Let's Give Obama the Benefit of the Doubt

Senator Barack Obama's repudiation of Reverend Jeremiah Wright has inspired the praise of some and the denunciation of others. This broad spectrum of opinion reflects the strange opacity of Obama's character and motivation.

We know all too well what makes Hillary tick and McCain seems to be an open book. But Obama is a man of mystery; someone has called him "a man in a fog". And he himself admits that voters ask "what do we know about him?" To date, we are still not sure whether he is mendacious or confused, open or deceitful, an idealist or a shamelessly glib opportunist.

Therefore, since we conservatives pride ourselves on our objectivity, I propose that we follow the legal dictum of "innocent until proven guilty" and give him the benefit of the doubt, just as he says he did with Rev. Wright. Let us, at least provisionally, try to construe all of his actions in the most favorable possible light.

Let us first concede his strengths. He has an excellent stage presence and is a gifted and persuasive speaker. Admittedly, most voters over thirty do not necessarily consider these to be virtues; they tend to associate such qualities with con men and used car salesmen. But one can be winning and eloquent and still be honest; think of Ronald Reagan.

Let us accept Obama's claim that, throughout twenty years of close association, he never noticed that Wright was a cesspool of anti-white hatred. Let us assume that, like many of us in church, he slept through the reverend's sermons and never heard Wright call on God to damn America or describe AIDS as a government plot against blacks. Let us further accept his reluctance to repudiate Wright as a noble loyalty to an old friend and mentor.

Let us also accept the innocence of his associations with questionable characters like Tony Rezko, Emil Jones, Robert Blackwell, Hatem El-Hady, and William Ayers. Let's attribute these and other unfortunate liaisons to an inability to judge people, or perhaps to a naïve nature, so high minded and forgiving that it only sees the good in others. This view would be in keeping with the idealistic character of the speeches that have made him famous.

Let us accept his habit of abstaining from voting, even in critical issues such as abortion and the budget, and his refusal to respond to Votesmart's 2008 Political Courage Test to a conscientious man's reluctance to make decisions hastily. This would also explain the vague, ill advised, or even inane statements that he has made about many important issues. Similarly, his inaccuracies of statement and occasional deviations from fact might be ascribed to honest human fallibility.

Let us also assume that the vagueries of his political philosophy, such as his failure to define "change" and his apparent flirtations with Marxism, black liberation theology, and the Black Muslim movement, are not attempts to deceive the public but merely reflect the vagueness of his innermost thoughts.

But if all this is true, then however much we may admire Obama's character, we must dismiss his candidacy on the grounds that he is utterly unfit to be President.

The President of the United States should have an attractive image and be an imposing and persuasive speaker. Obama, in his own boyish way, does have these qualities. But unfortunately, they are not enough.

The President of the United States must be a shrewd judge of competence and character as he selects associates and advisors for his administration. If any of his appointees fall short of his expectations, he must be quick to dismiss and replace them with a pragmatic disregard for old friendships. Unfortunately, as we have concluded above, Obama is much too trusting and loyal to make such choices wisely and much too slow in disaffiliating himself from untrustworthy associates. He might become another Warren Harding.

The President of the United States must be quick and decisive in dealing with sudden crises. Obama has shown, by his indecisive voting record and slowness in severing unsavory associations, that he is too dilatory and hesitant to make such decisions in a timely manner. He is simply not the right person for the three a.m. phone call.

The President of the United States must express himself precisely so as to avoid any unintentional ambiguities. If Obama is as open and honest as he claims to be, then his frequent gaffes must be attributed to a mental or verbal fuzziness that might endanger the country by causing him to "misspeak" in critical situations.

The President of the United States must protect the interests of the people from a word full of hostile and devious schemers. He must be wary and tough in his international dealings. If Obama is as naïve and gullible as we have charitably assumed him to be, and as other Democrats accuse him of being, then he would be no match for the belligerent heads of state in Islamic and Marxist countries. The very thought of such a child (as Maureen Dowd has described him) negotiating with deceptive and shrewd bargainers like Putin and Ahmadinejad is horrifying. Moreover, he has been accused of frequent timidity when confronting evil. Hitherto, we have often been tempted to liken Obama to Jimmy Carter. But if our assessment of his naïve and pussilanimous nature is correct, then he might well be another Neville Chamberlain.

