race | MY Vast Right Wing Conspiracy

Day 1 of McCain’s “It’s Time for Action Tour”

Day one was spent right here in sweet home Alabama, which I appreciate, because usually after the primaries, Alabama is pretty much written off by both parties. Even better, John McCain went into Democratic territory. I’ve always been annoyed that The Black Vote™ is always sort of ceded to the Democrats by default, and our candidates generally don’t really make an effort to take a bite out of that vote. Of course, I understand it–we conservatives see “black issues” as the same issues everyone else has, and that we all have the same basic goals. We’ve done a crappy job of selling our solutions to minorities, though. Good for McCain for reaching out and letting people know he’ll work for their votes.

Barack Obama’s speech: Fine, if you’re from the Left, I guess

More platitudes:

Ironically, this quintessentially American – and yes, conservative – notion of self-help found frequent expression in Reverend Wright’s sermons. But what my former pastor too often failed to understand is that embarking on a program of self-help also requires a belief that society can change.

Self-help is “quintessentially American” and conservative, but liberation theology or Marxism has little to nothing to do with “self-help.”

The profound mistake of Reverend Wright’s sermons is not that he spoke about racism in our society. It’s that he spoke as if our society was static; as if no progress has been made; as if this country – a country that has made it possible for one of his own members to run for the highest office in the land and build a coalition of white and black; Latino and Asian, rich and poor, young and old — is still irrevocably bound to a tragic past. But what we know — what we have seen – is that America can change. That is true genius of this nation. What we have already achieved gives us hope – the audacity to hope – for what we can and must achieve tomorrow.

Is that the Reverend I see under the bus? Not quite, but if Barack Obama sees his basic theory as that our society is static, and that he’s wrong, why not seek out a pastor and theology that he sees as correct (as Oprah did years ago)?

In the white community, the path to a more perfect union means acknowledging that what ails the African-American community does not just exist in the minds of black people; that the legacy of discrimination - and current incidents of discrimination, while less overt than in the past - are real and must be addressed. Not just with words, but with deeds – by investing in our schools and our communities; by enforcing our civil rights laws and ensuring fairness in our criminal justice system; by providing this generation with ladders of opportunity that were unavailable for previous generations. It requires all Americans to realize that your dreams do not have to come at the expense of my dreams; that investing in the health, welfare, and education of black and brown and white children will ultimately help all of America prosper.

There you go. Do you believe that acknowledging the very real legacy of discrimination–racism, sexism, bigotry, whatever-phobia–is best addressed by investing in the health, welfare and education of all children in the ways that Barack Obama supports? Does he support, for example, school choice and/or private school vouchers? Does he support, for example, a flatter, fairer tax system, which undeniably allows the disadvantaged poor to keep more of their own money? Or does he believe that we must “take care of” the disadvantaged by spending more on failing schools and raising taxes on those who provide jobs (”reverse the tax cuts”) to Americans AND middle-class Americans (what about that “renounce the middle class” thing?) so we can fund more government programs?

In the end, then, what is called for is nothing more, and nothing less, than what all the world’s great religions demand – that we do unto others as we would have them do unto us. Let us be our brother’s keeper, Scripture tells us. Let us be our sister’s keeper. Let us find that common stake we all have in one another, and let our politics reflect that spirit as well.

I don’t want the government to be “my keeper.” I can be my own keeper, thank you very much, and how is “be your brother’s keeper” consistent with “self-help,” anyway? This isn’t a government with programs based on selective Christian principles, anyway, is it? And if it is, why does Barack Obama support government actions that are so decidedly un-Christian? (Opposing a ban on partial birth abortion, for example, just to start.) His particular strain of Christianity simply isn’t the Christianity that most Christians–or Jews, or atheists, or anyone else–subscribes, anyway. Nor is Mitt Romney’s religion what most Americans believe, either, but the difference is, Mitt Romney didn’t ask us to accept his beliefs as part of how he has governed or would govern. Joe Lieberman is an Orthodox Jew, but he hasn’t asked anyone to accept his beliefs as part of how America should be run, either. And yes, John McCain is a Christian, but he doesn’t say we must be “our brother’s keeper” as justification for how he would govern. He believes that we do what we do because of our traditionally American values. Duty, honor, country. Independence. And yes, equality.

Of course, I don’t believe that Barack Obama thinks we should live under a theocracy, anyway. He does, however, believe in a theology that insists on social change–even revolution–to bring up the “oppressed.” In my eyes, this isn’t theology; it’s political ideology that uses Christian language (very selectively!) to support its theses.

