Mickey Kaus gives his review of Obama’s speech. When he gets to this point in the speech, he asks three very important questions.
As such, Reverend Wright's comments were not only wrong but divisive, divisive at a time when we need unity;
Doesn't Obama mean Rev. Wright's comments were 'not only divisive but wrong,' rather than the other way around?
Me: No! He means it exactly like that. And the answers to your next two questions take us to the promised land.
Isn't it worse to be wrong than "divisive"?
Me: Yes, for you and me. For Obama? No. Divisiveness is the most egregious sin.
Is unity the overriding virtue for Obama?
This is exactly right.
I’m quoting myself again:
Obama wants unity. To disagree with Obama is a lack of unity. Any lack of unity is cynicism. And cynicism is as big an enemy as terrorists.
Mickey, I can only hope that your questions lead you to these answers. I believe they unlock the noxious Gnostic Mystery of Obamianity.