Obama's religion

[D. Medvedev Fan]

I've heard that Obama was a Muslim and also that he goes to a somewhat racially biased pro-African American Christian church. Has he said himself what religion he is?

[Storico]

Best to dispel myths (http://thecaucus.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/01/24/obamas-religion-and-schooling/) as quickly as they rise up. :smile:

[Amazing Rando]

No, he's a Christian- a member of the United Church of Christ.

[D. Medvedev Fan]

Thanks

[Ægōthǔlian]

Who said he was Muslim? Just because he is black (half black, "oreo" really) you assume he muslim, that's cold, man.

[Lazarus]

According to Obama's book "Dreams From my Father" published in 1995, he and his wife, Michelle, were married in and are members of Trinity United Church of Christ in Chicago. Obama was born in Hawaii and raised by his mother and his maternal grandparents in Honolulu. His father was a Kenyan student at the University of Hawaii when he met his mother, but returned to Kenya shortly after their marriage. They were later divorced and Obama never met his father except for a short period when he was around 10 and his father made a short visit to Hawaii. Obama's father was from a Muslim family, but he himself did not practice any religion. Obama's African grandfather, from whom he received the middle name Hussein, was a practicing Muslim. Obama's mother was married a second time to an Indonesian businessman who was also from a Muslim background, but also did not practice a religion. His household was thoroughly secular and Obama attended a public school in Indonesia. Again, Obama's mother divorced and she and her son returned to Hawaii where Obama completed his high school education.

[Jackie Fox]

I've heard that Obama was a Muslim and also that he goes to a somewhat racially biased pro-African American Christian church. Has he said himself what religion he is?

He's UCC. The concecpt Trinity Church is "somewhat racially biased" is a slur.

[Jimmy Higgins]

He's UCC. The concecpt Trinity Church is "somewhat racially biased" is a slur.
No kidding. I can't understand why some people would even listen to some of these obviously false lies.

I read it in an email... or my friend/relative read it in an email. :ahem:

[Jackie Fox]

No kidding. I can't understand why some people would even listen to some of these obviously false lies.

I read it in an email... or my friend/relative read it in an email. :ahem:

LOL. Well, when Blacks stand up for themselves some see it as anti-white.

[Lizard]

He's UCC. The concecpt Trinity Church is "somewhat racially biased" is a slur.

Really?

From the website of Trinity Church:

10-point Vision:
7. A congregation committed to the HISTORICAL EDUCATION OF AFRICAN PEOPLE IN DIASPORA.

AND


Trinity United Church of Christ has been called by God to be a congregation that is not ashamed of the gospel of Jesus Christ and that does not apologize for its African roots!

AND


Books: Africentric and Christian

Whether or not church should cater to a specific race or not it a debatable topic. Whether Obamah's church does, is clear from their own website.

[Thomas More]

No kidding. I can't understand why some people would even listen to some of these obviously false lies.

I read it in an email... or my friend/relative read it in an email. :ahem:

Except if you replace the word "Black" with "White" you would call it racist.


The guy that runs it is a nut (http://www.newsmax.com/kessler/Obama_Church_Racism/2008/01/07/62285.html), as the race wears on this may prove Obamas Willy Horton. Of course he is still the media darling at the moment, he could be bludgeoning elderly nuns with fluffy white baby seals and they would not report it in a negative light.

[Jackie Fox]

Really?

From the website of Trinity Church:

10-point Vision:
7. A congregation committed to the HISTORICAL EDUCATION OF AFRICAN PEOPLE IN DIASPORA.

AND


Trinity United Church of Christ has been called by God to be a congregation that is not ashamed of the gospel of Jesus Christ and that does not apologize for its African roots!

AND


Books: Africentric and Christian

Whether or not church should cater to a specific race or not it a debatable topic. Whether Obamah's church does, is clear from their own website.

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make, other than providing an example of how conservative Christianity is no ally to oppressed people.

[Jackie Fox]

Except if you replace the word "Black" with "White" you would call it racist.

And rightfully so.

The guy that runs it is a nut, as the race wears on this may prove Obamas Willy Horton.

If so it would primarily prove the gullibility of the nervous white electorate. obama's Pastor is certainly more level headed than Pat Robertson or R.J. Rushdoony.

Of course he is still the media darling at the moment, he could be bludgeoning elderly nuns with fluffy white baby seals and they would not report it in a negative light.

Nice hyperbole but with no basis in fact. Are you Hugh Rodham or his brother Tony?

[Lizard]

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make, other than providing an example of how conservative Christianity is no ally to oppressed people.

My point was that Obamah's church is clearly biased towards one ethnic group.

Where you got that crap about oppressed people is beyond me.

[Lightknight]

This all sprang up when Obama used a Qur`an to be sworn into office.

Whether he's actually Christian or not, this makes him look... interestingly bad in our eyes.

[Thomas More]

[QUOTE=Jackie Fox] And rightfully so.[ /QUOTE]


So you support racism so long as it supports your political view. Just so we are clear on that.


[QUOTE=Jackie Fox] If so it would primarily prove the gullibility of the nervous white electorate. obama's Pastor is certainly more level headed than Pat Robertson or R.J. Rushdoony.[ /QUOTE]

No, it would prove they still have some common sense left, rather than conforming to what Oprah and the other media tell them to believe.

[QUOTE=Jackie Fox]Nice hyperbole but with no basis in fact. Are you Hugh Rodham or his brother Tony? [ /QUOTE]

Actually it does, If Huckabee or Romney or Edwards visited a church that said the same thing we would hear nothing else for 3 or 4 months. Obama is getting a free pass.

Sorry, I will probably end up writing in Buchanan/Nader rather than any of the muppets that are running. I prefer people who are not afraid to say what they actually think vs what focus groups decide they should think. It was a rather clumsly attempt at levity while making a personnal attack, I can appreciate it. Particuraly since it is apparently all you can offer in response. :)

[lao tzu]

This all sprang up when Obama used a Qur`an to be sworn into office.

Whether he's actually Christian or not, this makes him look... interestingly bad in our eyes.

You're confusing Congressman Keith Ellison of Minnesota ...

50141

... with Senator Barack Obama of Illinois.

50142

Let me guess. Do they all look alike?

[Jackie Fox]

My point was that Obamah's church is clearly biased towards one ethnic group.

Where you got that crap about oppressed people is beyond me.[/QUOTE]

There are many who commit oppression who are seemingly unaware of their actions and do things like confuse standing up for yourself with attacking others.

Read Gramsci?

[Jackie Fox]

[QUOTE=Jackie Fox] And rightfully so.[ /QUOTE]

[QUOTE]So you support racism so long as it supports your political view. Just so we are clear on that.

What is clear is the oppressed standing up for temselves is not racism.

Sorry, I will probably end up writing in Buchanan/Nader rather than any of the muppets that are running.

Then enjoy your irrelevance.

[Jackie Fox]

You're confusing Congressman Keith Ellison of Minnesota ...

50141

... with Senator Barack Obama of Illinois.

50142

Let me guess. Do they all look alike?

Not only that. White chicks married to brothers get mixed up too. I'm 6'1", 170# with brown hair and glasses and I get confused with a jailer who's also married to an African-American here even though she's a 5'3", 300 # blonde without glasses.

[Lizard]

Where you got that crap about oppressed people is beyond me.

There are many who commit oppression who are seemingly unaware of their actions and do things like confuse standing up for yourself with attacking others.

Read Gramsci?[/quote]

Well since I am not one of those, what is your point?

The term used was "bias" not "attacking". Did I not provide plenty of evidence for "bias"?

