"Just Give us the Facts" -- Lawsuits targeted board, Cain over retirement fund

How would you like to have been pressured into investing in your company's stock and then find out this:

The utility (Aquila Inc) eventually agreed in a settlement with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission to pay $26.5 million over claims that two of its subsidiaries manipulated natural gas prices by providing false prices and other financial details to trade publications.

That $26.5M used to pay a settlement on manipulation could have been used to pay into employee's retirement funds when the stock went from $37.50 a share in 2001 to $5 a share in 2008. The company also paid $10.5 million it paid to settle claims it failed to protect the retirement savings of its employees.  Earlier the company had opened up stock options that an employee could purchase $10,000 of stock a month at an 'advantageous' rate and pressured employees to buy their stock.   My question would be if the employees and board of Aquila Inc. drove up the stock prices with their purchase of company stock.  Enron's collapse seems to get the blame a lot and Aquila Inc. is no different.  Convenient to blame everything on Enron and not take responsibility.

You have to give it to Cain as he is saying that the board kept the company from going bankrupt.  He loves to throw the word bankrupt around like he was the savior of Godfather and now with Aquila Inc.  He did it with Godfather's Pizza saying they were on the verge of bankruptcy when he took over but that wasn't true:

Thus, in the middle of 1985, days before one of the largest Food companies in America, Pillsbury, bought the company, ten months before Cain took over, analysts were mixed about if Godfather’s would return to profitability in 1985. At this point, Godfather’s had been profitable every year since its inception in 1973 through 1984. There was simply no talk of bankruptcy.

That was another company that profits plummeted after the Cain group took over and closed over half the pizzerias.  Don't think Mr. Cain is a very good businessman but he can spin a tale of how everything was done right and he was the reason.  Facts don't match his rhetoric.

An article published in Bloomberg Businessweek by Tim Jones got the story right. It came out on June 6, 2011[7], the same week that PolitiFact published its article. It noted that he closed 20 percent of the company’s 640 restaurants and fired 300 to 400 people. Jones perceptively wrote, “He is a politician, just one who hasn’t held office. And like most politicians’ log cabin stories, Cain’s oft-told tale of how he rescued Godfather’s is kind to its hero and notable for what it leaves out.” He notes that Cain “has not released details of the company’s performance under his leadership” and ends by correctly stating:

The bottom line: Though Cain says he would revive the economy as he did Godfather’s Pizza, it’s not clear the chain improved much when he was CEO.

Politifact which is supposed to fact check politicians did not do a thorough job on Cain and his time at Godfather Pizza doing more of a puff piece as of October 18, 2011, but even then found Cain was lying or stretching the truth:

As of Oct 18, 2011, PolitiFact had checked out 19 statements by Herman Cain. It judged him telling the truth zero times, “mostly true” 3 times, “half truth” 4 times, “mostly false” 3 times, “false” 7 times, and “pants on fire” 2 times.” That’s 16 out of 19 half truths or worse, which means 84% of Cain’s statements have been judged half truths or worse. Politifacts is obviously willing to call Cain out when he lies. 

That is why it is so disappointing in this case, where PolitiFact should have exposed the fact that Cain wasn’t telling the truth when he talked about his success as manager of Godfather’s. If they had dug a little deeper and understood the situation more clearly, that is what I am sure they would have done.

Even in what turned out to be a puff piece on Cain which was more about style then substance, they found 84% of Cain's statements were half truths or worse and yet he is running for President?  What is with some of these conservative sites pushing Cain?  If he was white, I do not believe that all of this would be ignored in order to prop up Cain.

Conservative pundits/writers seem have the same disease that afflicted liberal pundits on Obama -- afraid to tell the truth and be labeled a racist.  How about telling the truth ignoring what someone may label you?  What some of the  conservative radio pundits like Rush and Hannity are doing is flat out wrong to prop up Cain and blame the media.

