Say Anything Blog

Once again the Democrat party is going to foist the equivalent of “Slick Willie” on our voting population.  Neither Obama nor Hillary are acceptable as candidates for high office, and certainly not Presidential material. The scary thing is the pictures of the 18 to 25 year olds with a phone in their ear and an I-pod in the other are the one’s really juiced up to vote for O or H.

I sincerely, passionately hope you are right Rob, this does appear to be a scandal of sufficient proportion to end his run for the White House. Or, is it? (1) You’ll never go broke underestimating the stupidity of the American voter (Carter, Clinton, Pelosi, Reid). (2) Do not underestimate the movie star mystique and almost Messiah image of Obama, most people do not vote the issues, hell they hardly understand them, they vote their emotions, damn the facts, full speed ahead. (3) Also, while it tis a long, long way to Tipperary (Tis St. Patricks Day after all), it is an eternity until November and the voters tire of such issues quickly.

No matter the age or state of health, for a military man it is always glorious to tilt at windmills, rescue a fair Dulcinea and be a gallant knight in armor in a glorious cause.

Unless Obama does to Wright what Stalin did to Trotsky, I think Wright will be “the gift that keeps on giving”.

"One must regard his leftist opponent as a parent regards his recalcitrant child. Don’t give an inch in a debate with a leftist, and you’ll soon frustrate him to the point that he falls back to his default position. He’ll gainsay your every point. He’ll even resort to calling you names and accusing you of having suspect parentage.”

I think you have all got yourself worked up over very little.  You have been searching and searching for something to hold against Obama, and all you have found were statements made by his pastor, not Obama.

Some people will be shocked and look into it.  But in the end, youll just find yourselves picking on a pastor of a black church and somehow hold Barack responsible for it.  Americans will get tired of that bullying style.  It won’t last until November.

He’ll keep pounding back on the forces of division and you will be there as his example.  Keep it up.

"Hannitized”: Your every comment on this blog is an example of divisiveness.  Shame on you!

"One must regard his leftist opponent as a parent regards his recalcitrant child. Don’t give an inch in a debate with a leftist, and you’ll soon frustrate him to the point that he falls back to his default position. He’ll gainsay your every point. He’ll even resort to calling you names and accusing you of having suspect parentage.”

Its unbelievable, but the take now is that the Rev. Wright
and his sayings and beliefs are being wrongfully attacked
by the media and all rich white citizens. Himself, his members, the United Church of Christ is now coming together as never before and proclaiming they are the victims.

but the take now is that the Rev. Wright
and his sayings and beliefs are being wrongfully attacked
by the media and all rich white citizens. Himself, his members, the United Church of Christ is now coming together as never before and proclaiming they are the victims.

Exactly.  And idiots like Rob who mischaractherize Wrights statements is giving truth to their claim.

When Rob quotes Wright as saying “Hiller is no N***R”, he is deliberately misrepresenting Wrights statement, which was “Hiller aint never been called no N****R.  That is markedly a different statement.

And is it racist to say someone never called you a bigoted, racist term?  No.

So with Rob’s genius, he is victimizing a person who already sees themselves as a victim.  And people with sympathize with that.  Nice job Rob.

Keep it up.

Its unbelievable, but the take now is that the Rev. Wright and his sayings and beliefs are being wrongfully attacked by the media and all rich white citizens. Himself, his members, the United Church of Christ is now coming together as never before and proclaiming they are the victims.

Of course they are; you don’t actually expect them to admit the truth, do you?

"One must regard his leftist opponent as a parent regards his recalcitrant child. Don’t give an inch in a debate with a leftist, and you’ll soon frustrate him to the point that he falls back to his default position. He’ll gainsay your every point. He’ll even resort to calling you names and accusing you of having suspect parentage.”

And idiots like Rob who mischaractherize (sic) Wrights statements is giving truth to their claim.

I’d be careful about calling people idiots and using the “word” “mischaractherize” in the same sentence, unless the amusement factor is the one you’re going for!

And remember...we’re not laughing with you!
Nice job, indeed!

For any voter trying to choose between the two candidates for commander in chief, there is no better test than this: When American strategy in a critical theater was up for grabs, John McCain proposed a highly unpopular and risky path, which he accurately predicted could lead to success. Barack Obama proposed a popular and politically safe route that would have led to an unnecessary and debilitating American defeat at the hands of al Qaeda.

Frederick W. Kagan

...victimizing a person who already sees themselves as a victim.

That’s what lefties always do to justify their politics of hatred and division.  Wright wants to drive a wedge between white Americans and black Americans, using race hatred rhetoric.  It couldn’t be clearer.
Res ipsa loquitur.

"One must regard his leftist opponent as a parent regards his recalcitrant child. Don’t give an inch in a debate with a leftist, and you’ll soon frustrate him to the point that he falls back to his default position. He’ll gainsay your every point. He’ll even resort to calling you names and accusing you of having suspect parentage.”

Keep it up.

We will; it’s a rich vein of Dem racist gold.  BTW, who’s “Hiller”?

"One must regard his leftist opponent as a parent regards his recalcitrant child. Don’t give an inch in a debate with a leftist, and you’ll soon frustrate him to the point that he falls back to his default position. He’ll gainsay your every point. He’ll even resort to calling you names and accusing you of having suspect parentage.”

I don’t believe Obama buys into his numbskull preacher’s worldview--thankfully, few people do: however, this might be the heretofor Mr. Clean’s “I didn’t have sex with that woman, Miss Lewinski” moment--I think.

Obama’s assertion that he did not know what this guy was preaching simply doesn’t pass the sniff test.  He’s on record, and it’s a doozy and it’s too damn bad if it happens to be divisive--unless you are from the Hannitized school, which clearly has no problem with Rev. Wright’s line of so-called thought.

That’s what lefties always do to justify their politics of hatred and division.  Wright wants to drive a wedge between white Americans and black Americans, using race hatred rhetoric.  It couldn’t be clearer.