[RumTumTugger]

I'm not sure what point you're trying to make, other than providing an example of how conservative Christianity is no ally to oppressed people.

So if this was one of the white candiates and there website stated.

Trinity United Church of Christ has been called by God to be a congregation that is not ashamed of the gospel of Jesus Christ and that does not apologize for its White European roots!]

You would be ok with that and not call them biased would you? and take to task anyone who did call them biased as being opressors?

[Lizard]

So if this was one of the white candiates and there website stated.

Trinity United Church of Christ has been called by God to be a congregation that is not ashamed of the gospel of Jesus Christ and that does not apologize for its White European roots!]

You would be ok with that and not call them biased would you? and take to task anyone who did call them biased as being opressors?

[monty python voice]Help, help, I'm being repressed![/monty python voice]

[RumTumTugger]

[monty python voice]Help, help, I'm being repressed![/monty python voice]

:lmbo:

[Thomas More]

What is clear is the oppressed standing up for temselves is not racism.


HAHAHAHAHAHA!

This is quite possibly the most ridiculous and the most ironic thing I have ever seen posted on this forum. I had no idea you posted on Stormfront nor applied their arguments here.

[Jackie Fox]

There are many who commit oppression who are seemingly unaware of their actions and do things like confuse standing up for yourself with attacking others.

Read Gramsci?

Well since I am not one of those, what is your point?

The term used was "bias" not "attacking". Did I not provide plenty of evidence for "bias"?[/QUOTE]

"We are not racist, etc." is a frequent cry of the privileged not taken at face value by the oppressed. Your "evidence" was insufficient for your inarticulate argument.

[Jackie Fox]

So if this was one of the white candiates and there website stated.

Trinity United Church of Christ has been called by God to be a congregation that is not ashamed of the gospel of Jesus Christ and that does not apologize for its White European roots!]

You would be ok with that and not call them biased would you? and take to task anyone who did call them biased as being opressors?

Are you familiar with things like "Norweigan Festival," "Czech Week," and Dies y Seis? Trinity's commitment to the African-American community is no different.

[Thomas More]

Are you familiar with things like "Norweigan Festival," "Czech Week," and Dies y Seis? Trinity's commitment to the African-American community is no different.

I don't often see Norwegian festivals being presented as Norwegian only. Of course the Pioneers commitment to the Russian people was admirable, as was the National Socialist dedication to the Germans at least by your logic. Now the only question is would you prefer to recieve your bleating points via Pravda or Der Sturmer.

[Lazarus]

I don't see anything wrong with Trinity being proud of it's African - American roots, just as I don't see anything wrong with St. Patick's in New York being proud of It's Irish roots or the many Lutheran communities in Iowa being proud of their German roots. I don't think Trinity is an exclusive community, welcoming only Blacks into their worship services, is it? Christian churches have often coalesced around cultural or racial groups. If Trinity is such a church, I would think it natural they would be proud of their cultural and racial heritage.

[Lightknight]

You're confusing Congressman Keith Ellison of Minnesota ...

50141

... with Senator Barack Obama of Illinois.

50142

Let me guess. Do they all look alike?I never watched him swearing in. If the newspapers that reported it as being Barack Obama actually confused him with Ellison then that's a pretty big mistake. They look nothing alike, in my opinion.

Here's the first few sources that come up when I google it. The validity of the sites are in question as far as I'm concerned, but there sure is enough of them. They state that both Ellison and Obama used the Qu`ran.

http://www.topix.com/forum/news/terrorism/TAL449ETN88CJE0FH
http://ph.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20071118154251AAym59N

However, there are then several sites following that then refute this very claim.

I think I have come to the conclusion that Obama must not have sworn in on the Qu`ran, as none of the sources are major news companies, and this would qualify.

Instead, what I have been finding are some papers that did publish that Obama swore in using a Qu`ran and then posted an apology once things were cleared up.

http://www.idahostatesman.com/letters/story/247613.html

So I guess the media was fooled this time and myself by proxy. So there, I hope you guys enjoyed watching my learning process :p.

[lao tzu]

So I guess the media was fooled this time and myself by proxy. So there, I hope you guys enjoyed watching my learning process :p.

My apologies, Lightknight, there was no need for me to be that snarky. Here's a Snopes link if you're interested in the straight skinny.

http://www.snopes.com/politics/obama/muslim.asp

The qur'an used in the private ceremony by Ellison originally belonged to Thomas Jefferson, by the way.

As far as I'm aware, the print media wasn't fooled, though. Most of the references to Obama and Islam come from a widely shared email that found its way into letters to the editor and forums such as this one. That is, just rumors from general citizens, usually debunked quickly. The only real exception was early coverage from FOX, for which they got spanked roundly by their chief cable rival. Both FOX and CNN could be considered media, but neither are reliable, FOX due to its political bias and CNN due to general incompetency.

<shameless plug mode>

If you absolutely must watch a television newscast, your best bet for accurate information is the NewsHour on PBS.

</spm>

As ever, Jesse

[Lizard]

Well since I am not one of those, what is your point?

The term used was "bias" not "attacking". Did I not provide plenty of evidence for "bias"?

"We are not racist, etc." is a frequent cry of the privileged not taken at face value by the oppressed. Your "evidence" was insufficient for your inarticulate argument.[/quote]
How was my evidence insufficient to show that Obama's church is biased in favor of a specific race?

[Lizard]

Are you familiar with things like "Norweigan Festival," "Czech Week," and Dies y Seis? Trinity's commitment to the African-American community is no different.

I agree. These things are also biased towards a specific ethnic group. Do you now concede the Obamah's church is biased? (not asking if this bias is good, bad or indifferent, just an acknowledgment that it exist. I have not made a value judgment on anything on this thread, related to Obamah's church)

[damienl]

We are not racist, etc." is a frequent cry of the privileged not taken at face value by the oppressed


Did you go to the University of Delaware? You know, implying that someone's 'privileged' (read 'oppressor') just because he happens to be (or you assume him to be) white is *also* a racist statement.

"I'm not a racist"
"Yes you are, you're just an oppressive descendant of slave-owners"
"But I've never done anything racist in my life"
"It's not what you do, it's who you *are*!"

Sounds about right?

[Jimmy Higgins]

I never watched him swearing in. If the newspapers that reported it as being Barack Obama actually confused him with Ellison then that's a pretty big mistake. They look nothing alike, in my opinion.Except the main media didn't make this mistake. Maybe you should be much more careful how you get your information.

Here's the first few sources that come up when I google it. The validity of the sites are in question as far as I'm concerned, but there sure is enough of them. They state that both Ellison and Obama used the Qu`ran.

http://www.topix.com/forum/news/terrorism/TAL449ETN88CJE0FH
http://ph.answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20071118154251AAym59N
You call these sources?!

I think I have come to the conclusion that Obama must not have sworn in on the Qu`ran, as none of the sources are major news companies, and this would qualify.

So I guess the media was fooled this time and myself by proxy. So there, I hope you guys enjoyed watching my learning process :p.The media as in small time papers and whatnot, not media in general. Learning process? Just how many people in the US know what they know about Obama from that stinking pile of lies that was the spam email? America can be pathetic when it comes to being informed.

[Jimmy Higgins]

Whether or not church should cater to a specific race or not it a debatable topic. Whether Obamah's church does, is clear from their own website.Wouldn't we need to go through the history of the black churches to better understand why they developed unity through their race before we start misrepresenting them?

