The New Republic

"The pastor, for all his love of Jesus, has little love for Obama, one of Jesus's truly humble servants."

Your faith in the sainted Obama's boundless virtues is touching.

- dkrieger

April 29, 2008 at 6:40pm

Spot on. Cornell West is one of the worst charlatans in the bunch. He was a joke on Bill Maher a few weeks ago.

- ralphnelle

April 29, 2008 at 6:59pm

Ralphnelle, it was pretty clear  that night he has the hots for Ayan Hirsi Ali, who ran circles around him.  He was a complete clown.  

- MOLLYSIMON

April 29, 2008 at 8:19pm

Sorry, but I really don't see Obama putting the Race Hustlers (Hucksters) out of business.

I think Obama should be a littel bit more honest and let America know that Black Churches do believe America is unfair.  White people don't want to beleive that Black Folks are a little less than satisfied with their station in life.

Liberation Theology is interesting and scary, and that is why John Paul II fought so hard to eradicate it in Latin America.  The Urban American version doesn;t have the revolutionary spirit, they seem to want to talk you to death with all the things Society does to wrong them.

I think it is also interesting that Mr. Peretz doesn't mention Jesse Jackson for whom Michelle Obama babysat and is remarkable quiet this political season.  And why not tie this in with Mssr Sharpton and his vow to shut down New York City?  These are professionals and I don't see them packing up just because one man is elected President.

Obama is trying to disown Rev Wright, but I think he needs to talk truth to power.  Tell America it has a race problem and it's not going away any time soon.  Tell them he thins he can make it better.  

- CRS9TNR

April 29, 2008 at 8:44pm

"But Wright is a side-show, a freak side-show that is propped up by other black hustlers -- Cornell West comes to mind, ok, a philosophical black hustler -- who are afraid that Obama has so deeply touched a nerve among white Americans that they will soon be out of work forever."

This is true, Marty, but you are missing the deeper irony here. (Perhaps Ironyroad can help you out).

Most of the white yuppies who support Obama also love Cornell West and for the same reasons. They each seem to offer to assuage the guilt they feel vis-a-vis "Black America." The believe, falsely, of course, that they can help heal the Black -White divide.  This divide is real enough but it won't be healed with words. And while some people have come to realize that Cornell West is s charlatan, they think that Obama can perform the magic that failed professor West.

- jacksondyer

April 29, 2008 at 8:48pm

CRS9TNR, you can pack more cliches in one post than anyone I know.

How is Black theology different from the white theology prached at by the likes of the KKK?

Racism is racism whether it is preached by those in power or by the powerless.

- jacksondyer

April 29, 2008 at 9:04pm

But jd, Obama wants to be elected president.  It's why he's out there.  This isn't about magic, it's about talent, intelligence, and also political power.  More than words, in other words.

- ironyroad

April 29, 2008 at 9:54pm

Molly, agreed. Ali stole the show substantively, and she did it in 1/10th the words. If West had any humility, any sincere intellectual curiosity, he would have let her, a person with deep and real experiences, do most of the talking. But alas, that'd be asking way too much of another egomaniac.

- ralphnelle

April 29, 2008 at 10:42pm

"But jd, Obama wants to be elected president."

Of course, but for a while he thought that he could talk his way to the presidency, which is to say keep repeating his shopworn  slogans.

In any case I am not saying that Obama and Cornell West are alike, merely that SOME of the people who support them are.

Of course, Obama also has support from people like Marty who wouldn't be caught dead supporting the the Charlatan West.

I don't know what your position is on West so I am leaving out of this equation.

- jacksondyer

April 29, 2008 at 11:04pm

"... one of Jesus' truly humble servants..."???!!!

Are you sick in the head?

- nturner

April 29, 2008 at 11:20pm

Thank you Ironyroad.  You said it well and economically and . . .  refreshingly devoid of irony.  I'm a white yuppy (Okay, the 'y' part is no longer applicable, does that make me an ouppy?) who thinks Cornell West is a fraud and who supports Obama.  I remember well a family vacation as a young boy in the deep South in the 50's.  I thought the difference between Colored and White restrooms was the paint on the wall.  What a surprise to learn it was the skin of the patrons.  When I returned home, I watched Orville Faubus at Central High, George Wallace at the U of A and Bull Connor with his dogs and fire hoses.  I don't feel guilty for all that but I do believe there are consequences and that, as a privileged member of the majority race, I bear some responsibility for making the future different from the past.  I am eager to begin that task under the inspired leadership of the remarkable Mr. Obama.

