Obama WILL be the next president

[Fash]

It's not crazy at all. We are in an era of white guilt. Blacks have come out in record numbers to vote for Barack Obama. Geez, I wonder why. Could it be because he's black?

Could it be their god given right? will of the people, and all?... Like someone else said, replace black with anything else and you could say the same.. Women are voting for Clinton, could it be because she's a woman?

A statement like "if he wasn't black he wouldn't be here" is retardation to the extreme... Midnyte, if you weren't a man, you wouldn't be here. see how irrelevant that statement is?

[Funkmasterr]

It's not crazy at all. We are in an era of white guilt. Blacks have come out in record numbers to vote for Barack Obama. Geez, I wonder why. Could it be because he's black?

Could it be their god given right? will of the people, and all?... Like someone else said, replace black with anything else and you could say the same.. Women are voting for Clinton, could it be because she's a woman?

A statement like "if he wasn't black he wouldn't be here" is retardation to the extreme... Midnyte, if you weren't a man, you wouldn't be here. see how irrelevant that statement is?

I see your point but don't think it totally fits this situation. All you have to do is watch BET to see that plenty of people are being encouraged to vote for him because he represents "us" (hint here- by us they don't mean everyone in the country)... I have to imagine that the turn out of teens to 20's black people that will turn out to vote will be a lot higher than ever, and I'd say it's a pretty safe bet that people showing up from XX projects have one reason and one reason only they are turning out to vote.

It might not sound nice but it's the truth, believe it or not.

[Nick]

It's not crazy at all. We are in an era of white guilt. Blacks have come out in record numbers to vote for Barack Obama. Geez, I wonder why. Could it be because he's black?

Probably that does affect some people's choice, but then again some men will vote for McCain because he's a man, and women will vote for Clinton because she's a woman, so what exactly is your fucking point? Do you even know?

[Funkmasterr]

It's not crazy at all. We are in an era of white guilt. Blacks have come out in record numbers to vote for Barack Obama. Geez, I wonder why. Could it be because he's black?

Probably that does affect some people's choice, but then again some men will vote for McCain because he's a man, and women will vote for Clinton because she's a woman, so what exactly is your fucking point? Do you even know?

Those other examples you state do not make the first irrelevant. And I would say that the number of black people that will vote for him solely because he is black is far greater than any of the others. I could be wrong, but I seriously doubt it.

[Forthe]

It's not crazy at all. We are in an era of white guilt. Blacks have come out in record numbers to vote for Barack Obama. Geez, I wonder why. Could it be because he's black?

I have no doubt there is an white guilt\search for redemption factor, but I would think that is counter-balanced by the bigot factor.

Black voters came out in 1992 75-85% for a little known white guy with no experience.

[Forthe]

It's not crazy at all. We are in an era of white guilt. Blacks have come out in record numbers to vote for Barack Obama. Geez, I wonder why. Could it be because he's black?

Probably that does affect some people's choice, but then again some men will vote for McCain because he's a man, and women will vote for Clinton because she's a woman, so what exactly is your fucking point? Do you even know?

Those other examples you state do not make the first irrelevant. And I would say that the number of black people that will vote for him solely because he is black is far greater than any of the others. I could be wrong, but I seriously doubt it.

13% of the US population is black. Odds are you are wrong.

[Fash]

Only 13%? That's surprising... Source?

[Aslanna]

Only 13%? That's surprising... Source?

http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0762156.html for starters. That one is easily researchable.

[Boogahz]

you can also just check the Census site and choose many options while playing with all of their data.

http://factfinder.census.gov/servlet/Th ... &-_dBy=040

12.4% is the estimate there

[Funkmasterr]

Ok, let me rephrase. Proportionately, the percentage of blacks that will vote that way will be more than the other demographics listed. The fact that anyone would even argue against that is silly.

[Truant]

Ok, let me rephrase. Proportionately, the percentage of blacks that will vote that way will be more than the other demographics listed. The fact that anyone would even argue against that is silly.

Backpedal faster!

[Boogahz]

Ok, let me rephrase. Proportionately, the percentage of blacks that will vote that way will be more than the other demographics listed. The fact that anyone would even argue against that is silly.

