I don't know how to break this to you Eric, but they are asking two different questions. Concerned about his relationship vs. did the relationship cause them to have doubts about Obama.

Just thought I'd point that out....

Totally OT but I don't see a post up on this yet.

http://ruralvotes.com/thefield/?p=926#comments

Clinton's haul in February was nowhere near $35M.

Check this out, Rush in legal trouble in Ohio re: cross-over voting.

http://www.alternet.org/democracy/80392/

it was a good speech. it will soften the fall and put this issue out in the open where it needs to be. the polls show that people appreciated that he had the guts to address the issue of race so directly.

Anybody going to talk about Chris Wallace taking on the morning show on Fox for non-stop Obama bashing? Mentioned on DKos

Okay, great credit him for a nice speech and, yes, lets have a good discussion on racism, sexism, and all the rest of the ways that people discriminate for bad or good. That said, there still remains the problem of Obama's participation, funding, friendship, and judgement about membership in a racist, America-hating church and community for over 20 years. This is not some passing thing, he even is raising his daughters in this environment. Is his judgement acceptable? Where are his values if this is acceptable for 20 years? Why reject now? Why all the lies about this? Heck, just last week he is quoted in several places as saying he never heard any of it. Now, on the 18th, he finally admitted that yes, he heard. I have yet to see an acknowledgment for the lies, nor an apology. And yesterday, he uses racism to trash his own grandmother as a 'typical White person' in explaining and accusing all White people of racism. I'm sorry, but nice speeches and a good conversation are not sufficient distraction to miss the point that Obama is knowingly and willingly a member of a racist and America hating church for 20 years and still today.

The real test of how this has affected Obama's electability will be in the actual remaining primary elections.

That's when people cast their secret votes to represent their firmest views.

If Obama can barely manage any more wins, except perhaps, in places like Oregon and NC where he should find easy victories, it will be all one needs to know about his real viability come November. If, for example, he wins only in Oregon from here on out, and he loses by landslides in a number of other states, who could honestly claim that he has a shot to win the general?

And what superdelegate in his/her right mind is going to plunk down for such a certain loser at that stage?

Um, if I were you, I'd STFU about the Lincoln Bedroom... that's the last thing your people need to bring up.

This is a cactus field we have to walk through as a nation. Lincoln realized that when he insisted we move toward a realization of the "all...created equal" business or dump the charade. There is no United States unless we keep polishing the gem at the grindstone. We're screwed if we don't.
There's that, too.

Oh, BTW, rassmussen is one of the worst polling ops. They are down near the bottom. Their polls are always notoriously skewed to the right on virtually everything, by 10 points and up I noticed. For example, on the king's approval they historically were about 10 points higer than all the other polls. I'd put more credence in the fox poll than rasmussen, which is saying alot.

Gov. Richardson's Endorsement is a spectacular evidence Speech is working. This is what the governor said:

Senator Obama could have given a safer speech. He is, after all, well ahead in the delegate count for our party’s nomination. He could have just waited for the controversy over the deplorable remarks of Reverend Wright to subside, as it surely would have. Instead, Senator Obama showed us once again what kind of leader he is. He spoke to us as adults

This is not only an endorsement for Obama but an endorsement for the speech that democrats need to look at.

People have doubts, they should also question Bill Clinton's association with Jeremiah Wright if they are so concerned.

This whole Jeremiah Wright = David Duke is total joke in itself. I just wish the MSM would get someone with balls enough to put it to rest. There's too many opinion throwers out there in the MSM that want to keep this story afloat when it has too many holes in it.

Just like the Antonio Rezko stich.

Wright-Clinton
http://images.politico.com/global/clintonwright2.jpg

Rezko-Clinton
http://www.nationalledger.com/artman/uploads/hillary_slumlord.jpg

Let's end this hypocrisy! VOTE OBAMA now for nominee!

.
.