Which goes to show that half of you nit-wits aren’t even reading or understanding correctly what the pastor said.  When referring to voting for Hillary vs. Obama, he was not trying to divide whites and blacks.  He was attacking other blacks for not supporting Obama, you idiots.

When he says “Hillary ain’t never been called no Ni****r” he is saying that she doesn’t understand what it’s like to have experienced racism, unlike Obama.  Its stupid, because I don’t think Obama experienced racism the same way some people have, but also because its foolish to say such moronic things.  But it’s not racist to say someone may not have experienced racism. 

Now, take the other statement in that sermon.  “Hillery has never has anyone say she wasn’t white enough”.  Why does he say this?  Because other blacks are being prejudiced against Obama.  Thats why he follows it up with “I am tired of Negroes who just dont get it”.  Or something to that effect.  It’s about blacks, not about whites.  You fool.

Further, when idiots like Rob purposefully mischaracterize what Wright said, it makes Wright a victim.  Then, you have just turned the tables.

I am telling you, you guys keep going down this road.  It’s going to shed light on his statements and then the context will come out and you will look stupid when you see you have wrong conclusions.  Dopes!

But that is what righties do, dismiss racism for the sake of playing a victim of reverse-racism that doesn’t exist.  Hilarious.

Neither Obama nor Hillary are acceptable…

Todd?  I’m missing something here?  What are you refering to?

"Here lies, in honored glory, an American soldier, known but to God.”

The stakes are high. Whether the issue is the economy, or energy, or the federal courts or national security, the right answers are coming not from the Democrats, but from the Republicans. The surge of operations that began a year ago is succeeding. The only way to lose this fight is to quit. Richard M. Cheney, Vice President, 30 May, 2008

Hannitized, proponent of identity politics that he is, seems to hold that only the melanin challenged can be racists.

how

droll

.

racist
One entry found.

racism

Main Entry:
rac·ism Listen to the pronunciation of racism
Pronunciation:
\ˈrā-ˌsi-zəm also -ˌshi-\
Function: noun
Date:  1933

1 : a belief that race is the primary determinant of human traits and capacities and that racial differences produce an inherent superiority of a particular race

2 : racial prejudice or discrimination

— rac·ist Listen to the pronunciation of racist \-sist also -shist\ noun or adjective

Out Here
Rodney G. Graves

Ceterum censeo Parthia esse delendam
Latin: “Furthermore, Parthia (Persia aka modern day Iran) should be destroyed.”

Exactly.  And idiots like Rob who mischaractherize Wrights statements is giving truth to their claim.

There has been no mischaracterization of Wright. He was quoted fairly and accurately...if not by Rob, then by the rest of us.

Which goes to show that half of you nit-wits aren’t even reading or understanding correctly what the pastor said.  When referring to voting for Hillary vs. Obama, he was not trying to divide whites and blacks.  He was attacking other blacks for not supporting Obama, you idiots.

That’s the DEFINITION of dividing along racial lines. “Vote for Obama! He’s black and so are you!” And those who won’t toe the racial line get attacked. Good for him.

I am telling you, you guys keep going down this road.  It’s going to shed light on his statements and then the context will come out and you will look stupid when you see you have wrong conclusions.  Dopes!

But that is what righties do, dismiss racism for the sake of playing a victim of reverse-racism that doesn’t exist.  Hilarious.

You are again being a dishonest little twat. OBAMA CAN DO NO WRONG! What context makes comments like “9/11 proved that people of color aren’t going to go away just because white America wants them to”?

You have focused on one lackluster comment and ran with it, ignoring all the others.

As I proved in the MLK thread, Obama’s church is indeed built on racial seperatisim. You’re just sticking your fingers in your ears and screaming “LALALALALALA.” This isn’t a debate. It’s us all shaking our heads at what a moron you’re being.

Tell me, so you work for Obama, Hannitized?

Do you work at all?

Imagine a white candidate went to a church for 20 years where the minister preached that blacks were the problem with America or other racist theories on par with what Wright says about Jews, America, Whites, etc. And that candidate said he had close relationship with that minister, akin to what you have said your relationship with Wright has been.

Would you accept as an explanation or excuse that the candidate ‘didn’t hear those things’? That the media was cherry picking quotes? That ‘he’s like a crazy uncle’? Or you find membership in such a church and a relationship with such a minister disqualifying?

Wouldn’t a white candidate who went to such a church be unelectable and rightly so?

the AVATAR
Old Tigers are more dangerous when they believe this could be their last hunt.

From , “The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen”
Old tigers, sensing the end,
they’re at their most fierce. 
And they go down fighting.

"Hannitized”: Contrary to your assertions, Wright’s statements actually lift the rock under which “black liberation theology” is hiding, and Obama is up to his ears in that one.  We’re beginning to see what he really means by “change”.

"One must regard his leftist opponent as a parent regards his recalcitrant child. Don’t give an inch in a debate with a leftist, and you’ll soon frustrate him to the point that he falls back to his default position. He’ll gainsay your every point. He’ll even resort to calling you names and accusing you of having suspect parentage.”

BTW, David Duke quit the KKK a long time ago, but that doesn’t stop people from demonizing him for that association.  I guess “guilt by association” is only bad when it’s applied to a black guy or a communist.

"One must regard his leftist opponent as a parent regards his recalcitrant child. Don’t give an inch in a debate with a leftist, and you’ll soon frustrate him to the point that he falls back to his default position. He’ll gainsay your every point. He’ll even resort to calling you names and accusing you of having suspect parentage.”

That’s the DEFINITION of dividing along racial lines. “Vote for Obama! He’s black and so are you!” And those who won’t toe the racial line get attacked. Good for him.

Um...well if it was JUST about color, you might have a point.  But it isn’t just about color.  It’s about being prejudiced against.  Just as you would want to elect a person who came from a poor family, or elect someone who had a homosexual brother or sister (hello Cheney).  The idea is to elect someone who understands you on a deeper level.  Not to elect them because they are the same color. 

Again, YOU are making that particular statement about race and color.

You are again being a dishonest little twat. OBAMA CAN DO NO WRONG!