I have been reading Marty for many years and I wouldn't say I'm his biggest fan.  But I feel better about both Marty and Barack knowing Marty sees the same possibilities as I do.  (Great job on the magazine, Marty)

- dhuey0

April 29, 2008 at 11:27pm

Marty says that "It may be the style of many black churches, as we are now being told by the self-anointed ambassadors of good will, but -- if it is -- pity those worshippers who want quietly to commune with God."

It reminds me of an argument I had with a former girlfriend. We both share the same faith, but one local parish had lively Gospel Masses and the other had a more contemplative High Mass. I preferred the High Mass, she preferred the Gospel version. Different strokes for different folks -- different was of worshiping God. I would like to say it all ended well, but it didn't. While I might well say I pity the parishioners who, like myself, prefer to quietly commune with God; I'm sure her reply would be that in the parishes I prefer she would pity the poor parishioners who prefer to boisterously give praise to the Lord. I think we both would be right, which is the gist of what Rev. Wright was saying when he distinguished between difference and "deficiency."

Marty also says, "Wright is...a freak side-show that is propped up by other black hustlers ...who are afraid that Obama has so deeply touched a nerve among white Americans that they will soon be out of work forever."

Obama has certainly opened up a new path and model for African Americans to navigate their way through American life in the 21st century; but if the Obama campaign goes down in flames, look for all those old "black hustlers" to re-emerge with a vengeance, saying "I told you so."

And whether Obama succeeds or fails in his bid for the presidency, look for a new leader with influence on the horizon in significant portions of the African American community: The Reverend Jeremiah Wright. This really isn't about what whites think about the "black hustlers" or Reverend Wright; it's about the plausible narrative they weave within African American communities.

If whites keep beating twisted sound-bites that create a caricature of Wright, they will neither understand the man, nor culture, thought, and mood of significant portions of the African American community.

- matthawk

April 29, 2008 at 11:46pm

Peretz,

Good post.

Please get rid of the "race hustlers" garbage. Only sullies an otherwise wise post. Wright is an idiot, a crazy, a fool, but a "hustler"?  Get rid of it..and you may find a larger audience.

- thejauntyboulevardier

April 29, 2008 at 11:53pm

"If whites keep beating twisted sound-bites that create a caricature of Wright, they will neither understand the man, nor culture, thought, and mood of significant portions of the African American community."

Yes, but what if a part of the problem is that the culture, thought, and mood of significant numbers of African-Americans are nothing more than self-inflicted damage and hobbling that prevent a normal development of individuals in American society?  If Wright is taken seriously with his provincial and paranoid implications, it doesn't bode well for anyone's future, especially that of black America.

- ironyroad

April 30, 2008 at 12:21am

C'mon, jaunty -- hustler, huckster, demagogue, media whore....  The likes of Wright, West, Sharpton, Farrakhan, Maxine Waters...the list goes on.  They have made careers of keeping their audiences down on the plantation.  Using various idioms, they have perpetuated the AA role as victim.  There is absolutely nothing controversial about using "hustler" to describe them.  What you are saying is, that "idiot," "crazy," "fool," they may be, but not hustler.  Because...they're sincere?  You're kidding, of course.

- jm_rice

April 30, 2008 at 1:14am

Aren't we putting Wright into too neat a box and haven't we in the last 3 days seen a far more interesting picture of the man?  Wright is 90% right and brilliant and let's say 10% off a cliff ...

He is both.  Does he go in for the politics of grievance and victimization?  Yes... but he also does tell truth to power and very effectively too.

What made the whole performance at the Press Club so disturbing is the conscious attempt to destroy Obama's candidacy out of a wounded narcissism on many levels... because Obama had partially repudiated him in the Philly Speech, far too weakly in the mind's of many, but far more importantly because Obana had gotten far more of the limelight than he had, the young whipper snapper!

Obama did what he had to do today.  Let's hope that this brouhaha which had very muscular subterranean legs hasn't already done its full damage along with "bittergate" and with the ABC "debate" where Obama seemed flabbergasted in getting whipsawed over mindless trivia.