By Rae:

Everyone who has not drank the Obama Koolaid is now really questioning the judgment of a man - a politician - with all the negative connotations that the label “politician” elicits, a politician who would negligently, without thought, enroll his children in a hate preaching church, or with thought, calculatingly do so for political expediency, without care of the price it would cost him and his children; that price being the brutal assault on the new and fresh minds and souls in those young ones who would have otherwise been allowed to grow and flourish in a new and better world - a world free of much of the old prejudices and hatreds of an older generation.

But no, Obama took away that innocence from his children either because of a lack of awareness and negligence in parenting and role modeling, or done in a calculated choice and disregard of them for the sake of political ambition. Either way, you arrive at the same result, that of bad judgment.
Everyone should question Obama on that, supporters and non-supporters alike.

We expect our leaders to exercise better judgment than that. Heck, the average American typically would know better than that, even the typical white people Obama referred to in his latest speech explaining his ill advised comparison between his own grandmother and his pastor.

But if we expect even more from our leaders then can we not, should we not, now question those who knowing of this defect in judgment, still come out in support of him and even endorse him as Bill Richardson did today? And what does that say of Sen. Lincoln Chafee of Rhode Island, a republican who endorsed Obama when he did not know better, who now continues to appear on Obama’s behalf, knowing of this poor judgment?

These politicians are now saying to the American people, we don’t care about that judgment. Our judgment is the same and our judgment says we want this man, this politician to be our leader now, our children’s role model.

When these politicians come up for re-election, we the typical white people as well as people of color who think it unwise to teach our children hate, should not forget those who came out in support of this politician and his judgment.

Rae

Why are people staying stuck on Wright? (I wanted to type 'stuck on wrong')

Obama's speech provides him with reasonable distance from Wright's words. Are people really prepared to abandon Obama because he did not throw Wright under the bus? Because he did not storm out of allegedly offensive sermons? When did this become the criterion by which we judge someone's character? When did it become appropriate for the people to scrutinize the words uttered from the pulpit in a house of worship?

And why isn't ANYONE talking about Hillary's association with VERY dubious religious figures? She is an active member of "The Family," a collection of right-wing intolerants.

And then there's that little thing about McCain's courting the support of Hagee, whose remarks about Catholics and Jews (and gays and Muslims) make Wright's pale in comparison.

If Wright's remarks are SUCH a big deal, why aren't these other things campaign torpedoes for Clinton and McCain?

Matthew Weaver: The answer is no. I can't even imagine my priest making a racist remark. If he were to do so... it would be his last sermon. Were the black community to find out, there'd be picketing outside the church almost immediately. However, mine is only the humble opinion of a typical white person.

tedirene, I'd be less worried about your priest making a racist remark and more worried about how much of your tithe has been spent paying off victims of sexual abuse in your diocese. Clearly, you lack the self-awareness to understand that you are in a far less defensible position than Obama in terms of where you choose to attend church--and I say that as a Catholic myself.

But that's not surprising, since you aren't capable of putting Wright's remarks into context, understanding what Obama really said in his speech on race relations, or grasping the point of Obama's anectdote about his grandmother as a typical white woman of her generation.

Obama is not a racist. He understands race issues, from both the black and white perspectives, better than you do. He's speaking to Americans about race in honest, adult terms. No intelligent person would call him a racist. He has empathy and understanding that you obviously lack.

In short, I think you are the one who needs to "get over it."

jenesq: That you suggest I ought to be concerned about the use of my thithes and the issue of pedophile priests, suggests to me that it is extremely unlikely that you are in fact a Catholic yourself. Though it is a handy means of trying to legitimize your slam on (once again) an entire group of people. It is however, a sentiment repeated ad nauseum on far left blogs, usually by atheists.

You have spent the majority of your keystrokes telling me that my opinion is wrong because I lack self-awareness, lack maturity, lack intelligence etc.. Again, all hallmarks of a far-left argument.

Surprisingly to you perhaps, I will trust my eyes and ears.

Obama's wife recently stated she was only just now proud of her country. He brings his children to a church where (he has acknowledged) the sermons would often be considered objectionable. He has referred to his grandmother as a "typical white person".

