[QUOTE=Jas09]
No, it’s “code” for “economic parity”. Basically that the economic situation for the black community should be on par with that for the nation as a whole. Is this something you think is a negative goal?
[/QUOTE]
Maybe “economic parity” means WE’RE GOING TO GIT THE SUCKA WHOSE BEEN RAPING ME AND MAKE HIM PAY!!! (Capitalized to represent screaming…that’s ok isn’t it?)
There are very few times I wish I was able to vote in U.S. elections. But I sincerely, sincerely wish that I were able to vote for Barack Obama, just to piss off those who are doing everything in his power to paint him as a scary Other. You know, instead of debating his positions, his opinions, or what he would do as President. Not his church, not his pastor, not some guy he was on a board with years ago, HIM.
But can’t do that, can we? We can’t debate what Barack Obama would do. He’s not the candidate, after all. His church is the candidate. His background is the candidate. His frikkin’ melanin count is the candidate. It’s not like there’s a person under all that perceived Other-ness, right?
Say, how’s the war going? How’s the dollar? Post Katrina reconstruction? Whoops, never mind, that’s not important, Obama’s church released a flyer once! Better get right on that.
[QUOTE=Orbifold]
Whoops, never mind, that’s not important, Obama’s church released a flyer once! Better get right on that.
[/QUOTE]
But, but, but they advocate economic parity, commitment, salvation and cultural and historic education.
The horror.
[QUOTE=5-4-Fighting]
But, but, but they advocate economic parity, commitment, salvation and cultural and historic education.
The horror.
[/QUOTE]
Nothing wrong with that until you start talking about supporting black businesses. Then it starts to sound like a Klan rally.
I just heard an audio clip of the priest who was invited to speak at the church. Oiy. It’s as if they are deliberately trying to sabotage Senator Obama.
[QUOTE=Magiver]
Nothing wrong with that until you start talking about supporting black businesses. Then it starts to sound like a Klan rally.
I just heard an audio clip of the priest who was invited to speak at the church. Oiy. It’s as if they are deliberately trying to sabotage Senator Obama.
[/QUOTE]
Magiver, after our last exchange ended, I thought you and I would be able to find some common ground. I sincerely did believe that and hope that we can.
What’s wrong with advocating support of black businesses by blacks? Even in this melting pot society you say you’re a part of, you have to acknowledge everybody many times go with what they know when it comes to socializing, hiring, seeking entertainment and decisions about whom to engage in business with.
Black businesses want to succeed just as much as any other and if a natural support group can be fostered among people with similar support, economic parity goals and fellowship why not? It’s not like they’re not also still available to the general customer/client/patron as well, such as yourself. You can still give them your custom, if you really want to. Establishing and building from familiar connections is always what’s tacitly going on the executive-laden golf courses of America and its top brass and decisionmakers and it has been for many years, right? I don’t see you excoriating them for builidng on the natural connections they’re used to and calling them grand wizards.
Would you say that Jews, who many times act in an insular manner when it comes to business support, referrals and connections here in New Yourk, resemble a Klan rally? I wouldn’t. I acctually admire them for their cohesiveness and emphasis on famiily and strength-building, because I believe they’re acting positively for self-development and not negatively out of some effort to keep someone else down. You seem to think proactive efforts towards development in the black community takes something away from you. It doesn’t.
Another example. There are several top box office black stars in Hollywood who have general appeal and can fill up seats and make money – millions and sometimes billions – for their studios. However, how often does a movie that’s considered black themed with a black-issue storyline get supported by the general movie-going audience to the tune of hundreds of millions? Most times those get marketed to black audience to attract the chances for profit and nobody bats an eyelash and describes the wider American movie-going public as reminiscent of Klan mentality. Would you? Taste aside, it ought to also make you wonder what’s is cloaking general audiences acceptance of movies with bllack story lines, but you don’t seem to want to look beyond the veil on that.
