Race, race, race. Can’t get away from it.
By now you’ve heard about a new AP-Yahoo News online poll that shows blacks and whites hold different views on race. Newsflash, right?
Generally speaking, blacks and whites don’t agree on how much racial prejudice exists and who’s to blame for such perceptions, and it didn’t take a poll to determine that. Fifty-seven percent of blacks said “a lot” of racial discrimination exists, and only 10 percent of whites said the same. A third of whites said “most” racial tension is caused by blacks, and only three percent of blacks said the same.
It would be helpful to know how individuals define prejudice and discrimination. The two aren’t wrong per se. We prejudge and discriminate all the time, as well we should. People my age and under have a twisted view of racism. Jim Crow was racism; jailing black men, who commit a disproportionate number of crimes, at higher rates is not.
The only newsworthy part of the poll is the contention that Barack Obama’s skin color will cost him six percent of the vote. If it weren’t for racial prejudice, Obama would get about six percent more support, according to the survey. That is, there are whites who won’t vote for him because of his race. In the same regard, some people will vote for him because he’s black. Both can be said and calculated about John McCain. But harping on Obama’s skin color gets more attention and generates more discussion.
Now this is rich: a white Democrat named Kelly Edmondson, who apparently participated in the survey, works with black students. She said hardworking and intelligent describe most blacks “very well,” and lazy and irresponsible describe most blacks “somewhat well.” Confusing. How many degrees different are “very well” and “somewhat well”? How can most blacks be hardworking and lazy?
What do you think of the lazy-and-irresponsible stereotype (a conventional, formulaic, and oversimplified conception, opinion, or image)? Are you willing to honestly express your views about it on this blog? Share your views about the poll, too.
By the way, stereotyping isn’t wrong per se, either. People of all races do it from time to time.
{ 58 comments }
I have been married to a Mexican for 20 years and am white. Until I married I had no idea the degree of racism and stereotypes that exist. It does not hinder my family, it only made me aware and more able to see in discussions both sides.
I have seen and heard stereotypes from even my own siblings. I was asked when my oldest was a baby if I tanned him(like in a tanning booth!) When he had a normal fender bender as a teen- I was told “well what do you expect from the son of a Mexican!” As if this would make me jump ship and agree about Mexicans.
A coworker of husband says she only dated white men because Mexicans are lazy…yet my Husband is a coworker and she sees daily his work ethic!
I will say this in this long winded comment: I believe that the government has been an enabler in the self fulfulling prophecy for the poor inner city minorities. Due to handouts and whatever, the divide has increased and separated, and the bar is lowered because they are black or brown or whatever. Then when test scores are low the inner city schools plead for more money…and the government complies…without requiring results because they are-well inner city minorities(which in my opinion reveals governments racism-thinking that minorities cannot do things all by self, and are really inferior).
What to do? Well I do not ever see racism disappearing. I do believe that the more we blend the more that see the big picture…but I will still be told all about illegals, pickers, and those that steal all the jobs that hard working(ie white people) would be doing, even though my husband was born in the United States, served in the military and in Law Enforcement.
Oh and I will not be voting for race…(but Life so not Obama) and I cannot support a woman who will be lifted as the ROLE model for mothers who has been out of the home for most of her childrens lives…
Jennifer
LaShawn, what is the purpose of this?
This blog topic is as race baiting a “topic of discussion” as anything any liberal would post. I’m sorry Lashawn but I really see no difference. What type of discussion are you really encouraging here?
You’ll probably get a lot of “hits” on your blog for this, but nothing worthwhile will come of it in my opinion.
I’m not sure whether or not you’ll get anything decent generated from this, although I think you’re trying to get dialogue from whites and blacks so that we can perhaps come to a better understanding.
Regardles, I’m white, middle class, Christian (unfort not a good one, I’m afraid…)….I think “Lazy and irresponsible” applies to ALL race and background. I know some white people who fall into this category, I know some blacks who do. I work with MANY Black people who are much more intelligent than I am and work their rears off. So I don’t think many of the stereotypes apply to them. I know their kids too. REALLY nice, smart, well spoken and hard working kids.
It’s how you raise your children that define them (and to a point yourself).
I also don’t think using stereotypes is altogether bad, or altogether good. People must remember generalizations are …not always correct.
“Race” is the elephant in the room. Is that an eternal, immutable truth? Shall we whistle past any discussion and just continue to stew in juices of our own notions about “race”?
As I have noted in the past, “race” does not exist from a science perspective. The old caucasian, mongoloid and negroid classifications that guided the thinking of early anthropology has been shattered by DNA findings.
So we are left with: “I may not be able to define race/racism, but I know it when I see it.”
So, we are talking about prejudice here. No one seems to think much of a huge per cent of blacks backing Obama. Apparently, that is deemed an understandable, non-racial perspective.
Apparently, if whites won’t vote for Obama because he is black is important on some level. That is to say, those whites are acting in a negative manner. That is deemed a bigoted, racial action.
Then there are those people who will not vote for Obama, but not because of this race. However, it seems OK for others to assure us that those people are telling lies and are, in fact, racists.
Obama has clearly indicated that he expects his race to work against him. Is that “playing the ‘race card’” or is it an immutable truth? Of course, if it is a well known fact, then it need not be spoken. The “race card” has some utility in predicting the cause of defeat and for urging people to vote to offset the “bigot” vote.
Nothing could sway me to vote for Obama. He could not be the candidate if he were white. It is entirely his race and being “clean” and “articulate” that have put him where he is. I do not care to have a president with those attributes as his main qualifications.
If he had served on the PTA, become the mayor of a small town, earned the governors seat and held to conservative principles, I would not only vote for him, I would be active in spreading the word.
But, when he has no definable set of principles or experience that resonate with the common voter, it all boils down to hope, change and race. And of these three amorphous concepts, race is the old divider and stinkbomb.
I do not see how anyone can refuse to discuss “race” and then turn around and use “race” freely in their observations. If anything is hypocrisy, that has to qualify.
Help me here, I’m told if Obama wins it is NOT because he’s Black, even though the largest number of Black people are supposed to vote in history.
