Here is the transcript and video of Barack Obama’s press conference in which he discusses Reverend Jeremiah Wright. The big press conference took place on April 29th, 2008. The comments were directed at Jeremiah Wright’s recent emergence to “defend himself” from criticism. Wright has done enormous damage to the Obama campaign.
In the press conference, Obama takes a 90 degree turn on his former pastor. No more the eccentric “uncle,” Jeremiah Wright was cast as a pariah by Obama. This was a necessary political move. Now the question becomes, will the public buy it? Or will the public continue to question how Obama is influenced by a 20-year relationship with an anti-American pastor he recently described as his spiritual mentor.
Obama has been slipping in the polls this week and needs Wright out of the picture. Yes, he will still win the primary contest with Hillary (well, probably), but Reverend Wright is doing enormous damage to his general election chances against John McCain.
Press conference video and transcript below.
Obama Press Conference Video (Jeremiah Wright)
Transcript:
Obama: I have spent my entire adult life trying to bridge the gap between different kinds of people, that’s in my DNA, trying to promote mutual understanding, to insist that we all share common hopes and common dreams as Americans and as human beings. That’s who I am. That’s what I believe. That’s what this campaign has been about. Yesterday we saw a very different vision of America.I am outraged by the comments that were made and saddened over the spectacle that we saw yesterday. I have been a member of Trinity United Church of Christ since 1992. I’ve known Reverend Wright for almost 20 yrs. The person I saw yesterday was not the person that I met 20 yrs ago. His comments were not only divisive and destructive, but I believe that they end up giving comfort to those who prey on hate and I believe that they do not portray accurately the perspective of the Black Church. They certainly don’t portray accurately my values and beliefs and if Reverend Wright thinks that’s ‘political posturing,’ as he put it, then he doesn’t know me very well and based on his remarks yesterday, well I may not know him as well as I thought either.
Now I have already denounced the comments that had appeared in those previous sermons, as I said I had not heard them before and I gave him the benefit of the doubt in my speech in Philadelphia explaining that he has done enormous good in the Church. He’s built a wonderful congregation, the people of trinity are wonderful people and what attracted me has always been their ministry’s reach beyond the church walls. But when he states and then amplifies such ridiculous propositions such as the U.S. government somehow being involved in AIDS.
When he suggests that Minister Farrakhan somehow represents one of the greatest voices of the 20th and 21st century. When he equates the U.S. war time efforts with terrorism, then there are no excuses. They offend me, they rightly offend all Americans and they should be denounced, and that’s what I am doing very clearly and unequivocally here today.
Let me just close by saying this. We started this campaign with the idea that the problems that we face as a country are too great to continue to be divided. That in fact all across American people are hungry to get out of the old, divisive politics of the past. I have spoken and written about the need for us to recognize each other as Americans regardless of race or religion or region of the country, that the only way we can deal with critical issues like energy and health care and education and the war on terrorism, is if we are joined together. And the reason our campaign has been so successful is because we had moved beyond these old arguments. What we saw yesterday, out of Reverend Wright, was a resurfacing and, I believe, an exploitation of those old divisions. Whatever his intentions, that was the result.
It is antithetical to our campaign, it is antithetical to what I am about, is not what I think Americans stand for, and I want to be very clear that moving forward, Reverend Wright does not speak for me, he does not speak for our campaign. I cannot prevent him from continuing to make these outrageous remarks, but what I do want to be clear about as well as all of you and the American people, is that when I say I find these comments appalling, I mean it. It contradicts everything I am about and who I am. And anybody who has worked with me, who knows my life, who has read my books, who has seen what this campaign’s about, I think will understand that it is completely opposed to what I stand for and where I want to take this country.
Last point, I am particularly distressed that this has caused such a distraction from what this campaign should be about, which is the American people. Their situation is getting worse. And this campaign has never been about me, it’s never been about Senator Clinton, or John McCain, it’s not about Reverend Wright. People want some help in stabilizing lives and securing a better future for themselves and their children.
And that’s what we should be talking about and the fact that Reverend Wright would think that somehow it was appropriate to command the stage for 3 or 4 consecutive days in the midst of this major debate is something that not only makes me angry but also saddens me.
