Democratic Presidential Primaries 2008

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Lanny_MacDonald

So, what exactly is wrong there? Do you actually know what the "black value system" is? I certainly don't. I also don't think that it is much different than the "white value system". Interestingly enough, the values you list above are pretty similar to that of the Moron church and the expectations of that institution. Replace the word "black" with the word "Mormon" and you'll see exactly what I mean.

Replace the word 'black' with 'white'...and tell me if that sounds any better.

Instead of 'white' supremacy....you have 'black' supremacy.

Oh, and instead of beating around the bush....why don't you get right down to it. Do you see a problem with the racially charged comments that Rev. Wright was making?

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally Posted by Calgaryborn

OK then. Try replacing the word "black" with the word "white".

Uh huh. What's your point? I have spent my whole life in the "white" community and that is the community I have supported. Anyone from another ethnic group coming into my community had to assimilate themselves to that community or get no support. That wasn't my choice, that was the choice of the community. I see no problem for a community that is predominantly black taking this stance. They are doing what they can to better their people. It's no different that any other wingnut religion and the preference they show to their own. And don't even try to pretend you are ignorant to the Christian Support Network that exists across North America. That's a "good old boys" network that is for "good god fearin' Christians" only, damn everyone else.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Lanny_MacDonald

They are doing what they can to better their people.

Strange, because I don't see blaming the white race for numerous problems as actually 'helping' their people.

But according to that knowledge....the 'KKKA' or whatever Rev. Wright called them, are only doing what they can to better their people.

No fault either way.

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally Posted by Azure

Oh, and instead of beating around the bush....why don't you get right down to it. Do you see a problem with the racially charged comments that Rev. Wright was making?

Taken completely into context, and not using some inflammatory sound bite from Faux News, and having a little insight into the black community and experience, no, I don't see anything wrong with the comments. I didn't find them to be racially charged in the first place. Only when taken out of context did they become racially charged. In context they were extremely critical of American society and American foreign policy. Yeah, they were harsh, but so is pretty well everything that comes from the Christian/Baptist preacher's pulpit on Sundays. That's the nature of their service. Its mind blowing the first time you see it, and seems like the wrong way to profess one's faith, but that's the way they do it.

This whole thing has been a real joke to be honest with you. What was said was in the confines of the church and done during a surmon. It's not like Wright called a press conference and called for the assassination of a foreign leader. No, that falls to white religious wingnuts.

[Calgaryborn]

Originally Posted by Lanny_MacDonald

Uh huh. What's your point? I have spent my whole life in the "white" community and that is the community I have supported. Anyone from another ethnic group coming into my community had to assimilate themselves to that community or get no support. That wasn't my choice, that was the choice of the community. I see no problem for a community that is predominantly black taking this stance. They are doing what they can to better their people. It's no different that any other wingnut religion and the preference they show to their own. And don't even try to pretend you are ignorant to the Christian Support Network that exists across North America. That's a "good old boys" network that is for "good god fearin' Christians" only, damn everyone else.

My community is predominately white. But there are other colours within it as well and I don't pay attention to their colour when I decide what Doctor I go to or which station I buy my gas from. Niether should you.

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally Posted by Azure

Strange, because I don't see blaming the white race for numerous problems as actually 'helping' their people.

But according to that knowledge....the 'KKKA' or whatever Rev. Wright called them, are only doing what they can to better their people.

No fault either way.

Yeah, comparing Wright to the KKK is brilliant. That's a real display of critical thought there Azure. How many years of education did you just flush down the toilet? I don't recall anyone from this church lynching a white person for being a white person. I don't recall anyone from this church burning a cross on someone's lawn. I don't recall anyone from this church oppressing another ethnic group in any way. They only do what is right for their community, which happens to be black. How the hell are people failing to see this?

[Vulcan]

Originally Posted by Calgaryborn

I think some of you should read the following article and follow the link in it to what was taken off of this churches web site a couple of days ago:

http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=59230


Here is the entire text of the section before it was redacted:

"Trinity United Church of Christ adopted the Black Value System, written by the Manford Byrd Recognition Committee chaired by the late Vallmer Jordan in 1981. We believe in the following 12 precepts and covenantal statements. These Black Ethics must be taught and exemplified in homes, churches, nurseries and schools, wherever Blacks are gathered. They must reflect on the following concepts:

1. Commitment to God

2. Commitment to the Black Community

3. Commitment to the Black Family

4. Dedication to the Pursuit of Education

5. Dedication to the Pursuit of Excellence

7. Commitment to Self-Discipline and Self-Respect

8. Disavowal of the Pursuit of "Middleclassness"

9. Pledge to make the fruits of all developing and acquired skills available to the Black Community

10. Pledge to Allocate Regularly, a Portion of Personal Resources for Strengthening and Supporting Black Institutions

11. Pledge allegiance to all Black leadership who espouse and embrace the Black Value System

12. Personal commitment to embracement of the Black Value System."



Obama's membership in that church is equal to finding out McCain was a member of a Arian church. If it is unaceptable to promote a white America it should be unacceptable to promote a black America.

