View Full Version : FOX Lies!! Barack Obama Pastor Wright
chosenbyone
03-22-2008, 06:39 AM
I was going to post this video on another thread, but I didn't want it to be missed. We've heard all the spin about Reverend J. Wright's (Obama's pastor) sermon after September 11. I had just about lost faith in Obama's judgement like so many others until I stumbled upon this video. I certainly had to repent last night for judging others after I heard what Wright had said before and after the snipit that played over and over on television. It was POWERFUL!
It was a shame that the mediia chose to take Wright's words out of context in order to create strife among the public and to help form doubt on a man of integrity. This video will surely cause everyone to see that they were played by the media just like me.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=QOdlnzkeoyQ
Rhoni
03-22-2008, 06:50 AM
Thank-you for sharing this with us CB1.
Blessings, Rhoni
Does that mean you are going to discount the plethora of racial comments made by Wright that have been documented over the past 20 years. One cannot deny his anti-semtic actions by embracing Louis Farakhan. One cannot deny Wright has made racially charged statements that would make Don Imus look like Billy Graham. Wright, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Farakhan want us to believe the black man is still a victim. If we could quarantine about a dozen of the so-called black leaders, 95% of the race problems would be eliminated.
I'm tired of being told I need to be color blind while the blacks are being told the white man is to blame for their failures. Wright needs to teach blacks how to rise above mediocrity instead of blaming white people for their lack of success.
Someone needs to tell Wright it is not the white man's fault a a high percentage of black men father children out of wedlock. Someone needs to tell the naacp it's not the white man's fault a lot of black kids are in single parent homes.
Blacks need successful role models like JC Watts, Clarence Thomas. Colin Powell, Condoleeza Rice, TD Jakes, Thomas Sowell, Larry Elder. These are a few of many blacks who rose above their situations and became the best. These people transcend race. These people have made Martin Luther King Jr's dream a reality.
Michael The Disciple
03-22-2008, 08:11 AM
True or not true that Wright and Obama ACCEPT GAY MARRIAGE?.
He is quoting an Ambassador in this chickens to roost comment....
He makes a powerful point about America's indignant approach .... to terrorism ...
His point was violence begets violence .... context is important ...
I will not excuse may of his other quotes but it would be interesting to hear the context of his other quotes ...
Lastly we know that the Clintons have called the Manguns their pastor ....
I wonder what would happen if one got some Mangun quotes ... and made a montage ... if he could be painted as a fanatic ....
This idea that we are going to hold our politicians fully accountable for the words of their pastors will not fly.
His "God ************ America" is in context of all govt's rising and falling .... German, Japanese, British ... etc.
Strong words and not appropriate but they add context to the statement ...
http://www.youtube.com/v/RvMbeVQj6Lw&hl=en
The language no doubt still remains inflammatory ... but how is it different with Kenneth Phillips preaching on the urban legend of Operation Shekinah ... or Irvin Baxter making recent American legislation acts in cohoots w/ the Anti-Christ ...
I am wary of preachers talking politics from the pulpit ... but I know I've heard many a preacher say that God will judge America for it's sins.
Brother Price
03-22-2008, 08:46 AM
This man is sick.
jaxfam6
03-22-2008, 08:47 AM
Does that mean you are going to discount the plethora of racial comments made by Wright that have been documented over the past 20 years. One cannot deny his anti-semtic actions by embracing Louis Farakhan. One cannot deny Wright has made racially charged statements that would make Don Imus look like Billy Graham. Wright, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Farakhan want us to believe the black man is still a victim. If we could quarantine about a dozen of the so-called black leaders, 95% of the race problems would be eliminated.
I'm tired of being told I need to be color blind while the blacks are being told the white man is to blame for their failures. Wright needs to teach blacks how to rise above mediocrity instead of blaming white people for their lack of success.
Someone needs to tell Wright it is not the white man's fault a a high percentage of black men father children out of wedlock. Someone needs to tell the naacp it's not the white man's fault a lot of black kids are in single parent homes.
Blacks need successful role models like JC Watts, Clarence Thomas. Colin Powell, Condoleeza Rice, TD Jakes, Thomas Sowell, Larry Elder. These are a few of many blacks who rose above their situations and became the best. These people transcend race. These people have made Martin Luther King Jr's dream a reality.
Amen
Oh and don't forget Bill Cosby. Not only is he funny but he doesn't support casting blame on others for your own problems.
I noticed that Wright had to mention that he saw 'Black' people jumping to certain death in that clip. Most white or hispanic ministers I know would have just mentioned people jumping to certain death.
Racism needs to be ended. 1st: laws giving someone special rights because of color, gender, sexual orientation, or some other form of minority standing has to be done away with. 2nd: groups that are allowed to use race or gender as a means of funding those partictular persons in college have to be ended. 3rd: forcing hiring practices onto employers that make them choose a person based on race or gender if you have two that are equally qualified and one is black and one is white or one is male and one is female has to be stopped. 5th: probably most importantly lawyers and ministers who make their living from the race card or minority card has got to be stopped.
Our liberal government wants to keep all these things going because they are HUGE money makers. People like Jackson, Nader, Sharpton, Farakhan are making BIG money off of these type of SCAMS.
When we all realize, most of all our government, that we are all people and we all should be treated the same based on the fact that we are HUMAN, not based on rather we are black, white, red, yellow, male, or female. All our law makers add on these rights for people based on race or gender as if our Constitution excluded them. Sorry to inform you but I saw nothing in the Constitution that excluded someone because of race or gender.
You are not African American just because you are black and born in America. You are American. I am not Anglo American or Euro American. I am AMERICAN. Sorry Native Americans but you no longer have a coner on the market. I am born and raised American. You may have had ancestors here long before I did but as of now I am an AMERICAN I deserve the same rights as you.
I am not against Blacks, Native American, Hispanics, or any other group. I am not against women. I believe we are all people, we are all Americans, we all have the same rights and should all be giving the same opportunities.
We as Christians, if you don't like the term just replace it with Apostolic or Pentecostal whichever floats your boat, need to start LOVING as GOD loved. Live like we love Him as much as we say we do and maybe, just maybe, it might start to spread around to the rest of the people.
Unfortunately even in our own ranks we can not get along or love each other. One group will not fellowship another because they cut their hair, they have a televison, they wear rings and necklaces, or the women wear pants. What was the 4Him song? 'Basics of Life' ? That's what we need,
"We need to get back to the basics of life. A heart that is pure and a love that is blind. A faith that is fervently grounded in Christ"
The thing that binds us should be our belief in One God, Baptism in Jesus name, and the infilling of the Holy Ghost. Let everyone then seek out their own salvation with fear and trembling. If you come to a higher understanding of something than I do then good for you. If you share it with me and I do not understand it or see the same SO WHAT? We are still brothers and sisters in Christ. I do not agree with my natural family about EVERYTHING so why should I agree with my spiritual family about EVERYTHING?
Hope I made some sense. Thanks for letting me get on my soap box for a few moments. We can go back to our normally scheduled program at this time. :tvhappy
Comparing Mangun to Wright does not apply here.
1. Mangun was not on any Clintion staff. Wright was on Obama's staff.
2. The Clintons were not married @ POA... Chelsea wasn't baptized @ POA.
3. Clintons relationships with Manguns were based upon childhood friendships w/Mickey Mangun. Obama selected the church Wright pastored.
The reason why this is a big deal is because Wright's prominent position on Obama's presidential staff. Although Wright no longer is on the staff, serious questions must be raised why someone who made racists and anti-semetic comments is allowed a prominent position on the staff on someone who claims to be a uniter.
He is quoting an Ambassador in this chickens to roost comment....
He makes a powerful point about America's indignant approach .... to terrorism ...
His point was violence begets violence .... context is important ...
I will not excuse may of his other quotes but it would be interesting to hear the context of his other quotes ...
Lastly we know that the Clintons have called the Manguns their pastor ....
I wonder what would happen if one got some Mangun quotes ... and made a montage ... if he could be painted as a fanatic ....
This idea that we are going to hold our politicians fully accountable for the words of their pastors will not fly.
chosenbyone
03-22-2008, 10:10 AM
Does that mean you are going to discount the plethora of racial comments made by Wright that have been documented over the past 20 years. One cannot deny his anti-semtic actions by embracing Louis Farakhan. One cannot deny Wright has made racially charged statements that would make Don Imus look like Billy Graham. Wright, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Farakhan want us to believe the black man is still a victim. If we could quarantine about a dozen of the so-called black leaders, 95% of the race problems would be eliminated.
I'm tired of being told I need to be color blind while the blacks are being told the white man is to blame for their failures. Wright needs to teach blacks how to rise above mediocrity instead of blaming white people for their lack of success.
Someone needs to tell Wright it is not the white man's fault a a high percentage of black men father children out of wedlock. Someone needs to tell the naacp it's not the white man's fault a lot of black kids are in single parent homes.
Blacks need successful role models like JC Watts, Clarence Thomas. Colin Powell, Condoleeza Rice, TD Jakes, Thomas Sowell, Larry Elder. These are a few of many blacks who rose above their situations and became the best. These people transcend race. These people have made Martin Luther King Jr's dream a reality.
One must remember that Reverend Wright was a civil-rights era pastor who spoke from experience about the struggle of equality for his race. Reverend Wright lived in the era of segregation and limited opportunity and saw first hand what many of us only read about in our history books.
Would it be too much of a stretch to see that Reverend Wright was from a generation that was directly affected by the blatant hatred of people of color and that was why he spoke so passionately about the treatment of blacks in his sermons?
Furthermore, where has he blamed the social ills of the black community squarely on whites? I would be interested to see where you got that idea when people who have known Reverend Wright has stated that he hasn't let the black community of the hook for the breakdown of the black family structure.
The following is an excerpt from an article in the The Salt Lake Tribune which explains what I have tried to above:
''The whole generation that Rev. Wright represents is expressing what they call a righteous anger, the anger from the failed promises of America,'' said Dwight Hopkins, a professor at the University of Chicago Divinity School. ''The prophetic anger is toward expanding the democracy, expanding it so all citizens can walk through the door of opportunity.''
Often lost in the attention paid to Wright's fiery sermons is the typical conclusion, Hopkins said - that despite all obstacles, you are a child of God and ''can make a way out of no way.'' That phrase, common in the language of the black church, was used by Obama in his 4,700-word speech Tuesday.
While Trinity United Church of Christ is more Afrocentric and slightly more political than most black churches, ''even conservative black churches talk about racism in a way that many whites would find wounding or offensive,'' said Gary Dorrien, a religion professor at Columbia University in New York.
''Most white Americans have a very limited capacity for dealing with black anger or acknowledging their own racial privileges,'' Dorrien said. ''Wherever white people are dominant, whiteness is transparent to them. In black church communities, dealing with that problem is an every-week issue.''
Wright does not focus his ire on white America alone, said Martin Marty, a retired professor of religious history who taught Wright at the University of Chicago.
''He is very hard on his own people,'' Marty said. ''He criticizes them for their lack of fidelity in marriage, for black-on-black crime. He is not saying one part of America is right and one is wrong.''
Obama and others also have highlighted Trinity's extensive social safety net. It offers college-placement help, drug and alcohol counseling, a credit union, and domestic-violence programs.
Wright retired last month, and his generation of pastors is being supplanted by a new wave of preachers with TV ministries and megachurches who preach a prosperity message, said Lawrence Mamiya, a professor of religion at Vassar College who studies the black church. That theme has little to do with overcoming racial or societal barriers, and a lot to do with faith being rewarded with material riches.
''We see that as the dominant trend now, with many young black seminarians in divinity school seeing that as their major model,'' Mamiya said. ''Some of the older clergy like Wright decry that, saying it's forgetting the whole social justice tradition.''
chosenbyone
03-22-2008, 10:12 AM
He is quoting an Ambassador in this chickens to roost comment....
He makes a powerful point about America's indignant approach .... to terrorism ...
His point was violence begets violence .... context is important ...
I will not excuse may of his other quotes but it would be interesting to hear the context of his other quotes ...
Lastly we know that the Clintons have called the Manguns their pastor ....
I wonder what would happen if one got some Mangun quotes ... and made a montage ... if he could be painted as a fanatic ....
This idea that we are going to hold our politicians fully accountable for the words of their pastors will not fly.
It was nice to see that someone got it!!! Thanks for your comments this morning, DA.
chosenbyone
03-22-2008, 10:22 AM
Thank-you for sharing this with us CB1.
Blessings, Rhoni
Your welcome...We've all seen when someone's comments were sliced and diced in order to paint someone in a negative light.
Michael The Disciple
03-22-2008, 10:38 AM
True or false? Wright and Obama support Homosexual relationships? If true how could a Christian ever vote for him?
staysharp
03-22-2008, 10:47 AM
In my mind, herein lies the problem: Preachers are not preaching the word of God. Churches are more of a social gathering for airing dirty laundry and griping about what is owed to them.
Men of God should preach the word. Jesus is the answer for their problems. If the love of Christ is dwelling in our hearts, racism goes away, hatred goes away, bitterness goes away, etc. Once the word of God is preached and faith is released, we then allow God access into our situations. The answer for the world's ills is Christ and Him crucified.
Men like Rev. Wright are not mouth pieces of the Holy Spirit, only puppets of a religious ego-centric system perpetrating hatred through isolationism.
This type of preaching is the voice of Satan's kingdom.
Mrs. LPW
03-22-2008, 10:57 AM
He is quoting an Ambassador in this chickens to roost comment....
He makes a powerful point about America's indignant approach .... to terrorism ...
His point was violence begets violence .... context is important ...
I will not excuse may of his other quotes but it would be interesting to hear the context of his other quotes ...
Lastly we know that the Clintons have called the Manguns their pastor ....
I wonder what would happen if one got some Mangun quotes ... and made a montage ... if he could be painted as a fanatic ....
This idea that we are going to hold our politicians fully accountable for the words of their pastors will not fly.
I can't believe I'm agreeing with Daniel A. :)
TK Burk
03-22-2008, 12:00 PM
The language no doubt still remains inflammatory ... but how is it different with Kenneth Phillips preaching on the urban legend of Operation Shekinah ... or Irvin Baxter making recent American legislation acts in cohoots w/ the Anti-Christ ...
I am wary of preachers talking politics from the pulpit ... but I know I've heard many a preacher say that God will judge America for it's sins.
This is a GREAT--and honest--post!!! :scoregood
GodsBabyGirl
03-22-2008, 12:03 PM
Does that mean you are going to discount the plethora of racial comments made by Wright that have been documented over the past 20 years. One cannot deny his anti-semtic actions by embracing Louis Farakhan. One cannot deny Wright has made racially charged statements that would make Don Imus look like Billy Graham. Wright, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Farakhan want us to believe the black man is still a victim. If we could quarantine about a dozen of the so-called black leaders, 95% of the race problems would be eliminated.
I'm tired of being told I need to be color blind while the blacks are being told the white man is to blame for their failures. Wright needs to teach blacks how to rise above mediocrity instead of blaming white people for their lack of success.
Someone needs to tell Wright it is not the white man's fault a a high percentage of black men father children out of wedlock. Someone needs to tell the naacp it's not the white man's fault a lot of black kids are in single parent homes.
Blacks need successful role models like JC Watts, Clarence Thomas. Colin Powell, Condoleeza Rice, TD Jakes, Thomas Sowell, Larry Elder. These are a few of many blacks who rose above their situations and became the best. These people transcend race. These people have made Martin Luther King Jr's dream a reality.
Sorry, a man who sexually harassed another sister can NEVER be my role model...
And as far as Condi goes, while many of my neighbors were fighting for their lives in the N.O. Superdome during & immediately after Katrina, she was clueless as to their plight.
The only one in your list I would even fathom as being my role model is Bishop TD Jakes.
The language no doubt still remains inflammatory ... but how is it different with Kenneth Phillips preaching on the urban legend of Operation Shekinah ... or Irvin Baxter making recent American legislation acts in cohoots w/ the Anti-Christ ...
I am wary of preachers talking politics from the pulpit ... but I know I've heard many a preacher say that God will judge America for it's sins.
It is true.
He will judge the nations & to whom much is given-much will be required.
It would be better that America/Canada call them selves atheist than try to act the hypocrite.
JMHO
TK Burk
03-22-2008, 12:06 PM
True or false? Wright and Obama support Homosexual relationships? If true how could a Christian ever vote for him?
This is not an endorsement for or against anyone; but if strict biblical obedience must be sought, a Christian could never vote for any candidates today.
Praxeas
03-22-2008, 02:56 PM
The language no doubt still remains inflammatory ... but how is it different with Kenneth Phillips preaching on the urban legend of Operation Shekinah ... or Irvin Baxter making recent American legislation acts in cohoots w/ the Anti-Christ ...
I am wary of preachers talking politics from the pulpit ... but I know I've heard many a preacher say that God will judge America for it's sins.
I am wary too....this is the time to preach to the lost the gospel of salvation....the truth that they are sinners. If our nation is being judged it is for the sins of the every day person and not George Bush....We live in a very immoral society and many of them claim to believe in God and even that they are Christians....maybe we are too involved in politics and not in the Word
Clarence Thomas did not sexually harrass that woman. Any one who suggests that he did is obviously ignoring the facts. I'm not a fan of Arlen Spector, but he did a brilliant job in exposing the dillusion and lies that were brought against Thomas. No reasonable person believes the hair in the coke story anymore.
There was plenty of blame to go around for dropping the ball in Lousiana. The local yocals who made it a political issue. And the head of Fema who was obviously over his head...
Sorry, a man who sexually harassed another sister can NEVER be my role model...
And as far as Condi goes, while many of my neighbors were fighting for their lives in the N.O. Superdome during & immediately after Katrina, she was clueless as to their plight.
The only one in your list I would even fathom as being my role model is Bishop TD Jakes.
scotty
03-22-2008, 04:40 PM
The language no doubt still remains inflammatory ... but how is it different with Kenneth Phillips preaching on the urban legend of Operation Shekinah ... or Irvin Baxter making recent American legislation acts in cohoots w/ the Anti-Christ ...
I am wary of preachers talking politics from the pulpit ... but I know I've heard many a preacher say that God will judge America for it's sins.
In my mind, herein lies the problem: Preachers are not preaching the word of God. Churches are more of a social gathering for airing dirty laundry and griping about what is owed to them.
Men of God should preach the word. Jesus is the answer for their problems. If the love of Christ is dwelling in our hearts, racism goes away, hatred goes away, bitterness goes away, etc. Once the word of God is preached and faith is released, we then allow God access into our situations. The answer for the world's ills is Christ and Him crucified.
Men like Rev. Wright are not mouth pieces of the Holy Spirit, only puppets of a religious ego-centric system perpetrating hatred through isolationism.
This type of preaching is the voice of Satan's kingdom.
I am wary too....this is the time to preach to the lost the gospel of salvation....the truth that they are sinners. If our nation is being judged it is for the sins of the every day person and not George Bush....We live in a very immoral society and many of them claim to believe in God and even that they are Christians....maybe we are too involved in politics and not in the Word
Great words brethren
scotty
03-22-2008, 04:45 PM
Sorry, a man who sexually harassed another sister can NEVER be my role model...
And as far as Condi goes, while many of my neighbors were fighting for their lives in the N.O. Superdome during & immediately after Katrina, she was clueless as to their plight.
The only one in your list I would even fathom as being my role model is Bishop TD Jakes.
Umm....I don't think Katrina falls under Condi's job description...
Your mayor was the clueless one
Your governor turned away federal help because it was offered by a republican. Yes ma'am, she chose politics over people....
MissBrattified
03-22-2008, 06:33 PM
I don't excuse Jeremiah Wright based on "context" anymore than I would excuse it in any Apostolic preacher. In fact, if an Apostolic preacher said something similar, most of you would rip him to shreds. So please don't waste your breath defending this charlatan.
Integrity is reflected both in what we say and what we do. What's down in the well comes up in the bucket. This man's rhetoric is not godly or reflective of honorable character. He would make a good politician--maybe. As far as what he says--I put him in the same category as Jesse Jackson. He's about as inspirational.
What we need as a country is for someone to stop the sniveling and whining on one side of the race coin, and stop the discrimination on the other side. I have never in my life treated someone badly because of their race, culture or skin color. Ever. So I get a little sick of hearing men like JW pound it into the heads of his constituents as if it is commonplace and normal. Maybe in isolated parts of the country, but certainly not as widespread as some would have us believe.
As for the slavery and the bad decisions by our government--come ON! I have two grandparents who were full-blooded Indian. But I don't go around ranting about the U.S. government robbing them of their land all the time and crying over spilled milk. Nor would I allow our children to talk about or dwell on something like that. As a parent I feel an obligation to teach my children to be thankful for what they have, and I would think a pastor would feel a similar obligation to encourage his congregation to be thankful, to love God, country and neighbors. Instead, JW is leading the way in inciting resentment, and stirring up ill feelings that should be repented over--not sympathized and empathized with.
I also think its hilarious that it's the "rich Republicans" who are mentioned--as if there aren't any rich Democrats. History is being rewritten, and before you know it, the Democrats will take credit for desegregation. Someone needs to educate themselves, JW included, and thank a few Republicans for their good works.
If JW were simply a politician, his comments wouldn't cause me to blink an eye. But I expect more from "men of God."
MissBrattified
03-22-2008, 06:37 PM
Umm....I don't think Katrina falls under Condi's job description...
Your mayor was the clueless one
Your governor turned away federal help because it was offered by a republican. Yes ma'am, she chose politics over people....
Those were some seriously bad decisions, and unfortunately, ultimately, GWB was blamed, when in fact it was local and state government who should have stepped in and done their jobs.