- Annabella2

April 30, 2008 at 2:01am

"Wright is 90% right and brilliant and let's say 10% off a cliff ..."Annabella2 said:

Brilliant? Is it brilliant to believe that Black people are right brained, and white people left brained?

What about someone like Obama of mixed "race?" Is he right brained or left brained.

Wright himself is neither. He is lame brained.  

" Does he go in for the politics of grievance and victimization?  Yes... but he also does tell truth to power and very effectively too." Annabella2 said:

What truth is that? That Whites infected black babies with AIDS? That 911 was our fault? And to whom does he say things? Not to any power structure. He like all loud mouths yell at the top of his lungs and doesn't address anyone specifically.

The notion of "speaking truth to power" is worse than a cliche, its a joke.  There is no truth in Wright and the people he talks to have no power.

- jacksondyer

April 30, 2008 at 9:25am

Marty, over the years I have truly enjoyed the vast majority of your columns but I really must say that you are plumb crazy when it comes to the subject of Mr. Obama.  I know the Clinton thing has something to do with it, but YOU'VE GOT...TO.  PULL.  YOURSELF...TOGETHER.  Say that capitalized part in a Kirk voice if it helps.

- selish70

April 30, 2008 at 9:51am

"Race Hustler" - Stanley Crouch's most incendiary contribution to our culture.  

Jackson, I can't speak for every white yuppie in the country that supports Obama, but I work in east coast liberal academic environment (the only place where anyone truly has any idea who Cornell West is) and he is univerasally considered a silly dolt, a dinosaur of the bad old PC days who has become a parody of himself.  

- Wandreycer1

April 30, 2008 at 10:05am

Sure racism exists in the US, but that is not Obama's principal problem. After all, he is the Senator from a big industrial state. And, Colin Powell is in contention to be McCain's running mate with no objection from those Republicans as far as I can see.

Obama's principal problem with older voters is his inexperience. His principal problem with working class voters is not race. (They would vote for Powell, because they feel that Powell shares their core values.)  They just don't connect with Obama. Adlai Stevenson comes to mind.

Obama also is his own victim of wanting it both ways. He does not want to be identified with the "race hustlers" like Sharpton and West, but he joins a church with a pastor who embraces their philosophy for political bona fides among blacks in Chicago.

Cornel West may be universally considered a silly dolt, but he is a tenured Professor at Princeton. Isn't that precisely the problem?  

- r-ennis

April 30, 2008 at 10:40am

Big Jim,

I just have a lower bar for negative racial connotation than others. I like much of what Cornell West says and writes, and I certainly think he is no more or less ridiculous than say, Charles Murray or a media figure like George Will. I think that Sharpton and Jackson, though very flawed, have certainly advanced the ball on some fronts, lost yardage on others. I think Mexine Waters is a pretty shrill harpy but a "hustler"?  

I can imagine the yew and cry if I called marty an "Israel hustler".  But you see, I would never do that because to me, "hustler" is a foul term, not to be casually tagged onto the the people I disagree with.

I am heartened that marty and others at tnr support Obama and as mad as I think the old fart is, I do believe he understands the essence of Obama, which seems to baffle many of his Spine acolytes.  But you see, marty has conditioned his audience,small though hardy here at the Spine, to expect this kind of manichaean line drawing, good v evil, black v white, huslter v  purist. The Spine is not a place to come to for nuance.

Though I must say that of all the marty/obama questioners,jacksondyer, of all people, seems to be consistent with his HC support. Unless I have missed a thread or two, he seems to understand that HC and BO are similar in terms of politicies and positions, and has simply stayed with his HC preference without demonizing BO. This kind of maturity, emanating from a rather unlikely source, is refreshing. I am so tired of this ridiculous internecine spats btw HC supporters and BO supporters. If HC gets the nod, I will be disappointed but will vote for her, simply because, though I support Obama, Clinton will stll make a better President than McCain.

- thejauntyboulevardier

April 30, 2008 at 10:45am

jaunty - I think the issue arises when the advocate in question shows a certain entrepreneurial drive, and flair, that influences his choice of when and where he promotes his views. Sharpton seems to be closer to a true political activist, but Wright and West are clearly generating large incomes based in no small measure on their adroit understanding of the media promotions game.

They're in the same category as Pat Robertson, Joel Osteen, Limbaugh and their type: entrepreneurs. Not "hustlers", ok, but hucksters whose main focus is self-promotion rather than promotion of a  movement or idea that transcends self.

