Obama Not Disowning Wright
April 25th, 2008 at 05:41pm Mark Noonan
Ben Smith over at Politico has the details, notes this flyer put out in Philadelphia (PDF) has Obama mentioning that it was after Wright’s sermon that he converted to Christianity. Let us quote a bit:
…one Sunday I put on one of the few clean jackets I had and went over to the Trinity United Church of Christ on 95th Street on the South Side of Chicago. And I heard Reverand Jeremiah A. Wright deliver a sermon called “The Audacity of Hope.” And during the course of that sermon, he introduced me to someone named Jesus Christ. I learned that my sins could be redeemed. I learned that those things I was too weak to accomplish myself, He would accomplish with me if I placed my trust in Him…
Side note: “one of the few clean jackets I had”? Does Obama keep a supply of dirty jackets around along with a selection of clean? Anyways…
Admirable words, and words that any one of ten million Evangelicals could repeat - those very same Evangelicals that Obama, and the rest of the left, denigrate in various ways…such as Obama’s recent remarks that such people are “bitter” and “cling to God” due to ill-feeling. The really sad thing is that this flyer is clearly designed for the urban black Christian demographic - there is no problem with courting such a vote, but you won’t see Obama wanting this to get on national television where his “practical atheist” upper class white supporters might see it (what is a “practical atheist”? Somone who, regardless of claimed faith, lives life as if God doesn’t exist).
Its a terrible thing, the way our liberals have to be - to pretend to be all things to all people; to hide their real beliefs, to try and convince everyone that they are with them 100%…but to be so would mean they can’t be 100% with the other group, so neither group must find out just what the liberal is saying to the other. Why don’t they try honesty? Because they don’t want to be stuck with 25% of the vote…
Entry Filed under: Campaign 2008, Corruption, Democrats
99 Comments
1. SteaM | April 25th, 2008 at 5:52 pm
It really bugs you that he is a good, smart, decent fellow Christian…
and liberal democrat.
Doesn’t it?
2. Diana Powe | April 25th, 2008 at 6:05 pm
Deleted - off topic. Ed Note: We hope you are well paid by the DNC for putting out the day’s talking points regardless of whether they are relevant to the discussion.
3. js | April 25th, 2008 at 6:22 pm
if he was really that smart he wouldnt have ties to political corruption…it just means that he wasnt caught yet…that does not make him “smart”…
4. js | April 25th, 2008 at 6:28 pm
we really cant call obama stupid, can we, after all…he rose up from the home base of the outfit in Chicago…yaa…Illinois, ya know, where hillary came from?
KENNEDY, OBAMA AND REZKO - OR: THE SLIMEY AND CORRUPT DEMOCRAT MACHINE OF THE SOUTHSIDE OF CHICAGO RIDES AGAIN!
http://arkansasgopwing.blogspot.com/2008/03/obama-chicago-way.html
i guess the mob didnt like hillary, she ended up in arkansas….to feminist maybe…but barak mohammad obama??..plyable trade for the mob…chi towns best foot forward folks….
5. js | April 25th, 2008 at 6:30 pm
http://astuteblogger.blogspot.com/2008/01/kennedy-obama-and-rezko-or-slimey-and.html
just how deep does the rabbit hole go….
6. Diana Powe | April 25th, 2008 at 6:41 pm
js,
If you’re going to throw around evidence-free accusations against people (hoping at least one of the scary things will stick to something), you might at least want to read “astute” bloggers who know how to spell their screaming capitalized words correctly. Just a thought…
Pssst, it’s slimy, not slimey.
7. Some Assembly Required | April 25th, 2008 at 6:42 pm
“if he was really that smart he wouldnt have ties to political corruption…it just means that he wasnt caught yet…”
ARE YOU SERIOUS?!?!?!?!?!
Man, I’ve read some ridiculous things from some posters here but that statement has to top the cake.
The man is guilty of something, I know he is, now lets find evidence or start rumors, maybe something will stick… And you call yourself an American Christian. Sheesh.
Mark, you ask about honesty while attacking Obama about his ‘bitter’ comments. The man was again speaking toward the Human Condition. He was being completely honest. When times of crisis and trouble come the first thing people turn to is faith. (Soldiers on the battle field, near death experiences, deaths in the family, losing your home, etc…) The next would be there rifles to defend themselves. (When you feel threatened you always know that handgun can intimidate even the richest man in the world. It’s an equalizer.) If you do not agree or understand this, it is either you are completely oblivious to human nature or disconnected with reality.
The man finds Christianity and you admire that, but you fault him because he found Jesus in Reverend Wright’s sermon, are you really that disappointed that McCain is ‘your guy’? The first step is admitting it.
8. js | April 25th, 2008 at 6:46 pm
really DP…your reputation for validity sucks a big hole in any blog you post on…nothing you say can actually impact the issue…and SAR…read…if you can…research…if you know how…but running your lip service like a stooge on a cloud really doesnt make any impact either…the word they use to describe what you do is obfuscate…not that you really contribute anything of value…you just stir BS to distract the facts from notice….
9. Tractatus | April 25th, 2008 at 6:49 pm
It really bugs you that he is a good, smart, decent fellow Christian…
and liberal democrat.
Doesn’t it?
Clearly. Obama pretty much shatters Noonan’s delicate framework–the one that holds liberals can’t be real Christians–and it leaves Noonan scrambling to come up with a way to say that Obama isn’t a “real” Christian or is otherwise a fraud (the little “practical atheist” schtick he throws in at the end, for example).
And he’s still (rather pathetically) trying to make hay out of “ZOMG! Obama has scary black preacher!” Tsk tsk…such anti-Christian bias, Noonan, demanding that a Brother in Christ denounce a Man of the Cloth like that.
10. js | April 25th, 2008 at 6:54 pm
You cant get good fruit from a bad tree, and face it, that Chicago tree is about as bad as it gets!!
11. Some Assembly Required | April 25th, 2008 at 7:00 pm
js, time and time again you ask ‘us’ to provide facts and for the most part ‘we’ link to credible sources which, after a quick search can be double or triple sourced by other credible sources. Of course you quickly dismiss them as ‘leftist conspiracy’ or some other soup of the day. Anyway… then you link to a conservative propaganda blog which is nothing more then just opinionated rants and think you’ve proved your point. It’s laughable.
P.S. you saying that I ‘obfuscate’, ’stir BS to distract the facts from notice…’, need to ‘read’ and do ‘research’ is known as projection. I find it hilarious, particularly since your ‘reading’ and ‘research’ is evidenced in your above posts. You’ve effectively made yourself look like a fool.
12. phnx | April 25th, 2008 at 7:05 pm
Ohhh the irony of these leftist atheists and Christian bashers defending a Christian racist because he’s black and supports Obama.
13. Tractatus | April 25th, 2008 at 7:11 pm
Ohhh the irony of these wingnut holier-than-thous attacking a Christian minister because he’s black and liberal.
14. Mark Noonan | April 25th, 2008 at 7:20 pm
SteaM,
Bugs me? No - but I do pray that my brother Obama will turn from the errors of Wright and come to accept the full message of Our Lord. Obama is, unfortunately, not the only person lured into falsehood by a man claiming to be a servant of Jesus…but Our Lord did note that at the End some would say, “Lord, lord”, but Jesus will say he knew them not. Its not Obama’s fault that he’s been suckered by a heretic and mountebank, but now that the truth is known, Obama should be calling on Wright to reform his views to be in line with the Christianity he claims to preach.
You’ll note that I offer no quesitons of Obama’s sincerity of professed belief…but I do - quite rightly - question why this clearly “born again’ story isn’t broadcast more widely by Obama…what is he afraid of? In my view, that his upper class white supporters will be turned off by it…and that, my friend, is a very bad thing for a Christian to do: be afraid to proclaim the faith.
15. Mark Noonan | April 25th, 2008 at 7:24 pm
Tract,
We do question whether Wright is actually a Christian in good standing…Christ did not ever preach “God d___ Rome”, even though as a Jew he had as much right to be angry with Rome as anyone. I pray he’ll stop doing what he does. To be a Christian requires certain beliefs - and racial exclusivity is anethema, even though at times various Christian groups have tried to graft such on to a Christian message, history has shown that all such attempts fall apart on the rock of Truth.
16. js | April 25th, 2008 at 7:31 pm
really SAR, gossip columns are not fact…get your head on straight and stop being a stooge!!
17. Tractatus | April 25th, 2008 at 7:32 pm
I do - quite rightly - question why this clearly “born again’ story isn’t broadcast more widely by Obama…what is he afraid of?
Uhhh…Noonan…he’s been telling that story for a while now. Particularly when he, you know, named his book after the title of that sermon and then, while promoting the book, told…that same story you claim he’s “not broadcasting widely” because he’s “afraid” of some imagined repercussions that I guess somehow make sense to you.
If this is seriously the first you’ve heard of it (and I suspect that it isn’t), then perhaps you should take unplug your ears and uncover your eyes.
18. js | April 25th, 2008 at 7:35 pm
now some dumb putz (DP) tells me i miss spelled slimey….you really suck at payin attention cuz i just pasted the title and link…maybe you should write a letter to your congressman, eh? another issue for file 13…..
wake up
19. Dennis | April 25th, 2008 at 7:53 pm
As a lifelong Christian, I find Mark’s posture toward liberals and attitude toward Barack Obama indefensible from any Scriptural base - let alone a logical or factual one.
There is no way under heaven that Mark’s attitudes of fault-finding, deconstructing the character and motivations of Obama, Jeremiah Wright and others and attributing the worst possible interpretations to them, can be squared with the values or teachings of Jesus Christ. Much of his mischaracterizing is condemned outright under the commandment “Thou shall not bear false witness against thy neighbor.” It is why I often turn away in disgust from this blog rather than say anything at all. Sometimes I can’t help myself.
Tell us, Mark, and give us some convincing evidence what Obama is hiding or pretending. It amazes me that you and others here who style yourselves “Christians” so adamantly, consistenty slander a fellow Christian whose entire life has been dedicated to public service. The Scriptures say in the mouth of two or three witnesses your testimony is to be established. So if you are a Christian testifying against your brother in Christ, give us credible witnesses for your accusations, or back off, or else place yourself in danger of divine judgment.
I know a few other Republican Christians - educated and accomplished people whom I respect, although we disagree politically - who admire and respect Barack Obama for his Christian testimony and his life of service. They do not agree with his political philosophy, but they hold the man himself in high esteem. What is the matter with the right-wing extremists here? I don’t know, but they are afflicted with a more pernicious kind of bitterness than anything Obama spoke about at his San Francisco venue.
As for calling Rev. Wright a heretic and mountbank - more of the same. You clearly don’t care to confront the uncomfortable truth Wright spoke in his “Chickens coming home to roost” sermon. He spoke no differently than Martin Luther King did - it was plain truth to anyone without cultural or political blinders on. But you understand the political expedience of praising Dr. King, while no such requirement exists for Wright. You can’t condemn one without condemning the other. Either you are misinformed, confused, or hypocritical - you decide which.
One more thing - totally left field, but somebody needs to say this - Mark, it is ungrammatical to say “Anyways.” The proper word is “anyway” - adverbs cannot be pluralized. Unless you are trying to get down with the peeps here and use Republican ebonics or something. Is you pretending to be somethins you ain’t?
20. SEW | April 25th, 2008 at 8:20 pm
“Jeremiah Wright and others and attributing the worst possible interpretations to them, can be squared with the values or teachings of Jesus Christ.”
Certainly “God Damn America” can’t.
“it was plain truth to anyone without cultural or political blinders on”
The political blinders are clearly on you Dennis.
“Thou shall not bear false witness against thy neighbor.” Try the period after the quotation mark next time.
21. Diana Powe | April 25th, 2008 at 8:54 pm
Deleted - off topic.
22. Diana Powe | April 25th, 2008 at 9:01 pm
js,
Here’s you gratuitously insulting me, “…now some dumb putz (DP) tells me i miss spelled slimey.” (my emphasis)
Now, here’s what I actually wrote, “…you might at least want to read ‘astute’ bloggers who know how to spell…”
No need to apologize.
23. ViralNexus | April 25th, 2008 at 9:27 pm
DP makes a very good point that the people who keep pushing the racist pastor schpeal- don’t actually know what Jeremiah Wright said. Sure they know the snippets pretty well but don’t realize there is a logical argument behind most of his statements. Great job!
24. Diana Powe | April 25th, 2008 at 9:38 pm
Deleted - off topic: Ed Note - we wonder why you even thought for a moment that we’d allow you to deflect the discussion away from Wright, Obama and the actual issues of the thread?
25. Canadian Observer | April 25th, 2008 at 9:44 pm
For the sake of y’all, I hope to blazes that the number of Americans who can see through this distracting garbage outnumber those who can not.
The amount of mud that is slung during your election preliminaries is utterly astounding. Has the business of finding a leader always been this dirty or is this a relatively recent phenomenon?
Americans have a chance now to bring the country back on track; hope you don’t blow it.
26. Greenspace | April 25th, 2008 at 9:54 pm
Deleted - off topic.
27. Diana Powe | April 25th, 2008 at 9:57 pm
Deleted - off topic.
28. Jeremiah | April 25th, 2008 at 10:01 pm
Jesus Christ The Son of God, is the Chief Cornerstone, and he says when ‘we build’, He’s not talking about building wood or stone structures…but we are to build off of His message, and when we do, we have a strong and perfect message. Yes, when we go by what Jesus taught, we can’t go wrong.
Jeremiah Wright could use some heavy correction in that area, because I’m pretty sure God is not well pleased with his anti-American, anti-White sentiments and rhetoric.
29. Jeremiah | April 25th, 2008 at 10:05 pm
In other words, Mr. Wright is not very level-headed, and it’s not squaring with a lot of folks….and for good reason….who wants somebody like Obama who has connections with that crook???
30. SEW | April 25th, 2008 at 10:08 pm
“2. Diana Powe | April 25th, 2008 at 6:05 pm
Deleted - off topic. Ed Note: We hope you are well paid by the DNC for putting out the day’s talking points regardless of whether they are relevant to the discussion”
Definitely overpaid, even if it’s simply a thank you.
31. Freedom1 | April 25th, 2008 at 10:09 pm
Barack Hussein Obama spent 20 years at Wright’s “church”…
“You don’t need a weatherman to know which way Barack Obama’s faith blows”: - directorblue.blogspot.com
“Five days before he announced his candidacy for president, Barack Obama wrote the following letter describing his relationship with Rev. Jeremiah Wright.*
His faith? Which aspect of Wright’s faith does Obama seek to emulate?
His faith in Hamas? After all, Wright published a letter from the terror group’s “political director” in the church newsletter. Hamas has killed over 500 Israeli and American civilians and pride themselves on killing children. [all links at original website]
His faith in despicable statements about the U.S. government? [...]
His faith in the lie that the government invented the HIV virus to kill the man of color? [..]
His faith in despicable racist Louis Farrakhan? In 2007, Wright awarded the Church’s Trumpeter award to Farrakhan, stating that “Farrakhan epitomizes greatness.” [..]
His faith in Muammar Gaddhafi, the man behind the Pan Am 103 explosion? Wright accompanied Farrakhan on a visit to Libya and its terror-supporting dictator Muammar Gaddhafi. Among Gaddhafi’s crimes: organizing the bombing of Pan Am Flight 103, which shredded 270 people. Among them were 35 students from Syracuse University and many infants.
His faith in the evil represented by the U.S.? “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…
His faith that America is a racist state? “What’s going on in white America — U.S. of K.K.K. of A! …Men turning on black men… that is fighting the wrong enemy!”
His faith in the lie that the U.S. government was behind Pearl Harbor? “The government lied about Pearl Harbor! They knew the Japanese were going to attack!”
His faith in moral equivalence? “What we are doing is the same thing Al Qaeda is doing under a different color flag!”
32. Diana Powe | April 25th, 2008 at 10:12 pm
Deleted - off topic.
33. SEW | April 25th, 2008 at 10:19 pm
The distinction? Not much difference in Gore, Kerry, Dukakis, McGovern and Obama. Except Obama is black.
34. Some Assembly Required | April 25th, 2008 at 10:31 pm
Deleted - off topic.
35. Freedom1 | April 25th, 2008 at 10:34 pm
Obama’s links to terrorists continue to grow…
“Terrorist Fundraisers for Obama” and Michelle Obama’s Terrorist Fundraiser ‘Friend’
LGF, “Another big Barack Obama supporter: Hatem El-Hady, former chairman of the Toledo-based Islamic charity Kindhearts, closed by the US government in 2006 for terrorist fundraising ["Kind Hearts for Charitable Human Development" = Hamas]: Terrorist Fundraisers for Obama. - Front Page Magazine.com
El-Hady has now devoted himself to raising money for Barack Obama; he has a page at the official Obama campaign web site, with three “friends” listed on it: “Rick,” “Fatima from Toledo, Ohio,” and … Michelle Obama.
Note: when someone is listed as a “friend,” it means they specifically chose it. In other words, Michelle Obama’s name isn’t there because El-Hady put it there — it’s there because she chose to be listed as his friend.
Update: 4/25/08 - Michelle Obama’s Name Removed from Terrorist Fundraiser’s Web Page - Update: Terror Fundraiser’s Page Disappears!
36. js | April 25th, 2008 at 10:40 pm
6. Diana Powe
Pssst, it’s slimy, not slimey.
—————————–
tell us DP, how did you get to be such a dumb putz?
apology? LOL!!! ROFLMAO@@@@@@!!!!!!!
and you make jokes!!
37. js | April 25th, 2008 at 10:42 pm
so tell us putz, exactly whom it is you infer that spent 20 years going to the church where Robertson, Falwell or Hagee preached…is he running for president?
38. Freedom1 | April 25th, 2008 at 10:46 pm
“When Will We Admit the Truth About Barack Obama?” - American Thinker
Conclusion…
39. js | April 25th, 2008 at 10:46 pm
The corruption of Chicago is ancient and legendary. AL CAPONE. RICHARD DALEY. Just two gigantic names that conjure up Chicago’s storied and slimy past in organized crime and politics.
now we can add one more name to Chicago’s sons, barak hussein obama…what is he, a paid politician that can like with the best of them? them? OH ya, like Gore, Kerry, Dukakis, Billy Clinton….lol
he is already famous to be associated with some of the biggest liars in modern history AND Chicago’s outfit!!
40. js | April 25th, 2008 at 10:48 pm
Democratic machine politics
Known for shrewd party politics, Daley was the prototypical “machine” politician, and his Chicago Democratic Machine, based on control of thousands of patronage positions, was instrumental in bringing a narrow 8,000 vote victory in Illinois for John F. Kennedy in 1960.
41. js | April 25th, 2008 at 10:49 pm
so this is how barak obama hussein is related to the kennedy family!! there had to be some far reach of reality behind the subject…i just knew it!!
42. js | April 25th, 2008 at 10:53 pm
so in reality, kennedy beat who? NIXON? he got caught playing the same game they pulled in Chicago, dirty pool…a game the DNC is GOOD at!!
buy ya gotta know somethin…you cant get good fruit from a bad tree…and BOTH the DNC “AND” Chicago’ are BAD TREE’S
rotten to the core!!
43. Freedom1 | April 25th, 2008 at 10:55 pm
Barack Obama’s connections to Marxism keeping growing. First Barack’s communist father and mother. Then his communist mentor “Frank”. Next, his time at Harvard. Then of course, there’s the Marxist Black liberation theology of Wright’s “church” in which Obama spent 20 years. Now, this…
Obama’s Official Blogger: A Hardcore Marxist
Barack Obama’s “official campaign blogger,” Sam Graham-Felsen, is a hardcore Marxist—and even leftists like this are disturbed by his presence on the campaign staff: Sam Graham-Felsen stands for what?
44. js | April 25th, 2008 at 10:59 pm
obama is like a man who is faced with the brunt of fact behind the truth, and its bearing down on him like a mountain….a good man would admit that wright was a corrupted racist and condemn it…of course…that would put an end to hussein obama’s 20 year association with the trinity church…and politics…but at least he could stand tall….and not care what the world thinks…because he was upright and honest….but not hussein obama…no…hussein denied that there was anything wrong from the git go….no racism…no support of terrorists….no support of rabid, black nation of islam in america…or even that he supported islam in KENYA and his cousin who plans (still to this day) to install SHARIA over the millions of christians in Kenya and enslave them…..no….hussein obama is not a good man…good men dont need to lie….and thats about all hussein obama does….
45. Diana Powe | April 25th, 2008 at 11:09 pm
js,
For some reason, I don’t feel compelled to engage in elementary school level name-calling.
46. congressive | April 26th, 2008 at 12:43 am
Obama should have disowned Wright long ago for one reason and one reason only: there was and is no Jesus. Christianity is a fraud, as pope whoever said back in Machiavelli’s time, a myth. The Romans, who were meticulous record keepers, had no record of the existence, and especially the trial or crucifixion of a Jesus son of a Mary or a Joseph.
But, sadly, that fact won’t get you very far in Christo-American politics. The 15% of us who know this can’t get elected by Muslim-Christian-Jewish delusionals who run the place.
On this issue, Obama seems equally delusional with all other viable political candidates throughout modern American history. Wright is insane because he believes in Jesus Christ, and calls on a god to damn America, a god who can’t even stop a certain Colorado pastor from buying crystal meth from a gay male hooker. How almighty can this god be?
47. Mark Noonan | April 26th, 2008 at 1:44 am
congressive,
Yeah, there’s all those files from the archives of the Roman Empire still in existence…amazing how they managed to keep all that parchment and papyrus safe during the great fire during Nero’s reign, and during the barbarian sack of Rome in 408…
48. Mark Noonan | April 26th, 2008 at 1:53 am
Dennis,
It isn’t “worst possible interpretation” - Wright’s sermons speak for themselves…He is either a con artist, or a racist. You pick - there are no other choices. Whatever he is, “Christian” ain’t it.
As for Obama, I cast no aspersion upon his faith - I have no way to peer into his soul, and as he hasn’t delivered any speech akin to Wright’s, I have no way of knowing if he actually shares Wright’s views…on the other hand, his failure to denounce Wright and leave his church at any time in the past 20 years does call into question his judgement…and leaves the question Obama’s racial views completely open.
As for Wright’s stated views about “chickens coming home to roost” - the problem is not in a recognition that we could and should have done things better, but in the fact that Wright de-facto approves of the 9/11 attacks.
49. Mark Noonan | April 26th, 2008 at 1:54 am
Tract,
Nice try - but lets see that flier turned into a national ad campaign. If you think that will happen, then you’ve got more rocks in your head than the average liberal.
50. Freedom1 | April 26th, 2008 at 5:35 am
Mark,
I’ve got a serious question for you.
“As for Obama, I cast no aspersion upon his faith - I have no way to peer into his soul….” - Mark Noonan
True. We can’t read Obama’s mind. However, Barack Obama’s pastor of 20 years, Jeremiah Wright, preached black liberation theology at Trinity United Church of Christ. James Cone, the chief architect of black liberation theology stated: Black liberation theology
That’s not Christian. It just isn’t. It’s blasphemy. Obama went to Trinity pastored by Wright for 20 years. This is what he was taught, right? So, how can Obama be a genuine Christian when Trinity’s theology isn’t Christian theology but instead “black liberation theology”?
It seems to me that we don’t need to read Obama’s mind to know that he isn’t a Christian. The core beliefs of black liberation theology clearly indicate that black liberation theology is NOT Christian.
I’d really like to know your thoughts on this.
51. Christian Wright | April 26th, 2008 at 7:27 am
Deleted - off topic.
52. Joe | April 26th, 2008 at 7:34 am
Deleted - complains about comment policy.
53. js | April 26th, 2008 at 7:57 am
joe,
if you were any more than a stooge i would worry about your slander…but guess what….it amuses me that you even try to match wits with me…you come to a gun fight with a butter knife…and really think spreading your BS is going to change the outcome…..
lol
you exemplify the meaning of fatuous
54. Canadian Observer | April 26th, 2008 at 9:00 am
The amount of hysteria emanating from the right on this subject is disconcerting to say the least.
As the rest of the world wonders what all the fuss is about and shakes its head at your silly shenanigans, you continue to distract from the real issues with sojourns into the ridiculous.
I guess, as Diana has said, Americans love the show biz aspect of politics and theatrics are just part and parcel of the game.
In the end, we can only hope all the nonsense can be put aside and a leader will be elected who will do you proud; a leader who can restore what has been broken and guide you to a better future.
55. Telstar | April 26th, 2008 at 9:28 am
15. Mark Noonan | April 25th, 2008 at 7:24 pm
Tract,We do question whether Wright is actually a Christian in good standing…Christ did not ever preach “God d___ Rome”,
So this is the standard Noonan says Democrats must achieve; Christ like! Wow is there a God given halo that surrounds you and the conservatives that we mere sinners can’t see.
56. Bill Eischeidt | April 26th, 2008 at 10:12 am
I am a sports guy now but before I was a crime and courts reporter who covered messes like the rezko trial and the trumped up Miami terrorist trial. Rezko is a crook like the bag man for every governor of every state in the Union was a crook since going back to James K Polk. This is not news it’s process. The whole rezko to Obama argument is dumb when you consider who the prosecutor is. The reason the Right Wing bloggers have put down their pens about rezko is there’s a trail from rezko to fitzgerald that involves Karl Rove and leads back to the Executive office of the white house. Now rezko is as guilty as original sin but his conviction being used as a GOP whippin stick is not important enough to them to allow light to be shined on pressure coming from the White House on Fitzgerald by way of Bob Kjellander to back off investigating Karl Rove in Plamegate.
The Reverend Wright thing is similar but not exactly the same. I like the question that’s been asked about how wouold this all play if this were a White GOP candidate whose pastor had said “G–d damn America?”
My answer to that question would be why would a white pastor have any reason to say that? What could possibly frustrate a white congregation so much where is the suffering and deprivation at the hands of a majority organized to deprive them of their civil rights for decades? It doesn’t exist and so the question is moot.
I still haven’t seen the Moyers interview but I’m sure to find it online somewhere. I wonder how important all of this is to people who are two months behind on their mortgage and their kids want to go to DisneyWorld this summer?
57. neocon | April 26th, 2008 at 10:15 am
“As the rest of the world wonders what all the fuss is about and shakes its head at your silly shenanigans, - CO”
Once again CO, we don’t care what the “rest of the world” thinks. More amusing though is that it is your messiah and his opponent who are creating all the ’shenanigans”. All in an effort to bring hope and change to hope which changes hope if you hope for change.
58. neocon | April 26th, 2008 at 10:21 am
“I like the question that’s been asked about how wouold this all play if this were a White GOP candidate whose pastor had said “G–d damn America?” My answer to that question would be why would a white pastor have any reason to say that? - Bill”
Thank you Bill for confirming my very low opinion of journalists. The above statement is dishonest, biased, racist and ignorant. But considering your occupation, it makes perfect sense.
With your level of stupidity, I am sure you have done well as a journalist.
And is it the governments problem that the kids of the parents behind on their mortgage can’t go to Disneyworld? Or do taxpayers own them that?
59. SEW | April 26th, 2008 at 10:36 am
“Holy crap Noonan. You have what… 10 deleted “liberal posts” and not one deleted rightie post? What is going on here?”
Joe, it’s termed BDS. And if you will note, it is extremely rare for you to post on topic. That and your insults is why you are deleted so often. Joe, few topics here are about Bush, yet most of your content is about him or other posters posting on topic. In fact as recently as 2 weeks ago I had to explain to you thwhat topic meant. Remember? You thought any random thought of DP from out in left field was the topic.
60. Bill Eischeidt | April 26th, 2008 at 10:38 am
Neocon,
For full disclosure I hate theme parks. My point was that there is no way that the Middle Class lifestyle can be maintained [two vacations a year, big SUVs, low cost fruits ansd vegetables, cheap grunt labor to do the things that might get your hands dirty] with the price of gasoline rising as it is.
And I think the assessment of the Reverend Wright thing is clear. I just don’t think it is socially acceptable in the US for white republicans to say “hey we don’t want this black guy to be president because, well he’s black.” So right wing pundits have to pantomime their intended meaning every reason they can to make every so called mis-step he makes and every “radical” association he has an apocalyptic [for white conservatives] issue.
I don’t think pointing this out is anymopre racist than saying Frank Thomas is too old and fat to play baseball anymore. This has nothing to do with Thomas being black it has to do with him having a crap batting average and that extra thirty pounds strapped to his butt.
And the stupid remark I’ll take from a man of your stature neocon because you know my profession far better than I do. If you don’t recognize what that was it’s called turning the other cheek.
61. neocon | April 26th, 2008 at 10:43 am
Bill,
So you’re saying the “white” republicans can not say, in a socially acceptable manner, that they don’t want a black President? And you don’t think that’s a racist comment?
You don’t consider that awfully stereotypical? How about if republicans don’t want Obama to be President because of his insane positions? Had you ever thought of that? Or is skin color your primary focus? As it is with most dishonest, idiotic journalists.
You’re profession is a joke.
62. SEW | April 26th, 2008 at 10:47 am
I just don’t think it is socially acceptable in the US for white republicans to say “hey we don’t want this black guy to be president because, well he’s black.”
Of course simply ignore the fact that 92% of blacks vote for this black guy because he is black. It’s a liberal politically correct MSM thing, and brie and merlot white guy thing. But hey liberal journalist, put it on the white republican. LOL.