Rush went way over the top when he likened Bialek's (Cain accuser) 13-year old son to a Nazi storm trooper.  Rush's attacks on the women who came forward have been demeaning to women so that a lot of women will never listen to him again but his attack on a 13-year old boy was so far over the top that I cannot believe he is still on the air.  Shows that Clear Channel who is owned by Bain Capital (Romney's company) could care less about content or he would have been suspended for his attacks.  Read into it what you want but it smells!

Democrats blame the right wing conspiracy and Republicans blame the liberal media.  The blame game should end today but then pundits and reporters from both sides would be faced with giving us the facts instead of using attack politics when they don't like what someone said or to cover for a candidate.  The day this country becomes color blind is the day that pundits from both sides don't prop up a candidate because of the color of their skin and candidates quit blaming attackers for being racist.  It cuts both ways.  If Weiner or Foley would have been black would they have been forced to resign from the Congress? It is a legitimate question because look what happened to the black Congressman Charles Rangel, Democrat from NYC who had all those ethics complaints, but he only received a slap on the hand.

All the voters want is the facts not some narrative that the media and pundits from both sides want to spin.  I was looking for the origin of 'Just the Facts' and found this gem:

Dragnet, and later Badge 714, always opened with a view of Los Angeles, with Jack Webb narrating the intro with the words, "This is the city. . .my name's Friday, Joe Friday; I'm a cop." Friday's famous line when interviewing witnesses to a crime was always, "Give me the facts--just the facts."

I remember Joe Friday using those words and that is what voters need to tell the candidates: "Give us the facts -- just the facts" of where you stand on issues and your background to be President.  Stop the lies, spin, and flip flops and be honest for a change.  If you make a mistake, admit to the fact don't spin.  Some Republican candidates are lying, spinning, and flip flopping more than I can remember seeing in the Republican Party primary for President.

Voters are also tired of Fox News trying to choose the Republican candidate with their spin as much as football fans are tired of ESPN trying to pick the College Football National Champion and the Heisman winner.  Too much narrative not substance is inflicting the talking class from politics to sports.

How are conservative pundits going to spin this one for Cain today?

Lawsuits targeted board, Cain over retirement fund

By RAY HENRY | AP – 5 hrs ago (11/21/2011) 

ATLANTA (AP) — Republican Herman Cain served on the board of a Midwest utility company that paid $10.5 million to settle claims it failed to protect the retirement savings of its employees and paid another $26.5 million over claims it manipulated gas prices, potentially embarrassing episodes for a candidate running for president on his business experience. 

Cain sat on the board of directors for Aquila Inc., a Kansas City-based utility, from 1992 until it was acquired in 2008 by Great Plains Energy Inc. Employees alleged in a class-action lawsuit that they were pressured into investing their retirement funds and other savings into company stock. Cain has been forced to answer questions on the campaign trail about the lawsuit, which was reported by Mother Jones magazine in May. 

Those employees said Cain and other company officials should have warned their employees that the stock was becoming increasingly risky as the firm floundered financially. The workers said the company's stock should have been eliminated as an investment option in the retirement fund. While Cain sat on the board, Aquila's stock price dropped from roughly $37.50 in 2001 to less than $5 before the company was acquired seven years later. 

Cain denies any wrongdoing and takes credit for helping stave off a corporate bankruptcy.
"There's a degree of risk in all investments in all companies," Cain spokesman J.D. Gordon said. "The actions that the board took saved the company." 

Cain shared responsibility for the company's overall direction as a member of the board. But attorney Fred Isquith, who represented eight workers who started the class-action lawsuit over the employees' retirement fund, said he was unaware of any evidence showing Cain was more culpable than others on the board. He said the utility was effectively run by members of the Green family, which founded it. 

"Could the board have done something? Sure," Isquith said. "Was it run on a day-to-day basis by the Green family? Absolutely. It was the board's responsibility collectively, and Mr. Cain was a member of the board." 

