home

Obama Supporter Conspiracy Theory: Clinton Forced Wright To Talk

By Big Tent Democrat, Section Media
Posted on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 09:20:59 AM EST
Tags: (all tags)
Share This: Digg! StumbleUpon del.icio.us reddit reddit

As eriposte predicted, rabid Obama supporters are forwarding the idea that Clinton made Wright do it.

Some people have totally lost it this campaign season.

By Big Tent Democrat, speaking for me only

< Dems Need A Unity Ticket | The Current State of Superdelegates >

  • The Online Magazine with Liberal coverage of crime-related political and injustice news

  • Contribute To TalkLeft


    • Display: Sort:
    Obama Supporter Conspiracy Theory: Clinton Forced Wright To Talk | 117 comments (117 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment

    Clinton (5.00 / 1) (#3)
    by AnninCA on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 09:27:03 AM EST
    camp wouldn't have taken such a risk.  What if Wright had come out and made sense?

    LOL*

    The editorial writers who are obviously pro-Obama are not making a lot of sense today.  They are twisting in the wind to make this OK.

    George Will actually has a fairly clear piece on the mess.

    And I posted this earlier, too.  It's interesting that the LA TIMES carried it.

    http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oe-goldberg29apr29,0,5010765.column

    Don't you know? (5.00 / 2) (#4)
    by hopeyfix on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 09:27:47 AM EST
    She's a mad scientist: she created the Ebola and AIDS virus, and recently she created a worm that was inoculated on poor Rev. Wright through his ear and reached his brain.

    Wait, perhaps I saw that on "Startrek II - The Wrath of Khan"... I am getting confused with all this fiction!

    It's the Vulcan mind meld. (none / 0) (#101)
    by alexei on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 12:09:56 PM EST


    Parent
    CDS had now (5.00 / 2) (#5)
    by Stellaaa on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 09:30:11 AM EST
    changed to Clinton Dementia Syndrome.  They are demented.  Nothing he does is wrong.  Everyone else, no Hillary is to blame for everything wrong.  Do they understand how paternalistic that is?  The guy cannot even get credit for his own mess up.  

    I kind of wonder whether (none / 0) (#91)
    by FlaDemFem on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:41:33 AM EST
    those Hillary-haters have issues with their mothers. It's so virulent that it has to be something other than politics. Just sayin'.

    Parent
    Your sad and misguided! (none / 0) (#93)
    by indy33 on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:49:57 AM EST
    Rude and offensive. You are also a horrible representative for your candidate. If my mother heard you say that(a Clinton supporter by the way) she would slap you! Just sayin'.

    Parent
    Well..well... (none / 0) (#94)
    by Stellaaa on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:52:23 AM EST
    now why would she slap?  It was a comment.  Gee...calm down.  No need to protest so much, it was an observation.  

    Parent
    Some of the stuff that is being spewed (none / 0) (#104)
    by FlaDemFem on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 12:26:19 PM EST
    about Hillary is so misogynist and non-policy oriented that there must be something else behind it. I didn't say that ALL the Obama supporters have issues, just that some of the "Hillary is the Devil Incarnate" types might have. And if your mother slaps me, hon, I will counter with a right cross. A hard one. I don't let anyone hit me, no matter what sex they are.

    Parent
    speaking of rude and offensive... (none / 0) (#106)
    by moll on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 01:15:05 PM EST
    I would like to know why it always comes down to someone needing to be hit. And why the someone who needs to be hit always seems to be a Clinton supporter.

    Parent
    At the risk of (5.00 / 2) (#7)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 09:34:43 AM EST
    being criticized for pigeonholing people based on brain wiring...I'm seriously starting to believe that the Clinton deranged have brain tumors or something that affect their abilities to think like rational human beings.

    So a Clinton supporter invited Wright to the press club. Well guess what?  Wright could have turned the whole thing into a ridiculously pro-Obama boon!  Guess what, he didn't!  And that's on him and on Obama.  

    It's NOT Hillary's fault.

    And any rational human being with an ounce of common sense and sense of fairness would think so.  Of course, this rules out Aravosis, who was a Republican when Bill ran for prez.  It also rules out KOS, Huffington and Sully too.

    She made Wright use the wrong 'side' of his brain (5.00 / 0) (#75)
    by Ellie on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:39:30 AM EST
    Folks, if she has that awesome super-power, Sen Hillary Rodham Clinton gawd-damn DESERVES to be President of These United States!

    (All of 'em, right down to the spate of hastily scooped and ginned ones Obama used to inflate his Inspirational Hype.)

    Parent

    Hillary was behind Wright all along! (none / 0) (#32)
    by Josey on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:03:06 AM EST
    OMG!  this is devastating!!!

    http://tinyurl.com/3osnq8


    Parent

    LOL! (5.00 / 1) (#38)
    by madamab on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:04:53 AM EST
    She IS the Queen of the Universe!!!1111!!!

    Parent
    We knew that already (none / 0) (#57)
    by TeresaInSnow2 on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:21:03 AM EST
    She is the messiah, right?  

    wink, wink, kidding.

    Parent

    She is a witch. (5.00 / 1) (#92)
    by inclusiveheart on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:42:41 AM EST
    She cast a spell on Wright and he is completely under her control.  /snark


    Parent
    I thought she turned him into a newt! (5.00 / 1) (#113)
    by jeffinalabama on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 01:48:16 PM EST


    Parent
    Afraid of paper tigers (5.00 / 3) (#8)
    by Prabhata on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 09:37:02 AM EST
    If BO's followers (not supporters) believe it, I think they are scared of a photo of Hillary.  To be afraid of a paper Hillary is just hilarious.