You can’t have it both ways. Why do you invoke the ugliness of the Klan when the thrust towards mutual support and economic parity is a positive for all and indicative of the conservative call to "pull yourself up by the bootstraps, " but, rather, say blacks ought not be building on the connections they have available to them and uplift. In addition that advocacy does not stop you from contributing to that growth and uplift.
And for the thinking electorate, those choices have nothing to do with Senator Obama.
Actually, that is not necessarily what the United Church of Christ stands for. That is the “ten point vision” of one congregation in the United Church of Christ. That particular congregation may be more focused on Africa specifically than other congregations within the UCC.
The denomination is about peace and justice for all people. It’s scope is global. It’s membership in the United States is predominately white. (I include this information only because it is being mischaracterized as a “black church.” Its motto is “They they may be one.”
Membership includes several Pulitzer Prize winning authors, poets and well known theologians.
I am not a member of this denomination, but I am really impressed with their organization and outreach. They are about service, not dogma. Don’t make the mistake of judging it by the Rev. Wright.
First, please cite where he currently is defending the beliefs of that particular congregation. (I haven’t seen him being attacked for the beliefs of the congregation.) Second, explain why one member is responsible for the beliefs of every other member of the whole. Third, explain how that can be true even when members disagree with each other.
Can you tell me which U.S. President of the last half of the Twentieth Century was sworn in using a Jehovah’s Witness Bible?
Why is talk of cultural diversity "antiquated’? Do you think that our culture is less diverse?
[QUOTE=5-4-Fighting]
Why would any thinking person be opposed to or troubled by any of these positive principles?
Reconciliation, Commitment To Africa, Cultural Education, Historical Education Of African People In Diaspora, Liberation, Restoration, Economic Parity, and including Adoration and Salvation, as listed on UCC’s website.
[/QUOTE]
Because people don’t see it as that (not looking at UCC’s website). All people have to do is watch some Sean Hannity saying, “commitment to the black community, the black work ethic, etc.”, some website excerpts he found taken out of context, and asssociates it with racist and separitist somehow. Then everybody believes him. And when that dies down, they watch the pastor’s words (out of context), and associate that with a different and more radical meaning. And that’s how we get the idea of UCC as this “separatist”, “anti-American”, “hate preaching” church.
[QUOTE=What the … !!!]
There you go again… typical reaction to a debat you don’t want to have.
What is retarded about holding a candidate responsible for the beliefs of the congregation that he has chosen to be a part of for 20 years and continues to defend?
[/QUOTE]
Well for one thing , you haven’t really told us anything about the details of their beliefs. I doubt you even know them. You did a little cut and paste job and now refer to it as if it tells us everything we need to know. It just doesn’t. when I saw the Wright.
The other thing I think you’re forgetting is that voters, a lot of them moderates, independents , and more than a few republicans, remember what happened the last time they let themselves get emotionally swayed by bullshit diversionary tactics like this. They remember getting betrayed by the dishonest self serving scumbags in power now. They’re a lot less likely to let it happen again and a little pissed off by the use of these kind of BS attacks. They’d like those who would be leaders and the people who promote them to talk a bit more about serious and relevant issues. If they can’t then I suspect the price will be lost votes.
Furthermore, since you seem to think that 20 year relationship means Obama should be held responsible for his churches beliefs, then perhaps we can rightly hold the republican party responsible for it’s long courtship of the religious right with all the vile things they have spouted over and over again.
McCain recently rejected a couple of controversial preachers. Did he do it out of honesty and integrity? Not many would think so. He did it because all the attention Rev Wright was getting was bouncing back and showing what embarrassing jackasses those two preachers are. He had embraced their endorsements and would still be doing so except for the Wright controversy. The republican party has done this for many years. Honoring conservative preachers who will preach their bigotry and ridiculous dogma to thousands in pews and through TV.
If you’re going to make the association for Obama and judge him in that way then have the honesty and integrity to apply the same standards for others. Let’s not nit pick petty differences to claim they are exempt.