Yet, if Obama loses it’s Because he’s Black. My neighbor, a Black lady told me this yesterday, and my mouth fell open, I think that American people will not elect a “Socialist”, be he or she be Green or Orange,
and one more thing, I think it is a shame that the Democrats, chose a man with such a large amount of baggage, the wild church, questionable friends,… and there are times when he seems be almost afraid, and that comes across loud and clear it almost seems to be a recipe for failure. I’m sure there are more electable men of color out there.
thanks for your time
Whatever, heliotrope. I talk about the social construct of “race” in my observations because I’m the most qualified person on this blog to do it, based on those observations – and how they grieve the set-apart spirit of Yahweh.
I don’t use my partisan beliefs to hide behind my prejudices like MOST people do, especially conservative Christians (because unfortunately I tend to get named amongst them..), so let’s not get it twisted up in here.
I’m prejudiced against lawless believers who know more about their parties talking points than Yahweh’s mandates about how mankind should behave and walk in His sight.
So my main problem is that the people (here) who claim to be on the apex of rightness in the partisan realm, don’t know jack about what the Father expects when it comes to these unfortunate sensitive matters, and I also hate for my sister (LaShawn) to make herself a willful target when truly righteous observers see how people are going to respond to such a topic.
Big Doddy I’m with you completely!
And why is it that everyone says that we never discuss race and it’s an “elephant in the room”. We talk about race ALL THE TIME! The problem is the way we talk about it. Just like discussing politics, people have their staunch beliefs that aren’t going to change no matter what someone else says.
I am white and ny spouse is black. We have been married for 30 years. So I’m hardly a racist.
What I do find racist is that some 90 % of black voters are voting for Obama. Why ? Only because he’s black and “its about time a brother gets to be President, the old white guys have been messing things up for years”. Ya doesn’t matter what the agenda (socialist) of said “brother” is, “we just want a brother in there “.
As for OP question of blacks being viewed as “lazy” etc. I think a lot of that comes from what the Democrat war on poverty did, make a welfare state which in the end severely damaged the black family . Many black women on welfare with children and no fathers etc. Several generations of that mindset has created a vast number of problems. The government basically encouraged black women to feel they did not need a man (or it was easier to boot out your man rather then try and work things out) because the governemnt would give her a check and be the daddy.
THEBIGDODDY:
Is LaShawn your “sister” in conservative political accord, or perfect religious agreement or by skin color?
La Shawn,
I saw the same article and blogged about it myself. In short, I think the writers of the article and some of the professors they quote are being disingenuous.
If you look up the full-text poll results PDF, you find that on the question of “Does the fact that if elected, Barack Obama would be the first black president of the United States make you more likely to vote for him, less likely to vote for him, or does it not affect your vote either way?”, the responses were “more likely” 9%, “less likely” 9%, “won’t affect my vote” 82%. Whatever losses Obama will incur due to his race are offset by gains due to his race.
“Is LaShawn your “sister” in conservative political accord”
Only in that we might be classified along the lines of independent conservatives. She’s a lot more tolerant and has a lot more respect for mainstream conservatives of the Christian persuasion than I do.
“or perfect religious agreement”
What’s that?
“or by skin color?”
We have mutual manifest destiny here in Babylon because of the pigmentation we share in common, but that doesn’t make her my sister – so nope.
She’s my sister because I truly believe she believes in and desires to worship the god of the Bible. That’s why.
I can put sundry Theological differences and world views aside without being a punk and a hater. Which is MOST (male) conservative pundits and commentators are. And I realized that I needed to stop naming names because they advertise and do talk-backs and ping-backs here and I don’t want to soil my sisters rep with them, but they know who they are.
I’m glad she’s doing what she’s doing. I just don’t care much for the company she keeps, but I don’t pay her bills or sign her paychecks, and my name isn’t on her birth certificate so who cares what I like. As a grown woman, I’m down with her doing her thing and hope she gets crazy rich in the process.
CL,
Marrying, adopting, or breaking bread with someone of a different classification doesn’t disqualify you from being a racist suspect. Sorry.
The stereotypes of ALL classifications of people are spiritual issues, and exist amongst ALL groups equally.
Show me a violent black and I’ll show you white embezzler. Show me a white serial killer, and I’ll show you a Latino drunkard. Show me a Latino con-artist and I’ll show you an Asian coward. Show me an Asian misogynist and I’ll show you a black witch.
All of those things Father Yahweh hates equally.
People are not as good as they think they are. Father Yahweh sees EVERYTHING.
People need to stop using their partisan beliefs to hide their prejudices, because Father Yahweh gives men the authority to call them out, but you need to watch out for who is doing the calling…because for every criticism of Jeremiah Wright, I can find one for Kenneth Copeland. Both are, if truth be told, lawless Christian preachers who may have actually occasionally said something Biblically correct.
It’s BELIEVERS who need to come correct, not heathen liberals and conservatives of the secular persuasion.
(People who claim to be) Believers need to stop acting like them so much. It’s a very very very bad look.
Well, every time THEBIGDODDY gets his dander up he rails about “punks” and “haters.” Such as:
In my “hood” punks are homosexuals. I am not informed what makes a “hater.”
It turns out that LaShawn is a “sister” because THEBIGDODDY finds that LaShawn meets this qualification:
Why God is a little “g” is beyond me. But then, I find an enormous difference between the God of the Old Testament and the God of the New Testament.
LaShawn writes as a Christian and the God of the New Testament. After reading the words of THEBIGDODDY, I can not say whether his God ( Father Yahweh) bridges the Old and New Testaments or whether He is some hybrid deity revealed to THEBIGDODDY and his immediate associates.
Until THEBIGDODDY stops pontificating in tongues, we mere mortals will stand aside and await clarification. Perhaps Father Yahweh will zap THEBIGDODDY with an epiphany.
If people look at the poll and the specifics of the questions and how the results were tabulated, you will see the poll is a crock of bunk.
heliotrope says:
“Well, every time THEBIGDODDY gets his dander up he rails about “punks” and “haters.”