    Speaking for me only (5.00 / 4) (#9)
    by stefystef on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 09:38:23 AM EST
    IMO, the Obama followers are starting to crack.
    It's tough to back a false "prophet" when the mask is slipping.

    Or first love (5.00 / 2) (#10)
    by Stellaaa on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 09:42:05 AM EST
    is not the angel you thought she/he was.  

    Parent
    the funny part is (5.00 / 1) (#11)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 09:43:12 AM EST
    Obamas only hope now is that Wright endorses Hillary.

    That would not suprise me and it would not suprise (none / 0) (#26)
    by Salt on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 09:58:38 AM EST
    me that that its campaign strategy recall they were pushing the Bill Clinton photo with Wright. I believe his campaign has shown they are willing to do whatever to win what's worse, could be worse, then re victimizing a community with their trumped up political stunts inflaming grievances that is some are very real those scars are not gone for everyone, Wrights proof of that, but not to long ago a man killed 5 people some official because he believed they were persecuting him like his words white plantation owners, its real, its harmful, its wrong and its reckless it's immoral so I expect anything now.

    Parent
    well (5.00 / 2) (#46)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:11:16 AM EST
    I was being snarky.  I guess honestly that would be one on the only things that WOULD suprise me.
    this whole thing is weird and wrong.
    it feels like something is going on that we dont fully see yet.
    I think I may agree with one comment that Wright wants Obama to lose because that furthers his victim mentality schitck.


    Parent
    Hey, Scaife endorsed her! (none / 0) (#109)
    by oculus on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 01:20:26 PM EST


    Parent
    Wow... (5.00 / 2) (#12)
    by DaytonDem on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 09:43:20 AM EST
    Some folks have wandered pretty far into the tin foil hat brigades.

    and no doubt - (none / 0) (#24)
    by Josey on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 09:56:05 AM EST
    Clyburn will be hitting the airwaves soon legitimizing another conspiracy theory because "many people are talking about this."


    Parent
    Clyburn was on Morning Joe this (none / 0) (#29)
    by athyrio on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:00:57 AM EST
    morning and was tooting a really different horn about this whole thing.....He sounded quite mellow.....The times they are achanging.....

    Parent
    Clyburn (5.00 / 3) (#36)
    by AnninCA on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:03:56 AM EST
    got reined in, no doubt.  He was out of control just at the wrong time.

    What an idiot.  He was even out yesterday touting Wright as great and implying that anyone who didn't "understand" just is racist.

    What an idiot.

    Parent

    Yup (none / 0) (#96)
    by djcny on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:55:35 AM EST
    I noticed that too.  He was very laid back and wasn't foaming at the mouth when WJC was mentioned.  What a difference a day makes.

    Parent
    Probably Only Because Joe Would Have Called Him (5.00 / 1) (#43)
    by MO Blue on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:08:03 AM EST
    on his B.S.

    Parent
    Joe and Mika were funny this morning (none / 0) (#61)
    by kayla on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:25:27 AM EST
    Most of the morning Mika kept going, "Yeah, Wright is being selfish here, but I think there's more to it than that" and "I think he is maybe a little jealous of Obama but there's probably something more to it" and "Well he could be upset with Obama, but Wright is very smart... I think there's more there" and finally Joe goes, "You think the Clinton's paid Wright to start talking."  He said it in kind of a "i am so annoyed with you hinting around these dumb consipiracy theories." tone.

    She goes, "NO... you're putting words in my mouth!"  it was kind of pathetic.  I turned the channel soon after that.

    She did the same thing when the Wright tapes came out.  She kept talking about how suspicious the "timing" was.

    Parent

    Sheesh is she dating David Schuster? (none / 0) (#78)
    by Maria Garcia on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:50:23 AM EST
    ...that's the same tune he was whistling over passportgate.

    Parent
    LOL (none / 0) (#81)
    by mmc9431 on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:01:38 AM EST
    I was amazed how quick that episode was shut down once it was reported that an Obama supporter might be involved! KO and all of MSNBC ranted for two days with the Hilary conspiracy and then there was dead silence. So much for journalistic integrity.

    Parent
    Actually, he said essentially the same (none / 0) (#98)
    by inclusiveheart on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:59:45 AM EST
    things on both MSNBC and CNN this morning.

    Clyburn ended both interviews saying, "With a crazy uncle like that, who needs 527s?"

    Clyburn, like many of the African Americans I've seen interviewed in the wake of Wright's media spree, made a big point of saying that his church wasn't like Wright's church.

    Ironic since Donna Brazile was trying to "help" a couple of weeks ago on This Week by explaining that Wright was pretty tame compared to most black churches.

    Wright's comments yesterday at the National Press Club though seemed to have really turned some of the AA community on its heels.  The guy said that black children don't learn the same way white children do because their brains are different - WTF?  Nancy Giles was on Dan Abrams' program last night and she was all about giving Wright the hook.

    Wright is all over the place - a loose cannon - and Obama really should have cut the cord back in January when Wright made that political speech about Hillary and "rich white people".  The fact that he and his campaign thought they could keep the lid on Wright is mind-boggling to me.