After all, segregation and hate helped lead to the formation of these churches. It's not as if white churches were opening their doors for blacks to join in the praising of the same god. So black churches developed so they could worship Jesus Christ. In order to help get through trials and rough times of segregation, they self-identified strongly with that which was their repressed race and their faith. That this still exists just speaks of the bond they developed. Should these churches stop existing merely because most whites decided to stop being the intolerant jerks they were a couple decades ago?

Most importantly, these churches find identity of pro-black community, not anti-white. Typically churches where white people are preaching their own greatness do so while they are also preaching intolerance for other cultures. Luckily these types of white churches are outnumbered by decent churches in this country. To bring up a contradiction regarding race is wholly unfounded. Plenty of areas identify on their cultural heritage, whether Polish, Slavic, African, etc... It's when a group of people speak negatively of other cultures, that issues of racism becomes a matter of discussion.

[Lizard]

Wouldn't we need to go through the history of the black churches to better understand why they developed unity through their race before we start misrepresenting them?

How in the world did I misrepresent anything? My sources were directly from the church itself. I never made any value judgment one way or the other. The comment was made:



I've heard that Obama... goes to a somewhat racially biased pro-African American Christian church.

A response was made:

The concecpt Trinity Church is "somewhat racially biased" is a slur.

I had heard the same thing about Obamah's church, so I decided to check the information out for myself. I went to the churches own website. I posted information from that churches own website. How it that misrepresenting anyone?





After all, segregation and hate helped lead to the formation of these churches. It's not as if white churches were opening their doors for blacks to join in the praising of the same god. So black churches developed so they could worship Jesus Christ. In order to help get through trials and rough times of segregation, they self-identified strongly with that which was their repressed race and their faith. That this still exists just speaks of the bond they developed. Should these churches stop existing merely because most whites decided to stop being the intolerant jerks they were a couple decades ago?

I have not (yet) made a value judgment on the bias that (to me) is obvious in Obamah's church. All I have done, thus far, is to argue that the bias is there.

It seems that you agree with me that there is bias, but instead of saying, "Yeah Lizard, you are right, you ask me question without even knowing where I stand on the issue. You might be surprised.

Most importantly, these churches find identity of pro-black community, not anti-white. Typically churches where white people are preaching their own greatness do so while they are also preaching intolerance for other cultures. Luckily these types of white churches are outnumbered by decent churches in this country. To bring up a contradiction regarding race is wholly unfounded. Plenty of areas identify on their cultural heritage, whether Polish, Slavic, African, etc... It's when a group of people speak negatively of other cultures, that issues of racism becomes a matter of discussion.

Yes, I have already acknowledged that Polish, Slavic, and other groups also have ethnically biased churches.

My sole reason for posting on this thread was to address whether or not Obamah's church had a racial bias. I have no interest in debating whether or not that is a good thing (that is for me an in house Christian issue, and not something I wish to debate in a civics forum).

[Jimmy Higgins]

I had heard the same thing about Obamah's church, so I decided to check the information out for myself. I went to the churches own website. I posted information from that churches own website. How it that misrepresenting anyone?Isn't there a difference between racial identity and being racially biased? I believe there is. Racial identity to me indicates a positive look at ones race. Racial bias to me indicates a negative look at other races.

[Lizard]

Isn't there a difference between racial identity and being racially biased? I believe there is. Racial identity to me indicates a positive look at ones race. Racial bias to me indicates a negative look at other races.
No, bias is a neutral term.

ETA: Or at least the way I was using it. I did look up "bias" on few online dictionary, and it seems that it frequently (but not always) is a negative, or at least prejudiced perception.

ETA: :lmbo: one of the dictionary sites I looked up had an Obamah add....how funny is that??? :haha:

[Jackie Fox]

I don't often see Norwegian festivals being presented as Norwegian only. Of course the Pioneers commitment to the Russian people was admirable, as was the National Socialist dedication to the Germans at least by your logic. Now the only question is would you prefer to recieve your bleating points via Pravda or Der Sturmer.

I've yet to see African-American events being styled as "Black Only", and I've been to hear Louis Farrakhan speak and there were plenty of whites and a smattering of Hispanics in attendence. All of all races had to frisked by the Fruit of Islam (his bow-tied entourage). considering how many whites are skeered to come to the Black side of town ignorance about such things is common.

Your post is incongruent due to your ignorance and defensiveness.

[Lizard]

Your post is incongruent due to your ignorance and defensiveness.

:offtopic:

Oh, the irony.....:irony:

[Jackie Fox]

:offtopic:

Oh, the irony.....:irony:

Like others in the cult you are confused abut what "irony" is.

[Jackie Fox]

I agree. These things are also biased towards a specific ethnic group. Do you now concede the Obamah's church is biased? (not asking if this bias is good, bad or indifferent, just an acknowledgment that it exist. I have not made a value judgment on anything on this thread, related to Obamah's church)

It seems the right wing wants a double standard when it comes to class and race. You don't see Huckabee's church under such scrutiny.

[JonLanceBarker]

furiously floundering again, miss fox? :rasberry:

[Thomas More]

Your post is incongruent due to your ignorance and defensiveness.

No, your post are drivvle incapable of moving outside repeating "You's peeples be ingnant" instead of actually engaging in any dialogue.

@ Jimmy

Racial identity and religion has already mixed and produced an ugly half breed called Identity Christians.

[Lizard]

It seems the right wing wants a double standard when it comes to class and race. You don't see Huckabee's church under such scrutiny.
So, are you admitting that Obamah's church has a clear predilection for a specific race/ethnicity?

[Jackie Fox]

furiously floundering again, miss fox? :rasberry:

You need to stay away from the insectide when you go to the hardware store.

[Jackie Fox]

So, are you admitting that Obamah's church has a clear predilection for a specific race/ethnicity?

Not in any different form than a Polish Catholic Church which offers a trip to Warsaw on Air Polska as the grand prize in Bingo.

[Lizard]

Not in any different form than a Polish Catholic Church which offers a trip to Warsaw on Air Polska as the grand prize in Bingo.

I'll take that as a yes.

[Jackie Fox]

I'll take that as a yes.

My concern is the white right-wing attack on Obama's church is a matter of racism, as such attacks on the Polish Catholic church in the same manner are not done.

[Trout]

My concern is the white right-wing attack on Obama's church is a matter of racism, as such attacks on the Polish Catholic church in the same manner are not done.

Well, I guess we can add racist to Jackie's many other qualities.

[Jackie Fox]

Well, I guess we can add racist to Jackie's many other qualities.

A serious charge. Any proof, or, just more pandering to the crowd?

[Ægōthǔlian]

Does anyone else think the "Bradley Effect" explains obama's loss of New Hampshire?

[Thomas More]

My concern is the white right-wing attack on Obama's church is a matter of racism, as such attacks on the Polish Catholic church in the same manner are not done.

How many Polish church's are Unabashidly Polish, have a “non-negotiable commitment to Poland", say that the US was punished for Racism on 9-11 and that evul Joos oppress innocent Palistinians because of racism. Find me the Polish Church that does those things and whose pastor hangs around with anti-semetic nut jobs then your straw man may have some validity.

[Lizard]

My concern is the white right-wing attack on Obama's church is a matter of racism, as such attacks on the Polish Catholic church in the same manner are not done.
I did not attack Obamah's church I just found some information on the church's website, and made an observation.

You said:

He's UCC. The concecpt Trinity Church is "somewhat racially biased" is a slur.

So, are your comments about Polish Catholic churches also a slur?

[lao tzu]

Does anyone else think the "Bradley Effect" explains obama's loss of New Hampshire?

