A Comment About

Conservatives, Rejoice: Obama Did the ‘Wright’ Thing

May 1, 2008 - 1:49 am - by Brendan Loy
ajacksonian
2008-05-01 07:44:54

So, when all the bad and hurtful choices to him and the Nation are removed, Barack Obama can finally back the right choice in a half-hearted way? Isn’t *that* a wonderful personality to have as President!

I do happen to remember the *previous* speech he gave on Wright way back in March and *he* was the one casting it as a ‘race issue’ when it was a ‘character issue’ for the candidate. He missed that chance by a long shot as he could not understand that to be a ‘change candidate’ one must be willing to sacrifice and change *themselves first* and he would not do so. He could have batted that one out of the field and demonstrated character, integrity, humility in having made very bad decisions and, then, having recognized that his own actions were *part of the problem* vow to change himself and work for that even if he did not win the race or the Presidency.

I didn’t hear those words from his mouth then or now.

If he can’t recognize that such ties *at home* are lethal to ‘change dialogue’, then it is no wonder he can’t figure out why Ayers, Rezko, Auchi, Khalidi, et. al. just aren’t appreciated in the rest of the nation and actually might be a problem when trying to get ‘change’. Those individuals and the organizations they are connected to do not represent any ‘healing’: they are gangsters, terrorist sympathizers, terrorists, and one of the most well connected individuals in organized crime and terrorism walking around the planet. If Obama can’t recognize Wright as a problem and having associated with him for 20 years, then what, exactly, will he do with individuals with far more connections and much further out of reach than Wright?

These are not ‘soft problems’ like ‘addressing racism’ but hard ones of people who are aiding and abetting those wishing no good to our country. So, for a man who runs on ‘character and judgement’ as his main reasons to have people vote for him, when he fails at *those* then why, exactly, should people consider voting for him? He has failed on the exact, same things he considers his strengths, which is a poor thing to see in a politician or a man.

He wants to be judged on those things?

So be it.