    Parent

    I heard that, too. (none / 0) (#58)
    by Marco21 on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:22:20 AM EST
    I was getting ready for work, not watching and missed his introduction, but heard the bulk of their conversation. When I realized it was Clyburn, I was shocked.

    He sounded much more conciliatory.

    Parent

    Am I a bad person if I (5.00 / 1) (#13)
    by Fabian on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 09:44:11 AM EST
    go to dkos and snicker at people who make these claims?

    Too bad I didn't read all 800+ comments from Markos' "reality based community" diary.  That comment alone was worth a few hours of a smug karmic warmth.

    Desperate and dependent its never Obama's (5.00 / 3) (#16)
    by Salt on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 09:46:37 AM EST
    Responsibilities never theirs, that's the campaign theme, grievance, always a victim never not. That's the toxic part and why this social justice, grievance, helplessness predatory nature of his communication strategy has so turned folks off. It's the old guard, it's that racist, it's that other racists, it' s the moderators, it's the divisive mean Hillary, it's Bill, it's seniors, it's Washington, it's the dumb uneducated working class, it's CEO's, it's McCain, it's Oil companies, it's Bush, it's Cheney, it's the old politics, it's, the Clinton Admin, it's terrorist, it's peevish and it's on and...on and on ...so you NEED Obama.  

    Obama's manufactured need the core of his campaign it's Obama  pushing helplessness judgmental and divisiveness same as the CR on the other side so you will buy Hope as what you need to cure your ails, works with the Latte class any others but most Americans don't believe themselves to be powerless victims not in control of their destiny.  When American's see Rev Wright as they have they see the same technique on display.

    What's the saying, some times you have to just well maybe its really him and not me...that's IMO where America is

    maybe it is time for a different kind of change (5.00 / 1) (#110)
    by moll on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 01:24:06 PM EST
    This is the whole 1970's Democratic party. It started with people fighting to be heard ("yes we have a legitimate grievance!") and turned into a very nasty situation where blame fuels everything.

    It's more than just the one issue (race). It is an entire philosophy/culture that refuses to allow critical examination of the link between victimhood  and entitlement.

    And it is a philosophy/culture that never looks at other forces, only victimhood and injustice. So they do not realize it when they are enabling something very unhealthy.

    The problem with bitterness and blame is that there comes a point where you have won your point: people do recognize something is wrong. And at that point, it is time to stop with the negative and bring out the positive. Bitterness and blame at this point interfere with what needs doing.  

    Parent

    Last year someone was telling me... (5.00 / 6) (#20)
    by kredwyn on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 09:49:29 AM EST
    about this special magic wand that Clinton had in her possession that could do all sorts of things.

    Obviously...she's been waving that sucker around again.

    I thought Wright had been dealt with already (5.00 / 3) (#22)
    by NotThatStupid on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 09:54:07 AM EST
    I remember being told it was all behind us -  nothing to see here - move on, please.

    Senator Obama gave a whole historic speech and everything.

    The low information voters aren't going to make him give another one, are they?

    To The Cries Of (5.00 / 1) (#47)
    by MO Blue on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:11:19 AM EST
    If that's all they got, "Bring it on, baby."

    Themes at Kos:
    Macho, macho men and big bad women.

    Parent

    So can we start calling Hillary (5.00 / 1) (#86)
    by FlaDemFem on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:27:38 AM EST
    "Macho Mama" now? Teehee.

    Parent
    NY Daily News had an article on it as well (5.00 / 2) (#23)
    by Davidson on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 09:54:11 AM EST
    Read here.

    Basically, they're accusing Clinton of witchcraft.  Seriously.  They remind me of the Puritans who burned those poor girls alive out of fear (read: misogyny).  Clinton has now become their #1 scapegoat.  Even if Clinton somehow did force Wright to speak out, no one forced Obama to seek him out as a spiritual mentor for 20 years.

    Anyone wonder to the other side lately? (5.00 / 1) (#25)
    by Stellaaa on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 09:56:13 AM EST
    Josh, Arianna et. al, not a word of the Wright embroglio.  Silence.  

    they are in shock (5.00 / 1) (#27)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 09:58:57 AM EST


    Parent
    She talks about ending the war on science. . . (5.00 / 3) (#28)
    by LarryInNYC on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 09:59:18 AM EST
    but I didn't realize she'd already invented a time machine.

    LOL. All powerful? (5.00 / 6) (#30)
    by rooge04 on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:01:30 AM EST
    If she was this all-powerful woman who could make Obama's pastor speak because she wanted him to...couldn't she also make it so that Obama never ran? So that she won every state? Oh my.  She's all powerful only when anything hurts Obama. Otherwise, she's serving tea.

    Insta-debunk: Who'd put a hand up Wright's @ss? (5.00 / 1) (#31)
    by Ellie on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:01:44 AM EST
    Seriously: ew.

    Secondly, are these super geniuses not aware that Sen Clinton is running her own campaign for office? That her world doesn't revolve around picking up or creating Obama's messes?

    Obama's a chronic screw-up and Wright's a loose-cannon. Neither needs help from HRC to take two freshly baked slices of stupid and pile a whole lot of stupid in the middle of them.

    I am a little fearful of (5.00 / 2) (#37)
    by kenosharick on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:04:04 AM EST
    how these people would react if Hillary did win the nom. Or how they will react after mccain trounces Obama in the general.

