Tuesday, March 25, 2008

Stating the Obvious

Warning: The following post might not be "fair and balanced."

Senator Clinton declares to the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review that Rev. Wright would not have been her pastor. (That's news).

Only her husband's in his moment of crisis.

Here's a transcription of her comments with my comments unfairly inserted.

Question:
How would you have responded if your pastor had said some of the things that Rev. Wright said [such as "in Bill Clinton, blacks had an intelligent friend in the White House"]?

Response:
“He would not have been my pastor. … You know, you don’t choose your family [especially not your spouse], but you choose what church you want to attend. I spoke out against Don Imus [and everyone who ever went on his show because they should have known all he did was spit hate; especially by claiming I was Satan]. I gave a speech at Rutgers University saying that hate speech [such as claiming in that unfriendly tone of Rev. Wright's that racism exists] was unacceptable in any setting, and I believe that. So for me, if I had been a member of such a [predominantly black] church [in the south side of Chicago] – first of all, if I had sat there for 20 years, I think you all would have a lot to say if somebody made comparable sorts of sermons [about the government's historical oppression of white people]. I just think you have to speak out against that [because denouncing and rejecting them on a nationally televised speech, on interviews with all the major tv stations, and in a blog column in the Huffington post is not enough]. You certainly have to do it, if not explicitly [after buying old DVDs of your pastors sermon and sifting through them relentlessly for politically damaging comments], implicitly by getting up and moving [because my spouse hasn't always been faithful, but I didn't choose him]."

No comments: