Obama's Dimestore 'Mein Kampf'

White Supremacists are denounced for distinguishing white values from black ones. White Supremacists are villified for promoting white interests.

But it's okay when blacks pledge, in church, to support only black politicians.
"Pledge Allegiance to All Black Leadership Who Espouse and Embrace the Black Value System."

Hey, but that's okay. They're black, so it isn't really racism.

http://www.tucc.org/black_value_system.html
 
White Supremacists are denounced for distinguishing white values from black ones. White Supremacists are villified for promoting white interests.

But it's okay when blacks pledge, in church, to support only black politicians.
"Pledge Allegiance to All Black Leadership Who Espouse and Embrace the Black Value System."

Hey, but that's okay. They're black, so it isn't really racism.

http://www.tucc.org/black_value_system.html

Actually, they pledge allegiance to black leadership who espouse the black value system. What is the black value system? Do they support white leadership that espouse the black values system?

Where is my proof Allie? I am still waiting about Obama.
 
That link takes you to the black value system, and it's on the church's website.

It's all about supporting your color.
 
That link takes you to the black value system, and it's on the church's website.

It's all about supporting your color.

Would they support a white politician who makes positive contributions to the general welfare of the black community? If so, they are not racist. They are an interest group.

Anyway, where is my proof?
 
Would they support a white politician who makes positive contributions to the general welfare of the black community? If so, they are not racist. They are an interest group.

Anyway, where is my proof?

Not according to the website. They are to patronize black institutions, support black economy, and black politicians.

If a white candidate were to come in with those primary objectives, maybe they'd support him. But I doubt it. Not only is it unlikely to happen...a white candidate who did such a thing would be highly suspect and labeled racist from the get go, but they wouldn't support him because he's not black.

But if you want to not believe their own statements, that's too bad for you. I think that's about the strongest evidence there is. Their own words stating their committment to a color.
 
Not according to the website. They are to patronize black institutions, support black economy, and black politicians.

If a white candidate were to come in with those primary objectives, maybe they'd support him. But I doubt it. Not only is it unlikely to happen...a white candidate who did such a thing would be highly suspect and labeled racist from the get go, but they wouldn't support him because he's not black.

But if you want to not believe their own statements, that's too bad for you. I think that's about the strongest evidence there is. Their own words stating their committment to a color.

I have just finished reading that web page. They do have a committment to black empowerment. They do profess a committment to the black community. They also make a committment to education, self-respect, God, the Black family, skill attainment, etc. If you think this is racism, then (as Jillian pointed out) pretty much every minority group is bigoted. Methodists have scholarships for other Methodists. Hispanics for Hispanics. Irish-Americans for Irish-Americans. Is this all racism and bigotry?
 
I have just finished reading that web page. They do have a committment to black empowerment. They do profess a committment to the black community. They also make a committment to education, self-respect, God, the Black family, skill attainment, etc. If you think this is racism, then (as Jillian pointed out) pretty much every minority group is bigoted. Methodists have scholarships for other Methodists. Hispanics for Hispanics. Irish-Americans for Irish-Americans. Is this all racism and bigotry?

You tell me. Libs are constantly screeching that anyone who has a Christian agenda is therefore, necessarily, a bigot and stupid besides.

They have a commitment to BLACK education, BLACK self respect, the BLACK family, BLACK skill attainment.

If that church was called the Freebush, Georgia Assembly of God and you substitued "White" for "Black" you'd denounce it as a racist church. I find it amazing (mind numbing, actually) that you refuse to acknowledge that it's STILL RACIST if a BLACK congregation is espousing racist values.
 
You tell me. Libs are constantly screeching that anyone who has a Christian agenda is therefore, necessarily, a bigot and stupid besides.

They have a commitment to BLACK education, BLACK self respect, the BLACK family, BLACK skill attainment.

If that church was called the Freebush, Georgia Assembly of God and you substitued "White" for "Black" you'd denounce it as a racist church. I find it amazing (mind numbing, actually) that you refuse to acknowledge that it's STILL RACIST if a BLACK congregation is espousing racist values.

You are right. If it was a white church pushing for white... whatever, I would find it racist. I don't think I would find it racist if it were an Irish-American church with a committment of Irish-American education. Maybe it has something to do with history. Do you feel differently? Do you think that every minority group that has a group-focus is bigoted? If not, we agree. Otherwise, we don't.

How many times must I ask you for the proof until I get the satisfaction of reading you admit that you are wrong? You are making me question conservative honesty?
 
You tell me. Libs are constantly screeching that anyone who has a Christian agenda is therefore, necessarily, a bigot and stupid besides.

No they don't "screech"... but they are kind of concerned about that whole separation of church and state thing.

They have a commitment to BLACK education, BLACK self respect, the BLACK family, BLACK skill attainment.

