tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3709087743016851805.post124271937988521766..comments2023-12-14T21:13:46.857-06:00Comments on Tom Roeser's Blog: PFLEGERS SERMON JEOPARDIZED OBAMAS CHANCES AND THUS THIS PRIEST IS
EXPENDABLE.Jake Parrillohttp://www.blogger.com/profile/11195261008177966339noreply@blogger.comBlogger1125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3709087743016851805.post-1129407329298307172008-06-12T06:23:31.000-05:002008-06-12T06:23:31.000-05:00Tom, great post as usual.Your column included a ve...Tom, great post as usual.<br><br>Your column included a very interesting tidbit that puts the lie to Obama's claim that his thinking cannot possibly be reflected in the ideology of Fr. Pfleger and Rev. Wright.<br><br>You write about Fr. Pfleger's absurd sponsorship of an appearance by radical Muslim Irfan on the fourth anniversary of 9/11 (apparently 2005). According to your column, Irfan bloviated on how 9/11 and its repercussions, particularly abuse of the Patriot Act, resulted in substantial prejudicial backlash against Muslims in America.<br><br>Few people appear to have taken notice of the fact that in Barack Obama's victory speech the night he won the Illinois Democratic primary for the nomination for United States Senator in 2004, and reprised nearly word for word in his lionized speech before the Democratic National Convention in 2004, Barack Obama made the following statement, and I paraphrase:<br><br>"We cannot continue to be tolerate an America..... where the John Ashcroft's use the Patriot Act to discriminate against Muslim immigrants..."<br><br>That phrase of Obama's struck me each time I heard it: What evidence is there of the Patriot Act being used to discriminate against "Muslim immigrants"? Is he referring to any legitimate use of the Act to identify potential terrorists?<br><br>But through your column's reference, we now know that Obama's remarks are evidence of an ideological and political perspective shared by the political radicals of Irfan's and Plfeger's vintage. This is direct evidence that Obama's belated claims that "they do not speak for me" or "that is not what I think" are neither completely truthful nor determinative of the question.John Currynoreply@blogger.com