Posted on 05/12/2008 1:41:50 PM PDT by 2ndDivisionVet
INDIANAPOLIS — Thank you, Rev. Jeremiah Wright. Love, Barack Obama.
Obama ended the worst two weeks of his presidential run with a razor-thin loss to Hillary Clinton in Indiana. His salve came earlier in the evening in North Carolina where he trounced Clinton, and the result stands to open the superdelegate floodgates in coming days. The nomination fight is essentially over. But the fact remains that Rev. Wright couldn’t have picked a worse time to speak out and get some national media action. CNN reports that exit polling showed that 48 percent of Hoosier Democrats said the Rev. Wright controversy influenced their votes, while 49 percent said it didn’t. And an overwhelming majority of those who were affected were white, blue-collar workers, or as the national media calls them, “lunch-bucket Democrats.”
Obama had to endure not only the Rev. Wright factor, but also waves of Republicans and independents who crossed over to vote in Democratic primaries. There was goading by conservative radio host Rush Limbaugh, who urged Republicans to create “chaos” by extending the Democratic nomination process to August.
The vote totals swelled for a number of legislative Democratic candidates in extremely Republican areas such as Goshen and North Manchester. In the April 29 Howey-Gauge Poll, 10 percent of registered Indiana Republican voters intended to vote in the Democratic primary with Clinton leading that group 50-44 percent. CNN reported Wednesday that 10 percent of Republicans actually crossed over, but 23 percent of the total were independents. CNN political analyst Bill Schneider characterized the “Rush Limbaugh effect” as “slightly measurable.” But when the plurality was just 14,000 votes, it might have been enough to throw the race to Hillary Clinton.
Obama campaign manager David Plouffe agreed that Limbaugh, “had a clear factor in the outcome.”
Obama also had to withstand the organization of U.S. Sen. Evan Bayh, who “seamlessly” integrated with the Clintons and brought along the Democratic Party establishment and 40 county chairs. Even so, many in the Clinton inner camp were expecting a victory in the 5 to 8 percent range, rather than the 50.9 to 49.1 percent margin. In tandem with the North Carolina loss and a wash among the delegates, the Clinton campaign came off its Indiana victory on its heels.
What cut into the Hoosier margin that Clinton so desperately needed? One was the federal gas tax holiday. I’ve never seen a public policy position so widely panned as this one. In 2000, there wasn’t nearly the negative reaction to Gov. Frank O’Bannon’s gas tax suspension. This could be attributed to the fact that it had been 21 years (1979) since the last fuel shock. This time around, it’s been coming at us in increments over the last eight years. Most Hoosiers realize there’s a bigger problem that vastly transcends Hillary Clinton’s pandering.
Another factor is that Sen. Lugar has been very vocal on energy security issues over the past several years. While this probably wouldn’t poll substantially, there is a growing awareness. Lugar has done scores of press briefings at E-85 gas stations around the state and has spoken to many Rotary and Kiwanis clubs (among others) about linking energy to national security. He conducts an energy conference at Purdue University. Hoosiers were a bit wiser when this issue came up this time.
Bayh thought that the economic issues forged Hillary’s narrow win. “To move from 10 points back against a formidable opponent who is out-spending you 3-to-1, well, that’s a good piece of work,” Bayh said after the vote. “The keys to victory? It involved the candidate starting with what she stood for, which is that focus on the middle-class economic issues.”
But how can she win the nomination?
“She has to keep winning, and we’ll just see how it plays out,” said Bayh. “I know what the math is, and I also know that life and politics are unpredictable. We don't know what will happen over the next few weeks. Barack has an advantage at this point.”
Despite these pressures, and to their credit, both campaigns managed to run a fairly clean race here, lending credence to a gut-felt notion I’ve had that Hoosier voters have little stomach for negative ads. There were few gaffes, but little in the way of inflammatory and divisive headlines. The candidates and their surrogates branched through the countryside to talk about issues, about their hopes and plans for the state and the nation.
For many voters, the choice between Obama and Clinton came down to matters of the heart, mind ... and skin color. Unfortunately, the Indiana Democratic Party’s racial fault lines were exposed. Comments from state legislators, fundraisers, party activists and other journalists revealed that a number of Hoosier Democrats simply could not muster a vote for an African-American for president. And this, in a party that has carried 80 to 90 percent of the African-American vote in gubernatorial, senatorial, congressional, legislative and municipal races.
I cannot remember another political candidate who had to answer for his pastor in a political context. In Indiana this spring, it played a role in who won a primary. But, because Obama lost by only the tiniest margin, it may not shift the ultimate course of history.
