then again, that's just me. Do what thou wilt, just don't hurt anyone, k?

jdfu!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

You know this WILL be an important issue to the US media, but only just AFTER Hillary gets the nomination, if she gets the nomination.

McCain's religious guides, the Revs Hagee and Parsley, scare me a whole lot more than Hillary's former pastor, who in turn scares me a whole lot more than the Rev Wright.
The media, as usual, has the whole thing backwards.

This is why I get all my news off the internet.
If I wanted to watch Faux News all the time and on every station, then I would bother to watch TV at least a little.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Wait, the aeticle misses the entire point and is making a big stretch here. Clinton, as much as I dont really like her, didn't sit in the pews for 20 years listening to her former preacher condone sexually abusing children. Obama DID sit in the pews for 20 years listening to his pastor condem America and whites.

Not a small difference but a BIG difference! Nice try but Obama is still in the hole in this one and struggleing to get out.

The only good thing is that after a month or more this will be old news and Obama can continue to focus on the issues which will bury Clinton. He will bne our next President and it will be a refreshing change from the normal party BS we all endure!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Hillary's berzerker strategy

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

When there are much bigger fish to fry, why bother worrying about what some preacher said about a social issue or did before being held accountable for an illegal activity? That stuff is so peripheral to the big issues and the qualifications of the presidential candidates that it doesn't even qualify as a legitimate side show. We should be calling out the mainstream press for distracting us with such pap instead of asking for more of it.

That said, if there is a need for dirt to sell papers and TV news, there is more than enough of it hanging about untouched.

Clinton seems to exposed herself as a self serving liar--several times over, in fact. The whole gestalt of her claim to 35 years of fighting the good fight for the common citizen appears to be mostly a big lie. Even her suggestions that she remains a candidate because she thinks she can be the nominee this year appears to be highly suspect.

That is the sort of stuff we should be demanding that the media cover right now instead of leaving it to Karl Rove and his gang to turn it into GOP campaign dirt in the Fall. Let's not add to the problem by spotlighting the personal failings of someone who never had much pull and was never going to have any important impact on military, education, health care, civil rights, financial, law enforcement, or any of the other major policy issues that deserve great scrutiny right now.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

All this BS about people's pastors is totally irrelevant to the issue at hand. We are not electing pastors to the presidency. We are electing people for whom there is not a religious test for the office. Why does the media get so upset about what some pastor says in the pulpit whether or not a candidate is in attendance or not? We do not care. Tell us more about health care, the economy, the occcupation in Iraq, the war in Afghanistan, but leave the damn preachers out of it.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Isn't america based in the principle of separation between state and church ?
ren't you discussing the wrong points of the issue here ?
People !
If one candidate seeks support from any church, or if there is reason to believe that his judgement will be consciously influenced by some religious agenda, it is totally legitimate to denounce all the possible dark aspcts of it.
But, if not, it is a personal issue and no one has the right to attack.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

So far, at least, America still has freedom of speech. It's what allowed the likes of Francis Schaeffer (one of the founders of the religious right) to compare the US to Nazi Germany and the USSR and still be courted by people like Jack Kemp and Ronald Reagan. It was his opinion that abortion, tolerance of gays, and the prohibition against organized prayer in schools were indicative of moral decay in this country. He had the right to that opinion, and he had the right to express it both in his speeches and in his writing. He was correct when he said that America allows abortion, that gays are increasingly tolerated (at least one would hope so), and that organized prayer in public schools is not permitted. It's his view of these issues, not the fact of them, that might be offensive to many people.

By the same token, Rev. Wright was of the opinion that the American government had allowed and even perpetuated crimes against blacks and other ethnic groups. Of course, this is true. Once again, it's not the facts, it's the assessment of those facts that is inflammatory. It's hard to argue with the fact that blacks have been discriminated against in the past, or that racial profiling and other indignities continue to be perpetuated against racial and ethnic minorities in the US. However, whether or not one believes that god should "damn" America for that behavior is another matter.

Rightwingers tend to condone or tolerate anti-American rhetoric when it comes to religious principles or "conservative" points of view. (We need another word to replace "conservative," as the extreme right is most definitely not conservative at all. They are radicals!) Although Francis Schaeffer writes that prohibiting organized prayer in schools is comparable to the "godless" USSR, Huckabee says he would select Schaeffer's book to take on a desert island along with the Bible. Liberals, being true believers in freedom of speech, mostly really don't care if someone expresses an unfortunate opinion, so they are simply not up in arms about this kind of thing.