Yes. See Getting it Wrong / Andrew Kohut (http://www.nytimes.com/2008/01/10/opinion/10kohut.html?em&ex=1200200400&en=052def808ec8ac80&ei=5087%0A) and my thread Race, polls, and Obama (http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showthread.php?t=107035).

[Jackie Fox]

Does anyone else think the "Bradley Effect" explains obama's loss of New Hampshire?

Not in that case, though to some degree it was in play in Harold Ford's loss to Bob Corker in Tennessee in 2006. In this case the increase in HRC's votes was due to positive regard for her, not negative regard for Obama.

[Jackie Fox]

How many Polish church's are Unabashidly Polish, have a “non-negotiable commitment to Poland", say that the US was punished for Racism on 9-11 and that evul Joos oppress innocent Palistinians because of racism. Find me the Polish Church that does those things and whose pastor hangs around with anti-semetic nut jobs then your straw man may have some validity.

I believe your distorted characterization of Obama's church is incorrect. Israeli (not Jewish, there's a big difference) oppression of Palestinians is a fact. We did, during the Cold War, have Polish Catholic Churches which supported Soldidarity dissidents.

To oppose the policies of the Israeli government is not in any form to be anti-Semitic.

[Jackie Fox]

I did not attack Obamah's church I just found some information on the church's website, and made an observation.

The fact that his church is under such scrutiny is evidence of racism, not necessarily by you.

So, are your comments about Polish Catholic churches also a slur?

I only made an observation like you did. The only difference is my views are not approved by the clicque here.

[Thomas More]

I believe your distorted characterization of Obama's church is incorrect. Israeli (not Jewish, there's a big difference) oppression of Palestinians is a fact. We did, during the Cold War, have Polish Catholic Churches which supported Soldidarity dissidents.

To oppose the policies of the Israeli government is not in any form to be anti-Semitic.

The Solidarity movement in Poland is not comparable in any way shape or form to the violent, totalitarian Islamic supremacy that the P.A. puts out. You still have yet to provide an example of the Polish Church who is

Unabashidly Polish, have a “non-negotiable commitment to Poland", say that the US was punished for Racism on 9-11, that evul Joos oppress innocent Palistinians because of racism, and whose pastor hangs around with anti-semetic nut jobs.

Calling them Zionist and racist because they have the audacity to defend themselves against people who want them dead is anti-semetic.

[Lizard]

The fact that his church is under such scrutiny is evidence of racism, not necessarily by you.



I only made an observation like you did. The only difference is my views are not approved by the clicque here.

So you made a slur?

[JonLanceBarker]

You need to stay away from the insectide when you go to the hardware store.

you'd think a "lawyer" could spell "insecticide." :hehe:

[Pilgrim]

The fact that his church is under such scrutiny is evidence of racism, not necessarily by you.

That's just silly. Any responsible voter will study the positions, philosophy, and religions of any candidate that is on the ballot. You're reaching and trying to make a racial issue when there isn't necessarily one which arguably shows that racism is a more of a problem you need to deal with yourself.

Having said that, I have seen, especially on FOX, Obama's race unfairly judged.

[Jackie Fox]

The Solidarity movement in Poland is not comparable in any way shape or form to the violent, totalitarian Islamic supremacy that the P.A. puts out. You still have yet to provide an example of the Polish Church who is

I have not made such a comparison. Solidarity was fighting for Polish workers. There are legitimate grievences of the Palestinians against the Israeli government, though less so under Labor governments than Likud.

Calling them Zionist and racist because they have the audacity to defend themselves against people who want them dead is anti-semetic.

No what is anti-semitic is oppression. Building settements for extremists to use them to buffer is an unfortunate occurrance, not related to Judaism. Of course it is no different from what we did to Native Americans.

FYI, Arabs are Semites as well as Jews.

[Jackie Fox]

That's just silly. Any responsible voter will study the positions, philosophy, and religions of any candidate that is on the ballot. You're reaching and trying to make a racial issue when there isn't necessarily one which arguably shows that racism is a more of a problem you need to deal with yourself.

Having said that, I have seen, especially on FOX, Obama's race unfairly judged.

On FOX you'll see every prominent Democrat's group affiliations unfairly judged.

Obama's church is no different from most African-American churches in the statement of purpose, they just spell it out and others don't. The entire topic is designed to spur fear.

[JonLanceBarker]

still floundering, i see. :b_dance:

[Jackie Fox]

still floundering, i see. :b_dance:

In other words I have stymied you in your pursuit to ingratiate yourself with the clicque by knocking down your arguments forthwith.

[JonLanceBarker]

In other words I have stymied you in your pursuit to ingratiate yourself with the clicque by knocking down your arguments forthwith.

dearie, dearie, dearie...you seem to be confusing me with someone else.

i haven't made any "arguments," i've simply been taunting you.

i am simply content to annoy and discredit Your Ridiculous Highness. (i do not mean "royalty" when i say "highness.") :wink:

[Thomas More]

I have not made such a comparison. Solidarity was fighting for Polish workers. There are legitimate grievences of the Palestinians against the Israeli government, though less so under Labor governments than Likud.



No what is anti-semitic is oppression. Building settements for extremists to use them to buffer is an unfortunate occurrance, not related to Judaism. Of course it is no different from what we did to Native Americans.

FYI, Arabs are Semites as well as Jews.

Originally posted by Jackie Fox
I believe your distorted characterization of Obama's church is incorrect. Israeli (not Jewish, there's a big difference) oppression of Palestinians is a fact. We did, during the Cold War, have Polish Catholic Churches which supported Soldidarity dissidents.

If you did not such thing why try to link them? The Palestinian grievences will not be resoved because the moderate Palestinians left long ago for greener pastures or were killed by those Palestinian hardliners. It is the same all over the Muslim world. The only difference between Labour and Likud is Likud will protest the dismemberment of Isreal.

No anti Semitism is forcing Jews out of their homes in favour of people who not only call for their deaths now but activly supported their extermination in Europe.

As a member of the Choctaw nation I would be very interested in your rendition of the revisionist blather about how my people are a bunch of stupid sheep who were taken advantage of by mean white men who were smarter than us.

[Jackie Fox]

dearie, dearie, dearie...you seem to be confusing me with someone else.

i haven't made any "arguments," i've simply been taunting you.

i am simply content to annoy and discredit Your Ridiculous Highness. (i do not mean "royalty" when i say "highness.") :wink:

Of course you have because you are incapable of rationally discussing the issues.

[Jackie Fox]

Originally posted by Jackie Fox
I believe your distorted characterization of Obama's church is incorrect. Israeli (not Jewish, there's a big difference) oppression of Palestinians is a fact. We did, during the Cold War, have Polish Catholic Churches which supported Soldidarity dissidents.

If you did not such thing why try to link them? The Palestinian grievences will not be resoved because the moderate Palestinians left long ago for greener pastures or were killed by those Palestinian hardliners. It is the same all over the Muslim world. The only difference between Labour and Likud is Likud will protest the dismemberment of Isreal.

No anti Semitism is forcing Jews out of their homes in favour of people who not only call for their deaths now but activly supported their extermination in Europe.

As a member of the Choctaw nation I would be very interested in your rendition of the revisionist blather about how my people are a bunch of stupid sheep who were taken advantage of by mean white men who were smarter than us.

You have chosen to say I said things which i did not say because of your poor rhetorical skills.

"Israel" is at best an artificial state and claims it's been "dismembered" when post-1967 borders are deemed imperialistic are laughable. Whatever it was in ancient times is irrelevant to what it is now.

If you went willingly on the Trail of Tears you must be 187 years old. That might explain the senility of thought. So you're an Apple, huh?

