…of why Dave should stay 100 miles away from politics. To wit, he has no idea what he’s talking about.
Obama finally said what he should’ve said weeks ago, and Dave, who has spent weeks crowing about how the press “got it wrong” is trying to find a way to save that assertion now that Wright has demonstrated that the press, less Moyers, pretty unequivocally got it right. Wright is eight kinds of loony, and now Obama doesn’t want to go anywhere near him. Dave’s fundamental problem, in situations like this, is that he fancies himself the perpetual victim, so when he sees other people being “attacked”, he immediately identifies with them. (Sometimes, when it suits him)
The fact is that Wright represents the sect of Liberalism that moderates and conservatives loathe the most: the Anti-Government, Blame-America sect. Obama knows it, and he did the right thing by coming out against Wright’s tired rhetoric. He’d have won a tremendous number of moderate and conservative votes if he had done that from the get-go.
Same for a speech at the NAACP. How do I know what’s usual there. If you tell me this is how it goes, I have no basis for saying or believing otherwise.
The question isn’t whether or not Wright’s sermons and speeches are “usual” or “normal”, the question is whether or not they’re healthy for the country, and Obama nailed it: “His comments were not only divisive and destructive, I believe they end up giving comfort to those who prey on hate.” Indeed.
Look, the explanation is really simple. When you rise, even a little, some friends don’t get it, and might not like it. Ask anyone who’s won a lottery, or Deal or No Deal, whose company IPO’d successfully. Ask them about the chickens that come home to roost. That’s what happened with Rev Wright. I’m sure of it.
This is ridiculous. Wright got popular, and his friends abandoned him? It sounds a lot more like Wright tried to ride Obama’s coattails to gain a platform for his Black Liberation Theology, and did a pretty decent job of it.
Anyway, the reason the press is so happy is that they got caught being assholes. It was just a few days ago I was giving them a hard time for the missing mea culpas. Now they don’t have to retract or apologize for screwing it up
Which is, of course, because they didn’t screw up. They got the story exactly right. Dave is still desperately clinging to the notion that the press got it wrong, and he was very wise and insightful a few weeks ago, when really all he was doing was rationalizing.
Hey Dumbo, you mis-read the key paragraph.
“Look, the explanation is really simple. When you rise, even a little, some friends don’t get it, and might not like it. Ask anyone who’s won a lottery, or Deal or No Deal, whose company IPO’d successfully. Ask them about the chickens that come home to roost. That’s what happened with Rev Wright. I’m sure of it.”
The guy who rose is Obama and the friend who didn’t get it is Wright. Even a 5th grader could have gotten that one, why can’t you? What a moron.
Sure thing, “Ansel”. If that’s what
youDave meant, that’s whatyouhe should’ve written. As it stands, the plain English of the paragraph is, at best, unclear as to what exactly it means, and at worst actually means that Wright was the one doing the rising.It’s entertaining to see Ansel/Dave twist into a pretzel to justify his earlier take on Wright, which was shared by a lot of Obama admirers before the National Press Club speech. Why not simply admit that he was wrong? Wright’s a raving nutcase and Obama was 100 percent correct to repudiate him. People who thought Wright was taken out of context — including me — were wrong.
Sometimes I wonder who Dave thinks he’s fooling. It’s not like his readership believes he’s a great political thinker, outside of a few particularly lame groupies on Twitter.
Compare this twit:
Tom Hunt’s FlickrFan discovery. He figured out how to search the metadata. Big deal
To this blog post:
http://www.scripting.com/stories/2008/05/02/tomHuntsFlickrfanDiscovery.html
One of these things is not like the other?