So funny that we didn't hear similar stories from Mississippi. LOL!!! And if you think there aren't black people in Southern Mississippi, you're cuh-razy. No, the government in MS simply did what they were supposed to, and they didn't whine to the federal government unnecessarily, other than to get the federal assistance that New Orleans should have been smart enough to ask for (sooner) but wasn't.
Margies3
03-22-2008, 06:44 PM
I don't excuse Jeremiah Wright based on "context" anymore than I would excuse it in any Apostolic preacher. In fact, if an Apostolic preacher said something similar, most of you would rip him to shreds. So please don't waste your breath defending this charlatan.
Integrity is reflected both in what we say and what we do. What's down in the well comes up in the bucket. This man's rhetoric is not godly or reflective of honorable character. He would make a good politician--maybe. As far as what he says--I put him in the same category as Jesse Jackson. He's about as inspirational.
What we need as a country is for someone to stop the sniveling and whining on one side of the race coin, and stop the discrimination on the other side. I have never in my life treated someone badly because of their race, culture or skin color. Ever. So I get a little sick of hearing men like JW pound it into the heads of his constituents as if it is commonplace and normal. Maybe in isolated parts of the country, but certainly not as widespread as some would have us believe.
As for the slavery and the bad decisions by our government--come ON! I have two grandparents who were full-blooded Indian. But I don't go around ranting about the U.S. government robbing them of their land all the time and crying over spilled milk. Nor would I allow our children to talk about or dwell on something like that. As a parent I feel an obligation to teach my children to be thankful for what they have, and I would think a pastor would feel a similar obligation to encourage his congregation to be thankful, to love God, country and neighbors. Instead, JW is leading the way in inciting resentment, and stirring up ill feelings that should be repented over--not sympathized and empathized with.
I also think its hilarious that it's the "rich Republicans" who are mentioned--as if there aren't any rich Democrats. History is being rewritten, and before you know it, the Democrats will take credit for desegregation. Someone needs to educate themselves, JW included, and thank a few Republicans for their good works.
If JW were simply a politician, his comments wouldn't cause me to blink an eye. But I expect more from "men of God."
Those were some seriously bad decisions, and unfortunately, ultimately, GWB was blamed, when in fact it was local and state government who should have stepped in and done their jobs.
So funny that we didn't hear similar stories from Mississippi. LOL!!! And if you think there aren't black people in Southern Mississippi, you're cuh-razy. No, the government in MS simply did what they were supposed to, and they didn't whine to the federal government unnecessarily, other than to get the federal assistance that New Orleans should have been smart enough to ask for (sooner) but wasn't.
Couldn't have said it better myself! Good posts, MissBratt!
Rev Dooley
03-22-2008, 06:54 PM
I was going to post this video on another thread, but I didn't want it to be missed. We've heard all the spin about Reverend J. Wright's (Obama's pastor) sermon after September 11. I had just about lost faith in Obama's judgement like so many others until I stumbled upon this video. I certainly had to repent last night for judging others after I heard what Wright had said before and after the snipit that played over and over on television. It was POWERFUL!
It was a shame that the mediia chose to take Wright's words out of context in order to create strife among the public and to help form doubt on a man of integrity. This video will surely cause everyone to see that they were played by the media just like me.Man of integrity my eye! He is still racist and his comments in blaming America for what is happening is way out of line.
His inflamatory rhetoric is no different than Farrakhan and their followers.
The bombing of Hiroshima is totally lame. Japan attacked us first. We did not attack them. Our bombing of them was in response to their terrorism. We called it "Pearl Harbor".
We as a country did not just decide to enslave people. Their own people in Africa SOLD them. I agree that it was a travesty for anyone to purchase another person, but America wasn't the only buyer. Slaves were shipped to South America to many islands only to die on sugar plantations.
Our attack on Hussein was a response to the terror that was being wrought on America. Anyone remember 911? Or has this already been forgotten by genuine americans?
Mr Wright doesn't deserve the title of "integrity". Integrity would uphold truth while he is only trying to fan flames of anger towards America.
He did a good job in support of Iraq.
Well lets get a little balance shall we?
The Ambassidor said the words "Americas chickens have come home to roost"
He did not wax elequent as the right reverand Jerimiah Wright did.
He did not make the the extended comments that Fox news quoted.
NO. NOT even a little bit did FOX News Lie!!!!!!!
Good grief people, this dude said we bombed Japan with Atom bombs with not even batting an eye! LIELIELIELIE! That was a well thought out, anti-American ATTACK by this lying racist.
Its just increadable.
Go back to finding what ever strand of goofiness needed to justify voting for Obama.
MikeinAR
03-22-2008, 08:37 PM
I am wary too....this is the time to preach to the lost the gospel of salvation....the truth that they are sinners. If our nation is being judged it is for the sins of the every day person and not George Bush....We live in a very immoral society and many of them claim to believe in God and even that they are Christians....maybe we are too involved in politics and not in the Word
That's been my argument forever. I'm waiting for someone to seriously look me in the eye and tell me that the election of one party over the other has changed the MORAL course of this nation. It sounded great in the mid 90's when the conservatives took Congress and then the Presidency in 2000. Most TV preachers had their "men" in power and surely the nation would be uplifted. Except it wasn't. Corruption that wreaked with a horrible stinch and immorality abounded.
Political parties and candidates will not accomplish what the pastor or the church wants. The only thing that will accomplish repentance and another great awakening to the truth is when PREACHERS (not politicians) preach the truth under the annointing and conviction falls.
What a shame to see so many of the known TV evangelists spending their oh so few national TV minutes on stupid political stuff that doesn't bring salvation and the change their saying they want.
I'll hop off the soap box now, but it's a fearful thing to stand before a TV audience and worry about agendas other than lifting Jesus up because that's what will draw all men to him.
TRFrance
03-22-2008, 08:54 PM
1... Fox is not the only one to carry the inflammatory words of Rev Wright. CNN, MSNBC, ABC news, CBS, etc did the same thing. So singling out Fox is just silly.
And Fox is not the one who came up with the montage of Rev Wright's words. Those words have been on record for a long time, and have been known by various people in the news media for a while now. They just chose to make an issue of it now for some reason.
2...So what if he is quoting someone else in his "chickens-are-coming-home-to-roost sermon?
If I gives a speech/sermon/lecture and quotes from someone else words in this manner, it's obviously because he agree with what that person is saying!
So the fact that he is quoting from someone else's speech is irrelevant.
Well everyone knows Fox is fair and balanced, TR
did you watch both videos?
scotty
03-22-2008, 09:03 PM
Are we fair and balanced??
If one posted such on here, would he be understood of his own opinion?
If this were a black UPC preacher, would he not be judged and convicted with 100+ pages of thread material?
YOU BET YOUR ALL KNOWING, HOLIER THAN THOUGH, HEAVENLY HERASEY HE WOULD.
TRFrance
03-22-2008, 09:08 PM
Well everyone knows Fox is fair and balanced, TR
did you watch both videos?
(yes, of course I watched the videos.)
But you're so missing the point, DA.
Never mind.
TR,
Obama is going to pleasantly surprise you as President ....
RevBuddy
03-22-2008, 09:23 PM
Chosen...
you need to relook at Rev. Wright's comments and sermon topics over an extended period...they are racist and outrageous in any context...
...the question is WHY did Senator Obama continue to attend this church without confronting a pastor with such an abborent agenda...
...sorry, no sympathy here...such behavior brings into question the judgment of Senator Obama...
The more I read the posts in this thread and others, the more convinced I am becoming that the average white person in this country hasn't even begun to understand the average black person's experience or point of view. We have such a long way to go.
TRFrance
03-23-2008, 02:31 AM
The more I read the posts in this thread and others, the more convinced I am becoming that the average white person in this country hasn't even begun to understand the average black person's experience or point of view. We have such a long way to go.
Brother, please. Spare us.
What does that have to do with the topic of this thread?
Lets stick to the topic at hand, shall we?
The issue here is that blaming FoxNews for "lying" here is weak.Very weak.
Again 1... they didnt lie. 2... Fox was just one of many new outlets running the same story. and 3... Wright made many other racially inflammatory statements apart from the one on that tape
TRFrance
03-23-2008, 02:36 AM
Chosen...
you need to relook at Rev. Wright's comments and sermon topics over an extended period...they are racist and outrageous in any context...
...the question is WHY did Senator Obama continue to attend this church without confronting a pastor with such an abborent agenda...
...sorry, no sympathy here...such behavior brings into question the judgment of Senator Obama...
Especially disturbing to me is that he would want to raise his 2 daughters children in that kind of environment.
This is a man who campaigns that he represents hope, healing, positivity, etc, but he lets this man inject such poison into the minds of his family for all these years?
He claims he was disturbed by some of White's inflammatory comments....but obviously not disturbed enough to leave.
Brother, please. Spare us.
What does that have to do with the topic of this thread?
Lets stick to the topic at hand, shall we?
The issue here is that blaming FoxNews for "lying" here is weak.Very weak.
Again 1... they didnt lie. 2... Fox was just one of many new outlets running the same story. and 3... Wright made many other racially inflammatory statements apart from the one on that tape
Right. Racism hasn't even entered the conversation.
"Does that mean you are going to discount the plethora of racial comments made by Wright that have been documented over the past 20 years. One cannot deny his anti-semtic actions by embracing Louis Farakhan. One cannot deny Wright has made racially charged statements that would make Don Imus look like Billy Graham. Wright, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Farakhan want us to believe the black man is still a victim. If we could quarantine about a dozen of the so-called black leaders, 95% of the race problems would be eliminated.
I'm tired of being told I need to be color blind while the blacks are being told the white man is to blame for their failures. Wright needs to teach blacks how to rise above mediocrity instead of blaming white people for their lack of success."
"One must remember that Reverend Wright was a civil-rights era pastor who spoke from experience about the struggle of equality for his race. Reverend Wright lived in the era of segregation and limited opportunity and saw first hand what many of us only read about in our history books.
Would it be too much of a stretch to see that Reverend Wright was from a generation that was directly affected by the blatant hatred of people of color and that was why he spoke so passionately about the treatment of blacks in his sermons?
Furthermore, where has he blamed the social ills of the black community squarely on whites? I would be interested to see where you got that idea when people who have known Reverend Wright has stated that he hasn't let the black community of the hook for the breakdown of the black family structure.
The following is an excerpt from an article in the The Salt Lake Tribune which explains what I have tried to above:
''The whole generation that Rev. Wright represents is expressing what they call a righteous anger, the anger from the failed promises of America,'' said Dwight Hopkins, a professor at the University of Chicago Divinity School. ''The prophetic anger is toward expanding the democracy, expanding it so all citizens can walk through the door of opportunity.''
Often lost in the attention paid to Wright's fiery sermons is the typical conclusion, Hopkins said - that despite all obstacles, you are a child of God and ''can make a way out of no way.'' That phrase, common in the language of the black church, was used by Obama in his 4,700-word speech Tuesday.
While Trinity United Church of Christ is more Afrocentric and slightly more political than most black churches, ''even conservative black churches talk about racism in a way that many whites would find wounding or offensive,'' said Gary Dorrien, a religion professor at Columbia University in New York.
''Most white Americans have a very limited capacity for dealing with black anger or acknowledging their own racial privileges,'' Dorrien said. ''Wherever white people are dominant, whiteness is transparent to them. In black church communities, dealing with that problem is an every-week issue.''
Wright does not focus his ire on white America alone, said Martin Marty, a retired professor of religious history who taught Wright at the University of Chicago.
''He is very hard on his own people,'' Marty said. ''He criticizes them for their lack of fidelity in marriage, for black-on-black crime. He is not saying one part of America is right and one is wrong.''
Obama and others also have highlighted Trinity's extensive social safety net. It offers college-placement help, drug and alcohol counseling, a credit union, and domestic-violence programs.
Wright retired last month, and his generation of pastors is being supplanted by a new wave of preachers with TV ministries and megachurches who preach a prosperity message, said Lawrence Mamiya, a professor of religion at Vassar College who studies the black church. That theme has little to do with overcoming racial or societal barriers, and a lot to do with faith being rewarded with material riches.
''We see that as the dominant trend now, with many young black seminarians in divinity school seeing that as their major model,'' Mamiya said. ''Some of the older clergy like Wright decry that, saying it's forgetting the whole social justice tradition.''"
"What we need as a country is for someone to stop the sniveling and whining on one side of the race coin, and stop the discrimination on the other side. I have never in my life treated someone badly because of their race, culture or skin color. Ever. So I get a little sick of hearing men like JW pound it into the heads of his constituents as if it is commonplace and normal. Maybe in isolated parts of the country, but certainly not as widespread as some would have us believe."
"Man of integrity my eye! He is still racist and his comments in blaming America for what is happening is way out of line.
His inflamatory rhetoric is no different than Farrakhan and their followers."
"you need to relook at Rev. Wright's comments and sermon topics over an extended period...they are racist and outrageous in any context..."
No, you're right TRFRANCE, racism was never brought up in this thread. In fact, I am probably imagining that it was mentioned in any of the other threads recently started on this forum too. It must be time to get my glasses checked.
Especially disturbing to me is that he would want to raise his 2 daughters children in that kind of environment.
This is a man who campaigns that he represents hope, healing, positivity, etc, but he lets this man inject such poison into the minds of his family for all these years?
He claims he was disturbed by some of White's inflammatory comments....but obviously not disturbed enough to leave.
How different is that from any of our people staying at a church where the preacher won't marry mixed couples because of not believing in mixing of the races? It's no different.
scotty
03-23-2008, 05:33 AM
How different is that from any of our people staying at a church where the preacher won't marry mixed couples because of not believing in mixing of the races? It's no different.
You can't be serious,
Get off the race altogether, He has made derogatory remarks against the jews, spoken of 9/11 being our fault, saying we bombed Japan just because we wanted too. He has said we should stop all aid to Israel.
I don't need to hear racial arguments to know that the rest of his statements are simple ignorant ramblings.
The man said "Bill Clinton was giving it to the blacks like he was giving it to Monica Lewinski"
WHAT?!?!?!?
What "man of God" would use such tasteless words in a tabernacle??
I have enough kudos about myself as not to say something like that on here, much less in the house of God.
And yes , there is a difference. A preacher who wont marry mixed race has a doctrinal issue. This man isn't preaching doctrinal issues, he is preaching about the politics of man from the pulpit of God.
There is no defence for that. Lest you lower yourself to his standards.
TRFrance
03-23-2008, 06:40 AM
How different is that from any of our people staying at a church where the preacher won't marry mixed couples because of not believing in mixing of the races? It's no different.
Well, I feel that's wrong too, and I've already said that on this forum anyway;so what's your point?
I'm not making excuses for one incident, by bringing up another, the way you seem to be trying to do. Jeremiah Wright is the issue here, and I don't see any need to deflect attention from him by talking about what someone else's pastor does.
Somebody else's white pastor is not the issue here. Why do you feel the need to bring him into this, instead of dealing with the topic at hand?
TRFrance
03-23-2008, 07:02 AM
Right. Racism hasn't even entered the conversation.
"Does that mean you are going to discount the plethora of racial comments made by Wright that have been documented over the past 20 years. One cannot deny his anti-semtic actions by embracing Louis Farakhan. One cannot deny Wright has made racially charged statements that would make Don Imus look like Billy Graham. Wright, Jesse Jackson, Al Sharpton, Farakhan want us to believe the black man is still a victim. If we could quarantine about a dozen of the so-called black leaders, 95% of the race problems would be eliminated.
I'm tired of being told I need to be color blind while the blacks are being told the white man is to blame for their failures. Wright needs to teach blacks how to rise above mediocrity instead of blaming white people for their lack of success."
"One must remember that Reverend Wright was a civil-rights era pastor who spoke from experience about the struggle of equality for his race. Reverend Wright lived in the era of segregation and limited opportunity and saw first hand what many of us only read about in our history books.
Would it be too much of a stretch to see that Reverend Wright was from a generation that was directly affected by the blatant hatred of people of color and that was why he spoke so passionately about the treatment of blacks in his sermons?
Furthermore, where has he blamed the social ills of the black community squarely on whites? I would be interested to see where you got that idea when people who have known Reverend Wright has stated that he hasn't let the black community of the hook for the breakdown of the black family structure.
The following is an excerpt from an article in the The Salt Lake Tribune which explains what I have tried to above:
''The whole generation that Rev. Wright represents is expressing what they call a righteous anger, the anger from the failed promises of America,'' said Dwight Hopkins, a professor at the University of Chicago Divinity School. ''The prophetic anger is toward expanding the democracy, expanding it so all citizens can walk through the door of opportunity.''
Often lost in the attention paid to Wright's fiery sermons is the typical conclusion, Hopkins said - that despite all obstacles, you are a child of God and ''can make a way out of no way.'' That phrase, common in the language of the black church, was used by Obama in his 4,700-word speech Tuesday.
While Trinity United Church of Christ is more Afrocentric and slightly more political than most black churches, ''even conservative black churches talk about racism in a way that many whites would find wounding or offensive,'' said Gary Dorrien, a religion professor at Columbia University in New York.
''Most white Americans have a very limited capacity for dealing with black anger or acknowledging their own racial privileges,'' Dorrien said. ''Wherever white people are dominant, whiteness is transparent to them. In black church communities, dealing with that problem is an every-week issue.''
Wright does not focus his ire on white America alone, said Martin Marty, a retired professor of religious history who taught Wright at the University of Chicago.
''He is very hard on his own people,'' Marty said. ''He criticizes them for their lack of fidelity in marriage, for black-on-black crime. He is not saying one part of America is right and one is wrong.''
Obama and others also have highlighted Trinity's extensive social safety net. It offers college-placement help, drug and alcohol counseling, a credit union, and domestic-violence programs.
Wright retired last month, and his generation of pastors is being supplanted by a new wave of preachers with TV ministries and megachurches who preach a prosperity message, said Lawrence Mamiya, a professor of religion at Vassar College who studies the black church. That theme has little to do with overcoming racial or societal barriers, and a lot to do with faith being rewarded with material riches.
''We see that as the dominant trend now, with many young black seminarians in divinity school seeing that as their major model,'' Mamiya said. ''Some of the older clergy like Wright decry that, saying it's forgetting the whole social justice tradition.''"
"What we need as a country is for someone to stop the sniveling and whining on one side of the race coin, and stop the discrimination on the other side. I have never in my life treated someone badly because of their race, culture or skin color. Ever. So I get a little sick of hearing men like JW pound it into the heads of his constituents as if it is commonplace and normal. Maybe in isolated parts of the country, but certainly not as widespread as some would have us believe."
"Man of integrity my eye! He is still racist and his comments in blaming America for what is happening is way out of line.
His inflamatory rhetoric is no different than Farrakhan and their followers."
"you need to relook at Rev. Wright's comments and sermon topics over an extended period...they are racist and outrageous in any context..."
No, you're right TRFRANCE, racism was never brought up in this thread. In fact, I am probably imagining that it was mentioned in any of the other threads recently started on this forum too. It must be time to get my glasses checked.
Your sarcasm, aside... you're still missing the point.
The man's has multiple comments that are racist, anti-American, and in many cases blatantly false. But you're trying to imply that those who criticize him are doing so because ...
...the average white person in this country hasn't even begun to understand the average black person's experience or point of view. So that's that your conclusion? That's the best you can come up with? Please, bro. Spare us.
Of course race is part of the overall issue. No one denies that. But the topic of the thread doesn't need to be hijacked, by you or anyone else. The topic of the thread is that Fox supposedly lied. Fox did not lie, neither did the news media lie in reporting what the man said. A lot of Democrats, and Obama supporters especially like to bash Fox, but Fox is not the problem here. Jeremiah Wright is .
And yes, we can always talk about race relations in general. We know we have a ways to go for things to be where they need to be. However, my response to the original post (the topic at hand) is that 1... Fox didn't lie 2... Rev Wright has made similar and other more outrageous statements 3. its ridiculous to blame Fox for carrying a story that all the major news outlets were carrying.
I guess you realized you weren't able to refute those 3 simple points...
Because you decided to skip over the points I made (and the thread topic) and focus on talking about how "the average white person in this country hasn't even begun to understand the average black person's experience or point of view". That may well be true brother, but as I said before, that is a separate issue.
I guess you simply preferred not to respond to the points I had made regarding the issue . But jumping all over the place and getting into side issues, instead of the central issue, just just further makes it clear that even you realize that the original point of this thread is invalid.
The whole premise of the original point on this thread is logically invalid anyway. I guess you realize that, and that's why you want to complain about racism in general. Fine. Suit yourself then. It seems that those making excuses for Jeremiah Wright will say whatever they can to deflect from the outrageousness of his comments. And even if deep down they know he's wrong, they can always find a way to blame white America. I guess personal accountability doesn't matter any more. At least the defenders of Rev Wright obviously seem to think so.
Discerner
03-23-2008, 07:29 AM
I was going to post this video on another thread, but I didn't want it to be missed. We've heard all the spin about Reverend J. Wright's (Obama's pastor) sermon after September 11. I had just about lost faith in Obama's judgement like so many others until I stumbled upon this video. I certainly had to repent last night for judging others after I heard what Wright had said before and after the snipit that played over and over on television. It was POWERFUL!
It was a shame that the mediia chose to take Wright's words out of context in order to create strife among the public and to help form doubt on a man of integrity. This video will surely cause everyone to see that they were played by the media just like me.
http://youtube.com/watch?v=QOdlnzkeoyQ
You are a racist bigot if you defend the words of this idiot. I dont care what kind of context he stated this extremist separatist views in. This guy is the biggest racist and bigot I have ever seen. Did you see the interview with Shawn Hanity and Allan Combs?
This man is a disgrace to Christianity and our country. If he doesnt like it hear, I say we take up a collection and send him to the country of his choice and hear if he still says "God D##M america!