TBD says:
So.. you think I’m angry, huh? Typical. Dander? Really?
heliotrope:
“In my “hood” punks are homosexuals. I am not informed what makes a “hater.””
TBD:
So?
heliotrope:
“It turns out that LaShawn is a “sister” because THEBIGDODDY finds that LaShawn meets this qualification:
I truly believe she believes in and desires to worship the god of the Bible.”
TBD:
So what’s it to YOU how I reckon myself with LaShawn? You and JB kill me with that. LaShawn Barber is not your Hottentot Venus, you dig? You need to mind your own business, sir.
heliotrope:
“Why God is a little “g” is beyond me. But then, I find an enormous difference between the God of the Old Testament and the God of the New Testament.”
TBD:
I don’t. He is the Elohim of ALL…from Ester to Sha’ul. Again…what’s it to you? You trying to debate Biblical Theology up in here? I wouldn’t advise it.
heliotrope:
“LaShawn writes as a Christian and the God of the New Testament. After reading the words of THEBIGDODDY, I can not say whether his God ( Father Yahweh) bridges the Old and New Testaments or whether He is some hybrid deity revealed to THEBIGDODDY and his immediate associates.”
TBD:
Yahweh is god of ALL mankind. Period. If you don’t like it, too bad.
heliotrope:
Until THEBIGDODDY stops pontificating in tongues, we mere mortals will stand aside and await clarification. Perhaps Father Yahweh will zap THEBIGDODDY with an epiphany.
TBD:
If you want to know who He is…study. It’s not my job to teach you anything, especially on this blog.
Darkstar is right!!! The poll nudged answers in a preconceived direction for political reasons.
Earlier today, when I first read LaShawn’s post, I examined my attitudes about ethnic groups, beginning with whites. After a minute or so, I realized that I had no big-picture concept of whites. None…nada…. From there, I considered hispanics and blacks. I couldn’t come up with a big picture there, either.
Pretty soon, it became obvious to me that IF I delineated a group people it is far more likely to be along divergent viewpoints and specific behaviors in a statistical format.
To me, affinity is overwhelmingly mental/spiritual.
Marrying, adopting, or breaking bread with someone of a different classification doesn’t disqualify you from being a racist suspect.
Wow. Who woulda thunk it? Beneath the outwardly placid and normal-looking exterior of this embittered God-and-guns-clinging typical white person might beat the heart (if it can be called that) of a ragin’ conservative punk hater racist. Please don’t tell my black wife.
I guess that if someday my family and I wake up in the middle of the night to find a burning cross in our yards or anti-black racist slurs scrawled on our front door I can name myself the prime suspect. Who am I to go against DODDY’s narrative?
Maybe he’ll go away if everyone ignores him.
It’s funny how you guys always prove my point.
Mwalimu says:
“Wow. Who woulda thunk it? Beneath the outwardly placid and normal-looking exterior of this embittered God-and-guns-clinging typical white person might beat the heart (if it can be called that) of a ragin’ conservative punk hater racist. Please don’t tell my black wife.
I guess that if someday my family and I wake up in the middle of the night to find a burning cross in our yards or anti-black racist slurs scrawled on our front door I can name myself the prime suspect. Who am I to go against DODDY’s narrative?”
TBD says:
That’s dramatic and weak…not to mention completely out of synch with what I wrote.
If you’re going to yoke up with someone of a different persuasion, then you need to be able to buck up in the spirit AND the flesh when confronted by those who might seek to subvert the sanctity of your union, sir. And not by the acrimonious sentiments of the common hoodrat bigot, but by the cosmopolitan face of global patriarchal white supremacy and its agents thereof.
If you were a man of righteous understanding and not only loved the person you married, but had godly love and empathy for every OTHER human being who looked like her then you then you would not have taken what I wrote personally.
In other words, if what I wrote didn’t apply to you, then keep it moving, sir. It doesn’t change the fact that I’m right about what I wrote and know what I’m talking about.
Correction:
“And not [SOLELY] by the acrimonious sentiments of the common hoodrat bigot,…”
Now here is a mystery:
I, for one, rarely get the point when TBD fulminates.
Believe me the white folks that are not voting for Obama would have no trouble and would vote for Michael Steele or JC Watts in a heart beat. That ought to tell you something. Its the POLICY and AGENDA of Obama not his color!
“Fulminates”
Typical.
Maybe that can be added to the Yahoo Poll of descriptions for non-white males. If we don’t engage by YOUR terms, we’re liable to be any NUMBER of things, right heliotrope?
And you all wonder why I come at you the way I do. You’re not as good as you like to pretend you are – which is the cusp of my ‘ire’. (Another one of heliotropes descriptors of my posts)
“Believe me the white folks that are not voting for Obama would have no trouble and would vote for Michael Steele or JC Watts in a heart beat. That ought to tell you something. Its the POLICY and AGENDA of Obama not his color!”
What are Michael Steele and JC Watts’ qualifications for POTUS?
Moreover, what is the demographic of people who voted for them in their PRESENT capacity?
We’re talking about POTUS. It wouldn’t matter which of your favorite token black was running, they’d get run through the ringer just as bad.
White liberals would show their true colors and spirit if Colin Powell were running just like white conservatives are showing their true colors and spirit with the Obama campaign.
Once this dies down, perhaps people will settle down and accept the fact that THIS sort of event is inevitable and deal with their cognitive dissonance and sin – and cope.
Senator Obama just happens to be the one to break the hymen of the seared conscience and spirit of America regarding this particular matter.
It’s BELIEVERS who need to come correct, not heathen liberals and conservatives of the secular persuasion.
(People who claim to be) Believers need to stop acting like them so much. It’s a very very very bad look.
Comment by THEBIGDODDY
With all due respect, the harsh tone with which you seem to lace the majority of your comments with, not to mention the general arrogance with you tend to speak…..well it’s a very bad look in its own right.
This is the Obama effect.
So it’s a style and personality issue, eh, Marvin, as opposed to the topic..ie racial perceptions, how people behave and regard those who don’t like them, and the role of the believer to set a different standard.
And as far as arrogance is concerned, it’s not the worst thing one can be called, and is earned. 22 years of teaching and exhorting and helping people overcome strongholds of ignorance that leads to fear has qualified me to talk about this matter the way I do, amongst other things.
