FOX and in particular, Bill O'Reilly, blatantly lied about Rev. Jeremiah Wright, claiming "we have now proven beyond a reasonable doubt that he is an anti-American guy and there's no question about it." He made this claim on the basis of 3 minutes of soundbites taken out of context. 3 minutes out of tens of thousands of minutes of preaching over the course of 35 years.
Choesn, do you believe that the inital post in this thread gives correct context to Reverand Wrights comments?
__________________ If I do something stupid blame the Lortab!
I find it curious that so many are willing to jump on the “America’s chickens are coming home to roost” bandwagon. I do believe that a nation will be judged by the things it does, however defending itself is not one of them. I do not believe America has practiced terrorism. We do not fly planes of innocent people into buildings filled with innocent people and cheer their deaths. America’s Chickens will come home to roost when we continue to elect those who support the wholesale destruction of innocent human life and promoting the abomination of same-sex marriage as a civil right. So if Rev. Wright wants to preach about “America’s chickens”, maybe he should start with his long time friend and member of his congregation…Obama.
Below is an assignment that I have done in my Critical Thinking class. I am curious as to why the black constintuency of our nation has switched from being Republican to Democratic. Can anyone unbiasly answer this question? Please read before making a comment, and may I suggest going to these sources before you do as well. If you answer with an opinion, at least back it up with some sources.
The online news article I read was from www.newsmax.com ,which was about Martin Luther King Jr. being a Republican. From the beginning, I was set to prove this article wrong because I have always known that the majority of the African-American community to be of the Democratic persuasion. To back my understanding of this fact, I went to http://people-press.org/commentary/d...?AnalysisID=95 , this site has shown the black democratic population to be 62-65% since 2000. So, why the claim from the newsmax.com staff that Martin Luther King Jr.was a Republican? I have been a casual reader of newsmax.com for several months, and I have come to the conclusion that they are biased towards the Republicans because they are always putting the Democrats in a "bad light" based upon their views.
My findings after doing search engine research through google were interesting. I have discovered that Martin Luther King Jr. was not opposed to ''democratic socialism", but privately supported this political idea so that he wouldn't be indicted by John F Kennedy for communism. The thing that kept him from embracing democratic socialism was the fact that it was difficult to put values of faith with socialism. The sources for this information are found www.en/wikipedia.org/wikj/martin_luther_king,_jr , and www.nbra.com . The "National Black Republicans Association" has a magazine called "The Black Republican" that seems to back up the claim made by newsmax.
In my opinion, newsmax is trustworthy in a biased sort of way.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pressing-On
I referenced this article on Rico's thread, "My Thoughts On Racism". Thought is was very interesting.
Easty/Pressing, I can’t answer the question based on what MKLJr believed philosophically. I can say that the early Civil Rights movement contained many republicans. George Herbert Walker Bush’s Father was a Republican Senator who supported the Civil Rights act. The early legacy is all jumbled. MLK might well have been a Republican and still have held some socialist views, that was not an out of the question thing.
An interesting historic footnote on the subject would be Condoleezza Rice’s father’s comments. He was a life long Republican and Condoleezza is herself….She was also either a member of the Birmingham church that was bombed or somehow related to that church. Her father’s word: “It was the white Republicans that were marching with us”.
Southern Democrats were very much against Civil Rights. Strom Thurmond was a democrat who left the party and ran for President on the Dixiecrat ticket as a segregationist. After failing to win, he became a Republican for the purpose of opposing Civil Rights legislation. When the southern white racist Democrats dropped from the party and became Republicans, Blacks shifted to the Democrat party enmass.
So to say that MKLJr was a Republican might very well be true. It might also be true that he would not have maintained that affiliation in the 1970’s and it might be true that if he had lived, the Black Civil Rights movement might not have become so radically socialist in its message.
__________________ If I do something stupid blame the Lortab!
Easty/Pressing, I can’t answer the question based on what MKLJr believed philosophically. I can say that the early Civil Rights movement contained many republicans. George Herbert Walker Bush’s Father was a Republican Senator who supported the Civil Rights act. The early legacy is all jumbled. MLK might well have been a Republican and still have held some socialist views, that was not an out of the question thing.
An interesting historic footnote on the subject would be Condoleezza Rice’s father’s comments. He was a life long Republican and Condoleezza is herself….She was also either a member of the Birmingham church that was bombed or somehow related to that church. Her father’s word: “It was the white Republicans that were marching with us”.
Southern Democrats were very much against Civil Rights. Strom Thurmond was a democrat who left the party and ran for President on the Dixiecrat ticket as a segregationist. After failing to win, he became a Republican for the purpose of opposing Civil Rights legislation. When the southern white racist Democrats dropped from the party and became Republicans, Blacks shifted to the Democrat party enmass.
