Does Wright go too far? Definitely, and I’m not saying that we crucify white evangelical pastors who say unpopular things either, but Obama is getting a lot more heat than any of the Republicans (from mainly moderate mainline Protestantism) who pander to pro-Israel, far right evangelicals.

This is one of my big problems with Hillary. She had a chance to stand up for her fellow candidate, but didn’t.

On your counterpoints, Mr. Bird:

I must admit that I will simply disagree with anyone who claims the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki weren’t justified. A full-scale invasion would have ended up wiping out the Japanese almost entirely, because their government was exhorting the citizenry to fight to the death. I realize it’s over six decades later and those of us (me included) can’t really understand what that kind of war is like. But from what I’ve read and what I’ve heard from the WWII veterans in my family, the truth is the A-bomb was really the best way to make it stop.

The comment about comparing the Clintons to Dubya was actually directed at Spike. However, I feel my point still stands. While I expected (or at least, hoped for) better out of the Clinton and Obama campaigns, they are not on a Rove scale. Rove committed treason when he outed Valerie Plame. Treason is absolutely unforgivable. I don’t think anything Barack or Hillary or their advisors have done or will do is on the level of nation betrayal.

I voted for Obama in the primary and I think I probably still would now. My point is, and always seems to be, that no matter what kind of shenanigans are coming out of the Democratic side, it’s just not as bad as the Republican alternative.

Firing on retreating troops, bulldozing enemy troops in trenches and burying them alive, etc.

The point isn’t “America is better.” The point of Wright’s speech (which you can read online in full) is that regardless of comparatives, we all owe ourselves a moral duty to consider how we treat those we consider enemies.

The US was in very good shape during Clinton’s years and I’d happily welcome 4 or eight more years of that style politics.

That would be great, except that the Nineties aren’t coming back. Deal with it.

So, it’s okay to kill civilians if their government “encourages” them to do unpleasant things?

Have you heard the things the civilian population was encouraged to do to soldiers if Aliied soldiers had had to land in Japan

Er, I know America commits atrocities during wartime. Even if you want to skip over the atom bombs and Dresden and My Lai and Abu Ghraib, there’s still the atrocities committed during the first Gulf War.

And what atrocities are those? All I really know about America at war is that whatever we do we’re still a lot better than the countries we fight.

Firstly, I compared her campaign to one orchestrated by Karl Rove, which is different. That having been said, it’s a matter of plain and simple dirty political tactics: hypocrisy, a sharp tendency towards negative campaigning, and lying that is both stupid and pointless. (The Bosnia thing is making her look like a complete idiot and it looks like it’s sticking, not least because it’s unfortunately hilarious.)

There hasn’t been a modern cqampaign that hasn’t involved dirty tricks.

We’re choosing on the basis right now of Hillary or Barack Obama, who is a manifestly superior candidate in many respects.

His wife wasn’t president for eight years. The US was in very good shape during Clinton’s years and I’d happily welcome 4 or eight more years of that style politics.

Is no one worried Wright might drag Obama down? That was a great speech he gave last week, but there’s plenty of political columnists out there who are willing to do things like point out you’re stuck with your family, you choose your church. And his wifes comments.

I’ll probably vote for Obama or Hillary but there’s plenty of people who’ll figure that with a big chunk of the world angry at us we don’t need to elect someone who represents them to lead us.

If that was the sole basis of the comparison it would be, but in context, where Wright mentions the bombing of Hiroshima and Nagasaki in a list of American military actions where war was conducted against civilians and non-civilians indiscriminately – which is, you know, his point – it really isn’t.

You think America commits atrocities during wartime?

Er, I know America commits atrocities during wartime. Even if you want to skip over the atom bombs and Dresden and My Lai and Abu Ghraib, there’s still the atrocities committed during the first Gulf War.

On another point, what is this ridiculous trend of comparing The Clintons to Dubya?

Firstly, I compared her campaign to one orchestrated by Karl Rove, which is different. That having been said, it’s a matter of plain and simple dirty political tactics: hypocrisy, a sharp tendency towards negative campaigning, and lying that is both stupid and pointless. (The Bosnia thing is making her look like a complete idiot and it looks like it’s sticking, not least because it’s unfortunately hilarious.)

A vote for McCain is a vote for more pointless murder.