    Aravosis has stated explicitly that Hillary will (5.00 / 3) (#49)
    by Joelarama on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:13:48 AM EST
    be to blame if Obama loses in the general.

    Aravosis has already switched parties once, and has joined Kos in declaring the primary to be a Hillary-caused civil war.

    I think you and I both are beginning to realize what Kos, Aravosis, and their ilk will do if Hillary wins the nomination.  We've seen many relatively prominent diarists at Daily Kos say they will not support Hillary, or will bolt the party, if she wins the nominee.

    This is political blackmail:  Obama must win, or we bring down the whole house.  

    What happened to the big tent?

    Parent

    I say call thier bluff (5.00 / 2) (#65)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:28:48 AM EST
    let them go.
    we can win without them.  have you counted Aravosis' comments lately.  he is not exactly burning up the blogosphere.  it has become a sad echo chamber for a few angry people.
    we can win without them.
    and nothing would make me happier.

    Parent
    I don't read his blog anymore, but (none / 0) (#83)
    by Joelarama on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:14:52 AM EST
    went over to see what you're talking about.  Wow, his comments have really fallen.  What a come-down.  It looks like his traffic is fine, though.

    Parent
    Really? (none / 0) (#60)
    by cawaltz on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:24:15 AM EST
    Where exactly are they going to bolt to? The choices are basically Democrat and GOP(at least for this go round).  It isn't like they haven't spent the last 4 years saying the only way to have a progressive majority is to change the Democratic majority from the ground up. Or is thier grand game plan to join the GOP and remake it from the ground up? It's so unbecoming when adults throw temper tantrums like 2 year olds in need of a nap. If Barack doesn't get the nomination I'm gonna hold my breath or vote for McCain. Geez, how childish!

    Parent
    I don't think they've thought it through. (none / 0) (#63)
    by Joelarama on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:28:21 AM EST
    But do not believe these blogger boyz are capable of admitting they are wrong.

    I've never seen Kos or Aravosis admit being wrong on any important matter.  

    Parent

    I've seen kos admit (none / 0) (#115)
    by cawaltz on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 04:18:47 PM EST
    he has made misakes and errors in judgement. Not often though. It will be rather ironic if they choose to sit this cycle out. I have been saying forever that there should be a plan B for dealing with the Democratic party(the opinion has always seemed to be absolutely no that third party solutions are not viable).

    Parent
    I don't think there is any contingency in which (none / 0) (#116)
    by Joelarama on Wed Apr 30, 2008 at 12:08:43 PM EST
    a third party would help progressives this election cycle.

    Parent
    Nope (none / 0) (#117)
    by cawaltz on Thu May 01, 2008 at 12:03:45 AM EST
    but the concept has always been that this isn't an instantaneous process anyways. Daily Kos was about taking things back and it was always a given that it would take more than one cycle.

    Parent
    They ain't got no tent... n/t (none / 0) (#100)
    by inclusiveheart on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 12:07:49 PM EST


    Parent
    I'm Even More Fearful Of How They Would (5.00 / 3) (#51)
    by MO Blue on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:15:58 AM EST
    react if Obama became president. Tavis Smiley is the new Dixie chicks. Eight years of Bush supporters demonizing and issuing death threat against anyone who dared to criticize him is enough, thank you. Don't want to see this level of political thuggery continued for a Dem.

    Parent
    amen (none / 0) (#79)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:52:30 AM EST
    the idea of him winning with them threatening "there will be blood" every other day is more than a little frightening.

    Parent
    What that "there will be blood" meme (none / 0) (#88)
    by FlaDemFem on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:36:18 AM EST
    does for me is remind me of Chicago '68 and the Dem convention. And the Chicago cops and the Daley machine. The same one, albeit the next generation, that put Obama into play on the national stage. Obama isn't old enough to realize the effect that is going to have on older Dems. And it won't help Obama at all. It will remind everyone of the very dirty political pool he came out of, and how the Daley machine deals with dissent. They break heads. Not a good image for someone claiming to be a unifier.

    Parent
    Aravosis shot his credibility long ago. (5.00 / 5) (#41)
    by Joelarama on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:06:11 AM EST
    This is "with is or against us," left blogosphere style.

    I'm beginning to wonder if John Dean's theory about authoritarianism on the right now applies to some on the  major lefty websites.  

    Bing-freaking-O! (5.00 / 3) (#66)
    by dws3665 on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:29:45 AM EST
    I have been thinking this exact same thing lately -- that there is a disconcerting amount of GOP-style "tell me what to think, daddy" stuff going on in Left Blogistan. The commenters at many of those sites are kinda scary in their fervor. Hillary has a few sites that are like that, but the Obama fever among the "A-list" blogs and their commenters is disturbingly reminiscent of exactly what Dean talks about: "Kos/Josh/Aravosis/Arianna says it, so we all believe it! And we condemn you as 'other' and 'evil' if you don't!"

    Parent
    Clinton Did It!!!! (5.00 / 2) (#50)
    by Marco21 on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:14:15 AM EST
    Some Obama supporters play 1990s-style GOP political games to perfection. Clinton Did It was a favorite of theirs.

    The other uncles (5.00 / 2) (#59)
    by Stellaaa on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:23:30 AM EST
    Teddy and Kerry.  Have not seen them defending or coming to the aid of Obama after the Irish bashing by Wright.  The imitation of JFK and the other Irish gems.  

    C'mon...defend your man.  Stand by him.  

