God Damn America, U.S. to Blame for 9/11: Obama's Pastor - Page 13

JAD_333 · 03-28-2008, 09:29 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chunder

...The mere fact that it's being talked about more than ever before is a damned good thing.

I agree. It lets off steam and helps people understand why each side sees itself as a victim.

Quote:

The only people seemingly interested in it's potential are republican strategists, and even then it's being backed away from by Mc Cain.

No, sir. Clinton's strategists tried hard to sell the DNC on seating the Michigan and Florida delegates she won. Argument? Obama's pastor problem may have crippled him; he can't win the the general election. The GOP will stay clear of the pastor issue for the simple reason that no more needs to be said about it. BTW, McCain isn't backing away from it; he wasn't going at it in the first place.

Quote:

All that matters now is whether or not the Republican Party keep on reverting to the speech, because they are likely to loose black votes over it, because at least they can be mature enough to see that elements like that exist in society, but lobbing everyone in the same basket, actually subversively makes the GOP draw a parrellel of unfairness of the label in their mind which resonates, and so it should.

The RNC and every republican strategist worth his salt knows that sticking it to Obama on the pastor issue is a no-go.

Quote:

I don't doubt that many predominantly black churches speak about their experiences and hurts of the past, and there is resentment from it. But, if it's politically acceptable for the Jewish Community to talk about things 60 years ago with resentment, well it's okay in my book for some of the black community to talk about their experiences 10-20 years ago

The issue isn't about speaking out about the past; it's about truth and attitude toward one's present country.

Zemco · 03-28-2008, 10:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gunnut

I saw the video of Wright's racist and treasonous remarks and I have to say he looked goofy in that outfit and sounded like a very bad commedian.

Did you see the whole video, or just the carefully edited disinformation part? Wright clearly states he is quoting US Ambassador Edward Peck, who made those comments on Fox News.

Here is the text of Wright's sermon.

Quote:

"Every public service of worship I have heard about so far in the wake of the American tragedy has had in its prayers and in its preachments, sympathy and compassion for those who were killed and for their families, and God's guidance upon the selected Presidents and upon our war machine, as they do what they do and what they gotta do -- paybacks.

There's a move in Psalm 137 from thoughts of paying tithes to thoughts of paying back, A move, if you will from worship to war, a move in other words from the worship of th God of creation to war against those whom God Created. And I want you to notice very carefully this next move. One of the reasons this Psalm is rarely read, in its entirety, because it is a move that spotlights the insanity of the cycle of violence and the cycle of hatred.

Look at the verse; Look at the verse; Look at verse nine: [rising voice] "Happy shall they be who take your little ones and dash them against the rocks."[lower voice] The people of faith are the rivers of Babylon. How shall we sing the Lord's song? If I forget the order ... The people of faith, have moved from the hatred of armed enemies [rising voice]--these soldiers who captured the king; those soldiers who slaughtered his son, that put his eyes out; those soldiers who sacked the city, burned, burned the towns, the burned the temple, burned the towers, they have moved from the hatred of [loudest voice] armed enemies to the hatred of unarmed innocents -- [low voice] the babies, the babies.

Blessed are they who dash your baby’s brains against a rock. And that, my beloved, is a dangerous place to be, yet that is where the people of faith are in the 551BC, and that is where far too many people of faith are in 2001 AD. We have moved from the hatred of armed enemies to the hatred of unarmed innocents. We want revenge, we want paybacks, and we don't care who gets hurt in the process.

Now I asked the Lord, what should our response be in light of such an unthinkable act, but before I share with you what the Lord shared with me I want to give you one of my little faith footnotes.

Visitors, I often give little faith footnotes, so that our members don't lose sight of the big picture, let me give you a faith footnote. Turn to your neighbor and say, "Faith footnote." [Voices: "Faith footnote"]

[Begin faith footnote]

I heard Ambassador Peck on an interview yesterday. Did anybody else see him or hear him, he was on Fox News. This is a white man, and he was upsetting the Fox News commentators to no end. He pointed out, (Did you see him, John?) --a white man-- he pointed out-- an ambassador-- that what Malcolm X said when he got silenced by Elijah Mohammad was in fact true, America's chickens are coming home to roost.