TRFrance
03-23-2008, 07:34 AM
You are a racist bigot if you defend the words of this idiot. I dont care what kind of context he stated this extremist separatist views in. This guy is the biggest racist and bigot I have ever seen. Did you see the interview with Shawn Hanity and Allan Combs?
This man is a disgrace to Christianity and our country. If he doesnt like it hear, I say we take up a collection and send him to the country of his choice and hear if he still says "God D##M america!
Thank you.
Even, "in context" his words are still offensive. And that doesn't even take into consideration the other racist and anti-American things he's said.
I wish people would stop drinking the Obama-Wright Kool-aid.
SOUNWORTHY
03-23-2008, 01:48 PM
The more I read the posts in this thread and others, the more convinced I am becoming that the average white person in this country hasn't even begun to understand the average black person's experience or point of view. We have such a long way to go.
I was told the same thing by a black Rev. one time. His words were" you just don't understand our culture" . II said, " if cheating is your culture then I don't understand"!
berkeley
03-23-2008, 02:52 PM
Umm....I don't think Katrina falls under Condi's job description...
Your mayor was the clueless one
Your governor turned away federal help because it was offered by a republican. Yes ma'am, she chose politics over people....
:bliss
MissBrattified
03-23-2008, 03:00 PM
There is absolutely NO context in which someone can say God **** America (my beloved country) and it will be okay. Sorry. Taking God's name in vain and cursing this country in the same breath--Wow. There was a time when that would get you charged with treason. I kind of miss those days.
Well, I feel that's wrong too, and I've already said that on this forum anyway;so what's your point?
I'm not making excuses for one incident, by bringing up another, the way you seem to be trying to do. Jeremiah Wright is the issue here, and I don't see any need to deflect attention from him by talking about what someone else's pastor does.
Somebody else's white pastor is not the issue here. Why do you feel the need to bring him into this, instead of dealing with the topic at hand?
Because I think you guys are making a mountain out of a molehill.
SOUNWORTHY
03-23-2008, 06:20 PM
There is absolutely NO context in which someone can say God **** America (my beloved country) and it will be okay. Sorry. Taking God's name in vain and cursing this country in the same breath--Wow. There was a time when that would get you charged with treason. I kind of miss those days.
Me too. Everyone was so rough on Kerry and Bush about their military carreer and Bush drinking. Obama has no Military carreer and is a self proclaimed pot head. The first Presidential candidate to admit using cocain. Here's what he had to say.
Long before the national media spotlight began to shine on every twist and turn of his life's journey, Barack Obama had this to say about himself: "Junkie. Pothead. That's where I'd been headed: the final, fatal role of the young would-be black man. . . . I got high [to] push questions of who I was out of my mind.
Is he going to turn to pot when things get rough in the White House.
I for one am afraid of this guy.
At least Clinton didn't inhale!!
Your sarcasm, aside... you're still missing the point.
The man's has multiple comments that are racist, anti-American, and in many cases blatantly false. But you're trying to imply that those who criticize him are doing so because ...
So that's that your conclusion? That's the best you can come up with? Please, bro. Spare us.
Of course race is part of the overall issue. No one denies that. But the topic of the thread doesn't need to be hijacked, by you or anyone else. The topic of the thread is that Fox supposedly lied. Fox did not lie, neither did the news media lie in reporting what the man said. A lot of Democrats, and Obama supporters especially like to bash Fox, but Fox is not the problem here. Jeremiah Wright is .
And yes, we can always talk about race relations in general. We know we have a ways to go for things to be where they need to be. However, my response to the original post (the topic at hand) is that 1... Fox didn't lie 2... Rev Wright has made similar and other more outrageous statements 3. its ridiculous to blame Fox for carrying a story that all the major news outlets were carrying.
I guess you realized you weren't able to refute those 3 simple points...
Because you decided to skip over the points I made (and the thread topic) and focus on talking about how "the average white person in this country hasn't even begun to understand the average black person's experience or point of view". That may well be true brother, but as I said before, that is a separate issue.
I guess you simply preferred not to respond to the points I had made regarding the issue . But jumping all over the place and getting into side issues, instead of the central issue, just just further makes it clear that even you realize that the original point of this thread is invalid.
The whole premise of the original point on this thread is logically invalid anyway. I guess you realize that, and that's why you want to complain about racism in general. Fine. Suit yourself then. It seems that those making excuses for Jeremiah Wright will say whatever they can to deflect from the outrageousness of his comments. And even if deep down they know he's wrong, they can always find a way to blame white America. I guess personal accountability doesn't matter any more. At least the defenders of Rev Wright obviously seem to think so.
Fox did what media does; they put out just enough of what he said to make it newsworthy. I have news for you. I heard apostolic preachers preaching that 9/11 was our own fault because of the things we have done overseas. I've gone to churches that were openly racist, with the pastor using the n word over the pulpit because "all his black friends knew he wasn't using it in a derogatory way". I know preachers that won't marry a black man to a white woman. The point I am making is that what this JW has said really isn't any different than so much of what I have already heard coming across apostolic pulpits. Where are the threads slamming those preachers? Where's the outrage over our own preachers doing some of the same things this JW has done? Why is this such a big deal now? Could it be because Barak Obama is a black man running for President and people in this country don't want to admit that they really don't want a black man to be their President, so they are doing anything and everything they can to discredit him?
There is absolutely NO context in which someone can say God **** America (my beloved country) and it will be okay. Sorry. Taking God's name in vain and cursing this country in the same breath--Wow. There was a time when that would get you charged with treason. I kind of miss those days.
Sister, he used the word in context, so it's pretty tough to prove he used God's name in vain, was cussing, etc.
Main Entry: 1************
Pronunciation: \ˈdam\
Function: verb
Inflected Form(s): ************ed; ************·ing \ˈda-miŋ\
Etymology: Middle English dampnen, from Anglo-French dampner, from Latin ************are, from ************um damage, loss, fine
Date: 13th century
transitive verb
1: to condemn to a punishment or fate; especially : to condemn to hell
2 a: to condemn vigorously and often irascibly for some real or fancied fault or defect <************ed the storm for their delay> b: to condemn as a failure by public criticism
3: to bring ruin on
4: to swear at : curse —often used to express annoyance, disgust, or surprise <************ him, he should have been careful><I'll be ************ed>
intransitive verb
Me too. Everyone was so rough on Kerry and Bush about their military carreer and Bush drinking. Obama has no Military carreer and is a self proclaimed pot head. The first Presidential candidate to admit using cocain. Here's what he had to say.
Long before the national media spotlight began to shine on every twist and turn of his life's journey, Barack Obama had this to say about himself: "Junkie. Pothead. That's where I'd been headed: the final, fatal role of the young would-be black man. . . . I got high [to] push questions of who I was out of my mind.
Is he going to turn to pot when things get rough in the White House.
I for one am afraid of this guy.
At least Clinton didn't inhale!!
Yeah, RIGHT! :ursofunny:ursofunny Hehehehehe! I got a bridge for sale real cheap.
Well, to balance out the Pastor Wright comments, not all African American preachers are supporters of Barack Hussein Obama. Check out this guy:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=khuu-RhOBDU
chosenbyone
03-23-2008, 09:30 PM
Man of integrity my eye! He is still racist and his comments in blaming America for what is happening is way out of line.
On what grounds were you able to categorically declare Wright as a racist? Have you known this man so well that you could stand and make such a declaration? Wright's premise was that our nation essentially reaped what it sowed. He outlined instances where our country terrorized other countries killing far more than were killed on our soil on 9/11. 9/11 was a national tragedy no one could negate that fact; however, blasting someone who voiced a different analysis of the situation should not be tolerated. Freedom of Speech was still a right of the citizenry of the US last time I checked. :stirpot
His inflamatory rhetoric is no different than Farrakhan and their followers.
The bombing of Hiroshima is totally lame. Japan attacked us first.
What would Jesus do??? Would killing thousands of children ever be justified in the eyes of God???
We did not attack them.Iraq didn't attack the US yet we bombed and destroyed their infrastructure, displaced over two million civilians and killed hundreds of thousands more!
Our bombing of them was in response to their terrorism.
Because of our nation's actions many countries view the US as a terrorist state.
We called it "Pearl Harbor".
We as a country did not just decide to enslave people. Their own people in Africa SOLD them.
So, the Africans were to blame for 400 years of slavery in the US?
I agree that it was a travesty for anyone to purchase another person, but America wasn't the only buyer. Slaves were shipped to South America to many islands only to die on sugar plantations. No arguement.
Our attack on Hussein was a response to the terror that was being wrought on America
Iraq had nothing to do with 9/11 or any affiliation with Al Qaeda...Bush and Cheney admitted that truth a year after they made the case that there was a link between Iraq and Al Qaeda. :stirpot
Anyone remember 911? Or has this already been forgotten by genuine americans? What??? No one has forgotten 9/11.
Mr Wright doesn't deserve the title of "integrity". Integrity would uphold truth while he is only trying to fan flames of anger towards America.
He did a good job in support of Iraq.
The Iraq war was built on lies.[B]
[B]Try telling those Iraqis who see their children begging on the streets in order to survive instead of attending school, the widow with her children living without electricity and running water, the father who found himself without his family, the families living apart in other countries and those buried in mass graves that they were better off today than before we invaded. :stirpot
Overall, 47% say they approve of “attacks on US-led forces” (23% strongly). There are huge differences between ethnic groups. An extraordinary 88% of Sunnis approve, with 77% approving strongly. Forty-one percent of Shia approve as well, but just 9% strongly. Even 16% of Kurds approve (8% strongly). The poll was conducted for WorldPublicOpinion.org by the Program on International Policy Attitudes (PIPA) at the University of Maryland and was fielded by KA Research Limited/D3 Systems, Inc. Polling was conducted January 2-5 with a nationwide sample of 1,150, which included an oversample of 150 Arab Sunnis (hereafter simply called Sunnis). :stirpot
chosenbyone
03-23-2008, 09:36 PM
You are a racist bigot if you defend the words of this idiot.
That was HARSH.
I dont care what kind of context he stated this extremist separatist views in. This guy is the biggest racist and bigot I have ever seen. Did you see the interview with Shawn Hanity and Allan Combs?
This man is a disgrace to Christianity and our country. If he doesnt like it hear, I say we take up a collection and send him to the country of his choice and hear if he still says "God D##M america!
Watch the video again and learn not to throw around such hateful name calling...thanks.
chosenbyone
03-23-2008, 09:55 PM
There is absolutely NO context in which someone can say God **** America (my beloved country) and it will be okay. Sorry. Taking God's name in vain and cursing this country in the same breath--Wow. There was a time when that would get you charged with treason. I kind of miss those days.
MB,
You had wrote above that you didn't apreciate him using God's name in vain. I have known that Jesus was the name of God, so I didn't think that Wright had used God's name in vain when he used GD in the context that he did in his sermon. :coffee2
I would have to say that I personally wouldn't have been comfortable with my pastor using such language. Thank God for Holy Ghost filled pastors.
berkeley
03-23-2008, 09:58 PM
MB,
You had wrote above that you didn't apreciate him using God's name in vain. I have known that Jesus was the name of God, so I didn't think that Wright had used God's name in vain when he used GD in the context that he did in his sermon. :coffee2
I would have to say that I personally wouldn't have been comfortable with my pastor using such language. Thank God for Holy Ghost filled pastors.
The name of God may be "Jesus" as we know it. However, saying "GD", and even "bless God" violates the principle of "Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain".
The name of God may be "Jesus" as we know it. However, saying "GD", and even "bless God" violates the principle of "Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain".
Brother, this is one instance in which that combination of words were used properly and in context.
berkeley
03-23-2008, 10:04 PM
Brother, this is one instance in which that combination of words were used properly and in context.
That's fine. When it is used when someone stubs their toe, it violates the principle of "thou shalt not." :)
MissBrattified
03-23-2008, 10:08 PM
MB,
You had wrote above that you didn't apreciate him using God's name in vain. I have known that Jesus was the name of God, so I didn't think that Wright had used God's name in vain when he used GD in the context that he did in his sermon. :coffee2
I would have to say that I personally wouldn't have been comfortable with my pastor using such language. Thank God for Holy Ghost filled pastors.
CB1, that is a weak argument. :rolleyes: Any reference to God, whether it is "Father", "Lord", "Jehovah", "Jesus", "God", used in a slang and disrespectful manner is unacceptable. I consider any of those usages to be taking God's name in vain.
If it were not, then how could someone have taken His "name" in vain in the Old Testament, before the name "Jesus" was revealed?
CB1, that is a weak argument. :rolleyes: Any reference to God, whether it is "Father", "Lord", "Jehovah", "Jesus", "God", used in a slang and disrespectful manner is unacceptable. I consider any of those usages to be taking God's name in vain.
If it were not, then how could someone have taken His "name" in vain in the Old Testament, before the name "Jesus" was revealed?
Sister, I can't see how you can say JW was using GD as a slang term. He used the term in the way the term is defined, not as a slang term.
That's fine. When it is used when someone stubs their toe, it violates the principle of "thou shalt not." :)
Also, the commandment is to not "take" the name of the Lord in vain, not "use" the name of the Lord in vain. God gave me an interesting nugget on that scripture a few years while I was sitting at a McDonald's eatin some grub. I've posted it before. Maybe I will do it again.
Discerner
03-23-2008, 10:14 PM
Fox did what media does; they put out just enough of what he said to make it newsworthy. I have news for you. I heard apostolic preachers preaching that 9/11 was our own fault because of the things we have done overseas. I've gone to churches that were openly racist, with the pastor using the n word over the pulpit because "all his black friends knew he wasn't using it in a derogatory way". I know preachers that won't marry a black man to a white woman. The point I am making is that what this JW has said really isn't any different than so much of what I have already heard coming across apostolic pulpits. Where are the threads slamming those preachers? Where's the outrage over our own preachers doing some of the same things this JW has done? Why is this such a big deal now? Could it be because Barak Obama is a black man running for President and people in this country don't want to admit that they really don't want a black man to be their President, so they are doing anything and everything they can to discredit him?
You must have gone to Pastor Wright's church since he fits this description. The guy is an idiot racist bigot. I haven't heard this coming across any white pulpits, if so dont you think there would be an outcry. Minorities have more rights in this country then white men will ever have. I would slam any preacher regardless of color if they made these same comments. This guy is a racist plain and simple, and if you agree with him you are a racist as well. These types of people are full of double speak, they claim everybody is racist all the while sprewing racist propoganda.
MissBrattified
03-23-2008, 10:17 PM
Sister, I can't see how you can say JW was using GD as a slang term. He used the term in the way the term is defined, not as a slang term.
Yes, Rico, he did. He called on God to curse this country. And that is totally unacceptable. That is swearing. And if he did not mean it in that context, then it is slang. Either way it is disrespectful and using God's name inappropriately. (in vain) To d*** something is to curse it. (to destruction) To [attempt to]invoke God's power by calling His name with the curse is terrible.
Saying, "God **** America" as an invocation or instructional manner is still to call down a curse upon the country from God, and I can't see how anyone could think that is alright or appropriate. I'm sorry, we don't use those words together, even "in context." First of all, I care more about being respectful to God to speak so frivolously, secondly, I care more about my country to call a curse upon it, no matter what It has done to deserve it, and finally, to invoke God's power in order to proclaim such a curse is definitely taking God's name in vain. It is presumptuous of God's intentions at best.
You must have gone to Pastor Wright's church since he fits this description. The guy is an idiot racist bigot. I haven't heard this coming across any white pulpits, if so dont you think there would be an outcry. Minorities have more rights in this country then white men will ever have. I would slam any preacher regardless of color if they made these same comments. This guy is a racist plain and simple, and if you agree with him you are a racist as well. These types of people are full of double speak, they claim everybody is racist all the while sprewing racist propoganda.
Listen, I let is slide when you called someone else a racist, but you aren't going to get away with it with me. You have lost your mind, if you think you can even come close to pegging me as a racist.
Yes, Rico, he did. He called on God to curse this country. And that is totally unacceptable. That is swearing. And if he did not mean it in that context, then it is slang. Either way it is disrespectful and using God's name inappropriately. (in vain) To d*** something is to curse it. (to destruction) To [attempt to]invoke God's power by calling His name with the curse is terrible.
Saying, "God **** America" as an invocation or instructional manner is still to call down a curse upon the country from God, and I can't see how anyone could think that is alright or appropriate. I'm sorry, we don't use those words together, even "in context." First of all, I care more about being respectful to God to speak so frivolously, secondly, I care more about my country to call a curse upon it, no matter what It has done to deserve it, and finally, to invoke God's power in order to proclaim such a curse is definitely taking God's name in vain. It is presumptuous of God's intentions at best.
Sister, preachers have been calling on God to judge this country for so many years it isn't even funny. What's the difference in a preacher calling on God to judge this country, condemn this country, or d*** this country? None.
MissBrattified
03-23-2008, 10:24 PM
Sister, preachers have been calling on God to judge this country for so many years it isn't even funny. What's the difference in a preacher calling on God to judge this country, condemn this country, or d*** this country? None.
There may not be a difference, I'll agree with you there. I don't think anyone should call down God's judgment. We should be pleading for His mercy.
MissBrattified
03-23-2008, 10:26 PM
You must have gone to Pastor Wright's church since he fits this description. The guy is an idiot racist bigot. I haven't heard this coming across any white pulpits, if so dont you think there would be an outcry. Minorities have more rights in this country then white men will ever have. I would slam any preacher regardless of color if they made these same comments. This guy is a racist plain and simple, and if you agree with him you are a racist as well. These types of people are full of double speak, they claim everybody is racist all the while sprewing racist propoganda.
I disagree with you, Discerner. JW's speech had valid points. They were just made poorly. Personally, I'm not convinced that he is a racist, but I think he is spouting what he thinks his congregation wants or needs to hear. Pandering comes to mind.
Calling names and making conditional statements like "if you agree...you're a racist[too]"--well, I don't see how that allows conversation to progress.
There may not be a difference, I'll agree with you there. I don't think anyone should call down God's judgment. We should be pleading for His mercy.
True. But sometimes preachers are feeling what they are feeling so strong that that's the only way they can get their point across; they call on the judgement of God.
Sister, I can't see how you can say JW was using GD as a slang term. He used the term in the way the term is defined, not as a slang term.
He was calling on God to ************/condemn America for its racist attitude.
He was not intending to "cuss."
... Minorities have more rights in this country then white men will ever have. ...
Surely you must be a racist to say something like that.
We don't say stuff like that.
It's not politically correct.
Affirmative action (some times referred to as "set asides" or "reverse discrimination" or "tilting the playing field") is just a way of trying to correct long-standing inequities.
deacon blues
03-23-2008, 11:11 PM
Well everyone knows Fox is fair and balanced, TR
did you watch both videos?
Neither Hillary or Obama are going to win this race.
Obama is eloquent for sure, but this Rev. Wright business has just neutered what his enitre candidacy is about. He is campaigning on "sound judgment". How can one say he has good judgment when he has listened to this kind of rhetoric for 20 years and never has spoken a word against it?
Obama is campaigning on a "different kind of politics in Washington" and yet he only now distances himself from Wright and throws his white grandmother under the bus for political expediency?
Obama campaigns on the "power of words" and yet wants to dismiss Wright's words as out of context?
I love you DA, but he is going to have to completely rewrite his strategy, which he cant' do because its the only thing beating Hillary. In the general election, these issues will dog him.
Hillary can only become the nominee with under handed tricks, which I think she is fully capable of doing. If she wins the nomination, the black vote, which every Democratic Presidential candidate must have at least in the 90 percentile to win a general election will drop significantly enough that she will not be able to defeat McCain.
Unless McCain is found making hand gestures in public restrooms or found listed in some prostitutes address book, I think the election is his to lose.
But as they say, "In politics a week can be a lifetime." There's a lot of time between now and November.
Discerner
03-23-2008, 11:14 PM
Listen, I let is slide when you called someone else a racist, but you aren't going to get away with it with me. You have lost your mind, if you think you can even come close to pegging me as a racist.
depends on if you agree with him or not. Would you say the man was racist if he were white and spewing this venom about blacks? The Rev IS a racist bigot!!!
depends on if you agree with him or not. Would you say the man was racist if he were white and spewing this venom about blacks? The Rev IS a racist bigot!!!
I don't care what you call him, but you aren't going to get by with calling me a racist. I can promise you that much.
Discerner
03-23-2008, 11:26 PM
I don't care what you call him, but you aren't going to get by with calling me a racist. I can promise you that much.
I dont think I said you were a racist? Show me where I called you a racist.
Discerner
03-23-2008, 11:27 PM
I don't care what you call him, but you aren't going to get by with calling me a racist. I can promise you that much.
Can you answer this question then? Would you say the man was racist if he were white and spewing this venom about blacks?
Can you answer this question then? Would you say the man was racist if he were white and spewing this venom about blacks?
If black people had owned white people, bought and sold white people, hung white people from trees, and made white people fight so hard just for basic human rights and dignity, then no, I would not consider them racist.
deacon blues
03-23-2008, 11:31 PM
True. But sometimes preachers are feeling what they are feeling so strong that that's the only way they can get their point across; they call on the judgement of God.
But it doesn't matter what other preachers are saying; they aren't pastoring a man running for Prez. I don't have a problem with BO's skin. I voted for Alan Keyes back in 2000 primaries, so my opposition to BO has nothing to do with a black man for president. His agenda is way too over the top liberal for me, no matter how eloquent he is. I'm opposed to his positions on the issues that matter most to me.