    Actually this is all true. (5.00 / 1) (#76)
    by Exeter on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:39:49 AM EST
    I don't know how they figured it out, but dam# them, they did! So, I think its just best to come clean right from the beginning.

    Clinton also made Wright say that Farrakhan "epitomized greatness" and "spoke the truth" and is on the verge of making Wright admit that he has flown in Farrakhans UFO and believes in Farrakhan's Yakub teachings.

    Guilt by Association (5.00 / 2) (#84)
    by Stellaaa on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:23:43 AM EST
    Liza Ryan (sp) and others are now saying that we are all partaking in guilt by association.  Well, I have one thing to say to politicians, if you want virtue by association (who endorses you etc) you have to accept guilt by association.  This is such a lame argument.  Cause frankly, I did attribute guilt to Bush and other Republicans for associating with Fallwell, Robertson etc.  Justice is when you take the good and the bad that comes with something.  Obama's speech caused this.  Obama used Wright and Wright is not gonna take it sitting down.  This is what tells me Obama is a political naive.  He was playing with fire when he started the race card playing and the religion pandering.  He played to the leftie boys and they took him down the drain.  

    PS. if he could (none / 0) (#85)
    by Stellaaa on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:25:11 AM EST
    not use his magic unity powers to make his preacher of 20 years work with him on this campaign, frankly what are the odds that he can "do unity" with the other side?  

    Parent
    I read Obama attended church in (none / 0) (#111)
    by oculus on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 01:26:20 PM EST
    Indianapolis this Sunday.  What will he do after the primaries finish?

    Parent
    If Hillary Clinton Has This Much Power (5.00 / 3) (#90)
    by BDB on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:40:05 AM EST
    then she's obviously the best nominee and potential president.  Hey, if she can get Wright to do this, think what she can do on universal healthcare.  If the FISA fight is any indication, Jay Rockefeller will be a lot easier to control than Jeremiah Wright.  

    Forgive the personal tone of this post (5.00 / 2) (#99)
    by AnninCA on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 12:05:34 PM EST
    but I used to write speeches for Fortune 100 CEOs.  

    They all sounded alike, btw.....

    Anyway, one thing I learned along my path in my own life is that people are people.  They get "shook up" just like the secretary does.

    They get "off-message" too.

    They rely upon speech-writers, PR, etc., to make them look solid as rocks.

    The truth?  My CEOs when selling out the company for the million-dollar umbrellas, were emotional wrecks.  They felt horrible.  (Just not horrible enough to actually do the right thing.  *haha)

    So this business of conspiracy theories is mostly just BS.

    People, even in power, occaisionally rise up to plant stuff or whatever.

    But most of what we see as off-shoot events really represents humanness.

    Wright was hurt.  He does put his position as a spiritual leader above politics.  He's going to blast Obama out of the water.  We've only seen a tip of the iceberg.

    Obama is now, in that Church, the "traitor."

    Wright is not about to back off from a lifetime of his own beliefs.

    And he's very, very emotional.

    I do not know how Obama should have handled this situation, but Wright is now uncontrollable.

    There's no taking it back.

    And this was Obama's "sounding board."

    So Obama told the public, "I can't disown him anymore than I can disown my white grandmother."

    We saw editorial after editorial saying, "Yes, you can....and you should."

    Now, we're seeing the consequences of not completely disowning him.

    It's on Obama.  And no speechwriter can save him.

    And of course, (none / 0) (#1)
    by andgarden on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 09:23:18 AM EST
    Sully now has all of the good ideas.

    made Wright (none / 0) (#2)
    by TruthMatters on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 09:26:58 AM EST
    do what?

    I highly doubt anyone is suggesting Clinton made him give those speeches.

    it says that Clinton supporters invited him to the press club, I don't know if thats true or not.

    Hmmm (5.00 / 6) (#6)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 09:31:48 AM EST
    I did not delve into the facts of the article because the implication is clear - Clinton was behind Wright doing what he did.

    Barbara Reynolds is a member of the National Press Club apparently. I seriously doubt she has the power to solely decide who gets invited to speak to the National Press Club.

    But so what? Jeremiah Wright wanted to talk. He talked to Moyers, he talked at the Detroit NAACP event and he could have talked to anyone he wanted to.

    Your defense of this crazy nonsense is shabby and weak.

    Parent

    About as sensible as (5.00 / 1) (#14)
    by Cream City on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 09:44:25 AM EST
    the electability defense these days.  (And that it is a defense now is telling.)

    Parent
    Free Will... (5.00 / 2) (#21)
    by kredwyn on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 09:52:25 AM EST
    Wright also had the choice to refuse the Press Club invitation.

    Parent
    He has the right to remain silent (4.00 / 4) (#54)
    by myiq2xu on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:17:44 AM EST
    but not the ability.

    Parent
    Was Hillary Clinton also behind (none / 0) (#108)
    by oculus on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 01:18:34 PM EST
    the Caucasian Catholic priest's invitation to Wright to give the benediction at the event honoring Maya Angelou in an African American parish in Chicago recently?

    Parent
    this is what the Politico article (5.00 / 1) (#19)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 09:48:58 AM EST
    that started it all says:

    Wright was invited to the National Press Club by a journalist and minister who supports Clinton.
    I don't mean to suggest some kind of plot. Her agenda here seems to have been the same as Wright's: To protect the minister's reputation from, among others, Obama.

    of course that part doesnt make it into most of the bloggerboys blog posts.