We took this country, by terror, away from the Sioux, the Apache, the Arrowak (phonetic) the Comanche, the Arapajo, the Navajo. Terrorism--we took Africans from their country to build our way of ease and kept them enslaved and living in fear. Terrorism. We bombed Grenada and killed innocent civilians -- babies, non-military personnel. We bombed the black civilian community of Panama with Stealth Bombers and killed unarmed teenagers, and toddlers, pregnant mothers and hard working father. [fullest voice] We bombed Khadafi, his home and killed his child. Blessed be they who bash your children's head agains the rocks.

[fullest voice] We bombed Iraq, we killed unarmed civilians trying to make a living. We bombed the plant in Sudan to payback for the attack on our embassy -- killed hundreds of hard working people --mothers and fathers, who left home to go that day, not knowing they'd never get back home. [Even fuller voice] We bombed Hiroshima, we bombed Nagasaki, and we nuked far more than the thousands in New York and the Pentagon and we never batted an eye. Kids playing in the playground, mothers picking up children after school -- civilians not soldiers. People just trying to make it day by day. We have supported state terrorism against the Palestinians and South Africa and now we are indignant? Because the stuff we have done overseas is brought back into our own front yard.

America's chickens are coming home, to roost. Violence begets violence. Hatred begets hatred, and terrorism begets terrorism.

[lower voice] A White ambassador said that, y'all, not a black militant. Not a Reverend who preaches about racism, an ambassador whose eyes are wide open, and whose trying to get us to wake up, and move away from this dangerous precipice upon which we are now poised. The ambassador said that the people we have wounded don't have the military capability we have, but they do have individuals who are willing to die and take thousands with them, and we need to come to grips with that.

Let me stop my faith footnote right there, and ask you to think about that over the next few weeks if God grants us that many days. Turn back to your neighbor, and say, "Footnote is over." [Voices: "Footnote is over."]

[End Faith Footnote]

[Gentle voice] Now, now. C'mon back to my question to the Lord, "What should our response be right now. In light of such an unthinkable act. I asked the Lord that question Tuesday, Wednesday, Thursday, and Friday.

I was stuck in Newark, New Jersey. No flights were leaving La Guardia, JFK, or Newark Airport. On the day tht the FAA opened up the airports to bring into the destinations of cities those flights that had been diverted because of the hijacking, a scare in New York close all three regional airports and I couldn't even get her for Mr. Radford's father's funeral. And I asked God, "What should our response be?

I saw pictures of the incredible. People jumping from the 110th floor; people jumping from the roof because the stair wells and elevators above the 89th floor were gone-- no more. Black people, jumping to a certain death; people holding hands jumping; people on fire jumping. [plaintiff high voice] And I asked the Lord, "What should our response be?" I read what the people of faith felt in 551BC. But this is a different time, this is a different enemy, a different world, a different terror. This is a different reality. What should our response be, and the Lord showed me three things. Let me share them with you quickly and I'm gonna leave you alone to think about the faith footnote.

Number one: The Lord showed me that this is a time for self-examination. [cheers] As I sat 900 miles away from my family and my community of faith, two months after my own father's death, God showed me that this was a time for me to examine my relationship with God. MY own relationship with God-- personal relationship with God.

I submit to you that it is the same for you. Folk flocked to the church in New Jersey last week, you know that foxhole-religion syndrome kicked in, that emergency chord religion, you know that little red box you pull in emergency? It showed up in full force. Folk who aint thought about coming to church in years, were in church last week. I heard that mid-week prayer services all over this country which are poorly attended fifty-one week a year were jam packed all over the nation the week of the hijacking the 52nd week. [inaudible]

But the Lord said, this aint the time for you to be examining other folks relationship this is a time of self examination. But the Lord said, "How is "our" relationship doing Jeremiah? How often do you talked to me personally, how often do you let me talk to you privately? How much time do you spend trying to get right with me, or do you spend all your time trying to get other folk right?

This is a time for me to examine my own relationship with God. Is it real or is it fake? Is it forever or is it for show? Is is something that you do for the sake of the public or is it something that you do for the sake of eternity? [voice rising] This is a time for me to examine my own, and a time for you to examine your own relationship with God -- self examination.

FibrillatorD · 03-28-2008, 12:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ironduke

It's not my study, it's Dovidio and Gaertner's. The first of which was conducted ten years before I was born.