[JonLanceBarker]

Of course you have because you are incapable of rationally discussing the issues.

:rofl:

:no: YOU are incapable of said activity.

i simply do not wish to waste my time rehashing what many of my betters have already said.

it is sufficient for me to point out your delusion in these matters, and move on. :lolo:

[Pilgrim]

Take your fight elsewhere. Let's stay on topic here. This is your only warning.

[Jackie Fox]

Attacks on Obama's church are primarily racist. Were it not for the cowardice and malice of the white racists they would not be made.

[Lizard]

Attacks on Obama's church are primarily racist. Were it not for the cowardice and malice of the white racists they would not be made.

Can you show me one place in this thread where anyone "attacked" Obama's church? (I have not read the entire thread, so there may be an "attack" but I have not seen one).

There was a comment that Obama's church may be somewhat racially biased. That was an observation, not an attack.

[Jimmy Higgins]

Can you show me one place in this thread where anyone "attacked" Obama's church? (I have not read the entire thread, so there may be an "attack" but I have not seen one).

There was a comment that Obama's church may be somewhat racially biased. That was an observation, not an attack.Actually, as you admitted yourself, it appeared to be an attack, though you claim that that was what you meant when you said racial bias (http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showpost.php?p=2199562&postcount=39). Using loose language like that can easily be misconstrued as being an attack as claiming racial bias rarely ever has a "neutral" meaning. I understand that you didn't mean it that way and I get that, but it could/was easily misunderstood.

[historic salve]

Having said that, I have seen, especially on FOX, Obama's race unfairly judged.
Would you vote for a smoker as president? (http://youtube.com/watch?v=ouKJixL--ms) :hehe:

[Jimmy Higgins]

That's just silly. Any responsible voter will study the positions, philosophy, and religions of any candidate that is on the ballot. You're reaching and trying to make a racial issue when there isn't necessarily one which arguably shows that racism is a more of a problem you need to deal with yourself.But references to his church via websites and emails aren't exactly designed and aimed at "responsible voters" nor are they harmless claims. It's a smear campaign designed for the undecided (irresponsible?) voter who is easily swayed by stuff they believe has authority because it came in an email or is found on a website. Certainly a majority of people won't be swayed by this, but the fact remains that this material is out there to take votes away from Obama.

[Jimmy Higgins]

Would you vote for a smoker as president? (http://youtube.com/watch?v=ouKJixL--ms) :hehe:
You know there are people who still get their news on that channel for one reason or another. What type of idiot would you need to be to be able to be lied or manipulated so easily?

[Lizard]

Actually, as you admitted yourself, it appeared to be an attack, though you claim that that was what you meant when you said racial bias (http://www.theologyweb.com/campus/showpost.php?p=2199562&postcount=39). Using loose language like that can easily be misconstrued as being an attack as saying "racial bias" rarely ever has a "neutral" meaning.

There is a far cry from something that may "appear" to be a negative comment, and an attack.

My church needs to work on outreach to the community more (a negative comment, not an attack).

And it appears that everyone here acknowledges that Obama's church, does in fact show a deference for a single ethnic/racial group. That is not an attack, I have not said that this is wrong (nor have I said this is right, this is IMO a Church issue and not a political one, thus not fit for the Civics forum).

[Pilgrim]

still floundering, i see. :b_dance:

Just a nit pick: the word is actually foundering. As in when a boat founders in the water. floundering is what one does with a gig when wants fish for supper.

[SteveF]

Here's an interesting take on this story that I'm not sure has been mentioned. The head of Obama's church is a certain Rev. Jeremiah Wright who has some interesting connections:

Obama has long had a close association with the head of his church, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, who appears to be a pretty complex figure (Jonathan Raban recently wrote an interesting and sympathetic account of Wright and of the relationship between Wright and Obama.) Some aspects of Wright's ministry and his ideas seem to be inspiring--by Obama's own account, he found Wright a major source of inspiration himself. Others are quirky or problematic, and some are downright ugly.

For example, Rev. Wright is an enthusiastic admirer of the poisonous and appalling Louis Farrakhan, head of the Nation of Islam. Aside from Farrakhan's notorious anti-semitism, homophobic bigotry, and anti-white racism, he is a supporter of various foreign dictatorships and a long-time apologist for Sudanese regime, which has been guilty of crimes against black Africans that include slavery and genocidal mass murder. And all that is just for starters. (Back when Malcolm X was assassinated by the Nation of Islam, which at that point was still run by its founder Elijah Muhammad, Farrakhan immediately praised the murder, and he may even have had a direct hand in setting it up.)

This commentary (along with the text of a NYT article on the subject) is from Jeff Weintraub's blog. Jeff is a political scientist at the University of Pennsylvania and is always worth reading, irrespective of political position. He finishes his article by saying:

Given Obama's record, I do expect that in responding to this issue he will do the right thing, somehow or other. But it will be a genuinely difficult test of Obama's political skill and integrity. If he doesn't clearly and explicitly repudiate Farrakhan at some point, that will be outrageous (and politically damaging, as it should be). This is a serious moral issue, which Obama should not and cannot evade. But it will be tricky to repudiate Farrakhan with any degree of clarity and honesty without, at the same time, offending some people in the black community (including Rev. Wright and his congregation). That will take finesse, and I wish him luck.

http://jeffweintraub.blogspot.com/2008/01/obamas-farrakhan-test.html

[Jackie Fox]

You know there are people who still get their news on that channel for one reason or another. What type of idiot would you need to be to be able to be lied or manipulated so easily?

The kind who votes for a Presidential Candidate on the basis of which candidate he'd rather drink a beer with?

[Jackie Fox]

Here's an interesting take on this story that I'm not sure has been mentioned. The head of Obama's church is a certain Rev. Jeremiah Wright who has some interesting connections...

Interestingly, Rev. Wright made some negative comments about Obama running for President which if I recall correctly concerned the fact he did not believe the church as a body should support Obama in that endeavour.

Farrakhan is essentially a straw man for white racists. Yes, he is an an antisemite, a homophobe, a UFO enthusiast, and a former Calypso singer called "Calypso Louie". However, that does not negate the tremendous self-help resources Black Muslim Communities have provided otherwise marginal people and allowed them to turn their lives around. Farrakhan is one of many minority leaders who are questionable to white middle class society but admired by people at the bottom because they stand up to raw, naked power.

IOW, he's the Black Pat Robertson. It's kind of like the final line of Rutledge's song "Rum, Gold, and Slaves" from "1776": "Hail Boston! Hail Charleston! Who stinketh the most?"

[Thomas More]

You have chosen to say I said things which i did not say because of your poor rhetorical skills.

"Israel" is at best an artificial state and claims it's been "dismembered" when post-1967 borders are deemed imperialistic are laughable. Whatever it was in ancient times is irrelevant to what it is now.

If you went willingly on the Trail of Tears you must be 187 years old. That might explain the senility of thought. So you're an Apple, huh?

Rhetoric is certainly not your strong suit, unelss chanting mantra counts as rhetoric nowadays.


Isreal is not less artifical than Palistine, Trans Jordon, Turkish Syria, Judea, or any of the other names conquerers have placed on it. Isreals 1967 border is correct for the best reasons of all. It has their troops all over it.

My ancestors walked the trail and ended up in northern Mexico.

On another note I have put up with your mindelss trolling gracefully until now. I don't often pull myself out of retirement to give someone my attention, so in many respects the battle is already over and you have won. Savour that statement, fattie, because I'm fairly sure you're not used to the concept. Your secret combination of seventeen varieties of flailing and genetic deficiency is an irresistible siren song for those such as myself- those too polite to laugh at the antics of retards in public, but more than willing to do so in the sweet, sweet anonymity of the internet. I have been drawn out like a bear baited, like a curmudgeonly moth to the most banal of flames.

