And how does she do it.  Many weeks ago, before the Iowa caucus, Political Night Train set out a strategy whereby Hillary would go negative on John Edwards, rather than Obama.  The strategy was designed to draw off much of Edwards support.  Seems no one in the Clinton campaign took our open advice, and now they long for those delegates that are pledged to Edwards.  Had Clinton gone extremely negative on Edwards, she would now be ahead, may have won a few additional states, could have avoided having Bill Clinton inject the “race” issue in South Carolina.  As a side thought, Bill Clinton’s injection of racism probably did more to damage Hillary personally than any other single event.  Although the Clinton’s are most likely not out-and-out racists, they are perfectly capable of using racism to win an election.  This willingness to use racism went down bad with black leaders, and blacks in general, not to mention whites.  Just when a young generation of whites were willing to go to the polls and say race doesn’t matter, along comes an old fart like Bill Clinton to say race does matter. So how does Hillary win in Texas and Ohio?  Hillary’s last chance, and Political Night Train’s open advice to her campaign is to go negative not on Barack Obama, but on Michelle Obama.  What you say?  Yes, go very negative on Michelle.  Hillary should use herself as an example and say that Michelle would be overly influencing on a Barack Obama administration.  Point out the statements that Michelle has made about whites, especially those ignored by the main stream media during the days in Iowa.  Point out the significant influence the Rev. Jeremiah Wright and Trinity Church has had on Michelle.  Point out that Michelle’s agenda is blacks only, blacks first, at the expense of other minority groups. Hammer over and over again how Michelle would overly influence Barack to put a black agenda ahead of all other issues.  Everything in an Obama administration would be tinged with black overtones.  All as the expense of other minorities.  This strategy would work since Bill Clinton has already introduced the racism issue.  Hillary would have to use her shills, people like James Carville to promote these stories while she stays above the fray.  In other words, Hillary needs to Swift Boat Michelle Obama.  Hillary could even use Michelle’s senior thesis at Princeton against her. 

Is Farrakhan Influencing Obama Through Jeremiah Wright?

Political Night Train believes the following articles are very revealing about Barack Obama’s relationship with Louis Farrakhan, a relationship that needs closer scrunity.  Also of question is influence the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Jr. and other leaders of Trinity United Church will have on Obama’s policies and how he would conduct his administration. Obama Decries Farrakhan StatementsBy Shailagh Murray
Sen. Barack Obama’s campaign moved quickly today to quell another race-related flap, this one involving Nation of Islam leader, Louis Farrakhan.
Columnist Richard Cohen stirred the pot this morning in an op-ed column in The Washington Post, writing:Barack Obama is a member of Chicago’s Trinity United Church of Christ. Its minister, and Obama’s spiritual adviser, is the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. In 1982, the church launched Trumpet Newsmagazine; Wright’s daughters serve as publisher and executive editor. Every year, the magazine makes awards in various categories. Last year, it gave the Dr. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. Trumpeter Award to a man it said “truly epitomized greatness.” That man is Louis Farrakhan.Cohen chronicled Farrakhan’s long record of inflammatory statements, from denigrating the Holocaust, to accusing Jewish people of victimizing African Americans. He did stipulate, “It’s important to state right off that nothing in Obama’s record suggests he harbors anti-Semitic views or agrees with Wright when it comes to Farrakhan.” But, he suggested, “Farrakhan, in a strictly political sense, may be a tough issue for him.” The column spread like wildfire around the blogosphere — especially on the right — and, this afternoon, the Obama campaign responded with an unequivocal statement on it from the candidate himself.“I decry racism and anti-Semitism in every form and strongly condemn the anti-Semitic statements made by Minister Farrakhan,” Obama said in the statement. “I assume that Trumpet Magazine made its own decision to honor Farrakhan based on his efforts to rehabilitate ex-offenders, but it is not a decision with which I agree.”

http://blog.washingtonpost.com/the-trail/2008/01/15/obama_decries_farrakhan_statem_1.html?hpid=topnews

 Obama ‘repudiates’ Farrakhan?Ed Lasky
The New York Sun is reporting that Barack Obama repudiated the views of Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan that were discussed in Richard Cohen’s Washington Post column. Cohen’s criticism regarding Obama’s ties to the Church and the Pastor that gave an award to Farrakhan were reaching a large audience that included potential Democrat voters who might be swayed to withdraw support from Obama. This statement by Obama is a political maneuver that should be given little credence. Obama is very actively involved in his church; he knew of this award long before Richard Cohen publicized its grant to Farrakhan. Furthermore, Pastor Wright has had a long relationship and alliance with Louis Farrakhan.  Obama did not object to these ties between Pastor Wright and Farrakhan before; nor has Obama rejected the anti-Israel diatribes of Wright. Regardless, Obama adheres to a church and a minister that have long espoused positions inimical to the American-Israel relationship, let alone the trumpeting of black values and racial exclusiveness.  This follows a pattern for Obama: he shows extreme loyalty to a church and pastor whose controversial views eventually become publicized. Then Obama “disappears” the Minister and Obama’s campaign (not Obama himself) issues a statement that Obama does not agree with everything that Wright espouses.  He solicits and gains support from the controversial George Soros, a man whose anti-Israel passions and allegations regarding America’s Jewish community and Congress are well-known. When these ties become publicized, Obama’s campaign (not Obama himself) issues a statement that Obama does not agree with Soros on this topic.  When Obama articulates anti-Israel positions in off-the cuff remarks, his campaign (not Obama himself-stop me if you have heard this before) issues clarifications that attempt to explain away the plain English import of Obama’s (the supreme orator) expressed views. In other words, Obama only disavows when it is politically opportune to do so. He seems to have never objected to these views before they become publicized and create a political firestorm because they belie his image of peace, compassion, unity.  Obama is not a profile in courage and his disavowals are political pabulum. 