This is ALL almost beside the point, anyway. Politics isn’t a zero-sum game. There’s more going on in the world than the legacy of discrimination; we can’t be focused solely on navel-gazing when there are other very pressing issues in America and the world that affect every American–and affect the entire planet, for that matter. Both Hillary Clinton and especially Barack Obama have consistently failed to recognize them, as is evidenced by their Senate records and during the campaign in pandering to their core supporters with their socialist ideals. Barack Obama in particular has chosen to focus on what he sees are the problems with oppressive America (”mean America”), and talked about “change,” rather than embracing what is right with America and where there are problems, finding NEW solutions to old problems. In the end, the only “change” he represents is a cosmetic change, and a much further leftward change from right now–but it’s still the same old Jimmy Carter politics: God damn America, it’s wrong unless it’s “fixed.” Fixed the Chicago Way.

[Previous posts]

UPDATE:
Fausta makes an excellent point:

Obama could have disavowed the church but chose instead to essentially say that rejecting Jeremiah Wright means rejecting the entire black community.

TUCC and Jeremiah Wright aren’t the entire black community, of course.

Here are just two (more)–make that five more–from whom you can find a different point of view.

UPDATE 2: Karl at Protein Wisdom examines Barack Obama’s religion and whether it matters. Excellent analysis, much more thorough than just giving links, as I’ve done.

Must-reads regarding Obama and Jeremiah Wright

Two of my all-time favorite writers, both of whom happen to be black; one also having Kenyan roots in common with Obama.
Juliette Ochieng (Baldilocks):

Why did it take so long for the MSM and other observers to give this very important issue the scrutiny it deserves? There are two reasons.

1. The race-baiting of the Clintons coupled with the accusations of race baiting by Obama supporters, and,

2. The wild goose chases regarding Obama’s Kenyan Luo heritage, his visit there, his relationship to Raila Odinga, the mind-bogglingly distorted analyses of the origins of the conflict in that country, the ahistorical analyses of how mixed-raced persons have been identified in this country and the Obama-as-Muslim whisper campaign.

Yes! I’d really point to her #2, because the Stupid Campaign (check out her “some sort of Islam-Christianity death struggle” link for a prime example of how incredibly stupid it can be) has done nothing but make Obama’s critics look like a bunch of ignorant yahoos any time Obama’s past is brought up. Furthermore, I’ll admit I’ve held back on writing about Jeremiah Wright myself, because I don’t want to be associated with the Stupid Campaign, and I don’t want to be accused of race-baiting (Juliette’s reason #1). That’s been my mistake, because giving Obama a pass for this gives him tacit approval. I think of it like this–hesitating to comment on gender issues, because you don’t want to be branded a stereotypical angry feminist. Silence connotates approval.

Go read what she’s written.

Then, Michael Bowen (Cobb) breaks it down from his perspective as a black man. Really, nobody does this better than he does for us clueless white folks, and the comments at his blog are often as enlightening, even when you disagree with a commenter’s particular viewpoint.

OK. This is for you white dude. I want you to go back you highschool memories and think of your first crush. You can see her face, her blonde hair, her blue eyes, the way she walked, her voice and how a mere glance from her turned your insides to jelly. She never touched you, she never even spoke to you, but you spent so much time thinking about her. You loved her and hated her at the same time. There are still songs that take you back to the moment. One day she actually spoke to you and told you that you were lower than toad poop. You never forgave her, and you never will.

And especially this, in a separate post:

The problem is very simple. Pretty much all black church activism is liberal / black nationalist activism. The black church has bitten off more than it can chew, and every American who doesn’t understand the subtleties of that nexus and where it does and does not break is going to be perplexed and skeptical about how (and if) Obama can wriggle out of it. I say he can’t because Wright married the man, and Michelle Obama’s UCLA speech is the first 1 of this equation. 1 + 1 = 2. Michelle Obama + Jeremiah Wright = Unpatriotic. And don’t be surprised when Wright is labeled racist. There is no escape here, there is only confrontation. So how does one distinguish doing good for blacks from doing good for America when so much of the rhetoric of black self-help is unpatriotic? That’s the question Obama, of all people, somebody very fresh to the scene, is going to have to answer. Or else.