- teplukhin2you

April 30, 2008 at 11:08am

jackson, being one of those white elitists that is paying for college from benefits of having served in the military, I like Obama and understand West through the prism of someone who needs to get over it.  And yes, racism is racism no matter which side it comes from, but there is a difference between racism and criticism, and pointing out to whites that they're being blind of they think that saying "white's aren't racist any more" makes everything OK.  Now, blaming the white government for AIDS, that's racist.

- anonevent

April 30, 2008 at 11:27am

Wait a second, isn't Cornell West an Obama advisor?  I thought he jumped on the campaign early on?  

- Lymon1

April 30, 2008 at 1:00pm

Wandreycer1 said:

"Jackson, I can't speak for every white yuppie in the country that supports Obama, but I work in east coast liberal academic environment (the only place where anyone truly has any idea who Cornell West is) and he is univerasally considered a silly dolt, a dinosaur of the bad old PC days who has become a parody of himself."

I am glad to read this, though, I agree with r-ennis that the problem, one of them, is that he is a tenured Professor at Princeton.

- jacksondyer

April 30, 2008 at 1:13pm

"Wait a second, isn't Cornell West an Obama advisor?  I thought he jumped on the campaign early on? "

He calls himself a critical supporter though he introduced him to his fellow African Americans in NY at the Apollo theater:

www.youtube.com/watch

- jacksondyer

April 30, 2008 at 1:16pm

I dispute Marty's  assertion that Wright is a race hustler. I don't think he is a con man like Sharpton

Wright  has two faults.  The first is one of  pride, of inability to admit error. And the second is that Wright is rather stupid..  The man  stuck in a prism of seeing the US as where it was in 1965 . And when folks try to tell him how foolish that is, he digs his feet in deeper and yells louder.

Wright reminds me of Norman Podhoretz .  Both are self-important  rigid 2nd rate intellects, who can't think outside the ideological categories  they developed decades ago..

- tembrach

April 30, 2008 at 5:37pm

a parting thought...

Wright is not the main attraction at the "freak side-show" that he might seem. The REAL story is Wright vs. MSM. When the story broke, I had to go find the clips on YouTube because all of the news stories consisted of combinations of the following statements: "how horrible", "how could he", "making Obama look bad", etc. They didn't mention anything about what was said or done to warrant these conclusions; it turns out he'd whupped his MSM detractors soundly and their bruised egos had been the ones writing the stories.

The media circus started with conservatives looking to smear Obama by proxy; Faux News ran what I am pretty sure amounts to a horribly racist slime fest. I am pretty sure its Racist because Faux News has not provided equal coverage or consideration for any of the nationally recognized White pastors that have been recorded making nearly identical statements from their own pulpits, and its a slime fest because they took tiny little sound bites from very long sermons out of context, reinterpreted the 3-7 words as political posturing by Wright from his pulpit. Once they had done that, the effort was to rub Wright in Obama's face until he had conceede discreditation and drop out of the race.

But the real side show is the efforts of the MSM to persue this story as a story itself. The continuing coverage started with other networks' coverage of Faux News coverage of the story. It snowballed as these other networks started deciding that maybe the story had merits and started reporting on it themselves (Clinton News Network, for starters). And it continues as the networks attempt to defend themselves from the accusations leveled by Wright in attempting to defend himself.

I watched the speech; there was NOTHING said that should have been considered scandalous or negative to Obama's campaign. I think the biggest problem was the ego whipping Wright handed out. My favorites were debunking one reporter's question by asking that reporter if they had actually watched the whole sermon, and point out that they had no business asking their question because they did not know what they were talking about. The most "scandalous" part of the speech was the apparent "exuberance" of Wright during the speech; he took some pretty obvious shots at his detractors during the speech, and obviously took joy in attacking and counter-attacking his detractors in the MSM.

I think the MSM deserved what they got, and they deserve a lot more. There are a whole lot of reporters trying to report "intelligently" on things they know nothing about. They never bothered watching the whole sermon, they're incorrectly attributing various "statements" to the wrong sources, and they have no idea what hermeneutics means. MSM needs to find a way to bow out of this whole Wright thing gracefully and apologetically, before more of America's theologians and scholars start getting involved and the truth comes to light. I've already heard stories about people realizing what is what after watching the Moyers interview and understanding what kind of reporting has been going on in regards to Wright; it will only get worse if things don't change.

