Phoenix32890
 
  1  
Thu 20 Mar, 2008 02:47 pm
Foxfyre wrote:
blatham wrote:
Phoenix32890 wrote:
Quote:
"Obama said his generation benefits from the past. 'And that's part of what this campaign has been about, is to say, let's acknowledge a difficult history, but let's move forward in a practical way to get things done.'


Obama decried what Wright had said, but felt that it was because of Wright's time of life, in the generation that saw segregation. Obama talks about "moving forward".

My question: Why would he subject his children, who have NOT lived through segregation to the hate filled rhetoric of a Wright? Was Wright the appropriate pastor to teach his kids? Would Wright be the one to help these children to get beyond the past?


Yes, indeed. And that's why, for Jewish people of middle years and younger who never lived through the Holocaust, it is entirely divisive and hate-spewing to remind them of this long ago incident and the dangers of anti-semitism and it's why the celebration of Jewish pride and difference is so destructive to the greater community's unity.


If Jewish parents attempt to teach their children that Germans are despicable people and are still persecuting the Jews and still hate the Jews and are still keeping the Jews down and "God da*m Germany", would you not have a problem with that?


I don't think that amongst intelligent Jewish people, that anything of the sort would happen. Right after the war, I was aware of a hatred of Germans, especially by those people who had lost families in the Holocaust. But I know that over the years, this attitude has dissipated by all but the most diehard bigots.
0 Replies
 
Miller
 
  1  
Thu 20 Mar, 2008 02:50 pm
Phoenix32890 wrote:
Foxfyre wrote:
blatham wrote:
Phoenix32890 wrote:
Quote:
"Obama said his generation benefits from the past. 'And that's part of what this campaign has been about, is to say, let's acknowledge a difficult history, but let's move forward in a practical way to get things done.'


Obama decried what Wright had said, but felt that it was because of Wright's time of life, in the generation that saw segregation. Obama talks about "moving forward".

My question: Why would he subject his children, who have NOT lived through segregation to the hate filled rhetoric of a Wright? Was Wright the appropriate pastor to teach his kids? Would Wright be the one to help these children to get beyond the past?


Yes, indeed. And that's why, for Jewish people of middle years and younger who never lived through the Holocaust, it is entirely divisive and hate-spewing to remind them of this long ago incident and the dangers of anti-semitism and it's why the celebration of Jewish pride and difference is so destructive to the greater community's unity.


If Jewish parents attempt to teach their children that Germans are despicable people and are still persecuting the Jews and still hate the Jews and are still keeping the Jews down and "God da*m Germany", would you not have a problem with that?


I don't think that amongst intelligent Jewish people, that anything of the sort would happen. Right after the war, there I was aware of a hatred of Germans, especially by those people who had lost families in the Holocaust. but I know that over the years, this attitude has dissipated by all but the most diehard bigots.


Very true and it's surprising how many American Jews want their remains buried on German soil.
0 Replies
 
Jonsey
 
  1  
Thu 20 Mar, 2008 02:53 pm
I don't know any American Jews that are angry like that.
0 Replies
 
Miller
 
  1  
Thu 20 Mar, 2008 02:55 pm
Jonsey wrote:
I don't know any American Jews that are angry like that.


Do you know many American Jews?
0 Replies
 
Miller
 
  1  
Thu 20 Mar, 2008 03:00 pm
maporsche wrote:
Why would Obama choose this man as his 'mentor'?


He may have chosen him as a father-figure, since he never really had a father. Also, he wanted to convert to Christianity. I still wonder why he didn't become a Catholic, as this is the major Christian religion in Chicago.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Thu 20 Mar, 2008 03:03 pm
Phoenix32890 wrote:
Foxfyre wrote:
blatham wrote:
Phoenix32890 wrote:
Quote:
"Obama said his generation benefits from the past. 'And that's part of what this campaign has been about, is to say, let's acknowledge a difficult history, but let's move forward in a practical way to get things done.'


Obama decried what Wright had said, but felt that it was because of Wright's time of life, in the generation that saw segregation. Obama talks about "moving forward".

My question: Why would he subject his children, who have NOT lived through segregation to the hate filled rhetoric of a Wright? Was Wright the appropriate pastor to teach his kids? Would Wright be the one to help these children to get beyond the past?