I’ve touched on this already:

Couple this America-loathing hate monger with Obama’s pal, the Weathermen terrorist William Ayers. Suddenly Michelle Obama’s saying this is the “first time” she’s ever been proud of America doesn’t seem so extraordinary. I find it impossible, inconceivable that Barack Obama would have such close ties to people with radically different ideas than he has, especially when he says he doesn’t think his church is controversial.

And I’ve written in many other comments (most recently here) that black theology isn’t what I have a problem with, in and of itself. (I do have a problem with its leftist bent, of course.)

“I would be puzzled that they would object or quibble with the bulk of a document [the Black Value System] that basically espouses profoundly conservative values of self-reliance and self-help.”

Who objects to that? Nobody I’ve seen who’s talking about Wright’s hateful rhetoric takes issue with THAT part of Black Liberation Theology. If they want to believe Jesus was black, I don’t care about that either. Good for them, if it makes them feel closer to Him. That is NOT the problem, and if Obama doesn’t understand people’s criticism, he’s as steeped in that garbage as Jeremiah Wright himself. It’s telling that he doesn’t consider it controversial, doesn’t understand how offensive it is. Just who does he think his voters (and potential voters) are? His big echo chamber? Maybe so, to a point. Not to THAT point, though.

Those values of self-reliance and self-help are no different from what Bill Cosby has said and for which he’s been eviscerated by victimologists. What *is* different, however, is what drives that quest for self-reliance. To someone like Jeremiah Wright or Malcolm X, it’s anger and hatred. To others, it’s confidence and independence from paternalism (i.e., the so-called “welfare-state”). There’s a stark difference. And worse, Jeremiah Wright says what he believes (God damn America!) is in the Bible. If you’ve watched the videos, you’ve seen him say “it’s in the Bible!” No, it isn’t, but Wright is preaching hatred as religion.

Finally, this isn’t from a black perspective, but Tom Maguire has some important further information, including a link to Obama’s wishy-washy defense at the Huffington Post. The Rolling Stone article to which Maguire links is already in my Obama dossier, waiting for an opportune moment, but I guess I forgot about it. (Rats!) Here’s a key quote:

“We are deeply involved in the importing of drugs, the exporting of guns and the training of professional KILLERS. . . . We believe in white supremacy and black inferiority and believe it more than we believe in God. . . . We conducted radiation experiments on our own people. . . . We care nothing about human life if the ends justify the means!” The crowd whoops and amens as Wright builds to his climax: “And. And. And! GAWD! Has GOT! To be SICK! OF THIS SHIT!”

This is as openly radical a background as any significant American political figure has ever emerged from, as much Malcolm X as Martin Luther King Jr. Wright is not an incidental figure in Obama’s life, or his politics. The senator “affirmed” his Christian faith in this church; he uses Wright as a “sounding board” to “make sure I’m not losing myself in the hype and hoopla.” Both the title of Obama’s second book, The Audacity of Hope, and the theme for his keynote address at the Democratic National Convention in 2004 come from Wright’s sermons. “If you want to understand where Barack gets his feeling and rhetoric from,” says the Rev. Jim Wallis, a leader of the religious left, “just look at Jeremiah Wright.”

Yep. “America is a mean place!”

Again, that’s where you need to get Baldilocks’ and Cobb’s perspective, because they understand it. Maybe that’s why I haven’t said much until recently–because I’ve been waiting for those who are a better authority on the world’s Jeremiah Wrights than I am. Either way, the question remains: Is this the kind of man to bring “unity” and heal old racial wounds? I don’t say “no,” I say HELL NO. I say giving a national voice to an agent of hatred and divisiveness like Jeremiah Wright would make things worse, and make no mistake: he would have a voice with his protege in the White House. After all, isn’t that exactly what some people worried about with Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee? Frankly, I wouldn’t be too worried about either of them, because at least the Southern Baptist and Mormon churches aren’t screaming about how evil America is.

There’s more relevant material getting updates over at Hot Air, and also here, with Oprah! I found this from Juliette in the comments there, too:

One of the reasons that I had to shop around for a church was that I kept running into the type that provided, shall we say,information and programs that fell outside of the scope of what I think a church–and a pastor’s–purpose should be (the purpose being to impart the Word and let the Word do the work). I’m very glad that the Spirit led me to do that.

About Oprah: just this past Sunday, one of my fellow parishioners and I got to talking about Oprah “coincidentally.” Neither of us had watched her show for years, but my friend had tuned in on accident and had been shocked at the New Age-y, secular agenda which OW seemed to be promoting. Has anyone else noticed this?