Question and Answer
Obama: Yes. I have not. I have not seen the transcript. What I hear was that he had given a performance, and I thought at the time that it would be sufficient to reiterate what I said in Philadelphia. Upon watching it what became clear to me was that it was more than—it was more than just him defending himself. What became clear to me was that he was presenting a world view that contradicts who I am and what I stand for. What I think particularly angered me was his suggestion somehow that my previous denunciation of his remarks were somehow political posturing. Anybody who knows me, and anybody who knows what Im about knows that that I am about trying to bridge gaps and that I see that commonality in all people and so when I start hearing comments about conspiracy theories and AIDS, and suggestions that somehow Minister Farrakhan has been a great voice in the 20th century, then that goes directly at who I am and what I believe this country needs.
Obama: Well look, as I said before, the person I saw yesterday was not the person that I have come to know for over 20 yrs. I understand that I think he was pained and angered from what had happened previously during the first stage of this controversy. I think he felt vilified and attacked, and I understand that he wanted to defend himself, but I understand that you know he’s gone though difficult times of late, and that he’s leaving his ministry after many years and so you know that may account for the change, but the insensitivity and the outrageousness of his statements and his performance in the Q and A period yesterday I think shocked me, it surprised me, as I said before, this is an individual who’s built a very fine church, and a church that is well respected throughout Chicago, during the course of me attending that church I had not heard those kinds of statements being made, or those kinds of views being prompted and I did not vet my pastor. Before I decided to run for the presidency, I was a member of the church so I think what it says is that I had not, I did not run though, run my pastor thought the paces, or review every one of the sermons he had made over the last 30 yrs, but I don’t think that anybody could attribute those ideas to me.
Obama: You know that’s something that you guys will have to figure out and obviously we’ve got elections in 4 or 5 days. So we’ll find out, you know what impact it has. But ultimately I think that the American people know that we have to do better than how we’re doing right now. I think that they believe in the ideas of this campaign. I think they are convinced that special interests have dominated Washington too long. I think they are convinced that we’ve got to get beyond some of the same political games that we’ve been playing. I think they believe we need to speak honestly and truthfully about how we’re gonna solve issues like energy or health care, and I believe that this campaign has inspired a lot of people. And that’s part of what, going back to what you asked Mike about why I feel so strongly about this today, after seeing Reverend Wright’s performance, I felt as if there was a complete disregard for what the American people are going through and the need for them to rally together to solve these problems. You know now is the time for us to not to get distracted, now is the time for us to pull tighter, and that’s what we’ve been doing in this campaign, and you know there was a sense that that did not matter to Reverend Wright, what mattered was him commanding center stage.
Obama: Well, the, uh, I want to, to use this press conference to make people absolutely clear that obviously whatever relationship I had with Reverend Wright has changed as a consequence of this.
I don’t think that he showed much concern for me. I don’t—more importantly—I don’t think he showed much concern for what we are trying to do in this campaign and what we’re trying to do for the American people and with the American people. And obviously he is free to speak out on the issues that are of concern to him and he can do it in any ways that he wants.
But I feel very strongly that look, I want to make absolutely clear that I do not subscribe to the views that he expressed. I believe they are wrong. I think they are destructive and to the extent that he continues to speak out, I do not expect those views to be attributed to me.
Obama: Well, you know, the new pastor, the young pastor Reverend Otis Moss is a wonderful young pastor and as I said I still very much value the Trinity community. I’ll be honest, this obviously has put strains on that relation, not because of the member or because of Reverend Moss, but because this has become such a spectacle.