Now that we have that out of the way, let's get down to the meat of the sandwich. Why did you suppose, after your umpteen years of unceasing and total failure at everything you have ever tried or done, that laying misspelled and incoherent hate on a forum would receive anything more than the most dismal of receptions? Is pattern recognition not your thing? That first, lumpy, corn-studded turd you left on this thread is not the products of an adequate mind; it is the turgid mental detritus of someone who is most profoundly sub-normal. We all make mistakes, and these things can be forgiven. Obesity is also commonplace. But you cross the line dividing "stupid mistake" from "full-on recessive". And, boy, did you cross it. Pumping-your-crazy-legs-rolling-full-tilt-into-deep-Tardsberg crossed it. People, smart people with advanced degrees in dressing themselves and super-doctorates in not requiring adult diapers, have indicated that your flailing antics have not only ceased to amuse, but actually never amused in the first place, and in fact create a sort of depressing "anti-amusement" that makes kittens die. Every one of your posts makes us sad inside, and kills literally dozens of fluffy, newborn kittens. Yet, you ignore the sage advice of your mental elders and continue to tearfully pound the keyboard with your enormous ego-wang. Why?
So, in summary, the steps to a better tomorrow:

1: Desist in your indignant spittle-laced flailings on this forum.

2: Get off my internet.

[JonLanceBarker]

Just a nit pick: the word is actually foundering. As in when a boat founders in the water. floundering is what one does with a gig when wants fish for supper.

thanks. is it possible for "floundering" to mean "flopping around like a fish?" :smile:

[Jackie Fox]

Isreal is not less artifical than Palistine, Trans Jordon, Turkish Syria, Judea, or any of the other names conquerers have placed on it. Isreals 1967 border is correct for the best reasons of all. It has their troops all over it.

There's no need for protection of a theocratic state where religious fanatics are given special exemption from military service. Democrats protect it due to Jewish voters, now Republicans allied themselves with the Likud due to christian extremists in their own ranks.

My ancestors walked the trail and ended up in northern Mexico.

You can keep on going if you wish.

On another note I have put up with your mindelss trolling gracefully until now. I don't often pull myself out of retirement to give someone my attention, so in many respects the battle is already over and you have won. Savour that statement, fattie, because I'm fairly sure you're not used to the concept. Your secret combination of seventeen varieties of flailing and genetic deficiency is an irresistible siren song for those such as myself- those too polite to laugh at the antics of retards in public, but more than willing to do so in the sweet, sweet anonymity of the internet. I have been drawn out like a bear baited, like a curmudgeonly moth to the most banal of flames.

Now that we have that out of the way, let's get down to the meat of the sandwich. Why did you suppose, after your umpteen years of unceasing and total failure at everything you have ever tried or done, that laying misspelled and incoherent hate on a forum would receive anything more than the most dismal of receptions? Is pattern recognition not your thing? That first, lumpy, corn-studded turd you left on this thread is not the products of an adequate mind; it is the turgid mental detritus of someone who is most profoundly sub-normal. We all make mistakes, and these things can be forgiven. Obesity is also commonplace. But you cross the line dividing "stupid mistake" from "full-on recessive". And, boy, did you cross it. Pumping-your-crazy-legs-rolling-full-tilt-into-deep-Tardsberg crossed it. People, smart people with advanced degrees in dressing themselves and super-doctorates in not requiring adult diapers, have indicated that your flailing antics have not only ceased to amuse, but actually never amused in the first place, and in fact create a sort of depressing "anti-amusement" that makes kittens die. Every one of your posts makes us sad inside, and kills literally dozens of fluffy, newborn kittens. Yet, you ignore the sage advice of your mental elders and continue to tearfully pound the keyboard with your enormous ego-wang. Why?
So, in summary, the steps to a better tomorrow:

1: Desist in your indignant spittle-laced flailings on this forum.

2: Get off my internet.

That's the best you can do? That's mighty pathetic. If I have disturbed one as weak intellectually and morally as yourself that's refreshing, but in the cast of characters here it's obvious you're hadly even an extra.

[JonLanceBarker]

blah blah blah, blah blah blah blah....:rant:

[The Curtmudgeon]

Just a nit pick: the word is actually foundering. As in when a boat founders in the water. floundering is what one does with a gig when wants fish for supper.

Just a second-order nit pick: The word is actually 'floundering', with an 'l'.

floun·der1 /ˈflaʊndər/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[floun-der] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–verb (used without object) 1. to struggle with stumbling or plunging movements (usually fol. by about, along, on, through, etc.): He saw the child floundering about in the water.
2. to struggle clumsily or helplessly: He floundered helplessly on the first day of his new job.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Origin: 1570–80; perh. b. flounce1 and founder2]

'Foundering' (without an 'l') means "capsizing" as you mention (and, as noted in the citation, might have contribute to the formation of the word 'flounder' in this sense), but I strongly doubt Jon was talking about boats.

The (sorry, that nit's on my pet peeve list) Curtmudgeon

[JonLanceBarker]

thanks, Curtmudgeon, that's precisely what i meant. :thumb:

[Jackie Fox]

blah blah blah, blah blah blah blah....:rant:

LOL!:lol:

[Jackie Fox]

Just a second-order nit pick: The word is actually 'floundering', with an 'l'.

floun·der1 /ˈflaʊndər/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[floun-der] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–verb (used without object) 1. to struggle with stumbling or plunging movements (usually fol. by about, along, on, through, etc.): He saw the child floundering about in the water.
2. to struggle clumsily or helplessly: He floundered helplessly on the first day of his new job.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Origin: 1570–80; perh. b. flounce1 and founder2]

'Foundering' (without an 'l') means "capsizing" as you mention (and, as noted in the citation, might have contribute to the formation of the word 'flounder' in this sense), but I strongly doubt Jon was talking about boats.

The (sorry, that nit's on my pet peeve list) Curtmudgeon

No "floundering" is to respond as Stephen Furst's character Kent "Flounder" Dorfman did in Animal House as he was told by "Otter" (Tim Matheson): "You @#$%ed up. You trusted us."

Disguised profanity is not allowed

[JonLanceBarker]

No "floundering" is to respond as Stephen Furst's character Kent "Flounder" Dorfman did in Animal House as he was told by "Otter" (Tim Matheson): "edited by a moderator. You trusted us."

straight from the infallibility of dictionary.com...:hehe:

[Lazarus]

Here's an interesting take on this story that I'm not sure has been mentioned. The head of Obama's church is a certain Rev. Jeremiah Wright who has some interesting connections:


This commentary (along with the text of a NYT article on the subject) is from Jeff Weintraub's blog. Jeff is a political scientist at the University of Pennsylvania and is always worth reading, irrespective of political position. He finishes his article by saying:


http://jeffweintraub.blogspot.com/2008/01/obamas-farrakhan-test.html

I was just wondering if Mrs. Clinton or any of the other candidates have ever publicly repudiated Louis Farrakhan. If Mrs. Clinton did repudiate Mr. Farrakhan, how do you think it would influence her standing in the Black community?