You see me as harsh, yet I see a bunch of dudes ganging up on someone because they don’t like or accept convictions from certain types of people as infinitely worse.
“What are Michael Steele and JC Watts’ qualifications for POTUS?”
++++++++
LOL…I certainly think they are just (if not MORE) qualified as Obama, and they don’t come with shady background and laundry list of terrorist friends, hate-monger pastor or felony convicted business dealing partners, wives who are “for teh first time” proud of the country-to start with. To start with !
I wasn’t comparing them to Senator Obama.
I’m aware of all the talking points that conservatives are taught when deriding individuals, but all I asked for was their qualifications.
I’m not familiar with TBD’s Yahweh, but in any case it is clear that Obambi’s god is mammon and death.
For this reason, any faithful Christian will want to avoid him, lest the millstone’s vortex drags us down with him.
As some have noted, I too care not about one’s “persuasion” of complected-ness, rather the “persuasion” of their character, moral values and beliefs. Obambi is sorely lacking in all three.
Hi La Shawn,
I think in order for you to evaluate the answers you receive about differences of perception between blacks and whites it would be helpful to know the ethnicity of the respondent. So for the record, I am a white, 56 year old female.
I don’t see how anyone can consider your blog on this topic “race baiting.” These days you can’t ask a legitimate question or have a valid opinion on anything without being labeled something nasty. It’s similar to disagreeing with a homosexual about choice versus a genetic connection. If you dare to say you believe they’ve chosen that lifestyle rather than having had it thrust upon them by a set of genes, you are quickly labeled a homophobe.
I absolutely believe blacks and whites have different perspectives on the very same subjects, but so do men and women. I can never turn my skin black or “grow a set.” I’m a white woman. I can no more know, feel, think or experience the world and how it treats me as a black person than I can relate to the world as a man would. Here’s a good example: My husband begins eating his dinner and says to me, “Where did you buy these steaks?” I frantically respond, “Why, what’s wrong with them?” Now, frightened and confused, he’s looking at me wondering, “Oh great, now what have I said or done wrong?” After a bit more discussion I learn his question was meant only to relate that the steaks were delicious, so he’d like me to buy more from the same store. He quickly learns the estrogen freak who prepared dinner thought he hated the steaks and was highly disappointed with the meal she’d placed before him. That’s just the way the world is for now.
I wish I could speak more freely with the black woman upstairs. We talk a lot on the phone, visit each other, exchange recipes and food, and provide transportation for each other when needed. We refer to ourselves as friends and speak of our friendship. Yet I feel that we are really only acquaintences because there are things we can’t discuss, the old “elephant in the room” bit. She thinks Obama’s “the One.” I think he’s a socialist in Dem’s clothing. His race means nothing to me, it’s his policies I can’t abide. But I fear an in-depth discussion with this lady could evolve into a racial wall being thrown up between us. Anyway, I just hate that and wish it weren’t that way.
So, I’ve tried to give you a little perspective from my place in this world. I like your blog, La Shawn, and look forward to every new entry. I’ve never felt your questions, musings, or opinions were in anyway antagonistic or biased, so please don’t let comments like the “race baiting” thing get to you.
Vicki in TN
So…am I prejudiced because, as a black woman, I adopted a black child…or because I did not adopt a non-black child?
To me, that is what most of the race conversation has been. If white people don’t vote for him because he’s black, they’re prejudiced. But if black people vote for him because he’s black…that’s not prejudiced (as in, prejudged…he’s prejudged to be a positive with blacks but a negative with whites)?
It’s so hard being a conservative black person in America. I’m surprised because I’m always hearing about all the tolerance and encouragement of diversity that abounds in this country!
Andy,
Are you a Bible believing Christian, and how long have you been saved?
Vicki says:
“I don’t see how anyone can consider your blog on this topic “race baiting.” These days you can’t ask a legitimate question or have a valid opinion on anything without being labeled something nasty.”
TBD:
It depends on who is participating. It’s like me going to a Nuwabian message board and telling them how much I enjoy spending time with my 18 month old white god-son. They don’t give a damn about him – or me for bringing it up. This is the same deal.
Vicki says:
“It’s similar to disagreeing with a homosexual about choice versus a genetic connection. If you dare to say you believe they’ve chosen that lifestyle rather than having had it thrust upon them by a set of genes, you are quickly labeled a homophobe.”
I can’t say that they are similar.
It can’t be argued that the color of one’s skin is genetic. But it is/has been debated as to whether homosexuals are created or made.
And the mainstream rejection of the two entities occur for different reasons, as well.
Homosexuals are not uniformly considered to be violent, angry, oversexed, lazy, unpatriotic, ungrateful, unintelligent, irrational, and host of other things.
The interesting thing is that the new mainstream trend (talking point) is to say that not only are these things pervasive, but it’s that LIBERALS and the Democratic party have enslaved “those people” and have them brainwashed into a stronghold that keeps them all there and made them failures as a race of people.
So no, it takes people of great understanding and knowledge of spiritual matters and HISTORY (not to be confused with NOSTALGIA that ignores sin and ungodliness) to have edifying discussions about matters of race.
You don’t find that much anywhere in cyberspace, not that I’ve seen.
How come everyone was all focused on New Orleans when Gustav came along. They even delayed the Republican Convention. But when Ike ripped up Galveston, the only thing we got was Geraldo being knocked over.
New Orleans after Katrina was turned into racial symbolism. And the idiot mayor was not only given a pass, but reelected. Did anyone notice how things work when you act like a grown-up? Nagin learned from Mississippi and Alabama and Bobby Jindal that talk is cheap and hard work saves lives. Nonetheless, Bush still gets blamed for the Katrina lack of intelligent preparation in New Orleans.
This type of injecting race into events is almost a national sport. Who needs old fashioned prejudice when professional race card players will show up at the drop of a hat?
TBD, I’m a Christian because I believe that Christ is the Son of God and died for our sins, PERIOD. There is no “seniority” credit given by God. Either one believes or one doesn’t and is judged accordingly. I also believe that the Bible is totally inspired by God (Jehovah).