Federal records show Isquith has made thousands of dollars in political donations, predominantly to the Democratic Party and its candidates. He said he does not have a preference for a candidate in the Republican presidential primary.
Lawyers for the workers said Aquila started out as a relatively conservative investment. As a traditional utility, the company produced predictable — though not necessarily large — returns and offered a dependable dividend payment. 

And the company encouraged its employees to invest. Workers enrolled in the company's investment plan could buy Aquila stock, among other options. It matched employee contributions into the plan fund with company stock. It granted stock options to nearly all its employees and allowed them to purchase up to $10,000 monthly in stock at advantageous prices. Workers could also use their dividend payments to buy even more Aquila stock at a discount. 

The lawsuit alleged that the company sent internal publications and set up meetings where employees were encouraged to invest even more. Starting in 1994, the company's annual report listed workers whose stock in the firm was worth at least twice their annual pay.
By the middle of 2001, Aquila stock accounted for two-thirds of the retirement plan's value, lawyers said. 

The root of the company's trouble came when it decided to expand into the energy trading business. The utility, then called UtiliCorp United Inc., started the process of spinning off its trading arm, called Aquila, into a separately traded stock. The timing couldn't have been worse.
A major blow came with the 2001 collapse of Enron, a major energy trader, in one of the biggest corporate scandals in U.S. history. It led to investigations of shady energy trading practices that, according to federal authorities, included parts of Aquila. 

The utility eventually agreed in a settlement with the Commodity Futures Trading Commission to pay $26.5 million over claims that two of its subsidiaries manipulated natural gas prices by providing false prices and other financial details to trade publications. The parent company was the sole or majority owner of those subsidiaries for most of their existence. 

A report from the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission identified Aquila as one of several firms that had manipulated energy prices in Western states. A wholly owned subsidiary of Aquila later agreed to pay nearly $76,000 to settle related complaints. The company denied wrongdoing and said it paid to avoid the cost of litigation.   

Excerpt:  Read More at Yahoo News

Black Republicans Demand Obama 'Bus' Apology

This article basically leaves us speechless. I cannot believe that Obama made this remark but it is a clear indication that he doesn't have a clue what blacks went through in southern areas for years:

During a campaign swing the president said, "We don't mind the Republicans joining us. They can come for a ride, but they gotta sit in back."

Is Obama oblivious to what happened with Rosa Parks when she wouldn't give up her seat to ride in the back of the bus that launched the civil rights movement? Or is he dumb enough to think there are no Black Republicans? In my lifetime I have never seen a more divisive President then Barack Obama. Think it is best summed up by Dr. Timothy F. Johnson who heads the Black Republican Association in an email:

Obama should immediately apologize for the offensive reference to the Jim Crow era.

"Once again the president is perpetuating the racism that exists, and [is] portrayed by the so-called Civil Rights organizations and their leaders," Johnson stated.

"Americans are sick and tired of these divisive statements the president continues to make," he added. "Our first objective is November 2, 2010.

"Next is to find the next president of the United States, and retire President Obama to Chicago, Hawaii, or Kenya in Nov. 2012," stated Johnson.

We love Johnson's idea of retiring the President and had to laugh that he said Kenya as part of his retirement. Maybe Obama can go to Kenya and become President -- they might appreciate him more but he may be too liberal for them as well.

Obama on the campaign trail has turned into a very nasty, unappealing campaigner who obviously forgets he is President of all the United States just not liberal, progressive Democrats. Why should Republicans even bother to try to work with him with his low regard for all of us?

We thought his comments to the Latino to remember their enemies (Republicans) was horrible but he has reached a new low this time. One of the biggest racist in this Country is turning out to the first 'black' President who seems to hate the fact he is 50% white and refuses to acknowledge that fact.