63. neocon | April 26th, 2008 at 10:53 am
SEW,
Bill is a great example of the mindset of liberals and journalists. What’s more frustrating is that, just like a fish doesn’t know it’s wet, liberals don’t realize how racist they actually are.
64. Bill Eischeidt | April 26th, 2008 at 11:03 am
I’m not saying that at all neocon. I am saying that this is the reason white repubicans don’t want Obama as president but they know socially this would not be acceptable. There is no socially acceptable way to say that you consider a black president a threat no matter his positions. And race is the most important unaddressed issue confronting America today and the Reverend Wright comments, the anti-McCain adopted kid/illegitimate black kid push polls in South Carolina in 2000 and the American flag pin debate point to that.
What did Reverend Wright do to get noticed by white conservatives? He called the nation they love to task for its sins agianst the smaller weaker nations of the world. Now before Barack Obama ran for president no conservative blogger popinted out what an able servant to his flock he was or what a great community leader he was or even howe he had risen above his birth to be a man of the cloth who was respected for his dedication to bringing the Gospel to all people with open doors on the most segregated hour of the week.
But to cast another sports analogy upon the waters, “Who really gave the Gianst a chance in pre season?”
Partisanship is fine neocon but would you be willing to have a bad Republican president than a good Democrat just so your pride of party can be satisfied. I am asking you personally would you rather have a GOP president that fails with a GOP majority in Congress than a successful Democrat in the White House with a Democratic Congress that makes things better for America and the world?
Which is more important to tou neocon, the GOP or your country?
65. Bill Eischeidt | April 26th, 2008 at 11:09 am
I hate brie and white wine tastes like crap. A nice cold Michelob amberbock and some aged cheddar and you might just get my attention. I don’t tend to ride in limousines very much either if that was going to be the next question and I’m pretty fond of dames with nice calves and big brown eyes and black hair.
And the fish comment can apply to anyone SEW including people with such a vested interest in being “conservative” that they can’t see how destructive that mindset is to a nation of supposedly people who have the right to dissent and free speech. What conservatives suffer from is the belief they they have a right to offend and never should have to suffer being offended. If you don’t like the way things are in your community, change the laws. If the majority feels the way you do it should take less than a generation to make America in the conservative image.
66. SEW | April 26th, 2008 at 11:10 am
My country. I don’t like McCain, but he is far better than Obama, who is much worse than McGovern, Dukakis, Gore, Kerry or the other Massachusetts socialist Ted Kennedy. The liberal media has exposed him only 1 time in 22 debates, covered for him 21 times.
67. SEW | April 26th, 2008 at 11:14 am
“What conservatives suffer from is the belief they they have a right to offend and never should have to suffer being offended.”
You have that 99.9% ass backward.
68. Bill Eischeidt | April 26th, 2008 at 11:31 am
Okay SEW I’ll play along.
Explain how I have that “ass backward” please.
I come from New Mexico land of enchantment not Missouri but you can understand the exercise I’m sure. How is it that i have that quote backward as it applies to conservatibves when the bulk of what you want to do is keep other people from doing things that offend you and otherwise cause no delay in commerce and no stress on the civil liberties of others. Most people in Mississippi, Alabama and Georgia would have said the same thing as Democrats in 1958 that you are saying as a Republican in 2008. That’s because it’s the same party of religion, guns, and the appearance of racila superiority in the South then as it is now with a different animal logo.
Look at the “core issues” of the GOP in 2008:
War, abortion, marriage and other “family values”, immigration.
None of those can stack up to the only thing Americans will throw all else over for and that is their own wallets.
Another sports analogy you might get, “Why don’t people watch hockey on TV?” The answer is the same reason those “hot button issues” are so cold in a country that has seen foreclosures triple in the last three years.
69. abpierce | April 26th, 2008 at 11:41 am
“And during the course of that sermon, he introduced me to someone named Jesus Christ. I learned that my sins could be redeemed. I learned that those things I was too weak to accomplish myself, He would accomplish with me if I placed my trust in Him…”
I am puzzled, as upon reading the sermon, there was only the mention of having a “vertical hookup” or ” vertical dimension” to balance the horizontal dimension. To me, that means up to that point in his life, he only had a horizontal life. So then he describes his salvation in Jesus as being able to think vertically? And Jesus is there to vertically help him complete his horizontal accomplishments? It is evident that he has a “working” faith, but perhaps not at the level of laying down his life for his Savior. He is frozen at Step One, sort of a kindergarten level. Oh, well.
70. Mark Noonan | April 26th, 2008 at 12:17 pm
Telstar,
Everyone who claims the title of “Christian” is supposed to attempt to be like Christ…more: Christ ordered us to be perfect, as our heavenly Father is perfect…of course, we fall short…but its easy to avoid things like Wright’s incendiary, racist, lying statements about America and Americans…if Wright were even remotely trying to be Christian, it should have been easy for him to avoid those mistakes.
71. Mark Noonan | April 26th, 2008 at 12:29 pm
Freedom,
I think the answer is contained in this:
God can do that - turn simple evil into complex good. Whatever Wright might have been once upon a time, he isn’t acting as a Christian now - he preaches a great deal of outright, bald-faced falsehoods - he is doing evil, and calling it good…and yet, in his Church, it is still said that Christ is Lord. And in such proclaimation, even surrounded by lies, God can still reach the hearts of those who don’t know the Lord - as I said, I can’t peer into Obama’s soul and tell exactly what is going on in there, but he says that Christ is his Lord, and I am bound to believe it unless absolute, incontrovertible proof is offered that it is not so.
Many of our brothers and sisters get it wrong - heck, I’m sure that you and I - translated to the life of the world to come - will be acutely aware of just how wrong we’ve had it at times. People slip in to heresy pretty easily, especially in our modern Age of Lies - becoming an apostate is something else again, and required a much sterner test. Obama - in as much as be agrees with Wright’s lies - is in error…but for me to hold him apostate will require a much higher bar than mere attendance upon Wright’s sins.
72. Mark Noonan | April 26th, 2008 at 12:33 pm
Bill,
If you really believe that Wright’s slanders are justified by the acts of people long dead against black Americans, also long dead, then you are not just a fool, but a wicked fool.
To say that white Americans won’t vote for a black man because he’s black is slander against white Ameircans when the GOP eagerly hopes for the further rise of Steele and Jindal, and thinks that Rice would make an excellent Vice President. Your statement is just plain and simple ignorant - and hateful to all decent people.
73. Tractatus | April 26th, 2008 at 2:25 pm
Nice try - but lets see that flier turned into a national ad campaign.
That’s precisely the point, Noonan–he’s told that story to the nation many times before. What part of that simple statement don’t you understand?
74. Mark Noonan | April 26th, 2008 at 2:33 pm
Tract,
Never heard it, not even once…if someone who has been paying close attention, as I have, hasn’t heard this element of Obama’s life, then it simply has not been broadcast in any meaningful sense.
75. js | April 26th, 2008 at 5:25 pm
even if you set aside race, obama really doesnt have what it takes to be president…he brushes the fringes of treason by suggesting we negotiate with nations that we have negotiated with until we turn blue…thinking more blueness will cure our rejection of tyrants and theocracy run afoul…as they cut of the hands of children as an example for others not to take a piece of candy that doesnt belong to them…and hang homosexuals side by side in the public square…and stone women who have been raped for adultury….
then he turns on the smile and whips out his flatulent lip service on change….change what exactly he fails to actually disclose…yet the allusion of socialism that stumps liberty is the only suggestions he has pandered…
ooobama is not for america…he is not red white and blue…his loyalty is in his black ethics…and racism he supported for 20 years while entwining himself in a lie and learning that the only way to spread that lie, is through a lie…such lies he has elevated to the epitome of self deceit…riding the coattails of the Chicago outfit, whom he owes up to his neck….
76. Joe | April 26th, 2008 at 10:29 pm
This just in on CNN…Over 40 gun crimes committed just this week in Chicago (mostly black Southside). At least 12 killed. What do they blame? Bad economy, the Iraq war, warm weather. WOW!?!
You won’t believe the response of the police department. They are bringing ina surge of extra police including SWAT teams armed with M-4’s.
As a matter of principle DEMs must insist the surge will fail. We must pull out of Chicago. The insurgents are killing at will. I am not willing that police forces remain in Chicago for 100 years.
Also, the money spent on police forces in Chicago could better be spent rebuilding New Orleans and giving free healthcare to lazy bums that won’t work.
If we atleast pull out half of Chicago’s police force by…say..August 25th. We can send them to Denver to hunt for Osama . Word on the street is that he will be at the DNC convention with Hamas to show his support for Barrack Obama.
77. js | April 26th, 2008 at 11:45 pm
the outfit runs the police in Chicago, you must be on drugs to think they will be going anywhere…
78. Freedom1 | April 27th, 2008 at 3:01 am
71. Mark Noonan | April 26th, 2008 at 12:29 pm
Mark, for the sake of Obama’s soul and the souls of the 8,000 people who attend Trinity plus the souls of all of the other Americans who attend black liberation theology churches, I hope you are right.
But, how someone can believe this blasphemy:
“If God is not for us and against white people, then he is a murderer, and we had better kill him.” - James Cone
…and still be a Christian is hard to believe. I could be wrong. I sincerely hope I am.
Mark: “Obama - in as much as be agrees with Wright’s lies - is in error…”
There’s error and then there’s black liberation theology. It’s not Christian theology. If it were a matter of simple error, I’d dismiss it. I doubt that the minor differences (and mistakes) will keep the 2 billion Christians on Earth out of Heaven. But, when does teaching a false doctrine-black liberation theology-as truth turn a legitimate Christian Church into a “Christian” cult?
The main question is does Obama and the rest of Wright’s parishoners know the difference? Do they know Christian theology? Or are they just taught that black liberation theology is Christian theology. Do they know the difference between the truth (Christianity - the Bible) and the lie (black liberation theology)?