The two are interrelated on in so far as the Bible guides me in how I should live my life as a Christian, and it informs me as to the character and mindset of God.
That said, Christians are told to judge other Christians by their fruit. In Obambi’s case, he is like the barren fig tree. He talks a good talk on the surface, but plainly lacks depth — ie, the moral question of abortion is “above his pay grade”.
When it comes to theology, he and his beloved pastor are whited sepulchres. Come to think of it, his grasp of the constitution is pretty shallow as well.
You see me as harsh, yet I see a bunch of dudes ganging up on someone because they don’t like or accept convictions from certain types of people as infinitely worse.
Comment by THEBIGDODDY
I don’t SEE you as harsh…you ARE harsh. My point was for someone who decries such treatment, it is ironic that you tend to demonstrate said behavior in spades.
As for what you see as worse, without a specific example, it is too much of a broad statement to really be of any meaning. For example, if someone is as pro-abortion as Obama is, frankly such an attitude should be “ganged up on” and derided. This can all be done in a loving fashion, but for the sake of the unborn, it must be done.
Andy,
I’m not talking about “seniority” I’m talking about maturity and understanding in the flesh AND spirit.
As well, you can’t say any more or less about Senator Obama’s character than one could say about Senator McCain’s character and be truly unbiased unless you do it from the side of godly grace and mercy.
Some Liberals run Senator McCain down about his previous marriage and his behavior toward his former spouse. No doubt it was a bad scene, worthy of scrutiny, but he should be given the same leeway as former President Clinton. No matter the venue for that type of lasciviousness, they are/were both adulterers.
As far as their Theology is concerned, you surely have the right to dissent, but remember that the behaviors and practices of the contemporary Christian church as a whole can also be scrutinized, so as YOU grow in your study, you should be prepared to defend that as well.
Senator Obama can’t and won’t address Black Liberation Theology fluidly because he doesn’t know it, and can’t. You all, for some reason, give him a lil too much credit in that regard. He’s a brilliant and highly intellectual man, but he’s no more or less Berean than most Christians in this day and age.
You’re saying Senator Obama is lacking in all three…well that’s kinda whack. You’re judging him by what YOU value FIRST, then what little you might know of scripture.
Go by what you know of SCRIPTURE first, (Not a heathen liberal/conservative talking point. In fact, if they aren’t saved – just don’t even include them in the equation) then put him up against all you can dig up on Bill Cosby, Alan Keyes, Michael Steele, Thomas Sowell, Colin Powell, Sidney Poitier, JC Watts, Eddie Murphy, Larry Elder, Michael Jordan, Vernon Jordan, Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton..and see who is really good or bad or just doing the things that men do.
People hold Senator Obama and Senator McCain to certain standards, but I hold conservative believers to a higher one until they behave according to the full counsel.. not just abortion and homosexuality.
“Chosen One” “Messiah” “Saviors” are easily 3 things a believer should never let come out of their mouths or keyboard when referring to this man. They reason they don’t get it is because of a woeful lack of spiritual understanding AND/or rebellion. Because there is nothing funny or cute about it in any context. This dude is a politician. He ain’t the savior of black people, or ANY people for that matter.
Marvin says:
“I don’t SEE you as harsh…you ARE harsh. My point was for someone who decries such treatment, it is ironic that you tend to demonstrate said behavior in spades.”
TBD says:
If I’m harsh.. I’m in awesome company, unless you have forgotten things you have written or SEEN written by others. Surely you don’t believe in double standards, do you Marvin? My harshness inveighs on sullied spiritually unbecoming behavior, not because of my covert prejudices. There is a difference there.
Marvin says:
“As for what you see as worse, without a specific example, it is too much of a broad statement to really be of any meaning.”
TBD:
Marvin:
“For example, if someone is as pro-abortion as Obama is, frankly such an attitude should be “ganged up on” and derided. This can all be done in a loving fashion, but for the sake of the unborn, it must be done.”
TBD:
I have no problem with that, but no one refers to him with any human dignity or loving dissent BUT me up in here. I have shared my extremely serious concerns with him and his campaign, as well as the people at Trinity in ways that would not be appropriate or palatable to this forum (and not in a vulgar way either) as opposed to fronting on line.
This is why I know that what YOU all THINK about his association with Trinity AND how much he even UNDERSTANDS and supports regarding BLT is baseless.
Senator Obama has trying to get where he is now for a long long time, and once you get over the fact that a black dude is the presidential nominee, you’ll get some perspective. I don’t expect it to occur anytime soon, but one day people will say, ‘oh yeah, I remember him, that guy with the Arab name who did such and such’.
Believe me we’ve seen worse than Senator Obama, and we WILL SEE worse, because the worst is already amongst us.
If I’m harsh.. I’m in awesome company, unless you have forgotten things you have written or SEEN written by others. Surely you don’t believe in double standards, do you Marvin?
No I don’t. But I am not the one railing at people for their harsh tones. I happen to believe that there is a time and a place for harshness. Jesus certianly used harsh messages we He saw fit.
My point was it is ironic that you seem to be calling upon Christians to strive for a higher level of discourse, all while the propensity of your comments are dripping with disdain.
This is why I know that what YOU all THINK about his association with Trinity AND how much he even UNDERSTANDS and supports regarding BLT is baseless.
Senator Obama has trying to get where he is now for a long long time, and once you get over the fact that a black dude is the presidential nominee, you’ll get some perspective.
Is this directed at me personally or at conservatives in general?
Thanks Marvin for responding:
“No I don’t. But I am not the one railing at people for their harsh tones.”
TBD:
So you think it’s REALLY about harsh tones with me? You think that’s my real annoyance, Marvin?
Marvin:
“I happen to believe that there is a time and a place for harshness. Jesus certianly used harsh messages we He saw fit.”
TBD:
So only YOU or certain people determine when rebuff is given and how it’s given, when the people on the Hastings thread are asking if the man has a piece of bacon in his mouth? Shucking and jiving? And even the sage of this blog making racialist comments like this:
‘But where do black Republicans come from? They make it to Congress on white votes. They make it on merit. Perhaps they will get a certain “coattail effect” from their skin color among black voters, but I suspect not much. In fact, I suspect that any black vote based on race is cancelled by white prejudice vote.”