[Pilgrim]

Just a second-order nit pick: The word is actually 'floundering', with an 'l'.

floun·der1 /ˈflaʊndər/ Pronunciation Key - Show Spelled Pronunciation[floun-der] Pronunciation Key - Show IPA Pronunciation
–verb (used without object) 1. to struggle with stumbling or plunging movements (usually fol. by about, along, on, through, etc.): He saw the child floundering about in the water.
2. to struggle clumsily or helplessly: He floundered helplessly on the first day of his new job.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Origin: 1570–80; perh. b. flounce1 and founder2]

'Foundering' (without an 'l') means "capsizing" as you mention (and, as noted in the citation, might have contribute to the formation of the word 'flounder' in this sense), but I strongly doubt Jon was talking about boats.

The (sorry, that nit's on my pet peeve list) Curtmudgeon

Fair enough. I'm guessing you're right about foundering contributing to floundering. Especially since flounders don't actually flop around clumsily. But I guess when something becomes common usage it eventually becomes correct usage as well.

[SteveF]

I was just wondering if Mrs. Clinton or any of the other candidates have ever publicly repudiated Louis Farrakhan. If Mrs. Clinton did repudiate Mr. Farrakhan, how do you think it would influence her standing in the Black community?

Dunno. He has repudiated him though!:

I decry racism and anti-Semitism in every form and strongly condemn the anti-Semitic statements made by Minister Farrakhan. I assume that Trumpet Magazine made its own decision to honor Farrakhan based on his efforts to rehabilitate ex-offenders, but it is not a decision with which I agree.

http://tpmelectioncentral.com/2008/01/obama_responds_to_richard_cohen_column_about_his_church_and_farrakhan.php

[Jackie Fox]

straight from the infallibility of dictionary.com...:hehe:

Your contribution here is a net negative. You post such things because you lack rhetorical skills to post things of value.

[Jackie Fox]

I was just wondering if Mrs. Clinton or any of the other candidates have ever publicly repudiated Louis Farrakhan. If Mrs. Clinton did repudiate Mr. Farrakhan, how do you think it would influence her standing in the Black community?

Negatively, just like McCain and Romney making negative statements about the "Minutemen" would harm them electorally.

[Lightknight]

Except the main media didn't make this mistake. Maybe you should be much more careful how you get your information. *sigh* but the media did make that mistake, which I why newspapers editors had to apologize at all.

You call these sources?! Well, yes. I called them unreliable sources. Anything wrong with that? I was trying to establish that there was a public belief that Obama AND the other guy used a Qu`ran to be sworn in. I think those sources are at least good enough to show that a lot of people were fooled by the mistake being made in numerous local columns.

The media as in small time papers and whatnot, not media in general. Learning process? Just how many people in the US know what they know about Obama from that stinking pile of lies that was the spam email? America can be pathetic when it comes to being informed.Did you read what I said? Here, let me quote myself for you.

"I have come to the conclusion that Obama must not have sworn in on the Qu`ran, as none of the sources are major news companies"

The papers that made the mistake were local companies like the local papers and newschannels. It was spoken about in some classrooms (particularly in Islamic courses) the next day as a result and when people who are really high in their field are fooled for at least a few days, then the general populace might never be set right.

What you saw in the entirety of my post was my learning process. Me going online and pulling together whatever I could find and learning, in the end, that this was probably a lie that was spread to some pretty gullible people that reporters trusted.

[JonLanceBarker]

Your contribution here is a net negative. You post such things because you lack rhetorical skills to post things of value.

you're not worth the effort of good rhetoric.

such work is done already. :hehe:

[Jackie Fox]

you're not worth the effort of good rhetoric.

such work is done already. :hehe:

You might want to look into Matthew 5:22.

[decoski]

Obama is the cult leader of his own religion. Just look at his following of mesmerized sheep who will applaud his vapid speeches and merely at his sneezing of all things: http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/news/politics/blog/2008/02/even_blowing_his_nose_obama_ge.html

[Pilgrim]

Obama is the cult leader of his own religion. Just look at his following of mesmerized sheep who will applaud his vapid speeches and merely at his sneezing of all things: http://weblogs.baltimoresun.com/news/politics/blog/2008/02/even_blowing_his_nose_obama_ge.html

Come on Dekoski, keep on topic here. You're really slowing down cubby. Seriously if this is the best you have then it must really be a sad time for you as far as politics are concerned. Hey, but anything to distract from McCain's lady friend eh?

[decoski]

Come on Dekoski, keep on topic here. You're really slowing down cubby. Seriously if this is the best you have then it must really be a sad time for you as far as politics are concerned. Hey, but anything to distract from McCain's lady friend eh?

The topic is Obama's religion, not McCain's ALLEGED pants drop. I'm not a McCain fan, but I'm not going to go there without some sort of evidence. So far, it looks like another liberal hit piece by the New York Times.

[Pilgrim]

The topic is Obama's religion, not McCain's ALLEGED pants drop. I'm not a McCain fan, but I'm not going to go there without some sort of evidence. So far, it looks like another liberal hit piece by the New York Times.

Oh yeah, and your little cult comment was so much more deep than a hit piece. Riiiigggghhtttt.

[decoski]

Oh yeah, and your little cult comment was so much more deep than a hit piece. Riiiigggghhtttt.

Thousands of people are jamming stadiums for a message with no specifics, just utopian, feel-good nonsense. People fainting right and left, clapping at the mere sneeze of the man. Do you deny that this is not cult-like? The man could easily start a cult and have a following.

[Ægōthǔlian]

Thousands of people are jamming stadiums for a message with no specifics, just utopian, feel-good nonsense. People fainting right and left, clapping at the mere sneeze of the man. Do you deny that this is not cult-like? The man could easily start a cult and have a following.

Obama does go on specific details on policy and action plans in he speeches. His website is very detailed on his plans for America, the perception that he lacks details probably comes from people tuning out of the middle of his speeches, only listening to his brief stump speeches, the perceptions promoted by his political rivals, etc. I do get the feeling when listening to the man that he does come on as messianic, I don't understand exactly what makes his charisma so powerful, perhaps few Americans actually knew that there are black people that are articulate speakers and are blown away in awe by a young black man that does not speak in Ebonics? Just saying, America is still very racist, perhaps that racism is what is fueling his success (lowered expectations?)? The very fact his religion is questioned to be Muslim probably would not have happened if he was white.

[RockRaider]

From TUCC website Talking Points (http://www.tucc.org/talking_points.htm)
The vision statement of Trinity United Church of Christ is based upon the systematized liberation theology that started in 1969 with the publication of Dr. James Cone’s book, Black Power and Black Theology.

This is what James Cone, the man who Obama`s senior spiritual advisor looks up to and whose ideas he preaches, states as black liberation theology. Listen carefully and please follow along.

"Black theology refuses to accept a God who is not identified totally with the goals of the black community. If God is not for us and against white people, then he is a murderer, and we had better kill him. The task of black theology is to kill gods who do not belong to the black community. Black theology will accept only the love of God which participates in the destruction of the white enemy. What we need is the divine love as expressed in black power which is the power of black people to destroy their opinion pressers here and now by any means at their disposal. Unless God is participating in this holy activity, we must reject his love."

IF the above quote of Cone's book is accurate, then the basis of Wright's comments regarding Cone's statements as central in the vision of TUCC is hard to back pedal away from.

And Wright is not Obama's grandfather or uncle -- crying that we all have a crazy uncle/granddad is not going to get him out of this one. Granddads and uncles we are born with (maybe not in the case of uncles, yet, we still have ZERO personal choice in them), spiritual advisers are those you choose to affiliate yourself with. He chose to affiliate and remain affiliated with Wright.

[Nikos]

He is definitely a black muslim!!!!!

[Mudflap]

He is definitely a black muslim!!!!! :doh:Did you miss that whole Reverend Wright thing? His Christian minister caused all that controversy and he had to leave the church? It was all over the news...

