Are you implying that the Wright clips are manufactured by either Clinton or McCain?

These clips exist only because Obama chose to associate with Wright, who is a hate monger, anti-white, anti-American who should be deported at once.

Clinton AND McCain are respectable leaders who are undispiduted patriots and good Americans who do not associate with people like Wright.

Look at it this way, if McCain hung with the KKK for 20 years and would not disown them, would blacks be in a big hurry to elect him? Of course not. Obama has LOST major support among Whites because of Wright, and thank God this information is out now for the American people to fairly assess Obama. It is the job of the press to reveal this information to the American people.

First, Rev. Wright is no KKK.

In case you have forgotten, KKK lynched and killed unaccounted number of black people in America. They burn crosses on lawns of black people to scare them away. They bombed and killed civil right activists.

KKK does not hate America. They hate black people.

Rev. Wright was a marine. (You don’t hear people say that)

He spewed hate of his country from the pulpit. A country he once fought for. Why was he doing so? Because of his anger and disillusion. Was his approach right? No. Was his approach the only option? No.

And I think Obama did a good job of throwing light into the thinking of people like Rev. Wright.

Like I wrote somewhere else, those unfamiliar with American Black church are the ones surprised by Rev. Wrights’ words. But I do not think that should be a surprise. I have never been to Native American worship centers. But I will not be surprised if I hear their priest heap Wright’s kind of rants on America.

These people are angry and have reasons to be. Some may not have the intellectual ability to channel their anger through a positive manner. Why they are angry should be of concern to those who care about America?

Please do not compare them to KKK.

The anger of Rev. Wright and his association with Obama should not be an excuse for people to abandon the search for change through Obama’s movement. Doing so means just one of two things - that you are comfortable with the status quo or that you never really wanted to see change anyway, just giving it lip service.

Nobody should be comfortable with the way things are. Both those effected by it and those not effected.

At Crystal :-
----------

Comparing Rev. Wright with KKK is preposterous. Having said that, I can understand what made you think along those lines. A hate preacher is a hate preacher. The Ku Klux Klan has a bloody and violent history. If McCain had an association of even 20 days with Ku Klux Klan, not even the neo-cons would have had any business to do with him. He could have never ever become a political leader of any prominence.

It is interesting to see how Rev. Wright and Louis Farrakhan are coming into play in the way of the Obama campaign. A few weeks back he was asked about his views on Farrakhan during a debate with Hillary and now the Wright controversy. I am glad that he has been able to manage it well both the times. Sometimes I feel bad about Obama.

It is a tragedy that skin color and gender has become the biggest issue in this presidential race and not the merit of individuals. This is a shame, after all, the man who takes office will set to rule not only the US of A but the whole world.

Nick, while the KKK has a violent history, I meant it as a group of people that were united in their hate of one race vs. another, and this is what Wright seems to be doing with thousands of his followers; teaching them to hate whites and to blame the USA for the ills of society and for any issues in their community.

The man is bad news, and please, to cite his record in the Marines does not exonerate him for telling others the USA created AIDS to kill blacks, how preposterous!

In addition, I find it bizarre that this man uses the name of Christ while doing the work of the Devil, creating hate and division instead love and kindness.

Below is a Lecture on the Black Church by Colbert King of Washington Post.

All they wanted to do was pray with the rest of the congregation. But that was asking too much.

To be sure, Absalom Jones and Richard Allen, two leaders in Philadelphia’s black community, enjoyed great success in bringing African Americans into the Christian fold.

But the steady growth in black membership at St. George’s Methodist Episcopal Church distressed the white congregation that owned the church.

At first, black Christians were moved to seats along the wall.

That still allowed for too much mingling.

So one Sunday morning as Allen, Jones and the other black worshipers knelt to pray, white church elders tapped Jones and Allen on the shoulders and told them to take their praying upstairs to a recently built balcony.

Rather than submit to such humiliation, Jones, Allen and the rest of the black worshipers walked out.

The two men formed their own congregations. Jones gained permission from the Episcopal Diocese of Pennsylvania to establish America’s first black parish, St. Thomas African Episcopal Church. He eventually became the Episcopal Church’s first African American priest.

Allen formed a Methodist congregation that eventually became today’s multimillion-member African Methodist Episcopal (AME) Church.

The walkout in the City of Brotherly Love occurred in 1787 — a year that marks the beginning of America’s independent black church, a theological movement born out of racism.

This history comes to mind as I listen to conservative commentators, chief among them MSNBC’s Pat Buchanan, brand as ”racist” the slogan adopted by Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago: ”Unashamedly black and unapologetically Christian.”

Trinity is Barack Obama’s church and the place where the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr. — a gift to all who would bring down Obama — served as pastor until his recent retirement.

Buchanan and his ilk look at Trinity’s slogan with horror. They label the church’s theological values ”Afro-centric” and ”racially exclusive.” Trinity is beyond the pale of Christianity, at least their version of it.

Psst: Trinity has plenty of company, coast to coast.

Many black congregations, from storefronts to mega-churches, are in sync with the Trinity slogan.

They, too, see no need to apologize for their African roots. Nor are they ashamed of preaching the Gospel of Jesus Christ.

But hey, what’s with this newfound concern about African Americans worshiping among themselves in their own way?

More important, who forced that separation?

As sociologist Kenneth Clark noted in his book ”Dark Ghetto,” ministers and lay leaders of white Christian churches historically were unwilling to incorporate large numbers of blacks into their houses of Christ.

That’s still the case today with some churches.

Truth is, folks like Buchanan don’t really care that America’s Christian congregations don’t look like salt and pepper on Sunday mornings. The reality of blacks and whites worshiping apart doesn’t disturb them.

If anything, Buchanan thinks African Americans are ingrates — that we should be satisfied with our station in life.

”America has been the best country on earth for black folks,” Buchanan wrote in his column, ” PJB: A Brief for Whitey,” posted on his Web site yesterday.

”It was here that 600,000 black people, brought from Africa in slave ships, grew into a community of 40 million, were introduced to Christian salvation, and reached the greatest levels of freedom and prosperity blacks have ever known,” he wrote.

Buchanan would have African Americans fall to their knees and thank white people for their grace.

”No people anywhere has done more to lift up blacks than white Americans,” he wrote.

Buchanan & Co. mock Obama’s notion of a racial divide in America and a need to heal the country. In their world, there are no black grievances worth noting.
Truth is, the right-wing commentariat is content to have black churches with timid members worshipping under the banner: ”I’m but a stranger here; heaven is my home.”

It’s those black congregations with pastors who make their churches a voice of liberating gospel, with a loud emphasis on sticking up for the persecuted and afflicting the comfortable, that right-wingers consider a threat to the republic.
Which gets me to the Rev. Jeremiah Wright.

I’ve never met him or been to his church. I’ve seen those TV snippets of his sermons. I’ve also heard what Barack Obama has said about his former pastor, their relationship and his views on Wright’s rants.

His explanations won’t satisfy some, especially those who never planned to support him, anyway. As for me, ’tis enough, ’twill serve.

I also know, as Clark has pointed out, that church plays a religious and cathartic role unlike that of any other institution in the black community.

It’s a haven, a place for emotional release and personal affirmation. The pastor is given much leeway, so long as the church is held together as a family.

Those thoughts may be beyond the understanding of people who wonder why Obama will not leave Trinity.

I know why he stays. So, I bet, would Absalom Jones and Richard Allen.
kingc@washpost.com

I was trying to respond but it has become too long. I will publish it as an article. I think it is important to put Rev. Wright in context.