When a progressive, black minister makes a provocative statement, the right reacts quite differently. It's the same right to free speech, it's a person expressing criticism of American morals or policies, it's a matter of a given slant on certain facts, but it's somehow not acceptable to the political or religious right. America denounced by god for racism is different to them from America denounced by god for allowing gay marriage.

The radical right in America has a definite double standard, and the "liberal" media has not felt the need to point this out. Candidates should not be held accountable for the opinions, speech, or writings of their ministers, friends, or associates of any kind. But even more, the treatment by the media of the different ends of the political spectrum should not be so out of balance.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Do you seriously expect me to believe Mrs. Clinton sat in the pew at he Resurrection Assembly of God church and listened to this guy, her "minister"? That now is the most outrageous part of this: would the Roosevelt's have been members of some "nearer my god to Thee" sect out in Oyster Bay, I mean, if here had been one, and I doubt it? How can Americans keep taking aboard all this "truth most dubious", I mean, does no one down in New York or Illinois know the lady's background? My long departed and much loved cleaning lady was the most wonderful person, I truly loved her as a human being, and she had nine kids, one of whom was a waif and white and just "taken in", with all he others,-- the source of much mirth when people in public commented on their relationship, as he called her "Mom." OK, she was worthy, but if I told (ca l965) you that she had become Archbishop of Canerbury, would you blieve me? How I wish it were so: equally, you think of Hilly and Billy there on Sundays? Or more? I'm afraid I don't, this is ANOTHER bit of smoke and mirrors, and anyone who goes for it a) needs his head examined b)has an endless appetite for the kind of "true" things that come tumbling out of the Washington, DC Santa;'s bag, (bag of tricks).

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Please see www.discussrace.com

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

convenience while killing their names - at their convenience. Faith based bullshit has had its run. It's time for rationality, humanity, compassion and real science - not some asshole preacher's kid believing people rode dinosaurs while smiting the unbelievers with swords beaten from plowshares - to rule human behavior.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

To devote some space to the looney-toons who are directly supporting insane mccain, and whose support he SOLICITED?

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Are all of you Obamites as jaded as this writer. Trying to equate Hillary's EX pastor for a crime he committed is ridiculous. Obama sat in this church for 20 years, claiming to not be aware of these racists views spewing forth from the pulpit; was married by the guy; had his children baptised by the guy; and refused to repudiate him. Talk about someone whose judgement should be questioned??? Would you want someone using this type of judgement to by your next president?? Is this the kind of people he would surround himself with in his cabinet...to be his "political advisors"???
I support Hillary but I would also support Obama if he were the nominee; more than I can say about most of the ranters and ravers on here. I'm just trying to make a point at how ridiculous some of you Obama supporters sound with your stupid arguments against Hillary and your lack of clear and rational reasoning!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

He was a former Pastor in the town of Clinton, not for Pres. and Ms. Clinton! We're talking Upstate New York, nowhere near where the Clinton's live!

I wish, ALL candidates would leave religion out of their campaigns! I wish, the IRA would do it's job, and start removing tax-exempt status for ALL churches that get involved in politics! Only houses of 'worship' or the portion used for worship, should be tax-exempt! These churches, with bowling alley's, book stores, and movie theaters, is absurd!

Unfortunately, if you put your Paster, on your campaign committee, you've opened yourself up to your religion (and his sermon's) to public questioning!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

A comment posted on Steven Reynolds blog:

CLINTON, NY. IT IS A TOWN!!! The pastor was NOT Clinton’s pastor! HE PRACTICED IN CLINTON, NY!!! Good GAWD, I live up here! I know about this case! CORRECT THIS SMEAR!!!! Oneida County is no where NEAR where Hillary lives in NYS!!!! CLINTON, NY!!! LOOK IT UP ON A MAP!!!!!

Comment by Diane — March 25, 2008 @ 2:24 pm

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What does Obama really believe?

The man was collecting six thousand dollars per year (and so was his wife) for four years to disseminate Muslim ant-Semitic propaganda. Then he decided to have a public career, and cut himself off from that source of money.

What does it say about the man except that he either believes in the anti-Semitic bulls**t that he espoused, or he believes even more firmly in selling his services to anyone who offers the cash.

I believe it is the latter. This is why Obama has received more corporate dollars from the insurance, chemical, manufacturing and death industries than any other candidate.