- GSpinks

April 30, 2008 at 6:27pm

Enough religiosity in our politics. Put it back in the pulpit, or the attic, whichever's more apt, and cease this madness of asking our candidates to show a level of smarmy piety that no one would even dream of requiring from a candidate for CEO or university pres. or four-star general or any other position of executive leadership in this country.

- teplukhin2you

April 30, 2008 at 7:11pm

tembrach said: "I dispute Marty's  assertion that Wright is a race hustler. I don't think he is a con man like Sharpton."

No, he just happens to have made a great living from preaching to the choir and attacking white people.  

That's how he got to live in a gated "white" community in a million dollar home.

"Wright reminds me of Norman Podhoretz ."

He doesn't remind me of Podhoretz at all.

Podhoretz is not someone I agree with on most issues, but he is neither "prideful nor stupid." Just because you don’t agree with someone doesn’t mean that he is stupid. In fact a sign of intelligence is the ability to recognize the brilliance of someone’s positions when you disagree with it passionately.

Have you read the essays Norman wrote in the early sixties about racial issues?  Read his "My Negro Problem--and Ours" and tell me about his being stupid or rigid:

www.lukeford.net/.../out.pdf

You just don’t know the man’s work, tembrach.

- jacksondyer

April 30, 2008 at 7:44pm

teplukhin2you said:  "Enough religiosity in our politics."

Yes, and enough is too much as far as I am concerned.  Besides, the religiosity is of the wrong kind" it's moralistic without being moral, it's self righteous instead of selfless, and it's judgmental rather than thoughtful.

- jacksondyer

April 30, 2008 at 7:48pm

Jacksondyer,

Thanks for nticing the Cliche's here.  I was trying to emulate Obama's speaking style and that of Rev Wright as a bit of Irony.

I tend to be a little muddled in my thinking and not as clear.

The Black Theology is different in many ways and it doesn't really approach the KKK.  In Detroit we have the Shrine of the Black Madonna, located near Elijah Muhammad Blvd, which is one of the earlier liberation churches.  There controversial argument 30 years ago was that Jesus was Black.  It was wrong, but it showed that most of our depictions of Christ as a young Blond Norwegian were also wrong.  

The Irony here, and I think a most people are missing this, is that Black Churches have always been used by politicians running for office.  Remember the Clintons going to the black churches and Bill grinning and clapping.  Remember Al Gore's akward trips.  The one politican who really spent time in a Black Church is now denying he knew what was going on there.

If I were Obama, I'd find some tape of Hillary in the Black Church and ask her a few questions.

My point is that Obama supporters are deluding themselves if they think the Race Hucksters will disappear with him in the white house.

- CRS9TNR

April 30, 2008 at 9:37pm

"My point is that Obama supporters are deluding themselves if they think the Race Hucksters will disappear with him in the white house."

I agree that they won't disappear any more than white race hucksters will disappear anytime soon.

Here is an article on Black theology, CRS. Is there anything here that is incorrect?

www.atimes.com/.../JC18Aa01.html

"Black theology refuses to accept a God who is not identified totally with the goals of the black community..."

As for images of Jesus as Black or White that is trivial, really. People who believe in his divinity have a right to represent him according to their own likeness.

As a non believer I have no say in how people represent Jesus to themselves.

The more important issue is what kinds of values they attribute to their divinity.

I realize that Black theology is in part a response not just to the religion of white people but to the challenge of the Black Muslims in their midst.

Still, I see no difference between a Black crowd seeing Jesus representing "black values"

and a White crowd representing "white values." Both sides are equally racist.

- jacksondyer

April 30, 2008 at 10:10pm

Jackson

I don't deny that  Norman had a lot to say in the 1960s. Yes, I did read what you cited- a few years ago.  I thought his analysis of how Blacks bulled Jews in NYC schools in the 1950s was spot on & needed to be said

But Norman did not evolve.  He just became bitter, petulant, reliving olld feuds . I read his article in the WSJ about Vietnam. In it, he nearly accused the lLft of stabbing America in the back. It was almost embarrassing.  Norman has become like a cranky uncle.  