All I have to say is this: if BO doesn't win either the nomination or the general election, I hope to God his supporters don't revert to, "see America IS racist!" If he loses and the mantra is playing the race card, it will actually set America back on race relations rather than help. The fact that he has come this far shows that America has come a long way. Sure there is more room for improvement, but if the supporters of BO take a position of "either elect him America or its proof you're all racists", they will hurt their cause rather than advance it.
Discerner
03-23-2008, 11:35 PM
If black people had owned white people, bought and sold white people, hung white people from trees, and made white people fight so hard just for basic human rights and dignity, then no, I would not consider them racist.
Look if guys like this preacher dont like the usa, then move out!!! Imagine how he would be treated in the middle east with these types of comments against the government and country. He would be in jail or worse. He is an idiot, matter of fact I would say his comments are not even those of a Christian.
.
But it doesn't matter what other preachers are saying; they aren't pastoring a man running for Prez. I don't have a problem with BO's skin. I voted for Alan Keyes back in 2000 primaries, so my opposition to BO has nothing to do with a black man for president. His agenda is way too over the top liberal for me, no matter how eloquent he is. I'm opposed to his positions on the issues that matter most to me.
All I have to say is this: if BO doesn't win either the nomination or the general election, I hope to God his supporters don't revert to, "see America IS racist!" If he loses and the mantra is playing the race card, it will actually set America back on race relations rather than help. The fact that he has come this far shows that America has come a long way. Sure there is more room for improvement, but if the supporters of BO take a position of "either elect him America or its proof you're all racists", they will hurt their cause rather than advance it.
Well, I will admit that I am a bit nervous about what the response will be, regardless of how things go. I believe he will eventually go all the way to the White House because he seems to draw support from a wider range of Americans than Hillary or McCain. If he does win the Presidency I am worried that someone will either try to kill him, maybe even succeed. If he doesn't win either the nomination or the presidency, then I am worried about what it will do to race relations in this country.
Discerner
03-23-2008, 11:38 PM
But it doesn't matter what other preachers are saying; they aren't pastoring a man running for Prez. I don't have a problem with BO's skin. I voted for Alan Keyes back in 2000 primaries, so my opposition to BO has nothing to do with a black man for president. His agenda is way too over the top liberal for me, no matter how eloquent he is. I'm opposed to his positions on the issues that matter most to me.
All I have to say is this: if BO doesn't win either the nomination or the general election, I hope to God his supporters don't revert to, "see America IS racist!" If he loses and the mantra is playing the race card, it will actually set America back on race relations rather than help. The fact that he has come this far shows that America has come a long way. Sure there is more room for improvement, but if the supporters of BO take a position of "either elect him America or its proof you're all racists", they will hurt their cause rather than advance it.
BO is a good speaker and gets people going. He has no plans of what he wants to change. Also, he has no experience. Two years ago he is a state legislator and we want this clown caring around the suitcase. It has nothing to do with his color, as a matter of fact his color has been favorable for him. These new revelations have all but doomed his candidacy. If he wins the nomination he has alienated enough white democrats to where they probably will just not vote.
Hoovie
03-23-2008, 11:39 PM
I agree with Deacon... as of right now it is McCains to lose.
Look if guys like this preacher dont like the usa, then move out!!! Imagine how he would be treated in the middle east with these types of comments against the government and country. He would be in jail or worse. He is an idiot, matter of fact I would say his comments are not even those of a Christian.
.
Get over yourself Discerner (as if)! Now you are starting to sound like these people who think the answer to the immigration problem is to round them all up and deport them. "If you don't like it here then get out!" This isn't the middle east, so that has nothing to do with the conversation. Apparently, only your point of view is the one that counts, in your mind at least.
Discerner
03-23-2008, 11:40 PM
Well, I will admit that I am a bit nervous about what the response will be, regardless of how things go. I believe he will eventually go all the way to the White House because he seems to draw support from a wider range of Americans than Hillary or McCain. If he does win the Presidency I am worried that someone will either try to kill him, maybe even succeed. If he doesn't win either the nomination or the presidency, then I am worried about what it will do to race relations in this country.
Im sure riots would be the way to go. So you are saying he should be voted in for President just because he is a black man? I'm sure he appeals to a lot less people after we find out what kind of extremist views he has been influenced by the last 20 years. Might as well been at a muslim training school in the middle east.
Im sure riots would be the way to go. So you are saying he should be voted in for President just because he is a black man? I'm sure he appeals to a lot less people after we find out what kind of extremist views he has been influenced by the last 20 years. Might as well been at a muslim training school in the middle east.
I have said nothing about him being voted in as president just because he is a black man. I have, however, said that this country is more ready for a black man as president than it is for a woman as president.
The more you post, the more your prejudices are manifesting themselves. Now he may as well have been at a muslim training school in the middle east. Wonderful. Just wonderful.
Discerner
03-23-2008, 11:45 PM
Get over yourself Discerner (as if)! Now you are starting to sound like these people who think the answer to the immigration problem is to round them all up and deport them. This isn't the middle east, so that has nothing to do with the conversation. Apparently, only your point of view is the one that counts, in your mind at least.
You are right, I am glad you know my politics. I do feel that we should round up all the ILLEGALS in this country for BREAKING the law. If someone came and robbed your house tonight you would want action taken against them, however, you probably think we should let these illegals be rewarded for breaking the law. Ridiculous. I pay too much in taxes to have to clothe, shelter, and provide free medical care to citizens of our friends to the south.
By the way, I forgot the middle east has nothing to do with this conversation. I also forgot about Obama's pastors comments about 911. I guess those had nothing to do with the middle east.
This preacher needs to keep on talking, and talking, and talking. I hope he keeps up with this rhetoric. Best thing that can happen for Barack.
Discerner
03-23-2008, 11:47 PM
I have said nothing about him being voted in as president just because he is a black man. I have, however, said that this country is more ready for a black man as president than it is for a woman as president.
The more you post, the more your prejudices are manifesting themselves. Now he may as well have been at a muslim training school in the middle east. Wonderful. Just wonderful.
Me racist? Im not defending a bigot. I would abhor these comments coming across any church I attended. As a matter of fact it would be serious enough that i would not attend that church. I dont care what race of people he was talking about.
You are right, I am glad you know my politics. I do feel that we should round up all the ILLEGALS in this country for BREAKING the law. If someone came and robbed your house tonight you would want action taken against them, however, you probably think we should let these illegals be rewarded for breaking the law. Ridiculous. I pay too much in taxes to have to clothe, shelter, and provide free medical care to citizens of our friends to the south.
By the way, I forgot the middle east has nothing to do with this conversation. I also forgot about Obama's pastors comments about 911. I guess those had nothing to do with the middle east.
This preacher needs to keep on talking, and talking, and talking. I hope he keeps up with this rhetoric. Best thing that can happen for Barack.
We are probably going to have to take it to another thread, but I would like for you to explain me exactly how we are supposed to round up 12-14 million people and send them back to their native countries. You tell me how much something like that would cost, where the money would come from, and exactly how the logistics would play themselves out. Start a thread on it.
Me racist? Im not defending a bigot. I would abhor these comments coming across any church I attended. As a matter of fact it would be serious enough that i would not attend that church. I dont care what race of people he was talking about.
You are so busy pointing your fingers at him that you are too blind to see the ones you are pointing at yourself. I'm done talking with you.
chosenbyone
03-24-2008, 12:48 AM
JEREMIAH WRIGHT'S CHARACTER WITNESS:
I found it more than a bit amusing that so many have labeled Wright a racist without ever knowing him personally. Below was copied from Mike Slaughter's blog page (http://mikeslaughter.com/blog/?tx_wecdiscussion%5Bsingle%5D=2007) this evening. Slaughter pastors a 4000 member Methodist church and has been instrumental in bringing revival to the Methodist brethren during the last decade. I thought this particular blog was worth sharing.
Dr. Jeremiah Wright has had a powerful ministry at Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago. He has been Barak Obama’s pastor for the last 20 years. Barak made a commitment to follow Jesus under Dr. Wright’s ministry 20 years ago. Jeremiah has initiated many vital social programs in the Chicago area. Numerous young men and women have heard God’s call to preach under his ministry. Frank Thomas, who has spoken at Ginghamsburg on numerous occasions, is but one.
A few isolated clips from Rev. Wright’s sermons are being circulated regularly through the media and on YouTube. They reveal controversial and divisive remarks. So is Dr. Wright a racist, divisive radical or an angry righteous prophet?
Anointed prophets of God are guilty of sometimes saying the wrong thing. I speak from personal experience. Boy, do I ever wish I could take some things back that I have spoken in a rash of anger or in a moment when the inspiration came from some other source than heaven. In an age of Internet and sermon podcasts, those statements continue to play into eternity. I can’t get them back! You could take some of those isolated clips and make me, and anyone associated with me, look like a real jackass, and sometimes for righteous reasons.
Jeremiah and I worked on our doctorates together. We have traveled together and worked on the same Jesus causes. I have never heard a racist statement or seen an unchristian attitude toward any person group in all of my encounters with him. Perhaps Jeremiah is living up to the anointing of his namesake, the prophet activist who ministered in the 6th century BC. The prophet Jeremiah lived during the last days of the Jewish Empire through the Babylonian captivity. Jeremiah was the “angry” prophet who prophesized the demise of his own nation for forsaking God, the Torah and turning to idolatry. He was considered a traitor and declared an outlaw during the reign of Zedekiah for declaring that Judah’s idolatry had been the cause of Babylon’s impending terrorist attack. He was arrested and held as an enemy of the state.
All of God’s prophets have a bit of “Balaam’s ass” in us. Forgive us when we are wrong, but listen carefully for what is right!
JEREMIAH WRIGHT'S CHARACTER WITNESS:
I found it more than a bit amusing that so many have labeled Wright a racist without ever knowing him personally. Below was copied from Mike Slaughter's blog page (http://mikeslaughter.com/blog/?tx_wecdiscussion%5Bsingle%5D=2007) this evening. Slaughter pastors a 4000 member Methodist church and has been instrumental in bringing revival to the Methodist brethren during the last decade. I thought this particular blog was worth sharing.
Dr. Jeremiah Wright has had a powerful ministry at Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago. He has been Barak Obama’s pastor for the last 20 years. Barak made a commitment to follow Jesus under Dr. Wright’s ministry 20 years ago. Jeremiah has initiated many vital social programs in the Chicago area. Numerous young men and women have heard God’s call to preach under his ministry. Frank Thomas, who has spoken at Ginghamsburg on numerous occasions, is but one.
A few isolated clips from Rev. Wright’s sermons are being circulated regularly through the media and on YouTube. They reveal controversial and divisive remarks. So is Dr. Wright a racist, divisive radical or an angry righteous prophet?
Anointed prophets of God are guilty of sometimes saying the wrong thing. I speak from personal experience. Boy, do I ever wish I could take some things back that I have spoken in a rash of anger or in a moment when the inspiration came from some other source than heaven. In an age of Internet and sermon podcasts, those statements continue to play into eternity. I can’t get them back! You could take some of those isolated clips and make me, and anyone associated with me, look like a real jackass, and sometimes for righteous reasons.
Jeremiah and I worked on our doctorates together. We have traveled together and worked on the same Jesus causes. I have never heard a racist statement or seen an unchristian attitude toward any person group in all of my encounters with him. Perhaps Jeremiah is living up to the anointing of his namesake, the prophet activist who ministered in the 6th century BC. The prophet Jeremiah lived during the last days of the Jewish Empire through the Babylonian captivity. Jeremiah was the “angry” prophet who prophesized the demise of his own nation for forsaking God, the Torah and turning to idolatry. He was considered a traitor and declared an outlaw during the reign of Zedekiah for declaring that Judah’s idolatry had been the cause of Babylon’s impending terrorist attack. He was arrested and held as an enemy of the state.
All of God’s prophets have a bit of “Balaam’s ass” in us. Forgive us when we are wrong, but listen carefully for what is right!
Chosen, you know as well as I do that this whole JW thing has nothing to do with JW. It's just a way of discrediting Barak Obama. After all, no one thought he would make it as far as he has.
TRFrance
03-24-2008, 02:37 AM
How different is that from any of our people staying at a church where the preacher won't marry mixed couples because of not believing in mixing of the races? It's no different.
Whatever, bro. Your logic is pathetic here.
Rather than properly criticizing bad behavior, instead you try to justify it by pointing out someone else's other bad behavior. Very, very weak.
I guess you've never heard of "two wrongs don't make a right".
Frankly, I think you're too emotional about this to really think with a clear mind on this issue.
scotty
03-24-2008, 05:37 AM
Whatever, bro. Your logic is pathetic here.
Rather than properly criticizing bad behavior, instead you try to justify it by pointing out someone else's other bad behavior. Very, very weak.
I guess you've never heard of "two wrongs don't make a right".
Frankly, I think you're too emotional about this to really think with a clear mind on this issue.
I also have noticed alot of feelings involved in Rico's post. You can't mix feelings with politics, just ask Christopher Hall.
To me the context and content of what he said is all after thought, the first thing you have to address is a preacher preaching the politics of MAN from the pulpit of GOD....Until you can justify that , the rest is just coffee shop talk.
TRFrance
03-24-2008, 06:14 AM
OBAMA IS TOAST
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZTFiNDgzODJjYzRmYjFiYjUxYWZkMWY4MzU2Nzg5ZTM=
Obama's toast. He may yet get the Democratic nomination, but tens of millions of Americans who are neither (a) black nor (b) guilty white liberals are simply appalled that Obama would revere a guy like Jeremiah Wright for 20 years, whatever the particularities of which services he did and didn't attend. It defies belief that Obama knew this man for all that time, intimately enough to have him supervise at the Obama wedding and the children's baptisms, yet did not know that Wright is a white-hating, America-hating crank. Who on earth believes this?
The MSM can't smother this, not in the age of the web, though they are trying mightily. (The Sunday New York Times "Week in Review" Section had nothing about Wright; neither did the main news section.) Americans are a fair-minded people, who find double standards obnoxious. A guy who says "nappy-headed ho's" in an irreverent radio show is dragged round the city walls behind a chariot to the delighted howls of a mob of self-righteous "anti-racists"; yet a man who uses the authority of the cloth to ************ our country and curse white people, is praised as a "biblical scholar" by a candidate for the presidency? I don't think so. This won't stand. The man is toast.
Pressing-On
03-24-2008, 06:21 AM
OBAMA IS TOAST
http://corner.nationalreview.com/post/?q=ZTFiNDgzODJjYzRmYjFiYjUxYWZkMWY4MzU2Nzg5ZTM=
Obama's toast. He may yet get the Democratic nomination, but tens of millions of Americans who are neither (a) black nor (b) guilty white liberals are simply appalled that Obama would revere a guy like Jeremiah Wright for 20 years, whatever the particularities of which services he did and didn't attend. It defies belief that Obama knew this man for all that time, intimately enough to have him supervise at the Obama wedding and the children's baptisms, yet did not know that Wright is a white-hating, America-hating crank. Who on earth believes this?
The MSM can't smother this, not in the age of the web, though they are trying mightily. (The Sunday New York Times "Week in Review" Section had nothing about Wright; neither did the main news section.) Americans are a fair-minded people, who find double standards obnoxious. A guy who says "nappy-headed ho's" in an irreverent radio show is dragged round the city walls behind a chariot to the delighted howls of a mob of self-righteous "anti-racists"; yet a man who uses the authority of the cloth to ************ our country and curse white people, is praised as a "biblical scholar" by a candidate for the presidency? I don't think so. This won't stand. The man is toast.
TRFrance,
This is the part that I think is important from your link:
The emerging line I'm getting from the media, from people I know, and online, regarding Rev. Wright goes something like this. "Many black churches have a certain style of preaching that includes rhetoric of passion, even anger, directed at the political and social system. This communication style must be appreciated in the context of the African-American church. Non-blacks shouldn't be offended by this style, as the metaphors, images and language of the style are not intended to offend. This style should be appreciated as an interactive performance of empowerment, not as a literal communication of facts."
I understand this and I certainly don't want to go around criticizing other peoples' church experiences. However, I think the Obama campaign should understand that many non-blacks (such as myself and my Japanese-American wife) have a certain style of voting that excludes support for the rhetoric of anger, as exemplified by Rev. Wright. And we certainly don't appreciate anyone criticizing our voting experience.
We are asked to understand and appreciate the anger......No wonder, for them, the changes comes slowly.
TRFrance
03-24-2008, 06:36 AM
We are asked to understand and appreciate the anger......No wonder, for them, the changes comes slowly.
If by "them" you mean black Americans, I hope you don't have the opinion that all or even most blacks think the way Jeremiah Wright does. I think that would be an unfortunate misperception of the way things actually are.
And the stuff that Jeremiah Wright preaches is not the norm in black churches. It is definitely out there, and is even popular in some circles, but it doesn't represent the majority of "black church" experiences on Sunday mornings.
I frankly think Jeremiah Wright has doing a disservice to the image of black churches, and so has the media, by giving people the impression that this stuff is normative in black churches, when it is definitely not.
Pressing-On
03-24-2008, 06:37 AM
Excellent article!
(excerpt)
When the Past is Past: Some Bad Things are Dead and Buried
By Suzanne Fields
Monday, March 24, 2008Obama deftly quoted William Faulkner's famous remark that the past is not dead because it isn't even past. But the reference was misplaced. The past when a black man was considered three-fifths of a person for purposes of allocating congressional seats is definitely dead, and buried. The past when black men and women were denied the right to vote is definitely dead and buried. The past when all Americans were required to pay a poll tax to vote is definitely dead, and buried. The past when restaurants, restrooms and schools were segregated by law is definitely dead, and buried.
He was correct in observing that Jeremiah Wright and millions of other black Americans came of age when segregation was still the law of the land and widely practiced even in places where it was not the law. But it's important to observe that they, like the rest of us, have also matured if not necessarily mellowed in the four decades since the Civil Rights Movement turned things upside down and inside out, putting them aright.
There will always be more to do in order to create that elusive "more perfect union," but it's important for spiritual -- and political -- leaders to remind us that social conscience has sometimes done its work, that some things in the past are definitely dead, and buried.
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/SuzanneFields/2008/03/24/when_the_past_is_past_some_bad_things_are_dead_and _buried
Pressing-On
03-24-2008, 06:43 AM
If by "them" you mean black Americans, I hope you don't have the opinion that all or even most blacks think the way Jeremiah Wright does. I think that would be an unfortunate misperception of the way things actually are.
And the stuff that Jeremiah Wright preaches is not the norm in black churches. It is definitely out there, and is even popular in some circles, but it doesn't represent the majority of "black church" experiences on Sunday mornings.
I frankly think Jeremiah Wright has doing a disservice to the image of black churches, and so has the media, by giving people the impression that this stuff is normative in black churches, when it is definitely not.
I believe in Obama's speech he said this was typical of a black church. I'm not sure that I can agree with you. It hasn't been my experience.
Let me find the quote.
That has been my experience at Trinity. Like other predominantly black churches across the country, Trinity embodies the black community in its entirety — the doctor and the welfare mom, the model student and the former gang-banger. Like other black churches, Trinity’s services are full of raucous laughter and sometimes bawdy humor. They are full of dancing, clapping, screaming and shouting that may seem jarring to the untrained ear. The church contains in full the kindness and cruelty, the fierce intelligence and the shocking ignorance, the struggles and successes, the love and yes, the bitterness and bias that make up the black experience in America.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0308/9100_Page2.html
We can say that all churches are made up of the same, but he seems to be, in the same breath, accepting of Wright, IMO. Just my take.
And if he gets in the White House will his pastor visit? Will he advise him spiritually and politically?
We have a situation between the DA and the black community where I live right now. I think I am slanted on the issue right now, honestly.
If by "them" you mean black Americans, I hope you don't have the opinion that all or even most blacks think the way Jeremiah Wright does. I think that would be an unfortunate misperception of the way things actually are.
And the stuff that Jeremiah Wright preaches is not the norm in black churches. It is definitely out there, and is even popular in some circles, but it doesn't represent the majority of "black church" experiences on Sunday mornings.
I frankly think Jeremiah Wright has doing a disservice to the image of black churches, and so has the media, by giving people the impression that this stuff is normative in black churches, when it is definitely not.
Your thinking is correct...
So has anyone bought this pack of silliness that Chosen is selling?
Fox bad
Wright good?
LOL!
Discerner
03-24-2008, 07:32 AM
You are so busy pointing your fingers at him that you are too blind to see the ones you are pointing at yourself. I'm done talking with you.
That is fine at least I am the one who is standing against a racist bigot who you are trying to defend. You want to say its ok for a black man to make racist remarks because of slavery and civil rights. Then you need to get over that. That is a dark period of our history and thank God I wasn't around for that. However, the past is the past. We have minorities that have gotten used to segregating on their own when it is good for them. They have historically black colleges, latino gatherings, etc., I think Martin Luther King wanted everyone treated equal, and now we see where his great message of hope has been prostituted into the fact that minorities get special treatment. What if there was a white history month, white appreciation days, etc. You have got to be able to see the double standard that has become the norm in our country. N
SOUNWORTHY
03-24-2008, 07:54 AM
That is fine at least I am the one who is standing against a racist bigot who you are trying to defend. You want to say its ok for a black man to make racist remarks because of slavery and civil rights. Then you need to get over that. That is a dark period of our history and thank God I wasn't around for that. However, the past is the past. We have minorities that have gotten used to segregating on their own when it is good for them. They have historically black colleges, latino gatherings, etc., I think Martin Luther King wanted everyone treated equal, and now we see where his great message of hope has been prostituted into the fact that minorities get special treatment. What if there was a white history month, white appreciation days, etc. You have got to be able to see the double standard that has become the norm in our country. N
There are those minorities who don't want equal rights they want all the rights.
