After Obama’s famous speech on race, (the one likened to Gettysburg) I wrote that yes it was a good speech, but that the part he didn’t mention in it, was that seeing Wright all over the internet really opened his eyes to the fact that this isn’t normal in a church.

No one thinks that Obama agrees with Reverend Wright’s ideas. No one. So why did he align himself with the preacher and donate tons of money? His discussion on race missed the part where somehow, many people (including him) think that the preacher’s rhetoric is normal and that’s why.

Which sure, that tells you that he’s naive and a bit of a doof, but whatever.

Yesterday Best of the Web takes a closer look at the “normalcy” of Obama’s religion after he (Obama) states:

“I didn’t anticipate my fairly conventional Christian faith being subject to such challenge and such scrutiny.”

Read the whole thing. He makes good points.

And let me link one more item concerning the Trinity Church. Bill Clinton yesterday in trying to respond coherently concerning the famous Vanity Fair article on him notes that Obama didn’t do squat when his church was calling the Mrs. Clinton a white racist.

It doesn’t have anything to do with the article, but it’s true. You can bet that Hillary and/or John McCain would have said something to their churches had the opposite happened.

And finally in a column by Jonah Goldberg he takes a look at what seems to be the big campaign question. Judgement vs experience.
The telling paragraph:

Obama, who was a junior Illinois state senator from a very liberal district in Chicago and a star parishioner of the Rev. Jeremiah A. Wright Jr.’s Trinity United Church of Christ when the country was debating invading Iraq, would have voters believe that he carefully weighed the pros and cons and concluded it would be a bad idea.

You may be willing to give Obama the benefit of the doubt. I am not. A far more plausible explanation is that Obama took the position you would expect from him. Just as it never occurred to him that his pastor would be an albatross in a national election, it never dawned on him that he should take a stance other than the one expected of anyone on the far left of the Democratic Party. This doesn’t necessarily obviate Obama’s bragging rights, but the idea that in 2002 he would have taken any other stance strikes me as unlikely as Wright or filmmaker Michael Moore siding with the pro-Bush camp.

No matter what the subject matter is of this campaign (unless it’s youth) John McCain is the better candidate. (this includes the character of the candidate’s spouse also. [ht TaiChi Policy])

May we remember this!!!