[QUOTE=Crackhead06]
Because people don’t see it as that (not looking at UCC’s website). All people have to do is watch some Sean Hannity saying, “commitment to the black community, the black work ethic, etc.”, some website excerpts he found taken out of context, and asssociates it with racist and separitist somehow. Then everybody believes him. And when that dies down, they watch the pastor’s words (out of context), and associate that with a different and more radical meaning. And that’s how we get the idea of UCC as this “separatist”, “anti-American”, “hate preaching” church.
[/QUOTE]
I think people aren’t as likely to be that shallow or easily swayed this time around. It wasn’t just Kerry who was swift boated. It was the whole freakin country and plenty of voters remember.
Some will still buy it but I’m thinking more will see it for what it is. Especially with lots of sources fighting back and pointing it out.
[QUOTE=5-4-Fighting]
Magiver,
What’s wrong with advocating support of black businesses by blacks?
[/QUOTE]
The same thing that’s wrong with someone advocating the support of white businesses. It’s an insulting statement to make. Don’t confuse supporting local businesses with a statement of support for black businesses. They may represent the same people but the message is entirely different.
[QUOTE=5-4-Fighting]
Black businesses want to succeed just as much as any other and if a natural support group can be fostered among people with similar support, economic parity goals and fellowship why not?
[/QUOTE]
Would you shop at an “Appalachian” owned business because a local minister thinks white people should support white owned businesses. Hell would freeze over before I would.
[QUOTE=5-4-Fighting]
Would you say that Jews, who many times act in an insular manner when it comes to business support, referrals and connections here in New Yourk, resemble a Klan rally?
[/QUOTE]
If public statements are made in front of a crowd of Jews, absolutely.
[QUOTE=5-4-Fighting]
Another example. There are several top box office black stars in Hollywood who have general appeal and can fill up seats and make money – millions and sometimes billions – for their studios. However, how often does a movie that’s considered black themed with a black-issue storyline get supported by the general movie-going audience to the tune of hundreds of millions? Most times those get marketed to black audience to attract the chances for profit and nobody bats an eyelash and describes the wider American movie-going public as reminiscent of Klan mentality. Would you?
[/QUOTE]
Different issue. How many Eskimo themed movies have you seen? There’s an unlimited number of ethnicity’s that could be represented in the movies. And I’m not even sure what a black themed movie is but if the audience at large isn’t interested in the plot then it doesn’t get made. And given my general desire to live in a melting pot society I would expect movies to represent society as a whole and not be racially themed.
Senator Obama used his church as a springboard and that’s fine for him on a local level. His intentions are now national and what worked for him before is now a stumbling block. He’s had to distance himself from Reverend Wright. This is simply a statement of fact. He had to do it again today with Father Pfleger. He cannot run for national office if people perceive him as a living the life of an insulated demographic.
What connection does Obama have with Father Pfleger. He was just a guest speaker at Trinity, he isn’t Obama’ priest. Supposedly Pfleger is a friend of Wright’s. So what? How many levels of separation are you guys going to go with this shit (not that Pfleger said anything wrong)?
The more you guys lean on this kind of fraudulent guilt-by-association tactic, the more piss scared you look.
[QUOTE=Diogenes the Cynic]
What connection does Obama have with Father Pfleger. He was just a guest speaker at Trinity, he isn’t Obama’ priest. Supposedly Pfleger is a friend of Wright’s. So what? How many levels of separation are you guys going to go with this shit (not that Pfleger said anything wrong)?
[/QUOTE]
Never said he was connected to Pfleger. You really need to read what people write before launching in.
Pfleger made an ass out of himself defending Wright and attacking Hillary. The audio clip was pretty obnoxious and the congregation was all wound up. Since Obama already distanced himself from Wright he needed to make the obligatory condemnation of Pfleger. If you want to argue the necessity of it then take it up with his campaign manager. I’m just pointing out the events as they exist.
What do you mean by “racially themed”? Is that the way you believe they are now, the way they used to be, or the way you believe they will be in the future?
[QUOTE=Magiver]
The same thing that’s wrong with someone advocating the support of white businesses. It’s an insulting statement to make. Don’t confuse supporting local businesses with a statement of support for black businesses. They may represent the same people but the message is entirely different.
