Obama Embraces a Bigot and a Fanatic, the Rev. Wright

Gargamel wrote:

He was comparing Wirght to the adulteress, not to Jesus. You completely missed the analogy.

Please pay closer attention.

I knew that. I simply used his analogy in more than one way to illustrate what is going on here. I also included the adulteress to Wright comparison, and rightly pointed out that they are not reacting in the same way. Jesus told the woman to go and sin no more, but neither Wright or Obama has done that, they continue to espouse the same philosophy. The analogy was a flop, and as pointed out, it does not support Obama.

0 Replies

okie wrote:

Gargamel wrote:

He was comparing Wirght to the adulteress, not to Jesus. You completely missed the analogy.

Please pay closer attention.

I knew that. I simply used his analogy in more than one way to illustrate what is going on here. I also included the adulteress to Wright comparison, and rightly pointed out that they are not reacting in the same way. Jesus told the woman to go and sin no more, but neither Wright or Obama has done that, they continue to espouse the same philosophy. The analogy was a flop, and as pointed out, it does not support Obama.

Sorry, but you don't know what Obama has said to Wright about it. It is entirely likely that, as Obama has stated, he has had many conversations with Wright about the nature of some of his comments.

It does support Obama - it was a fine analogy - but you are determined to twist anything to attack him, so...

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Another lesson to be learned here, forgiving the woman and voting for the woman are two entirely different things. If Wright disavowed his life of hatred and wallowing in past injustice, and if Obama totally disavowed that message and belief as well, I am quite happy to forgive Obama, in fact I hold no personal grudge against him now, no reason to even apologize, but I won't vote for him because he has different beliefs than mine. Not voting for someone has little to do with forgiveness, it has to do with beliefs. This discussion is so bizarre to even make these analogies in the first place. The analogies don't fit, and even when you apply them, they argue against Obama.

0 Replies

okie wrote:

Another lesson to be learned here, forgiving the woman and voting for the woman are two entirely different things. If Wright disavowed his life of hatred and wallowing in past injustice, and if Obama totally disavowed that message and belief as well, I am quite happy to forgive Obama, in fact I hold no personal grudge against him now, no reason to even apologize, but I won't vote for him because he has different beliefs than mine. Not voting for someone has little to do with forgiveness, it has to do with beliefs. This discussion is so bizarre to even make these analogies in the first place. The analogies don't fit, and even when you apply them, they argue against Obama.

There is no 'life of hatred.' You're simply making **** up.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

What is wallowing in the injustices of the past, then cyclo, that propels the Black Liberation Theology, on which the church is based upon?

0 Replies

okie wrote:

What is wallowing in the injustices of the past, then cyclo, that propels the Black Liberation Theology, on which the church is based upon?

It's not a life of hatred. You're just making stuff up.

I doubt you've done any real research into any actual sermons which Wright gave, or read anything he's written. But you feel perfectly qualified to denounce the man. That's ignorance speaking.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

I just "made it up" after I read the church's own website, and then a little about James Cone's philosophy, on which the church is essentially based upon. Thats all it took, cyclops.

0 Replies

Another note about the church website. It is cloaked in some feel good things, but it doesn't take long to see it is mostly political, not religious, and it is centered around righting the injustices of society, of the past, etc. It is about axes to grind. You don't have to call it hatred, but that is the true element that it becomes expressed as, because that is one important element of the philosophy.

I am incredulous that a man as intelligent as Obama fails to see this, and apparently feels this is some kind of grand philosophy. That is what is so surprising.

0 Replies

okie wrote:

Another note about the church website. It is cloaked in some feel good things, but it doesn't take long to see it is mostly political, not religious, and it is centered around righting the injustices of society, of the past, etc. It is about axes to grind. You don't have to call it hatred, but that is the true element that it becomes expressed as, because that is one important element of the philosophy.

I am incredulous that a man as intelligent as Obama fails to see this, and apparently feels this is some kind of grand philosophy. That is what is so surprising.

There's no hate involved at all. You made it up.

And I don't think that anyone's surprised that Republicans feel that there's no further purpose in having equality discussions and efforts in our society. You're just protecting the interests of your tribe, after all.

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

Continue the phsycobabble, cyclo. It is interesting to read, but it is so transparently phony. You will continue to defend Obama no matter what, I understand that, but I prefer common sense.

0 Replies

okie wrote:

Continue the phsycobabble, cyclo. It is interesting to read, but it is so transparently phony. You will continue to defend Obama no matter what, I understand that, but I prefer common sense.

You haven't done any real research on this issue, in order to find out the objective truth; why would anyone be persuaded?

Cycloptichorn

0 Replies

A discussion is fine.

BUT, when I (and I mean that figuratively, not literally) get talked TO instead of WITH, its not a discussion.
When I am told I have to pay for the sins of my father, things like slavery, racism, bigotry,etc., when I had nothing to do with those sins or when I am told I have to pay you for crimes committed upon your ancestors, that isnt a discussion.