Black Republicans Demand Obama 'Bus' ApologyWednesday, 27 Oct 2010 04:17 PM Article Font Size
By: David A. Patten

Black Republican leaders are demanding that President Barack Obama apologize for what they consider a racially insensitive remark that he made on the campaign trail this weekend.

During a campaign swing the president said, "We don't mind the Republicans joining us. They can come for a ride, but they gotta sit in back."

Dr. Timothy F. Johnson, the black Republican who heads the National Black Republican Association, told Newsmax in an e-mail Wednesday that Obama should immediately apologize for the offensive reference to the Jim Crow era.

....

Johnson is not alone in finding the president's "sit in back" remark offensive.

What if a Republican president had made such a remark? asked Fox News contributor Monica Crowley. She said it would have triggered an uproar from Al Sharpton and Jesse Jackson.

"I think after the Civil Rights movement of the 1960s, riding in the back certainly does have some Civil Rights and racial overtones to it, and you can't tell me the president of the United States wasn't aware of it when he said it," Crowley said Wednesday on Fox News. "I found his comment there appalling [and] I found his refusal to address it in a straightforward way also appalling."

The "sit in back" remark is part of a pattern of increasingly divisive rhetoric from the president in the run up to the midterm elections, Crowley said.

In one recent example, on Monday President Obama urged Latinos to "punish our enemies" during a Univision broadcast.

“If Latinos sit out the election," Obama said, "instead of saying, ‘We’re gonna punish our enemies and we’re gonna reward our friends who stand with us on issues that are important to us,’ if they don’t see that kind of upsurge in voting in this election, then I think it’s gonna be harder . . . "

Crowley added: "This is nothing new. Ever since this man became president nearly two years ago now, he has constantly used this kind of incredibly divisive rhetoric. He seems to forget that he's no longer campaigning.

"He's the president of the United States. The president is supposed to be the president of all the people, even those who disagree with his agenda and who disagree with him," Crowley said.

White House press secretary Robert Gibbs did not shy away from the controversial "sit in back" statement when asked about it in a press briefing.

He portrayed it as part of the ongoing metaphor that the president has used to assert Republicans drove the economy into a ditch.

“The president said this weekend that the Republicans are going to ride in the back and the middle class will be in the passenger’s seat,” Gibbs said.

In a none-too-subtle jab he added: “We’re certainly concerned with backseat driving.”

Source: Newsmax

Race Attack -- So True

This cartoon hit the nail on the head. If you disagree with Obama in any form, you are now a racist. It is the worst we have ever seen. We also note that the media is not reporting attacks on Republicans like a death threat against Eric Cantor by an Obama supporter until they had to report. Is that a hate crime? Probably not because he is a Republican.

George Will on 'Liberal McCarthyism': 'When In Doubt, Blame Racism'

Playing the 'race' card at anyone who disagrees with the President is getting old and frankly is disgusting. Why do we have to march in lock step with Obama when we don't agree with his policies? All during the campaign, we were confronted as being racist for not voting and supporting Obama nevermind we disagreed with his political agenda. Why weren't blacks who were voting over 90% for Obama accused of racism against McCain?

Racism comes from all races and is not limited to whites. Here is the definition of 'racism' according to the on-line dictionary:

1. 1 a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race

2. 2 racial prejudice or discrimination

Where in this definition does it say white or black? It doesn't and that is the point. The word 'racism' has been co-opted by the liberals to mean white against black and other minorities which gave us affirmative action.

Since we do not like the dictator agenda of Speaker Pelosi and Majority Leader Reid, what is that called since they are white and espouse the same agenda as Obama?

Then today we find out that Obama has asked Governor Paterson of NY who is blind and black, not to run for Governor? Why? If a white asked him not to run, they would be called a racist but what is it if Obama asks him not to run?

George Will covered it perfectly this morning but for some 'strange' reason Stephanopoulos wasn't interested in pursuing.