http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2008/01/obama_repudiates_farrakhan.html

 Barack Obama and IsraelBy Ed Lasky Here are some excerpts from this article …… One seemingly consistent theme running throughout Barack Obama’s career is his comfort with aligning himself with people who are anti-Israel advocates. This ease around Israel animus has taken various forms. As Obama has continued his political ascent, he has moved up the prestige scale in terms of his associates. Early on in his career he chose a church headed by a former Black Muslim who is a harsh anti-Israel advocate and who may be seen as tinged with anti-Semitism. This church is a member of a denomination whose governing body has taken a series of anti-Israel actions.   As his political fortunes and ambition climbed, he found support from George Soros, multibillionaire promoter of groups that have been consistently harsh and biased critics of the American-Israel relationship.  There are literally hundreds of churches on the South Side of Chicago that Obama could have chosen from. He selected one that was headed by Reverend Jeremiah Wright, Junior. The anti-Israel rants of this minister have been well chronicled. Among the gems:  The Israelis have illegally occupied Palestinian territories for almost 40 years now. It took a divestment campaign to wake the business community up concerning the South Africa issue. Divestment has now hit the table again as a strategy to wake the business community up and to wake Americans up concerning the injustice and the racism under which the Palestinians have lived because of Zionism 

Pastor Wright is a supporter of Louis Farrakhan (who called Judaism a “gutter religion” and depicted Jews as “bloodsuckers”) and traveled with him to visit Col. Muammar al-Gaddafi, archenemy of Israel’s and a terror supporter.

Read the rest of this article here:  http://www.americanthinker.com/2008/01/barack_obama_and_israel.html

 Political Night Train also thinks it is time for the media to begin looking into Michelle Obama’s work with Trinity Unitied Church, especially some of the anti-white and anti-Jewish views of groups within the church.  

First Reactions To Oprah In Iowa

Was it me or was Oprah yelling?

 

She (Oprah) should stick to daytime gab fests instead of stumping for candidates — she is not good at it.

 

Her (Oprah) speech was not as good as the expectations that the campaign had built up.

 

I was left a little disappointed.

 

It also seemed that everyone in the audience was more interested in hearing Oprah and not Michelle or Obama.

 

What a flop! Obama’s speech afterward was so disjointed that I hope people did not watch.

 

For all the hype, I was not impressed. I hope they retool Oprah’s speech or scrap her appearances altogether.

 Are we so culturally degenerate that we need a talk show hostess (Oprah) to tell us who’s best qualified to run this once-great country? ” I am so tired of Politics.” Why then is she (Oprah) involved up to her eyeballs in it?  Good speeches by Michelle Obama, Oprah and Barack himself. As Michelle Obama’s been telling people on the campaign trail, “the game of politics is to make you afraid so you don’t think… We’re asking you, please *don’t* base you votes this time on fear. Base it on hope.”  

Michelle Obama A Racist?

 The following statement by Michelle Obama is quoted from an interview her husband, Senator Obama gave in Iowa this past weekend.  “Boy, it’s really pretty up here,’ but she said, ‘But you know, I can see why if I was living out here, I’d want a gun.” This comment by the Senator’s wife was not widely reported in any media sources.  Makes you wonder, if this statement had been made, Harlem, by the wife of any Republican candidate, Sharpton would be branding her a racist.

HOT! Obama: My wife sees need for rural gun ownership

It has been reported that Obama’s wife has a chip on her shoulder for whites.  Does the following fit, and is Michelle sterotyping Iowans?  Guns in Iowa are OK, but not in Chicago?

HARLAN, Iowa — From his days of campaigning in Downstate Illinois, Sen. Barack Obama has been asked plenty of times about his views on gun ownership. But the Illinois Democrat and presidential candidate added a new wrinkle Saturday night while campaigning in conservative-leaning western Iowa, when he said his Chicago-native wife, Michelle, recently commented that she could see why rural folks might want to own guns.Here was Obama’s discussion of gun ownership and his wife’s thoughts during a campaign stop at a middle school:“We should be able to combine respect for those traditions with our concern for kids who are being shot down. This is a classic example of us just applying some common sense, just being reasonable, right? And reasonable would say that lawful gun owners – I respect the Second Amendment. I think lawful gun owners should be able to hunt, be sportsmen, protect their families.“And by the way, Michelle, my wife, she was traveling up, I think, in eastern Iowa, she was driving through this nice, beautiful area, going through all this farmland and hills and rivers and she said ‘Boy, it’s really pretty up here,’ but she said, ‘But you know, I can see why if I was living out here, I’d want a gun. Because, you know, 911 is going to take some time before somebody responds. You know what I mean? You know, it’s like five miles between every house.’ “So the point is, though, we should be able to do that, and we should be able to enforce laws that keep guns off the streets in inner cities because some unscrupulous gun dealer is, you know, letting somebody load up a van with a bunch of cheap handguns or sawed-off shotguns and dumping them and selling them for a profit in the streets.”http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/news/politics/blog/2007/11/obama_my_wife_sees_need_for_ru.html