    Parent

    Babara Reynold's has supported Rev. Wright ... (5.00 / 1) (#42)
    by Annie M on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:07:25 AM EST
    since the Wright story broke back in March:

    http://reynoldsworldnews.blogspot.com/2008/03/pastor-jeremiah-wright.html

    I think her motivation was to help Reverend Wright.

    Parent

    This is just (5.00 / 1) (#45)
    by AnninCA on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:10:21 AM EST
    silly talk.  At this point, everyone is either an Obama supporter or a Hillary supporter.  Conspiracy theories indicate a high level of paranoia and fear.

    But then I've thought that Obama tapped into those feelings all along.  The problem is that he cannot control that now.

    Wildfire emotional reasoning is marking his candidacy, even among those like Wright and Clyburn who should know better.

    Parent

    Ummm..I wasn't supporting the conspiracy theroy... (none / 0) (#67)
    by Annie M on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:32:02 AM EST
    I was saying that Barbara Reynold's genuinely supports Reverend Wright and has since the Wright story broke back in March.  I think Reynold's teaches at a divinity school and may also be a minister.

    My thought is that she invited him because she wanted to support him .... it has nothing to do with Clinton.

    Parent

    She lured him there and let him walk in ... (none / 0) (#107)
    by Ellie on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 01:16:01 PM EST
    ... but she yanked back his Genius at the last second so she could beat the snot out of it in the alley!

    Oooooh ... too evil by half! Now I super-plus want her to be Prez.

    Parent

    That would be nuts (none / 0) (#15)
    by AF on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 09:46:26 AM EST
    If anybody besides anonymous blog commenters were actually saying it.  If so, it's not in your link.  

    Hmm (none / 0) (#18)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 09:47:55 AM EST
    I have two links of course. And both lead to named Obama supporters making these claims.

    But ignore that if you wish.

    Parent

    Both links are (none / 0) (#33)
    by AF on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:03:27 AM EST
    about Barbara Reynolds, a Clinton supporter who invited Wright to speak at the National Press Club.

    Speculating that Reynolds may have wanted to help Clinton is not reasonable.  Speculating that it was arranged by the Clinton campaign is paranoid.  But none of the bloggers or journalists you link to say that it was.

    Parent

    Did you miss this from Ben Smith? (5.00 / 2) (#52)
    by standingup on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:16:13 AM EST
    Reynolds' is well placed to defend Wright. Her bio says she teaches "prophetic ministry and the media" at Howard University's divinity school.

    ALSO: Richard Prince points out that Reynolds has spoken critically of Clinton as well, after grilling her -- and being dissatisfied with her answer -- on the Ferraro flap.

    ALSO: She'd first pitched inviting Wright to the press club two years ago.

    You will find it if you follow the links and read the post.

    Parent

    Thanks (none / 0) (#97)
    by ding7777 on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:59:22 AM EST
    I figured they had a speaker committed months ago, so either Rev Wright accepted months ago or they bumped a previously committed speaker to accomadate Wright

    Parent
    Not unreasonable (none / 0) (#35)
    by AF on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:03:53 AM EST


    Parent
    Well (none / 0) (#40)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:05:40 AM EST
    Now I see that YOU are a proponent of this conspiracy theory. That makes you a kook imo.

    Parent
    Conspiracies require more than one person (none / 0) (#44)
    by AF on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:08:21 AM EST


    Parent
    not if you are a multiple personality (5.00 / 2) (#48)
    by Capt Howdy on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:13:47 AM EST
    like Hillary

    /snark

    Parent

    So this was Barabra Reynolds' plot? (none / 0) (#53)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:17:21 AM EST
    and you think THAT is sane?

    Parent
    Hmmm (none / 0) (#39)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:04:59 AM EST
    Therefore, the significance of Barbara Reynolds is what?

    Please do not play the fool. At least not with me.

    You are better than this.

    Parent

    Barbara Reynolds (none / 0) (#55)
    by AF on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:19:35 AM EST
    A supporter of both Wright and Clinton who invited Wright to speak, may well have wanted to help both Wright and Clinton by doing so, as indeed is what happened.

    That is neither crazy nor a conspiracy theory as it involves one person, Barbara Reynolds.

    The crazy conspiracy theory would consist in speculating that the Clinton campaign put Barbara Reynolds up to it and therefore blaming Clinton for this.  But nobody that I can see is saying that.

    Parent

    It is completely crazy (none / 0) (#72)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:36:10 AM EST


    Parent
    It is an insult to the intelligence (none / 0) (#73)
    by AF on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:37:49 AM EST
    of Revs. Reynolds and Wright to suggest they don't realize the impact this has on the campaign.

    Parent
    Dan Savage: "Pretty damn ruthless" (none / 0) (#89)
    by rockinrocknroll on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:38:23 AM EST
    That speech Rev. Wright gave yesterday at the National Press Club in Washington D.C.--the speech that may have delivered a fatal blow to the Obama's chances? A supporter of Hillary Clinton set it up. That's infuriating, huh? Pretty damn ruthless. But, you know, it has a certain swiftboat-or-be-swiftboated quality that is not without appeal. While Obama can't seem to do what must be done to defend himself and his campaign, Hillary Clinton has made it clear that she will do and say anything in defense of herself and her own campaign.