George Will on 'Liberal McCarthyism': 'When In Doubt, Blame Racism'
By Noel Sheppard
2009-09-20

Leave it to George Will to perfectly explain in just two words all the recent accusations by Democrats and their media minions that anti-government sentiment sweeping the nation is caused by racism.

Liberal McCarthyism.

Delicious.

Fortunately for those not understanding the reference, Will explained further when the Roundtable discussion on Sunday's "This Week" turned to all the recent pronouncements of racism directed at anyone having the nerve to challenge President Obama's agenda.

What we’re hearing is the liberals’ McCarthyism, which is, when in doubt, blame people for racism. Litigators have an old argument: When the law’s on your side, argue the law. When the facts are on your side, argue the facts. When neither’s on your side, pound the table. This amounts to pounding the table.

I have yet to see evidence, is there -- does evidence even intrude in this conversation? Is there any evidence that these people are racists? I think not.
Unfortunately, those pounding the table include so-called journalists who should be exposing the lack of evidence rather than participating in the charade.

Such happened moments after Will made this statement when guests Donna Brazile and
Robert Reich predictably disagreed with him:

BRAZILE: Well, George, there’s some evidence that -- not an overwhelming amount of evidence -- that some of -- a small fringe of this movement, clearly there’s some racism. And you don’t have to know the motives of someone’s heart to understand when you see signs, incendiary signs that basically compares him to a witch doctor, an African heathen. We know racism; we don’t have to be told or taught that. That -- that much we do know. [...]

REICH: Yes. The difference, though, I think -- and, by the way, I think Donna is absolutely right. There is some element of racism here. You can’t avoid it. The question is whether it’s the dominant element. I don’t think it is the dominant element. I think Peggy [Noonan] put her finger on it just now, and that is, when 1 out of 6 Americans is underemployed -- either unemployed or underemployed -- and when you have about 1 out of 3 Americans worried that they could be, there is an element of anxiety and fear in the population right now that demagogues either on the right or left will almost inevitably use to position themselves. The politics of resentment is something we’ve seen before in this country. Right now, you have right-wing talk radio people who are whipping it up, not just against the president, but against foreigners, against immigrants, against blacks, against elites. This is what happens in this country when people are scared.

Now, a real journalist, after what Will postulated, would have asked Brazile and Reich to offer evidence to support their positions. Host George Stephanopoulos didn't and instead changed the subject:

(Excerpt) Click to see full report at Newsbusters.org

Obama Merely Changes The Subject

By INVESTOR'S BUSINESS DAILY Posted Tuesday, March 18, 2008 4:20 PM PT

Election '08: Rather than break ties with his demagogic, anti-American pastor, Barack Obama used a speech on race to excuse his behavior and sweep the controversy under the rug. Passing the buck is not very presidential.

Speaking in Philadelphia, steps away from where the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution were enacted, the front-runner for the Democratic nomination for president delivered an address that used the words "race" or "races" 11 times, "racial" or "racially" 15 times, and "racism" or "racist" six times.

But Obama's recent troubles, which this much-hyped speech was supposed to put past him, are not about race relations. They're about one churchman who happens to be black, whose views from the pulpit are repugnant and from whom Obama doesn't seem to have the guts to distance himself.

Reacting to being linked with a bigoted conspiracy theorist by lecturing the nation on race is like disgraced ex-New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer responding to his getting caught patronizing an international prostitution ring by giving a speech on the female physique.

The supposed divide between black and white is not the issue here; Obama's longtime association with Jeremiah Wright is.

This is a man who believes the U.S. government formulated the HIV virus to commit genocide against blacks and that it is also responsible for the 9/11 attacks.

Yes, Obama claimed in his speech to have "condemned, in unequivocal terms, the statements of Reverend Wright that have caused such controversy." But he quickly proceeded to equivocate regarding them.