That is fine at least I am the one who is standing against a racist bigot who you are trying to defend. You want to say its ok for a black man to make racist remarks because of slavery and civil rights. Then you need to get over that. That is a dark period of our history and thank God I wasn't around for that. However, the past is the past. We have minorities that have gotten used to segregating on their own when it is good for them. They have historically black colleges, latino gatherings, etc., I think Martin Luther King wanted everyone treated equal, and now we see where his great message of hope has been prostituted into the fact that minorities get special treatment. What if there was a white history month, white appreciation days, etc. You have got to be able to see the double standard that has become the norm in our country. N
No double standard...for YEARS there were no people of color in magazines unless it was a Jesse Owens type. SO Mr. John H. Johnson founded Jet and Ebony. Nothing racist there...
Black History Month?! It was started by Carter Woodson, son of former slaves, who was disturbed to find the absence of Blacks in history books...if they were mentioned, it was in an inferior way, or sparingly, like George Washington Carver's accomplishments.
Black colleges?! It is because they couldn't be admitted into White schools.
Latino gatherings?! What is wrong with people of like heritage getting together?!
As for racism, is it alive and well YET today...again, my experience as a White woman in the Black community allowed me to see things first hand.
Are all things equal?! No way...
Is there racism on both sides?! You bet!!
But it's not just a "slavery is over...get over it" deal...it's about a 17 yr. old Apostolic girl being mistreated in a 7 Eleven...yes, in this century!!
It's about stuff you nor I can truly understand because we are not Black or Indian or Hispanic or Asian or of Middle Eastern descent.
I am not in favor of special treatment, but I am in favor of FAIR treatment...JMO...
DividedThigh
03-24-2008, 08:35 AM
where are all these obama and j wright apologists coming from, i dont believe there is any excuse for the things he said, they are hateful, and have no place in a sermon, and certainly mister obama cant expect me to believe that he didnt know this was going on in his own church, my own opinion of course, no excuse, dt:kickcan
where are all these obama and j wright apologists coming from, i dont believe there is any excuse for the things he said, they are hateful, and have no place in a sermon, and certainly mister obama cant expect me to believe that he didnt know this was going on in his own church, my own opinion of course, no excuse, dt:kickcan
The scottish will defend eating Hagis (sp) too.
makes no sense to me.
DividedThigh
03-24-2008, 08:40 AM
The scottish will defend eating Hagis (sp) too.
makes no sense to me.
i will have to admit ferd that i was not aware of how many bleeding heart, hate america libs that were in the church, interesting, dt
chosenbyone
03-24-2008, 08:51 AM
Chosen, you know as well as I do that this whole JW thing has nothing to do with JW. It's just a way of discrediting Barak Obama. After all, no one thought he would make it as far as he has.
You're so right! This (JW story) is starting to be the "swift boat" story of this year's Presidential campaign. :bubble
chosenbyone
03-24-2008, 08:54 AM
So has anyone bought this pack of silliness that Chosen is selling?
Fox bad
Wright good?
LOL!
Hey, now...don't you start ganging up on me! :boxing I am just a man on a mission to uncover the truth during this season of lies, distortion and mud-slinging. Besides, I like turtles!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4B-K4NGo2HE&NR=1
DividedThigh
03-24-2008, 08:57 AM
hey the swift boat vets were just as credible as that john kerry guy, even more in my opinion, and still no excuse for jw comments, dt
COOPER
03-24-2008, 08:57 AM
He was calling on God to ************/condemn America for its racist attitude.
He was not intending to "cuss."
When he says "America" who exactly is he wanting God to send ************ation?
Whites only?:kickcan
Hey, now...don't you start ganging up on me! :boxing I am just a man on a mission to uncover the truth during this season of lies, distortion and mud-slinging. Besides, I like turtles!
Can I ask you a serious question? How serious are you about the truth?
As it relates to this subject, do you want the actual facts or are you just trying to point out the counter hyperbole?
I ask this because i posted something that ought to be very much considered in looking for the truth....it seems to have been overlooked.
Pastor Wright states he quoted an Ambassedor in that tyrade about 9/11.
the only part that the Ambassedor actually said was "Chickens come home to roost" the Ambassedor did not wax elequent on indians getting waxed by white terrorists or America bombing Japan without batting an eye....
So was fox lying? do you consider your depiction of the context to be truthful?
Ferd,
Anyone comparing us bombing Hiroshima and Nagasaki in WWII to the 9-11 terrorist attack are so off their rocker and contemptable it is almost beyond words.
Those WWII bombings happened in the context of war and by all credible accounts probably save around one million allied lives and countless Japanese ones had the war continued.
So few Americans are students of history they have no clue of the context of those bombings. They only hear the wacko left cry that we were horrible for killing 160,000 people.
Look if guys like this preacher dont like the usa, then move out!!! Imagine how he would be treated in the middle east with these types of comments against the government and country. He would be in jail or worse. He is an idiot, matter of fact I would say his comments are not even those of a Christian.
.
That's one of the ways we are better than other countries.
DividedThigh
03-24-2008, 09:39 AM
Ferd,
Anyone comparing us bombing Hiroshima and Nagasaki in WWII to the 9-11 terrorist attack are so off their rocker and contemptable it is almost beyond words.
Those WWII bombings happened in the context of war and by all credible accounts probably save around one million allied lives and countless Japanese ones had the war continued.
So few Americans are students of history they have no clue of the context of those bombings. They only hear the wacko left cry that we were horrible for killing 160,000 people.
all true, good post cc1, be careful now some folks dont want to hear truth or common sense, which isnt so common anymore,dt
Ferd,
Anyone comparing us bombing Hiroshima and Nagasaki in WWII to the 9-11 terrorist attack are so off their rocker and contemptable it is almost beyond words.
Those WWII bombings happened in the context of war and by all credible accounts probably save around one million allied lives and countless Japanese ones had the war continued.
So few Americans are students of history they have no clue of the context of those bombings. They only hear the wacko left cry that we were horrible for killing 160,000 people.
Agreed. the added comment that action in Japan was "without batting an eye" is an out and out lie, and of Jerimiah Wrights own invention.
Truman agonized over the decision for weeks before, and the remainder of his life after. It was not done as Wright suggests on some whim with blood lust as the motive.
but Foxnews lied because Wright heard some two bit former ambassedor say the words "Chickens come home to roost".
chosenbyone
03-24-2008, 09:46 AM
Can I ask you a serious question? How serious are you about the truth?
As it relates to this subject, do you want the actual facts or are you just trying to point out the counter hyperbole?
I ask this because i posted something that ought to be very much considered in looking for the truth....it seems to have been overlooked.
Pastor Wright states he quoted an Ambassador in that trade about 9/11.
the only part that the Ambassador actually said was "Chickens come home to roost" the Ambassador did not wax eloquent on Indians getting waxed by white terrorists or America bombing Japan without batting an eye....
So was fox lying? do you consider your depiction of the context to be truthful?
Ferd,
When this story first broke, I was shocked and upset when I heard JW preach....just like many here; however, I didn't just stop there, but I began to spend hours pouring over as much information I could regarding JEW and his church.
The more I uncovered the more I realized that this man was being unfairly pigeonholed on his Afrocentric ideology and not judged on his overall life's work. He had done more for the inner-city community in Chicago than any government agency could have imagined. His work with the HIV/AIDS community stood out because he was willing to help when Reagan wouldn't even say the word AIDS.
He demonstrated more Christ-like virtue and compassion than many ministers had and when I looked at the "whole picture", his infrequent racially charged ramblings faded in importance.
I read an article by Anderson Cooper where he objectively investigated the story behind the story with JW's sermons. I'll post it in a minute...read it....it is fair and balanced journalism at its best.
BTW, I am not some lilly-livered liberal. I am a Conservative and I have been involved with the pro-life movement since 1991. The dilemma that I am having with Obama is his stand on many social issues...mainly abortion. As a Christian, I don't think that I will be able to vote for anyone this year. McCain and Hillary are two peas in a pod and though I have respect for Obama and will continue to press for the truth when the spin machine leaks slanderous stories, I will more than likely sit this one out!
chosenbyone
03-24-2008, 09:50 AM
The full story behind Rev. Jeremiah Wright’s 9/11 sermon
Posted: 10:09 AM ET
Editor’s note: CNN Contributor Roland Martin has listened to several of the sermons of Rev. Jeremiah Wright from Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago. Portions of the sermons have been excerpted in recent stories.
As this whole sordid episode regarding the sermons of the Rev. Jeremiah Wright has played out over the last week, I wanted to understand what he ACTUALLY said in this speech. I’ve been saying all week on CNN that context is important, and I just wanted to know what the heck is going on.
I have now actually listened to the sermon Rev. Wright gave after September 11 titled, “The Day of Jerusalem’s Fall.” It was delivered on Sept. 16, 2001.
One of the most controversial statements in this sermon was when he mentioned “chickens coming home to roost.” He was actually quoting Edward Peck, former U.S. Ambassador to Iraq and deputy director of President Reagan’s terrorism task force, who was speaking on FOX News. That’s what he told the congregation.
He was quoting Peck as saying that America’s foreign policy has put the nation in peril:
I heard Ambassador Peck on an interview yesterday did anybody else see or hear him? He was on FOX News, this is a white man, and he was upsetting the FOX News commentators to no end, he pointed out, a white man, an ambassador, he pointed out that what Malcolm X said when he was silenced by Elijah Mohammad was in fact true, he said Americas chickens, are coming home to roost.”
“We took this country by terror away from the Sioux, the Apache, Arikara, the Comanche, the Arapaho, the Navajo. Terrorism.
“We took Africans away from their country to build our way of ease and kept them enslaved and living in fear. Terrorism.
“We bombed Grenada and killed innocent civilians, babies, non-military personnel.
“We bombed the black civilian community of Panama with stealth bombers and killed unarmed teenage and toddlers, pregnant mothers and hard working fathers.
“We bombed Qaddafi’s home, and killed his child. Blessed are they who bash your children’s head against the rock.
“We bombed Iraq. We killed unarmed civilians trying to make a living. We bombed a plant in Sudan to pay back for the attack on our embassy, killed hundreds of hard working people, mothers and fathers who left home to go that day not knowing that they’d never get back home.
“We bombed Hiroshima. We bombed Nagasaki, and we nuked far more than the thousands in New York and the Pentagon and we never batted an eye.
“Kids playing in the playground. Mothers picking up children after school. Civilians, not soldiers, people just trying to make it day by day.
“We have supported state terrorism against the Palestinians and black South Africans, and now we are indignant because the stuff that we have done overseas is now brought right back into our own front yards. America’s chickens are coming home to roost.
“Violence begets violence. Hatred begets hatred. And terrorism begets terrorism. A white ambassador said that y’all, not a black militant. Not a reverend who preaches about racism. An ambassador whose eyes are wide open and who is trying to get us to wake up and move away from this dangerous precipice upon which we are now poised. The ambassador said the people we have wounded don’t have the military capability we have. But they do have individuals who are willing to die and take thousands with them. And we need to come to grips with that.”
He went on to describe seeing the photos of the aftermath of 9/11 because he was in Newark, N.J., when the planes struck. After turning on the TV and seeing the second plane slam into one of the twin towers, he spoke passionately about what if you never got a chance to say hello to your family again.
“What is the state of your family?” he asked.
And then he told his congregation that he loved them and asked the church to tell each other they loved themselves.
His sermon thesis:
1. This is a time for self-examination of ourselves and our families.
2. This is a time for social transformation (then he went on to say they won’t put me on PBS or national cable for what I’m about to say. Talk about prophetic!)
“We have got to change the way we have been doing things as a society,” he said.
Wright then said we can’t stop messing over people and thinking they can’t touch us. He said we may need to declare war on racism, injustice, and greed, instead of war on other countries.
“Maybe we need to declare war on AIDS. In five minutes the Congress found $40 billion to rebuild New York and the families that died in sudden death, do you think we can find the money to make medicine available for people who are dying a slow death? Maybe we need to declare war on the nation’s healthcare system that leaves the nation’s poor with no health coverage? Maybe we need to declare war on the mishandled educational system and provide quality education for everybody, every citizen, based on their ability to learn, not their ability to pay. This is a time for social transformation.”
3. This is time to tell God thank you for all that he has provided and that he gave him and others another chance to do His will.
By the way, nowhere in this sermon did he said “God ************ America.” I’m not sure which sermon that came from.
This doesn’t explain anything away, nor does it absolve Wright of using the N-word, but what it does do is add an accurate perspective to this conversation.
The point that I have always made as a journalist is that our job is to seek the truth, and not the partial truth.
I am also listening to the other sermons delivered by Rev. Wright that have been the subject of controversy.
And let me be clear: Where I believe he was wrong and not justified in what he said based upon the facts, I will say so. But where the facts support his argument, that will also be said.
So stay tuned.
ChristopherHall
03-24-2008, 09:52 AM
Does anyone know how Rev. Wright's sermon ended?
I guess a preacher can't preach against America's sin anymore unless it's a sin according to the Religious Right.
Ferd,
When this story first broke, I was shocked and upset by what I heard JW preach....just like many here; however, I didn't just stop there, but I began to spend hours pouring over as much information I could regarding JEW and his church.
The more I uncovered the more I realized that this man was being unfairly pigeonholed on his Afrocentric ideology and not judged on his overall life's work. He had done more for the inner-city community in Chicago than any government agency could have imagined. His work with the HIV/AIDS community stood out because he was willing to help when Reagan wouldn't even say the word AIDS.
He demonstrated more Christ-like virtue and compassion than many ministers had and when I looked at the "whole picture", his infrequent racially charged ramblings faded in importance.
I read an article by Anderson Cooper where he objectively investigated the story behind the story with JW's sermons. I'll post it in a minute...read it....it is fair and balanced journalism at its best.
BTW, I am not some lilly-livered liberal. I am a Conservative and I have been involved with the pro-life movement since 1991. The dilemma that I am having with Obama is his stand on many social issues...mainly abortion. As a Christian, I don't think that I will be able to vote for anyone this year. McCain and Hillary are two peas in a pod and though I have respect for Obama and will continue to press for the truth when the spin machine leaks slanderous stories, I will more than likely sit this one out!
you didnt answer the question. further you are ignoring one fundmental fact.
"Chickens come home to roost" was the only part of JWs comments that was a quote. The rest was of his own invention.
Where his comments concerning dropping an Atom Bomb on Japan accurate? Justifiable?
Agreed. the added comment that action in Japan was "without batting an eye" is an out and out lie, and of Jerimiah Wrights own invention.
Truman agonized over the decision for weeks before, and the remainder of his life after. It was not done as Wright suggests on some whim with blood lust as the motive.
but Foxnews lied because Wright heard some two bit former ambassedor say the words "Chickens come home to roost".
We were in a war.
We had been attacked by Japan.
The Japanese had vowed to fight to the death.
An invasion of Japan with a slow complete ground military operation and occupation was considered and the loss in both American and Japanese lives was considered.
The use of the Bomb was an option which saved many lives --both Japanese and American.
We were in a war.
We had been attacked by Japan.
The Japanese had vowed to fight to the death.
An invasion of Japan with a slow complete ground military operation and occupation was considered and the loss in both American and Japanese lives was considered.
The use of the Bomb was an option which saved many lives --both Japanese and American.
The number of One Million was American Casualties only. There is no telling how many Japanese were spared by the action.
Even the Japanese have stated as much.
ChristopherHall
03-24-2008, 09:59 AM
you didnt answer the question. further you are ignoring one fundmental fact.
"Chickens come home to roost" was the only part of JWs comments that was a quote. The rest was of his own invention.
Where his comments concerning dropping an Atom Bomb on Japan accurate? Justifiable?
I think some of his statements are over the top but we must remove the beam from our own eyes before trying to remove the mote out of the eyes of another.
The Republicans are terrified of facing Obama in a General Election...therefore they will stop at nothing to destroy his reputation before the eyes of the American people.
I think a preacher should be able to preach what they think. I'll tell you the SAME thing Wright told you...American will face the wrath of God for a host of sins and among them are her sins against entire people groups. When God judges nations he does so according to the full cup principle. One day America's cup will be full and the Lord will force her to drink his wrath.
Pressing-On
03-24-2008, 10:00 AM
I think some of his statements are over the top but we must remove the beam from our own eyes before trying to remove the mote out of the eyes of another.
The Republicans are terrified of facing Obama in a General Election...therefore they will stop at nothing to destroy his reputation before the eyes of the American people.
I think a preacher should be able to preach what they think. I'll tell you the SAME thing Wright told you...American will face the wrath of God for a host of sins and among them are her sins against entire people groups. When God judges nations he does so according to the full cup principle. One day America's cup will be full and the Lord will force her to drink his wrath.
CH,
I haven't read that anywhere. Could you post a link to support your statement? TIA
ChristopherHall
03-24-2008, 10:00 AM
We were in a war.
We had been attacked by Japan.
The Japanese had vowed to fight to the death.
An invasion of Japan with a slow complete ground military operation and occupation was considered and the loss in both American and Japanese lives was considered.
The use of the Bomb was an option which saved many lives --both Japanese and American.
Some in the early church would argue that it would be better to surrender to a foriegn invader than to kill multiplied masses of innocent people.
I'm not saying I'm against our use of the bomb...I'm just considering another perspective beyond the Christian Nationalist perspective of the right wing.
ChristopherHall
03-24-2008, 10:03 AM
CH,
I haven't read that anywhere. Could you post a link to support your statement? TIA
Polls were showing that McCain and Hillary were closer to a tie and that in some polls McCain actually beat Hillary. But in nearly every poll prior to this issue Obama won hands down. This is the Repbulican attack machine at work.
They will attack any one and anything if it will secure their power. Nothing is sacred or left to be another's opinion or experience. Everything becomes subject to THEIR judgment and THEIR interpretation.
Pressing-On
03-24-2008, 10:04 AM
Polls were showing that McCain and Hillary were closer to a tie and that in some polls McCain actually beat Hillary. But in nearly every poll prior to this issue Obama won hands down. This is the Repbulican attack machine at work.
They will attack any one and anything if it will secure their power. Nothing is sacred or left to be another's opinion or experience. Everything becomes subject to THEIR judgment and THEIR interpretation.
I've seen that McCain has had a 6 to 8 margin lead on Obama. 3 points is basically a tie for the give and take.
chosenbyone
03-24-2008, 10:14 AM
Where his comments concerning dropping an Atom Bomb on Japan accurate? Justifiable?
“We bombed Hiroshima. We bombed Nagasaki, and we nuked far more than the thousands in New York and the Pentagon and we never batted an eye.
“Kids playing in the playground. Mothers picking up children after school. Civilians, not soldiers, people just trying to make it day by day."
“Violence begets violence. Hatred begets hatred. And terrorism begets terrorism."
You mean the comments from JW's sermon above? The short answer would be yes his comments were justifiable.
DividedThigh
03-24-2008, 10:20 AM
boy the wind is blowing like a hurricane on here today, good thing i am northwest of it, lol,dt
chosenbyone
03-24-2008, 10:22 AM
The number of One Million was American Casualties only. There is no telling how many Japanese were spared by the action.
Even the Japanese have stated as much.
Japan's civilian population were starving, which our nation must have known before dropping the bomb killing innocent people. I can't except that Jesus approved the killing of so many innocent civilians who were trying to survive massive food shortages.
FOXNEWS.COM HOME > POLITICS AP Poll: 60 Percent Say WWIII Is Likely
Sunday, July 24, 2005
Two-thirds of Americans say the use of atomic bombs was unavoidable. Only 20 percent of Japanese felt that way and three-fourths said it was not necessary. Just one-half of Americans approve of the use of the atomic bombs on Japan
But military instructor Hugh "D.J." Carlen, who lives near Fort Knox, Ky., said: "I don't think we really needed to do it. We darn near had the country starved to death. We could have effected a blockade."
Skepticism about the bombings is widespread in Japan.
"I often hear the bombings were not necessary," said Toyokazu Katsumi, a 27-year-old engineer from Yokohama. "They just wanted to experiment with them."
For 63-year-old Masashi Muroi of Tokyo, the attacks with atomic bombs "were mass, indiscriminate killings and perhaps violated international law."
For younger people, World War II is something seen only on newsreel footage, in the movies and in history books. For those who lived through it, the memories are vivid.
Hideko Mori, a 71-year-old Tokyo housewife, said that as a child in Nagano in central Japan, she and her neighbors had to take refuge to avoid American air raids.
"Around the time I was in the 5th grade, when we went to school, instead of attending classes, we plowed the school grounds and planted potatoes and pumpkins, and we dug up bomb shelters," she said.
COOPER
03-24-2008, 10:29 AM
“We bombed Hiroshima. We bombed Nagasaki, and we nuked far more than the thousands in New York and the Pentagon and we never batted an eye.
“Kids playing in the playground. Mothers picking up children after school. Civilians, not soldiers, people just trying to make it day by day."
“Violence begets violence. Hatred begets hatred. And terrorism begets terrorism."
You mean the comments from JW's sermon above? The short answer would be yes his comments were justifiable.
What did we ever do to beget violence from Ben Laden?
Japan did not fly Airplanes into the towers on 9-11.
It was not Japan dancing in the streets that day.
Japan is a freind to America after all that has happened between our countries.
America does not have hate and racism now for the Japanese.
BrotherEastman
03-24-2008, 10:34 AM
Whether Fox News lied or not is irrelevent; the fact that Obama allowed JW to be his pastor for 20 years says enough for me. No one can tell me that he isn't poisoned by the hatred JW poured out of his own mouth.
chosenbyone
03-24-2008, 10:36 AM
We were in a war.
We had been attacked by Japan.
The Japanese had vowed to fight to the death.
An invasion of Japan with a slow complete ground military operation and occupation was considered and the loss in both American and Japanese lives was considered.
The use of the Bomb was an option which saved many lives --both Japanese and American.