And you know when I go to church it’s not for spectacle, it’s to pray and to find a stronger sense of faith. It’s not to posture politically. It’s not to, you know, it’s not to hear things that violate my core beliefs and so you kow and I certainly don’t want to provide a distraction to those who are worshipping at Trinity. As of this point I’m a member. I haven’t had a discussion with Reverend Moss about it so I can’t tell you how he’s reacting and how he’s responding.Obama: Look the, I mean, I dont think that it’s that hard to figure out from if it was just a political perspective. My reaction has more to do with what I want this campaign to be about and who I am. And I want to make certain that people understand who I am. In some ways what Reverend Wright said yesterday directly contradicts everything that I’ve done during my life. It contradicts how I was raised and the setting in which I was raised. It contradicts my decisions to pursue a career of public service. It contradicts the issues that I’ve worked on politically. It contradicts what I’ve said in my books. It contradicts what I said in my convention speech in 2004. It contradicts my announcement. It contradicts everything that I’ve been saying on this campaign trail, and what I tried to do in Philadelphia was to provide a context and to lift up some of the contradictions and complexities of race in America of which Reverend Wright is a part and we’re all a part. And try to make something constructive out of it. But there wasn’t anything constructive out of yesterday. All it was was a bunch of rants that that aren’t grounded in truth. And you know, I can’t construct something positive out of that. I can understand it, people do all sorts of things. And as I said before, I continue to believe that Reverend Wright has been a leader in the South Side. I think that the church he’s built is outstanding. I think that he has preached in the past some wonderful sermons. He provided valuable contributions to my family, but at a certain point if what somebody says contradicts what you believe so fundamentally and then he questions whether or not you believe it in front of the national press club then that’s enough. That’s a show of disrespect to me. It is also I think an insult to what we’ve been trying to do in this campaign.
Obama: Yea, no, she [Michelle Obama] was similarly angered.
Obama: First of all, in terms of liberation theology, I’m not a theologian. So I think to some theologians there might be some well worked out theory of what constitutes liberation theology versus non-liberation theology. I went to church and listened to sermons, and in the sermons that I heard—and this is true I think across the board in many black churches—there is an emphasis on the importance of social struggle, the importance of striving for equality and justice and fairness, a social gospel, so I think a lot of people would rather—rather than using a fancy word like that simply talk about preaching the social gospel. And that—there’s nothing particularly odd about that. Dr. King obviously was the most prominent example of that kind of preaching, but what I do think can happen and I didn’t see this as a member of the church, but I saw it yesterday, is when you start focusing so much on the plight of the historically oppressed that you lose sight of what we have in common that it overrides everything else, that we’re not concerned about the struggles of others because we’re looking at things only through a particular lens. Then it doesn’t describe properly what I believe in the power of faith to overcome, but also to bring people together.
Obama: I did not view the initial round of soundbites that triggered this controversy as an attack on the Black Church. I viewed it as a simplification of who he was, a caricature of who he was. And more than anything, something that piqued a lot of political interest. I didn’t see it as an attack on the Black Church. The only aspect of it that probably had to do specifically with the Black Church is the fact that some people were surprised when he was shouting. I mean that is just a Black Church tradition, and so I think some people interpreted that somehow as ‘wow he’s really hollerin’ and black preachers holler and whoop. So that I think showed sort of a cultural gap in America. You know the sad thing is that although the sound bites as I’ve stated I think created a caricature of him, and when he was in that Moyers interview, even though there were some things that continued to be offensive, at least there was some sense of rounding out the edges. Yesterday I think he caricatured himself, and that was as I said, that made me angry but also made me sad.
Obama: You know, I tried to talk to him before the speech in Philadelphia, wasn’t able to reach him because he was on a cruise. He had just stepped down from the pulpit. When he got back I did speak to him. And the, you know, I prefer not to share sort of private conversations between me and him. I will talk to him, perhaps, some day in the future. But, what I can say is that I was very clear that what he had said in those particular snippets I found objectionable and offensive. And that the intention of the speech was to provide context for them, but not excuse them because I found them inexcusable, so.?
Obama: There’s been great damage. It may have been unintentional on his part, but you know I do not see that relationship being the same after this. Now, to some degree, you know, I know one thing that was true was that he was never my quote unquote spiritual adviser. He was never my spiritual mentor; he was, he was my pastor. And so to some extent, how you know the press characterized that relationship, I think, wasn’t accurate. But he was somebody who was my pastor and married Michelle and I and baptized my children and prayed with us at, when we announced this race—and so, you know, I’m disappointed.








April 29th, 2008 at 1:00 pm
Wright’s rampage yesterday seemed to me to be about power and control. He seemed to be sending a clear msg to Obama that he wasn’t going to be put aside just so Obama could run for President.
I thought Obama looked genuinely hurt today. Although, he seemed hurt to be betrayed by Wright. It still doesn’t explain how he sat in that church under Wright’s ministry for 20 years.
April 29th, 2008 at 1:17 pm
Obama should have done this in the beginning. It seems very disingenuous now. Wright pretty much said the same stuff he’s been saying the last 20 years.