So to say that MKLJr was a Republican might very well be true. It might also be true that he would not have maintained that affiliation in the 1970’s and it might be true that if he had lived, the Black Civil Rights movement might not have become so radically socialist in its message.
Interesting. I was thinking that Malcolm X started the radically socialist message.
I read what you said in Bro. Eastman's response and wanted to say that you have presented good points.
But what are your thoughts on this....
I don't believe that 9/11 was "THE judgment of God" per se but rather God removing his hand of protection from us in an effort to reveal our vulnerability as a warning. It may serve as the first domino in God's over all purpose to judge our nation seeing that it has expanded into a global war that has left us even more enemies than before and created a government prone to domestic spying and the violation of even more civil liberties. I feel in my spirit that 9/11 was only the beginning of a story that could end with America calling for international aid after a strategic terrorist counter strike using weapons we pray they never acquire if we don't reach her with the Gospel.
9/11 may not seem like the judgment of God if viewed all by itself. However, when all is said and done and it is viewed in the context of the greater struggle unfolding...it may prove to having been the beginning of the end of the United States.
P.S.
It should be noted that we still have the majority of the last generation living that witnessed the unveiling of the American Government's abominable actions involving the Tuskegee Syphilis Experiment. We may find at least some of the acts mentioned in Jeremiah's condemnation included in God's testimony against America should His judgment fall upon this generation of Americans. I can't see God ignoring such a heinous crime against human beings.
Chris, God does not execute judgement on the repentant. America has universally condemned the things you and JW have pointed to.
Lets assume for arguments sake that dropping bombs on Japan was a sin in the eyes of God. (I dont believe it is), lets also agree that segregation was a national sin (I do believe it was). what is the current attitude? what has been the progression from those days to this?
Chris, if we are to "Spiritualize" these things, then we all have to agree that America has fully repented in that America has turned from a willingness to use Atomic weapons to a stance that it is a horrible thing, only to be used as a deterrent from others doing so.
and we have overturned segregationist law, and passed law that seeks to right the wrongs of the past.
This makes no sense. God removes his hand of protection as a warning to repent of sins that have already been repented for?
Tuskegee? Really? Who in the American Governement/Civilian Populace believes that was a good thing and ought to be repeated? Expanded?
__________________ If I do something stupid blame the Lortab!
On the subject of FOX News lying,--how did they lie? This madman said the things he said to incite hate. We are dealing with someone here who is wresting the Scriptures to his own destruction. This evil man was exposed,- and what he says on the rest of the video does not justify his hatred. There is a time for war and a time to kill- that is what the Scripture says!
Sorry, but according to Chris, we live under another covenant, therefore, anything in the OT is null and void.
__________________
I've gone and done it now! I'm on Facebook!!!
Yes he does. I've read them as required reading. He's very analytical and affords the reader the right to draw their own conclusion, however he's convinced of the position. Remember, he's writing material that is to be read by an entire organization of ministers with various view points. He's writing respectfully and with much respect.
That's called...tact.
Chris, look up the definition of 'probably'.
'Tact' isn't in that definition, even by implication.
'Used by people writing respectfully' also isn't in the definition.
Better yet, please call or email him and ask him why he used that word. Let me know what you find out.
__________________
I've gone and done it now! I'm on Facebook!!!
We only heard snippets of the sermon. How did the sermon end?
Anyone can take something someone said out of context and exaggerate it's meaning. I'd like to know how the sermon ended so that I can be certain I'm judging this man with righteous judgment instead of jumping to an emotionally driven conclusion.
For the record...I don't think Fox News is lying. I do think they only gave us a couple seconds of an entire sermon. By preventing us from seeing the closing of the sermon I feel reservations with jumping to condemnation. Though from what I heard...it was over the top. I once heard a sermon titled "Go to Hell!" If only snippets of this sermon was played on television you'd think this man was condemning every sinner in America. However, it closed with a plea that we Christians act to prevent this from happening to a lost and dying world.
Chris, don't make yourself look really stupid and suggest that JW was speaking in 'what ifs' during his sermon. The above post greatly damages any credibility you might have had up until this point.
__________________
I've gone and done it now! I'm on Facebook!!!
FOX and in particular, Bill O'Reilly, blatantly lied about Rev. Jeremiah Wright, claiming "we have now proven beyond a reasonable doubt that he is an anti-American guy and there's no question about it." He made this claim on the basis of 3 minutes of soundbites taken out of context. 3 minutes out of tens of thousands of minutes of preaching over the course of 35 years.
CBO, Oprah, who is quite the liberal, didn't quit that church after hearing only 3 minutes of that mess coming out of his mouth.
__________________
I've gone and done it now! I'm on Facebook!!!
How did he end his sermon? Certainly one could accuse any preacher by using a snippet of any sermon. How did the sermon end. I vote we judge it in it's entirety.
I say the Lord will judge him. He knew what he was saying and we all know as well.
Linear Mode