Backpedal faster!

Backpedal? It's what he said the first time.

Those other examples you state do not make the first irrelevant. And I would say that the number of black people that will vote for him solely because he is black is far greater than any of the others. I could be wrong, but I seriously doubt it.

What does that have to do with the percentage of the population that is black?

[Fash]

What does that have to do with the percentage of the population that is black?

It doesn't change Funk's point, but it does make it less relevant. Even if every single black voted, and only voted for him, they'd amount to < 13% of the entire population. I'd say it's obvious that blacks are not solely responsible for his popularity, and certainly not in control of the election.

[Boogahz]

What does that have to do with the percentage of the population that is black?

It doesn't change Funk's point, but it does make it less relevant. Even if every single black voted, and only voted for him, they'd amount to < 13% of the entire population. I'd say it's obvious that blacks are not solely responsible for his popularity, and certainly not in control of the election.

then the percentage would be 100%

I think his point was fairly obvious

[Sueven]

The point is that it's not possible to win a national election by appealing to blacks. A politician who hopes to boost his or her chances by receiving a lot of the black vote still has to achieve mainstream appeal in the non-black population. This task is made MORE difficult when one is seen as 'the black candidate' or 'popular among blacks' or as representative of black issues. See, for instance: Jesse Jackson, et all.

[Funkmasterr]

What does that have to do with the percentage of the population that is black?

It doesn't change Funk's point, but it does make it less relevant. Even if every single black voted, and only voted for him, they'd amount to < 13% of the entire population. I'd say it's obvious that blacks are not solely responsible for his popularity, and certainly not in control of the election.

If you consider that in the election, what would be an average % of votes for one of the two main candidates to get ? Like 40-50% would be my guess? Say 10% (the african american votes) voted for Obama and he had a total of 40% of the votes (keeping in mind these are percentages of people that voted, not of people in the country).. That isn't a majority but it most certainly isn't insignificant and those numbers of people that are not educated on his stance and vote for him entirely on skin color could very easily sway the vote in his direction.


Edit:
I don't deny this situation could be similar for the Hilary/woman situation, but I don't really buy it as much for McCain/white man, because there are ALWAYS multiple white men to vote for in an election..

[Midnyte_Ragebringer]

The thing I think many of you are not realizing is, this was Hillarys time. If Barack was a white guy named Joe Smith who had a whopping 3 years experience in the Senate, of which he never really took a stance or voted on anything, just talked a good game.....he would not still be in the race. Hillary would have locked it up a long time ago.

Barack is not where he is because of anything he has done. He is there because he is black and a good speaker who says nothign but says it in a sing song manner that puts a trance over the young and dumb.

[Fash]

If you consider that in the election, what would be an average % of votes for one of the two main candidates to get ? Like 40-50% would be my guess? Say 10% (the african american votes) voted for Obama and he had a total of 40% of the votes (keeping in mind these are percentages of people that voted, not of people in the country).. That isn't a majority but it most certainly isn't insignificant and those numbers of people that are not educated on his stance and vote for him entirely on skin color could very easily sway the vote in his direction.

I hear you, but I tend to agree with Forthe... that number would likely be neutralized by the bigot vote.

[Fash]

The thing I think many of you are not realizing is, this was Hillarys time. If Barack was a white guy named Joe Smith who had a whopping 3 years experience in the Senate, of which he never really took a stance or voted on anything, just talked a good game.....he would not still be in the race. Hillary would have locked it up a long time ago.

Then we should all be grateful for his blackness. Hillary is an embarrassment to her gender, her race, and her country... She must not be allowed to win the Presidency.

[Animale]

You read his books Mid (especially the autobiography)? He has way more substance than you have been lead to believe. Of course, since you are a sheep of the right it wouldn't surprise me if you haven't read it, maybe you should go and learn something instead of just parroting the popular lines.

Animale

[Fash]

I still say the "if he wasn't black" argument is completely irrelevant like "if the sky weren't blue"...

Being a woman and former first lady is Hillarys 'black' factor. It only shows how retarded our election system is, you have to have a gimmick to raise money. Keep in mind Ron Paul was 3rd in fund-raising with his 'revolution.'