If you want to have a "discussion", then lets do that.
But leave your demand for reperations or your claims that its my fault at home.

0 Replies

okie wrote:

Thanks for listening. I will get back to you on more words and phrases.

No problem, and thank you. I appreciate how you took the trouble to answer my questions, even knowing that they would not be popular.

You will probably have guessed that I can not put myself in your shoes. With many of the things you say about Obama, I simply have trouble imagining how you reached that conclusion.

But that's exactly why I was asking. I mean, it's clear that we're not going to actually agree about most any of this. So the next best thing for me is to at least figure out how this works. How you came to reach the conclusions that you came to.

I still dont agree, of course, with most all of what you say. But especially as a non-American, the most important thing for me is just to understand. What American voters think, how they reason, what are the associations that guide their conclusion. Now about Soz or Freeduck I dont really have to ask - with a few exceptions that arise from the difference between a US liberal and a Euro lefty, they work roughly like me. With you - well, I could just dismiss views like yours out of hand as simply unreasonable, or I can ask, and at least see how they emerge. It can only help me learn more about the nature of US politics, right? More info is always good, by definition.

So thanks again. Also, I'm going to bookmark this post for myself so I can re-read it whenever I'm tempted to get into another snide to and fro with someone who I think is just being unreasonable. ;-)

0 Replies

nimh, thanks for your kind comments. It is refreshing to hear, and although I have made light of your graphs and analysis at times, I do appreciate the thorough information and research you present here.

I realize my opinions are not particularly popular here on this forum with some, although there are also several here that think similarly, but I think my opinions are pretty much in the mainstream of a large minority of Americans, and probably a large majority of rural Americans. Most of the people I know would be shocked at some of the liberal opinions expressed here. I grew up rural, fairly poor, and we had to work hard, very hard, but never did our parents teach us that our hardships were due to some kind of injustice, they were merely part of life, although all of us suffer some somewhere along the way. We were thankful for the opportunity to be free, the opportunity to either succeed or fail, and it is my firm belief that success is available to anyone, anyone, in this country that is willing to work hard, stay off of drugs, show up to work on time, and live responsibly within one's means. This is proven over and over again by immigrants that come here without a dime and live successfully and happily. Failure is the vast majority of the time nothing more than self fulfilling prophecy.

It is with all of this experience and beliefs of mine, plus the fact that most people are living better now than when I was young, that I find some people's demands for change, complaining of injustice, whining, complaining, as we find on this forum, I find it absolutely repugnant and disgusting.

0 Replies

"
"All looks yellow to a jaundiced eye"-- Alexabder pope

" Individuals having no Religious affliation
show on the average
less prejudice than do church members."-- Gordon W Allport

Opinions founded on prejudice are always
sustained with the greatest violence."-- Gordon W Allport

0 Replies

okie wrote:

I think my opinions are pretty much in the mainstream of a large minority of Americans, and probably a large majority of rural Americans. Most of the people I know would be shocked at some of the liberal opinions expressed here.

No doubt.. And "a large minority of Americans, and probably a large majority of rural Americans", I'm sure, yes. (Which is part of why I'm being so curious ;-))

okie wrote:

I grew up rural, fairly poor, and we had to work hard, very hard, but never did our parents teach us that our hardships were due to some kind of injustice, they were merely part of life

I believe you - certainly when it comes to your generation. I'm curious though - you were born and raised in Oklahoma, right? I think you once said that your parents were "Okies" too..?

I'm asking because, of course, in our day and age, Oklahoma is one of the conservative bastions of the country, one of the most conservative states around. But it wasnt always like that... Jimmy Carter almost won the state, and a generation earlier, Truman won a landslide.

Hell, back before the Second World War, in what I guess would be your grandparents or even greatgrandparents' time, Oklahoma was a leftist bulwark! Roosevelt got almost three-quarters of the vote there, back in '32.

And who would believe it now, but way, way back in the state's earliest days, Oklahoma was a Socialist bastion! When the legendary red rebel Eugene Debs first ran for President in 1912, Oklahoma was his single best state in the country; he got 1 out of 6 votes there. Hell, even his successor, the long-forgotten Allan Benson who got just 3% nationwide, got 16% in Oklahoma. The authorities were so concerned, they made it illegal to fly the red flag.

Sigh.. uhm, what was I saying? Got lost there for a minute..

Yeah, so, I mean I'm sure there is absolutely nothing left there of an actual Socialist tradition; that must have faded away over 70 years ago during the Depression, when - is what I am guessing Question

- most of the poorest peasants who had voted for people like Debs or Fightin' Bob LaFollette lost their land and trekked to California...