I'd say the same about Wright & is refusal to entertain the notions of class as a way of explaining Black's social position. His wholesale rejection of  the sociology of William Julius Wilson indicates a man unable or unwilling to move beyond his old categories.

- tembrach

April 30, 2008 at 11:32pm

I've always thought Cornell West undermined the credibility of the Ivy League.  Did Princeton really fight to wrest him away from Harvard?  

What are we to think when two vaunted universities of such prestige and cachet hire a guy who even an ill-tutored lout like myself can easily see is a fake.  And a horrid writer of unreadable, pseudoi-literate, overblown prose.

- ChanRobt

April 30, 2008 at 11:32pm

tembrach said:  "But Norman did not evolve.  He just became bitter, petulant, reliving olld feuds . I read his article in the WSJ about Vietnam. In it, he nearly accused the lLft of stabbing America in the back. It was almost embarrassing.  Norman has become like a cranky uncle."

Maybe, but that is beside the point. I was reacting to your view that Norman was like Wrigth stupid.  He is not stupid; and even his views on the war on terror, agree with them or not, are well argued in his book.

I also wouldn't judge the quality of his intellect by an op ed piece in a newspaper.

In any case his comparison to Wright is embarrassingly silly.

"I'd say the same about Wright & is refusal to entertain the notions of class as a way of explaining Black's social position. His wholesale rejection of  the sociology of William Julius Wilson indicates a man unable or unwilling to move beyond his old categories."

It's not is rejection of this or that sociologist that makes Wright stupid it's his embrace of lame notions like the right/left brain distinction between white and black people.

As I said above you can disagree with someone and still recognize the superiority of their intellect. This is true for say someone like Thomas Sowell whose economic theories I don’t agree with but whose writings are always stimulating. The same is true for Podhoretz.

Wright is just not on their level.

- jacksondyer

May 1, 2008 at 12:28am

What's probably going to happen is that the Rev Wright will either take over from or form a troika with the current reigning hustlers, Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton.

We're likely to be seeing Rev Wright long after this election is over.  If he plays the game right, the media will be eating out of his hand.  And showing up whenever he summons them.

- ChanRobt

May 1, 2008 at 12:30am

Re Norman Podhoretz, I grew up in Brownsville, Brooklyn at just about the same time as he. When I first read "My Negro Problem - and Ours" I lost all respect I had for him. Brownsville was a tough neighborhood and I had some trouble from some blacks, but I had many black friends who would stand and fight by my side if it came to that. There were also Italian thugs and Puerto Ricans and others. I once saw a gang of Italian kids beat some blacks to a pulp with pipes. The neighborhood was not black against white as Podhoretz glibly suggested. Trouble was most Jews were like Podhoretz;  too chicken to fight back.

- r-ennis

May 1, 2008 at 2:43pm

tembrach writes, "...And the second is that Wright is rather stupid.."

Yeah.  Which brings us back to Obama's judgement once again.  

- ChanRobt

May 1, 2008 at 7:43pm

ironyrod says "Yes, but what if a part of the problem is that the culture, thought, and mood of significant numbers of African-Americans are nothing more than self-inflicted damage and hobbling that prevent a normal development of individuals in American society?  If Wright is taken seriously with his provincial and paranoid implications, it doesn't bode well for anyone's future, especially that of black America."

I suggest that ironyrod listen to what Wright actually said about African American culture at during the NAACP speech. I find it interesting that mainstream media ignore the thesis of the speech; I doubt they have the attention span to even know what it is. So, we can accuse a man of saying things that he is not really saying, and can take sound bites and twist them out of context; but it lends itself neither to an understanding of the ideas of the speaker or of the culture he is addressing. And it is pretty ignorant to confuse African American culture with something you see on TV that allows you to say it causes "self-inflicted damage."

- matthawk

May 1, 2008 at 10:38pm

So what did Wright say?  I'd suggest that you give us an idea, instead of just wagging your finger at people and dissing their attention span.  Me, I'm wondering why Wright thought that occupying people's attention span right at this moment with a set of wild rhetorical gestures might be useful for the larger political project of getting a Democrat into the White House who's also African American.  And perhaps he ought to have thought about how things MIGHT be taken out of context, him being a smart guy and all that.

I know if I was close to the first black American to have a serious shot at the presidency, I would be thinking of that.

But that's just me.  No doubt you know better, matt.

- ironyroad

May 2, 2008 at 2:40am