Unlike last time, all we have this cycle are gimmick candidates.

[Funkmasterr]

You read his books Mid (especially the autobiography)? He has way more substance than you have been lead to believe. Of course, since you are a sheep of the right it wouldn't surprise me if you haven't read it, maybe you should go and learn something instead of just parroting the popular lines.

Animale

I will admit I have not, but as I stated previously if he is the type that wants to make the pity me speeches and play the race card, that immediately eliminates any chance of me taking him seriously as a politician of any sort. That and there are other factors too, but we've been over that and I don't want to revisit reasoning.

[Funkmasterr]

I still say the "if he wasn't black" argument is completely irrelevant like "if the sky weren't blue"...

Being a woman and former first lady is Hillarys 'black' factor. It only shows how retarded our election system is, you have to have a gimmick to raise money. Keep in mind Ron Paul was 3rd in fund-raising with his 'revolution.'

Unlike last time, all we have this cycle are gimmick candidates.

Please tell me that the non gimmick candidate (in your opinion) from the last round wasn't the ketchup guy. Please.

[Midnyte_Ragebringer]

You read his books Mid (especially the autobiography)? He has way more substance than you have been lead to believe. Of course, since you are a sheep of the right it wouldn't surprise me if you haven't read it, maybe you should go and learn something instead of just parroting the popular lines.

Animale

Animale. It isn't about me reading it. I'm not a supporter of his. Ask his supporters why they are voting for him. They don't have any good reasons. They don't know what he's done or what he stands for. THEY haven't read his book.

[Fash]

Please tell me that the non gimmick candidate (in your opinion) from the last round wasn't the ketchup guy. Please.

I didn't consider W or Kerry to be gimmicky. Unless you look at it like... W ran on fear and terror, and Kerry ran on summer footwear.

[Keverian FireCry]

That isn't a majority but it most certainly isn't insignificant and those numbers of people that are not educated on his stance and vote for him entirely on skin color could very easily sway the vote in his direction.

You are likely right about black voters, but if you're going to start looking at elections based on prejudicial voting then there's a LOT more factors to look at than the % of blacks who vote black. How about the growing number of young voters wanting a younger candidate? Men voting against a woman candidate? Latinos voting against black candidate? Don't forget those tricky asians!!

The list goes on and on and on...

[Funkmasterr]

That isn't a majority but it most certainly isn't insignificant and those numbers of people that are not educated on his stance and vote for him entirely on skin color could very easily sway the vote in his direction.

You are likely right about black voters, but if you're going to start looking at elections based on prejudicial voting then there's a LOT more factors to look at than the % of blacks who vote black. How about the growing number of young voters wanting a younger candidate? Men voting against a woman candidate? Latinos voting against black candidate? Don't forget those tricky asians!!

The list goes on and on and on...

You are very likely correct. However there aren't any young, latino or asian candidates running this election. And I covered women in one of my last posts..

[Winnow]

How many people when they first heard of Obama's candidacy did not have a first reaction of "this guy doesn't have a chance in hell"?

Me! I'll admit it.

He still doesn't have a chance (McCain's our next President) but I'm extremely impressed at how the nation has voted (democrats).

[Sylvus]

Barack is not where he is because of anything he has done. He is there because he is black and a good speaker who says nothign but says it in a sing song manner that puts a trance over the young and dumb.

I disagree. If Barack were a white man who were a good public speaker he might still be in the same position that he is now. Right now our choices are Bush III (as I've seen McCain labelled in the media right now), Clinton II (and that's giving her more credit than she deserves, imo) and SOMEONE DIFFERENT. Someone whose voice obviously is resonating with a lot of voters, voters who have been disenfranchised by the current system. Someone who is at least viewed (fairly or not) as not being part of the Washington machine, or at least not as big a part of it as the others are. The idiots who will vote for him strictly because he's black will be more than offset by the idiots who will vote against him strictly because he's black. In 2004, black people made up 11% of the vote. White people over the age of 65 made up 16% of the vote. (source) Being black is not going to have a net positive effect on his campaign, it's one of those things that makes a good news story and the bullshit news shows like to focus on it because it's a shocking sound bite.