Obama basically said, “I cut ties this man now because he won’t shut up, even though just a few weeks ago I gave a big speech on race and tried to explain why I couldn’t cut ties with him.”
April 29th, 2008 at 1:31 pm
I think anyone that has been ever been let down and hurt by a leader of his church knows how this feels.
April 29th, 2008 at 1:35 pm
Wright’s ego is too big, and he saw fit to “defend” himself as if the issue was him. Wright: (as if you visit conservative sites) If Obama had not been a member of your church for over 20 years, you would not be in the spotlight right now. Obviously Wright can not live with his reputation “tarnished”, so he came to rescue himself, even if that means throwing Obama under the bus. And Clinton is right now a very happy bus driver…
April 29th, 2008 at 1:41 pm
Ok, I’m no supporter of Rev. Wright. I think he is dead wrong about just about everything.
BUT, how exactly is he letting Obama down? He’s saying exactly the same stuff he’s been saying for over 20 years! He’s just being himself. Obama feels betrayed by the fact that Wright won’t stay in the basement?
April 29th, 2008 at 1:43 pm
The problem I have is Obamas reactionary skills.
Not only do I not believe that after 20 years he didnt know this guys positions, I wonder about a leader who takes this long to deal with issues in a more expeditious manner.
But even if Obama did kick butt on this mess sooner I still dont see how he can explain away the last 20 years.
I just dont buy it.
April 29th, 2008 at 2:58 pm
10 bucks says that this seals the deal on the nomination. Doesn’t solve any general election fallout issues that will continue to linger, but this solves the NC primary and gives him the momentum again. This guy has an uncanny ability to bounce back from almost anything.
Wright is letting Obama down because Wright is taking the position of “I am more important than the ideals I hold or the people I serve”. Obama always knew that Wright was a skeleton, but Wright had no right to become a spewing bigot on a national pulpit.
The mainstream media is soaking Wright’s self-indulgence up because they love ratings, not news. Andrea Mitchell on NBC was giddy on Monday covering Wright.
If my drunk uncle started spewing crap that made me look bad just so he could get attention, I would feel let down as well.
April 29th, 2008 at 3:05 pm
Drunk uncle is not the same as your religious leader.
Also, bounce back? What exactly has Obama ever bounced back from in this campaign? Rev. Wright? Not yet?
April 29th, 2008 at 3:11 pm
YD - I agree with you except for your analogy. If your drunk uncle had been spewing crap for 20 years, praising Farrakhan, denouncing the USA, etc., I suspect that you would not praise him as your close confidant and spiritual adviser. This surely is good for ratings, but it is also relevant political news.
Micky2 - distancing sooner would have helped, although doubtful he could tell the complete truth. Could Obama really say, “look, I joined this church out of expediency because Christianity suited my political ambitions and this particular radical black church was helpful for my first local election. And its adoption of black liberation theology suits my socialist world view. But I rarely even go to church, and in fact, was never even baptised as a Christian because it ain’t a big thing for me. All that talk about ’spiritual adviser’ was to position me as a devout church-goer for votes from those religious a-holes.”
NYIndi - in what way has Wright let Obama down? ignatiusreilly has this right.
April 29th, 2008 at 3:16 pm
Young Dem.
I wouldnt feel let down by someone I didnt give a rats a$$ about anymore.
The timing is perfect for Hillary.
Tomorrow O Reilly will have her on and thats a plus for her. I also have no doubt this appearance was booked at FOX in a heartbeat once Wright started yapping again.
The concensus everywhere is pretty much the same, amd that is that this has hurt Obama a lot.
Also, it has raised the question more amongst voters that I asked a little while ago about his leadership abilities.
But from my position its a plus because I think McCain will mop the floor with Hillary.
April 29th, 2008 at 3:22 pm
McCain.
Yup, theres really no way to explain his way out of this unless he can convince the country that he had some change and awakening over night.
He was for Wright before he was against Wright ?
Didnt work for Kerry
April 29th, 2008 at 3:40 pm
Ig,
First a question: By chance taught by Jesuits? The Ignatius name thing stands out.
Second, Obama has seemed to bounce back from many blunders relatively well. First, he recovered from Wright episode I with the Philly speech (well received for the most part). Second, he recovered from the bitter comment when he lost PA by less than 10% (he was never going to win the rural white vote anyway). Third, he recovered from his ABC debate disaster by spinning it into a “voters want to hear about the issues” failure by Charlienopolis.