The problem, according to Obama, is not that Wright is wrong about America being a racist society, but that he "sees white racism as endemic." The problem is not that Wright has made statements that clearly seem anti-Semitic and anti-Israeli, but that he, as Obama puts it, "sees the conflicts in the Middle East as rooted primarily in the actions of stalwart allies like Israel, instead of emanating from the perverse and hateful ideologies of radical Islam."

Obama's pastor of 20 years is nothing more than "imperfect," as Obama sees it. And so, "I can no more disown him than I can disown the black community." He won't quit this church where hate is spewed, and he doesn't explain why over all the years he has never tried to straighten Wright out.

The rest of Obama's speech was spent explaining and rationalizing hate such as Wright's rather than denouncing it. Wright's words "reflect the complexities of race in this country that we've never really worked through," the result of which has been "a cycle of violence, blight and neglect" still haunting America.

The solutions? Expanded government for one, of course. But while Obama concedes that "the erosion of black families" is "a problem that welfare policies for many years may have worsened," he fails to understand what "Wealth and Poverty" author George Gilder knew back in 1981:

"What actually happened since 1964 was a vast expansion of the welfare rolls that halted in its tracks an ongoing improvement in the lives of the poor, particularly blacks, and left behind . . . a wreckage of broken lives and families worse than the aftermath of slavery."
Another of Obama's answers is that black anger and white resentment should give way to "the real culprits" — capitalists, or as Obama puts it, "a corporate culture rife with inside-dealing, questionable accounting practices and short-term greed" and Washington lobbyists who support it.

The early reaction to Obama's speech amounted to more media fawning on the order of that which was spoofed in a recent "Saturday Night Live" sketch. The Reuters headline was "Obama denounces preacher, urges race healing." The Boston Globe titled its story "Obama calls for racial unity." And the Washington Post proclaimed: "Obama Confronts Race in U.S." A CNN analyst even compared it to Lincoln's 1858 "A House Divided" classic.

Lincoln, however, used that occasion to warn that "this government cannot endure, permanently half-slave and half-free . . . . It will become all one thing or all the other." Unlike Obama, Honest Abe wasn't trying to have it both ways.

http://www.ibdeditorials.com/IBDArticles.aspx?id=290732552237836

My bold and highlighted!

Obama and the Minister

By RONALD KESSLER
March 14, 2008; Page A19

In a sermon delivered at Howard University, Barack Obama's longtime minister, friend and adviser blamed America for starting the AIDS virus, training professional killers, importing drugs and creating a racist society that would never elect a black candidate president.

The Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr., pastor of Mr. Obama's Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago, gave the sermon at the school's Andrew Rankin Memorial Chapel in Washington on Jan. 15, 2006.

"We've got more black men in prison than there are in college," he began. "Racism is alive and well. Racism is how this country was founded and how this country is still run.

No black man will ever be considered for president, no matter how hard you run Jesse [Jackson] and no black woman can ever be considered for anything outside what she can give with her body."

Mr. Wright thundered on: "America is still the No. 1 killer in the world. . . . We are deeply involved in the importing of drugs, the exporting of guns, and the training of professional killers .
. .

We bombed Cambodia, Iraq and Nicaragua, killing women and children while trying to get public opinion turned against Castro and Ghadhafi . . . We put [Nelson] Mandela in prison and supported apartheid the whole 27 years he was there. We believe in white supremacy and black inferiority and believe it more than we believe in God."

His voice rising, Mr. Wright said, "We supported Zionism shamelessly while ignoring the Palestinians and branding anybody who spoke out against it as being anti-Semitic. . . . We care nothing about human life if the end justifies the means. . . ."

Concluding, Mr. Wright said: "We started the AIDS virus . . . We are only able to maintain our level of living by making sure that Third World people live in grinding poverty. . . ."

Considering this view of America, it's not surprising that in December Mr. Wright's church gave an award to Louis Farrakhan for lifetime achievement. In the church magazine, Trumpet, Mr. Wright spoke glowingly of the Nation of Islam leader. "His depth on analysis [sic] when it comes to the racial ills of this nation is astounding and eye-opening," Mr. Wright said of Mr. Farrakhan. "He brings a perspective that is helpful and honest."