Funk said something about 'plenty of [black] people are being encouraged to vote for him because he represents "[black people]"'. That's exactly who someone should vote for: the person who represents them. Not in the sense that they look like you, but in the sense you can relate to them and they will lead in the manner that most fits your beliefs. Which candidate represents you the best, Funk? The grizzled old sexagenarian P.O.W. who was a pretty decent candidate 8 years ago and then had his spirit crushed by the Bush campaign, eventually selling out his beliefs and bowing down to the current administration that has left our country in the shitter? The 60 year-old former hippie turned battle axe with her Yale law degree, history of questionable if not outright shady dealings and 35 years of involvement (not experience, per se, just being around it) in a corrupt system that represents no one other than large corporations and lobbyists? Or the candidate who is most outside the current system, is the closest to being of the same generation as anyone reading this post, has admitted to youthful indiscretions like the rest of us humans, and speaks of hope and change and ideals? I'm not black, but I'm one of "them" that Obama represents.

Those are just my opinions, I'm sure some of you will disagree. But at this point, someone who only had good public speaking skills would still be one qualification up on our current President. And I think Obama has a lot more than "just saying nothing".

[Midnyte_Ragebringer]

Sue,

John Edwards was a different white voice. He didn't get the press coverage and media push that Barack got and continues to get. He is where he is because he has been put there.

[Sylvus]

I will admit I have not, but as I stated previously if he is the type that wants to make the pity me speeches and play the race card, that immediately eliminates any chance of me taking him seriously as a politician of any sort.

Where has he made pity me speeches or played the race card? The race card was played by someone working for his opponent's campaign.

[Sylvus]

Sue,

John Edwards was a different white voice. He didn't get the press coverage and media push that Barack got and continues to get. He is where he is because he has been put there.

Sue? Seriously?

John Edwards didn't get the press coverage this year because he already proved in 2004 that he wasn't even an attractive enough candidate to appear more viable than John Kerry, who lost the Presidential election to an incumbent with some of the worst approval ratings in the history of the Presidency. By the transitive property of logic, I probably have a better shot at becoming commander-in-chief than John Edwards does.

[Fash]

Plus Edwards was a shady trial lawyer who sounded so insincere even his own mother wouldn't buy his line of bull.

[Forthe]

Ok, let me rephrase. Proportionately, the percentage of blacks that will vote that way will be more than the other demographics listed. The fact that anyone would even argue against that is silly.

Backpedal faster!

Backpedal? It's what he said the first time.

Those other examples you state do not make the first irrelevant. And I would say that the number of black people that will vote for him solely because he is black is far greater than any of the others. I could be wrong, but I seriously doubt it.

What does that have to do with the percentage of the population that is black?

If 100% of the black population voted solely on race it would take a much smaller % of other demographics voting purely on the demographic identity (i.e. women voting for Hillary) to surpass the black vote numbers.

[Funkmasterr]

Barack is not where he is because of anything he has done. He is there because he is black and a good speaker who says nothign but says it in a sing song manner that puts a trance over the young and dumb.

I disagree. If Barack were a white man who were a good public speaker he might still be in the same position that he is now. Right now our choices are Bush III (as I've seen McCain labelled in the media right now), Clinton II (and that's giving her more credit than she deserves, imo) and SOMEONE DIFFERENT. Someone whose voice obviously is resonating with a lot of voters, voters who have been disenfranchised by the current system. Someone who is at least viewed (fairly or not) as not being part of the Washington machine, or at least not as big a part of it as the others are. The idiots who will vote for him strictly because he's black will be more than offset by the idiots who will vote against him strictly because he's black. In 2004, black people made up 11% of the vote. White people over the age of 65 made up 16% of the vote. (source) Being black is not going to have a net positive effect on his campaign, it's one of those things that makes a good news story and the bullshit news shows like to focus on it because it's a shocking sound bite.