In the past, simply suggesting this man was "articulate" was sufficient to raise a fire storm. However, his preacher openly condemning white people is given a pass? That is ridiculous and would not be tolerated for 5 seconds by you folks were it a white candidate of either party. In fact, the Clintons damn near need an attorney to vet any remark they make concerning race.

Back to your moral equivalence argument... If McCain were going to a Catholic church, with a convicted pedophile priest in charge, who referred to black people with the N word and said they were filthy, dirty bastards. Well then we'd be talking apples and apples.

Insulting me demeans you and is just an emotional reaction to a lack of evidence to support or express your position. Telling me what's in Obama' mind isn't an argument. That's just wishful thinking and emotion based.

If it walks like a duck...

I will admit that I'm in that "small" percentage who wasn't overwhelmingly moved by Obama's "race" speech; however,
For you in that same group, here is what you do

Sit back, close your eyes, turn on "the speech"..

You will find yourself floating up to some higher level, it will become surreal and you will get a better understanding of those staunch supporters of The Senator.

But a word of caution, if you open you eyes before the speech fades you will see just another politician.

Andrew Strat: "They have been trying to give Hillary the bums rush all along."

No. Obama's 28 states to Clinton's 14 states have been doing that.

BTW, True Confessions time here: I am a beer-drinking, blue-collar background, WASP male from Michigan. Right out of the Clinton demographic playbook, Right?

Her superlative "win" in Michigan was due, in very great part, to that fact that many — like myself — knew up front that A) our vote in the primary here wouldn't count for anything (heck, all the candidates agreed it wouldn't), B) the candidate of our choice, which was not HRC, was not even on the ballot and so C) I and many, many others I know who are very politically active simply stayed home. It was odd. It was bad. It left a sour taste in my mouth to not vote, when I always have before. But I felt there was little point to waste my time and the very expensive gasoline to vote "uncommitted" when I knew exactly for whom I wanted to vote.

That "major" (50%) win of HRC's in this state was not half of the typical voting electorate here. Of course, I have no hard figures on how many did stay home, but she did not win half this state and, as they all agreed, didn't "win" those votes anyway...

...any more than some dictator in a third world country can be said to have "won" an election where there was only one name on the ballot.

And one further note: About all this trash-talking, condescending bullsh*t about Obama supporters being "kool-aide drinking cultists" that we have had to absorb for months and months now? Look. We don't need some mommy figure to keep the 3 a.m. bogey men from popping out of the closet at us and shouting "boo!" We don't need some daddy figure (who probably suffers from PTSD anyway) assuring us his twitchy finger is next to teh red button on The Football so we can feel all secure in the night either.

I'll even stop saying "we." I'll own my own feelings here. I want what I already have: A person who can talk to me like I'm an adult. A person who can go against the wishes of his political advisers and deliver a gutsy, brave, and (gasp!) honest speech that requires both hearing and thinking, instead of something that straddles the middle and is sanitized and safe. Especially since he was forced to respond.

Yup. Maybe it wasn't enough for the real kool-aide drinkers, the "love it or leave it" types who are in denial that this is a blended culture encouraged by years of "Give us your tired, your poor, your huddled masses..." at the Pearly Gates of the U.S. in New York harbor.

Besides, when all good Christians acknowledge they were exposed to [fill in the blank] number of years of exposure to a doctrine that has at least 4-5 clear passages contained in the Literal Word that the only sentence for the 40% of the adult American population who have admitted to having committed adultery is death and fully denounce and reject such an anti-American doctrine, then and only then will I feel a fair standard is being applied to Obama and his position on the ex-Marine Rev. Wright.

Otherwise, those same good Christians (and Jews and Muslims, since they all share that Old Testament in their teachings) have not one leg to stand on if they suggest a person is unable to take the good from religious teachings and even the teachers, though those teachings espouse feelings and beliefs that do not serve the good of America's citizens.

I tried that bit about closing my eyes, and listening to the speech of the century. By the time it was over I was shouting yes we can, yes we can, yes we can. My wife had to come in and throttle me.

If you are not convinced, just try it for yourself.