Not according to that list it isn't equatable to an Aryan church. The Aryans preach hatred towards other races. I don't see any hatred here, only an uplifting of there own.

Sure there is anger when the preacher says 'god damn America' but I make a difference against anger made from ignorance and prejudice, from righteous anger caused by years of being treated as slaves and second class citizens.

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

Originally Posted by Azure

Strange, because I don't see blaming the white race for numerous problems as actually 'helping' their people.

But according to that knowledge....the 'KKKA' or whatever Rev. Wright called them, are only doing what they can to better their people.

No fault either way.

Can't we all agree that this sort of "guilt by association" is foolish anyway? Just because Obama went to that church doesn't mean he automatically agrees with everything Rev. Wright says. Likewise, McCain's having been ministered to by an apocalyptic millenarian who believes that the conflict in the middle east is a holy war does not mean that McCain agrees.

Both of these guys are just about the most secular candidates this country has seen in years. Let's not try to manufacture a connection where there isn't one. Both men go to church. Neither of them looks to their pastor for policy advice. Can't we just leave it at that? I don't like Rev. Wright any better than you do, but after reading Obama's speech I feel I have a better understanding of where those remarks come from--and to call them "black supremacist" is frankly inflammatory Bill O'Reilly stuff.

Honestly--I suggest you read the full text of Obama's speech. It's about the most nuanced and bold statement on race in American politics since the 1960s. No kidding. And I suspect you'll like what he has to say, if you give it a chance.

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally Posted by Iowa_Flames_Fan

Honestly--I suggest you read the full text of Obama's speech. It's about the most nuanced and bold statement on race in American politics since the 1960s. No kidding. And I suspect you'll like what he has to say, if you give it a chance.

That is why I posted the full transcript here the minute it hit the wire. It is a must read.

[Calgaryborn]

Originally Posted by Vulcan

Not according to that list it isn't equatable to an Aryan church. The Aryans preach hatred towards other races. I don't see any hatred here, only an uplifting of there own.

Sure there is anger when the preacher says 'god damn America' but I make a difference against anger made from ignorance and prejudice, from righteous anger caused by years of being treated as slaves and second class citizens.

Please read the article I linked to in that post:

http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=59230

The Reverend acknowledges his sources for authority and there is a lot of hatred involved.

[EddyBeers]

[quote=Azure;1238421]Yes of course.

On July 22nd, Obama is listed as a speaker in Miami at the National Council of La Raza at 1:30 (EST). That would be 12:30 CST.

The posted times for the services at Trinity are 7:30 EST and 11:00 EST. Obviously he couldn't have attended the 11am service. But the commenter contends he couldn't have attended the 7:30am service either based on an assumed flight time of 4 hours between Chicago and Miami.

However, according to the OAG, commercial flights only take 2 hours and 50 minutes flight time, and as I recall, the Obama campaign uses a chartered jet which could cut down on even that time. So while the author of the article claiming to have seen Obama at the July 22 service didn't specify which service, it is possible he could have attended the 7:30 service (8:30 EST) and still made the Miami speech at 1:30 EST. He may have left the service early (after the sermon) caught the campaign plane at about 9:00 CST (10:00 EST) and made Miami by 12:30 EST for a 1:30 speech.
\quote]

No, the issue is whether he was in the pew for that speech. Bill Kristol got it wrong, it is that simple. I would not expect more from Dan Quayle's former chief of staff though.

A couple things about your example. OAG says the shortest amount of time that a flight could take is 2 hours 50 minutes. Let us use that as the baseline.

He had to be in Miami at 1:30 and was in Miami at 1:30 for a speech.

Now let us use your ficticious scenario.

8:30 Church starts. Reverend Wright goes straight into his sermon on anti-white america and his vitrolic hatred of all things white . Obama gets his fix and is out of the church by 9 AM. The car ride to the airport is 39 minutes according to Google.

It is now 9:39AM EST. Let us say that he really hustles and gets to his plane and takes off in a half an hour 10:09 AM EST. Let us assume that the plane takes the normal 2 hours and 50 minutes that the shortest flight takes from Chicago to Miami. Let us also assume that he took a charter plane and that charter planes are not super fast compared with commercial jets and it takes about the same amount of time to get to Miami.

Obama lands at 12:59 PM EST. In lightning speed Obama exits the plane and enters into a waiting car. Let us assume this takes 10 minutes.

Now 1:09 PM EST. Obama then rushes to the Convention centre and arrives at 1:28 EST (estimated time on google maps). He then rushes into the Convention Hall to an adoring crowd and delivers his speech at 1:30 PM EST.

Having worked in politics for 7 years I can say we routinely gave Ministers a 2 minute window to work with..... good god, anyone who can say that there is even the most remote chance that he was in the pew for that sermon is on some serious crack. There are a number of assumptions that have to be made just to possibly allow Obama to see the Sermon and be in Miami for the speech.

I would say, IMHO, Obama was not present for the sermon. But hey, whatever works for right wing morons like Bill Kristol.

