It just seems a bit disingenuous to suddenly feel the need for a “retraction” when a similar scenario has come to light regarding a candidate you actually like.

Just as many here have divined motives for other's actions, let me join in. Mr. Knapp is trying to grasp the moral high ground. Recognizing that an active association with, contributions to, and seeking council of a arguably racist Minister is quite a bit different from accepting endorsement from a Minister with whom one has no active engagement. This kind of moral relativism doesn't sell well to a large swathe of America. Best to try appear humble (and magnanimous to boot) and take what one initially thought was a trump card off the table. Or said differently, after having played a King, only to take the Queen, can we please not play Spades.

Sorry Alex, but you chose the game. Trying to back out only now does not impress.

I wouldn't associate Obama too closely with this particular reverend any more than I thought it was a good idea to associate McCain with the two others. When running for office you should at least be polite to those who support you.

Obama probably doesn't believe half the junk Wright throws out for consumption and belonging to his church doesn't make it so. The world is full of people with funny ideas.

Thanks for letting us know you changed your mind. You have that right and now the whole matter is forgotten.

Alex if you can do the second part, you are better than most. Then again most have a hard time at admitting mistakes. They usually come up with some excuse or another.

Maybe you need a whole sermon to decide whether saying that god is damning America for it's non-support of Israel and letting terrorists destroy us is a wacky thing to believe, but that's a level of objectivity that seems to be completely unwarranted.

I mean, I didn't think the Wright issue was a big deal, but I certainly didn't take the stance that perhaps his comments were out of context and that I needed to view whole sermons to get a feel for what he was actually saying. I mean, it was quite clear even from the sound bites.

What judgements you take from these statements and such is not dependent on the context, per se. There isn't a whole lot of nuance in these men and their beliefs that needs fine parsing and weighing.

Really, Alex, you’re quite welcome to this objective soul searching and certainly one can have vastly different views on whether Hagee rates as a radical or is merely the mainstream of evangelical thought in America. But to claim that your only sources on Hagee are just “hit pieces” is rather odd. I mean, quite frankly it just seems like you need to hear about this new fangled technology called “Google”.

I do plan on looking into Hagee and Parsley, but simply haven't had this new fangled part of physics known as "time". :) I would not be suprised to learn that Hagee and Parsley are people that a prominent Presidential candidate shouldn't be embracing. But I don't know that for certain, because all I've seen are the bad things they've said. Not whole sermons.

My lord, don't you watch YouTube? I mean, I watched probably over 2 hours of excerpts from Hagee's rants and raves. Further, I watched the most excellent mashup the TPM folks put together of McCain's active embrace (literally) of Hagee and others.

Really, Alex, you're quite welcome to this objective soul searching and certainly one can have vastly different views on whether Hagee rates as a radical or is merely the mainstream of evangelical thought in America. But to claim that your only sources on Hagee are just "hit pieces" is rather odd. I mean, quite frankly it just seems like you need to hear about this new fangled technology called "Google".

It's not like Hagee has been hiding, nor has McCain been shy about his interaction with him.

In light of your correction of a mistake (after events and time had passed), what is your take on Sen. McCain's mistaken Iran/Al-Quaeda connection? I would point out that his correction was made immediately and there is some evidence that the connection does in fact exist - http://www.nysun.com/article/46032 - (via documents McCain would have access to).

Obama's whole campaign is about we the people taking charge of our own government. “This is not about me,” he says, “this is about you. Change does not happen from the top down, change happens from the bottom up. You will change the way government works and I will lead you in that effort.”

“If you are ready to make change happen…” Obama says.

This is the leadership that has been missing from America for too long.

That may be true, but I don’t know that 100%.

McCain appeared with both of them at public campaign rallies. Why else would you have them speak to your rally if you were not asking them to leverage votes?

McCain is actively looking to nuts like Hagee & Parsley to leverage votes.

That may be true, but I don't know that 100%. Additionally, I don't know that Hagee and Parsley are actually nuts, since everything I know about them comes from articles condemning them.

Yep, until the next time a Republican has a questionable associate whether it is someone close or just someone introducing them.

I resent the implication, sir.

The time to be tolerant or to forgive is before you or someone you support gets into trouble.

No doubt that's the ideal time, sir. But it's never too late to admit a mistake and take steps to ensure that one doesn't make it again.

On account of that, I will again state that I retract my condemnation of McCain’s association with Hagee and Parsley, because as of this moment I simply lack enough information necessary to form any judgment about it one way or the other. And lacking that information, I’ll give McCain the full benefit of the doubt.

I would retract your retraction. There is a fundamental difference between McCain and Hussein.

McCain actively courted Hagee and Parsley for reasons of political expediency as a shameless way to pony up to radical Christian elements in an attempt to prop up his dismal presidential bid. These two people are widely known national political figures.

Jeremiah Wright is a neighborhood preacher with no significant political influence outside a mile radius of his church. Obama was simply a long-time parishioner at his church. This, of course, is old news, since Obama recounted his interactions with Wright in his best-selling memoir over a decade ago.

Obama's relationship with Wright has been purely personal (and, hence, irrelevant to his presidential capacity) whereas McCain is actively looking to nuts like Hagee & Parsley to leverage votes.

Even more impressive for me, is that after 8 years with a slack-jawed dufus in the Whitehouse, we can look forward to not only a President that can string a 6 word sentence together without drooling on himself, but he can actually WRITE such an elequent speech.

That's right - Obama wrote that speech he gave. By Himself. This speech, being lauded over by both critics and pundits alike as "Historical", was written by Senator Obama. He gets it. Without being told what to say and think by polls and advisors - he really gets it.

The man is impressive and uniquely qualified to lead our country in these Dark times.