Funk said something about 'plenty of [black] people are being encouraged to vote for him because he represents "[black people]"'. That's exactly who someone should vote for: the person who represents them. Not in the sense that they look like you, but in the sense you can relate to them and they will lead in the manner that most fits your beliefs. Which candidate represents you the best, Funk? The grizzled old sexagenarian P.O.W. who was a pretty decent candidate 8 years ago and then had his spirit crushed by the Bush campaign, eventually selling out his beliefs and bowing down to the current administration that has left our country in the shitter? The 60 year-old former hippie turned battle axe with her Yale law degree, history of questionable if not outright shady dealings and 35 years of involvement (not experience, per se, just being around it) in a corrupt system that represents no one other than large corporations and lobbyists? Or the candidate who is most outside the current system, is the closest to being of the same generation as anyone reading this post, has admitted to youthful indiscretions like the rest of us humans, and speaks of hope and change and ideals? I'm not black, but I'm one of "them" that Obama represents.

Those are just my opinions, I'm sure some of you will disagree. But at this point, someone who only had good public speaking skills would still be one qualification up on our current President. And I think Obama has a lot more than "just saying nothing".

Of course, why wouldn't they vote for the one that represents them instead of some stupid whitebread honkey mofo? I mean, people like Jesse Jackson and Al Sharpton have done so much for the black community over the past few decades! It's only logical to elect a president who makes comments that sound like something one of those two would say.

The absolute rampant stupidity, ignorance, and self destructive behavior from the black community that continues to be counter-productive to what they think they are fighting for is fucking sick. I guess the point is, I don't feel the need to support or defend their right to be uneducated and ignorant.

This kind of uneducated bullshit is similar to the bullshit that got jesse "the douchebag" ventura elected here in MN.

Obama is selling people a dream world that will never work and never happen, and the people dumb enough to buy into that load of bullshit make up for the rest of the momentum he has gained. I really think without those two factors he would be nowhere.

[Midnyte_Ragebringer]

Obama's Pastor: God Damn America, U.S. to Blame for 9/11
Obama's Pastor, Rev. Jeremiah Wright, Has a History of What Even Obama's Campaign Aides Say Is 'Inflammatory Rhetoric'

Sen. Barack Obama's pastor says blacks should not sing "God Bless America" but "God damn America."

"He has impacted the life of Barack Obama so much so that he wants to portray that feeling he got from Rev. Wright onto the country because we all need something positive," said another member of the congregation.

"The government gives them the drugs, builds bigger prisons, passes a three-strike law and then wants us to sing 'God Bless America.' No, no, no, God damn America, that's in the Bible for killing innocent people," he said in a 2003 sermon. "God damn America for treating our citizens as less than human. God damn America for as long as she acts like she is God and she is supreme."

3 strike law huh? hehe Feeling a bit defense about that one. Interesting.

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,337515,00.html

We are who are friends are. Before you say that isn't true, try and recall if you were one of the folks who bashed Bush based on things Cheney did or said. Before you say that isn't true, try and recall if you were one of the folks who bashed Bush based on his affiliations with Afghanistan, oil moguls, Haliburton, his being a christian(eek! god forbid!).

Have a nice day hypocrites.

So, by the lack of response to this, I take it that hate speech is ok sometimes. Good to know.

[Nick]

Well he was the only one with the foresight to see that the Iraq war would be a total waste of time, so he's substantially less moronic than everyone else in the senate, and half of this board, straight off the bat.

[Ashur]

Bush III (as I've seen McCain labelled in the media right now)

Now who's parroting what the media tells him?

[Sylvus]

So, by the lack of response to this, I take it that hate speech is ok sometimes. Good to know.

Cletus,

Do you even understand what hate speech is? Here's a hint: being critical of the government is not hate speech.

Most people also understand that you can like and respect someone someone without taking every single viewpoint of theirs as your own.

Now who's parroting what the media tells him?

You say that as if I've accused people of parroting. I also don't think it's parroting if you reference the fact that it came from a source outside of yourself. I liked McCain once, specifically in 2000, but he's bent to Bush's will in the last few years. He had to or else risked political suicide, but that doesn't excuse him. And I still think he'd be a much better President than Bush was.