So ‘white votes’ are the ones given on MERIT, as opposed to other votes, Marvin? This is the type of discourse that you all let fly, but when someone else enveighs based on spiritual calling and principles, he’s the harsh one full of ‘ire’ and has his ‘dander’ up? Really Marvin? This is enlightenment, accountability and the high road of superiority that we conservatives espouse to over trashy vulgar liberals?
Marvin:
“My point was it is ironic that you seem to be calling upon Christians to strive for a higher level of discourse, all while the propensity of your comments are dripping with disdain.”
TBD:
Yes, because I do have disdain. You will NEVER see me call Senator Obama “Messiah” or some other silly name. You will never see me talk about this man’s wife or any other man’s wife or children, like I’ve read christian conservatives refer to them as “bratty” and “disruptive” during the DNC. And I BET you don’t believe that a fellow conservative would say such a thing, do that do you? Do you? You wouldn’t believe that our fellow conservative would call Senator Obama a “half-breed mongrel” and his wife an “ugly, angry, wench”, and NOBODY say a single thing. But..but..when TBD says we are BETTER than trashy liberal heathens who call Senator McCain a crusty old white man, I’m wrong.
Accountability. We’re trying to work to evolve and rebuild the conservative principles that we know work, but we want to act just as bad as those whom we disagree with. This is my point.
And nothing is personal against you, even though YOU came at me personally. I know you’d likely pass on me speaking for you or higher conservative principles (that reflect the spirituality that so many claim, at least in word), but I’m right Marvin. I’m right.
TBD says: “I’m not talking about “seniority” I’m talking about maturity and understanding in the flesh AND spirit.”
Andy says: “How long” one has been saved has no bearing on maturity in flesh & spirit, hence the useage of seniority. I seem to recall a recent post where TBD claimed to be more mature/understanding due to seniority. If you want the gist of the breadth and depth of my maturity & understanding, then peruse LaShawn’s archives as far back as you may care to go — Search term “Andy” is a good start
Crux of TBD’s paras 2 & 3: “No matter the venue for that type of lasciviousness, they are/were both adulterers.”
Andy: As was King David & murderer to boot, so what’s the point? We’ve all railed on McVain for his faults and ideology, as we have on any other candidate. As long as we have the right & power to vote, it is our prerogative and duty to put each candidate thru the wringer.
Until Palin came on the scene, I was prepared to write in either Barr or Mickey Mouse. She has her issues, but I could live with President Palin over Obambi any day.
Crux of TBD’s paras 4-6: “you should be prepared to defend that as well.”
Andy: Always ready to defend the faith. Obambi can’t, because he’s manifestly not even a “babe”, let alone a Berean — 2 Tim 2:15. Speaking of which, I await for any one Berean-quality pearl of wisdom to fall out from your scribblings.
TBD: “Go by what you know of SCRIPTURE first, (Not a heathen liberal/conservative talking point. In fact, if they aren’t saved – just don’t even include them in the equation)”
Andy: I think most of us are aware that even the most heathen can be annoited of God to rule. It’s one thing if a so-so, or weak Christian runs for elected office and we take him as is. It’s another thing for a supposed christian to allow messianic comparisons to be attributed to him by the unwashed masses, and even deign to speak for the Saints — yet none can point to even one fruit of his christianity.
That then raises an important question. If the “messiah” is not of Christ, then who is he? The foretold Antichrist? All that charisma and hype, certainly gives credence to the latter. However, with all prophecies considered, he’s not likely to be THE Antichrist, but Obambi sure is doing a bang-up job of being a little antichrist. Perhaps a trial run for the stooge, before Satan brings out his puppet.
Finally, the color of your skin means nothing in God’s eyes, you and I are just souls in the mist of time. So why do you insist on looking thru Satan’s lens of divisiveness? For me, it doesn’t matter if Obambi is purple and from the North Pole, my distaste for him centers on his piggish record (abortion, hanging out with crooks and terrorists, and his Marxist-Alinksy philosophy) tarted up with pseudo-christian lipstick.
“I wasn’t comparing them to Senator Obama.
I’m aware of all the talking points that conservatives are taught when deriding individuals, but all I asked for was their qualifications.” big daddy
hum…well then just who were you comparing them to ? You OUGHT to be comparing them to Obama(remeber him the One who wants be the most powerful man in the world). WHAT IS HIS EXPERIENCE ? man of 57 states . Speaking of talking points liberals always like to evade real issues and skirt them under a veil false pontification.
The point here is a black man may well make an excellent president just as any other man of color would. the point is THIS “One” WON’T.
And teh point is JUST because he IS black is not a reason for 90% of black voters to vote for him. Quite frankly the impression one might get is that as long as the man is black he could be a dog catcher and some would vote for him. Let’s not care about destroying the country with a socialist/ marxist agenda lets just get a brother in. And THAT is racism at its highest.
CL, Amen!!
Oh…two on one…big fun…
Andy:
“As was King David & murderer to boot, so what’s the point? We’ve all railed on McVain for his faults and ideology, as we have on any other candidate. As long as we have the right & power to vote, it is our prerogative and duty to put each candidate thru the wringer”
TBD:
It’s your prerogrative…okay, let’s put that statement up as a sticky note, shall we?
Andy:
“Until Palin came on the scene, I was prepared to write in either Barr or Mickey Mouse. She has her issues, but I could live with President Palin over Obambi any day.”
TBD:
Okey dokey, my young Christian buddy. Obambi, huh?
Andy:
“Always ready to defend the faith. Obambi can’t, because he’s manifestly not even a “babe”, let alone a Berean — 2 Tim 2:15.”
TBD:
Oh yes he is.. and so are you. You’re very young all around, dude.
Andy:
“Speaking of which, I await for any one Berean-quality pearl of wisdom to fall out from your scribblings.”
TBD:
Young. I’ve quoted and know more scriptures in context than you or anybody you know, dude. I’ve put them up selectively, but this isn’t really the place for that, but I can if you’d like.
