Now many blacks get seduced by this ideology and Barack was trying to identify himself as a black to get acceptance in south side black Chicago for his political ambitions. It worked for him in the local sense.

It is just for a national campaign, being identified, as a member of Black Nationalism is similar to a white being affiliated to the KKK.

This is deadly to his national campaign if he gets to be the nominee.

Now on the personal issue, if Barack did not agree with the philosophy, then why stay with the church for 20 years and decide to allow his children to be brought up in this hate speech environment. Barack did not have the moral courage to walk out or to address his disagreements with Rev. Wright. Now either Barack agreed or did not have the courage to disagree. Shows a flawed character. How can he stand up to America’s enemies?

Also the church has a decided anti Israel and pro Palestinian slant. Note that Hamas, a terrorist organization had a pastoral letter published by the church.

The impact of the videos has a devasting impact on the voters. This is a deal breaker.

What I cannot understand is how he thought this would not come out as the church sold the DVD’s. Perhaps he never thought his candidacy would go so far and then he was stuck. He could not bring it up and as long as the Clintons did not he thought he might be safe. The month before he was addressing a Jewish group and got a question from the audience that quoted Rev Wright and asked for an explanation. Barack gave the answer that Rev. Wright was like a crazy uncle and shrugged it off.

I would never vote for a candidate that willing and voluntarily chose to affiliate for 20 years with and anti American group and that hated whites and pushed Black nationalism. Most of Americans would not also.

I do hold Obama responsible for his craven failure to repudiate those views, and distance himself from them, until Wright became a political liability in the midst of a presidential campaign.

It’s one thing to sit quietly through the sermons of a preacher you occasionally disagree with. It’s another to maintain a 20-year association with, give significant sums of money to, and raise your daughters in, a church whose pastor devolves into foaming-at-the-mouth racist and anti-American nuttery with alarming frequency.

We can choose freely where we worship, and I for one would not worship at a place where a pastor said such hateful things. I might confront the pastor first, and if not satisfied, then leave.

Just recently one of the priests in the church where I belong included “Patriotism” in the same list of foibles as alcoholism, sexual addiction, and co-dependency. He was trying to point out how these things make you blind to reality. Ummmm, I took a little offense to a priest equating patriotism with sexual abuse and let him know with an email. We had a good exchange and I’m pretty sure he won’t do it again.

I don’t make a habit of rebutting homilies, but if I do, it’s been because of a perceived slam against the military. I would never tolerate a priest who continually rails against the military.

Why should Obama tolerate a pastor who continually spews hatred against the majority of citizens of the country for which he wants to be president?

Obama did a good thing today. His reluctance to throw his former pastor to the wolves - despite the political expediency of doing so - speaks volumes. What’s more, the criticism coming out of the very same mouths that once praised the likes of Pat Robertson, Ralph Reed, and Jerry Falwell rings so hypocritical that any sane person has to stifle a laugh.

Sorry to rant in your comment section - love the blog, keep up the good work!