[Midnyte_Ragebringer]

So, by the lack of response to this, I take it that hate speech is ok sometimes. Good to know.

Cletus,

Do you even understand what hate speech is? Here's a hint: being critical of the government is not hate speech.

Most people also understand that you can like and respect someone someone without taking every single viewpoint of theirs as your own.

.

http://www.tucc.org

Dr. Wright’s talking points (3.1.7) for Trinity United Church of Christ its Web site and the Black Value System (in response to Erik Rush’s comments (2.28.07) on the Hannity and Colmes show):

• One of the biggest gaps in knowledge that causes the kind of ignorance that you hear spouted by this man [Erik Rush] and those like him, has to do with the fact that these persons are completely ignorant when it comes to the Black religious tradition. 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.

• Black theology is one of the many theologies in the Americas that became popular during the liberation theology movement. They include Hispanic theology, Native American theology, Asian theology and Womanist theology.

• I use the word “systematized” because Black liberation theology was in existence long before Dr. Cone’s book. It originates in the days of the Trans-Atlantic slave trade. It was systematized and published by theologians, Old Testament scholars, New Testament scholars, ethicists, church historians, and historians of religion such as Dr. James Cone, Dr. Cain Hope Felder, Dr. Gayraud Wilmore, Dr. Jacqueline Grant, Dr. Kelley Brown Douglas, Dr. Renita Weems, Dr. Katie Cannon, Dr. Dwight Hopkins, Dr. Linda Thomas, and Dr. Randall Bailey.

• These scholars, who write in various disciplines, also include seminary presidents like Dr. John Kinney and professors of Hebrew Bible, like Dr. Jerome Ross. Black liberation theology defines Africans and African Americans as subjects – not the objects which colonizers and oppressors have consistently defined “others” as.

• We [African Americans] were always seen as objects. When we started defining ourselves, it scared those who try to control others by naming them and defining them for them; Oppressors do not like “others” defining themselves.

• To have a church whose theological perspective starts from the vantage point of Black liberation theology being its center, is not to say that African or African American people are superior to any one else.

• African-centered thought, unlike Eurocentrism, does not assume superiority and look at everyone else as being inferior.

• There is more than one center from which to view the world. In the words of Dr. Janice Hale, “Difference does not mean deficience.” It is from this vantage point that Black liberation theology speaks.

• Systematized Black liberation theology is 40 years old. Scholars of African and African American religious history show that Black liberation theology, however, has been in existence for 400 years. It is found in the songs, the sermons, the testimonies and the oral literature of Africans throughout the Diaspora.

“There is a man here who can take this country in a new direction,” Wright said during his Jan. 13 sermon, according to recordings obtained by FOX News.

It was not the first time Wright appeared to endorse Obama, who was baptized at Trinity United....

During a Christmas sermon, Wright tried to compare Obama’s upbringing to Jesus at the hands of the Romans.

“Barack knows what it means living in a country and a culture that is controlled by rich white people,” Wright said. “Hillary would never know that.

“Hillary ain’t never been called a nigger. Hillary has never had a people defined as a non-person.”

In his Jan. 13 sermon, Wright said:

“Hillary is married to Bill, and Bill has been good to us. No he ain’t! Bill did us, just like he did Monica Lewinsky. He was riding dirty.”

[Asheran Mojomaster]

I've read Obama's book, I've heard his speeches, I've read his stances, I've looked at his voting record. I've also heard Hillary's speeches, I've read her stances, I've looked at her voting record. If that crazy bitch gets the nomination she is going to crash and burn against McCain, and if she doesn't and somehow gets elected...God help us all.

On the other hand, I believe Obama is a sincere man who wants to be president to try to lead out country back in the right direction. He wants us out of the war. He wants to improve our public relations (and hes a damn good speaker, very charismatic. I think he would do well in overseas negotiations), he wants to make the government more transparent, he wants to review all of Bush's executive orders and throw out any that are unconstitutional, he wants to make America respected again.

Of course, the fact that we are going into a depression is really going to make this hard for him, but I think he is the best one for the job. Like I said, Hillary is crazy. Also, McCain knows NOTHING of economics, and we need a president that understands that shit.