Hey Kenny, OBAMA DIDNT SAY THOSE WORDS.  HE DIDNT DO ANYTHING WRONG.  Sink in yet??? 

What context makes comments like “9/11 proved that people of color aren’t going to go away just because white America wants them to”?

First, that wasnt a complete sentence.

Second, you know what my friend.  I spent all last year debating on a racist blog.  Here, have a looksee.

http://freedomfolks.com/

If you spend enough time reading, you will see that some white people actually think problems go away when non-whites do.  Again, its is not racism to say that people are racist against you. 

You have focused on one lackluster comment and ran with it, ignoring all the others.

Wait, wait, wait just one second.  All of a sudden it’s OK for Rob to run with a lack luster statement, to take it out of proper context and falsely paint it as racist but it is not Ok for me to mention it????  Are you kidding me???

As I proved in the MLK thread, Obama’s church is indeed built on racial seperatisim.

Oh REALLY?  Can you prove it.  Provide one example where they state anything about racial separatism.  See, once again, you are inviting attention to something you know little about.  You just keep brining attention to your false conclusions and see how your little experiment works out.

You’re just sticking your fingers in your ears and screaming “LALALALALALA.” This isn’t a debate. It’s us all shaking our heads at what a moron you’re being.

It’s not a debate because none of you are willing to parse some of the statements made by Wright or putting them in the proper context.

Bring it.

But it isn’t just about color.

It is for Wright, Obama, and their church of black liberation theology!  That’s the entire point here, and you aren’t smart enough to realize it.

"One must regard his leftist opponent as a parent regards his recalcitrant child. Don’t give an inch in a debate with a leftist, and you’ll soon frustrate him to the point that he falls back to his default position. He’ll gainsay your every point. He’ll even resort to calling you names and accusing you of having suspect parentage.”

Barack Obama is a liar. Simple.

If he could be an active member in this church without hearing something about sermons in which the pastor blamed America with this venom, he is lying. Simple.

If we assume for the sake of argument that it’s true that he had no idea how Wright really felt about America, after 20 years of patronage, then Obama is truly naive and is not fit for the presidency. Simple.

If he doesn’t realize that Americans would view Wright’s remarks as unacceptable then he is truly far too ignorant to be president. Simple.

If you still think Obama is the candidate of choice. Then you are… simple.

If he could be an active member in this church without hearing something about sermons in which the pastor blamed America with this venom, he is lying. Simple.

It’s not.  What is going to happen when they run dates and see that Obama was on the campaign trail when these statements were being made?  Who knows, maybe they will find out he was present during one of them?  But you can’t pretend to know.  That is wrong.

If we assume for the sake of argument that it’s true that he had no idea how Wright really felt about America, after 20 years of patronage, then Obama is truly naive and is not fit for the presidency. Simple

How does Wright really feel about America?  Can you explain that to me please?  Is it any way at all similar to how Martin Luther King felt about America?  I’m not talking about the racists here, I am talking about America and American wars and what they term American “imperialism”.

If he doesn’t realize that Americans would view Wright’s remarks as unacceptable then he is truly far too ignorant to be president. Simple.

You guys still haven’t proven that you can actually parse the sermons correctly.

If you still think Obama is the candidate of choice. Then you are… simple.

None of this sticks to Obama.

I heard more about this “church” today and the more I thought about it, the more it is like the “lynching” of the Duke University players by the gang of 88 and all those who voted for Nyfong.  They, in my opinion are racist.

Communism is evil

Hannitized: We do all agree - don’t we - that a year ago Senator Obama withdrew his invitation for Rev. Wright to give the opening invocation at his campaign launch because, as Obama said to him on the phone, “Some of your sermons are a little rough.”

And, how does one ‘prove’ that he can parse sermons correctly?

"Here lies, in honored glory, an American soldier, known but to God.”

The stakes are high. Whether the issue is the economy, or energy, or the federal courts or national security, the right answers are coming not from the Democrats, but from the Republicans. The surge of operations that began a year ago is succeeding. The only way to lose this fight is to quit. Richard M. Cheney, Vice President, 30 May, 2008

And, how does one ‘prove’ that he can parse sermons correctly?

I am not exactly certain of the question that was asked. 

I am simply saying that if you are going to crucify his pastor in an attempt to bring Obama down, you had better be specific and detailed in your analysis.  Otherwise you are going to invite a lot of scrutiny and we are already seeing that some parsing of the word choice does not in fact reveal racism.  None of it from what I have heard or seen promotes separatism.

And don’t get me wrong.  I think the way this pastor acts is disturbing and I certainly wouldn’t be apart of that church.  Not just because of inflammatory comments that are made now and again, or regularly.  I would feel uncomfortable with that style of preaching and being around people who are constantly over sensitive to racial intolerance.  I think his new pastor is much more subdued.

Regardless, the duty is now upon you to back up your claims of racism and separatism.  Or, we can just safely assume that everyone who goes to Liberty University, or a Christian of Falwells church is a bigot and hate-monger that thinks we brought 9/11 upon ourselves.  Is that fair?  Certainly, as often as Falwell said that statement and as publicized as it was, we know everyone heard it, right?

You guys still haven’t proven that you can actually parse the sermons correctly.

The sermons don’t require “parsing”; they are filled with racist and AntiAmerican hate, very plainly.  They are also part and parcel of the “black liberation theology”, which is based on black victimology and hatred of “white America”.  Obama is part of that.

"One must regard his leftist opponent as a parent regards his recalcitrant child. Don’t give an inch in a debate with a leftist, and you’ll soon frustrate him to the point that he falls back to his default position. He’ll gainsay your every point. He’ll even resort to calling you names and accusing you of having suspect parentage.”

if you are going to crucify his pastor in an attempt to bring Obama down,

Oh, pul-leeease! The retarded, petulant child Han-job rears his ugly rhetoric again.