Don't you think that we could have demonstrated the power of the A-bomb by dropping it in a remote area away from populated cities? We could have potentially avoided killing hundred of thousands of people by scaring the Japenese that their cities would be destroyed instead of using it the way we did.
BrotherEastman
03-24-2008, 10:39 AM
I think some of his statements are over the top but we must remove the beam from our own eyes before trying to remove the mote out of the eyes of another.
The Republicans are terrified of facing Obama in a General Election...therefore they will stop at nothing to destroy his reputation before the eyes of the American people.
I think a preacher should be able to preach what they think. I'll tell you the SAME thing Wright told you...American will face the wrath of God for a host of sins and among them are her sins against entire people groups. When God judges nations he does so according to the full cup principle. One day America's cup will be full and the Lord will force her to drink his wrath.
Sources please?
Pressing-On
03-24-2008, 10:39 AM
TRFrance,
We are asked to understand and appreciate the anger......No wonder, for them, the changes comes slowly.
If by "them" you mean black Americans, I hope you don't have the opinion that all or even most blacks think the way Jeremiah Wright does. I think that would be an unfortunate misperception of the way things actually are.
And the stuff that Jeremiah Wright preaches is not the norm in black churches. It is definitely out there, and is even popular in some circles, but it doesn't represent the majority of "black church" experiences on Sunday mornings.
I frankly think Jeremiah Wright has doing a disservice to the image of black churches, and so has the media, by giving people the impression that this stuff is normative in black churches, when it is definitely not.
TRFrance,
I thought you would be interested in this article:
(excerpt)
Faith, Race and Politics
By Harry R. Jackson, Jr.
Monday, March 24, 2008
Once on the air (Hannity and Colmes), my jitters disappeared. It was a great opportunity for me to share that the Church must lead the way in solving the problem of race in America. My loyalty to biblical faith is greater than my allegiance to my ethnic group. Many ministers under 40 years of age share my feeling, while those over 60 are often entrenched in an antiquated, old school, civil rights mindset.
After the program, I made a decision to be a greater agent of racial reconciliation than ever before. In 1981, I led a team that pioneered a new church in Corning, New York that was 95 -97% white. As the senior leader, I had to confront my own anger and bitterness in order to develop the church. My white co-author, Tony Perkins, and I share a common goal to assist the Church in uniting to solve the seven most pressing problems of our day, including race.
http://www.townhall.com/columnists/HarryRJacksonJr/2008/03/24/faith,_race_and_politics
Pressing-On
03-24-2008, 10:40 AM
Whether Fox News lied or not is irrelevent; the fact that Obama allowed JW to be his pastor for 20 years says enough for me. No one can tell me that he isn't poisoned by the hatred JW poured out of his own mouth.
Nice Avatar, BE!
chosenbyone
03-24-2008, 10:40 AM
What did we ever do to beget violence from Ben Laden?
Japan did not fly Airplanes into the towers on 9-11.
It was not Japan dancing in the streets that day.
Japan is a freind to America after all that has happened between our countries.
America does not have hate and racism now for the Japanese.
Coop,
Ferd asked me if JW's comments about Japan were justifiable which I answered in my post.
No one was suggesting that Japan had anything to do with 9/11.
cb1
COOPER
03-24-2008, 10:43 AM
Coop,
Ferd asked me if JW's comments about Japan were justifiable which I answered in my post.
No one was suggesting that Japan had anything to do with 9/11.
cb1
I know that......but because we bombed Japan; America should just set back, Suck it up and say we deserved 9-11?
HeavenlyOne
03-24-2008, 11:07 AM
Nice Avatar, BE!
I agree! Wish I could see a bigger one though!
Pressing-On
03-24-2008, 11:09 AM
I agree! Wish I could see a bigger one though!
Just copy it and blow it up if you're just wanting it for your dartboard!
:bliss:bliss
HeavenlyOne
03-24-2008, 11:10 AM
Just copy it and blow it up if you're just wanting it for your dartboard!
:bliss:bliss
Ummm....not with his wife and baby in the pic!! LOL!
Pressing-On
03-24-2008, 11:11 AM
Ummm....not with his wife and baby in the pic!! LOL!
Oh, I didn't think of that!
:killinme
Elizabeth
03-24-2008, 11:11 AM
I noticed that on this last page somehow the topic of Japan and WWII has entered the discussion.
I honestly have a hard time, sitting here safe in my home some 60+ years AFTER WWII- to question or to in anyway doubt what was done, to END WWII.
Yes it was horrific, yes it was horrible and people died. War is hell plain and simple. But my life is forever in debt to brave men and woman that sacrificed their lives for our future.
I am just amazed that what we had to do during WWII for our freedom being is brought up in a negative manner.
And somehow 9/11 is judgment for the bombing of Japan? I don't believe it!
MissBrattified
03-24-2008, 11:12 AM
I think some of his statements are over the top but we must remove the beam from our own eyes before trying to remove the mote out of the eyes of another.
The Republicans are terrified of facing Obama in a General Election...therefore they will stop at nothing to destroy his reputation before the eyes of the American people.
I think a preacher should be able to preach what they think. I'll tell you the SAME thing Wright told you...American will face the wrath of God for a host of sins and among them are her sins against entire people groups. When God judges nations he does so according to the full cup principle. One day America's cup will be full and the Lord will force her to drink his wrath.
According to the Sodom & Gomorrah Principle, God will spare an evil city for a handful of righteous people.
HeavenlyOne
03-24-2008, 11:13 AM
I noticed that on this last page somehow the topic of Japan and WWII has entered the discussion.
I honestly have a hard time, sitting here safe in my home some 60+ years AFTER WWII- to question or to in anyway doubt what was done, to END WWII.
Yes it was horrific, yes it was horrible and people died. War is hell plain and simple. But my life is forever in debt to brave men and woman that sacrificed their lives for our future.
I am just amazed that what we had to do during WWII for our freedom being is brought up in a negative manner.
And somehow 9/11 is judgment for the bombing of Japan? I don't believe it!
Jeanie, some people just want to have justifications for the actions of others who are wrong in what they say and do, but because others have done the same, then it's an excuse.
Pressing-On
03-24-2008, 11:13 AM
I noticed that on this last page somehow the topic of Japan and WWII has entered the discussion.
I honestly have a hard time, sitting here safe in my home some 60+ years AFTER WWII- to question or to in anyway doubt what was done, to END WWII.
Yes it was horrific, yes it was horrible and people died. War is hell plain and simple. But my life is forever in debt to brave men and woman that sacrificed their lives for our future.
I am just amazed that what we had to do during WWII for our freedom being is brought up in a negative manner.
And somehow 9/11 is judgment for the bombing of Japan? I don't believe it!
Amen!
HeavenlyOne
03-24-2008, 11:14 AM
According to the Sodom & Gomorrah Principle, God will spare an evil city for a handful of righteous people.
Excellent point.
Chris and others like him remind me of Jonah.
Go and preach how people will die by the wrath of God, sit under a tree waiting for the fireworks, then become angry that God changed His mind.
DividedThigh
03-24-2008, 11:15 AM
good luck trying to get thru to him miss b, lol,dt:kickcan
Pressing-On
03-24-2008, 11:15 AM
Good points by this black preacher!
Obama missed a huge opportunity to reach out and connect with the broader evangelical, faith community. Many non-black, Bible believing Christians have questioned the orthodoxy of the Senator’s faith. Evangelicals are troubled by the senator’s position on abortion and traditional marriage.
Though brilliant on the surface, last week’s speech wrongly characterized the problem with his minister’s preaching as solely a problem of race. In my view this controversy is more a matter of personal honesty and faith. I agree with Ken Blackwell’s critique of liberation theology. He wrote the following statement last Tuesday, “Liberation Theology... is a belief system about political agendas, socialistic economic policy, and redistribution of wealth.”
The fact is that neither the Senator nor his pastor is qualified to solve this race question in our nation. At the risk of sounding impractical, let me remind everyone that racism is a spiritual problem. It is a matter of the heart, first of all. And because it is truly a spiritual problem, it will require the involvement of a unified, emotionally focused church to lead us toward racial reconciliation.
Harry R. Jackson Jr. is founder and Chairman of the High Impact Leadership Coalition as well as author of The Warriors Heart: Rules of Engagement for the Spiritual War Zone.
Discerner
03-24-2008, 11:16 AM
Polls were showing that McCain and Hillary were closer to a tie and that in some polls McCain actually beat Hillary. But in nearly every poll prior to this issue Obama won hands down. This is the Repbulican attack machine at work.
They will attack any one and anything if it will secure their power. Nothing is sacred or left to be another's opinion or experience. Everything becomes subject to THEIR judgment and THEIR interpretation.
Man you must watch CNN. I know the republican party has its faults, but let your left leaning crowd run the country and see what we get. How does socialized medicine, higher taxes, more vote buying under the name of welfare, stronger government feel to you.
I am not afraid of Obama. These comments by his bigot mentor pastor will sink him.
Elizabeth
03-24-2008, 11:19 AM
Good points by this black preacher!
Good points by this black preacher!
Obama missed a huge opportunity to reach out and connect with the broader evangelical, faith community. Many non-black, Bible believing Christians have questioned the orthodoxy of the Senator’s faith. Evangelicals are troubled by the senator’s position on abortion and traditional marriage.
Though brilliant on the surface, last week’s speech wrongly characterized the problem with his minister’s preaching as solely a problem of race. In my view this controversy is more a matter of personal honesty and faith. I agree with Ken Blackwell’s critique of liberation theology. He wrote the following statement last Tuesday, “Liberation Theology... is a belief system about political agendas, socialistic economic policy, and redistribution of wealth.”
The fact is that neither the Senator nor his pastor is qualified to solve this race question in our nation. At the risk of sounding impractical, let me remind everyone that racism is a spiritual problem. It is a matter of the heart, first of all. And because it is truly a spiritual problem, it will require the involvement of a unified, emotionally focused church to lead us toward racial reconciliation.
Harry R. Jackson Jr. is founder and Chairman of the High Impact Leadership Coalition as well as author of The Warriors Heart: Rules of Engagement for the Spiritual War Zone.
Very Good!!! This man is right right right!
Pressing-On
03-24-2008, 11:20 AM
Good points by this black preacher!
Very Good!!! This man is right right right!
Yes he is!!!!!!!
Whatever, bro. Your logic is pathetic here.
Rather than properly criticizing bad behavior, instead you try to justify it by pointing out someone else's other bad behavior. Very, very weak.
I guess you've never heard of "two wrongs don't make a right".
Frankly, I think you're too emotional about this to really think with a clear mind on this issue.
Oh please. Don't confuse passion for being too emotional TRFrance. I don't get too involved in threads around here unless I think the topic is worth discussing, and racism is something I think is worth discussing
Discerner
03-24-2008, 11:25 AM
Isnt it amazing how members of an apostolic forum can defend racism and bigotry of the rev wrong? Unbelievable
“We bombed Hiroshima. We bombed Nagasaki, and we nuked far more than the thousands in New York and the Pentagon and we never batted an eye.
“Kids playing in the playground. Mothers picking up children after school. Civilians, not soldiers, people just trying to make it day by day."
“Violence begets violence. Hatred begets hatred. And terrorism begets terrorism."
You mean the comments from JW's sermon above? The short answer would be yes his comments were justifiable.
Then we really dont have a basis to communicate on this subject. If you thing the above comments are an accurate representation of the historic reality at the end of the second world war, then there is no basis for us to discuss this matter.
you are living in a fantasy world that doesnt match the historical record.
I think some of his statements are over the top but we must remove the beam from our own eyes before trying to remove the mote out of the eyes of another.
The Republicans are terrified of facing Obama in a General Election...therefore they will stop at nothing to destroy his reputation before the eyes of the American people.
I think a preacher should be able to preach what they think. I'll tell you the SAME thing Wright told you...American will face the wrath of God for a host of sins and among them are her sins against entire people groups. When God judges nations he does so according to the full cup principle. One day America's cup will be full and the Lord will force her to drink his wrath.
...Pats CH on the head... its ok little fella, it'll be all right.
PS, Republicans dont want hillary elected president and will do anything to stop her... up to and including ending up with Barak as president.
PSS, the Republican "Attack Machine" will do anything reasonable to stop Barak as well.... because he is a liberal democrat...
But when you put a guy on TV and let him quote himself, that doesnt constitute a charictor assassination. Here in Sanesville, we call that suicide.
DividedThigh
03-24-2008, 11:29 AM
Then we really dont have a basis to communicate on this subject. If you thing the above comments are an accurate representation of the historic reality at the end of the second world war, then there is no basis for us to discuss this matter.
you are living in a fantasy world that doesnt match the historical record.
his comments had no basis in reality at all, so right ferd, dt:kickcan
No double standard...for YEARS there were no people of color in magazines unless it was a Jesse Owens type. SO Mr. John H. Johnson founded Jet and Ebony. Nothing racist there...
Black History Month?! It was started by Carter Woodson, son of former slaves, who was disturbed to find the absence of Blacks in history books...if they were mentioned, it was in an inferior way, or sparingly, like George Washington Carver's accomplishments.
Black colleges?! It is because they couldn't be admitted into White schools.
Latino gatherings?! What is wrong with people of like heritage getting together?!
As for racism, is it alive and well YET today...again, my experience as a White woman in the Black community allowed me to see things first hand.
Are all things equal?! No way...
Is there racism on both sides?! You bet!!
But it's not just a "slavery is over...get over it" deal...it's about a 17 yr. old Apostolic girl being mistreated in a 7 Eleven...yes, in this century!!
It's about stuff you nor I can truly understand because we are not Black or Indian or Hispanic or Asian or of Middle Eastern descent.
I am not in favor of special treatment, but I am in favor of FAIR treatment...JMO...
Thank you Barb. I know you and I have butted heads in the past, but I am glad that you can see that racism is not just a "thing of the past". It's alive and well today. I know that I have experienced it firsthand because of being latino, even though I am as white skinned as they come. I've been denied housing, dealt with threats of crosses being burned in my front yard, looked down upon, accused of being part of the immigration problem in America; the list goes on and on. Anyone who think racism is a thing of the past in America doesn't have a clue.
You're so right! This (JW story) is starting to be the "swift boat" story of this year's Presidential campaign. :bubble
If Barak Obama wasn't perceived as a threat we never would have heard of Mr. Wright.
Coop,
Ferd asked me if JW's comments about Japan were justifiable which I answered in my post.
No one was suggesting that Japan had anything to do with 9/11.
cb1
According to Jerimiah Wright, 9/11 was just chickens come home to roost....one of those chickens was the bombs on Japan.
Wright believes Japan has everything to do with 9/11. But of course, some Foxnews producer held a gun to Wrights head and forced him to say that because as we all know, Foxnews lied!
I noticed that on this last page somehow the topic of Japan and WWII has entered the discussion.
I honestly have a hard time, sitting here safe in my home some 60+ years AFTER WWII- to question or to in anyway doubt what was done, to END WWII.
Yes it was horrific, yes it was horrible and people died. War is hell plain and simple. But my life is forever in debt to brave men and woman that sacrificed their lives for our future.
I am just amazed that what we had to do during WWII for our freedom being is brought up in a negative manner.
And somehow 9/11 is judgment for the bombing of Japan? I don't believe it!
Jeanie, you only have 2 options, either BELIEVE Jerimiah Wright because HE SAID IT, or believe that Foxnews lied and Wright didnt say it at all.
(I saw the video where Wright said it, and no there were no Foxnews producers with a gun to the guys head.)
Discerner
03-24-2008, 11:35 AM
...Pats CH on the head... its ok little fella, it'll be all right.
PS, Republicans dont want hillary elected president and will do anything to stop her... up to and including ending up with Barak as president.
PSS, the Republican "Attack Machine" will do anything reasonable to stop Barak as well.... because he is a liberal democrat...
But when you put a guy on TV and let him quote himself, that doesnt constitute a charictor assassination. Here in Sanesville, we call that suicide.
I think the Republicans are salivating at the chances of Barack in the general election. I am no fan of mccain and was worried about his electibllity. I now think that Obama Hussien hasn't seen anything yet. If Hillary is this tough on him, imagine how much stuff the republicans will dig up.
However, I do wonder if much can be dug up because Barack has about as much experience as an executive as I do as a heart surgeon. I have never seen one so unqualified as him get so much attention from the media. Anytime the media gets behind someone its time to go the other direction.
Elizabeth
03-24-2008, 11:35 AM
According to Jerimiah Wright, 9/11 was just chickens come home to roost....one of those chickens was the bombs on Japan.
Wright believes Japan has everything to do with 9/11. But of course, some Foxnews producer held a gun to Wrights head and forced him to say that because as we all know, Foxnews lied!
:lol
Exactly I think that what Coop & I were referring to that as well-
Discerner
03-24-2008, 11:36 AM
Jeanie, you only have 2 options, either BELIEVE Jerimiah Wright because HE SAID IT, or believe that Foxnews lied and Wright didnt say it at all.
(I saw the video where Wright said it, and no there were no Foxnews producers with a gun to the guys head.)
Haven't you heard he now has a body double preaching for him.
Discerner
03-24-2008, 11:39 AM
Here is the dude~
Elizabeth
03-24-2008, 11:39 AM
Jeanie, you only have 2 options, either BELIEVE Jerimiah Wright because HE SAID IT, or believe that Foxnews lied and Wright didnt say it at all.
(I saw the video where Wright said it, and no there were no Foxnews producers with a gun to the guys head.)
I don't think ANYONE could MAKE JW say anything he didnt believe--he couldnt even give S. Hannity a decent interview..he kept bringing up liberation theology writers.
To me the mouth speaks whatever is in the heart.
ChristopherHall
03-24-2008, 11:39 AM
We’ve only heard snippets of this man’s sermons and spin about his beliefs. We really have no idea who he is. Those casting a judgment haven’t even met him.
But I’ll go as far as to say that Obama is still the best candidate in the line up even if Jeremiah Wright preached sermons like this every service. If Obama took his message to heart Obama will be cautious with international relations demonstrating a break from the extreme hubris of the current administration that would be perpetuated by John McSame. Obama will also have a sense of just and fair domestic policies that do not discriminate against any segment of American society. Obama would attempt to unite us, asking that we be color blind and civil to all communities of faith; as opposed to the right’s persistent elaboration on Obama’s race and faith in its effort to wedge a divide in the American people. If Obama is focused on Africa, we may see more active policies against genocide and ethnic cleansing on the continent, not to mention better ties with nations rich in oil, gas, and other natural resources.
What’s McCain going to do? 100 years of war in Iraq? More pork? More tax shelters for an already bloated and gluttonous corporate beast? In one conference McSame was warning about Iraq but continued to say Iran until Lieberman corrected him.
Obama is still the best candidate hands down. How does anyone see Obama’s faith impacting American policies any more negatively than American already are under Bush and would be under McSame?
I think the Republicans are salivating at the chances of Barack in the general election. I am no fan of mccain and was worried about his electibllity. I now think that Obama Hussien hasn't seen anything yet. If Hillary is this tough on him, imagine how much stuff the republicans will dig up.
However, I do wonder if much can be dug up because Barack has about as much experience as an executive as I do as a heart surgeon. I have never seen one so unqualified as him get so much attention from the media. Anytime the media gets behind someone its time to go the other direction.
Rasmussen has McCain with a 55% approval rating and neither Barak nor Hillary have broken 50%. you cant get elected if half the people dont approve of you.
that being said, I still say the democrat has at the very least a 75% chance of winning the general election.
But Barak has real issues. The Tony Resco deal is just now heating up and the trial will be this summer. B. Hussain Obama is going to get eaten alive on that deal, and MIGHT end up in jail.
Elizabeth
03-24-2008, 11:42 AM
Haven't you heard he now has a body double preaching for him.
A body double?? How does one do that? Wow.
I don't think ANYONE could MAKE JW say anything he didnt believe--he couldnt even give S. Hannity a decent interview..he kept bringing up liberation theology writers.......the mouth speaks whatever is in the heart.
I agree with you.
to me the more telling aspects of JWs comments, and the part that gives me great pause on Obama is less about the overt idocy Obama has given a 20 year pass on, than it is about the undercurrent of racial devide that Wright spreads thru all of his comments.
go back and listen to the selection that starts this thread.
count how many times he uses racial identifers. the guy has a real issue with race in America. Obama has fed his young children a steady diet of Liberation theology.
I cannot name a thing worse than harming your own child. AND YES I think this can easily be called "Harming" your own children!
Elizabeth
03-24-2008, 11:44 AM
Rasmussen has McCain with a 55% approval rating and neither Barak nor Hillary have broken 50%. you cant get elected if half the people dont approve of you.
that being said, I still say the democrat has at the very least a 75% chance of winning the general election.
But Barak has real issues. The Tony Resco deal is just now heating up and the trial will be this summer. B. Hussain Obama is going to get eaten alive on that deal, and MIGHT end up in jail.
Can you post a link Ferd?
We’ve only heard snippets of this man’s sermons and spin about his beliefs. We really have no idea who he is. Those casting a judgment haven’t even met him.
But I’ll go as far as to say that Obama is still the best candidate in the line up even if Jeremiah Wright preached sermons like this every service. If Obama took his message to heart Obama will be cautious with international relations demonstrating a break from the extreme hubris of the current administration that would be perpetuated by John McSame. Obama will also have a sense of just and fair domestic policies that do not discriminate against any segment of American society. Obama would attempt to unite us, asking that we be color blind and civil to all communities of faith; as opposed to the right’s persistent elaboration on Obama’s race and faith in its effort to wedge a divide in the American people. If Obama is focused on Africa, we may see more active policies against genocide and ethnic cleansing on the continent, not to mention better ties with nations rich in oil, gas, and other natural resources.