Of course I mentioned her role in the Obama campaign and my friend, a black woman like me, but a life-long Democrat said something like this: “then they both bear watching.”

Something’s going on here.

Oy.

UPDATE: Another must-read, at Protein Wisdom (via Cobb’s comments–I told ya, read the comments there too!). Quick snip:

If we attempt to comprehend how Black Theology differs from traditional Christian Theology in a theological context it is that its focus is on black experience and its ‘gospel’ is in the liberation of the black oppressed. This has evolved today to the point that ‘praxis’ - the act of revolutionary liberation from oppression - has primacy. Traditional Christian Theology certainly offers liberation - focused on a liberation from sin - but it is also universal: “Whoever is thirsty, let him come; and whoever wishes, let him take the free gift of the water of life.” (Rev. 22:17) - and “there is neither Jew nor Greek, slave nor free, male nor female” in Christ (Gal. 3:28).

Given that we live today in a post-Christian society it may be instructive to take a view that considers a political rationale as well. It seems perhaps reasonable to conclude that Black Theology is a mapping of identity politics* onto traditional Christian theology. In this way it can be explained as the engulfing of traditional Christian terminology and meaning with the mission of identity politics - and in this case the identity politics of black Americans. Those interested in the meaning of language as it relates to our culture have visited this kind of expedient adoption.

Given that slavery has been abolished, amendments to the constitution have been made, the Civil Rights movement has been almost universally embraced, legislative acts have been promulgated, broad entitlements have been granted, affirmative action has existed, and we have conducted a long term experiment with enhancing the experience of a large number of groups with political identity, it seems almost strange that Black Theology rhetoric is what it is.

Perhaps it is that the point of view is so entrenched in the focus on oppression as an experience of primacy that any party to it can never move - the act of liberation is perpetually frozen in the experience of self-imposed oppression.

To which Cobb simply says, “Bingo.”

UPDATE 2: Obama claims he’s never heard Wright say such inflammatory things. It is to laugh.

Mr. Wright said that in the phone conversation in which Mr. Obama disinvited him from a role in the announcement, Mr. Obama cited an article in Rolling Stone, “The Radical Roots of Barack Obama.”

According to the pastor, Mr. Obama then told him, “You can get kind of rough in the sermons, so what we’ve decided is that it’s best for you not to be out there in public.”

Also, yes he was there in the pews when Wright was ranting about Evil Amerikkka™. It’s in his book.

UPDATE 3: Richard Miniter wisely cools some of the lasered heat on Jeremiah Wright, and put the blame where it belongs. Pay attention:

Rev. Wright is a black Christian minister who sees Jesus a black man persecuted by white Roman society. It sounds like a clever way to get his flock to come to church, not an anti-white hatefest. It seems like a tool to get his followers to identify with Jesus. You are suffering and the Savior has suffered just like you, but he followed the word of God and he triumphed and you can too. I have heard similar sermons in white and black evangelical churches.
[...]
That root is not racism against white people, although it may sound like it is.

The root of it is a perpetual grudge against America. Where does this grudge come from? From the 1960s Left, who believed it and taught it. The hippies may have seemed happy, but they were also paranoid and given to cartoonish conspiracy theories. And the counter-culture survives in an intact and virulent form in only one place: the black inner-city.

The real scandal is the cynics who promoted these terrible views in the black community and sowed fears which continue to separate us.

So don’t blame Rev. Wright. He is simply the victim of ideological disease, doing the best that he can to help others in his somewhat incapacitated state.

I’ll have more on this later; my point very quickly is that people should not see this episode as an indictment of black America or black churches. It’s a very specific segment of black America that occupies the same ideological space as whites, Hispanics, and anyone else on the Angry Left.

And it is that segment from which Barack Obama emerged, no matter how much he lamely tries to disguise it with “just words.”

[Previous posts on this issue here.]

Geraldine Ferraro steps in it

Once again, Democrats are hoisted on their own identity politics petard. Taking the opposite approach to race from Orlando Patterson with regard to Barack Obama, we have Geraldine Ferraro:

“If Obama was a white man, he would not be in this position. And if he was a woman (of any color) he would not be in this position. He happens to be very lucky to be who he is. And the country is caught up in the concept.”

He’s only getting votes because he’s black! Just like Jesse Jackson!

And hang on there a minute, Gerry…If he were a woman he wouldn’t be in that position?