Nobody is CRUCIFYING the wrong Reverend Wright. Your careless use of language depicts the careless ordering of what passes for your mind. It is not crucifying someone to QUOTE THEM CORRECTLY, dumbass! Do you even know what crucifixion is Han-job? Do you know anything at all? Sure doesn’t seem like it from all the crap you post here!

For any voter trying to choose between the two candidates for commander in chief, there is no better test than this: When American strategy in a critical theater was up for grabs, John McCain proposed a highly unpopular and risky path, which he accurately predicted could lead to success. Barack Obama proposed a popular and politically safe route that would have led to an unnecessary and debilitating American defeat at the hands of al Qaeda.

Frederick W. Kagan

I am telling you, you guys keep going down this road.  It’s going to shed light on his statements and then the context will come out and you will look stupid when you see you have wrong conclusions.  Dopes!

Actually, i kinda figured you might be pulling for Hillary! Every time you posit some lame, shallow or sophomoric defense of the wrong Reverend Wright (in other words, your typical spew!), you merely encourage people to research him more and become more firmly convinced what a hateful whackadoo he is, and how poor Obama’s judgment must be to count this race monger as a trusted spiritual advisor! Dope, indeed!

For any voter trying to choose between the two candidates for commander in chief, there is no better test than this: When American strategy in a critical theater was up for grabs, John McCain proposed a highly unpopular and risky path, which he accurately predicted could lead to success. Barack Obama proposed a popular and politically safe route that would have led to an unnecessary and debilitating American defeat at the hands of al Qaeda.

Frederick W. Kagan

Um...well if it was JUST about color, you might have a point.  But it isn’t just about color.  It’s about being prejudiced against.  Just as you would want to elect a person who came from a poor family, or elect someone who had a homosexual brother or sister (hello Cheney).

This defense sounds idiotic in the fact that he’s talking to black people. He’s telling black people not to be prejudiced against black people? It’s drivel. He is castigating black people for not voting for a black man. End of story.

That there are tens of thousands of people talking about finally electing a black man (Article’s like “In our Lifetime"), focusing entirely on his race and ignoring his politics, shows how moronic it is. This defense fails.

If you spend enough time reading, you will see that some white people actually think problems go away when non-whites do.  Again, its is not racism to say that people are racist against you. 

It IS racist to say that 9/11 was done because of white politics in the middle east, and it showed us “people of color aren’t going to go away just because white people want them to.” The nation is not the KKK, and ascribing the mentality of a small group of racists to the entire “white community” is no less offensive than me justifing calling all blacks thieves because I was robbed by one, or calling all hispanics Illegals because some indeed are. You’re being dishonest again, and you know it.

Wait, wait, wait just one second.  All of a sudden it’s OK for Rob to run with a lack luster statement, to take it out of proper context and falsely paint it as racist but it is not Ok for me to mention it????  Are you kidding me???

It’s not OK for you to deliberately pretend the others don’t exist. The entire rant Rob is talking about was racially devisive. He posted the entire 3-5 minute clip. Stop playing victim politics.

Your quote: “And is it racist to say someone never called you a bigoted, racist term?  No.”

Ron used several quotes, not just one. IF he said that Wright said “Hillary aint no nigger”, I didn’t see it. But who cares. He also listed 15-20 other quotes. Granted, out of the quotes Rob listed, the one you like to hype wasn’t that bad...OUT OF THE ONES LISTED. You’re the only one taking things out of context. And you have the chutzpah to attack others for what you’re doing? Schmuck!

Oh REALLY?  Can you prove it.  Provide one example where they state anything about racial separatism.  See, once again, you are inviting attention to something you know little about.  You just keep brining attention to your false conclusions and see how your little experiment works out.

Well, I went into it in great detail in another thread. So rather than rehash it...I will link to that thread.
http://sayanythingblog.com/entry/what_martin_luther_king_thought_of_people_like_rev_jeremiah_wright/#comments
But here is the main point:
People who talk about being a “black man in a racist white society” do not see themselves as part of that society. They call themselves Diasporia (the scattered, or more accurately those who are displaced in a foreign land). They talk of their devotion to the mother land, Africa. Wright continually denounced America (God damn America). It is beyond clear that he sees America as being anti-black. My ex girlfriend, who would probably like me dead, speaks better about me that Wright speaks of America.

It’s not a debate because none of you are willing to parse some of the statements made by Wright or putting them in the proper context.

Bring it.

Me: Here’s why you’re wrong.

You: Out of context.

Me: Here’s the context.

You: Change the subject. You hate black people.

The old adage is true. You can’t fix stupid./

And I love the claim that the new pastor is much better and more subdued.

We mean the guy that compared the criticism of Wright to the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr., and said that the “attack on Wright was an attack on all black people.”

It is not crucifying someone to QUOTE THEM CORRECTLY, dumbass!

Well, you ARENT quoting him correctly all the time.  And when you manage to quote him correctly, you come to the wrong conclusions of what he actually said.

This mistake is made often enough to demonstrate Robs propagandist nature, and your numb-minded responses to it.  Hysterical.

Even Fox News regulars don’t think Obama should be held responsible for what Wright says.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZHATK4OjnyI

“I am sick of Negros who just don’t get it”.

Wow, he sure didnt say he was sick of white people.  Why?  Because he is talking about Black people who arent voting for Obama.

“Hillary aint never had her own people say she aint white enough”

And again...he is speaking about blacks on blacks.  Not about whites.

“and not be reduced to their level of hatred, bigotry and small mindedness”

Sure doesn’t make the words of racism stand out...does it.  Face it.  You don’t like it because of his style and motivation.

You don’t like it that white people run the country and he tells you to your face.

The amazing part is that i hear more white people defending these statements on the left than anyone else.  Why is that?  Hmmmmm?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hAYe7MT5BxM&feature=related

We mean the guy that compared the criticism of Wright to the assassination of Martin Luther King Jr., and said that the “attack on Wright was an attack on all black people.”

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4RLX_dmYKQk&feature=related

Was there supposed to be a point to that mess Kenny?

He is castigating black people for not voting for a black man. End of story.