None of these industries care one iota about the millions who donate five bucks or a hundred to the Obama campaign. Killing me slowly should be their theme song, and Obama has sold his political and moral soul to the Corporate Establishment that he espouses to change.

That promise of Change is just as credible as the man sitting in the pews for twenty years and not hearing a racist word from his dear friend the minister in all that time.

Follow the money back to its sources and the secret of the Obama campaign becomes clear. Hanging the carrot of an Obama presidency in front of the delusional Democrats and "Progressives" rabid for change almost seems like a Karl Rove signature plot. It might place the Dems and anti-war blocks in a no-win situation.

Remember George McGovern: Obama is not nearly the man of integrity that McGovern is, though he pretends in this campaign to be his equal, and it fools millions. Rove, or those mimicking his tactics in this election, will expect a similar landslide for McCain in November, as Nixon trounced the better man in 1972.

These are the words of Thomas A. Nagy.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Hell, I had no idea she even was Catholic!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Religion is caused by any one or more of about half a dozen mental illnesses.
The truth about religion can be found in these books:

"The Neuropsychological bases of god beliefs" Dr. Michael A. Persinger MD,
psychiatrist 1987 "Religious people are just like my temporal lobe patients"

"The Origin of Consciousness in the Breakdown of the Bi-Cameral Mind" Julian
Jaynes Professor, Harvard University 1976 "Religious people are just like
schizophrenic patients"

"The Psychiatric Interview in Clinical Practice" Roger A. MacKinnon, M.D.,
Robert Michels, M.D. W. B. Saunders Co. 1971 "Religiosity is a common
symptom [of] schizophrenic patients"

"The God delusion" by Richard Dawkins. "Religion is caused by a kind of
computer virus that infects the living computer, the human brain."

"The Science of Good and Evil" by Michael Shermer, 2004 "Morality and Ethics
are now in the jurisdiction of Science and greatly improved thereby."

Many books in the new science called "Sociobiology": Morals and ethics are
instinctive and they evolved.

"God: The Failed Hypothesis" by Victor Stenger Scientific proof that god does
not exist.

"The God Part of the Brain" by Matthew Alper 1996. "The USA is anomolusly
religious because many early founder groups were religiously insane and fleeing
prosecution in Europe. Religion is a genetic disorder."

"The Accidental Mind" by David J. Linden, 2007 Belknap Press of Harvard
University Press. Religion is caused by the extreme klugeyness of the "designed"
by evolution brain. In particular, the narrative creation system cannot be turned
off. It generates false narratives that are believed by the generating person. This is
seen in experiments done in the laboratory. This book has the best explanation of
resistance to evolution: "There has also been an assumption that if one accepts the
idea that life developed without divine intervention, it necessarily follows that all
aspects of religious thought must be rejected. Those who take this line of
argument to extremes argue that when religious thought is rejected moral and
social codes will degenerate and "the law of the jungle" will be all that is left. It is
imagined by religious fundamentalists that those who do not share their particular
religious faith are incapable of leading moral lives." These suppositions are not
true many times over. Linden later mentions that the creationists [intelligent
design advocates] are exactly 180 degrees wrong rather than just a little wrong.
Being exactly wrong, they are unable to unlearn their error. See Sociobiology or
Sciobio.

"Scientists Confront Intelligent Design and Creationism" edited by Petto &
Godfrey, 2007. The ID and creationist crowd are trying to do away with science.
They see science as a "godless religion." Science is a process, not a religion.

"Manufacturing Belief" by Lewis Wolpert
http://www.salon.com/books/feature/2007/05/15/lewis_wolpert/

"The End of Faith" and "Letter to a Christian Nation" by Sam Harris

"Breaking the Spell: Religion as a Natural Phenomenon", by Daniel Dennett
Let's do scientific research on religion and find out what causes it.

"Origins of the Modern Mind" by Merlin Donald 1991 "So what did you expect
from a brain that is based on the Chimpanzee brain?