[JonLanceBarker]

He is definitely a black muslim!!!!!

Go home, n00b. :brood:

[Pilgrim]

Guys, Nikos is a troll. Please don't feed him.

[Nikos]

In the Muslim religion a child who is born takes the religion of his grandfather and father. Obama's Grandfather was a practicing Muslim and his father was a Muslim. He regularly attended the Mosque when he was young. Today he denies that but history speaks. He lies about it in order to get the Presidency.

Don't trust him!!

[Pilgrim]

In the Muslim religion a child who is born takes the religion of his grandfather and father. Obama's Grandfather was a practicing Muslim and his father was a Muslim. He regularly attended the Mosque when he was young. Today he denies that but history speaks. He lies about it in order to get the Presidency.

Don't trust him!!

Nikoz, you're fast becoming the laughing stock of the entire board. But for the sake or argument, even though we all know that Sen. Obama is not Muslim. Are you really racist enough to say that it should matter for a president? The framers were clear that there should be no religious test for holding public office.

That you think there should be shows that your understanding and opinion of the matter are antithetical to American values and politics. Maybe you ought to move somewhere where bigotry against religion and race is a more accepted practice. If I had a time machine I'd suggest Germany in in 1938.


Oh, and by the way, in my very own congregation we have folks who had Muslim parents and are now themselves practicing Christians. In a pluralistic society like ours it's not always about what dad did. Each generation has the opportunity to make it's own way. Now, please stop acting like a 5 year old. When you grow we'll let you have your chance too mkay?

[Nikos]

What matters is that Obama lies about his past. Maybe it does not mean anything to you, but for me I don't want a man who lies in the presidency! This speaks of his character and shows he is not qualified to serve as the leader of this great country.

Since I started to post my opinions on this forum you have belittled me as if my opinions don't count. You may not agree with me but I have every right to express my opinion just as others express theirs. I am strongly anti Obama and why do you get so upset when I express that?

[Pilgrim]

What matters is that Obama lies about his past. Maybe it does not mean anything to you, but for me I don't want a man who lies in the presidency! This speaks of his character and shows he is not qualified to serve as the leader of this great country.

Since I started to post my opinions on this forum you have belittled me as if my opinions don't count. You may not agree with me but I have every right to express my opinion just as others express theirs. I am strongly anti Obama and why do you get so upset when I express that?

Please Nikos, You're a troll and little more. Your posting style is disruptive and not conducive to the spirit of debate and conversation we hope happens here at TWeb.

Your understanding of the candidate is bigoted, narrow minded, and in point of fact, wrong. Excuse us if we call your opinion for what it is...crap.

No one is upset that you're expressing your opinion. What we're doing is rolling our eyes at a poster whose grasp on the facts is poor and yet who speaks with such certainty about them that he ends up looking foolish.

You've made countless assertions and have not offered even a glimmer of proof on your assertions. This is because you can't. Opinion is one thing. But don't think for a minute that your right to your opinion makes your opinion some how a good one.

Now, be a good boy and head back to the militia compound and let the grown ups talk ok?

[suffer for joy]

Didn't Obama say that there were 'many paths' to God? How does that make him a 'Christ'ian?

[Nikos]

Please Nikos, You're a troll and little more. Your posting style is disruptive and not conducive to the spirit of debate and conversation we hope happens here at TWeb.

Your understanding of the candidate is bigoted, narrow minded, and in point of fact, wrong. Excuse us if we call your opinion for what it is...crap.

No one is upset that you're expressing your opinion. What we're doing is rolling our eyes at a poster whose grasp on the facts is poor and yet who speaks with such certainty about them that he ends up looking foolish.

You've made countless assertions and have not offered even a glimmer of proof on your assertions. This is because you can't. Opinion is one thing. But don't think for a minute that your right to your opinion makes your opinion some how a good one.

Now, be a good boy and head back to the militia compound and let the grown ups talk ok?

You sound like another hotshot who thinks they know it all. You worship at the feet of your opinions which amounts to a bunch of hot air. Why don't you liberals wise up and get with it? I came on here discuss intelligently and you are what I get. yuk!!!!

You obamaites are all the same. An inch deep and a mile wide!!!

[JonLanceBarker]

I'm decidedly NOT an "Obama-ite" and I STILL think you're a troll. :grin:

[MiykaEl]

I've heard that Obama was a Muslim and also that he goes to a somewhat racially biased pro-African American Christian church. Has he said himself what religion he is?


Why should it mattter ?

[Alan3838]

In the Muslim religion a child who is born takes the religion of his grandfather and father. Obama's Grandfather was a practicing Muslim and his father was a Muslim. He regularly attended the Mosque when he was young. Today he denies that but history speaks. He lies about it in order to get the Presidency.

Don't trust him!!

You confuse Obamas right to run for the presidency with his religion. I don't believe he is muslim but even if he is we do have a constitution that does not prohibit him from office based on his religion.

[MiykaEl]

In the Muslim religion a child who is born takes the religion of his grandfather and father. Obama's Grandfather was a practicing Muslim and his father was a Muslim. He regularly attended the Mosque when he was young. Today he denies that but history speaks. He lies about it in order to get the Presidency.

Don't trust him!!



Can You PRODUCE Document / Date / Mosque / Pictures / Birth-date , Name Of The Imam Of Mosque He Attendant , Which Sect Of Muslims He Belong To Etc Etc . To Back Up Your Lie / Claim . Other Then Heresay . No Link's From Any Website Please .

[rogue06]

And for some strange bizarre reason...


A new poll finds that 23 percent of registered voters in Texas believe that Barack Obama is a Muslim, even though the Democratic candidate has repeatedly explained that he is a church-going Christian.

The poll, conducted by the Texas Politics Project and Department of Government at The University of Texas in Austin, showed Obama trailing John McCain by 11 points in the Lone Star State.

Forty-five percent of those polled accurately described Obama as a Protestant. But the 23 percent who identified his religion as Islam is about twice as high as in typical national polls.



Source (http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/10/30/poll-percent-texans-believe-obama-muslim/)

[MiykaEl]

And for some strange bizarre reason...


A new poll finds that 23 percent of registered voters in Texas believe that Barack Obama is a Muslim, even though the Democratic candidate has repeatedly explained that he is a church-going Christian.

The poll, conducted by the Texas Politics Project and Department of Government at The University of Texas in Austin, showed Obama trailing John McCain by 11 points in the Lone Star State.

Forty-five percent of those polled accurately described Obama as a Protestant. But the 23 percent who identified his religion as Islam is about twice as high as in typical national polls.



Source (http://elections.foxnews.com/2008/10/30/poll-percent-texans-believe-obama-muslim/)



When one is loseing , Fear set in and they try all the LIE'S / TRICKS to win , But like they say once a liar always liarrrrr . I would put them pass trying to Steal this one like their counter part bush did .

[Nikos]

If you believe that Obama is a Muslim, then you are absolutely correct. This man BO loves the Muslims and will favor them when in office.

[Lazarus]

If you believe that Obama is a Muslim, then you are absolutely correct. This man BO loves the Muslims and will favor them when in office.

The first sentence in this post is false. The second is unverifiable and designed to instigate fear and suspicion.

[MiykaEl]

The first sentence in this post is false. The second is unverifiable and designed to instigate fear and suspicion.


Fear is something isn't it . But to out right Lie Sinful .. The Republican have been lying for eight years now , Why should they stop now ? They will rather cut off their nose in smite their face .

[laffer]

I suspect Obama might be close to being an agnostic, or at least a very moderate Christian.
It's really nice to have someone like that in office after having had someone quite religious in there for so long.