That there are tens of thousands of people talking about finally electing a black man (Article’s like “In our Lifetime"), focusing entirely on his race and ignoring his politics, shows how moronic it is. This defense fails.

It fails in your mind because you have a subtle one Kenny.  Wrights statements clearly state experiences achieved as a result of being black.  To deny this is to deny common sense, which explains a lot about you.

You are avoiding the experience that comes with being black that speaks to differences between Hillary and Obama as candidates. 

The defense succeeds.

It IS racist to say that 9/11 was done because of white politics in the middle east,

What did the CIA mean when they used the word “Blowback”???  Run...Kennny....Run.

What did Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell say about why 9/11 happened Kenny?  Run Kenny....Run.

Ron used several quotes, not just one. IF he said that Wright said “Hillary aint no nigger”, I didn’t see it. But who cares. He also listed 15-20 other quotes.

“ROB” wrote it (see below).  Further, you are making the same argument Obama made.  FRICKING..... hilarious.

So Rob plays racial politics to divide whites from Obama and THAT is ok.  Obamas “PASTOR” say some inflammatory things that you see as racial politics and it is not.

Are you racist Kenny....or just a bad liar?

Side One:

- God Damn America
- Hillary Aint No N*gger
- Bill Treated Me Like Monica
- God Damn America (Remix)

of the quotes Rob listed, the one you like to hype wasn’t that bad...OUT OF THE ONES LISTED. You’re the only one taking things out of context.

Well then, lets play Kenny.  Parse them all.  Im game.

But here is the main point:
People who talk about being a “black man in a racist white society” do not see themselves as part of that society. They call themselves Diasporia (the scattered, or more accurately those who are displaced in a foreign land).

Just what I thought.  You got nothin.

That comes out of the perspective of liberation theology and black liberation theology. Are you familiar with Liberation Theology?  How many books of Dwight Hopkins have you read?  How many books of Cone’s have you read?

The African-centered point of view does not assume superiority, nor does it assume separatism. It assumes Africans speaking for themselves as subjects in history, not objects in history.

It comes from the principles of Kawaida, the second principle being Kuji Salawi (ph), which is self-determination, us naming ourselves, and not saying we are superior to anybody. We have no hierarchical arrangement.

When you say an African-centered way of thinking, African-centered philosophy, African-centered theology, you’re talking about one center.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,256078,00.html

It fails in your mind because you have a subtle one Kenny.  Wrights statements clearly state experiences achieved as a result of being black.  To deny this is to deny common sense, which explains a lot about you.

Fuck, you’re stupid.

Being black is not a defense to objectionable speech. Being white is not an exclusion from calling bullshit.

I have experienced more anti-white racism in my first ten years than most blacks could imagine anti-black racism.

Being. black. is. not. a. defense.

You are avoiding the experience that comes with being black that speaks to differences between Hillary and Obama as candidates. 

The defense succeeds.

I would be willing to pit racist experiences with Barack. I’d win, but you know, that’s all good.

“ROB” wrote it (see below).  Further, you are making the same argument Obama made.  FRICKING..... hilarious.

Rob copied and pasted from another site. He linked to it. The fact that you went back and copied it (yet failed to include the link) makes you a filthy liar.

Just what I thought.  You got nothin.

I had two pages of response....

That comes out of the perspective of liberation theology and black liberation theology. Are you familiar with Liberation Theology?  How many books of Dwight Hopkins have you read?  How many books of Cone’s have you read?

Granted I’ve only read 1/4 of a book of Cone’s, who is clearly a seperatist. I have no desire or time to read “whitey done me wrong” tripe. Hopkin’s just seems to be an idiot.

I have no desire to read someone who is thrown by the fact that Christians have done bad things in the past. Just reading about Hopkin’s reflections upon going to India made me think he was an intellectual midget.

The African-centered point of view does not assume superiority, nor does it assume separatism. It assumes Africans speaking for themselves as subjects in history, not objects in history.

That is Wright’s quote when called on his blatant racism. It is not the reality of the situation. Black liberation theory is based around blacks being in a society that they don’t belong to, that is against them, that hates them, that they are not. a. part. of. Them being disporia and all.

Are you going to actually adress anything I said Hannitized? Or are you just going to keep saying I can’t understand cause I’m white, and call me a racist?

What did the CIA mean when they used the word “Blowback”???  Run...Kennny....Run.

What did Pat Robertson and Jerry Falwell say about why 9/11 happened Kenny?  Run Kenny....Run.

Run, Kenny, run....are you fucking retarded? I addressed Falwell’s comments in the other post. I used him as an example of why Wright shouldn’t get a freaking pass. And I pointed out that morons like yourself were still quoting the man after he was dead...for comments that got universal condemnation from right wingers (except for Ann Coulter). I really don’t know what Robertson said, nor do I care. That’s not the point.

So, I have addressed at least 8 different points, and you have, in return responded with:
Telling me my white skin makes me too stupid to understand
Changing the subject to Robertson and Falwell (one of which I had already ridiculed)
Repeated Wright’s foolish comments
Lied about Rob
And called me a racist

Go fuck yourself you little prick.

Robs (sic) propagandist nature

Give it a rest, Brown Eyes!

For any voter trying to choose between the two candidates for commander in chief, there is no better test than this: When American strategy in a critical theater was up for grabs, John McCain proposed a highly unpopular and risky path, which he accurately predicted could lead to success. Barack Obama proposed a popular and politically safe route that would have led to an unnecessary and debilitating American defeat at the hands of al Qaeda.

Frederick W. Kagan

Han-job: First of all, thank you for not even trying to defend your careless, improper and mind-numblingly stupid use of the word “crucify”.
Second, thanks for cherry picking the statements about the wrong Reverend Wright that you care to defend. Let’s pretend the rest aren’t there, shall we?
And please tell us about the “context” for “God Damn America” and “Condamnliza Rice”. The world waits with bated breath!

For any voter trying to choose between the two candidates for commander in chief, there is no better test than this: When American strategy in a critical theater was up for grabs, John McCain proposed a highly unpopular and risky path, which he accurately predicted could lead to success. Barack Obama proposed a popular and politically safe route that would have led to an unnecessary and debilitating American defeat at the hands of al Qaeda.