    And that would include, it seems, standing silently by while a prominent supporter uses anti-gay slurs. From The Smoking Gun:

        With Hillary Clinton standing at his side, North Carolina Governor Mike Easley today described the Democratic presidential candidate as so tough that she "makes Rocky Balboa look like a pansy." Easley's compliment, as it were, may offend some voters since the word "pansy" is often used in a derogative fashion to describe a male homosexual.

    LINK

    As always, have a look at the comments.

    Parent

    You got a live one there (none / 0) (#102)
    by AF on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 12:25:13 PM EST
    That's pure CDS.

    Parent
    More specifically (none / 0) (#69)
    by AF on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:33:36 AM EST
    Reynolds may have wanted to keep Obama from distancing himself from Wright.  In fact, she has written:

    And it is a sad testimony that to protect his credentials as a unifier above the fray the Senator is fueling the media characterization that Rev. Dr. Wright is some retiring old uncle in the church basement instead of respecting Wright for the towering astute father of progressive social and global causes that he is.

    Now it's possible that Rev. Reynolds doesn't realize that by doing this she is hurting Obama's chances at being president.  But it's hardly crazy to think otherwise.

    Parent

    I agree with her here (none / 0) (#87)
    by kayla on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:28:38 AM EST
    and I think that was the motivation behind Wright's appearances.  He feels betrayed by Obama, and rightly so, imo.  This has mothing to do with Clinton, but everything to do with upholding Wright's legacy.  I don't think he wants to be known forevermore as the [potential] first black president's crazy uncle.

    Parent
    Well that didn't take long (none / 0) (#17)
    by Lil on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 09:47:01 AM EST
    More and more hoping Hillary kicks butt! And I started out an Edwards supporter and flirted with the idea of Obama. I haven't opened Kos since NH except when linked to from here.

    it wouldn't suprise me (none / 0) (#34)
    by beyondalldoubt on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:03:30 AM EST
    I think the latest Wright presser backfired in a major way because with him giving that nutty speech, where he just looked like such a nut... the public no longer saw him as "Obama's spiritual adviser" but just a total loon and total nut who should check themselves into the loony bin.

    Come on now, (none / 0) (#56)
    by indy33 on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:20:01 AM EST
    You link to Ameriblog, which is a pro-Obama site and point to a one sentence post about the Clinton supporter that invited Wright. This is fact and it is the only comment made by Aravosis. He links to a Andrew Sullivan post that is actually critical of Obamas response and asks him to be more proactive in separating himself. He links to Ben Smiths article in Politico, no one would say he is an Obama supporter. Aravosis says he agrees with Sullivan. How in anyway does that become a conspiracy theory that Clinton was behind the NPC talk by Wright. Your smearing of progressive blogs throughout this campaign has been shameless and take a look around this site and tell me that the anti-Obama folks havent gone nuts on here. You constantly allow Clinton supporters to use messainic, offensive and false accusations yet any critique of this is laughed off and deleted. Hows about the statement that Obama supporters must have "brain tumors". Im sure thats not offensive to those who have lost loved ones to cancer. I am convinced that most people are to immature and ignorant to actually have real political discourse(and yes some Obama supporters are included) so its no wonder the media focuses more attention to Rev. Wright for several days than actual issues like the torture meeting in the White House or the puppet generals who were paraded to the media as objective observers. I blame the ignorant people like those who would make a joke out of cancer, not the media anymore.

    Actually... (5.00 / 2) (#70)
    by Marco21 on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:34:52 AM EST
    I was able to read John's sentence, his links to Sullivan and Politico and the AB comments and STILL make up my own mind about it. BTD doesn't have the power of suggestion powers you seem to be alluding to.  

    Americablog was one of my favorites before the CDS settled in and Aravosis has a rockin' case of it. Let's not deny that and pretend he's just "pro-Obama."

    Please.

    Parent

    Yep! (5.00 / 1) (#77)
    by mmc9431 on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:46:44 AM EST
    I stopped stopped reading Aravosis after the McCurkin fiasco in SC. That made as much sense to me as "Log Cabin Republican's" do. Why would you support anything that is vocally against your interests?

    Parent
    You come on (none / 0) (#71)
    by Big Tent Democrat on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:35:21 AM EST
    What is the point of the post? You know it and I know it.

    Stop with the BS.


    Parent

    That is exactly my point (none / 0) (#80)
    by indy33 on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:53:17 AM EST
    I wish you would stop with the B.S. You are implying by your post that Obama supporters are claiming Clinton was behind Wrights speech and I have seen very little evidence of this. You cannot hold all blogs hostage to their commentors or diarists. Of course there are those on the fringe who may spew all kinds of nonsense(and this campaign has brought out the worst of all of us at times) but taking these folks and lumping them in with all Obama supporters is not accurate or fair. Take a look at some of the commenters here who have made very offensive and inflammatory remarks that Im sure you dont agree with. The only problem I have is when legitimate questions or alternate arguments are made, those seem to get deleted, yet comments like Obama supporters must have brain tumors are a-okay!

    Parent
    i seriously hope you're kidding (none / 0) (#74)
    by dws3665 on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:38:30 AM EST
    The sites smear themselves. No work by anyone else is necessary. Or do you really think the HRC campaign darkened Obama's photograph? What do you think Aravosis is implying when he HAPPENS to mention that a Clinton supporter invited Wright? Or that he ignores Wright's other media exposure this week? Spare me the self-righteous indignation; if you are truly unable to see the extent to which MUCH of the progressive blogosphere has abandoned any sense of objectivity about the primary, then I am wasting my time with this post.