Yeah, that’s the point. Look at all of these “Christian” leaders and “scholars” who defend Wright’s statements…
“If Jeremiah Wright is a Prophet, Isaiah Wasn’t” by Dennis Prager
The article goes on and on listing person after person backing Reverend Wright. It’s just appalling. It appears that there is a serious, systemic problem at the core of many black liberation theology “Christian” churches in America.
JS, or Jeremiah, I’d appreciate your input on this matter. If you think I’m wrong, please by all means say so. I’m sincerely worried about the souls of those people at Trinity and at other black liberation theology churches.
79. Freedom1 | April 27th, 2008 at 4:29 am
(Video) The Case Against Obama - Primetimepolitics.com
This video is just devastating against Obama! Between minutes 7:30-11:40, the video discusses Black Liberation Theology. Very informative. Very disturbing. According to the video, Pope John Paul II condemned Black Liberation Theology as a humanistic theology.
80. FmrMarine | April 27th, 2008 at 8:34 am
steambath;
>>>It really bugs you that he is a good, smart, decent fellow Christian?
and liberal democrat.<<<<
Obama good??
maybe to some, a danger? yes to many!
Obama smart??
yes! so was stalin, and hitler.
Fellow Christian??
NO, an afro centrist, marxist cult, with a sprinkling of Christianity is the reality.
Liberal democRAT?
ABSOLUTELY, liar, soulless, abortion supporting, homosexual loving, con man.
81. FmrMarine | April 27th, 2008 at 8:36 am
F1
The other case against earbama.
Trinity United Church of Christ
About Us
We are a congregation which is Unashamedly Black and Unapologetically Christian… Our roots in the Black religious experience and tradition are deep, lasting and permanent. We are an African people, and remain “true to our native land,” the mother continent, the cradle of civilization. God has superintended our pilgrimage through the days of slavery, the days of segregation, and the long night of racism. It is God who gives us the strength and courage to continuously address injustice as a people, and as a congregation. We constantly affirm our trust in God through cultural expression of a Black worship service and ministries which address the Black Community.
Trinity United Church of Christ adopted the Black Value System written by the Manford Byrd Recognition Committee chaired by 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
6. Adherence to the Black Work Ethic
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.
That about says it all!!!
82. FmrMarine | April 27th, 2008 at 8:44 am
joe;
>>>>This just in on CNN…Over 40 gun crimes committed just this week in Chicago (mostly black Southside). At least 12 killed. What do they blame?<<<
Bush?? LOL
This is an interesting piece
Race, Crime, and Violence
What is the color of crime in America?
Who is committing crime in this country and against whom? How much crime do blacks commit? Are Hispanics as violent as blacks? What about Asians? How much so-called hate crime is there in the country and who is committing it? The U.S. Department of Justice collects a huge amount of information on crime — enough to answer these questions. And, indeed, there are very substantial differences in crime rates by race.
Government statistics are essentially of three kinds: survey data, statistics on crimes reported to the police, and arrest figures. The annual Department of Justice survey is important because it gathers information on crimes that victims don’t report to the police. Even more important, every few years it gathers information on the race of both victims and perpetrators of violent crimes. It is therefore the only information about interracial crime collected at the national level. The survey is about as accurate a picture as it is possible to get of crimes Americans say they have suffered.
The Department of Justice also collects data on the number of crimes reported to the police and the number of arrests made — and racial data are included on most people who are arrested. Needless to say, these three kinds of information — crimes reported in surveys, crimes reported to the police, and arrests — represent a steady decrease in volume. For example, in 1997, the most recent year for which there is complete information, the annual survey found there were 1,883,000 cases of aggravated assault (attacks that could cause serious injury or death). Only 1,022,000 cases were reported to the police, and only 535,000 resulted in an arrest.
It is significant that the racial proportions for perpetrators as found in the survey data and the racial proportions for arrests are remarkably similar. Americans report in the survey that close to 60 percent of all robberies are committed by blacks and, indeed, 57 percent of arrests for robberies in 1997 were of blacks. The proportions are close for other violent crimes as well, which means that the police are arresting people of different races at essentially the same rates at which the public is being victimized by them. Endless assertions that the police arrest non-whites because of “racism” are largely false (see sidebar, p. 5).
A black is 103 times more likely to rob a white than
vice versa.
So who is committing the crime — and against whom? To start with the survey data on interracial violent crime, in 1994 (the most recent year racial data were gathered) there were about 1,276,000 single-offender crimes and 490,000 multiple-offender crimes. Although the survey categorizes victims and perpetrators as only “white,” “black,” and “other,” 89 percent of the single-offender crimes and 94 percent of the multiple-offender interracial crimes were committed by blacks against whites.
These are astonishingly lopsided figures. One way to understand just how lopsided they are is to express them as rates. The frequency of crime is usually expressed as a rate per 100,000 people. In these terms, 3,494 blacks out of every 100,000 committed a violent crime against a white person in 1994 while only 63 whites out of every 100,000 committed a violent crime against a black. The black rate is more than 55 times the white rate, meaning that the average black was 55 times more likely to attack a white than vice versa. In the case of robbery, or “mugging,” blacks were 103 times more likely to go after whites than the reverse. These figures are shown on the graph on this page.
The numbers are even worse for group attacks. For overall group violence, the black-on-white rate is 102 times the white-on-black rate, and for robbery it is 277 times the white-on-black rate. It is very unusual to find multiples this great when comparing the behavior of different groups. If blacks are just two or three times more likely than whites to drop out of school or die of prostate cancer, it is considered a matter of national importance. But practically no one even knows that blacks are 50 to 200 times more likely than whites to attack someone of the other race. If whites were just four or five times more likely to attack blacks than the reverse, it would be considered a crisis that required national attention.
Some people have argued that blacks attack whites because whites are richer and more likely to be profitable robbery targets. However, fewer than 20 percent of all violent black-on-white crimes are robberies. The rest are assaults and rapes, which presumably do not have an economic motive. In 1994 more than 30,000 white women were raped by black men while only 5,400 black women were raped by whites (the latter figure is uncertain because the actual survey found too few actual white-on-black rapes to permit confidence in an extrapolation to the country at large). Blacks are thus approximately 40 times more likely to rape whites than vice versa. It is hard to avoid the conclusion that much of the violence committed by blacks against whites is motivated by racial hatred.
From the national survey data it is possible to tell how much violence is interracial and how much is not, and in fact there is more black-on-white violent crime than black-on-black. When blacks committed violent crime in 1994, they attacked whites 56.3 percent of the time, whereas when whites committed violence they attacked blacks only 2.6 percent of the time. This does not mean that blacks are victims of violent crime no more often than whites are. Even if blacks are victims of only about half of all black violence, that half is concentrated in the 13 percent of the population that is black. Therefore, blacks are still about five times more likely than whites to be victims of violent black criminals.
These findings from the national survey data are very important, but the data are limited to crimes of violence other than murder (you cannot survey a murder victim) and the racial breakdown of “white,” “black,” “other” tells us nothing about Hispanics or Asians. For information on other crimes and for better racial categories we can turn to arrest data.
Murder is, of course, the most spectacular violent crime but it is relatively rare. Of all violent crimes reported to the police, fewer than one percent are murder. In 1997 there were 15,289 known murders in the United States, which represented a rate of 6.8 per 100,000 Americans. This is the lowest rate since 1968, and represents the fourth straight year of decline. The murder rate hit an all-time high of 10.2 per 100,000 in 1980.
Of the 15,289 Americans who were killed in 1997, 49 percent were black, 48 percent were white and the rest were “other” with a handful of “unknowns.” More than half of those arrested for murder were black. Murder is the one crime for which the federal arrest data give some information about the race of both victim and criminal, and murder usually does not cross racial lines: Approximately 90 percent of murderers were the same race as their victims.
When murder is interracial, blacks are considerably more likely to be the offenders. There were approximately 1,100 whites killed by blacks and 480 blacks killed by whites, which means that a black was about 15 times more likely to kill a white than vice versa.
Because blacks are so much more likely to commit murder and robbery than any other racial group, the percentage of blacks in the local population is probably the best single indicator of the level of violence. The graph on this page, compiled by Glayde Whitney of Florida State University, plots the murder rate against the black percentage of the population for the 50 states and the District of Columbia (which is the outlying data point at the upper right). The trend could not be much clearer.
Puerto Rico is not included in Prof. Whitney’s data, but according to 1997 data, it had a murder rate of 18.9 per 100,000, which was three times the national rate of 6.8, and higher than that of any state. The murder rate was lower than that of the District of Columbia, however, which had a 1997 rate of 56.9. The states with the highest murder rates were those with the highest percentage of blacks: Louisiana (15.7 per 100,000) and Mississippi (13.1). The lowest murder rates are found in overwhelmingly white states like North Dakota (0.9), South Dakota (1.4), New Hampshire (1.4), and Vermont (1.5).
Needless to say, big cities with large black populations had the highest murder rates. In 1996, New Orleans came in first at 72 per 100,000 followed by Atlanta (47), Baltimore (46), St. Louis (44), Detroit (43) and Birmingham (42). By contrast, Seattle — mostly white — had a murder rate of seven per 100,000.
When arrest data for other crimes are compared by race, the results are as shown in the first two graphs on the next page. Here, arrest rates for different groups are calculated as multiples of the white arrest rate, with the white rate always set to one. The black rate of about nine for murder, for example, in the first graph does not mean that blacks committed nine time as many murders as whites, but that they were arrested for murder at nine times the white rate. Since there are about six times as many whites as there are blacks, it means that in absolute numbers, more blacks than whites were arrested for murder — in this case about 7,200 as opposed to 5,350.