Frederick W. Kagan

Proof:

“Han-job”. Heh.

A title is born.

Election ‘08 - We Are So Screwed

I hope Obama is the Democratic nominee for President, no one in their right mind would vote for this lying hyprocrite.

Both he and his wife need to move to Arfica and hate America from their.  I suggest Darfur

I have experienced more anti-white racism in my first ten years than most blacks could imagine anti-black racism.

Being. black. is. not. a. defense.

Well, I am sure you have.  The question is, how much of that racism prevented you from getting a job or ahead in life.  I would wager, none.  If you have, it still doesn’t speak to the comparison of Hillary and Obama.

The fact that you have to resort to cursing, shows us that you are loosing the argument.

Being black is not a defense to objectionable speech. Being white is not an exclusion from calling bullshit.

Excellent choice of words.  Now you can see the difference between “objectionable speech” and “racism”.  Because to talk about being a victim of racism..........is not racism.  If you talk about your victimization in the terrible way Wright did, it’s objectionable.

You still haven’t proved racism.

I would be willing to pit racist experiences with Barack. I’d win,

Statements like that, show how far republicans will go to make a point.  Additionally they prove EXACTLY why Obama could never be a racist.  Thank you for proving my point. 

That is what I have been saying all along.  These objectionable statements are made by Wright, not Obama and you just proved that it is unlikely for Obama to be apart of this victimization of racism.

You.  Are.  Brilliant.

So, I have addressed at least 8 different points, and you have, in return
responded with:

Ahh, your interpretations are not amusing.  Their inaccuracy makes you trite and childish.

Telling me my white skin makes me too stupid to understand

I never said that and you know it.  Once again you cry racism where it is not warranted.  Proving this is all you have.  Lame.

I said its about experience.  To deny this is both dishonest and/or stupid.

Changing the subject to Robertson and Falwell (one of which I had already ridiculed)

Oh, gee, well since you already ridichuled it, I might as well never touch the valid point again...eh Kenny?

You know what I already ridiculed?  That YOU are changing the subject from Obama to Wright...and blurring the lines.  Then, I point out how hypocritical wingers are, because we are condemning Wrights statements, but that aint good enough?

Repeated Wright’s foolish comments

And you repeat Hannity’s foolish comments and Robs....and?

Lied about Rob

It was an honest mistake, and you guys are lying about Wright and Obama.  And?

And called me a racist

I asked if you were, I didn’t call you a racist, because your statements look an awful lot like Wrights to me. 

Besides, you guys are the ones calling Obama a racist.  How does it feel?  Do you even see the irony?

Go fuck yourself you little prick.

And with that, we see, who is really loosing the argument.  Keep talking.

First of all, thank you for not even trying to defend your careless, improper and mind-numblingly stupid use of the word “crucify”.

Look boy wonder, I addressed your childish point.  I quoted him accurately, YOU guys misquoted Wright through proxy and you all mischaracterize his statements.

Nobody is CRUCIFYING the wrong Reverend Wright. Your careless use of language depicts the careless ordering of what passes for your mind. It is not crucifying someone to QUOTE THEM CORRECTLY, dumbass! Do you even know what crucifixion is Han-job?

When I am not completely bored with your stupidity, I sometimes cherish the opportunity you often provide to make you look foolish.  There are so many precious moments to prove what a complete moron you are.

Read em and weep, you moron.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/crucify

cru·ci·fy (krs-f)
tr.v. cru·ci·fied, cru·ci·fy·ing, cru·ci·fies
1. To put (a person) to death by nailing or binding to a cross.
2. To mortify or subdue (the flesh).
3. To treat cruelly; torment: crucified the awkward child with teasing.
4. To criticize harshly; pillory: The media crucified the politician for breaking a campaign pledge.

Proof.  You are no challenge to me.  If and when I feel like responding to your childish tripe, I will.  Until then, please keep offering up precious gems like this so I can show the audience who is the one who deserves the respect.

That comes out of the perspective of liberation theology and black liberation theology. Are you familiar with Liberation Theology?  How many books of Dwight Hopkins have you read?  How many books of Cone’s have you read?

H,

I sincerely doubt that any of the controversy surrounding Wright’s rhetoric is likely to hurt Obama in his quest for the Democrats’ nomination.  But if he is successful in his campaign over Hillary, this millstone is likely to get unbearably heavy.

Whether Kenny has read any of Cone’s work or that of Hopkins, or whether you or I have read them is irrelevant.  What matters is the 25 to 40 million independent and moderate voters who will remember “God Damn America” on election day, and very little else.

Those who are familiar with so-called “black liberation theology” are most likely already aligned with Obama, and almost certainly with the Democrats in general.  Which means for purposes of this discussion, and for purposes of Obama’s intended election in November, their knowledge and their ballots are meaningless.

Know how many of those 25 to 40 million voters care about Hopkins or Cone?  Don’t bother taking off your shoes.  Your toes will not be needed!

“Poverty of goods is easily cured; poverty of the mind is irreparable.”

What matters is the 25 to 40 million independent and moderate voters who will remember “God Damn America” on election day, and very little else.

Exactly.  This is the very conversation I had with my friend in San Diego.  I told him it was a problem for Obama with the independents.  It was part of his appeal.

It is also a problem for some Democrats who arent completely familiar with Obama and his background.  This is why you will see an emphasis made to look at how Obama was raised and where he was raised.

While phone banking for Obama this weekend, (to remind to vote for State Delegates that could in turn into Superdelegate votes) I had this discussion with Hawaii voters. 

All of us who live or grew up in Hawaii know that blacks don’t suffer the sort of racism you see in the mainland or urban areas such as Chicago. 

I am not going to say it’s not an issue, but certainly it is unfair, in my opinion to peg Obama as a racist.

H,

Whether Barack Obama is a racist or not is irrelevant to me.  From my point of view there are plenty of issue-based reasons to vote against him that have absolutely nothing to do with race.