It's a social psychological concept and it's in the textbooks. Dovidio and Gaertner's study has been replicated numerous times. If the study and those that have replicated their findings were non-scientific I'm sure they would have never been published or made their way into textbooks and lectures at the University of Minnesota.

It seems you don't like the concept and the implications of it. That's your problem.

Here's some more definition on the concept from Rich Lee, an associate professor of psychology at the U of M:

Quote:

Some other key characteristics of people who may be viewed as aversive racists:

1) Endorse fair and just treatment of all groups
2) Unconsciously harbor negative feelings toward blacks and try to avoid interracial interaction
3) When interracial interaction is unavoidable, they experience anxiety and discomfort (not hostility like in more overt racism)
4) Anxiety/discomfort is due to concern about acting inappropriately and prejudiced, thus they adhere to established rules/codes of behavior. Frequently assert colorblindness to justify their behaviors
5) Negative feelings get expressed in subtle, rationalizable ways that ultimately disadvantage minorities or unfairly benefit the majority.

In a lengthy series of experiments, Dovidio and Gaertner have demonstrated the ways in which aversive racism affect social interactions and decision making processes, including job hirings and school admissions. It's compelling research.

Job hirings and school admissions? I thought you said that was "true" racism.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ironduke

Not being given a job because of his race. Not being allowed into a school, being forced to sit in the back of the bus. Being called a n*gger to his face.

He's likely only experienced aversive racism.

Where do you come off using Barack's experience with race (of which you are painfully ignorant) to both a. condemn Barack's relationship with another black man (Rev. Wright) and b. condemn the racist/white-liberal-guilty Dems pulling for him?

Put me in the living room of a big black family and I'll feel a little awkward like most white people would. But your professors say that whites who avoid interacting with blacks are racists, and that they're too dumb to even be aware of their aversive behavior. I call such people pvssies and snobs, but not racists. Racism is a different thing entirely. Dovidio and Gaertner in their haste to acquire tenure gloss over the fact that Jad and me and most white people are fully conscious of our aversive behavior. "Aversive racism" is not some subconcsious brake that overpowers 500 years of racism bearing down on black people and white people alike. That's ridiculous, they're ridiculous.

Next time don't forget to heed Jad's sig:

To be truly ignorant, man requires an education

gunnut · 03-28-2008, 12:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zemco

Did you see the whole video, or just the carefully edited disinformation part? Wright clearly states he is quoting US Ambassador Edward Peck, who made those comments on Fox News.

Here is the text of Wright's sermon.

Show me the comments made by Peck.

Everyone saw the comments made by Wright. Here's your chance to show us what he was really talking about at the pulpit.

**Ironduke** · 03-28-2008, 12:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JAD_333

What I was trying to tell you is that there is no such thing as "aversive racism." Racism is illogical and all encompassing. Race is the decider, not behavior. Aversion, avoiding, and so on isn't illogical even if the data is wrong, A white grandmother who fears black men isn't necessarily a racist.

Why make a point of the difference? Because racism and wariness of a race cannot be dealt with in the same way.

Have a good day...

Sure there is. If there are people being harmed by the behavior of others on the basis of their race, what else would it be called? A white grandmother who fears black men doesn't cast her automatically as an aversive racist, it's just one characteristic that can be used along with other criteria.

Here's more on how Dovidio defines how aversive racism is practiced:

Quote:

However, aversive racists do discriminate, usually unintentionally, in subtle and rationalizable ways, such as (1) when a negative response to a minority group member can be justified on the basis of some factor other than race, (2) when evaluative criteria are ambiguous or (3) in terms of providing special favors or support to ingroup members rather than derogating or injuring outgroup members.

**Ironduke** · 03-28-2008, 12:40 PM

Quote:

Job hirings and school admissions? I thought you said that was "true" racism.

Yes, but an aversive racist will reject the black on factors other than race, at a rate much higher than whites sharing those same attributes, without the realization they're doing so. Read above. A covert racist would purposefully find reasons not to hire or admit just because the applicant is black.

It is possible to racially discriminate without intentionally do so? The answer is yes. And that's where we find aversive racism. The body of research on the matter supports these conclusions.

