The problem Wright presents to Obama is this: the statements he has made and positions he has taken or endorsed are anti-thetical to the image of himself that Obama has presented to America in his most famous speeches.  I first noticed Obama at the 2004 Democratic Convention.  Obama's speech was the highlight of the convention because he spoke as a uniter.  Even his speech in Philadelphia addressed how we must try to understand racial differences.  Much of Wright's comments, on the otherhand, were how our government (and by extension white america) is evil and corrupt.  Mike you want everyone to look at Obama's record -- but most people don't do that.  They vote for who the trust or who they're gut tells them will be better for them.

The other problem Wright has created for Obama is one of perception.  Obama has run as being "not just another politician" -- kind of similar to the way McCain did in 2000 -- an argument which is weakened when Wright (who Obama did not cut loose) calls him just that: "Another Politician."

So it becomes an issue because its all voters are hearing.  Thats why Obama should do town halls -- tell people, not journalists, why he is the right candidate.  Answer regular people's questions about Wright and Trinity.  He needs to reassure his constituancy and his party that he can win.  He needs to get people excited again! He needs to get the momentum back and he needs to define himself again. I think he can do those things -- but I haven't seen him do it yet.

There's a poll showing Clinton with a slight lead in North Carolina. 44% to 42%

http://www.usaelectionpolls.com/2008/polls/pdfs/insideradvan tage-majority-opinion-research-north-carolina-april29-2008.p df

Timing plays a big role here Geoff - early in the season, when there were more primaries, he had an image of momentum because his wins were frequent and close together.

Now, at this point, the elections are like one or two a month, with plenty of time in between, and he was never projected to win Penn - yet when he didn't, there were 4 weeks leading up to it, and now a few weeks after it, where the Corporate Media harps about how he's lost momentum - If Penn were in Feb, it would've been a blip on the radar, but now we have all this time to dwell on it before and after the election.

Not to say the smear campaign hasn't had it's effect - timing isn't the only thing hurting him, but it's certainly being used by those who are playing the game.

while someone who supports Bush (is insane)

Michael:

Don't insult the insane that way.  They don't like him either.

Timing plays a big role here Geoff - early in the season, when there were more primaries, he had an image of momentum because his wins were frequent and close together.

Now, at this point, the elections are like one or two a month, with plenty of time in between, and he was never projected to win Penn - yet when he didn't, there were 4 weeks leading up to it, and now a few weeks after it, where the Corporate Media harps about how he's lost momentum - If Penn were in Feb, it would've been a blip on the radar, but now we have all this time to dwell on it before and after the election.

Not to say the smear campaign hasn't had it's effect - timing isn't the only thing hurting him, but it's certainly being used by those who are playing the game.

What is hurting him most Mike is he is allowing others to define him.  Maybe its me but he has not been as energized as he was earlier in the campaign.  He needs that back.  And he need to really reach out to two groups: Hispanics and "Reagan Democrats" -- because he needs them both to win a general election.

Michael Roberts wrote: If Wright had built entire sermons around the government creating the AIDS virus or the U.S. being terrorists (and I've watched the entire "God Damn America" sermon and don't consider that specific sermon being an example of that), I would agree with what you are saying. The statements that had been getting airplay up before last week were smaller bits of a broader sermon, and I have no problem with the idea that people who found them offensive just shrugged and moved on and focused on the broader message.

I think we may be getting our wires crossed where this notion of gossip is concerned.  You've mentioned several times that you see it, in the context of this discussion, as something having to do with throwing ones hands in the air, exclaiming "I CAN'T BELIEVE HE SAID THAT!!!" and storming out of the church to return no more.  That is decidedly not what I'm saying.  What I am saying is that people talk.  Period.  About anything.  Doesn't have to be all or nothing.  Doesn't have to be controversial.  Doesn't even have to be about anything meaningful.  People will talk about anything.  In that light, I find it incredibly tough to believe that people just plain didn't talk about what Wright was saying behind the pulpit, even if it was to say "You weren't here last Sunday, so this is what Rev. Wright said..." or "Rev. Wright had a beautiful sermon a couple of Sunday's ago about..." In 20 years.  Not a solitary soul spoke about what Rev. Wright preached, be it in the broader context of a sermon or the singular theme that was the week's focus.  People found it so ordinary, so within their wheelhouse so to speak, that they didn't discuss it?  Not even to voice their affirmation? 

Sorry.  Not buying it.

Hey, Matt - I think I have an insight - I think you're talking about people who go every week, and are really actively involved in the Church.

From what I can tell, Obama and his family showed up from time to time, and was involved in events.  I'm sure he was doing a lot of shaking hands and back-slapping, but I think I can believe Obama when he parsed his words and said he didn't know those specific quotes.