[/QUOTE]
That sounds That sounds fine. It does ignore the fact that blacks were regularly shut out of white businesses and obviously not welcome. I remember experiencing it myself in the early 80s. It’s easy to say “Get over it already” but not very realistic IMO. Things are getting better with every generation that passes and that’s all good but I can understand an urging to support local black business. I don’t see it as a bad thing.
I’ve seen this type of comparison a lot in the last few months. It just doesn’t work.
Simply replacing the word black with the word white is not automatically a fair comparison.
Right. thats why I hated Roots. Too racially themed.
[QUOTE=Magiver]
Never said he was connected to Pfleger.
[/quote]
Then you agree what he says is irrelevant and has nothing to do with Obama.
I didn’t hear him defending Wright, but so the fuck what if he did> What does that have to do with Obama. I disagree that he made an ass of himself, by the way. I think he and Wright both are pretty cool. All those perpetually outraged, religious right hate churches out there could learn a lot from these guys – not just from their demeanor and humor but also in the way they both actually get out in the community and do something for other people once in a while instead of just wallowing in homophobic self-loathing and waiting for the Rapture.
I thought it was funny. If you want to hear obnoxious, you should listen to McCain’s guys sometime – or really anyone on the religious right.
McCain condemned the remarks too. Does that mean McCain “had to distance himself?”
What did Pfleger say that was even offensive? He accused Hillary of “white entitlement.” You may disagree with that (and I do too…I think she feels entitled, but not because she’s white), but she has certainly said and done enough that I can see how someone would get that impression.
[QUOTE=What the … !!!]
what can we learn about a candidate based on their church of choice?
[/QUOTE]
That they both believe in Jesus Christ as the son of God and their saviour.
Given the the numerous times I’ve heard the belief in God ridiculed (ie. IPU) on this board, I wonder why the present presidential candidates are getting a pass on their religous beliefs.
Diogenes?
[QUOTE=The Flying Dutchman]
That they both believe in Jesus Christ as the son of God and their saviour.
Given the the numerous times I’ve heard the belief in God ridiculed (ie. IPU) on this board, I wonder why the present presidential candidates are getting a pass on their religous beliefs.
Diogenes?
[/QUOTE]
Because I truly don’t give a rat’s ass about their religious beliefs. It’s a complete non-issue to me. They can worship trees, for all I care. It’s got nothing to do with the job. I don’t care for the same reason I don’t care about my dentist’s religious beliefs or the guy at Jiffy Lube changing the oil in my car.
[QUOTE=Diogenes the Cynic]
What did Pfleger say that was even offensive? He accused Hillary of “white entitlement.” You may disagree with that (and I do too…I think she feels entitled, but not because she’s white), but she has certainly said and done enough that I can see how someone would get that impression.
[/QUOTE]
You have a habit of trying to debate something that has already been established:
**Sen. Barack Obama said he was “deeply disappointed” by a sermon at his church this week that mocked Sen. Hillary Clinton
“That is why I am deeply disappointed in Father Pfleger’s divisive, backward-looking rhetoric, which doesn’t reflect the country I see or the desire of people across America to come together in common cause.”**
It’s not my opinion, it’s Obama’s. If you disagree with the assessment then your debate is with him. I’m just referring to the events at hand.
[QUOTE=Zoe]
What do you mean by “racially themed”?
[/QUOTE]
I asked the same question. I was addressing 5-4-Fighting’s comments and I’m not sure what he was referring too.
[QUOTE=holmes]
Wasn’t he though? How can you not find these guys amusing? There’s a fundamental difference in style and substance between what this guy was saying and doing and Hagee and his ilk…they’re always so damn serious.
What I found interesting was that one the pundits, I think on Morning Joe; was like…"this white priest clearly has an inferiority complex…look at him trying to act ‘black’!
What?
[/QUOTE]
I may be wrong, but I always thought the job of a clergy man or women was to bring people closer to thier God, not president of the USA. These peoples actions make them sound like they have a few cards short of a deck.
Monavis