NOTE: This is for O'Hare, if the plane took off from Chicago Midway Airport subtract 10 minutes from driving time, if it took off from Chicago Airport subtract 4 minutes from driving time.

[Calgaryborn]

Originally Posted by Iowa_Flames_Fan

Honestly--I suggest you read the full text of Obama's speech. It's about the most nuanced and bold statement on race in American politics since the 1960s. No kidding. And I suspect you'll like what he has to say, if you give it a chance.

Obama's speech was an attempt to minimize the damage his association with this Pastor has given him. I'm pretty sure he would say anything to get elected just like the other two. The fact that he gives pretty speeches doesn't tell us a lot about him. Hilliary and McClain both have long histories of associations and actions that will be brought into the public scrutiny. Obama shouldn't get a free ride.

The problem is that a majority of Americans are not apart of Obama's church's "community". They would not be welcomed. Race is obviously central to Obama's church's belief system. For Obama to suggest that his Pastor's unfortunate comments were one of a few isolated instances is dishonest.

[MarchHare]

^^

(Edit: this is a repy to EddyBeers' post)

It's even worse than your scenario, though. Miami is in the Eastern Time Zone, and Chicago is Central, so at the start of the 8:30 church service in Chicago, it's already 9:30 in Miami. That leaves Obama only four hours to stay at the church long enough to hear the controversal sermon, travel by car to O'Hare, board his private jet, fly to Miami, depart his private jet, then travel by car to the site of his speech. No, there's no possible way he was in attendance the morning of that particular sermon.

[Iowa_Flames_Fan]

Originally Posted by Calgaryborn

Obama's speech was an attempt to minimize the damage his association with this Pastor has given him. I'm pretty sure he would say anything to get elected just like the other two. The fact that he gives pretty speeches doesn't tell us a lot about him. Hilliary and McClain both have long histories of associations and actions that will be brought into the public scrutiny. Obama shouldn't get a free ride.

The problem is that a majority of Americans are not apart of Obama's church's "community". They would not be welcomed. Race is obviously central to Obama's church's belief system. For Obama to suggest that his Pastor's unfortunate comments were one of a few isolated instances is dishonest.

Your description reveals that you have failed to actually read the speech. Obama could EASILY have just disavowed the beliefs in question and moved on. He didn't--he instead used the opportunity to talk seriously about the relationship between race and politics in America.

Seriously. Just read it--with an open mind. Obama shouldn't get a free ride, you're right. Nor should he be railroaded for someone else's beliefs. If you read his speech, you'll know what HE thinks. It'll be time well spent.

[Azure]

Originally Posted by Lanny_MacDonald

no, I don't see anything wrong with the comments.

“The government lied about inventing the HIV virus as a means of genocide against people of color. The government lied.”

And to expand on that...

“Barack knows what it means living in a country and a culture that is controlled by rich white people,” Wright said. “Hillary would never know that.

“Hillary ain’t never been called a . Hillary has never had a people defined as a non-person.”

In a Jan. 13 sermon, Wright said:

“Hillary is married to Bill, and Bill has been good to us. No he ain’t! Bill did us, just like he did Monica Lewinsky. He was riding dirty.”

[Calgaryborn]

Originally Posted by Iowa_Flames_Fan

Your description reveals that you have failed to actually read the speech. Obama could EASILY have just disavowed the beliefs in question and moved on. He didn't--he instead used the opportunity to talk seriously about the relationship between race and politics in America.

Seriously. Just read it--with an open mind. Obama shouldn't get a free ride, you're right. Nor should he be railroaded for someone else's beliefs. If you read his speech, you'll know what HE thinks. It'll be time well spent.

I have read parts of it. I will read it all if you like. But one speech in the middle of an election campaign doesn't necessarily accurately portray what one truly believes.

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally Posted by Calgaryborn

Obama's speech was an attempt to minimize the damage his association with this Pastor has given him. I'm pretty sure he would say anything to get elected just like the other two. The fact that he gives pretty speeches doesn't tell us a lot about him. Hilliary and McClain both have long histories of associations and actions that will be brought into the public scrutiny. Obama shouldn't get a free ride.

The problem is that a majority of Americans are not apart of Obama's church's "community". They would not be welcomed. Race is obviously central to Obama's church's belief system. For Obama to suggest that his Pastor's unfortunate comments were one of a few isolated instances is dishonest.

Which tells me that you either didn't read it, don't speak english, or are so blinded by your ideological beliefs that it woudn't matter what was said, Obama (or anyone else who game the speech) was wrong. I think I know which category you fall into.

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally Posted by Azure

“The government lied about inventing the HIV virus as a means of genocide against people of color. The government lied.”

Based on your accuracy of using quotes... transcript please.

[EddyBeers]

Originally Posted by Lanny_MacDonald

Transcript please.

documentation not needed, Bill Kristol and the National Review said he said it

[Lanny_MacDonald]

Originally Posted by EddyBeers

documentation not needed, Bill Kristol and the National Review said he said it

Za-iiiiiiiiiing!!!