The first graph shows a very clear pattern: Asians are arrested at lower rates than whites, and American Indians and blacks are arrested at consistently higher rates. (The “Asian” category includes Pacific Islanders, some of whom are quite crime-prone. Tongans, for example, are much more violent than Chinese or Koreans. However, their numbers are small and do not distort crime rates very much. All the data in this article on Asians also include Pacific Islanders.) As we saw earlier, arrest rates are a very good indicator of actual crime rates. Blacks are the most dangerous, crime-prone group in America and Asians are the least dangerous. Only a few crimes break this pattern. The second graph on this page shows multiples of arrest rates for atypical crimes. Gambling, for example, is the only crime for which Asians are arrested at a higher rate than whites (blacks are arrested at a much higher rate). Alcohol offenses are unusual in that whites are arrested for them at essentially the same rates as blacks, while Indians — true to their reputation — are the worst offenders. For white-collar crimes like forgery, fraud, and embezzlement, blacks are arrested at about three times the white rate and Indians at something close to the white rate. For most crimes, however, the pattern is consistent, with blacks committing the most crimes, followed by Indians, whites, and Asians.
Hispanic Crime
What about Hispanics? The national arrest data give the impression that Hispanics are never arrested for anything. Hispanic criminals are, of course, included in the four obligatory racial categories for arrests: white, black, Indian, and Asian. How many in which categories? The US Census Bureau gives us a clue. Its official estimate of the 1997 population divides all 268 million Americans into the four standard racial groups, but adds that there were also 29 million Hispanics who “can be of any race.” However, it also gives an estimate of non-Hispanic whites, non-Hispanic blacks, etc. Thus we find that according to the strictly racial classification there were 221 million whites in the country in 1997 but only 195 million non-Hispanic whites. When American Hispanics — approximately half of whom are Mexicans — are apportioned to the four racial categories, the Census Bureau thinks 91 percent are white, six percent black, one percent American Indian, and two percent Asian. This is crazy — it would be more accurate to consider the majority of them American Indians — but as far as the US government is concerned, almost all Hispanics are white.
This makes for odd census results. For example, according to the 1990 census, of the 3,485,000 people in Los Angeles, 52.9 percent were white, 13.9 percent black, 0.4 percent Indian, and 22.9 percent Asian — which adds up to 100 percent. This makes the city sound majority white. However, Los Angeles was also 39.3 percent Hispanic, and if we subtract the 91 percent of them who were probably classified as white, the real white population suddenly drops to 16.6 percent.
What does this mean for crime rates? Since at least 91 percent — if not all — Hispanics are lumped in with “whites,” if Hispanics commit crimes at higher rates than whites, official statistics inflate the white crime rate. Fortunately, some government jurisdictions can tell the difference between whites and Hispanics. The state of California, which has more Hispanics than any other, classifies its criminals as black, white, Hispanic, and other. The graph at the bottom of this page shows California arrest rates for the major violent crimes. As expected, blacks are the most violent, and specialize in mugging. Hispanics are roughly three times more likely than whites to be arrested for violent crime.
There is another way to estimate Hispanic crime rates. In 1996 the Department of Justice calculated incarceration rates per 100,000 population for non-Hispanic whites (193), Hispanics (688), and non-Hispanic blacks (1,571). Expressed as multiples of the white rate, the Hispanic rate is 3.56 and the black rate is 8.14. These multiples are close to the multiples for the California arrest data and justify the conclusion that Hispanics are roughly three times more likely than whites to commit various crimes.
We can calculate more accurate racial arrest rates if we separate out the 91 percent of Hispanic criminals we can assume are classified as white when they are arrested. By doing so, the white arrest rate decreases by about 20 percent and the arrest multiples for other races increase proportionately (in some cases Asian rates begin to approach white rates). The two side-by-side graphs on this page show how arrest rate multiples change when Hispanics are treated separately. For lack of more precise information, the Hispanic multiple is set at three times the white rate for all crimes even though there is certain to be some variation for different crimes. Both graphs are drawn to the same scale, with the white arrest rate set to one. They show at a glance how treating Hispanics as “whites” distorts crime figures.
It is worth noting that the survey data from which interracial crime data were extracted do not treat Hispanics as a separate category and probably includes virtually all Hispanics in the “white” group. It is therefore impossible to know how many of the “whites” who were reported to have done violence to blacks (or against whom blacks did violence) were actually Hispanic. If Hispanics commit violent crimes against blacks at a higher rate than whites — and judging from their higher arrest and incarceration rates for other offenses this is likely — then the survey data inflate white crime rates. The true figures for interracial crime are probably even more lopsided than those reported in the survey.
Disproportionate black crime rates have a seldom-discussed consequence: A lot of blacks lose the right to vote. In all but four states, felons cannot vote. In twelve states, a felony conviction can mean disfranchisement for life, but in most states, felons can reapply for the right to vote after they are off probation. Lefties have been wringing their hands over this, unsure of whether by calling attention to the number of blacks without the vote they can fight “racism” or whether calling attention to staggering black arrest rates will promote “racism.” Human Rights Watch and the Sentencing Project have plumped for the former, and report that two percent of all American adults are without the vote because of felony convictions and that among black men the figure is 13 percent. In seven states — Alabama, Florida, Iowa, Mississippi, New Mexico, Virginia, and Wyoming — a quarter of all black men are permanently ineligible to vote.
The lefties go on to point out that by 2020 about one third of all black men will probably have lost the right to vote. In the black parts of cities like Houston, Memphis, Miami, and New Orleans, as many as half the black men might be off the voting rosters. It causes the lefties great pain to imagine cities with black majorities but more white voters than black.
A very illuminating comparison can be made between arrest rates for blacks as compared to whites, and men as compared to women. We find that in terms of their likelihood to commit violent crimes, blacks are as much more dangerous than whites as men are more dangerous than women. The first graph on this page shows the arrest rates for men for various crimes as multiples of the arrest rates for women. The next three graphs compare the male-female arrest multiple to the black-white multiple. Blacks are as much more dangerous than whites as men are more dangerous than women — and these graphs are not even adjusted for the inclusion of Hispanics in “white” arrest figures.
Everyone knows that a group of unknown men is potentially more dangerous than a group of otherwise similar women. It is entirely reasonable to take precautions around men that one would not take around women. From a statistical point of view, it is just as reasonable to distinguish between blacks and whites as carefully as one distinguishes between men and women. It would be foolish not to lock the car doors when driving through black neighborhoods.
Police, of course, know that blacks commit a great deal of crime, and this explains “racial profiling,” the practice of stopping and questioning proportionately more blacks than people of other races. The police would be crazy not to. They also stop more men than women and more young people than old people. The police know from experience who the crooks are likely to be. If they spent as much time investigating old Asian ladies as they did young black men they would never get their jobs done. Everyone understands that men are more crime-prone than women and they understand why men are stopped more often than women. It is only because of racial hysteria that so many people at least pretend to believe the police stop blacks more often than whites because of “racism.”
Why Crime is Down
Politicians and the press have made much of the fact that crime rates are inching down — and indeed they are. The rate of violent crime declined every year from 1991 to 1996 and decreased by a total of 12.7 percent during that period. However, violent crime rates were still 300 percent higher than they were in 1960. President William Clinton likes to take credit for the recent decline, claiming that his initiative to spend federal money on a few thousand more police officers is what did the trick. Reality is not so kind. Crime rates are down because of the huge increase in the number of bad guys who are in jail. As the graphs on the next page show, we have never had so many people in prison, and incarceration rates, in terms of prisoners per 100,000 population are at unprecedented highs.
As the graph for incarceration shows, America has traditionally had about 100 people in jail for every 100,000 citizens. In the decade of the 1960s there was a terrific increase in crime. Perhaps not coincidentally it coincided with the triumph of silly liberal views about crime: society rather than the criminal is to blame, imprisonment is ineffective, the police are brutal, blacks never get a fair shake, etc. And so, despite the surge in crime, prison sentences were reduced and incarceration rates actually went down during the decade. By 1970, however, the combination of more crime and less imprisonment had reached intolerable levels, and we started sending people back to jail: to the point that we now have 400 prisoners per 100,000 citizens — a 400 percent increase in incarceration rates.
Current research suggests that every year of incarceration prevents 12 to 21 crimes. If we returned to our traditional incarceration rate of 100 per 100,000 it would require releasing nearly one million jailbirds — and would loose upon the country a crime wave that would drive every citizen into the arms of the National Rifle Association. The connection between falling crime rates and increasing incarceration rates should be clear to even the dimmest liberal; a crook who is doing time can’t stick a knife in your ribs. And yet, the most common big-media reaction to the swollen prison population is to argue that it is caused by some kind of malicious “prison-industrial complex,” and to worry that so many of the prisoners are black.
Because of the unprecedentedly large number of adults who are locked up and off the streets, juvenile arrest rates are a better indicator than adult arrest rates of real crime trends in the country. All children begin life out of jail, after all, so their crime and arrest rates are not held down by the fact that the worst of them are already locked up and out of circulation. And, in fact, the celebrated drop in adult arrest rates has largely passed them by. From 1991 to 1996, while adult crime rates were dropping steadily — as more and more bad guys were put behind bars — juvenile violent crime was rising for all but one of those years. In fact, since 1987, juvenile violent-crime arrest rates have risen every year but one. There is every reason to think that this is the true crime trend in the United States.
Crime trends for girls have been even worse than for boys. In 1967, boys accounted for 92 percent of juvenile arrests for violent crime and girls for only eight percent. By 1996, girls were committing fully 25 percent of violent juvenile crime. From 1967 to 1996, violent crime arrest rates for boys increased 143 percent, but for girls the increase was an astonishing 345 percent.
It is often pointed out that immigration keeps the population young because immigrants have more children than natives. Most immigrants are non-white, so the American population is turning non-white most quickly at the younger ages. With the exception of Asians, non-whites commit considerably more crime than whites, so the demographic shift cannot help but produce more crime. Rising rates of juvenile crime — probably fueled largely by immigration — are reliable harbingers of rising rates of adult crime. Since the country does not seem likely to go through another 1960s-style period of soft-headedness about sentencing, we can expect the prison population to continue to grow at a good clip.