What’s McCain going to do? 100 years of war in Iraq? More pork? More tax shelters for an already bloated and gluttonous corporate beast? In one conference McSame was warning about Iraq but continued to say Iran until Lieberman corrected him.
Obama is still the best candidate hands down. How does anyone see Obama’s faith impacting American policies any more negatively than American already are under Bush and would be under McSame?
Pats CH on the pate....its ok little buddy. It will be all right...
PS, We heard a 15 minute snipit that a defender of Obama and Wright right here in this thread. The mans body of work stands on its own.
PSS, some say Jerimiah Wright has suffered Charactor assassination. Where I am from when a fellow is quoted directly that is called Charactor Suicide.
DividedThigh
03-24-2008, 11:45 AM
hey you guys be careful the wind is out of his tunnel saying the same old garbage, lol,dt:laffatu
According to Jerimiah Wright, 9/11 was just chickens come home to roost....one of those chickens was the bombs on Japan.
Wright believes Japan has everything to do with 9/11. But of course, some Foxnews producer held a gun to Wrights head and forced him to say that because as we all know, Foxnews lied!
Ferd, you know as well as I do that when JW brought up Japan he wasn't using it solely as the reason for 9/11. He included it in his sermon as part of a list of things the USA has done that killed many more people than what we lost because of 9/11.
Can you post a link Ferd?
here is a good start
http://rezkowatch.blogspot.com/
Pressing-On
03-24-2008, 11:51 AM
FERD!!!!! Settle down!!! It's going to be okay!!!! You're making me feel hyper!!!!
:killinme
Elizabeth
03-24-2008, 11:52 AM
I agree with you.
to me the more telling aspects of JWs comments, and the part that gives me great pause on Obama is less about the overt idocy Obama has given a 20 year pass on, than it is about the undercurrent of racial devide that Wright spreads thru all of his comments.
go back and listen to the selection that starts this thread.
count how many times he uses racial identifers. the guy has a real issue with race in America. Obama has fed his young children a steady diet of Liberation theology.
I cannot name a thing worse than harming your own child. AND YES I think this can easily be called "Harming" your own children!
Could the results of this "steady diet" of Liberation Theology be?:
Michelle Obama's remark: “For the first time in my adult lifetime, I am really proud of my country"?
B. Obama: Avoiding to wear an American Flag pin?
B. Obama: Refraining to say the Pledge of Allegiance?
Ferd, you know as well as I do that when JW brought up Japan he wasn't using it solely as the reason for 9/11. He included it in his sermon as part of a list of things the USA has done that killed many more people than what we lost because of 9/11.
NO Rico, LISTEN to what he said. The bombings were listed as events of wanton terrorism as proof that the 9/11 attack was the judement of God for Americans own Terror attacks on others.
"Americas chickens come home to roost"
it wasnt a list of things America has done that killed many more people. it was a list of things in JWs view that America did unjustly to wantonly kill innocent people.
there is a vast different Rico.
DividedThigh
03-24-2008, 11:56 AM
Could the results of this "steady diet" of Liberation Theology be?:
Denise Obama's remark: This is the first time I can say I am proud of America?
B. Obama: Avoiding to wear the American Flag?
B. Obama: Refraining to say the Pledge of Allegiance?
absolutely, lol,dt:kickcan
Could the results of this "steady diet" of Liberation Theology be?:
Michelle Obama's remark: “For the first time in my adult lifetime, I am really proud of my country"?
B. Obama: Avoiding to wear the an American Flag pin?
B. Obama: Refraining to say the Pledge of Allegiance?
Yes
Yes
and
Yes.
and how do we all feel about Liberation Theology being in the Whitehouse?
remember, Liberation Theology includes the idea that America gets what it deserves. So when the bad guys hit us, our response ought to be soul searching and not retaliation.
DividedThigh
03-24-2008, 11:58 AM
Yes
Yes
and
Yes.
and how do we all feel about Liberation Theology being in the Whitehouse?
remember, Liberation Theology includes the idea that America gets what it deserves. So when the bad guys hit us, our response ought to be soul searching and not retaliation.
oh yeah that will scare all the bombers and radicals just waiting for a chance to kill us, good grief, lol,dt
oh yeah that will scare all the bombers and radicals just waiting for a chance to kill us, good grief, lol,dt
Yea, we are gonna love them to death!
make them convert and play nice!
DT, these guys are so myopic it is beyond belief.
they say "get out of the middle east" then when we do, they think these guys are going to be nice to us.
Reality is, we will be blamed for pulling out and getting millions of muslims killed.
They will say we pulled out and left them in the hands of madmen! The insanity of the debate is only exeeded by the duplicity of those we debate!
NO Rico, LISTEN to what he said. The bombings were listed as events of wanton terrorism as proof that the 9/11 attack was the judement of God for Americans own Terror attacks on others.
"Americas chickens come home to roost"
it wasnt a list of things America has done that killed many more people. it was a list of things in JWs view that America did unjustly to wantonly kill innocent people.
there is a vast different Rico.
Ferd, we did not have to use those bombs on Japan. Chosen by One made a good point that we could have picked a much less populated area to bomb to let the Japanese know we meant business. Granted, it's easy to second guess decisions that were made 60 years ago, but I can see how someone could include the bombing of Japan in an effort to illustrate how aggressive the USA has been in military matters. That's the point JW was trying to make. As a country, we could not believe someone had the audacity to bring two of our buildings down, but we don't think twice about the things we've done to other countries, things that cost many many more lives than what we lost on 9/11, all in the name of freedom and democracy.
DividedThigh
03-24-2008, 12:04 PM
Yea, we are gonna love them to death!
make them convert and play nice!
DT, these guys are so myopic it is beyond belief.
they say "get out of the middle east" then when we do, they think these guys are going to be nice to us.
Reality is, we will be blamed for pulling out and getting millions of muslims killed.
They will say we pulled out and left them in the hands of madmen! The insanity of the debate is only exeeded by the duplicity of those we debate!
truer words were never spoken, gravy train, dt:kickcan
chosenbyone
03-24-2008, 12:05 PM
Then we really dont have a basis to communicate on this subject. If you thing the above comments are an accurate representation of the historic reality at the end of the second world war, then there is no basis for us to discuss this matter.
you are living in a fantasy world that doesnt match the historical record.
Ferd,
As you were probably aware, there remained more than one version of history on any given topic. People have found it easier to believe the official version of many of the significant events of our nation's history, but truth could be found by listening to other sources too.
I wrote earlier in this thread that it was my opinion that Jesus wouldn't have approved killing hundreds of thousands of innocent people regardless of the reason. That was what I believed. Also, I had wrote that our country should have threatened the use of a nuclear bomb before it was actually used on major cities at the end of WWII. Seeking the path of a less violent and destructive end would have demonstrated a more compassionate, humane and peaceful end to that war. With that said, I wanted it to be known that if it were true that the use of the bomb(s) saved the lives of countless US military personnel, then I would have nothing to say on the matter. I served in the military proudly and I believed that the life of every serviceman and woman should be preserved.
I know that I posted a lot of articles on this thread, but I felt that reading other viewpoints other than what we were spoon fed by Washington only created the possibility of exposing the whole truth. Here was a commentary that I read recently regarding the use of nuclear bombs in WWII:
At the time, things looked bad for the Americans in the Japanese theatre. However, the Japanese internal situation was deteriorating rapidly. Although the army was willing to sacrifice the entire population of Japan, the civilian leadership thought the army incredibly short sighted and supported suing for peace.
However, the Japanese civilian leadership were too vague for their own good. In response to American surrender demands, the Japanese leadership responded with a term that had no exact translation and was unique to Japanese culture. It was probably meant in its common sense - when a Japanese person finds an offer unacceptable, he simply won't respond to it - a "silent rejection". Any Japanese person understands this cultural impasse and simply makes a better offer. However, the same term can also mean "silent contempt", meaning that the offer was being ignored as beneath their dignity. Truman accepted the latter explanation and felt the Japanese were unwilling to surrender.
Surprisingly, the dropping of the bombs had very little effect on the position of the Japanese military! Their intelligence was very good and they realized that the Americans only had the two bombs that they had already dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. However, the civilian government's pleas grew stronger and the Emperor, who had up until that point accepted the advice of the military, turned against them and gave them a direct order to surrender.
While a few more months would probably not have cost a lot of American or Japanese lives (the Japanese had no food, ammunition or supplies to speak of, and no navy at all to resist an American invasion), Truman was under time pressure to keep the Russians out. Stalin had already promised to commit forces to the battle. However, if they had done so, the Japanese, like many Chinese before them, probably would have realized that surrendering to the Americans would get them a better deal, as it probably did.
Elizabeth
03-24-2008, 12:06 PM
Ferd, we did not have to use those bombs on Japan. Chosen by One made a good point that we could have picked a much less populated area to bomb to let the Japanese know we meant business.
If we use the same reasoning the Japanese could have picked a different harbor that Pearl Harbor for their attack to get their point across.
Pressing-On
03-24-2008, 12:06 PM
If we use the same reasoning the Japanese could have picked a different harbor that Pearl Harbor for their attack.
Was going to say that, Jeanie!!!!!!!!! :thumbsup
DividedThigh
03-24-2008, 12:09 PM
Ferd,
As you were probably aware, there remained more than one version of history on any given topic. People have found it easier to believe the official version of many of the significant events of our nation's history, but truth could be found by listening to other sources too.
I wrote earlier in this thread that it was my opinion that Jesus wouldn't have approved killing hundreds of thousands of innocent people regardless of the reason. That was what I believed. Also, I had wrote that our country should have threatened the use of a nuclear bomb before it was actually used on major cities at the end of WWII. Seeking the path of a less violent and destructive end would have demonstrated a more compassionate, humane and peaceful end to that war. With that said, I wanted it to be known that if it were true that the use of the bomb(s) saved the lives of countless US military personnel, then I would have nothing to say on the matter. I served in the military proudly and I believed that the life of every serviceman and woman should be preserved.
I know that I posted a lot of articles on this thread, but I felt that reading other viewpoints other than what we were spoon fed by Washington only created the possibility of exposing the whole truth. Here was a commentary that I read recently regarding the use of nuclear bombs in WWII:
At the time, things looked bad for the Americans in the Japanese theatre. However, the Japanese internal situation was deteriorating rapidly. Although the army was willing to sacrifice the entire population of Japan, the civilian leadership thought the army incredibly short sighted and supported suing for peace.
However, the Japanese civilian leadership were too vague for their own good. In response to American surrender demands, the Japanese leadership responded with a term that had no exact translation and was unique to Japanese culture. It was probably meant in its common sense - when a Japanese person finds an offer unacceptable, he simply won't respond to it - a "silent rejection". Any Japanese person understands this cultural impasse and simply makes a better offer. However, the same term can also mean "silent contempt", meaning that the offer was being ignored as beneath their dignity. Truman accepted the latter explanation and felt the Japanese were unwilling to surrender.
Surprisingly, the dropping of the bombs had very little effect on the position of the Japanese military! Their intelligence was very good and they realized that the Americans only had the two bombs that they had already dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki. However, the civilian government's pleas grew stronger and the Emperor, who had up until that point accepted the advice of the military, turned against them and gave them a direct order to surrender.
While a few more months would probably not have cost a lot of American or Japanese lives (the Japanese had no food, ammunition or supplies to speak of, and no navy at all to resist an American invasion), Truman was under time pressure to keep the Russians out. Stalin had already promised to commit forces to the battle. However, if they had done so, the Japanese, like many Chinese before them, probably would have realized that surrendering to the Americans would get them a better deal, as it probably did.
tell that garbage to the boys that were defending the ships on okinawa and iwo jima against the kamikazes, they saw there friends die and burn, i know some of those men that are still around, it is amazing that i studied amercian history in college and have never heard this before, but then again i dont read revisionist history, sorry still isnt good enough, jw was wrong and he is still wrong, dt
Elizabeth
03-24-2008, 12:11 PM
Was going to say that, Jeanie!!!!!!!!! :thumbsup
Honestly PO I am amazed that we even have to defend our country in our own country! :gaga
If we use the same reasoning the Japanese could have picked a different harbor that Pearl Harbor for their attack to get their point across.
How many people died in Pearl Harbor compared with how many died in Hiroshima and Nagasaki? Think about that for a minute. Us killing that many people would be like my killing you and your entire extended family because you killed one of my children.
Elizabeth
03-24-2008, 12:14 PM
Ferd,
As you were probably aware, there remained more than one version of history on any given topic. People have found it easier to believe the official version of many of the significant events of our nation's history, but truth could be found by listening to other sources too.
Sure you are not Canadian? .........................j/k :lol
Michael Phelps
03-24-2008, 12:14 PM
Honestly PO I am amazed that we even have to defend our country in our own country! :gaga
We shouldn't be surprised by this, unfortunately. According to this way of thinking, if an intruder breaks into your home, and you shoot him/her in the defense of your family, should said intruder happen to live, they can sue you, and YOU become the defendant!
And, should they happen to expire, their family can sue!
Unbelievable........
Elizabeth
03-24-2008, 12:16 PM
How many people died in Pearl Harbor compared with how many died in Hiroshima and Nagasaki? Think about that for a minute. Us killing that many people would be like my killing you and your entire extended family because you killed one of my children.
Well I guess it just goes to show you better be careful who you pick a fight with then doesn't it?
Ferd, we did not have to use those bombs on Japan. Chosen by One made a good point that we could have picked a much less populated area to bomb to let the Japanese know we meant business. Granted, it's easy to second guess decisions that were made 60 years ago, but I can see how someone could include the bombing of Japan in an effort to illustrate how aggressive the USA has been in military matters. That's the point JW was trying to make. As a country, we could not believe someone had the audacity to bring two of our buildings down, but we don't think twice about the things we've done to other countries, things that cost many many more lives than what we lost on 9/11, all in the name of freedom and democracy.
Rico, Chosen by One makes the same argument that any number of liberal American Hating College professors have attempted to make since the 1960's.
I have personally debated a couple of them to the point that they just sputtered and shut up.
We arent talking about attitudes toward Japan in 2008. We are talking about the facts on the Ground in 1945 in the days leading up to the first bomb being dropped.
What we knew about Japan remains very clear. Poll results asking the uneducated masses (Most of whom cant tell you who the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court is) doesnt change the simply FACTS.
Both American and Japanese scolars will tell you that the cost of invasion would have been far greater than the losses from Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
There was no serious consideration of an embargo or some kind of Naval Blockade. Considering the size of Japan, the actual lenght the Japanese were willing to go to,
the FACT that in the closing days of the European front, America was very much concerned with a possible front opening against RUSSIA.
The HISTORIC REALITY was that use of the Atomic bomb was deemed necessary.
could we have hit something smaller? sure I suppose we could have. but remember first, Hiroshima was hit before Nagasaki, and that didnt get the Japanese to caputlate.
second, consider that both Hiroshima and Nagasaki were both "something smaller". They were not the main cities of Japan. we could have unleased the bombs on Tokoyo and Yokohama.
and third, the point here isnt that we should or should not have dropped the bomb, but the charge that it was done, according to Jerimiah Wright, without batting an eye! that is an out and out lie.
Elizabeth
03-24-2008, 12:18 PM
We shouldn't be surprised by this, unfortunately. According to this way of thinking, if an intruder breaks into your home, and you shoot him/her in the defense of your family, should said intruder happen to live, they can sue you, and YOU become the defendant!
And, should they happen to expire, their family can sue!
Unbelievable........
I know, I guess I meant defend American on AFF--UNREAL!
I must be getting old or something!
DividedThigh
03-24-2008, 12:19 PM
many of our generals were suprised that the second bomb brought them down, to say we did this without thought is exactly nothing but a lie, these people will churn up anything to justify there ideas, shame, dt
Pressing-On
03-24-2008, 12:19 PM
Honestly PO I am amazed that we even have to defend our country in our own country! :gaga
Amazing, isn't it! Goodness.
Discerner
03-24-2008, 12:20 PM
If we use the same reasoning the Japanese could have picked a different harbor that Pearl Harbor for their attack to get their point across.
Excellent post. Anyone who studies history sees the reason why we bombed Japan. It was a very difficult decision but it saved american lives. I have talked to too many WWII veterans who were actually there.
Some of the senseless post are embarassing too me as a patriotic flag waving American. War is ugly. People will die. It will happen.
Pressing-On
03-24-2008, 12:20 PM
Rico, Chosen by One makes the same argument that any number of liberal American Hating College professors have attempted to make since the 1960's.
I have personally debated a couple of them to the point that they just sputtered and shut up.
We arent talking about attitudes toward Japan in 2008. We are talking about the facts on the Ground in 1945 in the days leading up to the first bomb being dropped.
What we knew about Japan remains very clear. Poll results asking the uneducated masses (Most of whom cant tell you who the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court is) doesnt change the simply FACTS.
Both American and Japanese scolars will tell you that the cost of invasion would have been far greater than the losses from Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
There was no serious consideration of an embargo or some kind of Naval Blockade. Considering the size of Japan, the actual lenght the Japanese were willing to go to,
the FACT that in the closing days of the European front, America was very much concerned with a possible front opening against RUSSIA.
The HISTORIC REALITY was that use of the Atomic bomb was deemed necessary.
could we have hit something smaller? sure I suppose we could have. but remember first, Hiroshima was hit before Nagasaki, and that didnt get the Japanese to caputlate.
second, consider that both Hiroshima and Nagasaki were both "something smaller". They were not the main cities of Japan. we could have unleased the bombs on Tokoyo and Yokohama.
and third, the point here isnt that we should or should not have dropped the bomb, but the charge that it was done, according to Jerimiah Wright, without batting an eye! that is an out and out lie.
Excellent post, FERD!!!!
ChristopherHall
03-24-2008, 12:20 PM
Even Wright’s comments about Japan are being misconstrued.
Let’s try to understand his point before jumping to railing conclusions. America killed masses and masses of innocent people by dropping the bomb. Yes, a ground invasion would have cost us more military lives on both sides…but it would have afforded the civilian population an opportunity to flee. Right or wrong…we sacrificed the lives of masses and masses of innocent people to win the War.
The moral implications are disturbing. If American can drop nuclear weapons and kill masses of human beings to bring her enemy to their knees…does this not afford justification to Islamic fundamentalists who feel they have to do the same thing to their perceived enemy (us)?
There is a cycle to violence, war, and bloodshed and it perpetuates until someone is big enough to end that cycle. Right or wrong when we bombed Japan killing masses of civilians and innocent children…did we not communicate that such is an acceptable means of achieving victory in armed conflict?
I can see what Wright was saying though I don’t believe there was another way.
I’m realizing these are very complex issues and most want cut and dry black and white answers and because of this they miss the complexity of the issue.
Well I guess it just goes to show you better be careful who you pick a fight with then doesn't it?
Sister, it certainly doesn't fit the Biblical eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth doctrine. Again, it's easy to make judgements 60 years after the fact, but I think a case can be made for anyone who thinks bombing Hiroshima and Nagasaki were overkill during WWII. Of course, our use of those bombs is what made us the political powerhouse the USA is today.
marthaolivia
03-24-2008, 12:21 PM
Well I guess it just goes to show you better be careful who you pick a fight with then doesn't it?
Honestly PO I am amazed that we even have to defend our country in our own country!
Jeanie: I love your answers. I wish I could think that quickly.
Elizabeth
03-24-2008, 12:21 PM
Rico, Chosen by One makes the same argument that any number of liberal American Hating College professors have attempted to make since the 1960's.
I have personally debated a couple of them to the point that they just sputtered and shut up.
We arent talking about attitudes toward Japan in 2008. We are talking about the facts on the Ground in 1945 in the days leading up to the first bomb being dropped.
What we knew about Japan remains very clear. Poll results asking the uneducated masses (Most of whom cant tell you who the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court is) doesnt change the simply FACTS.
Both American and Japanese scolars will tell you that the cost of invasion would have been far greater than the losses from Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
There was no serious consideration of an embargo or some kind of Naval Blockade. Considering the size of Japan, the actual lenght the Japanese were willing to go to,
the FACT that in the closing days of the European front, America was very much concerned with a possible front opening against RUSSIA.
The HISTORIC REALITY was that use of the Atomic bomb was deemed necessary.
could we have hit something smaller? sure I suppose we could have. but remember first, Hiroshima was hit before Nagasaki, and that didnt get the Japanese to caputlate.
second, consider that both Hiroshima and Nagasaki were both "something smaller". They were not the main cities of Japan. we could have unleased the bombs on Tokoyo and Yokohama.
and third, the point here isnt that we should or should not have dropped the bomb, but the charge that it was done, according to Jerimiah Wright, without batting an eye! that is an out and out lie.
Ferd :thumbsup I think you need to work for FOX! Awesome point!
Discerner
03-24-2008, 12:22 PM
How many people died in Pearl Harbor compared with how many died in Hiroshima and Nagasaki? Think about that for a minute. Us killing that many people would be like my killing you and your entire extended family because you killed one of my children.
You touch my children and see what happens to you!!! I believe we should have dropped a few on Germany too. Anything to save American lives is what I am all about. I could care less about what some women oppressors in the Middle East think about us Americans.
Michael Phelps
03-24-2008, 12:22 PM
I know, I guess I meant defend American on AFF--UNREAL!
I must be getting old or something!
I know, me too.
My point is that the same mindset that causes us to have to defend America to the Americans has caused us to have to defend our own rights on our own turf.
The initial attack was made BY the Japanese on American (Hawaiian) soil.
The attack by the terrorists in 2001 was made BY the terrorist on American soil.
And, when we go to defend our rights, suddenly WE are the ones encroaching.
ChristopherHall
03-24-2008, 12:22 PM
Pats CH on the pate....its ok little buddy. It will be all right...
