you scare - there are children on this blog and they don't love you!

"Which did address the topic and ended the 'controversy'."

No, it didn't end the controversy, quite obviously.

Have you listened to the speech? Did Obama not answer and refute the issue?

Obama 'addressed' it because he believed the opportunity cost of not addressing it was too high. I'd say that calculation was correct. I'm not sure it would be correct in the case of McCain - that is to say, I'm not sure his albatrosses are costing him votes at the moment. I'm sure you think they should be, but there's no evidence that they are.

We'll see in coming months. And I'm sad to see you think everything is driven by political calculation alone. Makes me wonder what your values are (if you have any).

"Well-deserved odium, you mean. Attitudes such as Instapunk's deserve only scorn and mockery, or are you saying you agree with them?"

I don't agree with Instapunk, but then I haven't written a word in his defense. Wright on the other hands holds views that are equally as pernicious and equally as deserving of scorn and you are defending him.

Am I? Have I actually said "Rev. Wright is correct"?

Or am I simply pointing out that nothing is as simple as you make it to be?

"Our frustration is merely with those who refuse to actually think and prefer to insist the Earth is flat."

Your frustration is with anyone who doesn't think what you think.

No. It really is with those who refuse to actually think and prefer to insist the Earth is flat. I, like Obama, welcome alternate points of view, provided they have some basis in reality and aren't shallower than a drained swimming pool. You have yet to demonstrate either capacity.

When this first surfaced, I turned to my husband and said, "Is it because we're Catholic, we can understand Obama attending a church even though he may disagree or be embarrassed by some of the things his pastor says?" (I wasn't event thinking of the Church's racier scandals, but the more day-to-day stuff: like birth control, the role of women in the church, etc)

Charlie Pierce echoed the same sentiments on npr's "Wait, Wait ..." (a comedy show, sure, but ...) this Saturday.

"Have you listened to the speech? Did Obama not answer and refute the issue?"

He repudiated the statements while not really repudiating the man. That'll be enough for some, not for others. The fact is this is still being discussed and pontificated about. Hence, it's not over yet.

"We'll see in coming months. And I'm sad to see you think everything is driven by political calculation alone. Makes me wonder what your values are (if you have any)."

Well, you are happy to think of that of Republicans. I just believe it equally of Republicans and Democrats. It's the difference between a realist and a wide-eyed partisan.

Like I said, he had 20 years to do this. He's doing it now; go figure. If you can't join the dots on that one, you don't deserve help.

"Am I? Have I actually said "Rev. Wright is correct"?"

You defended him as a 'decent man'. Is it possible for a decent man to hold indecent views? I suppose so, but for the purposes of this dicussion his indecent views and the manner in which he propogates them are what matters. The idea that we should engage in a holistic assessment of the person (are they nice to children and animals etc) before condemning them for holding their views is rather strange to hear from a Greenwald acolyte - Greenwald being a man who has scarcely a good word to say about anyone or anything and has made a career out of seething bitchery.

"No. It really is with those who refuse to actually think and prefer to insist the Earth is flat."

That, my friend, is boilerplate. I'm all for insults, but if you are just going to unhook some lefty cliche off the peg and recycle it as though it were insight, I'm not going to bother talking to you any more.

We defended you as a 'decent man'. Is it possible for a decent man to hold indecent views? We suppose so, but for the purposes of this dicussion your indecent views and the manner in which you propogates them are what matters. The idea that we should engage in a holistic assessment of the person (are

they nice to children and animals etc) before condemning them for holding their views is very important and we are no no "lefties" We just recycle your words as though it were

insight and if you don't love us back we are not going to play with you any more.

When this first surfaced, I turned to my husband and said, "Is it because we're Catholic, we can understand Obama attending a church even though he may disagree or be embarrassed by some of the things his pastor says?" (I wasn't event thinking of the Church's racier scandals, but the more day-to-day stuff: like birth control, the role of women in the church, etc)

Charlie Pierce echoed the same sentiments on npr's "Wait, Wait ..." (a comedy show, sure, but ...) this Saturday.

-- Juliebird

It might be a little easier for American Catholics who are often at odds with the official stance of the Church or of a local Bishop. It might be. But I understand Protestants in the pew often disagree with the man in the pulpit themselves.

No one should ask why Obama did not challenge his preacher on every statement; he was there, I hope, to worship the ineffable One.

John Kerry learned the hard way that the average American wiil never believe their troops would engange in conduct that could be judged to be 'war crimes.' Even if Pastor Wright was a white man his views would still not fly in this country which has been on a war footing for over six or more decades and in every army in every war ever fought soldiers misbehave. I look forward to our mainstream news media finally confronting Bush, Cheney, Lieberman and all those still lying about the coming victory over terror. McCain has imitated Churchill's defiant bellicosity We will never surrender" and our media has not mentioned the British enemies were functioning nations with which you could negotiate a truce of their surrender. No such options exist when fighting this present enemy which a a globally dispersed band of religious zealots. If McCain chose to surrender who would he surrender to? Steve USN, WW2