And there's something wrong with those things?? Aren't you all always saying that blacks don't strive. don't pull themselves up by their bootstraps, etc? well, here's a group that wants to get it's community moving and upwardly mobile and self-sufficient....all of the things you supposedly value. Yet, when it's blacks, suddenly those traits aren't valued??

If that church was called the Freebush, Georgia Assembly of God and you substitued "White" for "Black" you'd denounce it as a racist church. I find it amazing (mind numbing, actually) that you refuse to acknowledge that it's STILL RACIST if a BLACK congregation is espousing racist values.

Racist values or community values as expressed previously?
 
You are right. If it was a white church pushing for white... whatever, I would find it racist. I don't think I would find it racist if it were an Irish-American church with a committment of Irish-American education. Maybe it has something to do with history. Do you feel differently? Do you think that every minority group that has a group-focus is bigoted? If not, we agree. Otherwise, we don't.

How many times must I ask you for the proof until I get the satisfaction of reading you admit that you are wrong? You are making me question conservative honesty?

Irish isn't a race. It's a nationality.
 
No they don't "screech"... but they are kind of concerned about that whole separation of church and state thing.



And there's something wrong with those things?? Aren't you all always saying that blacks don't strive. don't pull themselves up by their bootstraps, etc? well, here's a group that wants to get it's community moving and upwardly mobile and self-sufficient....all of the things you supposedly value. Yet, when it's blacks, suddenly those traits aren't valued??



Racist values or community values as expressed previously?

They are the ones who make the distinction. It isn't community, it says "black". I take it at face value. If support people based upon color, then that's racist.

I never said blacks don't strive....the only racial commentary I've ever made has been regarding the hypocrisy I see in liberal America when it comes to racism.

And Wright screeches.
 
Okay, show me where Obama says it is okay for a black person to do something that he says is forbidden for a white person to do. (I hope this is something substantial).

He supports a preacher that has said and believes whites are evil, that has said and believes this Country is evil, that said and believes that Terrorism is acceptable.

Now lest assume a white preacher had the belief and preached it that blacks are evil and that the country is evil and that terrorism is acceptable. What would you call him?
 
A racist pig!

Black people can't be racist because they're BLACK. Terrorists are JUSTIFIED in wanting us dead, and Americans shouldn't care because only a handful died on 9/11 and around the world....And America is a terrible place, Americans are terrible people, and Christians are backwards idiots who deserve to be villified, ridiculed, taxed out of existence and chased out of the schools.

Those beliefs are what distinguish me as a compassionate and color-blind liberal.

Thank you.
 
They are the ones who make the distinction. It isn't community, it says "black". I take it at face value. If support people based upon color, then that's racist.

But when you criticize them based on color it isn't???

I never said blacks don't strive....the only racial commentary I've ever made has been regarding the hypocrisy I see in liberal America when it comes to racism.

And certainly you're an excellent judge of what everyone on the left thinks, because they all think the same thing.

And Wright screeches.

No. He doesn't. Anger (whether we think its justified or not) isn't interchangeable with "screeching". Want to talk about screeching? Hmmmmmm.... listen to Annie Coulter and Rush Limbaugh for about 3 seconds.
 
Anyone who screams obscenities is screeching. It's not justifiable anger, dear.

And I never criticized anyone based on color. That's a Wright thing.
 
Anyone who screams obscenities is screeching. It's not justifiable anger, dear.

And I never criticized anyone based on color. That's a Wright thing.

Damn is an obscenity??? Man, you're strict. :eusa_doh:

I don't think you realize how the stuff you write sounds. And I don't think much of Wright ... but that's neither here nor there. I don't care how much he gets castigated. It's the putting his words in Obama's mouth that I take issue with.
 
A preacher who screeches "God damned United States" is using obscenities.

If you want to quibble, that's fine. Defend him till the cows come home.

I haven't put his words into Obama's mouth. Obama does fine on his own, on the one hand saying he wouldn't listen to racist garbage, and on the other hand, trying to justify it.
 
A preacher who screeches "God damned United States" is using obscenities.

If you want to quibble, that's fine. Defend him till the cows come home.

I haven't put his words into Obama's mouth. Obama does fine on his own, on the one hand saying he wouldn't listen to racist garbage, and on the other hand, trying to justify it.

not obscene. sorry.

He was shouting down the corrupt powers that be.... just like Amos and Jeremiah and Elijah...
 
Actually, that wouldn't work either because he denounced it. Still, there might be a valid question of standards if he (as we can assume) would be less tolerant of a parishoner at such a church. But then you get back to history and context, or otherwise, I am racist and filled with self-loathing.

LOL...yeah true...I like to take the history and context view also. LOL. Great minds think alike.
 

Forum List

Back
Top