After Newsmax broke the story of the award to Farrakhan on Jan. 14, Mr. Obama issued a statement. However, Mr. Obama ignored the main point: that his minister and friend had spoken adoringly of Mr. Farrakhan, and that Mr. Wright's church was behind the award to the Nation of Islam leader.

Instead, Mr. Obama said, "I decry racism and anti-Semitism in every form and strongly condemn the anti-Semitic statements made by Minister Farrakhan. I assume that Trumpet magazine made its own decision to honor Farrakhan based on his efforts to rehabilitate ex-offenders, but it is not a decision with which I agree." Trumpet is owned and produced by Mr. Wright's church out of the church's offices, and Mr. Wright's daughters serve as publisher and executive editor.

Meeting with Jewish leaders in Cleveland on Feb. 24, Mr. Obama described Mr. Wright as being like "an old uncle who sometimes will say things that I don't agree with." He rarely mentions the points of disagreement.

Mr. Obama went on to explain Mr. Wright's anti-Zionist statements as being rooted in his anger over the Jewish state's support for South Africa under its previous policy of apartheid. As with his previous claim that his church gave the award to Mr. Farrakhan because of his work with ex-offenders, Mr. Obama appears to have made that up.

Neither the presentation of the award nor the Trumpet article about the award mentions ex-offenders, and Mr. Wright's statements denouncing Israel have not been qualified in any way. Mr. Obama nonetheless told the Jewish leaders that the award to Mr. Farrakhan "showed a lack of sensitivity to the Jewish community." That is an understatement.

As for Mr. Wright's repeated comments blaming America for the 9/11 attacks because of what Mr. Wright calls its racist and violent policies, Mr. Obama has said it sounds as if the minister was trying to be "provocative."

Hearing Mr. Wright's venomous and paranoid denunciations of this country, the vast majority of Americans would walk out. Instead, Mr. Obama and his wife Michelle have presumably sat through numerous similar sermons by Mr. Wright.

Indeed, Mr. Obama has described Mr. Wright as his "sounding board" during the two decades he has known him. Mr. Obama has said he found religion through the minister in the 1980s. He joined the church in 1991 and walked down the aisle in a formal commitment of faith.

The title of Mr. Obama's bestseller "The Audacity of Hope" comes from one of Wright's sermons. Mr. Wright is one of the first people Mr. Obama thanked after his election to the Senate in 2004. Mr. Obama consulted Mr. Wright before deciding to run for president. He prayed privately with Mr. Wright before announcing his candidacy last year.

Mr. Obama obviously would not choose to belong to Mr. Wright's church and seek his advice unless he agreed with at least some of his views. In light of Mr. Wright's perspective, Michelle Obama's comment that she feels proud of America for the first time in her adult life makes perfect sense.

Much as most of us would appreciate the symbolism of a black man ascending to the presidency, what we have in Barack Obama is a politician whose closeness to Mr. Wright underscores his radical record.

The media have largely ignored Mr. Obama's close association with Mr. Wright. This raises legitimate questions about Mr. Obama's fundamental beliefs about his country. Those questions deserve a clearer answer than Mr. Obama has provided so far.

Mr. Kessler, a former Wall Street Journal and Washington Post reporter, is chief Washington correspondent of Newsmax.com and the author of "The Terrorist Watch: Inside the Desperate Race to Stop the Next Attack" (Crown Forum, 2007).

http://online.wsj.com/article/SB120545277093135111.html?mod=djemEditorialPage

Obama's Pastor: God Damn America, U.S. to Blame for 9/11

Obama's Pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Has a History of What Even Obama's Campaign Aides Say Is 'Inflammatory Rhetoric'

By BRIAN ROSS and REHAB EL-BURI
March 13, 2008—

Sen. Barack Obama's pastor says blacks should not sing "God Bless America" but "God damn America."

The Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Obama's pastor for the last 20 years at the Trinity United Church of Christ on Chicago's south side, has a long history of what even Obama's campaign aides concede is "inflammatory rhetoric," including the assertion that the United States brought on the 9/11 attacks with its own "terrorism."

In a campaign appearance earlier this month, Sen. Obama said, "I don't think my church is actually particularly controversial." He said Rev. Wright "is like an old uncle who says things I don't always agree with," telling a Jewish group that everyone has someone like that in their family.

Rev. Wright married Obama and his wife Michelle, baptized their two daughters and is credited by Obama for the title of his book, "The Audacity of Hope."

An ABC News review of dozens of Rev. Wright's sermons, offered for sale by the church, found repeated denunciations of the U.S. based on what he described as his reading of the Gospels and the treatment of black Americans.

"The government gives them the drugs, builds bigger prisons, passes a three-strike law and then wants us to sing 'God Bless America.' No, no, no, God damn America, that's in the Bible for killing innocent people," he said in a 2003 sermon. "God damn America for treating our citizens as less than human. God damn America for as long as she acts like she is God and she is supreme."

In addition to damning America, he told his congregation on the Sunday after Sept. 11, 2001 that the United States had brought on al Qaeda's attacks because of its own terrorism.
"We bombed Hiroshima, we bombed Nagasaki, and we nuked far more than the thousands in New York and the Pentagon, and we never batted an eye," Rev. Wright said in a sermon on Sept. 16, 2001.

"We have supported state terrorism against the Palestinians and black South Africans, and now we are indignant because the stuff we have done overseas is now brought right back to our own front yards. America's chickens are coming home to roost," he told his congregation.

Sen. Obama told the New York Times he was not at the church on the day of Rev. Wright's 9/11 sermon. "The violence of 9/11 was inexcusable and without justification," Obama said in a recent interview. "It sounds like he was trying to be provocative," Obama told the paper.
Rev. Wright, who announced his retirement last month, has built a large and loyal following at his church with his mesmerizing sermons, mixing traditional spiritual content and his views on contemporary issues.

"I wouldn't call it radical. I call it being black in America," said one congregation member outside the church last Sunday.

"He has impacted the life of Barack Obama so much so that he wants to portray that feeling he got from Rev. Wright onto the country because we all need something positive," said another member of the congregation.

Rev. Wright, who declined to be interviewed by ABC News, is considered one of the country's 10 most influential black pastors, according to members of the Obama campaign.

Obama has praised at least one aspect of Rev. Wright's approach, referring to his "social gospel" and his focus on Africa," and I agree with him on that."

Sen. Obama declined to comment on Rev. Wright's denunciations of the United States, but a campaign religious adviser, Shaun Casey, appearing on "Good Morning America" Thursday, said Obama "had repudiated" those comments.

In a statement to ABCNews.com, Obama's press spokesman Bill Burton said, "Sen. Obama has said repeatedly that personal attacks such as this have no place in this campaign or our politics, whether they're offered from a platform at a rally or the pulpit of a church. Sen. Obama does not think of the pastor of his church in political terms. Like a member of his family, there are things he says with which Sen. Obama deeply disagrees. But now that he is retired, that doesn't detract from Sen. Obama's affection for Rev. Wright or his appreciation for the good works he has done."

http://abcnews.go.com/print?id=4443788

*****

NOTE: My bold and highlight. If a pastor of my church spoke these words, I would get up and walk out never to darken the doorway of his church his again. For Obama to have continued to attend this church after 9/11 speaks volumes about Obama. No one who cares deeply for America, no matter your race would continue to attend this 'racist' church. You don't have to be white to be 'racist' as this pastor has proved. Do we want a President that goes to a church with a pastor like this in the White House that has had a huge influence on his life? Think about it! Samantha