I am biased here because I do support Obama, but these types of failures could sink a candidate. NC will prove whether he has bounced back from Wright episode II though. He needs to win by 10%. Otherwise, I defer and admit he might be fatally flawed.
Micky2,
Yes the Wright issue has hurt Obama A LOT, but today’s press conference puts it to rest as much as it ever could be put to rest. Hillary has her hands full with the gas tax holiday issue. It does not seem to be playing well with most Dems. This doesn’t raise questions of leadership abilities as much as judgement. His leadership abilities appear fine because each time Wright has appeared, he has taken a strong stance with a well received speech. Its his judgement about having Wright as his pastor that is concerning your average Joe.
April 29th, 2008 at 3:51 pm
No, definitely not Jesuits. NJ public schools, so I was more likely to encounter a communist than a Jesuit. Ignatius is not my name. It’s from A Conderacy of Dunces.
I agree with you that Obama survived some negativity in recent weeks. However, I don’t think he’s yet recovered from that negativity. It still surrounds him, and probably will continue to do so for the rest of this election.
I agree that NC will be a good litmus test. Obama for the first time ever faces somewhat of a “must win” situation.
We shall see! As with all other stuff in this election, the only certainty is that things will be confusing.
April 29th, 2008 at 5:00 pm
Sounds like you are bitter! HA!
I realize that none of us reading this thread are average Joes. We aren’t the people the candidates care about though. Conservative or liberal, we here all make up our minds based on deeply thoughtout positions and rationale. Not that average Joes are too stupid to have deeply thoughtout positions, but that they are more worried about keeping their jobs and protecting their families. Those are the people who want to know whether Obama represents their belief systems or not. Same people who are worried about whether Hillary is genuine.
About McCain mopping up Hillary….I think that is a bit wishful thinking. The war and the economy still put this race in the Dems court.
April 29th, 2008 at 5:02 pm
I do agree that decision making is the foundation of leadership though….take a look at our current situation!
April 29th, 2008 at 5:58 pm
fascinating discussion, thanks for posting this to the forum.
I think what you have to ask yourself is “is there anything in Obama’s history that would lead you to believe he isn’t genuine in what he says, or holds any of the views espoused by Wright”?
At this point, I don’t think there is. Does this hurt him or help him? I don’t know. It could cause a backlash among black voters that he so desperately needs, while not really helping him among Whites. I liked what he had to say today, but I just can’t make a guess as to how this will play out over the next few days.
I do think that most Americans see the whole Wright affair as a side-show that is reinforcing that politics is a spectator sport rather than a way to elect people who will actually deal with the many serious issues facing this nation today.
April 29th, 2008 at 6:43 pm
Young Dem.
If I’m bitter its not about the leadership we have now.
Its because of the choices we face in November.
I will stand behind MCcain basically because he is the one who has survived this far, and I will support someone who has a predominantly conservative stance as opposed to the two evils you Dems have to choose between. One is a disengenuous snake and the other is an empty gas bag with no experience that will enable him to lead. I myself believe the Cons had better choices with Giuliani or Huckabee. Life goes on. Those two candidates alone have more experience than either Hillary or Obama and are far more knowledgable of how to conduct our foriegn policies.
Obama let all the average joes down with his bitter comments. He clearly showed he cannot relate to the average everyday struggles of an average American. He’s been spoon fed his whole life, this is no secret.
McCain on the other hand has had plenty of experience that gave him incdredible drive and resiliance that even the American with the greatest of hardships could never relate to.
Hillarys vision of a good economy is to play Robinhood with my money.
If you remember correctly it wasnt too long ago she was giving away the house and the lot it came on with credits going to people for college funds , babies, and slew of other entitlements that you could not explain how she was going to pay for them. And her hubby probably told her to stop threatening to spend other peoples money.
And only a fool would think that whoever is elected is going to pull troops out of Iraq as soon as these two clowns say they will.
They are telling antiwar moonbats what they want hear for now just to get votes.
We are in Iraq for the long haul. Hillary and Obama know we must remain in the middle east in order to maintain some sort of stability. Obama and hillary are also aware that we are building the biggest embassey we have ever built anywhere in Iraq. They know the deal.