    Parent
    I agree! (none / 0) (#82)
    by indy33 on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:13:13 AM EST
    There is no doubt that the blogs have been filled with nasty and exploitative material that is really only hurting democrats as a whole. I made the mistake of falling into many things that upon further, more reasoned analysis were false and pointless. Yet dismissing the impact that left-leaning blogs have had on our politics and the promotion of progressive ideas just because they dont support the same democrat as you seems a little overboard. The way I look at it, if I respected them before the primary, than once the primary is over, slowly but surely that mutual respect will come back. I am not trying to be self righteous at all, in fact it is the self righteosness of some on this blog that bothers me the most. Many commenters have jumped on any excuse to slam Obama and his supporters in very offensive and ultimatley self defeating ways yet this is overlooked. While slammimg other sites for supposed CDS, you are allowing ODS! Talk Left made it very clear, early on that it was a pro-Clinton site and was not going to apologize for it, so its a little confusing when you slam other sites for not being objective!

    Parent
    no (none / 0) (#95)
    by dws3665 on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 11:53:55 AM EST
    I think you are confusing "self-righteousness" with "disagreement." BTD is not a Clinton supporter, which you would know if you actually read his posts. Jeralyn clearly favors Hillary and does so openly. What differentiates this site, imho, is that it actually maintains (among its front pagers) some measure of balance. Commenters are another matter; it is the front pagers at the other blogs that have shamed themselves. Like I said, if you cannot see this, I am wasting my time.

    Parent
    But TalkLeft has also not allowed name calling... (none / 0) (#103)
    by alexei on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 12:25:21 PM EST
    vitriol and vapid arguments from either Obama or Clinton supporters in the comments.  

    Parent
    Ask BTD if I read his posts. (none / 0) (#105)
    by indy33 on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 12:54:30 PM EST
    Im sure he wishes that I read them a lot less! I am well versed in his "media darling" theory. Calling him an Obama supporter is pushing it a little. He has made much of the fact that Clinton and Obama are so alike on most issues that because Obama gets such "glowing" media support that he will go with him. His attitude towards Obama supporters and his slamming of other blogs are what get me riled up.(Also to a lesser extent, the Fla/Mich issue). The deletion policy gets a little aggravating too, when Clinton supporterrs can make base-less and offensive attacks that are ignored yet Obama supporters who try to speak rationally are deleted. Look at BTDs recent stories and count for me how many are pro-Obama! I have just been noticing a lot of angst towards other blogs for behavior that is very similar to here. I dont comment anywhere else but I read anything I can get my hands on, and I agree with you that some blogs have gone overboard. We all have a responsibility to curb this on both sides, and it does come from both sides! Its hard though when someone says that you are naive and a cultist for liking a fellow democrat. Or when your support for Obama over Hillary is likened too some Freudian issue with your own mother. I know that ignorant things have been said about Clinton supporters and I dont participate in that because too many people I respect and admire are Clinton supporters. I myself have spent years working for and defending the Clintons and my first Presidential vote was for Bill. Im not anti-Hillary, I am pro-Obama but ultimatley I am pro-democrat and pro-progessive(does that even work), so all the marginalizing and slander of both our candidates needs to stop.  

    Parent
    If Hillary can do this (none / 0) (#62)
    by Sunshine on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:26:49 AM EST
    Maybe she can get somebody from the Rezko trial to come and talk next....

    Blind Support (none / 0) (#64)
    by mmc9431 on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:28:44 AM EST
    This is an example of my main objections to Obama. We've had 7 years of this blind faith leadership. Anyone who questioned the emperior was an Unamerican traitor. We don't need this again. Refusing to acknowledge a mistake and then blaming everyone else for it has been the theme for too long. All politicians are POLITICIANS. Anyone who blindly follows them is a fool. Hilary was wrong on the Kyle/Keiberman vote and I wrote her and nailed her for it. I didn't blame it on Obama. (Who hid from the vote). Even your own candidate can be wrong! Just admit it.

    Finally! somone who has it right on Rev. Wright! (none / 0) (#68)
    by ctrenta on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 10:33:12 AM EST
    This is a good video.... albeit it's from April 3. Did any of you catch this?

    Here's an unedited exchange between FOX News producer Porter Berry and Father Pfleger, friend of Rev. Jeremiah Wright.

    Click here to watch.

    Agree. Wright has been in the (none / 0) (#112)
    by oculus on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 01:28:40 PM EST
    business of prosyletizing much longer than Obama has.  He will not back down, nor should he.

    How to get banned (none / 0) (#114)
    by Rhouse on Tue Apr 29, 2008 at 04:09:33 PM EST
    from the Huffington Post -i.e. post a link to the blog of Rev. Dr. Reynolds (Evil Hillary supporter) to show that she actually supports Rev. Wright and that his history in the church should not be dismissed in sound bites.  She  really appears to be on his side and thinks that what he's saying needs to be said.
    Of course, all the comments today are calling her an evil woman who should burn in hell for hurting Obama's chances to be President.  Go figure...
    http://reynoldsworldnews.blogspot.com/2008/03/pastor-jeremiah-wright.html

    Obama Supporter Conspiracy Theory: Clinton Forced Wright To Talk | 117 comments (117 topical)

    Readers Must Login or Create an Account to Comment