Andy:
“I think most of us are aware that even the most heathen can be annoited of God to rule. It’s one thing if a so-so, or weak Christian runs for elected office and we take him as is. It’s another thing for a supposed christian to allow messianic comparisons to be attributed to him by the unwashed masses, and even deign to speak for the Saints — yet none can point to even one fruit of his christianity.”
TBD:
I can. Fidelity. (But I’m sure you don’t believe that, right?)
Andy:
“That then raises an important question. If the “messiah” is not of Christ, then who is he? The foretold Antichrist? All that charisma and hype, certainly gives credence to the latter. However, with all prophecies considered, he’s not likely to be THE Antichrist, but Obambi sure is doing a bang-up job of being a little antichrist. Perhaps a trial run for the stooge, before Satan brings out his puppet.”
TBD:
That’s very clever and snide, but baseless. Those are all your talking points and hold not spiritual bearing or validation. Saying Senator Obama is the anti-Messiah is giving him waaay more credit than he deserves. When the son of perdition rears his head, you’ll know it. Well, maybe you won’t.
Andy:
Finally, the color of your skin means nothing in God’s eyes, you and I are just souls in the mist of time. So why do you insist on looking thru Satan’s lens of divisiveness?
TBD:
I don’t insist on looking at anything the way you frame it, neither do I stand complicit in any of the workings of haSatan. Do you even know who the Adversary is, Andy? That’s YOUR filter, for if you even dug or understood the message I’ve been sending, you wouldn’t even be hollering that mess out. You are out of your league, bro.
Andy:
“For me, it doesn’t matter if Obambi is purple and from the North Pole, my distaste for him centers on his piggish record (abortion, hanging out with crooks and terrorists, and his Marxist-Alinksy philosophy) tarted up with pseudo-christian lipstick.”
TBD:
You have a great sense of humor though. I have a lot more respect for you than I do some of the other closet racialists up in here. Great response, bro.
Round two: CL..
CL says:
“hum…well then just who were you comparing them to ? You OUGHT to be comparing them to Obama(remeber him the One who wants be the most powerful man in the world). WHAT IS HIS EXPERIENCE ? man of 57 states.”
TBD:
Should you two cats be at Band Practice or something..?
Hey, I never said he had enough experience to be President. Ah..the gaffe.. don’t they ALL make them though. Gaffes are easy to pick up and pick on. Good one.
CL:
“Speaking of talking points liberals always like to evade real issues and skirt them under a veil false pontification.”
TBD:
“False pontification”? What’s that? I’m not talking about Liberals. I’m talking about how conservatives are. Are you a liberal? I know I’m not. What?
CL:
“The point here is a black man may well make an excellent president just as any other man of color would.”
TBD:
What??
CL:
“the point is THIS “One” WON’T.”
TBD:
Never said he would. I’m not voting for him, so.. okay.
CL:
“And teh point is JUST because he IS black is not a reason for 90% of black voters to vote for him.”
TBD:
I could explain why that is, but it would go over your head. Not to mention that the 90% figure is probably kinda high and is just another number thrown around by white conservatives to make non-whites look stupid and tribalist. Get that crap outta here. Americans are tribalist, bigoted, and lawless all around. You can’t pin that on people just because they have found novelty in the first black Presidential nominee. Get some maturity and perspective. This is all going to wear off. Stop believing everything you read on the blogs. Adopt a pet or something.
CL:
“Quite frankly the impression one might get is that as long as the man is black he could be a dog catcher and some would vote for him. Let’s not care about destroying the country with a socialist/ marxist agenda lets just get a brother in. And THAT is racism at its highest.”
TBD:
It’s not racism, but it sure is stupid – I’ll give you that, but as I said before.. get some historical (not nostalgic) perspective, and you’ll learn empathy in the process.
Things are not always what they seem, and sometimes they are quite simple.
The reason we can’t get away from race in this election is due to the left keep bringing it up every 3.4 seconds. Obama brings up race, his koolaid following kooks keep bring up race, and the media that worships Obama keep bring up race. How can it not be ignored? They are already saying that if he loses it was because of him being black. You have black Obama supporters aka ludacris saying that when Obama win he’s going to “paint the white house black. Then you have blacks that are saying there will be race riots if Obama lose. If only Obama and his flock could run on the issues instead of desperately needing the crutch of race to support his campaign.
On ONE hand, people say “ya’ll are obsessed with “race”.. race race race.. but then on the other hand you have other people saying “why can’t we talk about the elephant in the room?”
I said it’s not the topic, it’s the spirit of the people doing the talking. Americans don’t know jack about how to reconcile ethnic differences. It’s a spiritual, supernatural thing to be able to love people regardless of their persuasion, and not only love them, be mature enough not to say ANYTHING stupid and out of pocket in ANY context.
Since people can’t do that, it’s an accursed conversation, as opposed to a blessing that gives honor to Father Yahweh’s design.
THEBIGDODDY of “punks and haters” fame intones
I guess that “speechless” would be my reaction to that one.
That’s cause there is nothing to say, heliotrope, and you know it, sir.
Wow! There can be no good relations between races or ethnic groups unless there is a spiritual, supernatural “thing.” I imagine that each participant would have to be imbued with that spiritual, supernatural “thing.” I pity the person who is locked into this mindset. It is so full of gloom, pessimism and petty defeat that it ordains that no one need make the effort to bridge the gap.
*sigh*
I’m talking spiritual matters that only the Holy Spirit can do, and you’re talking about the flesh.
As such it’s obvious why we disagree on matters of justice, mercy, and faith.
Plus, no one said anything about not buckling down and coping with people of different persuasions, but OBVIOUSLY it doesn’t work for people as well as it should, right?
And my whole point is that so-called believers shouldn’t be in the flesh when dealing with such matters, because the flesh is at enmity with Father Yahweh. If it weren’t then we would not have as many issues as we do.
My view is that spirit filled people don’t struggle with offending or not offending or being named amongst those who would be accused of such things because they know how to treat people.