"Atheism, A Case Against God" by George Smith

"God is not Great; how religion poisons everything" by Christopher Hitchens, 2007

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

As a sophomore undergraduate student in Physics, your homework in Probability
and Statistics class may include figuring out when the second coming would be
required, assuming that the bible was 100% true in the year zero. That is, when
would the bible be down to 50% true? The popular and professors' answer in
1965 was the year 500. The true answer: A friend of mine was born and raised in
Budapest, Hungary. As an adult, he came here and stayed. After 25 years, he
visited his home town of Budapest. He was unable to communicate with his high
school classmates because the Hungarian language had changed so much. The
correct answer is less than 25 years. The first gospel was not written down until
50 years after the alleged events and then in a different language. The people who
told the story were at about the same level of civilization as "wild Indians", I mean
Native Americans before Columbus got here. We have all played or seen played
the game called "Telephone" in which a story is passed down a line of re-tellers.
By the Sixth re-telling, the story has no resemblance to the original. The gospel
story had to have been re-told at least 6 times before it was mis-translated the first
time. [Note that whoever wrote it down the first time was free to write whatever
he wanted to. The storytellers were illiterate and unable to check his written text
by reading it. Besides that, he wrote in Greek rather than Aramaic.] Conclusion:
There is no truth anywhere in the bible, and there never was. There is no way to
know what "jesus" or "mohammed" or any other such character actually said or
did.

ALL of the jurisdictions that were formerly in the jurisdiction of religion have
been taken over by Science. There is no longer a need to debate the issue.
Religion is an unfortunate side effect of having evolved from a chimpanzee-like
animal in a very brief 6 or 7 million years. "God" will not save us from the
consequences of global warming or an asteroid impact or a tornado because there
is no such critter as "god.".] Ethics and morality are instinctive, not derived from
religion. Female instinct has greater force in morality than male instinct because
the female is in command of the sexual encounter. Look up "Sociobiology". The
origin of the Universe is the subject of Cosmology which is part of astronomy
which is part of the science of physics.
Religion is a SCAM. ANY religion, there are 10,000 to choose from at any one
time. People keep inventing new religions [for the benefit of the "prophet," of
course] and forgetting other religions. ALL preachers, priests, imams, rabbis,
iatolas, etc. belong in jail for "grand theft, bunko type".

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I don't think the article refers to the pastor as being Hillary Clinton's; I did a web search under the Church's name, and it indicated that Pastor was charge, then found guilty, then sentenced for the crime, but the church was located in Clinton. It did not say attended by the Clintons. Several articles referenced it in that manner. Perhaps you know more about this than what can be found on the web. Please correct me if I am wrong or misunderstanding.
peace

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

IT SEEMS ESSENTIAL THAT ALTERNET DO A LITTLE BIT OF RESEARCH BEFORE PUTTING "NEWS" UP. THIS STORY IS ABOUT A PASTOR FROM CLINTON, NEW YORK. HE IS NOT THE PASTOR OF THE CLINTONS. I HAVE RECEIVED ALTERNET FOR A VERY LONG TIME....THIS IS REALLY NOT WELL DONE.
JIM GUGLIELMINO

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

I am a democrat siding for obama (because I am too young to vote). I thought that it was stupid he was attacked for his pastor's (not his) exercising of the first amendment right. Now, when the media and Hillary discovered this footage, they had a "field day". I hope she's condemned as much as he was (or more) or realizes how hypocritical her actions are. After all, his pastor was only expressing himself; her pastor was having sex with a minor!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

What is sad is the inability of people to understand what they read or rather who see what they want to see and not what is there. The man was not Pres. & Sen. Clinton's pastor. He is a pastor who formerly lived in Clinton, N.Y. Nothing to do with the Clintons. FOCUS, people, FOCUS!

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Wow, if I had to be responsible for the embarrassing things my kids or my parents or my pastor said, that would take a whole lot of time away from the embarrassing things that I have said. I wish that I could un-ring my own bell at times. Society seems to be in "WITCH HUNT" mode much of the time. The details are sketchy here but so were the details of Pastor Wright's comments.

My suggestion is that we make the media accountable for attempting to smear people based on association and go back to the old days -- expecting news people to report news accurately and completely -- investigated and verified.

Also, I have angst with a society that swallows anything wholesale without searching for the truth and demanding it! It is not a wonder to me that a few people with boxcutters can command aircraft with hundreds of others on board. This comes about as a result of people who march lockstep with the one with the microphone, or the SpinDoctor.

I can't see how we can blame the press for their ways because we won't hold them to any accountability. If the sea of readership/viewer ship dries up they will have to pick up the clue phone and do better.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

This is a example of irresponsible reporting. He is not Clinton's minister. He served as a pastor of a church in the central N.Y village of a town called Clinton. Named for George Clinton, the first governor of N.Y. It still amazes me how the media and others report false information all the time without doing their research. Not sure if this was intentional or not, but don't just blindly believe things that you hear anymore people. Do your own research.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]