But the Roosevelt/Truman era though; that must have been your grandparents' (maybe even your parents'?) time.. hey, my grandparents were grown up already then. Not all that long ago. So once there must have been a keen sense of the role that injustice played in the poverty in which many "Okies" lived back then..

What about your family? Were your parents already always conservatives, or were they the first generation to turn from left to right? Or was yours - or was your family always already conservative? How long have your family been "Okies"?

From my study room view of the state, looked at from thousands of miles away through the lense of election maps, it also seems like there's a real difference between the South/East of the state on the one hand, and the North/West of the state on the other. A split that's been there throughout the decades too! All the way from the 1910s (when the South of the state was the Socialists' stronghold) to the 1990s (when Bill Clinton won all of the Southeast and some of the Southwest - both times). Do you have any idea what that is all about? Is it to do with race, or poverty, or I dont know what? Is there some kind of cultural difference, or is it just one of those things that only shows up in statistics?

0 Replies

Woody Guthrie was an Okie. That should tell you something, nimh.

0 Replies

"As I was walkin' down the highway,
I saw a sign there, said 'Private Property'
But on the other side, it didn't say nothin'
That side was made for you and me."

(rarely sung verse, for some reason, to "This Land Is Your Land", by Woody Guthrie, Oklahoman)

0 Replies

nimh wrote:

okie wrote:
I think my opinions are pretty much in the mainstream of a large minority of Americans, and probably a large majority of rural Americans. Most of the people I know would be shocked at some of the liberal opinions expressed here.

No doubt.. And "a large minority of Americans, and probably a large majority of rural Americans", I'm sure, yes. (Which is part of why I'm being so curious ;-))

okie wrote:
I grew up rural, fairly poor, and we had to work hard, very hard, but never did our parents teach us that our hardships were due to some kind of injustice, they were merely part of life

I believe you - certainly when it comes to your generation. I'm curious though - you were born and raised in Oklahoma, right? I think you once said that your parents were "Okies" too..?

I'm asking because, of course, in our day and age, Oklahoma is one of the conservative bastions of the country, one of the most conservative states around. But it wasnt always like that... Jimmy Carter almost won the state, and a generation earlier, Truman won a landslide.
..

I hope you don't mind, I only included part of your post for brevity sake, but will try to address all of it.

Yes, my parents were okies, as I grew up too, and I think I have a pretty good insight into what accounts for the phenomena or apparent change you speak of. My parents were strong FDR Democrats, my mother taught me the Democrats were for the common man while Repbulicans were for big business, and that is what my grandfather believed. However, here is the thing you must remember, these people are staunchly patriotic, my dad being in WW II, they all worked hard and were fiercely independent. To summarize as Ronald Reagan did, the Democratic Party left him, he never left the party. My parents are still registered Democrats, or were, only one is now alive, and tend to vote the man, not the party, which I see the fallacy of, but that explains how the state can go staunchly Democrat and then go Republican. They might vote Democrat locally, but haven't voted for a Democrat for president in a long long time, to my knowledge.

The people that I know absolutely resented the total absolute duds, the Clintons, and they found out Carter was a flop. They believe in principles like decency, and honesty. Oklahoma has far more problems than it used to have, but it is still a conservative state, even when they vote for Democrats. I don't believe you will see Oklahoma go for Clinton or Obama, whoever it is, they are not that liberal yet.

I actually grew up with a guy whose dad was more or less a communist, and this guy nearly made college a life's career and studied all the world's religions and governments, ended up with doctorates and masters of this and that, and actually lived in more than a dozen countries around the world. Alot of his seeking was because of his dad's sort of revolutionary ideas, which was unusual in the farming community, and this guy ended up searching all of this out for himself. Not too long ago, he confided in me that he wasted a long time and has concluded the old dirt farmers he grew up with had the best philosophy all along, not only that, capitalism was the worst system on earth - except for all the rest of the possible systems. I think he thought utopia existed somewhere, but to his disappointment, he never found it. Where he grew up was as close as he could have gotten to it, and now I think he realizes that.

I wish he could talk to the Obamaites and tell them to cool it, their visions of some idealistic world does not exist, but instead quit their complainin and whinin and moanin about change, and wake up each day to appreciate the free country and the life they have.

Also, I missed a couple questions, my grandfather was a homesteader, so he settled land inhabited by the indians before that. That has to be an injustice, right? My dad immigrated from Europe, and he was staunchly patriotic as well, never well off, but worked hard all his life. I am the first generation in the family to be registered Republican, but there was little disagreement between me and my parents beyond party. Except I worked in the oil business and found out it was business that makes the world go around, so I am very pro-business.

0 Replies

Gee, here I thought the American Way was, "if it's broke, fix it". I didn't realize it was, "if it's broke, ignore it", okie.

0 Replies

Obama Embraces a Bigot and a Fanatic, the Rev. Wright

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know