Yes, indeed. And that's why, for Jewish people of middle years and younger who never lived through the Holocaust, it is entirely divisive and hate-spewing to remind them of this long ago incident and the dangers of anti-semitism and it's why the celebration of Jewish pride and difference is so destructive to the greater community's unity.


If Jewish parents attempt to teach their children that Germans are despicable people and are still persecuting the Jews and still hate the Jews and are still keeping the Jews down and "God da*m Germany", would you not have a problem with that?


I don't think that amongst intelligent Jewish people, that anything of the sort would happen. Right after the war, there I was aware of a hatred of Germans, especially by those people who had lost families in the Holocaust. but I know that over the years, this attitude has dissipated by all but the most diehard bigots.


Oh I agree completely. I used to play in a bridge club with a full blood German lady, immigrated here as a child, and a Jewish lady from New York whose grandparents died at Auschwitz. They are good friends. I doubt the subject of the Holocaust has ever come up. I think the few Jews who still harbor hatred toward Germans (or Christians or any others for that matter) are in a tiny minority. I only used the illustration as rebuttal to Bernie's line of reasoning.
0 Replies
 
Butrflynet
 
  1  
Thu 20 Mar, 2008 03:03 pm
So, has anyone viewed those videos yet? What did you think of them?
0 Replies
 
spendius
 
  1  
Thu 20 Mar, 2008 03:05 pm
Bernie wrote-

Quote:
Has anyone actually read Lapham?!


Yep. I have. A slick mish-mash I'm afraid. I was right to say that it's whole meaning was divulged by the time I laughed at the " hideous Satanic liberal" phrase. Only someone who likes reading the same idea over and over again could derive anything further from it from an intellectual point of view except maybe pleasure at each stroke on his ego.

The Simple Truth about Socialism was the title of a lecture delivered by Bernard Shaw to the Fabian Society on Dec. 9 1910. In it he said---

Quote:
The simple truth about Socialism is that it means equality of income--a state of society in which the entire income of the country is divided between all the people in exactly equal shares, without regard to their industry, their character, or any other consideration except the consideration that they are living human beings....that is Socialism and nothing else is Socialism.


So the outcome described at interminable length in the link is exactly what you can expect with vastly unequal incomes,as a matter of simple logic, given human nature, and thus it is no surprise to me, even if it is to Mr Lapham.

The suspicion arises that to not address yourself to Mr Shaw's prescription is, in effect, to give sustenance to the situation Mr Lapham goes to great pains to expose and as this provides opportunities for the excercise of righteous indignation, always an enjoyable experience I'm told, one can readily see why only the inevitable consequence is in the frame for discussion and the cause is neatly shunted to one side.

In fact, a black propagandist of the right could well have written Mr Lapham's piece as a device to allow armchair socialists to think something is being done when nothing is being done and thus they can sit back in comfortable smugness believing themselves to be sound Socialists rather than having to trouble themselves with setting up the barricades which they really ought to do if they believe their country to be being ruined.

And the situation, from a strictly Socialist point of view, becomes somewhat more complex if the international arena is taken into account as, of course, it must be if those claiming to be Socialists wish to avoid the charge of racism and, not or, of special pleading.

One might lie back and contemplate the ceiling as all the good judges recommend.
0 Replies
 
Phoenix32890
 
  1  
Thu 20 Mar, 2008 03:07 pm
Foxfyre wrote:
Phoenix32890 wrote:
Foxfyre wrote:
blatham wrote:
Phoenix32890 wrote:
Quote:
"Obama said his generation benefits from the past. 'And that's part of what this campaign has been about, is to say, let's acknowledge a difficult history, but let's move forward in a practical way to get things done.'


Obama decried what Wright had said, but felt that it was because of Wright's time of life, in the generation that saw segregation. Obama talks about "moving forward".

My question: Why would he subject his children, who have NOT lived through segregation to the hate filled rhetoric of a Wright? Was Wright the appropriate pastor to teach his kids? Would Wright be the one to help these children to get beyond the past?


Yes, indeed. And that's why, for Jewish people of middle years and younger who never lived through the Holocaust, it is entirely divisive and hate-spewing to remind them of this long ago incident and the dangers of anti-semitism and it's why the celebration of Jewish pride and difference is so destructive to the greater community's unity.


If Jewish parents attempt to teach their children that Germans are despicable people and are still persecuting the Jews and still hate the Jews and are still keeping the Jews down and "God da*m Germany", would you not have a problem with that?


