In article <rs5f24d7g0lktncpgt63nuf038nev2ah68@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>,
JK <no@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> wrote:
>On Sun, 11 May 2008 14:48:56 -0400, "Dano" <janeanddano@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>
>wrote:
>>He is willing to smear Obama with guilt by association (Wright), while
>>keeping the same types of associates (Hagee).
>
>I've only got a couple minutes here, so I'll just address this huge
>error on your part. The two are NOT the same. Obama spent 20 years
>listening to the sermons and having a close relation****p with a
>spiteful, racist man. And that's not even to mention his friend****p
>with a known terrorist.
>
>OTOH, McCain NEVER attended Hagee's church and is only a passive
>acquaintance. Hagee endorsed him, not the other way around.
He's not that passive. He said he was honored and proud to have Hagee's
sup****t and endorsement. And according to Hagee, John McCain's campaign
sought out his endorsement.
http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1003728364
I'd agree that the cir***stances are different. However, I'd invite you
to consider what would happen if Farrakhan said "Yeah, Obama sought me
out and asked for my endorsement." I don't think it would go all that
well for Obama; I truly don't.
And...
I don't really care how long McCain's been associated with Hagee. The
second he knew Hagee said Katrina hit New Orleans because it was a
sinful city, McCain needed to stop associating with the man.
But he won't do it. He won't say the simplest thing in the world:
"I reject his endorsement."
You don't get to be proud that a bigot endorses you. Imagine if Obama
said "I'm proud to have Farrakhan's endorsement." Think he'd get away
with that?
--
Bryant Durrell // durrell@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
// durrell@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
|