Hearts and minds ? BS !
Saddam gave us a perfectly legite reason to go in and do what we knew we had to do for a long time. And that was to plant our American hides right in the middle of the hornets nest and keep an eye on the most disfunctional part of the world that could collapse the world economy.
Untill we have some alternative source of energy that cant be threatened by radicals we need a strong precense in the middle east in order maintain the flow of oil. Not just to us but to almost every viable economy on the planet
If you are learned in the intentions of Al Queda and other radical sects in the middle east you will be aware of the fact that they all know disrupting our flow of oil will cripple us. OBL has said this so specifically in his letter to America.
Not more than last week two pipelines and a refinery under construction were attacked by radicals. And one oil tanker in the gulf was attacked also. Think about it. That is why oil spiked again a couple weeks ago.
Our current leadership really has nothing to do with the state of our economy. The free market is a living breathing function that has its own ups and downs that come and go in average cycles. And the reason for the state of the economy can be mostly attributed to the American and his spending and investment paranoia. ( and idiots who bought houses they couldnt afford)
Thank God George bush had the insight and clarity to see what would be on the horizon if we didnt make an appearance and precense in the middle east.
If we had told the whole country that we were going there to secure our countrys economy instead freeing the Iraqis no one would of liked it. There had to be some humanitarian element to the invasion or most people would of balked. We gave Saddam the rope he needed to hang himself and then our entrance was justified.
April 29th, 2008 at 6:57 pm
Oh ! Young Dem.
You can thank Carter and environmentalists for ethanol also which is now disrupting the food market and commodities all over the planet.
Bring all our food cost up between 15 and 25%.
If anything is going to screw up economical balance and is to blame for our hardships ethanol is. Once the oil cartels knew we going to start using ethanol thay wanted to squeeze us one more time, and so they did.
Bio fuels have been with us for a long time but it was Carter who usherd it in in the 70s when he scared the crap out of America and said oil reserves all over the world would dry up by the mid 90s (sometime around there)I can pull the speech if you want me to.
The worst leadership this country has ever had was Carter.
As a Young Dem you probably dont remember the gas rationing and having to stand in line for hours only to be turned away because the station ran out of gas that was 3.50 a gallon. In those days that was like paying 10.00 a gallon today. And you could not come back until the day after because the rationong was operated on an odd/even cycle depending on the number you plates ended with.
April 29th, 2008 at 7:54 pm
Micky2, why do the GOP-bots ignore Bush’s pronouncements of support for Ethanol programs going back as far as the 2000 campaign?
April 29th, 2008 at 8:58 pm
BOB
I never said only Dems were responsable for the impact ethanols corn deflecting effect has had on us. Ethanol has become a cash cow for both sides of the isle now and corn farmers via subsidies.
But Carter is responsable for bringing it to our market more than any other administration.
Along with the environmentalists of the 70s and 80s. Todays environmentalists are well aware of the drawbacks of ethanol and actually lobbying against it.
I support Bush but not on every policy.
I’m not crazy about how we went into Iraq. We should of gone balls out and cut to the chase.
And I’m not crazy about his border policy, or lack of.
He was questioned once on the border and actually said money trumps immigration law.
I could ask the same about Bill Clinton or Bush senior who had just as much a hand in it as any other administration.
So the reason it would appear to you that we ignore it is only because their is plenty of blame to go around. And most of the agreements bills and contracts had already been a done deal well into 2000.
April 29th, 2008 at 9:55 pm
Just say no to biofuels. Eat the corn. Hydrogen is the answer to our energy needs. We have access to plenty of seawater. Hydrogen > electricity via fuel cells (big/little[car-engine-sized]/really big) > provides the energy to break the hydrogen from h2o > cycle with lots of extra energy from it for other stuff. Tons of new nuclear powerplants until “pie-in-the-sky” cold fusion (safe energy) is found with a Manhattan-project-like effort. We make a distributed generation power grid as we go along building our point-of-use kind of new energy infrastructure (makes our country much safer from any attack or grid failure as a bonus - no more brownouts).
Will this thing from obama be enough? Amazingly, I think it might be. Obama’s devotees want this to be enough.