Another study includes job applications, where there are large disparities for followup interviews between candidates with "normal white" names, and stereotypical black names, with otherwise identical applications. Another would include the disparity in which white people extend help to a white or black person in apparent medical distress in studies on the bystander effect. Another, already mentioned, measures the huge disparity between the rate in which people coded as white liberals prematurely hang up on a black man calling for help.

What you're arguing is that it's impossible to commit racial discrimination unless a person consciously holds racist views. Which is dead wrong. Racial discrimination can occur among people who are strongly opposed to racism and possess egalitarian values. And it doesn't extend to just feeling awkward in a black family's living room, it extends to situations in which the outcomes are genuinely harmful.

Back to the argument, I doubt that Obama has experienced segregation. I doubt that he's been flung 20 feet by a water cannon. I doubt he's had the crap beaten out of him because he's black. I doubt he's been called a n* to his face. As a matter of fact, I'll bet he's seen more positive than negative discrimination in his life.

As the resident expert on Obama, perhaps you could prove otherwise, citing the man himself.

**Parihaka** · 03-28-2008, 18:31 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JAD_333

What I was trying to tell you is that there is no such thing as "aversive racism." Racism is illogical and all encompassing. Race is the decider, not behavior. Aversion, avoiding, and so on isn't illogical even if the data is wrong, A white grandmother who fears black men isn't necessarily a racist.

Why make a point of the difference? Because racism and wariness of a race cannot be dealt with in the same way.

Have a good day...

Obama disagrees with you. He clearly viewed his grandmother as some form of racist because she was scared of black men.

2DREZQ · 03-29-2008, 12:28 PM

I don't care anymore about what the good reverend said. I have a bigger fish to fry:

Here is the direct quote from the statement of faith of Obama's church that should be burned into the memory of every conservative and middle-of-the-roader out there:

"The fortunate who are among us combine forces with the less fortunate to become agents of change for God who is not pleased with America’s economic mal-distribution!" italics added.

Think about it for a minute; This is the published statement of faith to which Obama must have tacitly assented in order to be a member. In other words, IT IS AN ARTICLE OF FAITH FOR BARAK OBAMA THAT IT IS GOD'S WILL THAT WEALTH IN THIS COUNTRY BE RE-DISTRIBUTED! Since the only agent capable of such change is the Federal government, and since this man is running for the top slot, shouldn't we be scared spitless of this SOCIALIST?

JAD_333 · 03-29-2008, 22:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Parihaka

Obama disagrees with you. He clearly viewed his grandmother as some form of racist because she was scared of black men.

I am sure that Obama disagrees with me on a lot of things.

But I wouldn't say he "clearly" views his grandmother as a racist. I think he was saying that precedent can make white people afraid of blacks and vice versa. I don't know why it is so hard to understand that discreet avoidance of certain people of another race is not necessarily racism; racism is across the board prejudice against members of another race without any casse or justification, except a belief in one's own racial surperiority. Most taxi cab drivers in Washington refuse to not pick up young blacks not because the odds of being robbed and shot by them is very high. Is that racism or discretion?

JAD_333 · 03-29-2008, 22:52 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by 2DREZQ

I don't care anymore about what the good reverend said. I have a bigger fish to fry:

Here is the direct quote from the statement of faith of Obama's church that should be burned into the memory of every conservative and middle-of-the-roader out there:

"The fortunate who are among us combine forces with the less fortunate to become agents of change for God who is not pleased with America’s economic mal-distribution!" italics added.

Think about it for a minute; This is the published statement of faith to which Obama must have tacitly assented in order to be a member.

2D, it's a dumb statement and fodder for the drum beaters, but it is not an article of faith in the United Church of Christ, and a member can disagree with it and still be remain a member.

If the acid test of membership in any group is 100% acceptance of everything the group says, then just imagine all the groups we'd have to drop out of, starting with the human race.

**Parihaka** · 03-29-2008, 22:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JAD_333

I am sure that Obama disagrees with me on a lot of things.

But I wouldn't say he "clearly" views his grandmother as a racist. I think he was saying that precedent can make white people afraid of blacks and vice versa. I don't know why it is so hard to understand that discreet avoidance of certain people of another race is not necessarily racism; racism is across the board prejudice against members of another race without any casse or justification, except a belief in one's own racial surperiority. Most taxi cab drivers in Washington refuse to not pick up young blacks not because the odds of being robbed and shot by them is very high. Is that racism or discretion?