I don't think that amongst intelligent Jewish people, that anything of the sort would happen. Right after the war, there I was aware of a hatred of Germans, especially by those people who had lost families in the Holocaust. but I know that over the years, this attitude has dissipated by all but the most diehard bigots.


Oh I agree completely. I used to play in a bridge club with a full blood German lady, immigrated here as a child, and a Jewish lady from New York whose grandparents died at Auschwitz. They are good friends. I doubt the subject of the Holocaust has ever come up. I think the few Jews who still harbor hatred toward Germans (or Christians or any others for that matter) are in a tiny minority. I only used the illustration as rebuttal to Bernie's line of reasoning.


Personally, I think that Bernie threw in a red herring to avoid confronting my question.
0 Replies
 
Miller
 
  1  
Thu 20 Mar, 2008 03:07 pm
Jonsey wrote:
I don't know any American Jews that are angry like that.


If you're read any historical books on the Nazis and the concentration camps, etc it would be very hard in my opinion not to be mad. Very mad.

it seems to me, that it would be normal tobe mad at what the Nazis did to the Jews.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Thu 20 Mar, 2008 03:09 pm
Phoenix32890 wrote:
Foxfyre wrote:
Phoenix32890 wrote:
Foxfyre wrote:
blatham wrote:
Phoenix32890 wrote:
Quote:
"Obama said his generation benefits from the past. 'And that's part of what this campaign has been about, is to say, let's acknowledge a difficult history, but let's move forward in a practical way to get things done.'


Obama decried what Wright had said, but felt that it was because of Wright's time of life, in the generation that saw segregation. Obama talks about "moving forward".

My question: Why would he subject his children, who have NOT lived through segregation to the hate filled rhetoric of a Wright? Was Wright the appropriate pastor to teach his kids? Would Wright be the one to help these children to get beyond the past?


Yes, indeed. And that's why, for Jewish people of middle years and younger who never lived through the Holocaust, it is entirely divisive and hate-spewing to remind them of this long ago incident and the dangers of anti-semitism and it's why the celebration of Jewish pride and difference is so destructive to the greater community's unity.


If Jewish parents attempt to teach their children that Germans are despicable people and are still persecuting the Jews and still hate the Jews and are still keeping the Jews down and "God da*m Germany", would you not have a problem with that?


I don't think that amongst intelligent Jewish people, that anything of the sort would happen. Right after the war, there I was aware of a hatred of Germans, especially by those people who had lost families in the Holocaust. but I know that over the years, this attitude has dissipated by all but the most diehard bigots.


Oh I agree completely. I used to play in a bridge club with a full blood German lady, immigrated here as a child, and a Jewish lady from New York whose grandparents died at Auschwitz. They are good friends. I doubt the subject of the Holocaust has ever come up. I think the few Jews who still harbor hatred toward Germans (or Christians or any others for that matter) are in a tiny minority. I only used the illustration as rebuttal to Bernie's line of reasoning.


Personally, I think that Bernie threw in a red herring to avoid confronting my question.


Laughing
0 Replies
 
Butrflynet
 
  1  
Thu 20 Mar, 2008 03:11 pm
Butrflynet wrote:
Has anyone watched the videos I linked to a few pages back?

Here's the link again:

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/3/20/124426/842/246/480797
0 Replies
 
Miller
 
  1  
Thu 20 Mar, 2008 03:14 pm
in Boston, the radio stations are playing the tapes night and day... Embarrassed
0 Replies
 
Butrflynet
 
  1  
Thu 20 Mar, 2008 03:17 pm
Have you watched the ones at that dailyKOS link, Miller?
0 Replies
 
Miller
 
  1  
Thu 20 Mar, 2008 03:19 pm
no
0 Replies
 
revel
 
  1  
Thu 20 Mar, 2008 04:11 pm
Miller wrote:
Jonsey wrote:
I don't know any American Jews that are angry like that.


If you're read any historical books on the Nazis and the concentration camps, etc it would be very hard in my opinion not to be mad. Very mad.

it seems to me, that it would be normal tobe mad at what the Nazis did to the Jews.


I completely agree that Jews have a right to mad at what the Nazis did to them. Many have gotten past it and that is good.

However the two are not really comparable because blacks have been mistreated in this country in which they still live and they still continue to be profiled by cops and are treated unfairly in the courts because they do not have the resources to hire decent lawyers and a host of other ways. They have never had reparations for slavery and all the horrible suffering they had to endure before the civil war.