PS, We heard a 15 minute snipit that a defender of Obama and Wright right here in this thread. The mans body of work stands on its own.
PSS, some say Jerimiah Wright has suffered Charactor assassination. Where I am from when a fellow is quoted directly that is called Charactor Suicide.
Ferd, you don't have to be insulting. Please express your point without doing so...if you're capable. We're brothers in a discussion not enemies.
DividedThigh
03-24-2008, 12:22 PM
Sister, it certainly doesn't fit the Biblical eye for an eye, tooth for a tooth doctrine. Again, it's easy to make judgements 60 years after the fact, but I think a case can be made for anyone who thinks bombing Hiroshima and Nagasaki were overkill during WWII. Of course, our use of those bombs is what made us the political powerhouse the USA is today.
that is reasonable rico, good for you, lol,dt
ChristopherHall
03-24-2008, 12:23 PM
Could the results of this "steady diet" of Liberation Theology be?:
Michelle Obama's remark: “For the first time in my adult lifetime, I am really proud of my country"?
B. Obama: Avoiding to wear an American Flag pin?
B. Obama: Refraining to say the Pledge of Allegiance?
Actually both are myth. Look it up.
Discerner
03-24-2008, 12:23 PM
Even Wright’s comments about Japan are being misconstrued.
Let’s try to understand his point before jumping to railing conclusions. America killed masses and masses of innocent people by dropping the bomb. Yes, a ground invasion would have cost us more military lives on both sides…but it would have afforded the civilian population an opportunity to flee. Right or wrong…we sacrificed the lives of masses and masses of innocent people to win the War.
The moral implications are disturbing. If American can drop nuclear weapons and kill masses of human beings to bring her enemy to their knees…does this not afford justification to Islamic fundamentalists who feel they have to do the same thing to their perceived enemy (us)?
There is a cycle to violence, war, and bloodshed and it perpetuates until someone is big enough to end that cycle. Right or wrong when we bombed Japan killing masses of civilians and innocent children…did we not communicate that such is an acceptable means of achieving victory in armed conflict?
I can see what Wright was saying though I don’t believe there was another way.
I’m realizing these are very complex issues and most want cut and dry black and white answers and because of this they miss the complexity of the issue.
check this web site out, its for people like you
moveon.org
Elizabeth
03-24-2008, 12:23 PM
Well I guess it just goes to show you better be careful who you pick a fight with then doesn't it?
Honestly PO I am amazed that we even have to defend our country in our own country!
Jeanie: I love your answers. I wish I could think that quickly.
Thank you! :wave
I'm just spouting off I guess :D
DividedThigh
03-24-2008, 12:24 PM
ch i have 6 brothers, 5 of them younger than me, that is exactly what i would do to them if they talked like that, pop them on the mellon and discuss it after, lol,dt
Discerner
03-24-2008, 12:24 PM
Rico, Chosen by One makes the same argument that any number of liberal American Hating College professors have attempted to make since the 1960's.
I have personally debated a couple of them to the point that they just sputtered and shut up.
We arent talking about attitudes toward Japan in 2008. We are talking about the facts on the Ground in 1945 in the days leading up to the first bomb being dropped.
What we knew about Japan remains very clear. Poll results asking the uneducated masses (Most of whom cant tell you who the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court is) doesnt change the simply FACTS.
Both American and Japanese scolars will tell you that the cost of invasion would have been far greater than the losses from Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
There was no serious consideration of an embargo or some kind of Naval Blockade. Considering the size of Japan, the actual lenght the Japanese were willing to go to,
the FACT that in the closing days of the European front, America was very much concerned with a possible front opening against RUSSIA.
The HISTORIC REALITY was that use of the Atomic bomb was deemed necessary.
could we have hit something smaller? sure I suppose we could have. but remember first, Hiroshima was hit before Nagasaki, and that didnt get the Japanese to caputlate.
second, consider that both Hiroshima and Nagasaki were both "something smaller". They were not the main cities of Japan. we could have unleased the bombs on Tokoyo and Yokohama.
and third, the point here isnt that we should or should not have dropped the bomb, but the charge that it was done, according to Jerimiah Wright, without batting an eye! that is an out and out lie.
He needs to be worried about accurate portrayals of history rather than some unknown liberation theology.
Ferd,
As you were probably aware, there remained more than one version of history on any given topic. People have found it easier to believe the official version of many of the significant events of our nation's history, but truth could be found by listening to other sources too.
I wrote earlier in this thread that it was my opinion that Jesus wouldn't have approved killing hundreds of thousands of innocent people regardless of the reason. That was what I believed. Also, I had wrote that our country should have threatened the use of a nuclear bomb before it was actually used on major cities at the end of WWII. Seeking the path of a less violent and destructive end would have demonstrated a more compassionate, humane and peaceful end to that war. With that said, I wanted it to be known that if it were true that the use of the bomb(s) saved the lives of countless US military personnel, then I would have nothing to say on the matter. I served in the military proudly and I believed that the life of every serviceman and woman should be preserved. [/I]
I will try to read the entire post and comment but the above gives me great pause.
clearly you are missing some very large chunks of historic context. Not only did we warn Japan (they didnt believe the warning), but we bombed Hiroshima then waited on the Japanese to surrender, when they did not, we bombed Nagasaki and waited again.
what ever secondary and tertiary sources of history you find, you cannot unfind what was believed to be the acutal situation in 1945.
The factors in mainland Japan were not unlike those that existed in Okinawa. The invasion of Okinawa gave America the understanding of what an invastion of the mainland would cost.
You cannot view historic decisions by looking in hindsight. You must review the decisions based on the understanding of the information held by the decision makers. Truman spent weeks agonizing over the decision and went to his grave wondering if he did the right thing. In it all, he knew that he saved the lives of a million Americans.
Discerner
03-24-2008, 12:25 PM
Check this genius out!
http://youtube.com/watch?v=aNTGRL0OJWQ
marthaolivia
03-24-2008, 12:26 PM
Thank you! :wave
I'm just spouting off I guess :D
Someone needs to spout off. Doesn't silence give consent? I just wish I could do it with your finesse!
Rico, Chosen by One makes the same argument that any number of liberal American Hating College professors have attempted to make since the 1960's.
I have personally debated a couple of them to the point that they just sputtered and shut up.
We arent talking about attitudes toward Japan in 2008. We are talking about the facts on the Ground in 1945 in the days leading up to the first bomb being dropped.
What we knew about Japan remains very clear. Poll results asking the uneducated masses (Most of whom cant tell you who the Chief Justice of the Supreme Court is) doesnt change the simply FACTS.
Both American and Japanese scolars will tell you that the cost of invasion would have been far greater than the losses from Hiroshima and Nagasaki.
There was no serious consideration of an embargo or some kind of Naval Blockade. Considering the size of Japan, the actual lenght the Japanese were willing to go to,
the FACT that in the closing days of the European front, America was very much concerned with a possible front opening against RUSSIA.
The HISTORIC REALITY was that use of the Atomic bomb was deemed necessary.
could we have hit something smaller? sure I suppose we could have. but remember first, Hiroshima was hit before Nagasaki, and that didnt get the Japanese to caputlate.
second, consider that both Hiroshima and Nagasaki were both "something smaller". They were not the main cities of Japan. we could have unleased the bombs on Tokoyo and Yokohama.
and third, the point here isnt that we should or should not have dropped the bomb, but the charge that it was done, according to Jerimiah Wright, without batting an eye! that is an out and out lie.
Brother, neither you nor I was there, and, as I have already pointed out, it's easy to make judgements 60 years after the fact. I can see how someone could include our bombing of these cities as part of their believing that the USA got what it deserved on 9/11. You don't, and I doubt we will be able to convince each other otherwise.
DividedThigh
03-24-2008, 12:27 PM
you can look it up all you want it is not a myth that obama stopped wearing the american flag a while back and gave some lame answer when asked about it, dt
ChristopherHall
03-24-2008, 12:27 PM
NO Rico, LISTEN to what he said. The bombings were listed as events of wanton terrorism as proof that the 9/11 attack was the judement of God for Americans own Terror attacks on others.
"Americas chickens come home to roost"
it wasnt a list of things America has done that killed many more people. it was a list of things in JWs view that America did unjustly to wantonly kill innocent people.
there is a vast different Rico.
How do we know that America's destruction of so many innocents in Japan wasn't a factor in God's wrath visited upon us on 9/11?
Slavery
Dehumanization
Oppression
Abortion
Sodomy
Greed
War Mongering
Bro....I'm not convinced that God wasn't upset when we dropped the bomb backed the shadows of innocent children into the concrete pavement of their school yards.
chosenbyone
03-24-2008, 12:29 PM
You touch my children and see what happens to you!!! I believe we should have dropped a few on Germany too. Anything to save American lives is what I am all about. I could care less about what some women oppressors in the Middle East think about us Americans.
The war with Germany was already over when we dropped the bombs on Japan. Furthermore, there were only two bombs in our arsenal at that time.
Elizabeth
03-24-2008, 12:29 PM
I know, me too.
My point is that the same mindset that causes us to have to defend America to the Americans has caused us to have to defend our own rights on our own turf.
The initial attack was made BY the Japanese on American (Hawaiian) soil.
The attack by the terrorists in 2001 was made BY the terrorist on American soil.
And, when we go to defend our rights, suddenly WE are the ones encroaching.
I guess that is why we need someone in charge that is able to put a deaf ear to this mindset.
I do believe the majority does not hold to these beliefs, at least I hope and pray that they don't...because it just doesn't make sense.
Michael Phelps
03-24-2008, 12:30 PM
How do we know that America's destruction of so many innocents in Japan wasn't a factor in God's wrath visited upon us on 9/11?
Slavery
Dehumanization
Oppression
Abortion
Sodomy
Greed
War Mongering
Bro....I'm not convinced that God wasn't upset when we dropped the bomb backed the shadows of innocent children into the concrete pavement of their school yards.
Do you think the attack on America was "God's wrath"????????
If so, you believe in the doctrine of the terrorists........they are the ones who proclaimed that they were acting on behalf of God, or Allah, or whoever.....
marthaolivia
03-24-2008, 12:30 PM
The war with Germany was already over when we dropped the bombs on Japan. Furthermore, there were only two bombs in our arsenal at that time.
Two was enough.
tell that garbage to the boys that were defending the ships on okinawa and iwo jima against the kamikazes, they saw there friends die and burn, i know some of those men that are still around, it is amazing that i studied amercian history in college and have never heard this before, but then again i dont read revisionist history, sorry still isnt good enough, jw was wrong and he is still wrong, dt
Regardless of American understanding of the situation on the ground in Japan today, that article does not go so far as to suggest that American KNEW how much food Japan had in 1945.
further, It is an out right lie to suggest that Japan was out of amunition.
Further, if the Emporor suggested that every Japanese citizen would resist to the death, they would have.
and that part about Russia is absolutly correct.
you tell me if you would have liked to fight the cold war with a communist Japan.
or worse, what the outcome would have been if we were having the issues in Europe (Berlin) in the far east as well.
World War 3 might have been fought in the 1950s without those bombs.
Elizabeth
03-24-2008, 12:32 PM
Someone needs to spout off. Doesn't silence give consent? I just wish I could do it with your finesse!
Bless you! :friend
I am not worthy! I am just me-
DividedThigh
03-24-2008, 12:32 PM
Two was enough.
it is true that those were the only two we had produced, it is also true we had the capacity to make more, dt
DividedThigh
03-24-2008, 12:35 PM
Regardless of American understanding of the situation on the ground in Japan today, that article does not go so far as to suggest that American KNEW how much food Japan had in 1945.
further, It is an out right lie to suggest that Japan was out of amunition.
Further, if the Emporor suggested that every Japanese citizen would resist to the death, they would have.
and that part about Russia is absolutly correct.
you tell me if you would have liked to fight the cold war with a communist Japan.
or worse, what the outcome would have been if we were having the issues in Europe (Berlin) in the far east as well.
World War 3 might have been fought in the 1950s without those bombs.
i remember much of the cold war very well, have to agree with you ferd, it would have been ugly, dt
ChristopherHall
03-24-2008, 12:38 PM
Do you think the attack on America was "God's wrath"????????
Yes. God removed his hand of protection, just as he did Judah.
If so, you believe in the doctrine of the terrorists........they are the ones who proclaimed that they were acting on behalf of God, or Allah, or whoever.....
No. I agree with the Bible. GOD used the Babylonians to bring Judah to her knees over a multitude of sins. God will use Islam to do the same to America. Jeremiah of the Old Testament stood against those singing "God bless Judah! We shall have victory!" Jeremiah went as far as to advocate that Judah surrender and save herself the destruction God would visit upon them through the Babylonians...of course...he was deemed unpatriotic from that day forward.
But Jeremiah was right.
Pressing-On
03-24-2008, 12:39 PM
Check this genius out!
http://youtube.com/watch?v=aNTGRL0OJWQ
Separatist but not. LOL!
Even Wright’s comments about Japan are being misconstrued.
Let’s try to understand his point before jumping to railing conclusions. America killed masses and masses of innocent people by dropping the bomb. Yes, a ground invasion would have cost us more military lives on both sides…but it would have afforded the civilian population an opportunity to flee. Right or wrong…we sacrificed the lives of masses and masses of innocent people to win the War.
The moral implications are disturbing. If American can drop nuclear weapons and kill masses of human beings to bring her enemy to their knees…does this not afford justification to Islamic fundamentalists who feel they have to do the same thing to their perceived enemy (us)?
There is a cycle to violence, war, and bloodshed and it perpetuates until someone is big enough to end that cycle. Right or wrong when we bombed Japan killing masses of civilians and innocent children…did we not communicate that such is an acceptable means of achieving victory in armed conflict?
I can see what Wright was saying though I don’t believe there was another way.
I’m realizing these are very complex issues and most want cut and dry black and white answers and because of this they miss the complexity of the issue.
where is that Toro award??????
Chris, did you fail that part of english class on comprehension?
Ferd :thumbsup I think you need to work for FOX! Awesome point!
How come our 3 musketteers cant get that?
Discerner
03-24-2008, 12:42 PM
The war with Germany was already over when we dropped the bombs on Japan. Furthermore, there were only two bombs in our arsenal at that time.
You are correct in this. Maybe I should have stated had we had the bombs sooner. I believe that had the war dragged on we would have used these bombs against Nazi Germany. I just wished we could have developed these bombs about 5 years earlier and maybe saved a few million jews from the Holocaust.
Ferd, you don't have to be insulting. Please express your point without doing so...if you're capable. We're brothers in a discussion not enemies.
when you distort history and outright refuse to accept that JW was quoted, you insult our collective intelegence.
you should be prepared for it.
Elizabeth
03-24-2008, 12:42 PM
Actually both are myth. Look it up.
Actually what he refused to do was cover his heart during the National Anthem.
According to United States Code, Title 36, Chapter 10, Section 171
171 READS:Conduct during playing
During rendition of the national anthem when the flag is displayed, all present except those in uniform should stand at attention facing the flag with the right hand over the heart. Men not in uniform should remove their headdress with their right hand and hold it at the left shoulder, the hand being over the heart. Persons in uniform should render the military salute at the first note of the anthem and retain this position until the last note. When the flag is not displayed, those present should face toward the music and act in the same manner they would if the flag were displayed there.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N8QCkgg5Kjo&NR=1
Brother, neither you nor I was there, and, as I have already pointed out, it's easy to make judgements 60 years after the fact. I can see how someone could include our bombing of these cities as part of their believing that the USA got what it deserved on 9/11. You don't, and I doubt we will be able to convince each other otherwise.
Rico, I had a history major in college, and while I didnt finish my degree in history, i did take all of the classes needed.
I can speak with pretty clear understanding on the historic context.
DividedThigh
03-24-2008, 12:44 PM
Actually what he refused to do was cover his heart during the National Anthem.
According to United States Code, Title 36, Chapter 10, Section 171
171 READS:Conduct during playing
During rendition of the national anthem when the flag is displayed, all present except those in uniform should stand at attention facing the flag with the right hand over the heart. Men not in uniform should remove their headdress with their right hand and hold it at the left shoulder, the hand being over the heart. Persons in uniform should render the military salute at the first note of the anthem and retain this position until the last note. When the flag is not displayed, those present should face toward the music and act in the same manner they would if the flag were displayed there.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N8QCkgg5Kjo&NR=1
he did also take off his flag pin and stop wearing it a while back, tellme are those pink shoes in that picture, nice, not, lol
Elizabeth
03-24-2008, 12:46 PM
How come our 3 musketteers cant get that?
:ursofunny
How do we know that America's destruction of so many innocents in Japan wasn't a factor in God's wrath visited upon us on 9/11?
Slavery
Dehumanization
Oppression
Abortion
Sodomy
Greed
War Mongering
Bro....I'm not convinced that God wasn't upset when we dropped the bomb backed the shadows of innocent children into the concrete pavement of their school yards.
how do we know that the things we have suffered personally were not the wrath go God.
I could go down this road with you personally CH. I could tell you that the issues you have had that have led you to want Government supplied healthcare was Gods wrath visited on your family for some precieved slight to God.
It would be both insulting and out of line. JWs comments sans context are equally vile.
Do you think the attack on America was "God's wrath"????????
If so, you believe in the doctrine of the terrorists........they are the ones who proclaimed that they were acting on behalf of God, or Allah, or whoever.....
Not a democrat alive defended Pat Robertson when he suggested 9/11 was Gods wrath for the immorality of America.
kind of funny how Chris is lining up behind JW on this point.
where is that Toro award??????
Chris, did you fail that part of english class on comprehension?
Ferd, as much as I hate to admit it, CH is making some good points.
Pressing-On
03-24-2008, 12:49 PM
Actually what he refused to do was cover his heart during the National Anthem.
According to United States Code, Title 36, Chapter 10, Section 171
171 READS:Conduct during playing
During rendition of the national anthem when the flag is displayed, all present except those in uniform should stand at attention facing the flag with the right hand over the heart. Men not in uniform should remove their headdress with their right hand and hold it at the left shoulder, the hand being over the heart. Persons in uniform should render the military salute at the first note of the anthem and retain this position until the last note. When the flag is not displayed, those present should face toward the music and act in the same manner they would if the flag were displayed there.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N8QCkgg5Kjo&NR=1
Asked whether Obama normally puts his hand over his heart while listening to the national anthem, Obama spokesman Bill Burton replied by e-mail: "Sometimes he does, sometimes he doesn't. In no way was he making any sort of statement, and any suggestion to the contrary is ridiculous."
Okay!
Ferd, as much as I hate to admit it, CH is making some good points.
that only goes to show how devolved you have become Rico.
ChristopherHall
03-24-2008, 12:51 PM
when you distort history and outright refuse to accept that JW was quoted, you insult our collective intelegence.
you should be prepared for it.
How did his sermon end?
Elizabeth
03-24-2008, 12:51 PM
Actually both are myth. Look it up.
he did also take off his flag pin and stop wearing it a while back,
Well I did look it up like our Mr.C Hall suggested and came up with this as well-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmHtGQq-z_Y&NR=1
Discerner
03-24-2008, 12:52 PM
Actually what he refused to do was cover his heart during the National Anthem.
According to United States Code, Title 36, Chapter 10, Section 171
171 READS:Conduct during playing
During rendition of the national anthem when the flag is displayed, all present except those in uniform should stand at attention facing the flag with the right hand over the heart. Men not in uniform should remove their headdress with their right hand and hold it at the left shoulder, the hand being over the heart. Persons in uniform should render the military salute at the first note of the anthem and retain this position until the last note. When the flag is not displayed, those present should face toward the music and act in the same manner they would if the flag were displayed there.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N8QCkgg5Kjo&NR=1
No one wants to talk about this! Keep it quiet you right wing flag loving patriotic american!
Rico, I had a history major in college, and while I didnt finish my degree in history, i did take all of the classes needed.
I can speak with pretty clear understanding on the historic context.
That's fine, but it still doesn't preclude others from having differing opinions.
ChristopherHall
03-24-2008, 12:54 PM
Actually what he refused to do was cover his heart during the National Anthem.
According to United States Code, Title 36, Chapter 10, Section 171
171 READS:Conduct during playing
During rendition of the national anthem when the flag is displayed, all present except those in uniform should stand at attention facing the flag with the right hand over the heart. Men not in uniform should remove their headdress with their right hand and hold it at the left shoulder, the hand being over the heart. Persons in uniform should render the military salute at the first note of the anthem and retain this position until the last note. When the flag is not displayed, those present should face toward the music and act in the same manner they would if the flag were displayed there.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N8QCkgg5Kjo&NR=1
You need to look this up on FactCheck. I'll do it for you.....
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/sliming_obama.html
Now please, let's have a moment of silence for the death of honesty.
Pressing-On
03-24-2008, 12:54 PM
Well I did look it up like our Mr.C Hall suggested and came up with this as well-
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JmHtGQq-z_Y&NR=1
Didn't he way he was for change? LOL
Discerner
03-24-2008, 12:55 PM
That's fine, but it still doesn't preclude others from having differing opinions.
I would rather base my opinion on actual historical facts, rather then some left wing ideology
Pressing-On
03-24-2008, 12:55 PM
You need to look this up on FactCheck. I'll do it for you.....
http://www.factcheck.org/elections-2008/sliming_obama.html
Now please, I expected better from you! LOL
CH,
We still have a quote from one of Obama's spokesmen:
Asked whether Obama normally puts his hand over his heart while listening to the national anthem, Obama spokesman Bill Burton replied by e-mail: "Sometimes he does, sometimes he doesn't. In no way was he making any sort of statement, and any suggestion to the contrary is ridiculous."
vBulletin® v3.8.5, Copyright ©2000-2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.