After the first kerfuffle I watched a number of the videos of the "controversial" sermons in full on YouTube, where they are posted. I was also shocked at the degree of manipulation the mainstream media has done to this guy's image. There is basically nothing in what he said that I disagree with, and the two statements called 'inflammatory' were taken horribly out of context of sermons that were 45 minutes to an hour long and contained a lot of dramatic characterization and straw men and other rhetorical strategies. They were both sermons advocating peace and patriotism -- you'd never, ever know that from the way the sound bites have been presented and discussed.

It doesn't surprise me that the general public has the wrong idea, because most people will absorb the headline stories and not go digging for the original content. But the people using the sound bites to tar Obama are doing something extremely sleazy - they know they are taking the pieces out of context, and they are intentionally misrepresenting them, because they can make some hay out of that.

Those interested might want to watch the first two Trinity Church videos here. Each begins by replaying the sound bite, then following it with the entire sermon, where the soundbite falls into the context and sounds....a lot different.

And of course, in the meantime, the notoriously "liberal" press softpedals the whole Hagee-McCain thing. After all, McCain called his comments about Hurricane Katrina being the wrath of god "nonsense!" That's good enough for us!

I agree that the whole thing was blown out of context, although I wasn't surprised at all.

But, to be fair to Senator Clinton, I'm guessing she comes from a religious and cultural background that WOULD avoid pastors that speak with Rev. Wright's passion and particular brand of rhetoric.

And yet, she's been in public life long enough, to be very literate about the differences between the black church and her own mainline protestant denomination. She and her husband have called on support from black clergy and campaigned in black churches. It's not believable for her to claim that she's never heard this sort of exhortatory preaching, doesn't know about black liberation theology, and has no idea what rhetorical strategies he's using - even if she doesn't attend a church where that happens.

It's not just the Clinton campaign that's responsible for this, though - it's every single journalist, pundit, or talking head that has discussed the matter publicly without informing first themselves, and then the rest of us, about what exactly is going on with those sound bites.

Therein lies the rub, Miko. It's a sad situation that we have to make ourselves more informed than the supposed informers. It's a result of so much bandwidth to fill, and so little material. With all the news channels fighting for the same limited dollars, financial standards become much more important than professional ones. I may be cynical, but I believe that is a large reason the Bush administration got a pass on the Iraq war. War is good for business, and lots of material for everyone.

That Senator Clinton didn't raise the discourse, and chose the low road she did, really isn't surprising to me.

That Senator Clinton didn't raise the discourse, and chose the low road she did, really isn't surprising to me.

Not that anyone has the time or the desire, but if you go back and look at all my comments, you will see me strongly in the Clinton camp until recently.

She's had some opportunities to really rise above, and she's just pandered and pandered. And while Obama is not above that, he's had some moments of clarity and honesty that have taken my breath away.

A silly, yet telling, example is when he came to Eugene. He's in to hoops, and it was just before the first round of the NCAA's and someone asked him where the Ducks were on his bracket. . ."one and done" was his answer. . . would Clinton, in a similar situation have said that in Eugene? Not likely.

The supposed lifelong Cub fan then becomes a Yankee fan overnight, and in baseball, you just don't do that. It may be trivial to offer sports anecdotes, but it's also telling of something else, I think.

I knew you were very pro Clinton, danf. Didn't know you changed your mind. I am very numbed by this election. I was interested, but it's been sucked out of me. Someone farts, and everyone else will admit they fart, but they do it in private, and when they do, it smells like lilacs. Then the 57 news channels will have a long analysis on farting in America, pundits will yell over each other shrilly, and Larry King will interview someone that thinks the position of fartmaster general should be created, and they are the one that should be nominated. Then there will be a discussion of whether or not they really did fart, or if it was just a kid with a whoopie cushion, or an unfortunate corduroy episode. Still others will claim the other candidate planted a ventriloquist farter. In the meantime the war goes on, and we continue to get robbed blind by the government and the corporations that have their hands up the governments ass. Still, all the news media will be talking about passing gas.

I agree, eekacat, but that's why I think it's really important not to turn off and numb out, but to keep learning and speaking as true citizens, to resist becoming sheep ruminating on our pre-chewed media cud. A lot depends on the outcome of the election. It's too bad the process has been so draining, but I think, in part, it's the price of a) democracy and b) a corporate media conglomerate out of control and kneeling before its advertisers.

Miko is right. Clinton may have grown up in the white Chicago burbs, and the Clintons may have attended a white Baptist church in Little Rock, and a white Methodist church in Washington, but good grief -- Bill was called "the first black President", serenaded by a black choir at the '92 Little Rock victory celebration, and on and on.

On the other hand, Hill and Bill have both always made a virtue of hypocrisy. They call it "triangulation" .... It's actually helped both of them avoid the dreaded "flip-flopper" label time and again. In some ways when she pulls this crap, she's deliberately appealing to the fans of street politics, and I even get a little twinge of respect for her as someone who would definitely not get out of the kitchen because she couldn't stand the heat. In that sense, it's flagrant and deliberate.

All that said, what a media lynching (to use a highly inappropriate metaphor) that was for Wright.

re, eek's comment: It's far past time we redefined what is meant by a "free" or "independent" press. There is absolutely no need for a corrupt government (or other powerful entity) to attempt to bridle or trivialize the news media when the market economy achieves this goal so much more efficiently and thoroughly.

Until the public is willing to collectively fund or support financially independent, ethical, professional journalism at a significant level, I don't see how this will change.