How can it be that Obama, who has known Wright for 20 years, not know of Wright's views?

How is it possible that a minister who brought Obama, a religious skeptic, to faith not be his spiritual mentor(or of sorts), especially when Obama attended only one church?

Obama might agree with Wright or he might not agree, but Obama cannot now know Wright!

Obama, or his campaign, or both did not have it in them to go on the offense. Only recourse was to vilify the pastor.

How is this any different from the Clintons?

Who will Obama vilify next?
I remember his wife saying that she is proud of America for the first time (you see, the truth does not matter)
I remember his wife also saying "the race situation - that is America" ( you see the context does not matter)

Washington post's editorial admonishes Wright's audacity.
Eugene Robinson concludes Wright threw Obama under the bus and implores Obama to do the same. Robinson feels compelled to separate himself from Wright, and loathes Wright's egocentric behavior.
George Will goes on a complete rant on Wright, Wright's importance in the campaign, "correctness" of the use of Wright in the campaign attack machines.
Bob Herbert, at the NYT says Wright went to Washington to bury Obama.
(Oh, I could not ready this kind of bullshit in other places, which I am sure there is no dearth of)
I spent 15 minutes yesterday watching few infotainment pseudo-reality networks (CNN, MSNBC, are there anymore? I would not know) and it was all about how Wright is screwing things up for Obama.

I have even read Josh say "I think Rev. Jeremiah Wright's new kick Obama in groin-athon is playing a big role too.", in the context of why Obama's appeal seems to be loosing.

And I am saddened.

Saddened that democrats can not bring home a more effective offense (NOT defense) to blunt the "Oh my God, Obama is friends with Wright" stuff.

Saddened that the American infotainment industry still dictates the direction of the conversation.

Saddened that America, as always, is on a self-gratifying circular loop.

Incensed at Obama's aloofness at  setting the direction of the conversation and taking control of the narrative.

I am frustrated at the dumbness of the media, self-apologetic attitude of the democrats and, in this case, THE BLACK COMMUNITY, and Obama campaign's incompetence.

The only thing Obama's campaign did so far was cash-in on Obama's charisma. Maybe it is to get to doing some real work.

I am no big fan of Obama. He does not come off as a policy person, does not provide specific ideas, does not educate the public, does not engage in conversations until he is forced to.
And I am a skeptic of his Iraq plan. He has never spoken at length of the sufferings of the Iraqis.
And I don't find him charismatic or super-eloquent, or even super handsome.
All that said, I believe Obama is the most temperamentally, emotionally, and intellectually suited to be the President - not even JFK let alone Mr. Clinton, in my opinion, was so qualified.
Which brings me to one component of the debate - Electability: Can Obama really win the general against John McCain?
a) Oh my God, McCain will say he is linked to terrorist
b) Oh my God, Republicans will link him to Wright
c) Oh my God, Republicans will portray him and his family as America haters
d) Oh my God, Republicans will say that he is elitist and is not in touch with Real America

I have heard these questions over and over and over and over again. Not just from Clinton surrogates, (empty) talking heads, and even Obama supporters. And I am forced to ask myself: Are democrats such set of cowards that they are not even confident that they can plan a counter attack that they want to nominate a candidate who is less controversial or has been fully vetted even if he or she is hollow?

And NO, anyone who says that there are very few differences, if any, between Clinton and Obama are wrong. There is a huge temperamental difference, and a huge emotional restraint difference.

I am convinced that Hillary's Administration will be no different, in many aspects, to George W. Bush's, and it is of no benefit my causes: Transparency, treatment of citizens as adults rather than as children, and pushing for, and convincing citizens to share collective responsibility and sacrifice.
To me this election, at the primary level and at the national level, is either fundamental democratic change or no change. I am tempted to say I would rather choose that "no change" which will make it possible for me to choose the change I want next time around.