Of course, to be honest, I don’t much care who is or is not a racist.  The word is grotesquely overused… usually by people on the Left who are incapable of making a more advanced argument on the merits.

I also abhor the use of the word “fair” or “fairness” in a political context, nor have I any use for so-called “hate crimes” laws.  But that’s a whole other discussion.

“Poverty of goods is easily cured; poverty of the mind is irreparable.”

25 to 40 million independent and moderate voters will remember this…

That prediction overlooks millions upon millions of registered democrats and republicans who - in the privacy of the voting booth - will remember it also.

Today Senator Obama gave a good speech - not a great one - but a good one; yet he failed to free himself from the web he is tangled in. He is now in a “catch 22”, where every effort to defend or disavow Rev. Wright, where every effort to disassociate his campaign from race, where every effort to move on, only further intensifies the very question which he and his campaign worked so hard to avoid at the outset: As a black man, how much of his campaign is about race?

"Here lies, in honored glory, an American soldier, known but to God.”

The stakes are high. Whether the issue is the economy, or energy, or the federal courts or national security, the right answers are coming not from the Democrats, but from the Republicans. The surge of operations that began a year ago is succeeding. The only way to lose this fight is to quit. Richard M. Cheney, Vice President, 30 May, 2008

pparets,

You are correct on both points.  I deliberately overlooked the registered Republicans and Democrats, assuming that most of each group would vote for their respective party nominee in any case, and that ultimately, as is usually the case, the election in November will be won or lost in the middle among the independents and so-called “moderates.”

And your take on Obama’s speech was dead on as well.  He did not really disavow Wright, nor clear up questions of his judgment in choosing Wright’s church and maintaining his membership there, but instead tried to make his relationship with his pastor an acceptable part of who and what he is.  Almost as though it has just now dawned on him that however far to the left he goes to defeat Hillary for the nomination, he will have to move that much farther back toward the center for the general election.  One more reminder of just how far to the left the Democrat party has been moved in recent years.

Come November, Obama’s race, and his pastor’s racism will be largely irrelevant.  But the phrase “God Damn America” will be the death knell of an Obama presidency.  Obama has nothing to offer the American voter but platitudes and judgment.  His speech was a good speech, and in a way, a courageous one as well.  But it did nothing to put to rest questions about his judgment.  And the platitudes are already on the teleprompter.

“Poverty of goods is easily cured; poverty of the mind is irreparable.”

To criticize harshly; pillory:

Again, Han-job, for the slowest among us (that would be YOU, dumbass!)

It is not crucifying someone to QUOTE THEM CORRECTLY

And why would you pick such a weasel word as “crucify” to describe shining the light of day upon the wrong Reverend Wright’s statements?
Could it be that the lying piece of scum that is perpetually calling Rob a liar and a propagandist is trying his own limp hand (pun intended) at being a propagandist and only failing miserably because of his own limited intelligence?

For any voter trying to choose between the two candidates for commander in chief, there is no better test than this: When American strategy in a critical theater was up for grabs, John McCain proposed a highly unpopular and risky path, which he accurately predicted could lead to success. Barack Obama proposed a popular and politically safe route that would have led to an unnecessary and debilitating American defeat at the hands of al Qaeda.

Frederick W. Kagan

thanks for cherry picking the statements about the wrong Reverend Wright that you care to defend. Let’s pretend the rest aren’t there, shall we?
And please tell us about the “context” for “God Damn America” and “Condamnliza Rice”. The world waits with bated breath!

Han-job: Seem familiar? It’s the question you haven’t (can’t?) answered.  You say Wright’s words are taken out of context. I ask you to provide us with the context. Your answer, much like your mind, is totally absent!

You are no challenge to me.

Correct! Because I ask honest questions of honest people. You are disingenuously dishonest.

Can you provide the proper context for

“God Damn America”

and

“Condamnliza Rice”

And although your one-handed typing is prodigious, try not dodging and ducking the question, or trying to obscure the question with irrelevant information.

Or just go back to the kiddie pool.

For any voter trying to choose between the two candidates for commander in chief, there is no better test than this: When American strategy in a critical theater was up for grabs, John McCain proposed a highly unpopular and risky path, which he accurately predicted could lead to success. Barack Obama proposed a popular and politically safe route that would have led to an unnecessary and debilitating American defeat at the hands of al Qaeda.

Frederick W. Kagan

He is now in a “catch 22”, where every effort to defend or disavow Rev. Wright, where every effort to disassociate his campaign from race, where every effort to move on, only further intensifies the very question which he and his campaign worked so hard to avoid at the outset: As a black man, how much of his campaign is about race?

I can see how some would think that way.  However, I don’t see that at all.  Up until this became an issue, none of these questions passed our minds.  The people who could be offended by this connection were unlikely to vote for him based on his race.

Democrats, and some independents will be faced with a decision, should he be lucky enough to win the nomination.  Do they believe a man that has presented himself as honest, forthright and speaks of unification of the country?  Or do they succumb to the pressure of those who wish to perpetuate the seeds of division, and turn on the very principle that probably made them want to vote for Obama in the first place?

In all honesty, Hannitized, I don’t think most people support Senator Obama on principles. He simply hasn’t articulated any principles to support, unless one regards ‘hope’ and ‘change’ as principles.

That’s the very reason why people are so alarmed at the Rev. Wright issue. They are wondering if his statements might not be the ‘principles’ which Obama has not defined.

They support him as an articulate, exciting and attractive young man who seems “in touch with the times”, but that will fade. What is missing for the Senator from Illinois is experience and statesmanship. In eight more years, he will be a far better, matured candidate.

I like the guy. I just think his politics need to be tested and forged in the real world. He’s just not ready to be President of the United States.

"Here lies, in honored glory, an American soldier, known but to God.”

The stakes are high. Whether the issue is the economy, or energy, or the federal courts or national security, the right answers are coming not from the Democrats, but from the Republicans. The surge of operations that began a year ago is succeeding. The only way to lose this fight is to quit. Richard M. Cheney, Vice President, 30 May, 2008

Maybe “Hannitized” sees no need to put “God Damn America” into context because he feels the same way himself?