As far as your objection to the supernatural aspects of loving your neighbor, I can’t address it, because it’s not one of those things that’s debatable. If you want to give people a pass on mistreating people who are different than they are, that’s on you. But I don’t play that, and I will talk about people who DO play that.
And it appears that’s where folks dissent with me, sir.
TBD,
Over a period of time, I have found myself wondering what I have said that gave you whatever impression of my views that you seem to have. One of your comments above illuminated something for me.
You said, “I’m talking spiritual matters that only the Holy Spirit can do, and you’re talking about the flesh.”
I thought it worthwhile to clarify something.
Often, I am focused upon microeconomics while you emphasize compassion and spirituality.
Yet, I cannot help but think that spirituality has to be translated into a real world metrics. Compassion has to be compassionate. So often, those who love others a lot, do things that hurt others a lot.
Where we are missing the boat is that I assume compassion as the baseline for my comments.
Meanwhile, I do not care to make assumptions about the baseline for others and simply take their comments as written. I no more want to be the repository for all that is negative among fiscal conservatives than I imagine any liberal wants to be the repository for those on the fringes.
Meanwhile, I am focused upon the practicalities and don’t take the time to say the lofty stuff. In a way, I feel that constantly reaffirming my “love for my fellow man” would be embarassingly preening.
I also draw a huge distinction between wanting to do good and knowing how to do good.
I see that my failure to articulate my ultimate goals has created an unfortunate impression.
For me, it has always been far more important to examine what a man does than what a man says.
Meanwhile, I spent decades overseas working with the poor, always from a perspective that was market based.
So, when I am criticising policy or statements that I view as mistaken, it cannot be inferred that I am ying-yanging against the poor or the downtrodden. I have been in those shoes too much of my life to go down that road.
I am ying-yanging against poor policy or flawed statements.
Does this make any sense to you?
Excellent pearl of wisdom here: “There can be no good relations between races or ethnic groups unless there is a spiritual, supernatural “thing.””
And what, pray tell, of the spiritual & supernatural thing that is aka Satan, lord and master of the principalities under Heaven (Eph 6:12)? “Bad” relations between races & ethnic groups are but another tool that the angel of light uses to deflect focus from Christ.
So far, seems to me that you have a beef with infidelity to the exclusion of bona-fide fruits of the Spirit (Gal 5:22 & Eph 5:9). Even the unbelievers know a thing or two about fidelity, to whit, King Abimelech when he sought after Abraham’s “sister”. So fidelity to one’s spouse(s) is not much of a mark of the Christian.
(As an aside, interesting that God stopped Abimelech from taking Sarah, but didn’t stop Abraham and Hagar. So now we have to deal with the modern day Arabs & Islamofascists — chew on that)
Come to think of it TBD, the cadence of your incoherent rhyme and reason brings me to mind of a troll or two that used to haunt this corner a couple of years back. You selectively flit from one vague meme to another without laying one concrete thot that can be tried and tested scripturally.
Instead of addressing the merits of the subject at hand, you expend your time attacking people you don’t even know. When marginally challenged, you hide behind claims of age, maturity, wisdom or some mystic To-Be-ology.
You name-drop the Bereans, yet you babble on like a fool with hardly a shred of logic.
If you’re really older than Helio, myself and some others, then you’re senile. In fact, the way you come across the screen, you’re more apt to be a prepubescent teen tossing out canards. In either case, you’re a poseur.
When called out, you wiggle out with the typical lame dodge: “…but this isn’t really the place for that, but I can if you’d like.”
Really? Bring. It. On.
To quote one old lady; “Where’s the beef?
Until then, I’m going to ignore your new-age psychobabble.
JB,
What you write makes perfect sense, JB.
This is what I’ve been talking about..
“1 Corinthians 2:12-14
12 And we have received, not the spirit of the world, but the Spirit that is from Elohim, in order to know what Elohim has favourably given us,
13 which we also speak, not in words which man’s wisdom teaches but which the Set-apart Spirit teaches, comparing spiritual matters with spiritual matters.”
**People at odds with one another is not a government matter or a partisan matter, it’s a spiritual matter. And spiritual people MUST put their partisan prejudices aside, if they are walking in HIS spirit or even HAVE His spirit dwelling on the inside, to even discuss it.
As well..
“14 But the natural man does not receive the matters of the Spirit of Elohim, for they are foolishness to him, and he is unable to know them, because they are spiritually discerned.”
**Which is where I got off myself. I assumed you knew I was talking about it from a spiritual point of view, even though you perhaps assumed nothing spiritual about my style. That’s quite understandable.
“15 But he who is spiritual discerns indeed all matters, but he himself is discerned by no one.
16 For “Who has known the mind of Yahweh? Who shall instruct Him?” But we have the mind of Messiah.”
The mind of Christ GIRDS us when PRACTICAL matters stall. And it’s the spirit of the Almighty that lets us know that it’s time to look DEEPER into why things have stalled.
YOUR approach is a great approach, but don’t assume my approach isn’t the same. What I’ve been inveighing here is not me in totality. I agree that compassion isn’t nearly as much about giving a hand out, but it’s PUTTING a hand out. It’s up to the other person to get up, reach up, out or around, or whatever to take that hand. I don’t play THAT either.
Kee in mind, Y’Shua said “come”, he didn’t say “stay right there, and I’ll come take care of you..poor baby”. That’s not gospel.
Remember, we are both conservatives…we are just different kinds of conservatives. I’m a Network Engineer by trade, and a Bible teacher by calling. I know when it’s time to use a velvet glove, and a time to use a skillet.
I think I understand you a lot more JB, and I know that Father Yahweh is please by that; and that’s really ALL that matters.
We have to compare spiritual THOUGHTS, WORDS, and DEEDS, with the same.
THEBIGDODDY notes
And LaShawn asked
So THEBIGDODDY tells us what only the Holy Spirit can do and rails at “talking about the flesh.”
I was once an intelligent person. But this is making me stupid. I surrender. But I will still strive to treat all races and ethnic groups with respect and brotherly love without regard to their race or ethnic group. Even if that is something only the Holy Spirit can do. Ooops. I’m feeling a bit more stupid.
Comments on this entry are closed.