Certainly it is, and Hillary is a superior candidate to McCain. So, for that matter, would John Edwards, Dennis Kucinich, or even the odious Joe Lieberman be, and should Hillary manage to squeak out the nomination, I would tell people to hold their noses and vote for her. But we’re not choosing on the basis of “Hillary or McCain.” We’re choosing on the basis right now of Hillary or Barack Obama, who is a manifestly superior candidate in many respects.

You can’t possibly believe 9/11 was America’s “greatest national tragedy”. Compared to, say, the Civil War (Or Slavery before it and Jim Crow afterwards), or any number of events that predate 9/11 in American history that day looks a whole lot less tragic.

And please don’t tell me dropping nukes on civilian targets is somehow less evil because the Japanese weren’t saints. Is there even any point in playing “who suffered the most”? What do you get for winning?

It boils down to this – I’ve been a Democrat all my life. I watched the 2000 election as it was stolen (though Gore’s decision not to let Mr. Clinton campaign for him was a bad one) and in 2004 I watched the Republican Slime Machine turn a John Kerry, an actual war hero, into a coward in the eyes of the American public.

I wasn’t happy with Gore for dropping the ball on his home state. I wasn’t happy with Kerry for not fighting the slander harder. And I am becoming less and less pleased with Mrs. Clinton and Obama as this fight goes on. But I am still a Democrat, because I sincerely believe Barack and Hillary are superior choices to the guy who wants to keep us in Iraq.

Jeremiah Wright comparing 9/11 to Hiroshima and Nagasaki is completely absurd. You think America commits atrocities during wartime? As bad as it’s been – and it has been bad – the USA’s actions don’t hold a candle to what Japan did. And I am not just referring to Pearl Harbor. I don’t care what color Rev. Wright is. I don’t care how many doctorates he has or how many people he’s preached to. Comparing our greatest national tragedy to dropping the atom bomb is utterly unfair and, more importantly, highly unethical for a widely respected leader.

That said, Wright’s not the one running for president.

On another point, what is this ridiculous trend of comparing The Clintons to Dubya? Let me lay it out for you in the most simple terms I can think of – The Clintons, despite any and every ciriticism you can possibly heap upon them, are not responsible for the deaths of 4000 soldiers and over a hundred thousand Iraqi civilians. George W. Bush is a heinous war criminal. Nothing the Clintons have ever done can possibly compare to that.

A vote for McCain is a vote for more pointless murder. Despite this senseless bickering in the Democratic party, whoever wins the nomination is the last, best hope for peace.

This warned her, quite well. She obviously didn’t care:

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/23601041/

That is a perfect example of the anger and disbelief that we are feeling right now. Power corrupts…

If the Clintons lose the nomination–and yes, it’s a Billary thing, it’s always been a Billary thing–they lose control of the party, and they get relegated to the dustbin of history. Never mind that under the Clinton/Terry McAuliffe stewardship of the Democrats the party lost both houses of Congress, scuttled Gore’s chances in 2000 due to scandal fatigue among the electorate (altho’ Gore ran a lousy campaign too, which didn’t help), and couldn’t unseat Bush in 2004 despite his dismantling of the Constitution, the breaking story on Abu Gharib, and the growing unpopularity of the war. In other words, the Democrats who benefitted the most from the Clintons in power were the Clintons.

They transformed the party into Lite Republicans sucking at the corporate teat, knowing that their core constituencies of labor and minorities didn’t really have anywhere else to go, and exploited the constituencies’ dependence on their noblesse oblige. They turned the party into craven do-nothings more concerned with getting re-elected than with offering any kind of resistance to the GOP. And the sad thing is that even now, as the Clintons are determined to destroy the party to save it, that too many Democrats are afraid to oppose them. Or worse, they’re okay with Rovian slime tactics as long as it’s on their side. The Clintons are assholes, but they’re their assholes.

I second Aardy’s observation that the Clintons are Democrat versions of Bush: secretive Machiavellians who will spin reality to suit their ends (because we need them to tell us what “is” is), and who value personal loyalty above duty to, I dunno, the common good, maybe? Or public service? I’m surprised the Obama campaign hasn’t hit them hard on this, and really bring it home to the voters: do we want another 4-8 years of this kind of reckless, self-serving divisive bullshit? I know that if Hillary somehow finds a way to steal the nomination, I will quit the Democratic party, because their continued control of it will be intolerable to me. And frankly, I’d vote for McCain in the General, because I don’t think she should be rewarded for the tactics she’s pulled–and this despite my being a lifelong progressive.