Plus it wasn't that long ago when they still suffered gross discrimination such as separate-but-equal schools, "colored" water fountains, salary differentials, lynching and the Tuskegee syphilis experiment; denied the right to move in certain neighborhoods even if they could afford to over come the odds and afford to live in those neighborhoods. Many of the older generation still remember all that before the days of the civil rights movement and affirmative action and all those things conservative hate which helped the blacks overcome some of their struggles.

However; Obama's point has been all along (if any one bothers to read all his speeches) is to talk about it but find ways to move forward.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Thu 20 Mar, 2008 04:13 pm
FreeDuck wrote:
Foxfyre wrote:
Even letters to the editor in Salon recently have noted that Obama won't go on the record at length with anybody re any sticky wickets in his record That is his right of course. But it does little to calm any questions people might have about him.

Err, I guess you didn't hear about how he sat for several hours with the Chicago Tribune and answered every single question they asked of him about several of these so called "sticky wickets"?

http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/opinion/chi-0316edit1mar16,0,2616801.story

Facts, pesky facts.
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Thu 20 Mar, 2008 04:16 pm
Foxfyre wrote:
So far, since the speech, his negatives have been rising among those fence sitters suggesting that he was not convincing to them.

What polls did you see that in?

I've seen several polls that clearly showed his fortunes declining after the "Wright highlights" video hit the networks last weekend. But I havent seen any poll showing that Obama's numbers went down since his speech. In fact, both the Gallup and Rasmussen daily polls suggest it has helped him.

But if you saw any, please let me know, that would be interesting for the Polls etc thread...
0 Replies
 
nimh
 
  1  
Thu 20 Mar, 2008 04:20 pm
Again, it seems to be Foxfyre's posts in particular that make me want to respond... there's no "hunting" involved, just those are apparently the ones that I feel need to be responded to.

Foxfyre wrote:
What they want to know is that if the man who wants to be their president does in fact reject Wright's views or did he condone them for 20 years because that is actually where his heart lies?

You just cant let it rest, eh. Obama has in fact rejected Wright's views, explicitly and repeatedly, now again in his speech, as the many quotes Candid brought to you once again showed.

And when I asked you directly what concrete indications or signs any of the "scrutinizing" of Obama has turned up that he does in fact share them after all, your only argument seemed to be, well, he went to church there for 20 years. Implying that if he went to church there, he must have agreed with everything the preacher said, even if he explicitly says that he doesnt. Oh, that and the flag lapel and heart on hand thing. Thats it.

But the lack of any actual concrete indication that Obama does share these particular views of Wright's, even though it's directly counter everything he's written and said throughout his political life, apparently wont stop you from speculating time and again that, hey, Americans just want to know whether he might share those views after all. They also want to know whether Hillary has stopped beating her husband yet, I'm sure.
0 Replies
 
Foxfyre
 
  1  
Thu 20 Mar, 2008 04:27 pm
nimh wrote:
Foxfyre wrote:
So far, since the speech, his negatives have been rising among those fence sitters suggesting that he was not convincing to them.

What polls did you see that in?

I've seen several polls that clearly showed his fortunes declining after the "Wright highlights" video hit the networks last weekend. But I havent seen any poll showing that Obama's numbers went down since his speech. In fact, both the Gallup and Rasmussen daily polls suggest it has helped him.

But if you saw any, please let me know, that would be interesting for the Polls etc thread...


I didn't say Obama's polls went down since his speech. Or if I did, I didn't mean to say that. But neither have they come up from their previous lows. They have been essentially unchanged in the last three days according to Rasmussen while McCain's fortunes seem to be improving. Facts. Pesky facts.

I interpret this to mean that he did not succeed in persuading those who have been influenced by Jeremiah Wright's rhetoric. I don't think the speech influenced the pro-Obamaites or the anti-Obamaites one way or the other.
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

So....Will Biden Be VP? - Question by blueveinedthrobber
My view on Obama - Discussion by McGentrix
Obama/ Love Him or Hate Him, We've Got Him - Discussion by Phoenix32890
Obama fumbles at Faith Forum - Discussion by slkshock7
Expert: Obama is not the antichrist - Discussion by joefromchicago
Obama's State of the Union - Discussion by maxdancona
Obama 2012? - Discussion by snood
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Obama '08?
  3. » Page 651
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 1.07 seconds on 11/17/2024 at 10:24:36