The prison population will also turn increasingly non-white — whites are already a minority. According to the Department of Justice, the 1995 racial breakdown in American prisons was as follows:
Total:
Black:
White:
Indian/Eskimo:
Asian:
Not Known:
1,126,287
544,005
455,021
10,176
6,483
110,602
110,000 Not Known? A footnote to the table warns that in California, Illinois, New Jersey, Nevada, Wyoming, and 15 other states, “some or all Hispanic prisoners [are] reported under “not known’ “! Footnotes also tell us that Montana considers all Hispanics to be white and that seven states — including big ones like Texas and Mississippi — just “estimate” the racial numbers. Once again, crazy bookkeeping makes it impossible to keep track of Hispanics, and impossible to know how many are lumped in with “whites.” But even if we ignore all the “not knowns” and assume none of the “whites” is Hispanic, “whites” account for only about 40 percent of all prisoners.
In 1995 there were 100,250 federal inmates, of which 20 percent were non-citizens. The feds do not have any “not knowns,” and report their prison population to be 36.9 percent black, 32.6 percent white, and 27.5 percent Hispanic, with Indians and Asians at 1.5 percent each. It is clear that an all-white America could make do with a much smaller prison system.
The dwindling minority of white prisoners — now likely to be controlled by non-white prison guards — will be increasingly vulnerable to rape, humiliation, violence, and extortion. More and more will seek protection by joining white-consciousness prison gangs. Already, in largely non-white prisons, it is whites who are members of “racist” gangs who maintain the best morale.
The large number of black and Hispanic prisoners has a significant but unquantifiable bearing on racial differences in rates of violent crime. According to the graph on page 6, blacks are about five times more likely than whites to be arrested for violent crime. Periodic Department of Justice surveys also find that Americans report blacks to be committing violent crime at about five times the white rate. It is worth noting that these figures apply only to blacks and whites who are not already in jail. To get a true indicator of genuine racial differences in violent or other criminal tendencies rather than just a record of criminal behavior for a given year, one would have to turn all the convicts loose and then compare crime rates. The 1997 black-white differential of 500 percent is large enough already, but it is substantially reduced by the fact that, proportionately, eight times as many blacks as whites are already in jail and are restrained from the violent acts they would certainly commit if they were free. A true black/white multiple of violence not distorted by existing differential incarceration rates would be considerably greater than five.
With the exception of Asians, the burgeoning non-white population presents a very significant threat to our safety and security. Crime considerations alone would justify a return to a much more selective immigration policy. So long as whites remain too timid to discuss the challenges they face, those challenges will never be met. AR
• • • BACK TO TOP • • •
S P E C I A L R E P O R T
Police Bias? Says Who?
The “racist” police officer is practically a cliché. White cops all over the country are supposed to be shooting, beating, and arresting innocent blacks and Hispanics — or at least trying a whole lot harder to collar them than whites. Aside from some isolated incidents of racially motivated brutality, this is a false image. The police arrest blacks and Hispanics because they commit crimes.
The first line of evidence is the close correspondence between survey data and arrest data. If the public says half the muggers are black, and half the muggers the police arrest are black, it is unlikely the police are making “biased” arrests. Even more to the point, the police have essentially no discretion over whom they arrest for a violent crime. Except for murder victims, most people get a good enough look at an assailant to know if he is black or white. If the victim says a white man took his wallet, the police can’t very well go out and arrest a black man even if they wanted to.
The police have a lot of discretion over whether to make an arrest in the case of non-violent crimes, such as violation of liquor laws. Unlike murder or rape, there is not a great deal of public pressure to make arrests, and the police can walk away from crime if they want to. Presumably, a “racist” officer would see a drunk on the street and make an arrest only if the drunk were black. In fact, drunk driving and other liquor offenses — in which police can make arrests or not largely as they choose — are the very crimes for which the black multiple of the white arrest rate is the smallest (see previous page). If “racist” cops are picking on blacks they are not doing a good job.
Finally, if the police are “racist,” why are Asians arrested at consistently lower rates than whites? Wouldn’t “racist” cops think of some way to snare Asians?
It is often argued that the large number of blacks arrested for drugs — particularly crack cocaine — is evidence of police bias. However, there is a completely independent indicator of who is using illegal drugs, which suggests that the police are arresting the very people they should. The Department of Health and Human Services keeps statistics on people admitted to emergency rooms because of drug overdoses. Blacks are admitted at 6.67 times the white rate for heroin and morphine, and no less than 10.5 times the white rate for cocaine (Hispanics are admitted at two to three times the white rate). What better evidence could there be that people of different races are using drugs at markedly different rates, and that the police are simply doing their job?
Like so many other destructive racial myths, the myth of the racist cop refuses to die. AR
SURE jist ask ole al $harpton in NYC today!
83. FmrMarine | April 27th, 2008 at 8:47 am
68. Bill Eischeidt
ANOTHER ..Christian hating post from hells kitchen,
84. Bill Eischeidt | April 27th, 2008 at 12:01 pm
83. FmrMarine | April 27th, 2008 at 8:47 am
I don’t think you get the real gravity of the situation in America FmrMarine. If you insist on making this an US against THEM, a Political/Racial Ideology Derby if you will, then nobody wins. Social ills like abortion I think are best settled at the state level, but that won’t satisfy the Political Right Wing because they want to mandate with a minority what the majority can do. That’s fine. Let’s play it that way for awhile and see how it works.
The crime in Southside only has an effect on white people that GO to the Southside. Most black or Latino criminals really have no need to set themselves up to be killed by cops in an upscale white neighborhood unless they actually have a death wish, or worse, orders.
In threat informative little pamphlet you copied and pasted I didn’t see a thing about white crime. And you see this is my problem it’s got to be everyone else but not the guy in the mirror. Here’s where you separate editorialists from ideologues: I can make connections between Hillary Clinton lying about “being under sniper fire” and how her prevarications hurt chances for the Democrats to win the White House, Obama’s Reverend Wright problems in rural white areas where the “bitter” people dwell and how McCain is wandering in the desert by himself looking for another Christian leader to endorse him and raise some eyebrows and make some nods. You can’t address any such issues on your side because of the Cult of Perfection invoked by the Party of We Can Do No Wrong; that’s called blind ideology and foolhardy loyalty. Works if you barrack for Manchester United but it looks really ignorant if you look at the plethora of serious problems facing America that blaming minorities and illegal immigrants, painting everything with your religious beliefs and waging warfare for the sake of creating patriotic totems cannot solve.
So I’ll leave you to think about this you are president of the US in January 2009 and you have a super majority in both the House and the Senate and Boehner and McConnell are standing on the other side of your desk looking for the game plan from the head of your party.
What’s your first priority? What’s the game plan?
Any of the rest of the conservatives here feel free to jump in with a Bennie Sugg.
85. FmrMarine | April 27th, 2008 at 1:00 pm
“What’s your first priority? What’s the game plan?”
END ABORTION.
END GAY MARRIAGE proposals.
DISBAND the nea.
KICK homosexual agendas off campus.
END hate crime legislation.
END 1 st amendment - lie - to “protect” pornography.
Expand 2nd amendment rights.
END all “diversity” programs and govt rolls in this scam.
Fire all liberal judges, and US attys.
END the iraqi war in 90 days, Put 500,000 troops in and shut the show down.
Take care of the iran situation from iraq with the 500,000 man.
That is in the first 15 minutes.
86. FmrMarine | April 27th, 2008 at 1:05 pm
B.E. - poronagrapher;
>>>If you insist on making this an US against THEM, a Political/Racial Ideology Derby if you will, then nobody wins.<<<
It Is
and
We will win.
EVIL always looses.
87. Bill Eischeidt | April 27th, 2008 at 1:46 pm
Okay. Look folks some actual engagement on issues! Fmr Marine I’m really proud of you for stepping up to the plate.
Let’s see how Boehner and McConnell would respond to your “plan.” I like Boehner and I think her would have the jewels to say, “Do you know what your job is Mr President? Would you like to still have it in six months? If we do this none of us will survive a term and I think I speak for Senator McConnell in saying we like it here in DC.”
End Abortion– Can’t be done by a president even by executive order because it was found in precedent by the SCOTUS to be the right of women to get safe abortions. Sorry about that but you do have recourse. You could make it a part of your agenda to get the Red States to vote on it and likely most of then would restrict abortion to rape and incest and saving the life of the mother a few might go so far as to restrict all abortions for minors no matter the circumstances. At best you’d have your law in a watered down fashion in say 17 states. Abortion will never be illegal totally in the US that sort of law is political suicide and opens a whole other can of legal issues involving “murder for hire” scenarios that even the Family Research Council won’t go near.
DISBAND the nea– Very tempting idea. I’m not a big union guy anyway because they seem a bit more harmful than good in general. My question is what do you replace the NEA with? I get the idea you would advocate homeschooling but there aren’t enough high paying jobs in the Western hemisphere to allow all the American wives to stay home to teach kids. Capitalism doesn’t work that way.
END GAY MARRIAGE proposals– The people have right to petition their government so to end the people’s ability to propose anything from leash laws to gay marriage proposals is in violation of every state constitution in the several 50 states. They can Impeach you for that kind of thing.
KICK homosexual agendas off campus– Here we go again with that whole sticky 1st amendment thing again. What a barrier that bundle of sentences has been to total domination of the populace, huh? That’s why the Congress put it there.
I would imagine Christian agendas at the Universities across America would be fine.
END hate crime legislation– This looks good on paper because I am sure it makes you angry when a straight man is tried in court for beating up a gay man or five white cops go to prison for brutalizing a black kid who was driving too fast in a white neighborhood. This would start to look bad to you if say the Black Anarchy Gang brutalized a group of white girls lost in Compton with a flat tire and carved I hate whitey into the hood of their car. Hate crimes legislation serves everyone. And besides why do you care Fmr Marine white people in your world don’t commit crimes bro.