April 29th, 2008 at 10:22 pm
Obama seems to be becoming something of a “teflon candidate” (Whether that is an outside and sonewhat artificial result (such as maybe a “love is blind” effect factor partially is another story). If obama clinches the nomination, will the teflon pass be valid through November?
Does it seem to anyone else that obama cutting ties to wright now smacks of being a little politically opportunistic? Does it seem like he’s kinda counting on the short attention-span of America to forget about their 20-year association and all the personal ties between them? Unfortunately, it might work. This guy actually makes hillary look fairly reasonable by comparison. Now that takes some doing, and is truly amazing.
April 29th, 2008 at 11:14 pm
IMI.
I just bought a new car. Its gonna have to run on gas for the next ten years.
Nukes are great if we can get the environmentalists and gerbil warming freaks to let us do something besides ride bikes.
Not to mention that a whole new grid could take decades
April 30th, 2008 at 2:14 am
Micky,
Why do you posts all sound like you are angry? Your lame attempts at humor just make your arguments sound really pathetic. Gerbil warming? Plus, you are missing the fact that environmentalists know nuc power is carbon neutral. Those “gerbil warming freaks” are against coal-fired plants, not nuclear.
You pulled Carter out of thin air and blamed him for our ethanol problems? The ethanol boom of the past 5 years is a product of the free market trying to get in on some of the oil action. They (ADM, Cargill, Monsanto, etc) could care less if food prices go up, they know that more acres are in production this year than any before. And that means more profits. Any environmentalist worth their salt knows that cellulosic ethanol is the only way biofuel is going to work. If we scientists cannot get the process figured out in 5-10 years, the ethanol boom will bust. Corn-based ethanol is unsustainable, period.
April 30th, 2008 at 6:52 am
Young Dem.
I am probably the least angry person you will ever meet. But even if I was I doubt anyone who knew what the left has done and is willing to do would blame me.
Environmentalist run in packs. Not all are deranged zealots. But the remainder are all just a bunch of corporate monkeys.
This is just one of many stories in relation to those groups that are impeding process due to disposal methods concerning spent fuel from weapons testing to civilian radioctive waste.
http://www.ens-newswire.com/ens/jan2008/2008-01-11-091.asp.
A good majority of environmentalists are not just concerned with carbon emissions Young Dem. They are also concerned with other forms of pollution, many of which are myths, and have no connection to the atmosphere.
Carter was not pulled out of thin air.
He was a combined response to your critisism of todays leadership and a statement that shows how the Dems are incapable of electing effective leadership. Most recently would would be the worst and most useless congress this country has ever seen in over 50 years.
And the two worst Dem presidential candidates I have ever seen. These two clowns are what you guys have stuck yourselves with. Nice job.
Carter was also mentioned as part of the blame for todays skyrocketing food costs and for bringing us a fuel that has only proved to be advantageous for corn farmers and politicians.
Whether corn based ethanol is sustainable or not for the next five years is really irrelevant to todays predicament and how it came to be.
The CATO institute is one of the most reliable sources there is on this history.
http://www.cato.org/pubs/pas/pa-241.html
“When OPEC restricted oil production again in 1978–and the Carter administration tightened oil and gasoline rationing, creating artificial panic–Andreas arrived at the White House with a salvation scheme. Why not increase subsidies for ethanol? According to Frank Greven, who is working on a book on Andreas and ADM, “During the 1978 Persian Gulf oil crisis, he convinced Carter that using ADM’s ethanol as a lead-free octane booster in gasoline would promote energy independence and cleaner air.”(39) As part of its grandiose solution to the energy crisis–which the president proclaimed to be the moral equivalent of war–the Carter administration drove through Congress a plan to exempt gasoline with 10 percent ethanol from the 4-cents-a-gallon federal fuel excise tax.”
As you can see I dont proclaim things unless I can back it up. Cosequently my arguements are hardly pathetic if you actually study any recent history pertaining to the facts. And not buy into the heartfelt and wishful positions based on the emotional and idealistic rationalization that we see so much on the left.
The classic example of this would be the left that is suppoorting Obama on the idea that a black man in office would a great example of diversity and yet we know little of the man that qualifies him to lead our country.
I’m not angry Young Dem.
I’m just a little weary of all the BDS out there and actually laugh a little now everytime I hear Dems critisise our presidents leadership.
And when they do I quickly will remind them of the choices they have made in recent history that have proven to be less than impressive