Hillary’s not winning because she’s a woman? Yeah! Anyone who doesn’t support Hillary is a misogynist pig! Hey Gerry, did you support Elizabeth Dole when she ran for President in 2000? No? What are you, some self-loathing tool of the patriarchy?

Thankfully, I’m a Republican so I’m used to hearing nonsense such as this as explanation for my political views. Haha. This must be utterly gut-wrenching for the tolerant, color-blind, feminist Left. Hey chumps, don’t feel bad–you’ll get used to it. See, that’s how it works with the Left; if you aren’t supporting the right person, you’re evil–whether it’s due to racism, sexism, or both. That’s just how it goes. You can’t win in that twisted game, so forget it.

But if you aren’t a racist or a sexist, you can still sleep well at night like I do, even though I’m voting for John McCain (despite his being gender- and melanin-challenged). See, for some of us, issues really do matter.

Meanwhile, the big dogs watch the yippy little dogs fight.

Listening to Obama and Clinton discuss their national security credentials, Romney said, is akin to “listening to two chihuahuas argue about which is the biggest dog.”

“When it comes to national security, John McCain is the big dog, and they are the chihuahuas,” he said.

There must be a way to turn that into a racist or sexist statement. Come on, liberals, help me out here.

Uploaded on October 11, 2005 by Jenjiferz

This is getting to be fun.

The KKKlinton KKKampaign’s 3am ad

What, you think “KKKlinton KKKampaign” is a bit much? Yeah, me too. But Harvard professor (shocker, I know) Orlando Patterson doesn’t think so, according to his op-ed in the New York Times (where else?):

I have spent my life studying the pictures and symbols of racism and slavery, and when I saw the Clinton ad’s central image — innocent sleeping children and a mother in the middle of the night at risk of mortal danger — it brought to my mind scenes from the past. I couldn’t help but think of D. W. Griffith’s “Birth of a Nation,” the racist movie epic that helped revive the Ku Klux Klan, with its portrayal of black men lurking in the bushes around white society. The danger implicit in the phone ad — as I see it — is that the person answering the phone might be a black man, someone who could not be trusted to protect us from this threat.

Yeah, especially when the black man in the ad climbed through the window and…oh, wait. That didn’t happen.

Shorter Orlando Patterson:

If you dare criticize teh Obamessiah, you’re just like the Ku Klux Klan, blasphemer!

I suppose the only way to remedy the situation is to vote for Obama, because issues are irrelevant. What’s really important is that a black man be elected, regardless of his experience or his stand on the issues, or else we’ll show we’re really all a bunch of white-hooded sociopaths!

Oh, what an interesting year this is going to be.

I wonder where Patterson was in 2006 when Michael Steele was running for Senate? On Steele’s bandwagon? I wonder if he’s a big fan of Clarence Thomas, Condoleezza Rice, Colin Powell, Alphonso Jackson, Ken Blackwell, etc.? Somehow, I doubt it. He must be a racist!

Stuff Goofy White ~~People~~ Liberals Like

This has to be the funniest damn blog I’ve seen in a long time.

Yeah, I know–y’all aren’t that white guy, right? Yeah, there’s at least a little of you in there. Even I found “Dogs,” which unlike almost everything else there, isn’t a fascination restricted to ridiculous liberal elitists.

What’s almost as funny: the thin skin of some of the commenters. I’m guessing anyone offended by the site probably sees a little too much of himself in it. Waaaahhhh!

Here’s another thing you’ll only, ONLY ever see on a white person. Yesterday, I saw a soccer mom driving her hybrid SUV with one of those black “W” stickers. Nope, not the “W the President” sticker (although lots of people around here still proudly sport ‘em on their cars–gotta love Alabama). It had “WINE” underneath the W. BWAHAHAHAHA!!!!! I thought I was going to die laughing! Hi, I’m an upper-middle class sophisticated latte liberal, and I like wine! LAME!

Found via Cobb, who has his own hilarious list of stuff black people like. This, while explaining why “black people like to tell off white people,” made my sides hurt laughing because it’s so painfully true:

White people tend to forget who they are and what they’re doing on this planet. That’s why they watch foreign films. They know that they live two inches off the ground, and of course they often forget whether or not they are living in reality. They ask themselves stupid questions like, how do I know everything I’m experiencing is not an illusion and maybe when I’m asleep, that’s reality.

What. Hey, I know it’s not just me. (How do I know? Because I ask myself these absurd existential questions, of course!)

Beth, Scorpio (see #22). Heh.