Allow me to summarize:
“Obama only lost Indiana because of Rush Limbaugh and a bunch of racist white folks.”
Hillary did not, however, lose NC of racist black folks.
Funny... I can't remember another candidate whose pastor damned America either.
(some key excerpts)
REV. BOB SCHENCK, NATIONAL CLERGY COUNCIL: "it's based in Marxism. At the core of his [Wright's] theology is really an anti-Christian understanding of God, and as part of a long history of individuals who actually advocate using violence in overthrowing those they perceive to be oppressing them, even acts of murder have been defended by followers of liberation theology. That's very, very dangerous."
SCHENCK: "I was actually the only person escorted to Dr. Wright. He asked to see me, and I simply welcomed him to Washington, and then I said Dr. Wright, I want to bring you a warning: your embrace of Marxist liberation theology. It is contrary to the Gospel, and you need, sir, to abandon it. And at that he dropped the handshake and made it clear that he was not in the mood to dialogue on that point."
JOSE DIAZ-BALART, TELEMUNDO NETWORK: "Liberation theology in Nicaragua in the mid-1980's was a pro-Sandinista, pro-Marxist, anti-U.S., anti-Catholic Church movement. That's it. No ifs, ands, or buts. His church apparently supported, in the mid-'80s in Nicaragua, groups that supported the Sandinista dictatorships and that were opposed to the Contras whose reason for being was calling for elections. That's all I know. I was there.
I saw the churches in Nicaragua that he spoke of, and the churches were churches that talked about the need for violent revolution and I remember clearly one of the major churches in Managua where the Jesus Christ on the altar was not Jesus Christ, he was a Sandinista soldier, and the priests talked about the corruption of the West, talked about the need for revolution everywhere, and talked about 'the evil empire' which was the United States of America."
The Real Story Behind Rev. Wright's Controversial Black Liberation Theology Doctrine:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,354158,00.html
Obama's Church: Gospel of Hate
Kathy Shaidle, FrontPageMag.com
Monday, April 07, 2008
In March of 2007, FOX News host Sean Hannity had engaged Obama’s pastor in a heated interview about his Church’s teachings. For many viewers, the ensuing shouting match was their first exposure to "Black Liberation Theology"...
Like the pro-communist Liberation Theology that swept Central America in the 1980s and was repeatedly condemned by Pope John Paul II, Black Liberation Theology combines warmed-over 1960s vintage Marxism with carefully distorted biblical passages. However, in contrast to traditional Marxism, it emphasizes race rather than class. The Christian notion of "salvation" in the afterlife is superseded by "liberation" on earth, courtesy of the establishment of a socialist utopia.
http://www.frontpagemag.com/Articles/Read.aspx?GUID=30CD9E14-B0C9-4F8C-A0A6-A896F0F44F02
From "45 Communist Goals":
#27. Infiltrate the churches and replace revealed religion with "social" religion.
http://www.uhuh.com/nwo/communism/comgoals.htm
Oh, please, any conservative I could name was always being attacked for his "pastor" or any passing clergyman he happened to have nodded to on the street...even though his "pastor" was not the equivalent of David Duke, whom the Very Flaky Rev. Wright resembles closely although in reverse.
How can even a liberal like this raving, snake-in-the-grass corrupt Chicago pol who found that the way to fame and riches lay through black racism and then rushed to adopt it? After, of course, he had extorted a juicy hospital position for a wife who is as unqualified as he is, except that the only qualification you needed for that job was color. So maybe they're both qualified, now that Barry has rejected the white half of his family.
Simply put -- if any 'melanin-challenged' political candidate had belonged to a "church" (as I wave the two fingers from both of my hands in the air...) that pledged its allegiance to white folks, and the 'motherland' of Europe -- they'd have been rightfully bounced before they even got on the ballot to be junior councilman...
I cannot believe a political candidate would have gotten this far having belonged to such a "church" as Mr. Obama...Had I not lived to see this unfortunate event.
Agreed. I think what bothers me about “Reverend” Wright and the other liberation theology proponents is the concept that they should hate white Europeans for going to Africa and bringing their European culture to that continent, while at the same time advocating that blacks here refuse to accept European or American culture and only live “black” culture. So one side’s refusal to change their culture is a sign of the devil and the other side’s is its virtue. Talk about hypocrisy. If they want to live an authentic “black” culture they can return to the African continent and go at it, instead of pretending to live it here on the taxpayer’s dole.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.