“San Francisco Chronicle stands by report that Obama recently talked GOTV with Jeremiah Wright”
So? Can’t a man get a little bit of spiritual advice from his long-time pastor? I thought you wingnuts were all about Jesus. Or does Jesus just work for the white man now?
The San Francisco Chronicle is standing by its columnist’s report that President Barack Obama recently held a get-out-the-vote teleconference with his anti-American former pastor, Jeremiah Wright.
The report appeared Oct. 20 in a column by Willie Brown, the city’s former Democratic mayor and a 15-year chairman of the state assembly.
The purpose of Obama’s teleconference, according to Brown, was to talk with faith leaders about ways to spur turnout among African-Americans.
“Brothers and sisters aren’t among the top turnout groups … [compared to 2008] this time it’s not going to be that easy,” Brown wrote.
The Obama campaign promptly denied that report.
“It is not true. … The story is totally incorrect,” Lis Smith, the campaign’s rapid-response director, said in an email to The Daily Caller.
But a senior editor at the newspaper tentatively endorsed the column’s claim on Thursday.
“We stand by what was in the column, and if that changes we will clear it up for our readers,” Trapper Byrne, the Chronicle’s deputy metro editor, wrote to TheDC.
[...] in 2008, Obama distanced himself from his former pastor after reporters noticed that Wright’s sermons and writings were extremely critical of the United States and white people.
The paper’s report comes at an awkward time for the president, who is now using GOP presidential candidate Mitt Romney’s associations with a fellow Republican, Indiana Republican Senate candidate Richard Mourdock, to portray Romney as unfair to women.
After the Obama campaign denied the claim in Brown’s column, TheDC asked Brown and the newspaper’s editors for a response.
Brown has not responded to TheDC.[...]
Byrne followed up Oct. 25, saying the paper stands by the column and offering an explanation for Brown’s silence.
“Willie Brown left town because his sister-in-law passed away in Washington state, which probably explains why he’s been hard to reach this week,” Byrne said.
Incidentally, and as an aside, I’ve heard Mourdock interviewed on a number of occasions and he’s a very solid constitutional conservative. That the left is trying its hardest to pick off non-establishment GOP candidates, pouring much of their money into campaigns against Steve King or Michele Bachmann or Richard Mourdock — and the national GOP is giving those candidates the least amount of support in local elections (Richard Lugar, eg., hasn’t stepped up to endorse Mourdock, who defeated him in the GOP primary, despite his having received conservative support himself for 36 years in the Senate) — tells you everything you need to know about why, after the November elections, there need be a revolution inside the GOP “big tent,” with the result that either it is taken over by constitutional conservatives and classical liberals / libertarians / Reagan Democrats, or else a new party will form, one that will join with the GOP on certain issues, but will fight them on others.
Until it becomes clear to the ruling class that the people are no longer interested in being kept out of the whole “consent of the governed” loop. Which they’ll know once they feel a hairy Hobbit foot in their ass.