For any voter trying to choose between the two candidates for commander in chief, there is no better test than this: When American strategy in a critical theater was up for grabs, John McCain proposed a highly unpopular and risky path, which he accurately predicted could lead to success. Barack Obama proposed a popular and politically safe route that would have led to an unnecessary and debilitating American defeat at the hands of al Qaeda.

Frederick W. Kagan

Hannitized is very big on toddling in and calling names and vilifying Rob and his opponents, but seems awfully short on substance when asked to back up his assertions (and assumptions! He’s BIG on assumptions!) and the simplest of questions! (Designed specifically to match his mentality!)

Brown eyed turkey (Han-job) says the remarks are “out of context”. When said brown eyed turkey is asked to provide the context of two specific statements, Hannitized is missing in action. Maybe we could put his picture on a milk carton?

For any voter trying to choose between the two candidates for commander in chief, there is no better test than this: When American strategy in a critical theater was up for grabs, John McCain proposed a highly unpopular and risky path, which he accurately predicted could lead to success. Barack Obama proposed a popular and politically safe route that would have led to an unnecessary and debilitating American defeat at the hands of al Qaeda.

Frederick W. Kagan

Hannitized’s picture on a milk carton. Imagine the possibilities!

For any voter trying to choose between the two candidates for commander in chief, there is no better test than this: When American strategy in a critical theater was up for grabs, John McCain proposed a highly unpopular and risky path, which he accurately predicted could lead to success. Barack Obama proposed a popular and politically safe route that would have led to an unnecessary and debilitating American defeat at the hands of al Qaeda.

Frederick W. Kagan

Lose of appetite and reduced milk sales?

Out Here
Rodney G. Graves

Ceterum censeo Parthia esse delendam
Latin: “Furthermore, Parthia (Persia aka modern day Iran) should be destroyed.”

Obama is toast, I believe. 

This all get’s down to Black Liberation Theology.  When the words of Wright are first heard by most people, they think he’s a ‘nut case’, not realizing that there is a greater context of BLT. Just the words themselves tend to turn all but true believers away.  Contrary to what Hanibama has said above, once the context of Wright’s words are dicovered, the situation for Barack Obama becomes worse! 

The foremost BLT preacher says:

Black theology refuses to accept a God who is not identified totally with the goals of the black community. If God is not for us and against white people, then he is a murderer, and we had better kill him. The task of black theology is to kill Gods who do not belong to the black community. . . . Black theology will accept only the love of God which participates in the destruction of the white enemy. What we need is the divine love as expressed in Black Power, which is the power of black people to destroy their oppressors here and now by any means at their disposal. Unless God is participating in this holy activity, we must reject his love.

- James Hal Cone (from Wikipedia)

Now this quote and others like it are getting out on blogs and airwaves.  The realization among many is that Obama BELIEVES this stuff.  It’s not a case of a nice but ‘crazy’ uncle that lets slip once in a while.  It’s actually CORE BELIEF of the entire church.  Now we know why the Obamas have never been proud of America.  They’ve lived and breathed BLT for at least 20 years, probably longer given Michelle’s thesis.  They’ve supported it with tens of thousands in contributions.  Michelle honestly hated America until she was surprised to find that America doesn’t actually hate blacks, that white men could actually vote for Barack in greater numbers than they voted for his white opponents.

Just in the last couple of days, I’ve heard blacks and whites on the radio and in blog comments indicate that they voted for Obama in primaries, donated money, etc., but now CANNOT vote for him.  These are primary voters, not just the masses who might happen to make it to a major election. 

I now wonder if it might not be the best strategy for Republicans preparing to vote for Hillary to turn around and vote for Obama?

Q. How can you tell when Hannitized is lying (or full of crap)?
A. He types stuff!
You don’t think he was insincere when he went on, and on, and on about the context of the wrong Reverend Wright’s remarks, and then refuses (or is unable) to provide any context in which

God Damn America

Condamnliza Rice

or

The US of KKKA

For any voter trying to choose between the two candidates for commander in chief, there is no better test than this: When American strategy in a critical theater was up for grabs, John McCain proposed a highly unpopular and risky path, which he accurately predicted could lead to success. Barack Obama proposed a popular and politically safe route that would have led to an unnecessary and debilitating American defeat at the hands of al Qaeda.

Frederick W. Kagan

Obama had risen above race in his campaign until it became clear that he spent nearly 20 years as a member of a radical, white-hating church.

This is more than mere “guilt by association"--it’s an affirmation of how Obama (and certainly his wife) want to share Sundays with their children listening to the rants of an anti-American nut case preacher.

Obama’s speech was eloquent, but unconvincing and now he’s been reduced to just another black candidate who is unelectable in a national contest.

If Hillary is nominated because the Democrats realize that Obama can’t win the presidency, the blacks will first riot in the streets (I’m hiding under the bed at home on that night!) and then they’ll stay home on election day like pouting children.

The Democrats have a problem.

Obama’s speech was eloquent,

The question is why didn’t he leave that church? Why didn’t he leave—why doesn’t he leave even today—a pastor who thundered not once but three times from the pulpit (on a DVD the church proudly sells) “God damn America”? Obama’s 5,000-word speech, fawned over as a great meditation on race, is little more than an elegantly crafted, brilliantly sophistic justification of that scandalous dereliction.

For any voter trying to choose between the two candidates for commander in chief, there is no better test than this: When American strategy in a critical theater was up for grabs, John McCain proposed a highly unpopular and risky path, which he accurately predicted could lead to success. Barack Obama proposed a popular and politically safe route that would have led to an unnecessary and debilitating American defeat at the hands of al Qaeda.

Frederick W. Kagan

The link to Charles Krauthammer

For any voter trying to choose between the two candidates for commander in chief, there is no better test than this: When American strategy in a critical theater was up for grabs, John McCain proposed a highly unpopular and risky path, which he accurately predicted