It is indeed discretion or bias, not racism. I'm just not sure Obama sees it that way. By comparing Wrights statements with her views

Quote:

I can no more disown [Rev. Dr. Wright] than I can disown the black community. I can no more disown him than I can my white grandmother – a woman who helped raise me, a woman who sacrificed again and again for me, a woman who loves me as much as she loves anything in this world, but a woman who once confessed her fear of black men who passed by her on the street, and who on more than one occasion has uttered racial or ethnic stereotypes that made me cringe

I think he moves past mere discretion and into stereotyping her as at least a little racist. Especially when you view his follow-up.

Quote:

"The point I was making was not that my grandmother harbors any racial animosity, but that she is a typical white person. If she sees somebody on the street that she doesn't know - there's a reaction in her that's been bred into our experiences that don't go away and sometimes come out in the wrong way and that's just the nature of race in our society. We have to break through it. What makes me optimistic is you see each generation feeling less like that. And that's pretty powerful stuff"

So I paraphrase him as meaning 'It's typically white to view blacks with suspicion.'

Kansas Bear · 03-29-2008, 23:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Parihaka

It's typically white to view blacks with suspicion.

Unless you have a multi-racial family.....

**Parihaka** · 03-30-2008, 00:20 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kansas Bear

Unless you have a multi-racial family.....

Sorry, I was paraphrasing Obama and he does have a multi-racial family. I'll amend my post.

JAD_333 · 03-30-2008, 00:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Parihaka

It is indeed discretion or bias, not racism. I'm just not sure Obama sees it that way. By comparing Wrights statements with her views.

I am not so sure Wright is a racist in the true sense of the word. Rather, I believe he is a product of the world that white Americans created for blacks before segregation ended. He was thrust into a very insular world defined by whites in which blacks looked at whites as jailers. Its members condemned racism, fought against it. Now we are expected to believe that they have become the very thing they fought against. I can't accept that. If anyone knows how illogical racism is, it is Amercian blacks, especially those who grew up in a segregated America. So, Wright to me is an enigma. a man who rails at the glass half empty. Preachers who rock the house are like the media; good news doesn't fill the pews any more than it sells newspapers.

Quote:

I think he moves past mere discretion and into stereotyping her as at least a little racist. Especially when you view his follow-up.

I think he was trying to say his grandmother's anger and resentment against some blacks doesn't make her a racist any more than Wright's anger and resentful against some whites makes him a racist. He was saying that neither of them reason based purely on skin color.

Quote:

It's typically white to view blacks with suspicion.

Many do; many don't. For me, it depend on the situation. There are also some white groups I view with suspicion. I don't want to get too specific lest I offend some Wabber's state, but there is a region near my home where a lot of the men work construction. Many of them work cheap because they don't have licenses, don't have insurance and don't pay taxes. I've been burned by a fair share of them. Shody work and no follow up. Now when one of them asks me for work, I am inclined to look elsewhere even if it costs me more.

Kansas Bear · 03-30-2008, 00:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Parihaka

Sorry, I was paraphrasing Obama and he does have a multi-racial family. I'll amend my post.

No offense taken, sir.....

No need to amend anything.......

03-29-2008, 12:28 PM	#188 (permalink)
2DREZQ Contributor Join Date: 08-04-03 Posts: 704	I don't care anymore about what the good reverend said. I have a bigger fish to fry: Here is the direct quote from the statement of faith of Obama's church that should be burned into the memory of every conservative and middle-of-the-roader out there: "The fortunate who are among us combine forces with the less fortunate to become agents of change for God who is not pleased with America’s economic mal-distribution!" italics added. Think about it for a minute; This is the published statement of faith to which Obama must have tacitly assented in order to be a member. In other words, IT IS AN ARTICLE OF FAITH FOR BARAK OBAMA THAT IT IS GOD'S WILL THAT WEALTH IN THIS COUNTRY BE RE-DISTRIBUTED! Since the only agent capable of such change is the Federal government, and since this man is running for the top slot, shouldn't we be scared spitless of this SOCIALIST? __________________ USS North Dakota

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes	Rate This Thread
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode	Rate This Thread:

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)