Have you read this interview of Senator Obama below?

Any comments?

http://www.audacityofhypocrisy.com/2008/06/06/barack-obama-the-2004-god-factor-interview-transcript/?loc=interstitialskip

Jim C

You’re describing descrimination… not racism.

Jim C

“Being politically incorrect”

and

“Keeping it real”

People do not want to admit the possibility that what they say about people is sinful and dirty and/or suspect.

Using Senator Obama’s middle name is NOT racist, and I personally don’t even consider it in that instance as being such, but something worse, actually.

Mainly for the REASONS I gave David in my response #37, it certainly isn’t something ANY so-called Christian who has any sense of walking in the spirit should do.

Instead of submitting to that call (walking in the spirit, comparing spiritual thoughts with spiritual words) they get tacky and trashy and swear up and down that people should have “thicker skin”. This is the talk of carnality. Some things you have NO business letting fall outta
your mouth.

All things are lawful, but not expedient.

People who call names and hide behind their liberty is weak in the flesh AND spirit and are walking in one of the things the Father hates – cowardice. I don’t care how good they THINK they are.

But I will say that even though LaShawn is a devout Christian woman, not all the participants on this blog are, and even amongst those who declare to be so, there are varying degrees of submission and understanding of certain spiritual things, which explains a few things.

He said this at Indianapolis during his campaign and he was specifically referring to the words “coercion” and “invasion” in reference to the actions of South Carolina.

Lincoln was certainly a great wordsmith and the source of many important quotes. But sometimes a quote needs context to make sense. This particular quote caused Lincoln a fair amount of trouble with the Ohio delegation and he was forced more than once to plumb the meaning he intended.

I am not quite certain how it is meant to apply to this discussion thread and perhaps the person who posted it might have some enlightening words.

Could you please give an example?

It could, or not be, discrimination based on race.

As heliotrope wrote, it could merely just be coincidental that the person(s) against whom you choose to discriminate may differ from yours.

But if it’s already a given that it’s not racism to include his middle name to refer to him, then the matter is settled, is it not…unless the objective is to convince someone that you are above that sort of thing.

At the end of the day, as the conscience of this nation regarding charity towards their fellow man is waning, the war of attrition remains, whereby people are violently asserting their right to say whatever they want about whomever they want without any fear of reprisal or rebuke. It’s George Jefferson vs. Archie Bunker reborn.

Some of us are caught in the web of “choosing” whether we are “black” or “white” or “mixed” or just good old American mongrel. But that doesn’t wash for many in “black” America. They are as strident about the one drop rule as the good old boy redneck racists ever were.

Barack has chosen the utility of black victimhood while offering himself as having a magic foot in the door of white power. I marvel that he hasn’t discovered that he has a second middle name which is Bolivar. He sure would be using it loud and clear if it were.

Since there is no biological explanation for race, it is necessary for the race crowd to define it to their particular needs. If you are a basic jerk living among people of different color and attitudes than you, you might assume they are racists when they steer clear of you.

Discrimination is the key here. I choose who I associate with. When I work with street level alcoholics (and I do) I do not bring them home with me. That is because I actively discriminate against their conduct and persons and find them unfit for inclusion in my private life.

A neighbor is a flaming religious fanatic. I have heard his stuff for years and you can not say good morning without getting a full blast of “repent and be saved” in return. I avoid him like he has a case of fleas while still trying to be polite. That is not always easy with someone who insists on forcing his views on you.

All of this is to say that much of what some people who are stuck on “racism” are experiencing is the reflection of their own baggage and character.

If I remember correctly, it wasn’t conservatives that initially brought up Barack’s middle name. That was all initially put out by the Clinton camp in an email that included pictures of Obama in Kenyan garb. They counted on the American people to not know the difference between muslim dress and Kenyan dress. And, lets face it, I sure didn’t know the difference at the time. So, they were hoping to portray Obama as an Islamic manchurian candidate.

As far as why we emphasise it now, as was pointed out above, perhaps it’s to draw attention to Barack’s ties to radical black Islam in the form of the Nation of Islam and Louis Farrakhan. Ties that he does have — and are quite legitimate to point out.

Perhaps in some cases (like the Clinton camp’s attempts) it’s to instill fear that he’s some sort of Islamofacist manchurian candidate. I don’t really know. Either way, I don’t believe that it’s racist to point out his middle name.

Racism is defined as discrimination based on race… not religion. In other words, if people choose to not vote for Obama because he may be Muslim that’s not racism. However, if they were to choose to not vote for him because he’s black… yes, that is racism.

Thanks,

Jim C

Thanks for orienting the discussion in a more fruitful direction as it had gone off the tracks. My bad.

Onward…

You are so right. When one’s self worth is predicated upon externals, it is really difficult to see those externals challenged. Sad really.

As for Wikipedia, I do find it helpful for a basic overview and segue to other sources of info. Should it be at the top of the food chain? My guess is that most folks only want science cliff notes.

The problem you describe is as old as science itself: reputable, intelligent scientists bitterly clinging to theories that slowly lose their scientific basis. Off-hand I can name three other examples: the steady-state universe, race science, and the luminiferous aether.

BTW: when I was doing an Internet search to check the spelling of the scientific theories I listed I noticed that Wikipedia was at or near the top. Scary, eh?

In a word, “No.” Your interpretation is well off the mark. Not only have you missed what I meant, but you seem to have missed what was written…

“In reality, white Americans are so repulsed by real expressions of racism that skinhead orgs and other sundry trash have been turned into utter pariahs.”

I ask:

Really? Skinhead orgs and other sundry trash are “real” expressions of racism in America?

Seems like you all have settled the racism problem though.

And, since it has now been “proven” that man-made global warming disproportionately attacks minorities, to question its’ tenets most definitely makes one a racist.