Two new polls show conflicting results on Obama-Wright controversy

A staff reporter for The Daily Voice writes, "Although the two polls provide seemingly conflicting views on the national electorate, they both found that the public's perception of Obama's electability has declined since the Jeremiah Wright controversy re-erupted last week." This is what I am discovering through looking at as many polls as possible. There is a clear question developing about the electability of Obama which will effect super-delegate decisions. This does seem the more important issue. The democratic party must select a candidate who has the best chance of defeating McCain. Whether or not the democratic party makes a wise choice is, in itself, very questionable. I am interested to learn how Oprah Winfrey leaving the Trinity United Church of Christ because of Wright, will play out. My hunch is this latest bit of gossip will harm Obama. We will know in the coming days and weeks. Winfrey enjoys a lot of influence, especially with women regardless of skin color. She does endorse Obama but her choice to leave the Trinity church will present a moral dilemma. Polls and common sense both suggest this Wright mess is costing Obama a lot of votes. This news about Winfrey might cost Obama votes, as well. Okpulot Taha Choctaw Nation

He wins some votes he loses some votes Purl Gurl, part of the game and the media's obsession with this Wright guy. But, he did gain a new 'super delgate" one from Purl Gurls 'tribe.' Way to go Kalyn Free! He picked up Kalyn Free, an at-large member of the Democratic National Committee. “As a member of the Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma, I am proud of what it means to be an American Indian. I am proud Barack Obama is committed to our unique issues and willing to tackle our toughest problems, from historical inequities and injustices to contemporary issues, like protection of our right to tribal self-determination, access to health care for our elders, and education for our children. Despite the threats that have faced our culture and our people, hope has lifted Indian people through the most difficult times. Because we remain connected to our past, our culture and our communities, we never gave up that hope. American Indians need not just progressive ideas but new and visionary leadership that inspire us to build a better future for all Americans.

Marc comments with excitement, "...he [Obama] did gain a new 'super delgate' one from Purl Gurls 'tribe.' Way to go Kalyn Free!" For readers, this is a brief introduction to Kalyn Free, one of our tribes more progressive and modern tribal leaders. She is well respected. http://indnslist.org/Kalyn_Free Rather funny, save for her hair, she looks a typical white girl. I really like Kalyn Free. Contrasting Kalyn Free is our American Indian, Arlen Melendez, who has endorsed Clinton. I also really like Arlen Melendez. Readers can learn about Melendez at this site, http://nativeunity.blogspot.com/2007/07/kalyn-free-responds-to-prez-on-rez.html What is important to note is between the INDN web site and the Native Unity web site, much respect is displayed for opposing viewpoints. There is no petty bickering, no displays of ego. Our peoples remain unified and we share our opinions with the utmost in respect, even when in disagreement. Our method of dealing with politics and all outside issues is to present as much truthful and factual information as possible then leave decisions to the individual. Deciding upon issues internal to our peoples is a quite different process but is very democratic and much too complex to discuss at this blog. I take much pride in our peoples' behavior of being open and honest, in our peoples' behavior of being truthful free of personal bias. We are very powerful in our quiet peaceful ways; when we speak, people listen carefully. Okpulot Taha Choctaw Nation

Hey Ms Purl Gurl, Ms Okpulot Taha from the infamous Choctaw Nation? The only thing it will cost him is votes from you and WHITE voters who weren't going to vote for him anyway. The rest of us sees CHANGE! But since you love to give Barack grief and Rev Wright as well Feast your Navajo eyes on this sweetie pie Wright And Ridiculous Of all the strange features of this presidential race, the tarnishing of Barack Obama has got to be the most ridiculous. First Obama was accused of anti-religious elitism. Then he was accused of identifying with the underclass anger of his spiritual mentor. Excuse me, but which is it? Am I supposed to believe that Obama is a supercilious elitist or a menacing ghetto radical? Is he contemptuous of religion or too close to a religious leader? Obama's critics don't bother to say. Meanwhile, real character issues go relatively unheeded. Start with Obama's turbulent preacher. Yes, Jeremiah Wright says some disgraceful things. But can anyone explain how that changes Obama's qualities as a candidate? Is anyone suggesting that an Obama administration would view AIDS as a government plot to kill African Americans? Or that it would govern from the perspective that the United States is a terrorist nation? Obviously an Obama administration would do no such thing. Which makes the storm over the preacher an absurd digression. The Wright affair tells us that Obama bonded with someone whose political views are sometimes toxic. But as a young man trying to make sense of his mixed heritage, Obama looked to Wright for spiritual guidance, not political tutorials; as a community organizer, Obama focused on Wright's admirable social work, not his resentment of the white establishment. Indeed, Obama's own views on race and politics were diametrically opposed to those of his pastor. This is the candidate who campaigned for as long as possible as though race were irrelevant -- as though the tantalizing prospect that the United States might elect its first black president were merely incidental. A few months ago, there were those who suggested that Obama was not black enough. Now he is too black? This is preposterous. If Obama clearly does not share Wright's views, of what precisely is he guilty? Of befriending someone with repugnant opinions? Anyone who condemns Obama on that basis should examine his own circumstances. Real human beings present one another with complex social choices: The dependable work buddy may be unfaithful to his wife; the salt-of-the-earth neighbor may despise Hispanic immigrants. How many Obama critics have themselves been friendly with someone with misguided views? What about Bill Clinton, who counted the one-time segregationist William Fulbright among his mentors? Are you reading Ms Okpulot Taha from the infamous Choctaw Nation? George W. Bush has taught us that "you are with us or you are against us" is not a good basis for a foreign policy, and the same is true of much human endeavor. It would be impossible for people to join a political party if they had to agree with everything it stood for. It would be impossible for liberal Catholics to worship if they had to storm out of the church the moment they disagreed with something uttered from the pulpit. As a matter of political tactics, Obama should have avoided tying himself to Wright. But, rather refreshingly, Obama is not one of those politicians who obsessed about his presidential viability from the moment he entered college. Which brings us to that other attack on Obama: that his comment about blue-collar voters "clinging" to guns and religion makes him an elitist. The remark may have been untactful, as Obama himself said. But what did it tell us about Obama's fitness to be president? Would he use his power to discriminate against churchgoers? His own churchgoing suggests not. Would he control guns? One hopes so. And is he really an elitist snob? After Harvard Law School, Obama could have pursued a career that involved contact only with hypereducated brainiacs like him. But by working as a community organizer and in state politics, he chose a life that put him among ordinary folk. The elitist label is ridiculous. Are you still reading Ms Okpulot Taha from the infamous Choctaw Nation? The real character issue, in this campaign as in others, comes down to one thing: Does a candidate have the guts to espouse positions that are not politically expedient? Here there are serious questions about Obama, who pledges to pull out of Iraq no matter what, and who promises both to increase spending and not to raise taxes on anybody making less than $200,000 to $250,000 a year, ensuring the perpetuation of crippling federal deficits. For that matter, there are serious questions about Hillary Clinton, who proposes an irresponsible gas-tax holiday, and about John McCain, who couples gas pandering with a flip-flop on the Bush tax cuts, which he once (correctly) viewed as unaffordable. But these genuine character issues have been shunted aside by the spectacle of Obama's falling-out with his preacher. The Obama-Wright "revelations" are really a revelation about our political culture: About its failure to distinguish the important from the trivial and about the inevitability that the race card will eventually be played against a black candidate. If the once formidable Obama campaign is knocked off course by these "revelations" in today’s primaries, it will be a travesty. So there you have it. RACISM+STUPIDITY+BIAS=DEFEAT Everybody has flaws even your Hillary!