I do disagree with Obama on many of his socialist stances however. But since my main picks were out of the race a long long time ago, he is definitely my #1 (and only one actually) for November. If he doesn't get the nomination, I hope either he runs independent (if he did it would probably give the election to McCain, but many republicans don't like McCain and many democrats despise clinton), just to fuck up our party system as much as possible.

I think we are at a point that if the right things happen we could finally get out of the 2 party system. I could definitely see the repubs splitting, with one group being the neocons, and one being the traditional, more moderate republicans, and a similar thing with the democrats.

That last bit is more a dream of mine than anything, but now, or in the next few elections I believe it could happen. Once that happens, it would open the floodgates to all of the other parties who want to join in but are pretty much barred from getting into office, or even running for office, at this point.

[Sylvus]

So... you're calling those quotes hate speech?

They still aren't.

[Midnyte_Ragebringer]

So... you're calling those quotes hate speech?

They still aren't.

No. Not at all. Continuing to bash the "rich white man" isn't hate speech. It isn't continuing to keep a divide between the races either.

[Kilmoll the Sexy]

If Obama lost the primary to Hitlery, his best move would be to switch to the GOP and run as the VP on McCain's ticket. He is as close to a Republican as Giuliani anyway.

[Forthe]

So... you're calling those quotes hate speech?

They still aren't.

No. Not at all. Continuing to bash the "rich white man" isn't hate speech. It isn't continuing to keep a divide between the races either.

I'm a bit ambiguous on this. Throwing around the white man statement is certainly racial, but it is also factual as our societies are controlled by rich white men.

[Midnyte_Ragebringer]

Nah. I'd like to see Governor Sarah Palin become the VP.

[Midnyte_Ragebringer]

So... you're calling those quotes hate speech?

They still aren't.

No. Not at all. Continuing to bash the "rich white man" isn't hate speech. It isn't continuing to keep a divide between the races either.

I'm a bit ambiguous on this. Throwing around the white man statement is certainly racial, but it is also factual as our societies are controlled by rich white men.

So if a white preacher says something about how the black man is more likely to become a criminal to his congregation, it's okay, right?

[Sylvus]

No. Not at all. Continuing to bash the "rich white man" isn't hate speech. It isn't continuing to keep a divide between the races either.

Once again, you're attributing a quote from one man to another man. And you're misquoting him. He said that the country is run by rich white people. How is that bashing anyone? It's true.

Your own quotes said

• We [African Americans] were always seen as objects. When we started defining ourselves, it scared those who try to control others by naming them and defining them for them; Oppressors do not like “others” defining themselves.

• To have a church whose theological perspective starts from the vantage point of Black liberation theology being its center, is not to say that African or African American people are superior to any one else.

• African-centered thought, unlike Eurocentrism, does not assume superiority and look at everyone else as being inferior.

• There is more than one center from which to view the world. In the words of Dr. Janice Hale, “Difference does not mean deficience.” It is from this vantage point that Black liberation theology speaks.

Those quotes appear to be the antithesis of "hate speech".

[Forthe]

So... you're calling those quotes hate speech?

They still aren't.

No. Not at all. Continuing to bash the "rich white man" isn't hate speech. It isn't continuing to keep a divide between the races either.

I'm a bit ambiguous on this. Throwing around the white man statement is certainly racial, but it is also factual as our societies are controlled by rich white men.

So if a white preacher says something about how the black man is more likely to become a criminal to his congregation, it's okay, right?

Are black men more likely to be criminals due to the color of their skin or due to economic conditions? Do poor black neighborhoods have higher crime rates than poor white neighborhoods or poor hispanic neighborhoods?

I do see your point tho.

[Aabidano]

Obama is selling people a dream world that will never work and never happen, and the people dumb enough to buy into that load of bullshit make up for the rest of the momentum he has gained. I really think without those two factors he would be nowhere.

That sums him up for me. He talks a great line, he might even mean it. Doesn't mean he'll be successful.

I'll have to dig up the article, if you look at the people paying for both his and Hilary's campaign, they're both eating from the same trough. Which just means more of the same old BS. He's not an alternative, just a slicker package.