END 1 st amendment - lie - to “protect” pornography– Tough nut to crack here because like trying to figure out the NFL draft there are so many directions to go in. First off if only heathens in America were buying or consuming porn that would mean the majority of Americans are heathens which would scotch that whole conservative Christian America paradigm. The flip side of that coin is then Christians must be consuming great gulps of porn and I can see how that annoys you. Face though it is free speech and it isn’t doing anymore harm than cocaine is really which I didn’t see anywhere on your agenda as a thing that should be eradicated. Like bad programming on TV porn can be avoided you don’t have to consume it either on TV or the Internet. The people that like it get it and all others don’t have to see it.
Expand 2nd amendment rights– Aside from issuing every American a rifle and a sidearm i don’t see where you are going with this. Some of my colleagues have written extensively on despite America being a nation of gun owners most Americans still don’t know how to defend themselves against an armed aggressor. But I’ll play put a handgun in the hands of every non felon in America and watch simple road rage turn into shootouts that lead to more convicts and bigger jails. I didn’t even go into the school shooting things that would virtually explode in number from such lunacy.
END all “diversity” programs and govt rolls in this scam– I don’t know of any government funded diversity programs but I would go one further and say let’s send everyone that isn’t white out of the US. Wouldn’t that make things easier? I’ll come back in five years and see how you’re doing.
Fire all liberal judges, and US attys– I’m assuming you mean any judge that thinks women, gays and lesbians, minorities and pro choice advocates deserve a fair hearing in court. I think you mean AUSAs and other career people as they are the ones who do the real work in the DOJ. But I’ll hand you the Judiciary and ask you how long would Wall Street stand for this?
END the iraqi war in 90 days, Put 500,000 troops in and shut the show down.
Take care of the Iran situation from Iraq with the 500,000 man.– We half agree on this. The current administration was told they needed 450K troops to do the job and they balked because politically it would have looked bad. Dumb. Now the only way you get to that number is to cancel rotations back home until the war is won. it would be bloody and horrible and you would have to have a full news blackout to do it the right way but you could kill every Shi’a in Baghdad in say 18 months and only incur 100 000 wounded and 10 000 dead. But hey the only news coming out of Iraq would be your news and the occasional whining of wives back stateside. After the first 18 moths when al Maliki can rule as he pleases the draft you started on January 21, 2009 would have born its first rangers and then you could just walk across the border into Iran for another decade of fighting. One question: what does oil cost on July 4, 2010 if you do this?
So in 15 minutes you’ve scrapped the Constitution because of homophobia, given every non-con wingnut over 18 in the good ole US of A a permit to carry a concealed gun, flushed the Civil Rights act by calling a reach for equality a power grab of heinous “diversity” agendas, reversed a century of jurisprudence and replaced it with religion based dogma that would send shockwaves through the global economy and oh yeah broken the US Army beyond recognition for at least a generation.
Next post I’ll take my own stab at it. This is going to look like Jets Colts in 69 I think.
88. Bill Eischeidt | April 27th, 2008 at 1:50 pm
86. FmrMarine | April 27th, 2008 at 1:05 pm
B.E. - poronagrapher;
You know the human nude form is beautiful as is the physical act of love but it’s a little strange that even with the links to reverend hagee, trinity broadcasting, covenant eyes and a litany of others all you see is the porn. There are over 3 000 very intelligently thought out posts on that site that trunpet the views of conservatives and Liberals in a fair and open forum. Kinda like the planet you live on Fmr Marine if you would leave the reailer from time to time or peel back the Confederate flag you have tacked up over your window you might see some of it.
89. FmrMarine | April 27th, 2008 at 1:50 pm
ZING……………..
Run out the line………….BAIT TAKEN !
LOL
90. js | April 27th, 2008 at 1:51 pm
“So in 15 minutes you’ve scrapped the Constitution because of ….”
what a line….the only one who even came close to doing that was you…you assume the most radical means to do anything an everything…which basically means that the entire long winded post you made was nothing but your personal ego, and had nothing to do with the issues…..you are pathetic…
91. FmrMarine | April 27th, 2008 at 1:52 pm
BE
like the tongue in the A$$….real family oriented post
92. Bill Eischeidt | April 27th, 2008 at 1:56 pm
90. js | April 27th, 2008 at 1:51 pm
Huh? Did I fall down the rabbit hole or is this how government really works when the GOP is in charge. Toe the party line and no fresh ideas will be allowed.
What I did was address each thing that Fmr Marine said was on his agenda given an electoral perfect storm item by item. js you have nothing good to say and nothing to add because brother you ain’t that bright. I’m sure the GOP CAN depend on your vote in November and the rest of your low IQ bloc.
I was trying to have a reasonable debate with Fmr Marine and I can accept that he can wrap his head around a web site that covers adult topics politics and current events as well as sports. But I bet he has read more than one issue of Playboy and they do the exactly the same thing though a bit more tame than we do.
93. Bill Eischeidt | April 27th, 2008 at 1:58 pm
Fmr Marine I would make a wager that not a single person in the US lost their life because they saw that image.
How many would lose their lives if the US adopted your policies? Thousands? tens of thousands? Hundreds of thousands? Do you care?
94. js | April 27th, 2008 at 2:01 pm
did you fall down and hit your head a few time billy…because you have a big, big problem putting 1 and 1 together to get to 2….radicalizing what fmrmarine said isnt a debate, its your pathetic ego making a statement…get real fool
95. FmrMarine | April 27th, 2008 at 2:07 pm
BE poronagrapher
>>> put a handgun in the hands of every non felon in America and watch simple road rage turn into shootouts that lead to more convicts and bigger jails. I didn’t even go into the school shooting things that would virtually explode in number from such lunacy.<<<<<
Statistics prove you a
A - LIAR
B - MORON
C - ALL the above
such drivel is right out of your marxist-democrat playbook.
It has been PROVEN to be 180 degrees diametrically opposed to the nonsense spewed by you.
by the way earbama will win the nomination.
Because we are held hostage by the “black community” and it’s so called “reverands”
OUR countries - “blakk mullas”, dont like the outcome of something fine.
They will riot, rampage, loot, pillage and murder until they force us to go their way.
This is the great “unity” that awaits us if earbama is crowned.
96. Bill Eischeidt | April 27th, 2008 at 2:23 pm
95. FmrMarine | April 27th, 2008 at 2:07 pm
The only reason riot leads to change in America is because it costs your corporate masters a buck.
Are you nuts?
200 million white men and women are being held hostage by the 40 million strong black community?
What happened to you Fmr Marine did you have some sort of run in with black people that turned them into something diabolical or are you just angry that you didn’t get all the money and power you felt you deserved?
Hey I still say if the white settlers of this country had done all the work themselves and said , “Hey we are a Christian nation and we will have no part of slavery,” we would not even be having this conversation for many reasons. The need for cheap agricultural labor and the lack of resolve to seek manumission and emancipation before civil war brought all this down on your own heads when you couple the anger of having the wealth the South had amassed taken away during Reconstruction. As much as you would like to distance yourself from the plight of black America you are just as guilty as a master who held a black woman down to rape her or an overseer with a whip or Jim Crow sending out the lynching party if you do not speak up for your brothers and sisters of color in their fight for equality and payment on the ancestral debt they are owed.
You have a right to be frustrated racially because it seems to you that America has turned its back on the ideal that the white man is superior but you do not Sir have the right to wipe your butt with the Constitution which the last time checked protected the rights of all men and women who are called Citizens of the United States of America whether you like the color of their skin, the content of their character, their sexual orientation or their political affiliation. Like it or not these people are your equals and as long as there is a Constitution they will continue to be.
And finally I thank you to your service to the country. If every kid at 18 could join the military I think America could be saved from whatever cancer has affected your power to reason.
97. Bill Eischeidt | April 27th, 2008 at 2:36 pm
No wonder America is in such a state when any time you actually discuss issues here come the insults and the attack of the source.
Well given a Liberal Congress here’s how I would start with Reid and Pelosi in my Oval Office.
I would suspend the capital gains tax for one year and after the sunset I would make the rate 18%
I’d have my new Sec’y of the Treasury; Mohammed El-Erian put together a plan for mortgages in crisis similar to the Resolution Trust Company. It wouldn’t exactly bail out people with bad mortgages but it would make the Treasury the bank of last resort for homeowners who are upside down.
Next I’d call in my new Fed Chairwoman Erin Callan and ask her how she feels about a strong dollar. She would smile I know and we could expect a Fed Funds rate increase at the first FOMC meeting of 50 basis points. That one gesture would bring the dollar back on par with the Euro in three months and additional quarterly 25 basis point increases until you reach 5% would quash inflation and even settle the runaway price of crude oil.
Third we’d have to tackle the Iraq war. I would get on the horn and call my good new pal Iraqi president Nouri al Maliki who will have been dreading this phone call for four years. “Nouri, it’s time to put up between you and I we’re starting to bring out forces in one year to a level of 75 000 and in two years to a rapid reaction force of 50 000 that will stay in country for two more years. By the summer of 2013 only 25 000 US troops will be in your country. Fish or cut bait. ”
I’d bring the leadership of Hamas, Hezbollah, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Iran, Syria, Jordan, the EU, Egypt, Russia, China and India together at a sub cabinet level to negotiate a way that peace can be brought to the Middle East. It will be time to dictate to Israel and the Palestinians that the rest of the world wants peace and you’re just going to have to swallow this pill.
That in the first 100 days.
98. Tractatus | April 27th, 2008 at 6:19 pm
Never heard it, not even once…if someone who has been paying close attention, as I have, hasn’t heard this element of Obama’s life, then it simply has not been broadcast in any meaningful sense.
Uh, no. That just demonstrates that you haven’t been paying close attention like you claim. Don’t you want to be some sort of political writer full-time? Better do your homework, Noonan.
99. poetryman69 | April 28th, 2008 at 6:56 am
At best, Wright is a stranger to the truth. Just as it is troubling that conservatism has become a Satanic cult bent on practicing ritual human sacrifice and dismemberment in Iraq for the next 100 years, so too is it disturbing that a cult on the left thinks they can curse America and lie about it or that we are to supposed to admire them for the way they curse us. Well in that case, dm U too! And in the words of FUtus, the sitting VP, fu as well.