Of course our assumption of Obama's probity might be wrong. Perhaps he is the unscrupulously devious poseur that his critics see him to be and that his words-versus-deeds gap seem to indicate. His questionable political maneuverings and his dealings with lobbyists and favor seekers lend credence to such a view of him. This cynical assessment would absolve him from some of the shortcomings cited above. But some of us believe that such hypocrisy should of itself be an absolute disqualification for public office.

Either way, Senator Obama is utterly unfit to be President of the United States. But he would make a dandy White House press secretary.

We know from history that talking has a very low chance of success.

If he wants to “talk” to prevent Israel getting blown up - seems to me we do not give him the benefit of the doubt. The downside is too catastrophic.

Does anybody have any documented proof that Barack Obama actually went to church? A canceled check is not evidence of this.

Does a book written by Barack Obama count as "documented proof?" If so, refer to Chapter 14 of "Dreams from My Father," in which Obama describes his first meeting with Wright and his first attendance at TUCC and how inspired he was by Wright's sermon, including the phrase "It is this world, a world where cruise ships throw away more food in a day than most residents of Port-au-Prince see in a year, where white folks' greed runs a world in need, apartheid in one hemisphere, apathy in another hemisphere...That's the world!"

No mention of HIV or G-D America, but an accurate characterization of Wright's views and preaching through the years. Barack Obama shares those views, wrapping them in sugar coating and disguising them as a "search for a racial identity" in 450+ pages of socialist/Marxist propaganda masquerading as biography.

History has OBAMA examples for us to learn from:

Neville Chamberlain gutted the military of England for social programs (the way Obama wants to do). Chamberlian said that “if only Hitler could sit down with pen and paper and write out Germany’s complaints, then peace could be realized.”

Chamberlain met with Hitler, who fell to the floor in fits, then signed a useless piece of paper....Chamberlian came home declaring “Peace in our time” to the cheers of the English people.....Churchill, watching the spectacle, said, “Little do they know the horror that is about to befall them.”

History has shown that dictators, thugs, and terrorist LOVE to talk...which is exactly what Obama wants to do with them. History has shown that a very high percentage of the citizenery will believe that talking works...and history has shown that talking to dictators, thugs, and terrorists leads ONLY to disaster.

I have no “doubts” about Mr. Obama.

Thus, there is nothing to be “given”.

- John

Mr. Obama is a phony. He adopted his elitist and black supremist persona as Lou Farrakhan and Bill Ayers were his constituents in his state Senate district in Illinois.

I have no idea what he “actually believes”, but he is extremely dangerous as he is extraordinarily thin-skinned for an individual seeking the presidency, where criticism over anything and everything is part of the job.

LET'S NOT AND SAY WE DID!!

This is the same phenomenon that gave America Oprah Winfrey. But this is A LOT scarier. All it gave Oprah was tons of money and influence. Obamalamadingdong will have REAL POWER to damage the country in ways about which Winfrey could only dream!

“SOMETHING WORTH CONSIDERING is the fact that Barack Obama paid for this Jeremiah Wright microphone — contributing tens of thousands of dollars to bankroll Wright and his activities. When you pay for something year after year knowing what you’re paying for, guess what, you own it, like anything else you’ve paid for, it’s yours.”

http://gregransom.com/cgi-bin/mt/mt-search.cgi?tag=Obama&blog_id=1&IncludeBlogs=1

This is a typical black theologian, hate America chuch. This pastor is a hate monger and Obama knows it and agrees with him. After his wife's comments, I believe both want to definately change this country radically into something which is far from the idea of America.

Obama doesn't give two hoots about Wright. Obama joined Wright's church because that was *the quickest avenue to power*. That's the thing about Obama, nobody knows what he really thinks. He's a black box, a cipher. More than any candidate in American history IMO. As Al Sharpton said off the record "that boy is one smooth mother<explicative>".

To date, we are still not sure whether he is mendacious or confused, open or deceitful, an idealist or a shamelessly glib opportunist.

OBL ignores 50% of his heritage because the only he could be nominated was being black. A deceitful opportunist.

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.